Hello! I'm just an average young woman who loved anime, manga, game and anything that picked up my interest! But I am particulary interested in producing my own series one day, and hope with all my tears that it will come true!
A very obvious one is that Jason wears glasses! There is no way that he has 20/20 vision after dying and the pit I’m sorry
Another Jason one is that he had blue eyes before the pit and green eyes after
Jason is a cuddly sleeper, I don’t make the rules. I think it’s more of the comfort of being able to hold onto you to know your safe but I think it’s easier for him to sleep with you there
Tim has beauty marks. He is ungodly pale, I don’t see him as someone who can tan 😭 but he has a couple of beauty marks on his face.
Unlike Jason, Tim is NOT a cuddly sleeper. Obviously he likes laying with you and holding you but when he does finally fall asleep he needs to sprawl out (he does hold onto your hand/wrist when he does sleep though)
Tim prefers to hold hands, than the bicep grab. He likes the warmth of his hand in yours and his favorite past time is rubbing his thumb against yours or tapping an I love you in Morse code against yours hand
Dick always wears mismatched socks. It’s a weird one but I don’t see him as someone who takes the time to match his socks after he washes them
Dick does handstands around the house, it’s the one skill you agreed was safe to do in the house after he tried a round off and broke a vase
Dick wakes up before you ever morning because his favorite part of the day is in the small hours of the morning where the light of dawn catches on your skin with the small rise and fall of your chest
It's never taken Damian longer than 10 minutes to reply to a text or call you back, he will just drop everything
Damian has a sketchbook full of drawings for you, whether it is of you or something that reminded him of you (on the back page of each sketch there's a letter for you)
Damian introduces you to Talia and Alfred before anyone else and he lets out the smallest sigh of relief when he gets both of their approval
Rising from the dead to share this painting and then disappear again
I have spent over 90 hours of my life on this thing because I have had the brain rot for the last 2 years of my life (almost 20 if you count when I first read the comics) and it had to express itself somehow
Hope this dramatic bitch feels appreciated
(A Dream of Morpheus, handmade egg tempera on panel, 12x18 inches...if by any chance you'll be at SDCC or Gen Con, I'll be at booth 934/936 at the first one and Art Show #13 at the second one - come see the original, maybe get a print, or just yell/cry about Sandman with me?)
And here, have some more details - I had fun combining some favorite elements from both the comic and the show ♡
The police guidance is unambiguous and publicly available, so why do so many commentators continue to deny what it says?
By: Andrew Doyle
Published: Jun 10, 2026
‘The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.’ These words are among the most frequently quoted from George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. We see them in memes, in online arguments, repeated endlessly in opinion columns in the national press. The passage has turned into the very thing that Orwell hated the most: a cliché.
Yet ideas become clichés for a reason. So many aspects of Orwell’s novel seem prescient today, not least this tendency among authoritarians to blur the lines between truth and fiction and demand that the population play along. There is no clearer example than what has become known as ‘two-tier policing’. The evidence for it is overwhelming, and yet commentators, journalists, politicians, podcasters, activists and online loudmouths continue to deny it. Once again, the narrative has taken precedence over reality.
The notion that members of the public must be treated differently according to their group identity is not simply a speculative explanation for egregious police conduct. It is explicitly encoded in guidance published by the College of Policing and the NPCC (National Police Chiefs’ Council). There are numerous recorded interviews with officers who tell us that their job is to investigate and arrest those who have caused offence to particular groups. Multiple whistleblowers have revealed details of training sessions they have been compelled to attend that have instructed them to take a two-tier approach.
But you wouldn’t know any of this had you only read a recent article by Andy Hughes, LBC’s Crime Correspondent. Hughes argues that it is ‘nonsense to say police are told to treat people differently based on their ethnicity’ and claims to have spoken to dozens of officers who have confirmed his view. It seems odd that Hughes does not realise that there is nothing particularly surprising about officers repeating the party line. Far more revealing are those who are speaking out about two-tier policing – none of whom Hughes appears to have spoken to – in spite of the risk to their career. They’re called ‘whistleblowers’ for a reason.
Then there is the police guidance itself. Hughes attempts to shrug off the Police Anti-Racism Commitment on the grounds that he doesn’t understand it:
‘The NPCC guidance says: “Producing equality of policing outcomes for people from different ethnic groups by responding to individuals and communities according to their specific needs, circumstances and experiences.”
I’ve read this section several times, and I still don’t know what it means.
The wording is “clumsy”, as the NPCC admits, and police chiefs say they will review the guidance.
But to suggest this means every police officer is now told to treat people differently based on race is inaccurate – and dangerous.’
A generous interpretation would be that Hughes simply hadn’t read the following sentences in the guidance, which could not be clearer even for those unfamiliar with the activist jargon.
And there you have it. The ‘Police Anti-Racism Commitment’ explicitly states that officers should treat people differently based on race and that they must reject the principle of equality before the law. Their commitment to racial equity, it says, ‘does not mean treating everyone “the same” or being “colour blind” (racial equality)’. Of course, it’s unlikely that Hughes stopped reading at that point. It’s more plausible that he realised that the document flatly contradicted his narrative and decided to omit the relevant line.
However, the ‘clumsy’ language that Hughes cites (but does not understand) is evidence enough. When the guidance calls for ‘equality of policing outcomes’, it is saying that suspects should be treated differently according to their race in order to reduce disparities. It draws on a principle of Critical Race Theory, that equality of outcome is evidence of unequal treatment. As Ibram X. Kendi puts it, ‘racial inequality is evidence of racist policy’.
It’s the same logic that prevented Valdo Calocane, a paranoid schizophrenic, from being sectioned by the NHS. Having perpetrated a violent crime, mental health staff did not detain him because they were concerned about ‘over-representation of black men’ among those committed. They were simply following the NHS guidelines, but Calocane went on to murder two teenagers and an older man in June 2023. When ‘racial equity’ is adopted as policy, it costs lives.
Let’s have a closer look at the evidence of institutional capture as reflected in the official police guidelines.
The key change in policing practice occurred because of the shift from equality (treating everyone the same) to equity (treating people unequally to ensure equal outcomes). These principles are oppositional, but are frequently presented as synonymous. When Sir William MacPherson wrote his report in 1999 about the racially-motivated murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence six years prior, the need for racial equality was emphasised. This was not a controversial stance, and the vast majority of the public still agree that racism in law enforcement must not be tolerated.
Twenty-one years after the report, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) submitted written evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee for a follow-up inquiry. By this point, there had been a clear shift away from equality and towards equity, although the specific term was not yet used. While the NPCC made a pledge ‘to embed diversity, equality and inclusion into our workforce and into the services provided to communities’, point 9 was perhaps the most significant: ‘We are committed to understanding disparity within policing and to explaining that disparity. If we cannot, we will reform.’
We all understand that disparity of outcome does not automatically mean that there has been unequal treatment. Nobody, for instance, claims that since 96% of the prison population are male, that must mean that sexism against men is embedded into the system. So while black people are represented in prison at roughly three times their share of the population, we cannot assume that this is because of racism in the police force. Tony Sewell, the chair of the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities in 2021, has persuasively explained how family structure, education and socioeconomic factors can account for the disparity.
In other words, the NPCC was proceeding from a false premise. But it was only after the death of George Floyd in 2020 and the subsequent Black Lives Matter riots and protests that the concept of ‘equity’ became the guiding principle. The Police Race Action Plan, launched in May 2022, opens by explaining that it had been authored in response to an event that had taken place across the Atlantic and in a completely different context of police practices.
‘In the summer of 2020, nations across the globe were rocked by the outpouring of emotion following the murder of George Floyd. It provided a catalyst for the expression of deep concerns about the social injustice experienced by Black people. This was the same in the UK. Although this was a wider expression against societal injustice, it was about policing.’
The document repeatedly referred to the need for ‘equitable’ rather than ‘equal’ treatment. By now the seeds had been thoroughly sown for the abandonment of the principle of equality before the law. By the time we get to the updated Police Race Action Plan of 2025, also produced by the NPCC and the College of Policing, the language is explicit: ‘The police service of England and Wales is committed to anti-racism and racial equity’. Every force in England and Wales has been encouraged to implement this plan, which has led to local forces producing their own likeminded policy guidance.
In 2025, the Met Police commissioned what it described as ‘two key documents’ - 30 Patterns of Harm and A Structural Companion Guide - as part of its London Race Action Plan. The analysis was based on the highly tenuous premise - expressed as though it were incontestable - that ‘anti-Black harm is not incidental to policing; it is structured into its logic’. On the ideal of police neutrality, the author of the review (Dr Shereen Daniels) had this to say:
‘Neutrality is often presented as a position of fairness, balance, or objectivity. But in practice, especially in institutions like the Met, neutrality is not neutral. It reflects dominant norms, particularly whiteness, in how risk, credibility, professionalism, and even “evidence” are defined. To claim neutrality is to claim distance from bias. But that distance is not real. It is structurally coded. It hides power while appearing impartial.’
Such dogma was the inevitable result of the ideological capture of the College of Policing and the NPCC, whose Police Race Action Planestablished a new performance framework for law enforcement. This was then filtered down through training, policies and local action plans. Suddenly, officers were being told to acknowledge their ‘white privilege’ when they should have been honing strategies for crime prevention. The influence of this ideology has been undeniable, but that hasn’t stopped many from denying it.
Those who cling to their belief that two-tier policing is a myth have a Sisyphean struggle ahead of them. They will have to explain why all of the relevant guidelines explicitly promote a two-tier system and expect officers to implement it. They will have to account for why so many police officers have described training sessions in which they are instructed to treat suspects according to the principle of equity rather than equality. In short, it is their unenviable task to disprove what the evidence so plainly reveals. Good luck with that.
With every generation being born, Dead Magic spreads farther and deeper into the cracks of Rena's population . The renowned title of Epiteph, achieved by those at the height of magical strength and knowledge, becomes more myth than reality.
Elzbeth "Ely" N. Locke has the title in her sights, despite the affliction. With her brother Rudi of Night Howl and the friends made along the way, they set out in search of a feat worthy of the title Epiteph.
[Start Here] or [Latest Episode!]
Next Update: Next year or something, I'm starting from the top, woops
3 pages are added every 2-3 weeks on Mondays and usually updates on the same post till about 6 pages
Instagram (social media in general tbh) is really starting to piss me off but I still want to share my art cause I love drawing and its fun and don't want my art to stay sitting in my art folder
Anyway here's Dick and Bruce (shockingly enough this one of his better parenting moves)
The Riddler probably has such an up and down relationship with the Robins because they all tend to tackle things differently and he’s always so thrown by how they handle his riddles.
The Riddler: To free Batman from my trap, you must answer this riddle, little bird. I speak without a mouth and hear without ears. I have no body, but I come alive with wind. What am I?
Dick, eight years old and freshly Robin: *thinking really hard*
The Riddler looking at Batman dangling upside down: ?
Batman: He just needs an extra minute.
The Riddler:
Batman: English isn’t his first langauge.
The Riddler, feeling a little bad: oh, that’s… take your time, buddy.
Jason, twelve years old: *lifting a hand*
The Riddler: -uh, yes?
Jason: Can you repeat that? The riddle?
The Riddler: um, yeah, sure. I have cities, but no houses. I have mountains, but no trees. I have water, but no fish. What am I?
Jason: Yeah, you’re a map but when you’re talking about multiple species of fish, which you probably are, you can say fishes. If you’re using fish, you’re only talking about one species.
The Riddler:
Jason: I just think you should know that. You know as a “genius”
The Riddler: The more you take, the more you -
Tim: Footsteps, where’s Batman?
The Riddler: No, you have to let me-
Tim: Nuh-uh
The Riddler: The fuck do you mean “nuh-uh”? Who raised you?
Tim, on two hours sleep, with two essays due on this fine Thursday night: *fucking launches himself at The Riddler*
The Riddler: I wear a mask but not to hide,
Steph: It's you. You're the answer.
The Riddler: You have to let me finish.
Steph, mimicking him: YOu HaVE tO LEt mE FIniSH
The Riddler: I have-
Damian: *launches himself at the Riddler*
The Riddler: Batman, fuck, FUCK, he’s fucking biting me-
Finally finished this piece after months of reworking. Far from perfect, but I’m glad it’s done. Inspired by the amazing Bruno Redondo, Dan Mora, and especially Dexter Soy.
conversations overheard through the batkid com lines pt 73 (masterpost here)
Damian: was he not- i mean i know he wasn't fatherly, but was he not strict when you two were younger?
Dick: *loud laughing* oh, man, not even close-!
Jason: yeah, he really wasn't- i mean, he tried to be on occasion i guess; but it wasn't really parental strictness more than it was just being harsh and bitter.
Tim: so B really didn't try at all at first, huh?
Jason: he didn't- ok, honestly? my personal theory is that he didn't know he had kids until after i died.
Dick: *laughter turns to wheezes* wHAT?
Jason: no- *wheeze* shut up, hear me out, *cackles*
Tim, audibly amused: what the fuck does that even mean--like you think he forgot he adopted you both?
Jason: no, no- i just think he didn't understand the correlation between adoption and actually being in charge.
Damian: you think that in his mind it was a one time thing? like 'oh, adopting kids? yeah i did that in the past, fun night'.
Tim: *wheeze*
Jason: y-*snort*-yeah, you get it.
Dick: SO WAIT- *deep breath* so you- so you think that for Bruce it was like he had no idea until after you died, at which point he was panicking looking around like 'FUCK A CHILD IS DEAD, SOMEBODY CALL HIS PARENT- ooooh, i get it now,'
Tim: *loud uncontrollable cackling*
Jason, also fighting through wheezes: no i- *choke* no, i mean like- i think he didn't really understand that he was supposed to be a parent in all the senses rather than just the legal. i think you were too happy with every non-parent-like decision he made, and i was too independent, so he thought we were all just chill living in each other's spaces.
Dick: *wheeze* he thought- he thought that Dad was just a title, like Mr or Mrs,
Damian: -like when you buy a two foot square of land online so you can legally be called a lord.
Dick: *cackling* tHAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS-
Jason: yeah, yeah- and then i died and Tim fuckin' showed up, and i have to imagine he was just white-knuckling it in the Batcave looking at him like 'god, i really need to lock the fuck in with this guy',
Tim and Dick: *start crying*
Damian: you think- *snort* so finding Drake was Father internally sighing and going 'ok, time to grind i guess'?
Jason: exac- *wheeze*
*connecting ping*
Bruce: boys, it's-
*a pause* *breathless laughter*
Bruce: i don't even want to know what's so funny this time. i'm just here to call Robin home; it's almost three, i want you to come back to the cave with me so you can get some sleep before your exam at school tomorrow.
Damian, disgruntled: *sigh* yeah yeah, on my way.
Dick, weeping, tone high-pitched: he's locking in-
