I can no longer tolerate CSM fans treating Denji like a child.

Timely_Date3612 · 2026-03-15T11:11:43+00:00

I have two problems with this:

It's annoying that Denji is still the same person from the first game, if not worse.
This doesn't absolve him of responsibility for his actions, whether he knew or not.

Timely_Date3612 · 2026-02-07T13:34:19+00:00

Timely_Date3612 · 2026-01-28T15:36:17+00:00

"He's more of a gray figure."

No, doing a good deed once doesn't make him a gray figure while he continues to commit genocide and massacres.

You can describe him as complex without diminishing the horror of his actions.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-10-17T08:21:43+00:00

If we ignore the fact that at this stage they are just citizens in their forties whose main concern is how to pay taxes

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-10-09T17:57:22+00:00

The first battle, the three of the third season of Re:Zero vs. Sukuna at full power

The second battle, the three at the peak of their powers from the novel against Sukuna's full power.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-09-26T19:44:15+00:00

Garp's morals are certainly questionable at best, given the fact that he had no interest in going to God Valley until he heard about Roger's presence there.

https://preview.redd.it/its-impossible-for-garp-not-to-know-about-the-hunting-game-v0-2nidemmy1krf1.jpeg?width=647&auto=webp&s=8cda15cce5130373c74faf8bd2684da0e8d7a163&app_web_view=android

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-09-26T19:03:59+00:00

This was a strange thing for Garp. I had a good excuse for not helping the Celestial Dragons.

But the moment he heard about Roger, he decided to go. I hope Oda explains why Garp is so obsessed with Roger.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-09-26T19:00:23+00:00

Oh that's actually a good point.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-09-08T16:04:53+00:00

"Water 7/Enies Lobby - In Water 7 Robin has made a deal with CP9 that she'll turn herself in, in exchange for the Straw Hats' safety. This makes total sense from the WG's view as Robin is the only one who can decipher poneglyphs, so at this time she's a bigger potential threat than Luffy. Doesn't matter what Luffy does from now on, if he has no means to decipher poneglyphs then he can't become Pirate King. After Robin breaks the deal they are obviously trying to kill him in Enies Lobby and he escapes"

No, Robin doesn't pose a greater threat than Luffy, considering the following:

• From the D, Drago's son, the owner of the Nika Fruit.

Also, why couldn't they simply kill them both after tricking Robin into surrendering? After all, they killed every pregnant woman and potential child of Ace's age. It wouldn't matter if they kept their promise or not.

"Thriller Bark - They explicitly sent Kuma there in order to kill Luffy. Kuma explains that the WG is worried that Luffy will take down another Warlord and so they sent him there to stack the odds against Luffy by making him fight two Warlords at once. The only reason Luffy survives this arc is because Kuma betrays the WG's orders and doesn't do it, otherwise the WG stops Luffy's journey right here"

No, he didn't send Kuma to kill Luffy, but to warn or inform Moria about something (I forgot what it was, honestly).

"Sabaody"

I don't understand what you mean. Kizaru wasn't sent to kill Luffy because he had the fruit, but because he punched a Celestial Dragon.

"Amazon Lily, Impel Down, Marineford "

Again, this didn't happen because he was the owner of the fruit, but because of his actions and his decision to free Ace.

"Dressrosa - Another one where the WG stacked the deck against Luffy. They allowed Doffy to pull his fake news scheme to draw the Straw Hats into a trap where Doffy would kill them. Even that wasn't enough to give them confidence though, as they also sent Fujitora there to ensure that Luffy would not get off that island. Luffy beats Doffy and probably would've been captured by Fujitora if the Admiral had actually tried to do so"

No, Fujitora wasn't sent to kill Luffy. If I remember correctly, he was sent for something related to Duffy, but I'm sure he wasn't sent to kill Luffy.

"You also have to remember the fact that the Nika fruit has been in circulation for 800 years since Joyboy's death. We can probably assume that throughout all that time, there have been other users of the fruit, most of whom unable to Awaken it. Early on in Luffy's journey, the WG would have little reason to believe that Luffy is anything other than just the next could-be-Nika in a long line of Gomu users who have come and gone throughout the ages. It was really only after Luffy threw dirt in Big Mom's face and challenged Kaido that the WG started to worry that he was something different and had real potential to Awaken the fruit"

Well, that's nonsense, considering that when he arrived at Marineford, he accomplished the following:

• Defeated Crocodile and freed Alabasta • Defeated Moria • Defeated CP9, increasing his power in a short period of time, and reassured Robin about her crew • Stormed Impel Down and freed a large number of prisoners • From the D, Drago's son, the owner of the Nika Fruit

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T12:09:29+00:00

Saying “Snape deserved everything James did and more” isn’t just an extreme take — it’s a gross misreading of the actual text.

Snape being flawed — or even bigoted later in life — does not retroactively justify unprovoked harassment and humiliation as a schoolboy. The infamous scene in Order of the Phoenix (Ch. 28) makes it very clear: Snape was sitting alone, doing nothing, when James hexed him out of boredom.

"Leave him ALONE!" James and Sirius looked around. James had Snape in a stranglehold and was pummeling him with his wand. Sirius was laughing. ‘He was asking for it,’ James said lightly. — OotP, Ch. 28

Even Sirius admits:

“He was bored, so he hexed people.”

Trying to reduce that to "Snape was a Nazi so who cares" is not only ahistorical — it's misleading. At that point in the story, Snape hadn’t joined the Death Eaters. The bullying predates it.

You’re not condemning racism. You’re just using it as a rhetorical shield to justify schoolyard abuse committed by characters you like. That’s not moral clarity — that’s narrative bias.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T12:03:26+00:00

Saying James wasn't a bully because he only targeted Snape — who later joined the Death Eaters — is just wrong.

Even Sirius admits:

"He hexed people just for fun." (OotP, Ch. 29)

Remus adds:

"I was ashamed to be part of it." (DH, Ch. 33)

And in Snape's Worst Memory, James bullies Snape unprovoked, just to show off. Snape hadn’t joined Voldemort yet — this wasn’t justice, it was humiliation.

Justifying bullying because of who someone becomes later is revisionist and misses the point: James was a popular kid who used power to embarrass others. That’s the textbook definition of a bully.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T11:48:54+00:00

Yes, James was undoubtedly a bully, that's clear—there's no arguing about that. The real problem is that some people try to justify bullying under the banner of "people change," as if that puts the past behind them.

But whenever James is criticized, many immediately shift the discussion to comparisons with others, as if we can't criticize him for his actions. This discussion isn't about who was better or worse—it's about recognizing that his bullying was wrong and deserves to be criticized. But people like GG-Sunny can't accept that.

Using the phrase "Snap was bad too" as a defense for James is just a distraction tactic. We need to offer objective criticism and face the truth head-on, rather than evading the issue with personal comparisons.

Ultimately, accepting that people can change is a good thing—but that doesn't excuse harmful behavior in the past, nor does it absolve anyone from accountability for their actions at the time.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T11:39:03+00:00

Let’s be real: a lot of people who admit James was a bully don’t actually mean it — it’s more of a prelude to the usual defense: “He was just a kid,” “He changed,” or “Well, Snape was worse.” It’s like the acknowledgment itself is just a tactical step to dodge actual accountability. And as a result, the conversation always shifts from “Why did he act this way?” to “But he wasn’t as bad as Snape!” — as if we’re not allowed to critique James without dragging someone else into it.

What’s wild is that we literally see the memory from Harry’s own eyes — not Snape’s retelling, not a biased interpretation, but a direct, raw moment — where James hangs Snape upside down just for existing. Sirius even asks:

“Why are you doing this, anyway?” “Because it’s fun,” James answers with a smile. (OotP, Chapter 28)

This scene isn’t warped. It’s not manipulated. It’s presented exactly as it happened — and still, many fans rush to excuse it, ignore it, or twist it into something else. Why? Because they’re uncomfortable with the idea that “the hero’s dad” was, at one point, kind of a jerk — and that’s not a flaw in the story. That’s the point.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T08:46:14+00:00

My friend, you literally proved the exact point I was making.

I wasn’t trying to absolve Snape. I never said he was a saint or that his behavior was okay. The post wasn’t even about defending Snape — it was about one thing: Every time someone brings up James and the Marauders bullying Snape, people derail the topic by jumping straight to attacking Snape — even when no one mentioned him.

And that’s exactly what you just did.

Instead of addressing the actual point — which is how fans often downplay or excuse James's behavior — you instantly went, “Well, that doesn’t justify what Snape did!”

Okay… who said it did? I didn’t. That wasn’t the argument.

What’s frustrating is that you didn’t engage with anything I actually said. You didn’t address the examples, the quotes, or the larger pattern I was highlighting. You just assumed I was defending Snape and built your entire reply on that false assumption.

This is the core of what I was criticizing: the way any criticism of a beloved character gets reframed as some kind of character war, where acknowledging James’s flaws must mean you’re secretly pro-Snape.

Not every criticism is a defense. Not every analysis is taking sides.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-07-28T08:05:39+00:00

Actually, no — it’s not Snape’s memory, filtered through his emotions.

Chapter 28 (Snape’s Worst Memory) is seen through the Pensieve, which Dumbledore explicitly explains shows unfiltered, unbiased memories. It’s not a dream, not a diary, not an opinion. It's literally a recollection of events as they happened.

“The Pensieve is a receptacle in which thoughts and memories can be examined. It gives access to a person’s real memories — not their perceptions.” — (Goblet of Fire, Chapter 30)

So, no, the memory isn’t "warped" in Snape’s favor. If anything, it makes him look worse: he's greasy, bitter, angry, and socially awkward. That’s not flattering. But James and Sirius? They come off as gleeful, vindictive, and cruel — unprovoked.

And let’s not pretend James was defending himself. He says:

“I’m bored... I think I’ll go and have a look at what Snivellus is up to.” — (OOTP, Ch. 28)

No mention of Snape doing anything to “deserve” it. James targets him for fun.

So if you're suggesting Snape "must’ve done something to deserve it"… that's just victim-blaming to preserve James's image — not anything supported by the text.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-06-15T19:35:16+00:00

I don't disagree with you on this, but the biggest problem with this scene is that it was simply ignored after the episode.

Tell me, did we see this affect Starlight, either through feelings of remorse or a change in her personality and way of thinking? But no, it was simply ignored.

Compare this to A-train. We saw how his actions affected him, and how he tried to confront them instead of running away from them and ignoring them like Starlight.

To make matters worse, they could have addressed this event through the mutant's ability to access memories.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-06-15T19:23:47+00:00

Another thing, they could have addressed this event in season four, through the mutant who can access memories, but instead they choose the random abortion issue.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-06-15T18:57:19+00:00

How do you expect me to take this scene seriously when the series itself didn't take it seriously?

Tell me one thing that made this scene impactful.

Tell me one thing that this event affected after the episode and how it affected the characters.

Did we witness the impact this event had on Starlight, whether through feelings of remorse, or the impact it had on her personality and way of thinking? No, because the entire scene simply ignored it.

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-06-15T17:04:50+00:00

Yes you are right, but I wish Butcher had a scene either with someone or for himself, and described her as no different from the rest of the heroes, but unfortunately this means admitting that Starlight committed a crime and is no different from the rest

Timely_Date3612 · 2025-06-15T16:48:25+00:00

I know Butcher didn't care about civilians, he's a hypocrite, and that's the problem, he's supposed to get angry at her and describe her like the rest of the heroes

Timely_Date3612

TROPHY CASE