fancop, an idiot: wanting to fuck a cartoon dog means you want to fuck a real dog.
Me, a villain fucker: no, I wanna fuck a sleezy gangster having a redemption arc, this one just happens to be a furry.
(if I’d (🕷😎) had been the one around yesterday for scooby discourse instead of 💀🎂 this definitely would have come up 🤣🤣🤣)
That Scooby Doo discourse exists only because Scooby Doo is not conventionaly attractive. Nobody would bat an eye if it was about Kovu. Everybody wanted to smash Kovu.
Right? Would anybody say shit about my homeboy Charlie B Barkin?
Aw, anon, I’m really glad that could reassure you. (I also have a suspicion what show you’re talking about and I’m hoping to catch up with it soon.)
I love it when characters show their caring and compassionate sides, even when it’s in unusual ways.
I often find that fictional characters are often more compassionate than a lot of real people– even the characters who are considered ‘bad guys’ or just bad people in fiction.
In fiction there are two types of sinister schemes and heroic plans that succeed, and two types that fail.
Succeed:
🐭 schemes and plans that work because they are genuinely clever, meticulous, and well thought out.
🐭 schemes and plans that work because they are not as clever as their schemer thinks, but I am the author and I chose not to have any of the many possible things that could go wrong with the plan go wrong.
Fail:
🐭 schemes and plans that fail because they are not as clever as their schemer thinks and something obvious goes wrong.
🐭 schemes and plans that are genuinely clever, meticulous and well thought out, but I am the author and I chose to have something that no possible planner could have predicted go wrong at the worst possible moment.
Elusive third type of successful scheme:
A scheme so objectively pathetic, it succeeds because nobody in-universe takes it seriously enough to stop it.
Fuck, you’re right. We don’t write idiot heroes enough. 🤣🤣🤣
In fiction there are two types of sinister schemes and heroic plans that succeed, and two types that fail.
Succeed:
🐭 schemes and plans that work because they are genuinely clever, meticulous, and well thought out.
🐭 schemes and plans that work not because they are as clever as their schemer thinks, but I am the author and I chose not to have any of the many possible things that could go wrong with the plan go wrong.
Fail:
🐭 schemes and plans that fail because they are not as clever as their schemer thinks and something obvious goes wrong.
🐭 schemes and plans that are genuinely clever, meticulous and well thought out, but I am the author and I chose to have something that no possible planner could have predicted go wrong at the worst possible moment.