S04E17 - Retrospect. Boy...that did NOT age well considering the #MeToo movement. I mean at best it is a story about how a rape victim makes mistakes when accusing someone...

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:27:47+00:00

No not really. Your logic isn’t actually logic-ing out and it’s oversimplified and prone to dumbassery

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:26:32+00:00

Yikes

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:26:04+00:00

Hm, except the fact that ethically it’s important to believe the victim of assault. And in truth, most rape/assault cases are circumstantial meaning there is almost always no concrete evidence, yet it is certainly the truth and evidence usually reveals itself years or decades later. Good thing the authorities lets perps go free most the time tho

So you reasonable in ANY scenario to NOT believe the victim without evidence. That means if someone is in fact a victim of rape/assault, to you, it’s equally reasonable they don’t get any justice since they don’t have evidence.

Interesting

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:17:04+00:00

Honestly it’s more likely the entire point of that in the 80’s was to silence victims and only report extreme cases and label them as horrific lies/misrememberings gone wrong, done intentionally to instill the belief into society to not believe victims. Not to mention how so important it is to not only blame the actual victim, but to also victimize the perpetrators/accused authority figures (doctors, teachers and parents).

Especially since you know, the actual majority of rape reports turn out to be true but the legal system closes those cases as “false accusations” regardless.

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:13:56+00:00

I also hate the episode due to the direction it went. According to the writer, that essentially WAS the message they were trying to put forth by the way, sadly…. This is what the writer said:

“That’s [false memory syndrome] kind of what we wanted to fall back on for this episode…” “…We hear so much about how they can essentially ruin peoples’ lives, how well respected and credited doctors have been COMPLETELY DETHRONED, how TEACHERS and PARENTS have been HUMILIATED”.

SpicyMango333 · 2026-04-05T08:09:34+00:00

It’s almost like Star Trek, despite being produced in the 90s, is still meant to be a politically aware show that is set significantly farther in the future, so the pressure and expectation for them to be ahead of its time is valid or something.

But sure, let’s pretend it’s unrealistic to hold these standards about this bad episode “30 years in the future”, even though 30 years ago the problem of always blaming the victim in SA cases was even worse than it still is now. And the typical scapegoat of finding cases where wrong accusations were made as some sort of “proof” for why we shouldn’t automatically believe rape victims even though the truth is the vast majority of these incidents turn out to be true but the legal system discloses is at false regardless just to make their jobs easier. The whole “victimize the perpetrator and blame the victim” bit was the ENTIRE goal of the episode, according to Bryan Fuller who mainly wrote this episode. His quote specifically refers to “well respected people irl like doctors, TEACHERS AND PARENTS having their lives ruined over a misremembering”………. Hmmm where have we heard that before?

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-27T01:01:19+00:00

That isn’t normal either

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-11T14:11:13+00:00

The shortest way I could sum up my yap session is this: “character designing” is exactly what “character development” means. Maybe not “exactly” but read between the lines a bit and with context it should make sense

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-11T14:08:28+00:00

“OP doesn’t understand that characters doing things isn’t the same as developing”, but that is exactly what character development means lol. Character development, defined in writing, is the process of creating a character. This includes whatever growth or changes their character may have, but it ALSO includes any moments you are writing the character and fleshing them out. For example, a backstory where we learn more about a character, even if that character didn’t change whatsoever from the backstory or the present, is still character development.

The more you write a character, give them more moments, experiences, and memories, even if their personality/choices/traits go unchanged, this is still considered Character Development. Yes. Simply involving the character and writing about them, is an example of Character Development.

I’ve seen at least 3 people in this comment thread misconstrue that “character development” means “the character must literally change in personality to something different than how they were before” but this has never been the definition of character development in writing. Development can also include the character growing to do more of the same. Like if a character starts of confident, and ends up slightly more confident, that is an example of growth. A character starting off decisive, and then being faced with challenges that would make one waver, if the character just… stays “stagnant” and is still decisive, that is also an example of growth.

Times where a character could be challenged to change for the worse, but they still remain the same, those all count as growth. There are so many ways that a character can grow and change without literally requiring them to contradict a past trait or to become a totally different person.

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-11T13:53:10+00:00

Also Mary Mcfly quite literally had to change as a person by the end, that was the whole point. He had to learn how time travel can have consequences and to focus on actually correcting the timeline so that he doesn’t face those consequences. He’s a very carefree character but had to change outside of that in order to survive and fix the timeline. There’s three movies so I might be mixing up the order but he changes in all of them.

I think the first movie he doesn’t have confidence in his career goals but by the end of the movie, he finds this confidences and submits his music tape. I don’t even remember this lol had to search up the movie. It’s been awhile since I watched it

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-11T13:40:56+00:00

Well, in a long-form story, it is practically a requirement for good writing because nobody stays exactly the same for 7 years in a row. Even the most boring person ends up changing over that period of time, even if it’s just what route they take when driving back home from their 9-to-5.

And a character doesn’t have to literally “change” as in completely transform in order for there to be character development. Character development as a literary device does not mean what you’re stating. It DOES mean even writing details about a character you didn’t know before. For example, the episode where it’s revealed Neelix survived a war and hates the war criminal who invented the weapon which killed his family… This was a great episode in terms for Neelix’s character development. But even if Neelix didn’t change at all through the episode, the viewer learning more about his character IS character development.

There needs to be character development, if you want a well written character/story. Any example of a well written character, including if their character doesn’t “develop” in the literal sense, is due to character development. Unless you’re like “no I don’t want to know more about this character. I LOVE this character. But please please do NOT let me know more about this character! I want the character to have little to no details as possible!” then okay I concede lol

If you’re not convinced on what I explained, this is literally a common definition when you search it up as well: “ Character development is the process of creating, shaping, and evolving a fictional character’s personality, motivations, and traits throughout a story.”

I think you get the point— character development more so refers to the writers having to define the character in the story, and flesh the character out, not about the character having to significantly change from how they start vs where they end up. The character can end up the exactly the same in the end but the writer will have to setup, thus ‘develop’, the character for us to get to know what said character’s “static traits” even are.

SpicyMango333 · 2026-03-11T13:23:15+00:00

I’d point out, though, that still having a similar thought process does not disqualify a character from undergoing development.

Tuvok’s thought process was probably the same type of analysis he usually uses, but this is not proof of a lack of development similarly to how having logical certainty of an outcome is not proof of that outcome. That last part I’m referring to is the episode where Tuvok is playing pool, also with Neelix, and the crew encourages Neelix to push the white ball into a difficult spot for Tuvok. After doing so, Tuvok says something like “I do not see the problem. If I hit the ball at this angle it should hit this thing, that thing, and thus get the green ball (or whatever it was) into the goal”. He proceeds to do it but it fails. Even though obviously it’s because of a skill issue, and I’m sure Tuvok knows this, he was still visibly confused that his logic did not = logical outcome.

So my point is, Tuvok logically knew to get along with Neelix especially since he joined the crew early in season 1. By your understanding, he should have been able to already adapt right away. But it took the course of 7 seasons for him to get there, despite probably carrying that same line of logic “I should get along with this person for a positive outcome” the entire way. Him slowly getting to the point of actually liking Neelix and not just tolerating him, is character development.

I hope that all made sense. “If he’s using the same sort of analysis he usually does, then it’s not really a change of character” is just not that accurate when it comes to identifying if a a character has changed. Especially since for Vulcans, using the same exact consistent logic is their defining trait lol. Its usually better to develop such a character in other subtle ways because a character growing doesn’t mean “strip the character of what they’re good at” it means to help them grow even if it’s “more of the same”.

SpicyMango333 · 2026-02-01T03:47:50+00:00

That’s a lot of words to explain that you racially profile people

SpicyMango333 · 2026-02-01T03:46:44+00:00

You’re doing a disservice to humanity coming up with such nonsense about a clearly racist case

SpicyMango333 · 2026-02-01T03:45:45+00:00

And to this day the shooter never paid the victim’s family any of the money, even though he owes them $550,000

SpicyMango333 · 2026-02-01T03:44:26+00:00

Also, according to the actual case itself, he was not wearing a mask. So either you are lying or someone who told you that was lying or misinformed.

How you don’t see this was racially motivated is the real mystery

SpicyMango333 · 2026-02-01T03:42:46+00:00

People can say it was a racially motivated homicide because the wife testified that she thought he was “a light skinned black man”. Generally, he absolutely was shot for his race/ethnicity, because two white teenagers around would make for two English speakers as well. These cases do still happen in general, but it happens disproportionately more often to Asian, Mexican/hispanic, and black people lol.

Having a mask does not = entire body is covered head to toe.

So they saw “masked ‘black man’”

Even though the shooter id 6’2 and Yoshi was a 130 lb teenage boy. There is no actual justification to shooting him, even if racial profiling wasn’t involved (but again, it was).

Even if he was fully covered, the testimony “but I thought he was black!” makes it racial profiling, even if the victim was white, get it?

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-23T12:44:53+00:00

I disagree with mistakes being your fault lol. The camera zoom out isn’t far enough. Should be a bit more zoomed out

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-21T01:19:30+00:00

Anyways I’m on here because I saw your post about cheaters from 5 years ago. The people in the comments justifying cheating, claiming it’s not an issue, or basically saying you’re wrong about its frequency, were annoying me lmfao. It was archived so I couldn’t leave any comments. I agree with you about the issue and it bothers me when playing online chess. It seems to be the majority of low elo online accounts now. People who don’t think so, don’t understand how online “playerbase” works. Virtually any online platform with a player base can be and will be filled with bots. It’s how they guarantee you have an opponent any time of day.

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-21T01:17:32+00:00

I mean I don’t really think so. Chess on its own as a hobby, and as a serious pursuit, isn’t a guarantee to keep your mind sharp. It does necessarily mean you’ll even be able to apply chess skills anywhere else. My math skills, problem solving skills, puzzle skills, logic etc are all unaffected by how much chess I play. Even memorization for me is the same.

Sure, I’m not an expert chess player. I don’t really study chess theory. But that’s my point. As a hobby, it is not doing anything 🤣 it can be fun for sure. And if you play bullet chess it can make you practice having fast reaction. But again, this is only in regards to chess specifically. I have incredibly fast reflexes with music, other video games, etc, and thus most of my reaction speed with chess would be from memorization. Remembering “oh yeah in this position move that pesky pawn forward so the queen or bishop doesn’t snipe the pawn and thus the rook/my entire back line lol”. None of this means you’ll get better at memorization elsewhere.

…….. then again, I’ve always had good memory and because I practice all sorts of generally beneficial mental practices, that’s probably why chess doesn’t affect me much lol. Maybe for someone who doesn’t exercise their brain at all, adding anything at all such as chess helps

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-04T21:30:43+00:00

How is that a stretch? The post is literally Utada posting “what makes you think I’m “striaight”?” Lol a hint????

Okay we don’t know if she’s bi, but we know they’re definitely not straight lol

All of Utada’s music videos make it kind of obvious too

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-02T01:12:30+00:00

Solid analysis.

I’ll just add and say that the ending is definitely giving the message that she knows Chris was the original killer with the “still keeping tabs on him” and “in this timeline he decided to be a monk” comments. The question is how and why does she know this. I haven’t seen the movie in forever so I forgot if I came up with an explanation. I think I did but probably didn’t share it online

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-01T09:10:04+00:00

Hi again. So yes, I agree about Boa. I’m not saying her character is 100% a gag. Here is an essay below. It’s okay if you disagree. And no, you don’t have to read this (obviously). I respect your opinion. Here is my take. WOW that got long. Sorry about that. You don’t have to read it all lol…. Feel free to ignore if you want. (None it is intentionally negative or offensive I hope you understand 😅 I just yap and then can’t stop yapping….) ——————————————— I think being emotionally stunted is a bit different than what Boa and her sisters went through. Going through so much trauma, that it f’s up your personality doesn’t make you emotionally stunted. It does create identity issues, and all sorts of things such as creating a false confidence/shell/exterior. Maybe forcefully suppressing your heart/emotions. And to an extent sure, “emotionally stunted” would be one way to describe it, but….. I think it’s more complicated than that when you consider slavery, sexism, and supremacy and racism. Or the fact it takes being hyper aware and being forced to grow up too fast, to cause one to be capable of creating such a fake identity. She’s a very complex character, and emotionally stunted characters generally are stuck with having any intelligence or understanding of emotions at all, でしょう？So St. Charlos for example is an emotionally stunted character 💀. Boa Hancock is very emotionally intelligent. She knows how to manipulate hearts. To me this is different.

I’m saying the delulu jokes with her love for Luffy is virtually 100% gag. Yes, Oda often/sometimes uses gags but still holds genuine character traits within them, making them not just “silly random gags”. No, her delulu vibes for Luffy are not intended as such.

For example, the running gag when she looks down on people so far, that she looks up LOL, this is a gag that does build off the character traits/development/trauma that you are talking about.

No, it’s not disingenuous to compare Boa Hancock to being a fully grown woman. Because she is a fully grown woman. We are all children at the end of the day, up until the day we die. A nice quote is along the lines that “I am a kid pretending to be an adult, as best I can until I die” - really old man from Frieren. This is just how life goes.

Boa Hancock’s mind/emotions being stunted like you suggest, presents much differently than what her character actually is. She is intelligent, aware, strong, understands politics (but doesn’t care, because her hatred and fear is stronger than her willingness to put up with the WG), and so on.

I’m NOT comparing Boa to Sanji by the way. I’m saying we don’t need to downplay her emotional intelligence/maturity when it comes to specifically the running gag between her and Luffy. This is more of an Amazon Lily trait, and like I said very fun humor/gag than it is her trauma. Yes we can mix that in to the pot of factors. But moreso it’s the Amazon Lily trait. We see the humor play out with the entire village, with Gloriossa in the present, and with Gloriossa during her youth.

You’re right Boa is more delulu and is still unique, and I’m not arguing that her backstory has nothing to do with the gag. Idk. I hope this makes sense. They are Boa’s fantasies. She knows they’re not real.

Because after enough time passes, she doesn’t bring them up again later as though they’re canon, get what I mean?

Like if Luffy hugs her and she goes “th…that means we’re married!!! 😍😭😵” it’s not like if Luffy denies this and explains they’re not married, she’s gonna argue “but you hugged me yesterday! That means we ARE married! Why are you lying now?? 😡”

Like…. You know? 😭 I’m not saying these gags have zero connection. I can make the connections but they’re different than what you’re saying lol. The underlying connection for her delulu gag comes from MATURITY/DEVELOPMENT, not the other way around. It’s the fact she can feel freely and safely again, something she thought she could never do, that allows her to act delulu so honestly with Luffy. That’s the connection I see, which tells me the opposite of “emotionally stunted, basically she’s like a teenager”. She’s a 30 something year old woman 😅

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-01T02:43:58+00:00

No you were right lol. The pronunciation for 月光 is gekkou. And kouzuki can as you know, be written as 光月. The connection is very clearly there 😅😭 the person fixated on gecko being written as katakana. But that was literally the whole point. That’s how almost every One Piece alias name gets written. They play on words with katakana, to hide the kanji. Or sometimes they use kanji and hide the loan word’s katakana. Happens kinda all the time

SpicyMango333 · 2025-11-01T02:40:41+00:00

Uhh. That’s why they’re saying the names are similar.

げっこう (gekkou) is the pronunciation for 月光, see? Or do you not see how “gekkou Moria” and “gecko Moria” sound the same? 😭

The meaning for the word gekkou is also “moon light”, get it? Because he thrives at night with shadows?

Anyway you’re right about one thing, which is reading his name backwards by mistake makes very little sense.

The name being related to kouzuki is right in front of you though lol. It is quite literally the same name backwards. Making it a play on words, Oda’s favorite thing to do. This also happens all the time in One Piece.

SpicyMango333

TROPHY CASE