I’ve never understood where people got the impression that game Michael was extremely obedient in hopes of earning approval, affection, and validation from William. I mean, he clearly does not admire him. That appalled laugh/scoff after he says “they thought I was you” says a lot. And it sounds like it’s coming from a place of deeply personal frustration that’s existed for a long time and isn’t some new revelation he had after being scooped.

And I especially never got that impression from what we see in the FNAF 4 mini games. To me that has always looked like a kid acting rebellious because of anger from years of abuse. If he wanted to make William proud of him, I feel like making his brother cry all the time, locking him in the storage room at Fredbear’s, and publicly bullying him at his birthday party isn’t gonna do him any favors. And I know that as far as Michael was concerned, William wasn’t around to watch them that week very much, but it’s not like he wouldn’t find out about it when coming home. It would become William’s problem at some point and he’d end up mad, and I think Michael knew that.

Does that mean Michael doesn’t want validation from William? Not necessarily. I mean, no matter how much he rejects him, I’m sure there’s something deep inside that still yearns for it. And I think part of him was hoping that maybe, just maybe, he’d get it by successfully freeing Elizabeth.

If he were to be very obedient and seeking validation, I would think that would be when he was younger than we see him in FNAF 4. Very young. It’s like Elizabeth says in The Fourth Closet:

“I see everything clearly now. But in my memories ... things were much simpler, which made it so much more painful. Now I know that people are all fading, fragile, inconsequential. But when you are a child, your parents are everything: They are your world, and you don’t know anything else. When you are a little girl, your father is your world. How tragic and miserable such an existence is.” 

Rather Elizabeth has had this realization (books) or not (games), she has always fallen into an obedient role, because she still loves and admires William despite his wickedness. She still seeks his approval. 

But when Michael became aware of this, I think he had an incentive to reject William more than any of his other kids because of their similar appearance. He looks like his father and that makes him not want to be like him. You hear this in that laugh/scoff in the speech I mentioned earlier. He always tries to walk in the other direction. I’ve always thought that was the point of his character. 

But now with movie Michael I’ve found myself questioning if my takeaway from it all has been incorrect all these years. I’m wondering what Scott’s intentions are. And I’m aware the movies are an alternate universe. It seems to me like movie Michael is a complete reversal of game Michael, right down to his preference to be called “Michael” instead of “Mike.” And that might be intentional. I’ve seen people say movie Michael is more like Elizabeth, and I think that’s correct. The dynamic of the Afton siblings may have been shifted around here. 

I’ve seen many people say Vanessa is a better representation of game Michael and I half agree with that. The only thing with the Vanessa connection that stops me from fully agreeing is her assistance in the murders. I don’t know when MikeAccomplice because so popular, but I have to assume it was after the first movie came out in 2023. Because if my memory serves me right, it hadn’t always been so widely believed.

Vanessa is the rebellious one, yes, but she’d been obedient. It took her years to be strong enough to break away from William. But I don’t think game Michael ever had to break away. Like I said I think he didn’t ever want to be like William because he’s cursed with the appearance of the person who hates him the most. Which is why I’ve just never been able to understand game MikeAccomplice unless he was being forced or threatened.

And don’t get me wrong, Vanessa absolutely had been being threatened. She was terrified, as we see in the movie. But had she always been like that? Or was she just like movie Michael until she listened to her inner voice that told her “I don’t have to listen to him anymore. He will not control me anymore.” 

And considering we see Michael behaving rebellious as young as he was in FNAF 4, years before the missing children’s incident, why would he suddenly be fine with assisting with murders for the sake of approval when he’s older? And don’t say people don’t frame it like that. I see people say this all the time. I’ve even seen people say he did what he was told up until being scooped because that was the crucial point where he realized William was bad. Really??? Even if I don’t agree with game MikeAccomplice, I would much rather it be interpreted like Vanessa in the movie. 

But I still think there’s a difference. I think Michael Afton has always been a special case. Why is he the only one who looks so similar to William? Isn’t that significant? Why is he the protagonist of most if not all of the games? I think what hooked people on him so much initially was the idea the serial killer having an eldest son who vows to undo the evil he caused. The idea of a son who looks so similar but is so different because he rejects his father. Seriously, the appearance thing is both alluring and really interesting, and I feel like more could’ve been done with it in the games. And it’s especially disappointing to see it not being utilized (so far) in the movies, because I’ve always felt that it was a VERY big part of who Michael Afton is as a character. 

Movie Michael is like if Michael had his curse lifted. He’s just another FNAF character in the movie. And you know what? That might mean he’s got a chance at a happy ending. Because game Michael’s fate was honestly decided the day he was born as the main villain’s reflection. I mean like come on. Of course he’s the protagonist of the games. It’s the most narratively satisfying thing ever. Almost cliche. 

I think the “seeking approval” came from the PJ Heywood interview. I don’t know I’m a newer fan (relatively speaking, I started liking fnaf in 2019-2020) so I wasn’t all there for everything. That is the only semi-official mention of that as far as I’m aware so it may have influenced people’s opinions.

Leonid Pasternak  (Ukrainian, 1862–1945) - The Torments of Creative Work

oh leonid, we're really in it now

Leonid, you really understand it.

Save me Leonid, from my empty Word document

Leonid what should I do about the emails

Babe are you okay? you reblogged Leonid Pasternak's Torments of Creative Work again

oh leonid, we're really in it now (even more)

how it all feels lately

“If autism isn’t caused by environmental factors and is natural why didn’t we ever see it in the past?”

We did, except it wasn’t called autism it was called “Little Jonathan is a r*tarded halfwit who bangs his head on things and can’t speak so we’re taking him into the middle of the cold dark forest and leaving him there to die.”

Or “little Jonathan doesn’t talk but does a good job herding the sheep, contributes to the community in his own way, and is, all around, a decent guy.” That happened a lot, too, especially before the 19th century.

Or, backing up FURTHER

and lots of people think this very likely,

“Oh little Sionnat has obviously been taken by the fairies and they’ve left us a Changeling Child who knows too much, and asks strange questions, and uses words she shouldn’t know, and watches everything with her big dark eyes, clearly a Fairy Child and not a Human Like Us.”

The Myth of the Changeling child, a human baby apparently replaced at a young age by a toddler who “suddenly” acts “strange and fey” is an almost textbook depiction of autistic children.

To this day, “autism warrior mommies” talk about autism “stealing” their “sweet normal child” and have this idea of “getting their real baby back” which (in the face of modern science)  indicates how the human psyche actually does deal with finding out their kid acts unlike what they expected.

Given this evidence, and how common we now know autism actually is, the Changeling myth is almost definitely the result of people’s confusion at the development of autistic children.

Weirdly enough, that legend is now comforting to me.

I think it’s worth noting that many like me, who are diagnosed with ASD now, would probably have been seen as just a bit odd in centuries past. I’m only a little bit autistic; I can pass for neurotypical for short periods if I work really hard at it. I have a lack of talent in social situations, and I’m prone to sensory overload or you might notice me stimming.

But here’s the thing: life is louder, brighter and more intense and confusing than it has ever been. I live on the edge of London and I rarely go into the centre of town because it’s too overwhelming. If I went back in time and lived on a farm somewhere, would anyone even notice there was anything odd about me? No police sirens, no crowded streets that go on for miles and miles, no flickery electric lights. Working on a farm has a clear routine. I’d be a badass at spinning cloth or churning butter because I find endless repetition soothing rather than boring.

I’m not trying to romanticise the past because I know it was hard, dirty work with a constant risk of premature death. I don’t actually want to be a 16th century farmer! What I’m saying is that disability exists in the context of the environment. Our environment isn’t making people autistic in the sense of some chemical causing brain damage. But we have created a modern environment which is hostile to autistic people in many ways, which effectively makes us more disabled. When you make people more disabled, you start to see more people struggling, failing at school because they’re overwhelmed, freaking out at the sound of electric hand dryers and so on. And suddenly it looks like there’s millions more autistic people than existed before.

“…disability exists in the context of the environment.”

Reblog for disability commentary.

That last paragraph is absolutely important.

“How come nobody ever heard of ‘dyslexia’ until widespread literacy became a thing?”

That dyslexia comment is genius

Interestingly, Dyslexia is less common in non-english speaking countries. And almost unheard of in countries that use some sort of pictograms for lettering (e.g. Chinese and Japanese).

>see bird creeping up and down a tree trunk >look it up >common treecreeper

can't make this shit up

movie afton rabbit study>>>

ao3 is an awesome website for people who love "open in new tab"

modern day who’s on second

“me saw who! me saw who!!!”

I cannot stop watching this video. It’s fucking hilarious and I’ve watching it’s approximately 20 times already

So many characters that should’ve been butch ….

I’m fat I’m gay I’m chopped I’m washed I’m stupid I’m ugly I’m broke and most importantly I’m gonna make it

you know what. I think I should be allowed to temporarily turn into a seal and go swimming around in the ocean for a while. just submit a little note to work that says "sorry, I need to take some sick time, I am becoming a seal" and leave for a week

The trope I appreciate very much

Hey OP? I want you to know that this post changed my life. I have seen it three times now, and while life is still pretty hard, I have focused on increasing my calories and gaining some weight because you know what? You're right.

you guys have to get more weird. it's genuinely not hurting anyone. get weirder. get horny and sexual with it. get violent, get horrifying, get scared, get sad.

having art as your job or school focus is so embarrasing you'll be crashing out like fuuckkk... fuuckk ive got all these images due... my shapes and colors deadline is coming up.... fuckkk....

”Are you an introvert or an extrovert? Do people energize you or drain you? Would you rather be at a party or a library?” Stop subscribing me to binaries. Social interaction is invigorating and makes my life better and I’m exhausted the whole time.

Please invite me to the function. I’ll be all tsundere about it