Cesare

aka almostnever
Posts I Like
Posts tagged "meta"

Pack Theory: Fact or Fiction?

Pack theory states that dogs, like wolves and some other wild canids, are “pack” animals. This is understood to mean that they would naturally live in complex social groups with a clear hierarchy governing the relationships between individuals in the group. While the group would cooperate in order to hunt and care for offspring, there would also be constant competition within the group as each animal strove to increase its status. There would be a clear leader of the pack, known as the “alpha” male, and his mating partner would be the “alpha” or highest ranking female. The alpha pair would have absolute rights to food, shelter and reproductive activity. All the other animals would have a definite place in the hierarchy and would relate to each other through submissive or dominant gestures depending on where they ranked. The lowest ranking animal, the “omega”, would be constantly picked on by everyone. If the alpha dog became ill or showed any form of weakness, he would be deposed and replaced by the dog next in seniority.

Pack theory was originally based on a study of captive wolves (Zimen, 1975). Wolves from various origins were brought together and had no choice but to live together. Studying these wolves revealed that there was a significant amount of competition and fighting to establish rank within the group. However, at the time it was not taken into account that captivity was a major influence in this behaviour. More recently, a 13 year study of wild wolves at Ellesmere Island (Mech, 1999) revealed that wolves actually live in family groups consisting of parents and offspring. Once pups reach 1 to 2 years of age they leave their parents, find their own mates and start their own families. Thus all wolves eventually become “alpha”! Furthermore, conflict within family groups is rare, with parents naturally caring and providing for their offspring and pups naturally relying and depending on their parents.

…the only conclusion we can draw is that the way dogs and wolves relate to each other and behave within a group seems to be determined by the situation they find themselves in i.e. the environment.

http://www.tarynblyth.co.za/articles/pack-theory-fact-or-fiction/
Quote
Futurama’s Fry and Robot Devil argue. - Robot Devil: YOU CAN’T JUST HAVE YOUR CHARACTERS ANNOUNCE HOW THEY FEEL! - Robot Devil: THAT MAKES ME FEEL ANGRY!

Futurama’s Fry and Robot Devil argue.

-

Robot Devil: YOU CAN’T JUST HAVE YOUR CHARACTERS ANNOUNCE HOW THEY FEEL!

-

Robot Devil: THAT MAKES ME FEEL ANGRY!

(via pearlo)

Photo
It ain't right and it ain't wrong. It just is.: codenamecesare: More about this scene in response to other comments.... →

widgenstain:

codenamecesare:

More about this scene in response to other comments. It got RIDIC long, sorry, I have many thoughts. Also potentially triggering, maybe, for tangentially touching on assault.

Read More

Okay, we clearly read this scene differently.

First of all, structurally, I don’t…

I wrote a million words about this already and I can’t really find more to explain why I thought it was boundary-crossing and skeevy (except that the fact that it was played for humor was part of what made it skeevy; imagine him bodily shoving her out of the way and barging into her room and that being played for laughs and I think it’s clearer why his entering her room by force— and using his power is ‘by force’— is messed up.)

But I do need to say: wrong kiss. In my endless screed, I wasn’t talking about Charles’s end-of-movie kiss with Moira, I was talking about the deleted scene kiss with the champagne.

In the deleted ‘Abracadabra’ scene where Charles propositions her, Moira turns him down. Later, after a lot of action scenes in which they barely interact, there is another cut scene in which Charles brings champagne and he and Moira reprise his ‘mutation made us the dominant lifeform’ pickup line, and they kiss. In order for any of the Moira characterization of the ‘Abracadabra’ scene to mean anything, there would need to be something between ‘Abracadabra’ and champagne kisses to show why Moira changes her mind about Charles. It could be as simple as Moira toasting Charles and saying ‘Well, we go into battle tomorrow, let’s have fun tonight’ but without some explanation for Moira’s change of heart, the message becomes: Moira’s thoughts don’t matter, she is just there to be a Love Interest, not a character in her own right.

The kiss at the very end in front of the mansion is something else entirely. In the film as screened in theaters, it came off to me like Charles had been attracted to Moira from the start and recognized it was mutual, but they set the attraction aside because there were a million more important things going on, and now that it’s all over, he kisses her in a melancholy ‘what might have been’ kind of way, while altering her memory.

(Incidentally while I’m headcanoning, it’s my headcanon that Moira agrees to have her memories altered temporarily so that she can go tie up loose ends at the CIA and quit, after which, she and Charles will meet up, he’ll remove the block on her memory, and she’ll come to work at the school, in charge of security measures and supervising construction of the underground complex and designing the Danger Room.)

Link
fassbenderbender: codenamecesare: More about this scene in response to other comments. It got RIDIC long, sorry, I have many thoughts. Also potentially triggering, maybe, for tangentially touching on assault. Read More But maybe that’s why this scene should be in a film. Charles isn’t a perfect person, in fact very often in comics he’s just an egoistic asshole in my opinion. I think his relationship with Raven and making covering herself don’t show it. He’s a hero because he want a good thing - peacful coexistence for mutants and humans, but that doesn’t mean he’s the good one. This scene shows that he’s stubborn and ready to take what he wants only because he can. So even if his goal(worldpeace, not getting laid) is righteus that’s not equivalent to being good. Beach scene is a moment to choose and without this abracadabra-scene it’s more like a choice between pro-human non-violent Charles and anti-human agressive Erik. With the scene I can expect that Charles won’t hesitate to use his powers/be selfish to achieve the goal not only when is needed but also when it’s possible. You said that’s clear without this scene - I think it’s not so clear in the final form of the film. I think it’s clear on the beach in the final form of the film that Charles is not non-violent as a rule, because he just helped Erik kill Shaw. Even though he told Erik he didn’t believe it was the right thing to do, he helped Erik do it. Professor X in the comics is a nonsensical amalgam of dozens of writers’ ideas and requirements. Comics plots frequently require him to be an asshole. How many storylines pit the X-Men against an enemy, only to discover the enemy is Professor X’s estranged boyfriend, estranged step-brother, estranged ex-girlfriend, long-lost son by an estranged girlfriend, etc.? It’s a cheap plot point to create a “Gasp!” moment when the X-Men learn that a villain turns out to have a connection to Professor X, but those moments always mean that Professor X is sending the X-Men out to fight at his behest without telling them anything about his past and the dangerous people who have grudges against him. That’s beyond asshole behavior, but I find it hard to count that as Charles Xavier characterization because it’s almost always done in an ass-pulling, hacky way that has nothing to do with Charles as a person and everything to do with the writer needing to pump out another 22 pages this month.The other characters don’t distrust him after these assholish incidents, as they would if the characterization were meaningful and consistent. No matter what fuckery Xavier commits for the sake of the plot, the overall narrative always maintains that Professor X is an inspiring leader who motivates the X-Men to protect humanity and try to win hearts and minds to accept mutantkind. As motleypatches put it very well: “Charles is supposed to have a virtue— having charm, wealth, education, looks and deciding NOT to committ mass violence are not virtues in themselves. It’s his sincerity and his hope in humanity and mutants and individual will, despite his power to mindwipe everyone, that need to be presented as foundation for Prof. X, a man we know becomes responsible the education of the future of people with potentially destructive powers.” If nothing else, XMFC/MMU Charles Xavier needs to prove himself trustworthy, if we’re going to believe that he convinces dozens of mutants to join his school, train their powers under his guidance, and act according to his leadership. He can be flawed, but the audience needs to believe he’s trustworthy, and that’s something this scene would have broken for me.

fassbenderbender:

codenamecesare:

More about this scene in response to other comments. It got RIDIC long, sorry, I have many thoughts. Also potentially triggering, maybe, for tangentially touching on assault.

Read More

But maybe that’s why this scene should be in a film. Charles isn’t a perfect person, in fact very often in comics he’s just an egoistic asshole in my opinion. I think his relationship with Raven and making covering herself don’t show it.

He’s a hero because he want a good thing - peacful coexistence for mutants and humans, but that doesn’t mean he’s the good one. This scene shows that he’s stubborn and ready to take what he wants only because he can. So even if his goal(worldpeace, not getting laid) is righteus that’s not equivalent to being good.

Beach scene is a moment to choose and without this abracadabra-scene it’s more like a choice between pro-human non-violent Charles and anti-human agressive Erik. With the scene I can expect that Charles won’t hesitate to use his powers/be selfish to achieve the goal not only when is needed but also when it’s possible.

You said that’s clear without this scene - I think it’s not so clear in the final form of the film.

I think it’s clear on the beach in the final form of the film that Charles is not non-violent as a rule, because he just helped Erik kill Shaw. Even though he told Erik he didn’t believe it was the right thing to do, he helped Erik do it.

Professor X in the comics is a nonsensical amalgam of dozens of writers’ ideas and requirements. Comics plots frequently require him to be an asshole. How many storylines pit the X-Men against an enemy, only to discover the enemy is Professor X’s estranged boyfriend, estranged step-brother, estranged ex-girlfriend, long-lost son by an estranged girlfriend, etc.? It’s a cheap plot point to create a “Gasp!” moment when the X-Men learn that a villain turns out to have a connection to Professor X, but those moments always mean that Professor X is sending the X-Men out to fight at his behest without telling them anything about his past and the dangerous people who have grudges against him. That’s beyond asshole behavior, but I find it hard to count that as Charles Xavier characterization because it’s almost always done in an ass-pulling, hacky way that has nothing to do with Charles as a person and everything to do with the writer needing to pump out another 22 pages this month.

The other characters don’t distrust him after these assholish incidents, as they would if the characterization were meaningful and consistent. No matter what fuckery Xavier commits for the sake of the plot, the overall narrative always maintains that Professor X is an inspiring leader who motivates the X-Men to protect humanity and try to win hearts and minds to accept mutantkind.

As motleypatches put it very well: “Charles is supposed to have a virtue— having charm, wealth, education, looks and deciding NOT to committ mass violence are not virtues in themselves. It’s his sincerity and his hope in humanity and mutants and individual will, despite his power to mindwipe everyone, that need to be presented as foundation for Prof. X, a man we know becomes responsible the education of the future of people with potentially destructive powers.”

If nothing else, XMFC/MMU Charles Xavier needs to prove himself trustworthy, if we’re going to believe that he convinces dozens of mutants to join his school, train their powers under his guidance, and act according to his leadership. He can be flawed, but the audience needs to believe he’s trustworthy, and that’s something this scene would have broken for me.

Photo
More about this scene in response to other comments. It got RIDIC long, sorry, I have many thoughts. Also potentially triggering, maybe, for tangentially touching on assault. widgenstain: turtletotem: codenamecesare: Even though he’s obnoxious as hell in this scene and deserves the shutdown he gets… I love what I see as Charles’s delight that he has a chance to show off his telepathy to Moira, a baseline human who knows about his mutation. That’s a huge part of Charles’s character, after all, for better and worse: he wants to believe baseline humans will accept and love mutations as much as he does. When he does his awful little ‘Abracadabra’ trick, I simultaneously want to rack him one for being entitled and presumptuous and wrongwrongwrong, and I also want to pet him for how giddy he looks after showing Moira what he can do. I wish that angle on Charles’s ability had showed up in some other context that wasn’t skeevy and stayed in the final cut. I didn’t think it was that skeevy… obnoxious, sure, but considering how cavalier he is with his power, freezing her in place for a second is pretty benign. Really, I think that cavalier use is very much related to his giddy, child-like desire to show off; he thinks of his telepathy as a party trick. So few people in his life have ever known about the telepathy in order to be unsettled by it; it’s never occurred to him that most people wouldn’t like him popping in and out of their brains as the whimsy takes him. (Raven should have been a hint, of course, but little sisters are often unreasonable, now aren’t they?) Part of what I love so much about XMFC Charles is that he’s irresponsible and overconfident and has never yet had to question himself or live with his mistakes. Charles before he was Professor X, just as the tagline says. He’s like a field of snow just waiting to be trampled; you can’t help wanting to preserve it, no matter how badly you need to get to the other side. I agree with that it wasn’t too skeevy and everything else and would like to point out that even if it was Charles behaving entitled, it was made very clear that Moira is perfectly capable of shutting him down and look out for herself. Even if she’s “just a human” or “just a woman”. For me the scene was about her, and I think it’s a pity that it was cut because it gave her much more personality. Even though I like the way Moira holds her ground and refuses Charles, I’m glad this scene didn’t make it into the film for three reasons. 1. In a later deleted scene that’s clearly meant to go along with this one, Moira and Charles share a kiss. Nothing between this scene and the later tryst scene explains why Moira changes her mind about getting involved with Charles. Without at least some indication of what changed Moira’s mind, the later romantic moment undoes a lot of the character-building of Moira’s refusal in this scene. 2. From a purely plot-driven storytelling point of view, this scene is really in there largely to demonstrate that Charles can make people invisible to set up how later, in the back of the truck in Russia, he masks the presence of himself and Erik and all those soldiers from view. (This is also why early on, Charles freezes Moira’s partner while talking mind-to-mind to Moira, even though he doesn’t need to do it and in fact, it’s conspicuous and weird— but the filmmakers needed to establish Charles is capable of that to set up how Charles holds Shaw still in the climax. Personally I get pretty bored with the way any special talent a character displays frivolously early on in an action film will come back to save the day in the third act, but anyway.) We see enough of Charles’s powers early on that we don’t need a demonstration of the ‘invisibility’ use of his telepathy to understand how it works in Russia, which is probably the biggest reason this scene was cut. 3. We see Charles being entitled, arrogant, privileged and insensitive in the rest of XMFC, and this scene takes it over the top, in my opinion, moving him from a flawed but sympathetic character to an asshole. Would this one scene make Charles an asshole, really? I think so. I strongly feel like this scene implies very troublesome things. When I call it “skeevy” I mean: sketchy, dodgy, maybe not overtly too bad on the surface, but implying a whole host of very bad possibilities. To review… Charles comes to Moira’s room. She attempts to gently, firmly turn him down. He snaps his fingers and uses his telepathy to enter her room. She continues to turn him down. He propositions her and gets into her face physically. She has him read her mind and, presumably, projects how serious she is about saying no to him. He backs off and leaves. True, compared to what Charles could do, using telepathy to appear in Moira’s room is relatively innocuous. And like I originally said, I do think there was a large factor of Charles just excited that she knew about his powers and wanting to show off. But… that’s a little like saying that a dude who shoved his way bodily into my room wasn’t so bad because he could’ve just punched me. “Less than the worst” doesn’t equal “okay.” And it’s also not okay if a guy pushes into the room after I say no by doing a backflip because he’s just so excited to show me that he can. What makes this scene so skeevy— I think it’s worse than the mostly-male filmmakers realized, though maybe another reason it was cut was that they wised up— is that Charles used his power to get into her room against Moira’s will… and the fact that this is a relatively harmless demonstration of what he can do just makes that dodgier, because he still gets to think of himself as merely being flirty when he has in fact decisively crossed a line. Moira said no, and he came into her room anyway. By doing that, he signaled that her refusal doesn’t matter to him, that her ‘no’ at the door is overruled by his desire to come in. That’s always a warning sign with anyone.And if Charles Xavier in particular believes that what he wants overrules what you want, that is scary, because he can have anything he wants just by thinking about it. The only thing holding him back is respect for other peoples’ autonomy, and he just showed that he doesn’t respect Moira’s decisions when they conflict with his desires. It’s sadly true to the early ’60s that a guy would think this way (and way too many men still think this way now.) But Charles is a telepath. Shouldn’t he know better? It’s always been a puzzle to me that the filmmakers decided that the telepathic character should have insensitivity as a major flaw, when empathy is such a huge part of his power and his identity. In his relationship to Raven it can be explained by the fact that he doesn’t use telepathy with her, and while he’s still wrong in his behavior with Raven, his insensitivity there is more understandable. But his insensitivity to Moira in this cut scene would just make him an asshole. At the door, she tells him how she feels. He doesn’t care. (It’s possible that he’s using his telepathy this way to answer her concerns about being involved with him while they’re working together: he might be trying to signal, hey, you don’t have to worry about your colleagues, I can make myself invisible, I can definitely conceal the fact that we’re involved. That’s slightly less bad, I guess? Slightly.) The fact that Charles is played by cute-as-a-button James McAvoy might camouflage how screwed up Charles’s behavior is, here, and I think McAvoy looks for opportunities to do exactly this kind of thing in his roles: show characters who use that charming handsome face to get away with things that would be unquestionably smackable offenses in a less sweet-looking guy, and convey through his acting the underlying problems with the behavior— in Charles’s case, arrogance, entitlement, selfishness and insensitivity. This isn’t just my opinion, McAvoy himself said that he wanted to show the younger Charles as extremely full of himself. It’s not just the performance, though. I remember one of the First Class filmmakers saying that he wanted the audience to feel at the end of the movie like they’d choose to go with Erik, and honestly, I think they stacked the deck that way pretty transparently in the film. (As they’d have to, considering that Erik moves to commit mass murder and/or an act of war against US soldiers in the climax.) I understand the appeal of making the ‘villains’ more sympathetic and exposing the heroes’ feet of clay. And XMFC does make an excellent subtextual point that when the mutants split up, the X-Men, who want acceptance, are all characters who have reason to believe they’d benefit from the status quo if people just saw past their mutations, whereas the Brotherhood characters all have issues with the status quo beyond their X-genes— variously being of color, female, or Jewish. Charles’s arrogance, entitlement and privilege definitely help to highlight that theme. And I’ve written before that I think Professor X has been from the start more a plot device than a character, and previous takes on him as the wise sage and noble visionary, the safety net, the father figure, bored me. I think XMFC’s Charles is a much more believable and real take on the character. But Xavier is still supposed to be at least the foundation of a hero. If XMFC were going to include this scene where Charles disrepects Moira’s autonomy, and values his own selfish desires over someone else’s choices and comfort, the film would need to show him realizing the error of his ways and growing past that, in order to portray him as a hero in waiting. Instead he just gets told off (in a way the audience isn’t even privy to) and backs off, having learned to respect Moira’s decisions, but not that in general he should respect other people’s choices. Given all that, I’m glad it was cut. Yes, nearly two years later my feels about the movie are still such that I can type a mile about a single scene that didn’t even make the final cut. I’ll show myself out.

More about this scene in response to other comments. It got RIDIC long, sorry, I have many thoughts. Also potentially triggering, maybe, for tangentially touching on assault.

Read More

Photo
cute things said by my husband

helens78:

Me: *explains the B&D universe*
Grant: Wait, soulbonding?
Me: *explains the fannish convention of soulbonding*
Grant: Ah! Okay.
Me: *ponders* If we were in a soulbonding universe, do you think we’d be soulmates?
Grant: I hope so!  I wouldn’t want to be bonded to anyone else!

People do marriages in fandom lots of different ways, but I love that my guy actually takes my worldbuilding questions seriously.  And that he knows where a joining spot is and has been known to nuzzle mine while spooning me.

(Neither one of us actually believes in the “One Perfect Mate” or “soulmates” theory — we have actually had conversations about which of our friends we could have happy marriages with, and neither one of us is the least bit threatened by those people! — but it’s sweet that if the soulbond was a real phenomonon, he’d want to be bonded to me.  NAWWWW.  I would certainly want to be bonded to him!)

Nawww

Meanwhile, this is probably why within Bound & Determined verse(s) we don’t necessarily believe in One Perfect Mate either, which contributes to our interest in branching AUs to the AU. Our OTP always love each other. But Jason is happily in love with Kurt in a lot of branches, and happily in love in a trio with Charles and Erik in others. Kurt can be happy with Jason, or happy in a polyamorous tie with Piotr, Kitty, and Logan. Sometimes Tony reconciles with Rhodey, sometimes Rhodey takes up with Nick Fury and Tony gets together with Steve…

Text
Asker pearlo Asks:
From Backseat Driver: "Charles tucks away the tiny hint of triumph that was just starting to show and breathes again, "Please." [...] By now Erik knows better than to go anywhere with Charles without a tube of Vaseline, and that alone makes him angry again, evidence of how well Charles has him trained."
codenamecesare codenamecesare Said:

Charles tucks away the tiny hint of triumph that was just starting to show and breathes again, “Please.”

“Shameless,” Erik mutters, getting in and yanking Charles into his lap by his shirt, slamming shut all the doors at once. “You’re not getting a ‘backseat makeout,’ I’ll tell you that now,” he’s stripping Charles half with his hands and half with his power, “I’m not going to stop at heavy petting, I’m not squirming around back here groping like a teenager.” He sits on the passenger’s side and kicks Charles’s trousers into other footwell, shoves the rest of his clothes out of the way. He needs Charles’s cooperation to get off the shirt, and Charles resists, holding it around him and blushing furiously, as if this whole thing hadn’t been his idea.

He never knows, with Charles, if anything is an act, if Charles really feels something, really enjoys something, or just reads Erik’s mind and reacts the way Erik expects, gives Erik what he wants to see. At times like this, half-angry with Charles and so turned on he’s light-headed, Erik’s not sure it matters. He unfastens his belt and fly and spreads the zipper open, and he nearly can’t believe he’s doing this in a car outdoors with sunlight pouring in through the window, open for anyone to see, but he pulls out his cock and says, “Suck me.”

Charles nods and folds down awkwardly in the footwell, leaning over Erik’s lap and mouthing Erik’s cock the way he always takes it at first… a false start, his tongue sliding under, his red lips parted, not enough, and a little frown; then he licks his lips and tries again, opening wider, eyes falling shut, a low, hungry nnh in his throat as he keeps trying to take more and more.

Erik can’t let him keep it up long, the sight overwhelming as always. He threads his fingers through Charles’s hair and tugs with a hoarse, “Stop,” and Charles reluctantly pulls off. “Get up here,” Erik says, and when Charles starts to straddle his lap, “no. Facing away.” Charles swallows, shuddering, and turns around, bracing himself against the passenger’s seat.

By now Erik knows better than to go anywhere with Charles without a tube of Vaseline, and that alone makes him angry again, evidence of how well Charles has him trained.

======

From Backseat Driver. I wrote that story all in one night. I really like it, I think it’s one of the solo stories I’m most happy with (probably because I didn’t have a chance to overthink it.) I always enjoy writing for fanart and Palalife’s car sex fanart was particularly, ahem, inspiring.

This illustrates my headcanon that whatever might happen between Charles and Erik, ultimately Charles is going to be in control, because he can’t help but be. He knows how people feel, what they want, what they’re thinking. That’s natural for him. If he wants backseat sex and Erik’s stubborn about it, Charles is going to know that he can get his way by begging, and he’s perfectly willing to do it, because I don’t imagine a mindreader would be very inhibited.

But at the same time, it’s not wholly manipulative, because when Charles blushes, he really is embarrassed. Not because it’s sexual; that doesn’t get to him. But because he’s showing vulnerability, admitting that he wants something— even if he’s only showing it by giving Erik what he wants to see, still, the fact that he’s willing to pretend to beg is just as exposing as begging would be.

Read More

Answer

pearlo:

Charles at his most scarily persuasive.

yessssssssssss

I need to rewatch this scene. I can’t remember if Charles has his hands in his pockets the whole time, or if he puts them there at a particular moment. Either way, it makes a nice physical reinforcement of his words: he’s voluntarily keeping his hands and his mind in check.

ETA: Or maybe he’s doing that because it pulls his trousers tighter and shows off his ass when he turns around… can’t blame Erik if that helps sway him to stay.

Photoset
jabletown: codenamecesare: I wish I were better at incorporating themes into fic, rather than just laying them out as straight meta. But I can’t come up with a way to illustrate this in fiction, so here it is, just the idea: While writing that depressing unrequited half-fic the other day, it occurred to me that we know, canonically, that Charles’s birth parents were inattentive at best, and once his stepfather and stepbrother came onto the scene, things got much worse. People often tend to gravitate to relationships and situations that feel familiar to them, even when they’re unhealthy. In that light, it’s not surprising that Charles Xavier dedicates himself and his students to trying to protect and serve an indifferent and hostile world. It’s not surprising he would believe that if mutants can just be good enough and achieve enough, humans will accept and love them. And in a way, subconsciously, it might be comfortable to Charles when he and his X-Men knock themselves out protecting humans and doing good, but acceptance and love never come. It’s what he’s used to. pattern seeking also explains Erik’s need to pursue and find oppressors rather than try to maintain a personal life that might make him happy ^^^This.

jabletown:

codenamecesare:

I wish I were better at incorporating themes into fic, rather than just laying them out as straight meta. But I can’t come up with a way to illustrate this in fiction, so here it is, just the idea:

While writing that depressing unrequited half-fic the other day, it occurred to me that we know, canonically, that Charles’s birth parents were inattentive at best, and once his stepfather and stepbrother came onto the scene, things got much worse.

People often tend to gravitate to relationships and situations that feel familiar to them, even when they’re unhealthy.

In that light, it’s not surprising that Charles Xavier dedicates himself and his students to trying to protect and serve an indifferent and hostile world. It’s not surprising he would believe that if mutants can just be good enough and achieve enough, humans will accept and love them.

And in a way, subconsciously, it might be comfortable to Charles when he and his X-Men knock themselves out protecting humans and doing good, but acceptance and love never come. It’s what he’s used to.

pattern seeking also explains Erik’s need to pursue and find oppressors rather than try to maintain a personal life that might make him happy

^^^This.

Photo
I wish I were better at incorporating themes into fic, rather than just laying them out as straight meta. But I can’t come up with a way to illustrate this in fiction, so here it is, just the idea: While writing that depressing unrequited half-fic the other day, it occurred to me that we know, canonically, that Charles’s birth parents were inattentive at best, and once his stepfather and stepbrother came onto the scene, things got much worse. People often tend to gravitate to relationships and situations that feel familiar to them, even when they’re unhealthy. In that light, it’s not surprising that Charles Xavier dedicates himself and his students to trying to protect and serve an indifferent and hostile world. It’s not surprising he would believe that if mutants can just be good enough and achieve enough, humans will accept and love them. And in a way, subconsciously, it might be comfortable to Charles when he and his X-Men knock themselves out protecting humans and doing good, but acceptance and love never come. It’s what he’s used to.

I wish I were better at incorporating themes into fic, rather than just laying them out as straight meta. But I can’t come up with a way to illustrate this in fiction, so here it is, just the idea:

While writing that depressing unrequited half-fic the other day, it occurred to me that we know, canonically, that Charles’s birth parents were inattentive at best, and once his stepfather and stepbrother came onto the scene, things got much worse.

People often tend to gravitate to relationships and situations that feel familiar to them, even when they’re unhealthy.

In that light, it’s not surprising that Charles Xavier dedicates himself and his students to trying to protect and serve an indifferent and hostile world. It’s not surprising he would believe that if mutants can just be good enough and achieve enough, humans will accept and love them.

And in a way, subconsciously, it might be comfortable to Charles when he and his X-Men knock themselves out protecting humans and doing good, but acceptance and love never come. It’s what he’s used to.

Photo
Single A Theme :: Version 1.3.1 :: By Business Bullpen