officiallilith:

paradox-master:

officiallilith:

The idea that Chara abused Asriel, as presented in @nochocolate ’s “Asriel: How his Behavior Points to a Case of Abuse” post is disrespectful to real survivors of abuse due to the poor application of the abuse narrative. This isn’t to say that all stories or headcanons of abuse are disrespectful. However, I feel that the allegations of abuse in nochocolate’s  post are poorly-applied and thus disrespectful due to the bias that she uses in discussing Chara, the lack of impartial canon evidence about Chara, and the misconstruing of what is there in canon.

This isn’t an attack on the creators of the theory. I think the other nochocolate posts I’ve seen promote a higher standard of reasoning than this post and related Chara posts, which is one reason why I find it disappointing. And I wouldn’t normally make another discourse post about a fanon concept, because I don’t inherently like making these, but I feel like there’s been a prevalence of “abusive Chara” since this post was made and it’s become hard to ignore.

I’m dividing this 18k-word post into several parts. The first is directly replying to related posts made by Nochocolate that attempt to explain Chara and their actions. These are important because Nochocolate cites several of her own posts, and many of these posts skew canon or pass off headcanon as fact in order to portray Chara in a negative light, thus making it easier to see them as an abuser.

Then, with that contextual information, I will discuss what type of person Chara is actually stated to be in the canon. Finally, I will reply to the “Asriel: How his Behavior Points to a Case of Abuse” post itself.

Keep reading

Nochocolate has made some pretty good posts in my opinion, but they always come off as unnecessarily harsh towards Chara when they come up.

This is a very good post; on par with the classic “A CHARActer Analysis.” The only thing missing is humorous alternate names for the Genocide path.

I feel about the same, yeah. I enjoy some nochocolate posts, but almost every post I’ve seen about Chara on that blog is skewed to support the ‘Chara is abusive’ theory.

I can’t believe I’ve never seen this huge CHARActer analysis before (and I reached several of the same conclusions as the OP regardless). My messy post pales in comparison to this well-presented behemoth of an essay. It touches on several things that I either neglected or wanted to touch upon in my post but didn’t because it’s long enough already– like I bring up how Flowey wants to ‘teach’ the human the true nature of the world, but also how Chara is looking to you to learn the true nature of the world. I didn’t even realize that Chara won’t narrate the golden flowers that Frisk falls on until they meet Flowey and Toriel, either.

I kinda want to revise my post- and maybe I will in the future. But right now, I’ve worked on this post so much that I’ve neglected some other responsibilities, so I’m going to let this post sit the way it is. If I get a reply from nochocolate, though, I’ll reply accordingly. Otherwise, nah. In addition, I don’t want to just reinvent the wheel and rewrite what the CHARActer analysis says. (And I’m really not that good of a theorist… I made this post because it was important to me, but that’s about it.)

I highly encourage everyone who read my post to read A CHARActer Analysis for a neat, professional analysis of Chara’s actual personality and actions.