Sirius And Peter Make Me Believe In Karma. The Dog And The Rat Suit Them So Well. I Still Don’t Understand

etienne-louis bouleé’s cenotaph for isaac newton

Sexual Violence: Concept, Implications, and Consequences

I'm going to say this very seriously because I couldn't care less if you dislike a character and have a pathological need to justify another one at all costs, just because you can't handle being a fan of a guy who wasn't actually a hero. I usually like characters who are absolute pieces of shit, so I have no problem with this, but it seems that some people take it way too personally.

But I don't care. I don't care if you hate Severus Snape. I don't care if you need to call him a Nazi or a racist or any of those things that are neither true nor have any real political, social, or cultural comparison within the lore of the saga. I don't care if you have to invent that he was a stalker or a harasser when he wasn't, or if you need to say he never showered and was ugly because you have the mental age of a five-year-old. I don't give a damn.

There is something beyond fandom, beyond personal taste, and beyond internet wars, and that is the fact of JUSTIFYING a sexual assault.

So, as someone who, due to life circumstances, has spent several years in therapy, had to go to therapy precisely because of being in relationships involving violence and abuse, and who also has training in the prevention of gender-based violence, sexual violence, and sexual abuse, I am going to extend an act of courtesy to all these people who, either out of ignorance, lack of knowledge, or simply because they have empathy shoved up their ass, are denying that certain things constitute sexual violence. I will provide a free lesson on this very serious topic, because I am seeing people who literally have the same discourse as the average potential abuser who denies violence unless the victim is half-dead in a hospital. And I will explain why this view is so incredibly problematic.

This post is going to be long, guys, so get ready:

Sexual violence is a complex phenomenon that encompasses much more than rape. There has been a concerning trend of minimizing or even denying certain forms of sexual violence. This has a serious impact on both society’s perception of these offenses and the struggle of victims for recognition of their suffering. I'm gonna address what constitutes sexual assault from a legal, moral, and psychological perspective, why it is problematic to deny or minimize it, and how such denial not only discredits victims but also contradicts the very principles that many people defend in other areas.

1. What Is Sexual Assault and What Acts Does It Include?

Sexual assault is not limited to rape. In general terms, any sexual act committed against a person’s will, without their consent, or through coercion can be considered sexual assault. This includes non-consensual touching, forced exhibitionism, sexualized verbal harassment, and, in some cases, acts that involve public humiliation of a sexual nature, such as forcibly stripping someone against their will.

From a legal standpoint, different jurisdictions have established that sexual violence does not require penetration to be considered an offense. For example, the Spanish Penal Code, following its 2022 reform, specifies that any act that violates a person’s sexual freedom without their consent is considered sexual assault. In other countries, similar legislation reinforces the idea that rape is only one form of sexual assault but not the only one.

2. The Importance of Consent

One of the key elements in determining whether an act constitutes sexual assault is consent. Consent must be explicit, informed, and voluntary. It is not merely the absence of a "no" but the presence of a "yes" that is free from coercion. In cases such as forced public stripping, the lack of consent is evident, and the humiliation imposed on the victim has an undeniable sexual component, making it an act of sexual violence.

Moreover, the perpetrator’s intent is not the determining factor in classifying an act as sexual assault. That is, the aggressor does not need to have a sexual intent; what matters is the impact on the victim and the nature of the act itself. This is a fundamental distinction in criminal law and forensic psychology.

3. The Psychological Impact of Sexual Violence

Sexual assaults have devastating consequences for victims. Various studies have shown that people who suffer this type of violence may experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, shame, and loss of self-esteem. In cases such as forced stripping, there is an added element of public humiliation that can generate an extreme sense of vulnerability and helplessness, with lasting psychological effects.

When it is denied that these acts constitute sexual assault, victims’ suffering is minimized, and their experiences are delegitimized. This is particularly serious when denial comes from individuals who identify as human rights advocates, as it perpetuates the very structural violence they claim to seek to eradicate.

4. The Minimization of Sexual Violence and Its Implications

Denying that certain actions constitute sexual violence has multiple negative consequences:

It minimizes victims’ suffering: By denying that something is sexual violence, victims are told that their pain is not legitimate or that their experience is not valid.

It discredits years of feminist and legislative struggle: For decades, feminist and human rights movements have worked to ensure recognition of the multiple forms of sexual assault. Denying these assaults is a step backward in these advancements.

It reinforces a culture of impunity: When sexual assault is justified or minimized, it contributes to a culture in which these acts are neither socially nor legally sanctioned.

It implies victim-blaming: Denying that something is sexual violence can lead to blaming the victim for their emotions or for "exaggerating" their suffering, which is a form of revictimization.

5. The Hypocrisy of Justifying Assaults Based on Ideology

A serious issue arises when certain sectors justify sexual violence against specific individuals based on their ideology or social position. It is deeply ironic and hypocritical that those who accuse a person of being a "Nazi" or "racist" without solid evidence then deny that this person can be a victim of sexual violence. This attitude is not only morally reprehensible but also aligns dangerously with historical strategies used by totalitarian regimes, where sexual humiliation was employed as a method of torture and punishment.

Denying sexual violence against someone because of their ideology is, in essence, justifying it. This is not only a form of dehumanization but also contradicts the principles of universal human rights. Legal protections must apply to all individuals, regardless of their ideology, past, or character. Justifying violence based on the victim’s ideology leads to a dangerously fascist stance, the very thing that many claim to oppose.

6. Conclusion about this:

Sexual violence is a structural problem that goes beyond fandom wars or ideological debates. It has real psychological damage, serious legal consequences, and a profound social impact. Denying or minimizing it is not only irresponsible but perpetuates a culture in which victims are silenced and perpetrators remain unpunished.

Those who consider themselves progressive and human rights advocates have a moral responsibility to be consistent in their discourse. One cannot condemn one form of violence while justifying another depending on who the victim is. Sexual violence is sexual violence, regardless of whom it is committed against, and denying it is a betrayal of the fundamental principles of justice and human dignity.

The Dignity of Suffering in Silence: Snape as the Ghost of a Living Man

Severus Snape did not need to die to become a ghost. He already was one. Not in the dramatic sense—with clanking chains or flickering transparency—but in the far more tragic way:

He was present, but unreachable. He moved through the world, but nothing ever touched him back.

Not because he refused it. But because somewhere along the line, he decided he did not deserve to be held.

🕯 What Makes a Ghost?

It isn’t death. It’s what remains unfinished. A ghost is a person who still has something left behind—grief, guilt, longing—and no place to lay it down.

Snape had no grave for what he lost. No funeral for who he could have been. So he kept walking. Teaching. Protecting. Bleeding in silence.

He became a ghost of himself, not because he was weak, but because he had to keep going with no one to grieve him. Not even himself.

🕯 The Cost of Being Unheld

No one held Severus Snape. Not really. He wasn’t touched unless it was violence. He wasn’t spoken to unless it was demand.

He offered no softness because he received none.

And yet—he still gave. Still protected. Still fought for a future that would never welcome him.

He didn’t ask for kindness, because he believed that to do so would be indulgent. And indulgence was for the living.

🕯 He Did Not Haunt Hogwarts. He Haunted Himself.

Snape didn’t linger in the castle’s shadows because he was sinister. He did it because it was the only place where silence matched the volume in his mind.

He wasn’t afraid of the dark. The dark was quiet. The dark didn’t ask questions.

What haunted him was the memory of what he had done. What he failed to undo.

Every corridor was a past echo. Every student a reflection of someone he couldn’t save. He didn’t haunt Hogwarts. He haunted himself.

🕯 Silence Wasn’t Weakness. It Was Power.

He didn’t scream. He didn’t beg. He didn’t unravel in front of anyone.

Not because he couldn’t. Because he wouldn’t.

Snape held himself together out of strategy and survival. Because silence was the one thing Voldemort couldn’t extract, and Dumbledore couldn’t reshape. Because when the world gives you no permission to break, you learn how to endure beautifully.

🕯 The One Who Was Never Laid to Rest

There was no funeral—at least, none that was ever spoken of. No public farewell. Only a war, and then silence.

His portrait hangs at Hogwarts now—but it came later. After the world had rewritten the narrative enough to let him in. And even then, he does not speak from it. Not to us.

Legacy? Perhaps. But it feels uncertain—etched more in hesitation than celebration. His name, his work, his memory... handled like something delicate. Or dangerous. Not erased, but folded away, as if too many feared what it might reveal if honoured too loudly.

Perhaps that’s why he still lingers. Not in ghost-form. Not in frame. But in us.

In the ones who understand silence. Who dress in layers. Who never screamed, but should have.

He does not ask for mourning.

But he deserves to be seen.

He deserves to be laid to rest.

Even if it’s just whispered in quiet posts. Even if it’s just here.

I’m gonna publish this Letterboxd review because omg this movie is so great and this review express specifically how I felt when I first saw it. The setting, the animation, the entire movie is just WOW

Angel’s egg reminds me alot of the Geneis song and I have no words to describe how the song makes me feel (This is said by someone who is not currently a big fan of Grimes, because the quality of his music has worsened a lot ) I know that Grimes takes inspiration from anime and her songs It seems to be taken from a technological world like this movie.

Probably the religious symbolism of the song reminds me of the movie, which also uses religious symbolism too to talk about philosophical themes but I don’t know.

I just feel the need to put into words this feeling. This need to talk about a movie hasn’t happen to me since I saw the movie Perfect Blue lol un películon también, tremenda fumada psicológica eso sí, pero de la buena y que Aronofsky consiguiera los derechos para hacer más tarde the black swan es lo mejor que pudo pasar, es que hola? Natalie Portman en esa película fue simplemente lo mejor de su carrera.

Angel's Egg (1985) dir. Mamoru Oshii

'the temptation of saint anthony (first series),' ten lithographs by odilon redon; french c. 1888.

Black Phillip, I conjure thee to speak to me.

Leonora Carrington (1917-2011), Tarot, Major Arcana.

Soy una persona autista. Normalmente me pongo los cascos incluso cuando estoy con amigos o familiares. Eso me provoca un sentimiento de culpa al pensar si estoy siendo contradictoria: “¿Estoy haciendo esto porque me siento incómoda con mi familia?” La realidad es que no. Mi familia es de las pocas personas con las que me siento a gusto, segura. Con ellos, todos mis fantasmas pasados, todas mis heridas, sienten lo que es el alivio, lo que es el bienestar, lo que es estar tranquila. Ahí sé que no todo es hostil, y que, por lo tanto, no es necesario estar en alerta.

Ahí es cuando pienso que quizás no es una contradicción, que más bien es un acto de supervivencia. Como un puente que une dos necesidades que, a veces, no saben funcionar juntas. Una necesita protegerse, quiere estar a salvo y a gusto, y aunque se encuentre en un lugar seguro, solo sabe actuar de la única manera que ha aprendido: aislándose, permaneciendo en la intimidad, en las sombras. La otra necesita amor, no quiere estar sola y disfruta de la compañía.

La música se vuelve un ritual, un intento de calmar un momento abrumador, una forma de abrir una puerta entreabierta. A veces solo llego a asomarme; no quiero abrirla del todo por el miedo que siento. Algo me susurra y me aconseja. Ese algo me dice que aún no es seguro abrirla por completo. Es una voz que probablemente parte del miedo, una advertencia disfrazada.

Es una lucha constante entre mi necesidad de estar conmigo misma, de intimidad, y mi necesidad de conectar.

Soy tan sensible que, a veces, interactuar con otros se me hace demasiado. Interactuar se vuelve una lucha por ser vista, por pertenecer a los lugares en los que mi cuerpo está, pero no los siento como propios. Es una lucha de identidades, de querer ser vista por alguien verdaderamente, ya ni siquiera sé por quién. Lo busco desesperadamente: puede ser un familiar, un amigo, o quizás solo quiero ser vista por mí misma.

Solo quiero ser vista, y no a través de fragmentos de otras personas. No quiero que mi identidad se forme a partir de cada señal de rechazo que recibo, a veces disfrazadas de comentarios inofensivos, otras veces simples miradas, y en las peores ocasiones, señales claras de que no quieren que forme parte de ese lugar. También está la ansiedad de no saber qué hacer con eso. ¿Qué puedo hacer? Lucho, ¿pero para qué lucho? ¿Qué busco exactamente?

En esos momentos me siento como el monstruo de Frankenstein. Ese monstruo que ni siquiera tiene nombre y que, como un niño pequeño, camina torpemente a la deriva. Una criatura hecha de partes ajenas, incompleta, tan extrañas que hasta a mí misma me cuesta comprenderlas.

Cada rechazo dibuja una nueva identidad. Una identidad creada sin consentimiento, armada con pedazos de otros, que ni siquiera son propios. Una identidad formada por comentarios que resuenan como ecos, por prejuicios que desfiguran partes de mi identidad, por palabras degradantes que hacen daño a mi autoestima. Que se acumulan en capas para construir una narrativa condenada desde el inicio a vagar en busca de pertenencia, amor, comprensión, como si ese fuera su único destino, ser incomprendida desde el principio.

El deseo de buscar una identidad propia se hace presente y no se detendrá hasta que lo consiga

The Marauders didn't stop bullying Snape after the prank. It actually got worse.

A lot of people are surprised to realize that the scene in Snape's Worst Memory happens after the werewolf prank. When first reading OOTP, people generally assumed that SWM showed escalating tension between the Marauders and Snape that up led to the prank. But in DH, we see Snape and Lily talking about the prank before SWM. This means that the Marauders are still singling Snape out and targeting him after prank. Why?

My theory is that the bullying actually got worse after the prank. Because the only way to hold their friend group together was for the Marauders to double down and rally around blaming Snape for what happened.

Think about it: How did that incident not tear them apart? Sirius not only exposed Lupin's secret – he also attempted to use Lupin as a weapon against Snape, and he could have gotten James killed in the process. That's a huge betrayal.

But Sirius isn't mature enough to take responsibility for it. Lupin isn't self-confident enough to confront Sirius about it. "James would-consider-it-the-height-of-dishonor-to-mistrust-his-friends Potter" isn't going to be the one to lay blame on Sirius or break up the group. But it's too big an issue to ignore. The only way they can get over this is to put it all on Snape. It was just a joke, and Snape is an idiot, and James is a hero.

If you compare the two incidents that the books show us of the Marauders bullying Snape, you can see that totally different dynamics are driving the bullying. This shows how and why the bullying got worse after the prank.

The first bullying incident we see is on the Hogwarts Express, when James and Sirius engage in verbal bullying of Snape, with one small attempt at tripping him up as he leaves. This bullying is a form of bonding for James and Sirius and forms the basis of their friend group. This is an example of bullying driven by Peer Group factors (source), and this sort of bullying is generally done to:

to attain or maintain social power or to elevate their status in their peer group.

to show their allegiance to and fit in with their peer group.

to exclude others from their peer group, to show who is and is not part of the group.

What we're seeing here is that the soon-to-be Marauders are in new environment and they're defining their peer group and establishing social hierarchy, trying to establish their status. The Marauders continue in this pattern of Peer Group bullying throughout their school career, as evidenced by the detention records Snape has Harry transcribe in HBP. The Marauders seem to have thrown out hexes in a scattershot way to establish superiority over other students and look cool. This casual, incidental sort of bullying is likely what Snape experienced for the first several years of school.

But what we see in SWM isn't bullying to maintain Peer Group dynamics. This bullying isn't just flinging a single insult or a clever hex. James and Sirius hunt Snape, they deprive him of his wand and ability to escape the situation, and they repeatedly hex him until Lily (temporarily) stops them. This incident is extremely personal. This is an example of bullying driven by Emotional factors, and this type of bullying is done when the bullies:

have feelings of insecurity and low self-esteem, so they bully to make themselves feel more powerful.

don’t know how to control their emotions, so they take out their feelings on other people.

may not have skills for handling social situations in healthy, positive ways.

What we're seeing here is all the fraying edges of the Marauders' friendship. Sirius has just damaged their group, but he can't apologize or address it without accepting blame, so he has to take his emotions out on Snape. Punishing Snape is a way to exorcise his guilt. And it's actually imperative that he bully Snape into silence, because he is the one who has revealed Lupin's secret to Snape and put them all in jeopardy. Lupin can't confront Sirius about the betrayal of trust, and likewise he can't confront his friends here. Not only does Lupin not have the emotional security for handling this situation, he also can't risk putting himself in front of Snape in this moment, lest Snape scream "Werewolf" instead of "Mudblood." James is here trying to work through his own insecurities – in bullying Snape he is defending his friends, but James is also trying to get Lily's attention. James offers to change his ways if she'll give him a chance, because James needs to reassure himself that he is chivalrous, that he is a hero.

Looking at the way the bullying dynamics change and escalate in those two scenes, I think it’s clear that Lupin’s line, “Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to curse James so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down,” is an understatement.

Snape was a special case because he knew Lupin’s secret, which would always make him a potential threat. The Marauders would always take any opportunity they could to reinforce that Snape was powerless to do anything to them. And they’d continue to take out all their emotions about the prank on Snape rather than confronting each other.