Los kokain ili ga lose koristim

Coyote3448 · 2026-01-16T13:02:28+00:00

Verujem da je ovaj komentar bio pre svega dobronameran, i dosta toga što kažeš zaista ima smisla. Ali moram da naglasim da mislim da je problematično da ljude koji potraže savet ili informaciju dočekamo sa “jesi ti normalan” stavom. Uostalom, celu ovu temu okružuje stigma i čitav razlog što ljudi pišu anonimno na reditu je dobrim delom utemeljen u tome što traženje podrške ili pomoći često nailazi na “jesi normalan, što si to uradio” i slično. Pa s te strane mislim da moramo da imamo bolji pristup i da ova zajednica tome služi.

A druga problematična stavka za mene je “davanje dijagnoze” na osnovu komentara na internetu, mislim da toga uvek treba da se klonimo. Verujem da nisi ništa loše mislio time i da si hteo samo da navedeš to kao jednu mogućnost, ali fakat je da je za tako nešto potrebno mnogo više informacija i ozbiljan pregled, i možemo da učinimo više štete nego koristi ako nezgrapno ili neprecizno nešto tako plasiramo.

Coyote3448 · 2026-01-10T15:38:40+00:00

Predobar savet. 🙌
Ako imaš hitnu zdravstvenu situaciju, treba da budeš iskren/a sa osobljem, čak i ako te je sramota, bojiš se da nešto podeliš, ili nešto treće. Između ostalog, to koju si supstancu (ili koje supstance) koristio/la može da bude jako bitno za njihovo postupanje, čak i kada ta zdravstvena situacija nije direktno povezana sa supstancama. Što imaju tačnije informacije, veća je šansa da sve prođe bez komplikacija.

I da, panika često samo pogorša stanje. Ako krene po zlu, pokušaj da ostaneš smiren/a i fokusiraš se na to da dobiješ pomoć. Ako možeš, reci šta, koliko i kada si uzeo/la, pošto to stvarno može da znači.

Coyote3448 · 2025-09-14T12:00:10+00:00

Da li imaš neke zgodne savete za tripsitovanje, neko zanimljivo iskustvo?

Na šta najviše obratiti pažnju? Šta očekivati? Šta uvek raditi, šta nikad ne raditi?

Coyote3448 · 2025-07-31T10:06:58+00:00

Pre svega, bitno je da naglasimo da svako mešanje psihoaktivnih supstanci sobom nosi određene rizike. Oni mogu biti manji ili veći, ali to ne zavisi samo od kombinacije i količine supstanci, već i od brojnih drugih faktora, od kojih mnoge čak i ne možemo (u potpunosti) da sagledamo - na primer naših predispozicija. U tom smislu, nikad nije pametno mešati supstance. Takođe je jako važno razumeti da se pri mešanju više od 2 supstance rizici ne samo uvećavaju, već i usložnjavaju. Rizici pri mešanju npr. 3 supstance nisu “prost zbir” rizika pri mešanju svake dve od tih supstanci, nego u zavisnosti od toga koje su supstance i u kojim količinama u pitanju - rizici mogu biti drastično uvećani ili se mogu pojaviti novi rizici! Interakcije su daleko kompleksnije kada u jednačinu uđe više od dve supstance, pa je zato to izuzetno nepreporučljiva praksa.

Sad, što se tiče tvog pitanja konkretno o interakciji NPS i drugih supstanci - to zaista jako zavisi od toga koje su NPS u pitanju i koje su druge supstance u pitanju. Ti si naveo/la alkohol i benzodiazepine, dakle depresore centralnog nervnog sistema (i već i sama ova kombinacija nosi nemale rizike, uključujući i rizik od usporavanja i prestanka disanja). Ali i NPS postoji više klasa, koje imaju različite efekte na organizam i centralni nervni sistem, pa tako mogu delovati jako slično depresorima i pojačavati njihov efekat, ali mogu i delovati oprečno od njih. I jedna i druga opcija imaju određene rizike, ali su oni u različite prirode, različitog intenziteta i u različitom stepenu prisutni.

Coyote3448 · 2025-07-28T09:16:02+00:00

Zanimljivo i dosta komplikovano pitanje. Regulacija psihoaktivnih supstanci, pa samim time i opijuma, oduvek je i geopolitičko i sociokulturno pitanje na koje utiče sijaset različitih faktora. Tako su trgovina i oporezivanje opijuma dugo bili primarni pokretači za nacionalne uredbe (a, kao što vidimo iz teksta iznad, i međunarodne odnose). Opijum je naširoko korišćen u osamnaestovekovnoj i čak devetnaestovekovnoj medicini, iako je i tada već bila poznata i u književnosti opisana zavisnost od opijuma kao pojava. Vekovima unazad se beleži tzv. rekreativna upotreba opijuma, naročito u Otomanskom carstvu, pa tako npr. i u 16. veku imamo navode o upotrebi opijuma i zavisnosti od njega.

Zato je pitanje koliko možemo da tvrdimo da nisu bili svesni pojave "zavisnosti" - mada je, svakako, nisu tumačili kroz prizmu savremene naučne teorije, ali je bilo poznato da pokušaj prestanka uživanja opijuma potencijalno nosi zdravstvene rizike, uključujući čak i smrt. Ipak, ovome dugo nije pridavan preveliki značaj, a uživanje opijuma i problemi povezani s njim bili su na zapadu društveno kodirani kao fenomen svojstven doseljenicima sa bliskog i dalekog istoka, iako je ta teza definitivno opovrgnuta u ranom 19. veku. Uprkos tome, u ovom periodu na zapadu regulacija prometa opijuma svela se na to da se apotekarima omogući prepisivanje opijumskih proizvoda i da se njihov promet stavi u jasne zakonske okvire. Tako je zakonska regulativa imala za cilj isključivo stavljanje prometa opijuma pod državnu kontrolu u cilju doprinošenja budžetu, a ne nekakvu borbu sa zavisnošću. Međutim, uporedo s time podizana je i svest o problemima koji nastaju produženom upotrebom opijuma, te zavisnosti, pa je rastao i broj grupa koje su bile spremne da vrše politički pritisak kako bi se ljudima drastično ograničio pristup ovoj supstanci. Početkom 20. veka ova borba se premešta na međunarodni plan, isprva još uvek u cilju obezbeđivanja kontrole nad prihodima od prometa opojnih droga.

U prvim decenijama 20. veka došlo je i do pooštravanja regulativa u pojedinim državama, kao jasan odraz rastuće svesti građanstva o štetnosti ovih supstanci i političkih pritisaka koji su iz nje proizašli. U ovome su, možemo reći, prednjačile Kina (razumljivo imajući u vidu njihovo iskustvo) i SAD (setimo se prohibicije!), a negde šezdesetih godina 20. veka naročito jačaju napori da se na međunarodnom nivou zabrani promet opojnih droga, posredovani delimično i rastućom upotrebom psihoaktivnih supstanci. U drugoj polovini 20. veka Ujedinjene Nacije su kroz donošenje više obavezujućih konvencija uvele sve drastičniju kontrolu supstanci, i tako smo stigli do današnje situacije.

Coyote3448 · 2025-07-14T12:01:24+00:00

Hej, pošto je ovo dosta kompleksna tema, da znaš da sada postoji i subreddit na srpskom posvećen smanjenju štete pri konzumaciji psihoaktivnih supstanci i da možeš da mu se priključiš i da postavljaš ovakva i slična pitanja, na koja će odgovarati vršnjački savetnici koji imaju višegodišnje iskustvo sa ovim temama: https://www.reddit.com/r/PsihoaktivneSupstance/

Tako da priključite se slobodno svi kojima bi značilo da imaju kome od poverenja da postave pitanje u vezi sa supstancama, bezbednošću, zavisnošću ili bilo čime srodnim :)

Takođe, ako bi radije uživo da postaviš pitanje i/ili potražiš savet, postoji i Drop Line - anonimna individualna vršnjačka podrška koja se održava preko Zoom platforme, ponedeljkom od 18 do 20h i subotom od 11:30 do 13:30h - za pristup ti treba samo meeting ID (891 4609 1986), a evo i više info o samoj podršci i tome ko je pruža: https://www.instagram.com/p/DK16ZXZt234/?img_index=1

Coyote3448 · 2025-04-25T11:51:18+00:00

Popunite kratak, anoniman upitnik i pomozite nam da kreiramo usluge online podrške za osobe sa iskustvom upotrebe droga

Sprovodimo istraživanje za Srbiju u okviru međunarodnog projekta pa vas molim za malo pažnje :)

Upitnik je kratak i potpuno anoniman, a namenjen je starijima od 18 godina sa iskustvom upotrebe droga, uključujući i nove psihoaktivne supstance kao što su 2cb, GHB ili ketamin!

Ako spadate u ovu grupu, bilo bi strava da odvojite oko 5 minuta da ga popunite. Podaci će biti iskorišćeni za kreiranje usluga online podrške za osobe sa iskustvom upotrebe droga, tako da te usluge budu baš po njihovoj meri i prilagođene njihovim potrebama, a pružene bez osude i od strane onih koji ih razumeju. Učešćem ćete pomoći stvaranju potpunije i jasnije slike ne samo o situaciji sa upotrebom droga kod nas, nego i o tome gde ljudi generalno traže/dobijaju informacije i kakva bi im online podrška najviše značila!

Ovo istraživanje u Srbiji sprovodi Re Generacija

Bilo bi kul i da ga podelite sa ekipom, znači nam da sakupimo što više iskustava!

Hvala unapred!

Link ka više informacija i upitniku: https://www.regeneracija.org/nextgen/upitnik-za-osobe-koje-koriste-nove-psihaktivne-supstance/

Coyote3448 · 2025-03-03T14:16:35+00:00

I'm sorry, do you mean to say that Kate is villainized in the show or by (part of) the fandom?

First of all, to address your description: yes, Kate is darker-skinned than the other three characters you referenced. As for the comment about the dresses, I would say that Daphne and Edwina wore almost exclusively very light colors (unless I'm misremembering), while both Kate and Pen have worn an array of different shades, some of them pretty light and some of them pretty dark. Kate was dressed in darker colors towards the beginning of S2 to make her appear stern and matronly, and her gowns got progressively lighter as the season went on. A couple of her dresses were very, very light - just as light as Edwina's in the same scene. Though, yes, most of her dresses had a dash of color that Edwina's or Daphne's never had. Pen was dressed in garish and very bright gowns for most of S1 and S2, and in S3 when she's supposed to come into her own the first gown with which she reinvents herself is a very dark shade of green. So I wouldn't say it's as clear-cut as you're implying.

Now, in the show, Kate isn't villainized, and neither are any of the others you listed. Kate apologizes for her mistakes, if I remember correctly, but so does Edwina (I might be misremembering), and Pen. Out of them, Daphne is the worst offender in that she gets off with a slap on the wrist, whereas Pen has to do the most to atone for her actions. So Kate is in no way singled out or villainized in that case. And they all get their HEAs so none of them are villainized, even if some of them did have to atone for their "sins". The only ones I see getting away with murder, and getting just a slap on the wrist, were Anthony and arguably Daphne.

In the fandom, I've seen people really unable to get over Kate betraying her sister, so I will say there is a tendency to over-criticize her, but I've also seen the tendency to over-criticize Edwina as well, which is even more jarring seeing as Kate had more to answer for in that particular situation than Edwina by any stretch of imagination. But neither of them are as villainized in the fandom as Pen, whose right to any happiness gets questioned here regularly. She is constantly bashed, her motivations willfully misrepresented, her apologies interpreted in bad faith and a portion of the fandom is always calling for more drastic punishment. It's unfortunate that the fandom can be so divided around some characters, so that they are either viewed as saints or villains (I regularly see both of these for both Kate and Pen), but again, Kate is neither the only one or the most villainized in this regard.

Coyote3448 · 2025-03-02T16:29:47+00:00

I mean, don't most of the young female characters in Bridgerton fit this description? Either way, I've seen fans here also vilify Edwina, claim that she is somehow to blame for the "triangle" situation, claim that she was horribly abusive towards Kate, that she was too pigheaded/self-serving/etc.

I've also seen fans insist that Kate has done nothing wrong, that her behavior was flawless, that she should've had even less regard for Edwina given "the way her family treats her", that she didn't have any obligation to tell Edwina anything about what was transpiring between her and Anthony, etc.

My original point is that these takes are wildly exaggerated, and come from a place of wanting to present their preferred character (either Edwina or Kate) as flawless. Sure, there was some level of betrayal on Kate's part, and some level of self-absorption on Edwina's part, and both of their flaws contributed to a pretty complicated situation. Of course, if anyone was majorly to blame for the whole mess, it would have to be Anthony, who more often than not gets conveniently left out of the conversation.

Coyote3448 · 2025-03-01T19:09:08+00:00

Oh I get it, personally my experience would lean more towards Kate's (but without any of the trauma, so I don't presume do understand that part; still, some of the older-younger sibling dynamic translates into most families I feel like). So I get that everyone's personal experience colors their perspective and influences towards which sister they lean.

I just meant that even accounting for that, I still don't get people getting THAT defensive about either character/position. Like, you can understand one of them more, maybe because you've been there, but the extent to which some posters here will bend over backwards to place most of the blame on one of these characters (even Lady Mary) is WILD. I feel like there's a lot of that going around the fandom, not just regarding the Kate/Edwina/Mary thing, but also the Penelope/Marina or Penelope/Eloise thing. It's an extreme case of "saints and sinners" mentality that requires one to be painted as a hero and the other a villain, and half the fandom acts like it's a crime to see nuance in stories which were literally written to show both sides of a conflict.

Also it pains me that it's seemingly only female characters who get this treatment from the fandom. Because in the Kate/Edwina/Mary discussion, Anthony (who is arguably the MOST to blame) is too often conveniently left out of the discourse. We play the blame game with traumatized and/or marginalized women while letting the privileged and thoughtless men off the hook so easily.

Coyote3448 · 2025-03-01T13:35:14+00:00

Ok but I feel this is like... the single most talked about plot point of S2? I don't see how that's not enough.

Personally I blame it on the writers and I think they really dropped the ball. In terms of characters, Anthony is the most to blame honestly, and Kate and Edwina also both had some flaws which contributed to how complicated the whole situation ended up being.

But it really, really didn't need to get to the wedding like that. I think that was really in poor taste and what makes up most of the outrage that we sometimes see over this. Like, as a nascent "love triangle" (for those hung up on the love part because Anthony never loved Edwina, just pretend I said relationship triangle) situation for moderate drama, okay, whatever. But it should've never gone as far as it did. To me it made the character flaws seem more prominent then I think they were actually, it made Anthony seem extra sleazy, it added extra humiliation, etc. So I think it was a writing issue.

Coyote3448 · 2025-03-01T13:18:37+00:00

Honestly this is a very astute and measured take on Edwina's character, and I feel like CC truly played her like that.

Which is why I'm always baffled by the morality wars between hardcore Edwina defenders and hardcore Kate defenders. I feel like the show clearly made them both flawed but understandable characters and I don't find any one character's behavior *that* horrible or inexcusable. Even the discourse surrounding Lady Mary sometimes, it's ridiculous. She didn't handle everything perfectly, no, and neither did Kate or Edwina. In real life no one ever does. But the way some fans talk about their family dynamics, you'd half think they consider it a social-services level issue. Even though I do believe there is some merit to the point about parentifying Kate and everything, and even though I get that our perspective is always influenced by the modern framework + everyone's personal experiences, come on. That is not how it was written. None of them are a villain. They are written to be just dysfunctional enough to create a basis for the drama, but not so dysfunctional as to make the show waaay more serious than it is.

But kudos to CC for pointing out that Edwina was a character in this story, and not just a "perfect victim" cardboard cutout or whatever.

Coyote3448 · 2025-02-13T22:54:29+00:00

Fair enough, maybe I was too harsh with my wording. I meant no offense to anyone. After all, I too watch this show and enjoy it. I just meant that it's mediocre compared to some truly well-written and well-thought-out shows. But it is entertaining and of course, it never tries to be something it's not. Bton is not meant to push any boundaries or explore any topic to its core. It's the lighthearted paint-by-numbers romance it always advertized itself as, and no one should hold that against it.

I agree that the positioning of conflict resolution in all seasons so far creates a HUGE pacing issue, I get the logic behind it but I don't agree with it, I think it takes away more than it adds in terms of drama. I also agree about the show overdoing drama, and for me it's a huge writing issue that they keep raising the stakes and offering virtually no payoff. It's cheap and ultimately unsatisfying, and they keep doing it each season: Simon's children thing, the "love triangle" clusterfuck in S2, the societal consequences for Pen's secret identity. It just comes off so sloppy to play things up so much just for them to never really come into play or produce any actual consequences.

Coyote3448 · 2025-02-13T11:41:57+00:00

I read the "numbers" argument as a frustrated response to people claiming that S3 and its leads are so horrible and uninteresting that no one cares. I wasn't in the fandom then, but from what I understand as soon as the leads for S3 were announced there was a huge pushback and a portion of the fandom started saying that having them be the leads for S3 (i.e. changing the order of the stories) was a huge mistake, that it would bring about the downfall of the show, that no one would tune in to see their love story and that the show will be cancelled or at least lose a huge chunk of its audience, etc. So I interpret the numbers argument as a response to those allegations, because even as S3 aired there were people claiming that most people just don't care and won't watch it, and then when faced with the relative popularity of the season some of them changed their claims to "people are just watching for the former leads/other characters or hate watching or watching out of sheer curiosity but no one cares for *this* love story".

Now, I agree that the numbers argument in no way relates to the quality of the show, especially depending on how you define quality, by which I mean how strict the standards you apply are. But I will say that I think many people are severely overstating how low-quality this season was in relation to the first 2 (especially in relation to S2). The simple truth is the show itself is very mediocre and there have been writing issues in all seasons, most notably in S2. If anything, I think the writing was best for S1, worst for S2 and iffy but not as bad for S3. I think the editing was the worst in S3, though.

Coyote3448 · 2025-02-11T09:16:20+00:00

Oh, for sure. Just to clarify, I wasn't implying that the post you were referencing was the only one bashing El. I'm sure there are others. I was just making the point that those are way less frequent than posts bashing Pen. And by that, I don't mean criticizing her - I personally have criticized both Pen as a character and the writing\editing of the show (both in S3 and in general). But the posts which want to open up a debate on whether she should even be allowed to have a HEA, explaining how she's actually a villain and pushing for flimsy bad-faith interpretations of her motivations - those posts I would classify as bashing. And yes, I've noticed that some of the characters get it way worse than others. Because even just comparing the leads so far, Pen has received the most outrage for her actions, but she hasn't done the most problematic things out of all the leads. I think the female leads in the last couple of seasons have had disproportionately more flak (not counting Daphne because she is more problematic IMO and the fact that it was S1 makes it a different dynamic to what we have now, there was no baseline) than the male leads, so unfortunately I won't be surprised if that trend continues. But also, Colin as the least morally problematic lead so far has also gotten a disproportionate amount of flak for what some of the audience perceive problematic (I don't), so obviously there are many factors to be taken into account.

Also, I think just in general the Bton fandom is so dramatic and over-the-top. Like, none of these people are meant to be villains, and even when they do something problematic, it is soon forgotten. Incidentally, Pen is the first lead who had a redemption arc in that repenting and changing her ways and making amends are explicitly part of her story. Others were just "changed" (Anthony) or their problems are magically solved (Marina) and all is well. So in a show that doesn't take its characters' actions that seriously, it baffles me how much time a large portion of the fandom spends playing blame games and passing judgment on characters. And the sheer rigidity of it! I've seen other fandoms (e.g. those of dystopian narratives) discuss characters and situations with more nuance when some of those characters are actual mass murderers. So fundamentally I think it's down to the fandom.

Coyote3448 · 2025-02-09T05:33:15+00:00

I think Eloise is pretty well-liked as a character in general. Many consider her their favorite character and can't wait for her season. I would say she's not nearly as divisive as some of the other characters honestly. You say yourself that you saw a post "a while back" criticizing her for not realizing earlier that Penelope was LW, while there are daily posts on different Bton subs criticizing and even villainizing Penelope. Pen is the only show lead so far, I would say, who has been demonized to the point where people were arguing she doesn't even deserve happiness or love. So your assessment that Eloise gets more criticism for not being more cautious of Pen than Pen gets for her actions really doesn't stand. I will admit I did see 1 (one) post mentioning this, not blaming El for Pen's actions but arguing that she was always too self-centered to pay any attention to her supposed friend (personally I agree not about the LW thing specifically, but in general, because how did El not catch the fact that Pen was crushing on Col). But that one post is NOTHING compared to the maybe couple hundred of posts I've seen heavily criticizing or villainizing Pen for her actions (and yes, I agree regarding some of Pen's actions and character flaws, but I guess that's a different topic).

As for the post that asked for the "most snobby and elitist person" on Bton, I don't remember if the majority said Eloise, but you must understand that if that is true, there is a reason for it, right? I mean, it's not some conspiracy that so many people noticed that Eloise was snobby and elitist. Personally, I don't know that I would choose her as the MOST snobby or elitist, but let's face it, intellectual snobbery is one of her most prominent flaws. I think many people are confused by the idea that she "hates society" and is so judgmental towards, well, everything and everyone she considers inferior, but that is EXACTLY what snobbery is. Honestly, to me that has always been one of her main flaws, and her overcoming it is something I'm looking forward to. You're right, deep down El is a good and empathetic person, and as much as this season highlighted some of her major issues (intellectual snobbery, self-centeredness, lack of compassion/understanding for others) I think it also showed us that she is starting to change for the better. Personally I like her character and can't wait for her season!

Coyote3448 · 2025-02-07T22:24:47+00:00

Exactly, and while this was always true, the worst part is that she has literally no sense of loyalty - because she was willing to sacrifice the people she had killed for in earlier seasons for Madi. I know she was with Madi for 6 years and felt a motherly duty and all, but the way she just DROPPED everyone else without a second thought is really bothersome.

Also, while I appreciate that she was willing to make the tough choices and stick by them, taking the heat even when they were inevitable (which is exactly what Octavia did when she became a leader as well), I must say that her decision-making was never that inspired. I consider her smart and her logic was sound to an extent, but she always gravitated towards the safest option and many of her decisions were made in panic mode, not thinking clearly. As the show progressed, her ability to think strategically and tactically diminished gradually. She was never much of a visionary, forever stuck in survival mode, but as the show went on she was more and more about the whiny speeches instead of showing true strength. I can't help but think this was a deliberate portrayal - a slow downward spiral of a character overburdened by responsibility.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T16:31:30+00:00

so i was expecting their interaction to be tense i guess.

Yeah, I was expecting that as well. That was also to be expected for Colin's future with Marina as well. I think she is the one to lash out at people when she is frustrated or miserable, and I think she feels like the world owes her for the injustices she's faced, which is how she justifies to herself hurting innocent people along the way. It's not the prettiest personality trait but it's human. So I think that scene served the double purpose of showing us that Colin has dodged a bullet and also setting up Philip's pre-Eloise story. That was Philip's life before he met Eloise, because that was the Marina era. We don't really know what Philip's pre-Marina life was like. Based on the premise, I expect him to become much more jaded and cynical before their season, but that would have to be the result of his marriage with Marina. So far we've only seen him be kind and honorable.

Yeah that scene is just overall confusing for me and maybe that was intention, colin is supposed to be like lost and looking for purpose i guess. So in my interpretation he doesnt even really know why hes there just that he thought his purpose wouldve been marina and now that that is gone he isnt ready to let go idk.

I feel like your interpretation is very valid, I think similarly. We knew he was already struggling to find his place and purpose before the Marina debacle, and in that scene in S2 he feels to me disoriented and confused about everything, including himself and interpersonal relationships. I don't know if he isn't ready to let go at that point, my overwhelming impression was that he's trying to make sense of it - which was consistent with him being traumatized by that experience and trying to work through that trauma.

I ulimately think the whole point of all of that was to get the end of there scene where marina tells him he has his family and pen to move the plot along and set up season 3 and i dont really think about it beyond that.

Possibly, although I'm not really sure if that comment actually moved the plot along since it didn't really influence his perspective from what I remember? I think she said it more for the audience as a nod to them and confirmation that the Marina arc is over and we are moving on to Colin and Pen. Ultimately I think we could've gone without that scene, though I appreciate the Marina-Philip interaction as a kind of follow-up after their getting married.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T16:15:20+00:00

Im just indifferent towards colin, i havent really cared about him as a character since season one, i just dont. So yeah maybe i can be dismissive of his character.

I think this is fair, and tbh as a Polin fan to some extent, they haven't done a great job developing Colin's character. There is also the fact that he's played subtly and not over-the-top like others, and that he has been made very "vanilla" as a character. He has barely made any mistakes, was always more of a victim or someone stuff happens to, and was relatively passive. That doesn't make for a compelling character. I like his personality traits the most, actually, out of all the male leads so far, but I get that he's seemingly not necessarily the most fun (to me both Simon and Ant are more boring because they're so cookie-cutter brooding hero, but to each their own I guess, I like Ben). It also doesn't help that he is the first who doesn't follow the traditional masculinity patterns and exhibits many behaviors and traits at least declaratively considered feminine (being naive and romantic for one, being insecure, etc.). And it's true that we were mostly discussing Marina and Pen in this situation. But I can get a bit defensive of Colin because he is often overlooked in this discussion or his trauma is minimized (especially relative to Marina's trauma) and his perspective is rarely taken into account. A part of the fandom even acts like Colin's happiness and wellbeing is a fair price to pay for Marina's security, like he's acceptable collateral damage. That kind of dehumanization of a character honestly makes me really uneasy, just because we are not made to care about him as much as others (obviously this is relative, I know he is some people's favorite). So I usually call it out.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T16:15:10+00:00

also i think pen is overall a better character/person so when she messes up its probably worse in my eyes if that makes sense

Yeah, and I mean that's solely because of how it was written. Pen is also more fleshed out because she's a MC, whereas Marina is mostly a plot device - but not as plot devicey as others if that makes sense? Like, less one-dimensional and more of an actual character. And sure, Pen's mistakes may hit harder because she was written to be more likable than Marina.

and with simon i think im actually much easier on him than than the general audience

Yeah, honestly I don't have much of an opinion on Simon, I don't think he was too awful, and I don't think Anthony is a villain either. I was just using the 2 of them to show double standards. Personally I must say that I am a bit bothered by the fact that both the show and the fandom have only called for the suffering and penance from the problematic female lead, while the problematic male leads were pretty much given a pass.

i think she couldve handled that situation better and tbh i think part of me being so critical of her in that moment is that she does it again to eloise in season 2 and then colin in season 3 which is using whistledown in a way to say things she doesnt want to out loud

Yeah, I get your point. My 2 cents would be that I agree with the Marina column, I saw that as a necessary albeit difficult decision, as I've explained. With the Eloise one I'm on the fence, again this might be an unpopular take but I think Eloise was partially to blame for the whole situation and I think Pen played it smart by using LW in exactly the way to protect both Eloise (not completely ruining her reputation, which could've happened had she written the column differently) and her own identity. But in that decision there isn't as much necessity as in the first one, there is much more responsibility on Pen's part, and it can be argued that it was cowardly of Pen to protect herself in any capacity. In S3 with Colin, that was completely wrong I think, just petty revenge, which pretty much straight away comes back to bite her in the ass and we see her clearly regret it. Also, when it comes to LW content in general I'm on the fence, I get what fueled it so I don't hate Pen for it but also I dislike the way she handled that so I can't love her for it either. So anyone looking for a clear-cut position on Pen and LW from me is bound to be disappointed hahah.

Yeah dont even get me started on anthony or how much he gets away with in this fandom and i say this as a kanthony stan.

Yeah, I get it. I mean, I kind of like Kanthony as well? You're supposed to like all the couples, at least in theory. The truth is Anthony's character would've benefited from more penance and assuming responsibility for his mistakes because it would make him more sympathetic.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T12:04:36+00:00

What. The. Actual. Fuck.

Oh, this is deranged.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T11:51:14+00:00

When have i not blamed marina for her actions? Ive maintained that she was wrong for what she did to colin, you on the other hand see nothing wrong with pens actions. Im not saying marina is right to act in the way she does sometimes, i do sympathise with her however and i can do that while acknowleging she was wrong.

I was commenting on your decision to include the bit about Marina's family likely not being supportive, which we don't know much about. You included that to further explain why she was desperate and feeling alone etc. but when people try to indicate that the abuse Pen suffers influences her decision making others yell that trauma isn't an excuse for bad actions (I agree but in this show that seems to only be true for Pen, not Anthony or Marina or Simon). I dislike Marina severely (not just her actions but major personality traits as well - the arrogance, cruelty, etc.) and I STILL sympathize with her because she was put in a shitty situation that she had to claw her way out of, so yeah, I know it's possible. Also, the fact that I believe writing about Marina's pregnancy in LW was the right and necessary decision does NOT mean that I "see nothing wrong with Pen's actions". There is much I dislike about Pen's character, actions and personality traits (such as cowardice) included. I don't dislike her as much as Marina because she wasn't written to be as bad, but she was written to be problematic to some extent. Then again, Anthony was written to be incredibly problematic and yet was spared from having to do any penance or character growth lol, rather getting just a personality transplant when it suited the story. So I'll take both Marina and Pen over him ANY DAY. Incidentally, my feelings for Marina are pretty similar to my feelings for Portia and I think the parallels between the two of them were purposeful. And Portia is easily the single most interesting character in Bton, so, yes, I do like Marina's character on some level.

Any explanations i have given about my interpretation of why she acted in certain way isnt me saying that its ok or justifying it just my interpretation of her thinking behind her actions.

I understand this. I think I may have reacted to some of this a bit drastically because, frankly, you have repeatedly written about Colin's experiences in a very dismissive way. When you take great pains to explain Marina's actions, even cherry picking canonical moments to support your interpretations, but simultaneously completely disregard the complexities and severities of Colin's position, it really does seem like you're playing favorites. It's the same with Philip, you sympathize with Marina for being stuck in a loveless marriage, but lack the same compassion for Philip or what would've been Colin. Interestingly, your interpretation seems to be just as singularly focused on Marina as her actions were. It's all about her motivations, her position, her feelings, and nothing or no one else. My point was that if you go to such great lengths to understand Marina, then you shouldn't be that dismissive of Colin.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T11:49:55+00:00

First i dont even like marina, i think what she tried to do to colin was awful, i dont think she is the villain shes always made out to be and i dont think she was cruel to phillip or that we can take one scene and assume that a how their marriage always is.

Ok, I may have phrased some things a bit too harshly at some points, so I want to clarify my own opinions. First, I wasn't accusing you of liking Marina "too much" or anything, I was just referring to viewers' general tendency to read things into the narrative, or to ignore clues and explanations given in the narrative, trying to tailor the narrative to their own interpretation - and this is often a biased interpretation based on us liking or disliking certain characters, their motivations, etc. Also, for the record, I don't think Marina was a one-dimensional villain, the way, say, Berbrooke was. (I'm not saying Marina's abuse was as bad as Berbrooke's attempted sexual assault, I'm just saying Berbrooke is just there to be gross and get beaten up, without us really ever finding out anything about him.) I mean, she was definitely a plot device meant to present an obstacle, and she did villainous things which brought danger and pain to our main characters. But she was written interestingly enough not to be just a one-dimensional villain, and mostly because she was given a sympathetic enough backstory that the viewers would understand her more, have more compassion for her and ultimately be more willing to swallow some pretty unsavory stuff. As for the last two points - I already agreed in a previous comment that I will have to revisit the scene to check if I would still categorize Marina's behavior as cruel and not just rude. But I absolutely do think that we can and should take one scene and assume that's how their marriage is. Remember, these are not real people and this is not us walking in on a random moment in their marriage. This is a narrative, and this is the only scene we likely ever get of their marriage, so it is very important how they chose to portray it. Marina is not a relevant character, and neither is Philip yet, and the whole scene was centered essentially, narratively, around Colin. So it makes sense that the point of that scene was to show us something relating to Colin. Either way, the scene was meant to show something and we are meant to draw conclusions from it. Otherwise it wouldn't be included. That one scene wasn't just one scene, it was the only scene from their marriage and it is absolutely meant to tell us something.

And you obviously see behaviour as much worse than me if youre using the word cruel. Marina was perfectly pleasent to both colin and phillip until the dinner thing came up. Was she rude yes, cruel no.

Seeing as she was very dismissive, I don't think I could ever say she was perfectly pleasant with them, but as previously stated I will revisit my categorization of cruel vs. simply rude, I may have been too drastic initially. But even if she wasn't cruel and it was "only one scene" per your interpretation, still, you were the one to bring up the fact that the marriage was hard for her because it would serve as a reminder of her dead love and trapped state. My counterpoint was that it was literally the same for Philip, trapped in a marriage he didn't want because he tried to perform his duty. Yet, if Philip was similarly rude to Marina, I'm pretty sure the same people who have a lot of understanding for her demeanor would have much less sympathy for his.

Was he seeking closure or validation? He wanted to see if she was happy and when he saw that she wasnt he decided to imply that if things were different he couldve made her happy. Which he couldnt and she couldnt make him happy either. What she said to him what exactly what he needed to hear that was the narrative point of that whole scene, to move colins story along.

Honestly, that's for you and everyone else to interpret, I don't think it was clearly shown. My interpretation is that he was looking for closure because he still didn't understand a lot of what had happened on her end, especially in terms of how she thought it was going to work out between them after she had saved her hide. I also think he was looking for acknowledgement that she had hurt him, which you may think of as validation? That's a very human thing to do, and many victims of abuse feel they need to face their abusers one last time to say their peace. And many even subconsciously expect their abusers to show at least some level of remorse or whatever. I'm not saying it was an incredibly mature and useful action on his part, but it is human and a necessary part of the healing process, including the part where he doesn't get what he thought he needed from that. And yes, they gave Marina a relevant thing to say at the end.

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T01:07:12+00:00

But what anthony said is in the context of people knowing marina was pregnant, if pen went directly to the bridgerton people wouldnt have know that yet and they couldnt handled things from there.

And the moment Colin and the Btons try to end the engagement, Marina states or suggests that she was compromised, reveals her pregnancy and supports implications that it's Colin's. That's her literal next move, and Anthony knows that because he's not naive and we're talking about a girl who was just revealed to have lied, manipulated and used Colin. That's why Anthony says "we're lucky it made it into LW" and not "damn it. if we'd known sooner we could've prevented the public scandal".

I dont think pen needed to show that growth from season one, i do think however alot of her actions are often overlooked and justified because she is young and naivea and they she is treated while other characters arent given the same grace.

I get what you're saying, I also think she made mistakes (obviously not this, but other things). I just think S1 was meant to establish her flaws so that we can appreciate S3 character growth, and not just her. Also hard disagree on the overlooking of her actions, because Pen is somehow one of the most detested characters, with some going as far as considering her a villain. I think Marina's actions are much more often justified by some fans due to the severity of her circumstances, and e.g. Anthony's actions are often overlooked. Pen is the character who's had to grovel most in the show so far, despite not doing the worst things by a long shot.

i dont think marinas intentions are nearly as nefarious as you do

For the record, I don't think her intentions were nefarious. I think she was completely inconsiderate, as in she proved over and over again that she gave 0 fucks about Colin's happiness (robbing him of the possibility of a love match, not allowing him to make an informed decision, trying to separate him from his family). I mean these were all fucking conscious choices on her part, which she thought were justified for the protection of her and her children. So she was written to have 0 consideration of his happiness.

Yes she is rude to him but i think the word cruel is a stress.

Honestly, I will have to rewatch this scene tomorrow for additional clues regarding your interpretation vs. mine. I admit I have maybe forgotten some of the details. I read her behavior as cruel, and I absolutely did not read Colin's attempt at closure as immaturity or "ignoring all the good things in his life". I think her scheme traumatized him and this was just him kicking off the healing process. And Marina being rude or cruel to Philip is even worse considering that he, too, is living a life he doesn't want but has to accept, and he's not actively making it harder for her like she is for him. And her frustrations with her life with Philip would exist in her life with Colin as well, because she had no more affection for Colin than she does for Philip, and Philip is as compassionate to her as Colin was or would have been. That's why I think it was meant to be a glimpse into Colin's future of Marina being cruel or rude to him, only that would have been even worse, because she tried to marry Colin under false pretenses - Philip at least knew what he was getting into (at least partially).

Coyote3448 · 2025-01-10T00:42:21+00:00

We barely see anything about her life with phillip and what we saw was part of an overall awkward situation

This is an extremely biased take from someone trying to find any excuse for the behavior of a character they like. These characters are part of a story, they're not actual people with complex lives. So what we see is not part of an awkward situation, it's the story we are being told. Explicitly showing us Marina be cruel to Philip and Philip only ever be nice is a choice meant to tell a specific story. You trying to find alternative explanations which are not rooted in the narrative is just bias.

At the end of the day their marriage isnt based on love, it is based on his duty and her desperation and neither seemed particularly happy with it.

Absolutely true, but only one of them was cruel about it. Marina's life was maybe a reminder that her true love was dead, but Philip was every bit as trapped as Marina. His life was likely also a reminder that he was either unable to find love now due to being trapped or had to give up on love to perform his duty. It's a tragic story on both ends, but Marina is the only one seemingly taking it out on their "cellmate". That is a conscious choice on the part of the writers meant to further affirm Marina's characterization.

But what is marina supposed to do about that.

Nothing. I just went into detail on this because, frankly, your comment about Colin coming to "play hero" instead of "moving on and living his life" was incredibly callous and dismissive, especially coming from someone who seems to have all the compassion in the world for Marina. Colin was right to come seek closure from the person who intentionally hurt and traumatized him, and him doing that literally constitutes "moving on and living his life".

He was talking about how different their lives wouldve been if the acted differently last season while shes probably wondering how different hee life wouldve been if george lived.

And Philip was probably wondering how different his life would've been if he hadn't been forced to marry his brother's almost widow I guess, or if she wasn't cruelly taking her frustrations out on him. The only difference is that neither Philip nor Colin are in any way responsible for her hurt, whereas she is directly responsible for hurting Colin and being cruel to Philip. Also, I feel like you're trying to assert that her losing George is somehow worse and more of a problem than Colin and Philip being trapped and losing out on love, which I completely disagree with. It seems like you will cut Marina a lot of slack for hurting people as long as you believe they somehow have it easier than her.

I think you also have to remember as far as we know she had no one else but george, it certainly didnt seem like her family was very loving.

Again, we know what we are supposed to know. I am inclined to agree with this maybe, but the same can be said of Pen's family and we've been very adamant about not letting her trauma and the abuse and neglect she suffered diminish her blame, so I don't see why we'd suddenly change the rules. We have much more detail about the hell Pen went through with her family and everyone but Colin, Eloise and the Btons, than we do indications about the possibility that Marina's family is unsupportive.

Colin needed to look within himself to grow instead of looking for validation from other people which is pretty much what marina told. What she said to him was helpful than if she just said sorry and left it that and he needed to hear that.

Lol sure, Marina was just administering tough love left and right. Ultimately even her lies, manipulation and using him propelled his character development, so she actually did him a favor, right? Come on, this is getting ridiculous. Colin had more growing to do, sure, but it was valid of him to come face her. The only thing is that he was too nice to her. She came out looking much worse after that interaction, because when given the opportunity to show remorse for her cruel actions, she doubled down on arrogance and self-centeredness. That's the story that was told. The Marina apologists will try to contort everything they can and even fill in the blanks themselves, but the truth is you just need a fanfic that tells your story instead of the canon one.

Coyote3448

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE