No one will believe me if I say that my opinions on TMA change depending on if the person who’s expressing their opinions I’m reading is annoying.
“Martin and Jon’s relationship is so wholesome and good!” Actually, Martin physically assaulted Jon several times while at the most Jon dismissed Martin’s thoughts and feelings.
“Martin and Jon’s relationship is toxic and not even in the interesting way.” Actually, considering that they had their own shared and separate traumas, they did pretty well to make things work.
“Basira, Georgie, and Melanie had every right to treat him how they did because of how their trauma interacts with his.” Actually, if Jon’s trauma isn’t an explanation and excuse for his behavior, then neither is theirs.
“Basira, Georgie, and Melanie should’ve shut up and let Jon eat more people’s fear cause they were okay with others doing the exact same thing.” Actually, considering how they faced the same retraumatization he did his victims, they had a right to try and stop him.
Like. I could go on. But you understand? It’s when I personally find the person espousing whatever take they are reprehensible that I am able to have a nuanced view. Cause if that person thinks something then I sure as fuck ain’t gonna agree with them.