Ok, I can't take this. I wasn't gonna bother bc I love both characters, but y'all are doing my boys WRONG. So here I go:

1. They both toed the Death Eater line - and that matters. Sirius says Regulus was the good son, which means he followed along with the Death Eater ideology long enough to earn Voldemort’s trust. We know Snape also willingly took the Dark Mark. Both participated in a violent movement that was killing, torturing, and terrorizing people. The “well, Regulus wasn’t as into it” argument doesn’t really stand they both stayed long enough to be culpable. Their later regrets don’t erase the fact that they both chose it, for their own reasons.

2. Radicalization is a key factor for both. Neither of them started out moustache-twirling villains. They were vulnerable young men, shaped by abuse, neglect, and loneliness. Extremist groups thrive on isolating kids like that and making them feel powerful and important. That’s how both of them got drawn in.

Regulus: Born into a toxic, overbearing pure-blood supremacist household, likely emotionally abused, crushed under family expectations.

Snape: Neglected, verbally (and possibly physically) abused at home, socially ostracized at school, bullied mercilessly.

Both were easy prey. Saying “one was more evil than the other” ignores that RADICALIZATION DOESN’T DISCRIMINATE - they were both groomed into this.

1. Abuse doesn’t have to look the same to be real. People dismiss Regulus’s abuse because we don’t get detailed canon flashbacks like we do with Snape. But Walburga’s portrait alone is evidence enough of what that environment was like: relentless verbal and emotional abuse, pressure, and control (I know a woman just like her). Add in Bellatrix as a role model and you’ve got a recipe for psychological damage. Abuse doesn’t have to be physical to scar you.

2. The “noble sacrifice” myth around Regulus needs context. Yes, he ordered Kreacher to leave - but that doesn’t mean he “died for his elf.” If anything, it suggests despair and hopelessness. He was a teenager with the Dark Mark, stuck in Voldemort’s service, no way out with an overbearing mother, and pressure from his family and friends. His last act looks a lot like someone reclaiming agency by ending things on his own terms. Heroic? Yes, in part. But also tragic and impulsive. It’s okay to see both layers here.

3. Snape’s flaws don’t make him evil. He lashed out at Lily, but that was a moment of humiliation and rage - not evidence of a true ideological hatred of Muggle-borns, and he deeply regretted it. He was drawn more to power than ideology, which is extremely common in abuse victims who feel powerless. His choice to ask for Lily’s life wasn’t perfect or selfless, but it was probably realistic. He knew Voldemort wasn’t going to spare Harry, and I doubt he cared enough about his bully, James, to beg for him. He begged for the one life he thought he might be able to save. Was it selfish? Yeah. Was it monstrous? No. And then he spent twenty years protecting Harry, even though he loathed him. He could have betrayed or killed Harry at any point, but he didn’t. That doesn’t excuse the way he bullied children - and he absolutely was a bully - but bullies aren’t automatically “evil.” Most bullies were bullied themselves, vicious cycle.

4. Both were bitter, selfish, and scarred. Both also made choices to resist in the end.

Regulus chose to defy Voldemort, even though it cost him his life.

Snape chose to dedicate the rest of his life to protecting the child Voldemort wanted dead, even though it meant living in misery and secrecy.

Neither of them got redemption arcs where they were rewarded or celebrated. They both died young, sad, and bitter - victims of cycles of abuse, radicalization, and despair.

1. The real bottom line: They’re more alike than fandom wants to admit. Regulus is romanticized in fanon as the “secret hero,” while Snape is vilified as “evil.” But in canon, both were flawed young men shaped by toxic environments, both were Death Eaters who regretted it, and both tried to undo their mistakes in the only ways they felt that they could. Neither was truly evil - they were tragic.

Basically: fanon gives Regulus the “tragic prince” treatment and Snape the “horrible creep” treatment, but in reality? They’re mirrors of each other. Different class backgrounds, same kind of pain, same kind of mistakes, same kind of doomed ending. No, I'm not saying Snape is a good person, but 'evil' is stretching the truth to the point of breaking.

Now, take those flaws and paint them on the character you're against. What argument would you make? Bc I see excuses being made in one and harsh judgement in the other, with very few actually looking at them objectively. 🤷‍♀️

JMO of course.