tea egg @sunsteep - Tumblr Blog

(Un)Friendly reminder: Vanitas' birth flower is the myosotis, which means "don't forget me" and Noé's birth flower is the aster, which means "I'll never forget you", because, theoretically, Vanitas is dead and Noé is writing all his memoirs, I mean, the myosotis was not forgotten, for the aster never forgot.

ammy246

I thought of a possibility of how D.Gray-Man might end: What if Allen disappears/becomes one with Nea, and Lavi is left behind? What if Lavi is the one who Records how the story ends? Allen may be gone, but Lavi is the one who remembers him.

"This is the where Allen disappears." -Cross Marian.

This makes me wonder if Lavi is actually the protagonist of D.Gray-Man, and what we are witnessing is his recordings as Bookman. Hoshino-sensei did once say that the D in D.Gray-Man stands for Dear like you'd write in a letter, so this could perhaps be a message from Lavi to Allen after the story's end and Allen is already gone, or perhaps the other way around where it's about Allen's final words to Lavi. I just have a feeling that D.Gray-Man will likely not have a happy-ending *praying that I am wrong*.

woozicutie

ripping my throat out right now.

beanghostprincess

I think I just fell in love

gojoracle-deactivated20241106

OH MY FUCKING SGGWDJURJLG SAKURA IN RED HIGH HEELS

animangabwedit

Wind Breaker by Nii Satoru

youghvaudough

I will forever appreciate a theme in my fictional stories, & that’s exactly what Wind Breaker (by Nii Satoru) has, so, I present:

Wind Breaker characters have a theme to their names.. a thread:

Bōfūrin / 防風鈴

so, even though our protag group’s name is written and visually represented as “wind chime”, Bōfūrin’s name is where this group’s theme of trees/plants start:

防風鈴 (“prevent/protect” “wind chime”) has the same reading as 防風林, a type of forest planted strategically to prevent wind erosion of soil — much like Fūrin’s mission of protecting and serving their town

all of Bōfūrin’s named members (and close associations) so far have some element of tree/plant/wood in their last name (if you look at the kanji of their last names, you’d see a lot of wood radicals/木字旁):

桜遥 • Sakura Haruka: 桜 / cherry tree

(fun fact: his name 遥 / haruka means "far"; also it's commonly a feminine given name)

蘇枋隼飛 • Suō Hayato: 枋 / sandalwood (?) or tree used as timber, general term for wooden beams in houses

(fun fact: his last name 苏枋 is the Chinese name of a traditional reddish brown color, named after a pigment made from 苏木!)

楡井秋彦 • Nirei Akihiko: 楡 / Siberian elm

杉下京太郎 • Sugishita Kyōtarō: 杉 / Japanese cedar (cryptomeria japonica)

柊登馬 • Hiiragi Tōma: 柊 / holly osmanthus (osmanthus heterophyllus)

(fun fact: his name 登馬 means "to mount a horse"; no, not that kind of mount, the regular horseback riding kind)

梅宮一 • Umemiya Hajime: 梅 / plum tree

(fun fact: his name 一 is just "one")

This association also extends to Kotoha, who is very closely associated with Bōfūrin:

橘琴叶 • Tachibana Kotoha: 橘 / orange tree

now, Bōfūrin members yet to be featured in the show: (spoilers below the break)

(if you want to go to later parts: part 2 - shishitoren & part 3 - noroshi!)

azuretl-deactivated20250506

About Wind Breaker! [Names-Bofurin]

I've been wanting to post something about Wind Breaker for a while now since the anime came out, but I was bombarded with work in the last few months. I thought about what I could possibly post... maybe interesting tidbits of what happened behind the scenes? What was it like translating a title as dynamic as WB? The sound effect choices? Or even discussing Tsubakino as a character and the choices we made for him. (Note: We used masculine pronouns for Tsubakino in the manga because we were informed by Editorial to use he/him for him. I asked our project manager to talk to Editorial to ask the mangaka how to handle him a while back, and the answer we got was "he/him." Unsure if this means that Editorial made this choice or if the mangaka himself did. At any rate, all I know is that Tsubakino wants to be officially addressed as he/him. SEE. THERE IS SO MUCH I CAN SAY ABOUT TSUBAKINO AND WHAT THIS CHOICE MEANS!!!) But instead, I've decided to settle on an intro post about the characters and what their names represent. I was pretty surprised not to see the print copies dive into their names--I thought they would since they made a section in the end about delinquents and the Wind Breaker name. So instead, here you go! Let's talk a bit about the Furin boys' names! I wanted to add Shishitoren too but this got really long...and I really need to get back to work. I might make a Shishitoren post next time! Read more under the cut!

uswarcrimes

US CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY & GLOBAL TERRORISM

US Use of Weapons of Mass Destruction The indiscriminate use of bombs by the US, usually outside a declared war situation, for wanton destruction, for no military objectives, whose targets and victims are civilian populations, or what we now call “collateral damage.”

Japan (1945)

China (1945-46)

Korea & China (1950-53)

Guatemala (1954, 1960, 1967-69)

Indonesia (1958)

Cuba (1959-61)

Congo (1964)

Peru (1965)

Laos (1964-70)

Vietnam (1961-1973)

Cambodia (1969-70)

Grenada (1983)

Lebanon (1983-84)

Libya (1986)

El Salvador (1980s)

Nicaragua (1980s)

Iran (1987)

Panama (1989)

Iraq (1991-2000)

Kuwait (1991)

Somalia (1993)

Bosnia (1994-95)

Sudan (1998)

Afghanistan (1998)

Pakistan (1998)

Yugoslavia (1999)

Bulgaria (1999)

Macedonia (1999)

US Use of Chemical & Biological Weapons The US has refused to sign Conventions against the development and use of chemical and biological weapons, and has either used or tested (without informing the civilian populations) these weapons in the following locations abroad:

Bahamas (late 1940s-mid-1950s)

Canada (1953)

China and Korea (1950-53)

Korea (1967-69)

Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia (1961-1970)

Panama (1940s-1990s)

Cuba (1962, 69, 70, 71, 81, 96)

And the US has tested such weapons on US civilian populations, without their knowledge, in the following locations:

Watertown, NY and US Virgin Islands (1950)

SF Bay Area (1950, 1957-67)

Minneapolis (1953)

St. Louis (1953)

Washington, DC Area (1953, 1967)

Florida (1955)

Savannah GA/Avon Park, FL (1956-58)

New York City (1956, 1966)

Chicago (1960)

And the US has encouraged the use of such weapons, and provided the technology to develop such weapons in various nations abroad, including:

Egypt

South Africa

Iraq

US Political and Military Interventions since 1945 The US has launched a series of military and political interventions since 1945, often to install puppet regimes, or alternatively to engage in political actions such as smear campaigns, sponsoring or targeting opposition political groups (depending on how they served US interests), undermining political parties, sabotage and terror campaigns, and so forth. It has done so in nations such as

China (1945-51)

South Africa (1960s-1980s)

France (1947)

Bolivia (1964-75)

Marshall Islands (1946-58)

Australia (1972-75)

Italy (1947-1975)

Iraq (1972-75)

Greece (1947-49)

Portugal (1974-76)

Philippines (1945-53)

East Timor (1975-99)

Korea (1945-53)

Ecuador (1975)

Albania (1949-53)

Argentina (1976)

Eastern Europe (1948-56)

Pakistan (1977)

Germany (1950s)

Angola (1975-1980s)

Iran (1953)

Jamaica (1976)

Guatemala (1953-1990s)

Honduras (1980s)

Costa Rica (mid-1950s, 1970-71)

Nicaragua (1980s)

Middle East (1956-58)

Philippines (1970s-90s)

Indonesia (1957-58)

Seychelles (1979-81)

Haiti (1959)

South Yemen (1979-84)

Western Europe (1950s-1960s)

South Korea (1980)

Guyana (1953-64)

Chad (1981-82)

Iraq (1958-63)

Grenada (1979-83)

Vietnam (1945-53)

Suriname (1982-84)

Cambodia (1955-73)

Libya (1981-89)

Laos (1957-73)

Fiji (1987)

Thailand (1965-73)

Panama (1989)

Ecuador (1960-63)

Afghanistan (1979-92)

Congo (1960-65, 1977-78)

El Salvador (1980-92)

Algeria (1960s)

Haiti (1987-94)

Brazil (1961-64)

Bulgaria (1990-91)

Peru (1965)

Albania (1991-92)

Dominican Republic (1963-65)

Somalia (1993)

Cuba (1959-present)

Iraq (1990s)

Indonesia (1965)

Peru (1990-present)

Ghana (1966)

Mexico (1990-present)

Uruguay (1969-72)

Colombia (1990-present)

Chile (1964-73)

Yugoslavia (1995-99)

Greece (1967-74)

US Perversions of Foreign Elections The US has specifically intervened to rig or distort the outcome of foreign elections, and sometimes engineered sham “demonstration” elections to ward off accusations of government repression in allied nations in the US sphere of influence. These sham elections have often installed or maintained in power repressive dictators who have victimized their populations. Such practices have occurred in nations such as:

Philippines (1950s)

Italy (1948-1970s)

Lebanon (1950s)

Indonesia (1955)

Vietnam (1955)

Guyana (1953-64)

Japan (1958-1970s)

Nepal (1959)

Laos (1960)

Brazil (1962)

Dominican Republic (1962)

Guatemala (1963)

Bolivia (1966)

Chile (1964-70)

Portugal (1974-75)

Australia (1974-75)

Jamaica (1976)

El Salvador (1984)

Panama (1984, 89)

Nicaragua (1984, 90)

Haiti (1987, 88)

Bulgaria (1990-91)

Albania (1991-92)

Russia (1996)

Mongolia (1996)

Bosnia (1998)

US Versus World at the United Nations The US has repeatedly acted to undermine peace and human rights initiatives at the United Nations, routinely voting against hundreds of UN resolutions and treaties. The US easily has the worst record of any nation on not supporting UN treaties. In almost all of its hundreds of “no” votes, the US was the “sole” nation to vote no (among the 100-130 nations that usually vote), and among only 1 or 2 other nations voting no the rest of the time. Here’s a representative sample of US votes from 1978-1987:

US Is the Sole “No” Vote on Resolutions or Treaties

For aid to underdeveloped nations

For the promotion of developing nation exports

For UN promotion of human rights

For protecting developing nations in trade agreements

For New International Economic Order for underdeveloped nations

For development as a human right

Versus multinational corporate operations in South Africa

For cooperative models in developing nations

For right of nations to economic system of their choice

Versus chemical and biological weapons (at least 3 times)

Versus Namibian apartheid

For economic/standard of living rights as human rights

Versus apartheid South African aggression vs. neighboring states (2 times)

Versus foreign investments in apartheid South Africa

For world charter to protect ecology

For anti-apartheid convention

For anti-apartheid convention in international sports

For nuclear test ban treaty (at least 2 times)

For prevention of arms race in outer space

For UNESCO-sponsored new world information order (at least 2 times)

For international law to protect economic rights

For Transport & Communications Decade in Africa

Versus manufacture of new types of weapons of mass destruction

Versus naval arms race

For Independent Commission on Disarmament & Security Issues

For UN response mechanism for natural disasters

For the Right to Food

For Report of Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination

For UN study on military development

For Commemoration of 25th anniversary of Independence for Colonial Countries

For Industrial Development Decade in Africa

For interdependence of economic and political rights

For improved UN response to human rights abuses

For protection of rights of migrant workers

For protection against products harmful to health and the environment

For a Convention on the Rights of the Child

For training journalists in the developing world

For international cooperation on third world debt

For a UN Conference on Trade & Development

US Is 1 of Only 2 “No” Votes on Resolutions or Treaties

For Palestinian living conditions/rights (at least 8 times)

Versus foreign intervention into other nations

For a UN Conference on Women

Versus nuclear test explosions (at least 2 times)

For the non-use of nuclear weapons vs. non-nuclear states

For a Middle East nuclear free zone

Versus Israeli nuclear weapons (at least 2 times)

For a new world international economic order

For a trade union conference on sanctions vs. South Africa

For the Law of the Sea Treaty

For economic assistance to Palestinians

For UN measures against fascist activities and groups

For international cooperation on money/finance/debt/trade/development

For a Zone of Peace in the South Atlantic

For compliance with Intl Court of Justice decision for Nicaragua vs. US.

**For a conference and measures to prevent international terrorism (including its underlying causes)

For ending the trade embargo vs. Nicaragua

US Is 1 of Only 3 “No” Votes on Resolutions and Treaties

Versus Israeli human rights abuses (at least 6 times)

Versus South African apartheid (at least 4 times)

Versus return of refugees to Israel

For ending nuclear arms race (at least 2 times)

For an embargo on apartheid South Africa

For South African liberation from apartheid (at least 3 times)

For the independence of colonial nations

For the UN Decade for Women

Versus harmful foreign economic practices in colonial territories

For a Middle East Peace Conference

For ending the embargo of Cuba (at least 10 times)

In addition, the US has:

Repeatedly withheld its dues from the UN

Twice left UNESCO because of its human rights initiatives

Twice left the International Labor Organization for its workers rights initiatives

Refused to renew the Antiballistic Missile Treaty

Refused to sign the Kyoto Treaty on global warming

Refused to back the World Health Organization’s ban on infant formula abuses

Refused to sign the Anti-Biological Weapons Convention

Refused to sign the Convention against the use of land mines

Refused to participate in the UN Conference Against Racism in Durban

Been one of the last nations in the world to sign the UN Covenant on

Political & Civil Rights (30 years after its creation)

Refused to sign the UN Covenant on Economic & Social Rights

Opposed the emerging new UN Covenant on the Rights to Peace, Development & Environmental Protection

Sampling of Deaths >From US Military Interventions & Propping Up Corrupt Dictators (using the most conservative estimates)

Nicaragua – 30,000 dead

Brazil – 100,000 dead

Korea – 4 million dead

Guatemala – 200,000 dead

Honduras – 20,000 dead

El Salvador – 63,000 dead

Argentina – 40,000 dead

Bolivia – 10,000 dead

Uruguay – 10,000 dead

Ecuador – 10,000 dead

Peru – 10,000 dead

Iraq – 1.3 million dead

Iran – 30,000 dead

Sudan – 8-10,000 dead

Colombia – 50,000 dead

Panama – 5,000 dead

Japan – 140,000 dead

Afghanistan – 10,000 dead

Somalia – 5000 dead

Philippines – 150,000 dead

Haiti – 100,000 dead

Dominican Republic – 10,000 dead

Libya – 500 dead

Macedonia – 1000 dead

South Africa – 10,000 dead

Pakistan – 10,000 dead

Palestine – 40,000 dead

Indonesia – 1 million dead

East Timor – 1/3-½ of total population

Greece – 10,000 dead

Laos – 600,000 dead

Cambodia – 1 million dead

Angola – 300,000 dead

Grenada – 500 dead

Congo – 2 million dead

Egypt – 10,000 dead

Vietnam – 1.5 million dead

Chile – 50,000 dead

Other Lethal US Interventions CIA Terror Training Manuals Development and distribution of training manuals for foreign military personnel or foreign nationals, including instructions on assassination, subversion, sabotage, population control, torture, repression, psychological torture, death squads, etc.

Specific Torture Campaigns Creation and launching of direct US campaigns to support torture as an instrument of terror and social control for governments in Greece, Iran, Vietnam, Bolivia, Uruguay, Brazil, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Panama

Supporting and Harboring Terrorists The promotion, protection, arming or equipping of terrorists such as:

Klaus Barbie and other German Nazis, and Italian and Japanese fascists, after WW II

Manual Noriega (Panama), Saddam Hussein (Iraq), Rafael Trujillo (Dominican Republic), Osama bin Laden (Afghanistan), and others whose terrorism has come back to haunt us

Running the Higher War College (Brazil) and first School of the Americas (Panama), which gave US training to repressors, death squad members, and torturers (the second School of the Americas is still running at Ft. Benning GA)

Providing asylum for Cuban, Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Haitian, Chilean, Argentinian, Iranian, South Vietnamese and other terrorists, dictators, and torturers

Assassinating World Leaders Using assassination as a tool of foreign policy, wherein the CIA has initiated assassination attempts against at least 40 foreign heads of state (some several times) in the last 50 years, a number of which have been successful, such as: Patrice Lumumba (Congo), Rafael Trujillo (Dominican Republic), Ngo Dihn Diem (Vietnam) Salvador Allende (Chile)

Arms Trade & US Military Presence

The US is the world’s largest seller of weapons abroad, arming dictators, militaries, and terrorists that repress or victimize their populations, and fueling scores of violent conflicts around the globe

The US is the world’s largest provider of live land mines which, even in peacetime, kill or injure at least several people around the world each day

The US has military bases in at least 50 nations around the world, which have led to frequent victimization of local populations.

The US military has been bombing one Middle Eastern or Muslim nation or another almost continuously since 1983, including Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Iran, the Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq (almost daily bombings since 1991)

This, then, is a sampling of American foreign policies over the last 50 years. The FBI uses the following definition for Terrorism: “The unlawful use of force or violence committed by a group or individual, who has some connection to a foreign power or whose activities transcend national boundaries, against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.” This sounds like the terrorism we just experienced. It also sounds a lot like the US policies and actions since 1945 that I’ve just described.

This is a version of an an original page atributed to Robert Elias, a US Professor of Political Science , a list which, like so many others, has otherwise ‘disappered’

via https://web.archive.org/web/20161125052245/http://www.the-philosopher.co.uk/whocares/popups/warcrimes.htm

easy-revenge

Well, now I'm curious. Why do you think Angel had deeper feelings for Aki? Go crazy

ahahah ur wish is my command ~

now bear with me a lot of this relies on things that are up to interpretation so brace urselves for me reaching and being maybe a tiny bit delusional thanks

so, i will deliberately not talk about the very popular moments that akiangel has, i can do a separate post about them at some point, but i want to focus specifically on angel.

meaning: scenes where their feelings and actions are reciprocated like saving each other, helping each other live longer etc will not be mentioned in this post.

lets take this chronologically:

- bomb devil arc

angel is the personification of duality. we know he exists as an oxymoron. from his name all the way to his personality.

this for me is the core of what i think angel is as a character. however i wont get into analysing angel's whole internal conflict rn.

(i have a post talking about angel's feelings, the grief and remorse he must feel with no recollection of what brought them on. I'll talk about that in depth some other time bc even though it plays into this part, we'll stray from the subject. i thought it was worth mentioning briefly though)

that's not what i wanted to talk about in this scene. i want to focus on the second part, which happened after reze's death.

in that scene, makima had ordered angel to bring aki with him to the scene. angel disregarded that order and came alone, which led to makima "accusing" him of being kind for sparing aki from the task of killing a girl. angel replies to this with "i am an angel after all".

what gets me the most about this beautiful scene is that as we now know, makima is the control devil. her word is law. even when she's not actively making ppl obey her will, we know her commanding aura makes it difficult for anyone to stray from her orders. despite that, here is angel, casually going against a direct order to keep aki from doing sth he doesn't want to do.

this might not seem like much, but follow my thought process here.

the infamous scene. contrary to popular belief, im here to talk about the first picture rather than the later two.

the moment between aki letting go of angel's shirt and grabbing his hand, angel gets a flash of the human he was in love with before makima found him.

i used to believe he got that flash bc he thought he was finally approaching his own death (still a valid interpretation), however here rolls a very popular theory about makima's power.

we know who she can control has to do with status, who views her as superior and whatnot. however, at the very end of part 1, we have power breaking her control as she thinks about her moments with denji. in that scene, power is still afraid of makima, so why is makima unable to take control of her?

a lot of ppl have interpreted this as a "weakness" to makima's power. more specifically, that strong feelings have the power to break her control over someone, at least briefly.

rolling with this, we can assume this is what happened with angel in this scene. for just a second he gets to access the memories that makima has locked away. the next question is, what are his strong feelings about in that moment?

we know that angel isn't afraid of death, he's been waiting for it. taking that into consideration, I don't think it was the feelings about his impending death that made makima's hold on him loosen.

i think it was aki. being saved. being cared for. being cared for so unconditionally, by someone who doesn't have two months of his life to spare. by someone who by all means should not care about angel at all.

immediately afterwards, angel is held. held protectively over a chest, against a storm. we don't know how long it's been since angel has been in a situation similar to this but we can assume it's been a long time.

in my potentially delusional opinion, that feels powerful enough to shake makima's control even for a moment.

you might have guessed where im heading with all this.

- gun devil arc:

here. in this very scene. we see the shock on angel's face as aki gives himself up. the horror of what it can mean, the trigger of memory of what it had meant for him in the past.

in this scene, angel regains all the memories makima took from him, without her permission.

makima doesn't seem swayed by this, but she does comment on it, indicating it wasn't her doing at all.

following my previous logic, strong emotions is once again what pushes makima out of angel's head. this time, quite literally kicks her out. even for a little while.

considering makima's power, how easily she takes complete control of him right after anyway, we can only imagine how strongly angel felt about aki losing himself to her in that moment.

now it's up to anyone to interpret this as whatever they want. it's up to anyone to call me crazy and completely disregard this whole thing since it's thriving on subtext and theory along with analysis powered by hyperfixation.

i personally cannot shake the feeling that there are at least romantic undertones here. there are so many akiangel scenes i didn't talk about in this post, so many very blatant hints that akiangel's bond was never friendship. there was tension from start to finish and there's no other explanation for it.

as for angel specifically, since this post is about his feelings, we know he's been in love before. with a human nonetheless. we know he has the capacity for it. I don't think im reaching to think that caring so deeply and wholeheartedly for a human again could mirror these feelings.

i dont think its too unlikely for him to be in love again. but that's just me.

i was asked to go crazy and crazy i went lmao. my asks are open for more prompts for me to analyze. i have sm more to talk about if anyone wants to hear it.

thanks for the opportunity to get this off my chest heheh <3

easy-revenge

Do you think that Aki saw Himeno as a sister or just a friend and never more than that?

here's me challenging myself again bc for the life of me i cant comprehend what aki hayakawa is feeling half the time.

short answer to your question: no.

what did he see her as instead? im nowhere near a coherent and clear answer.

I'll tell u what i do know. we see aki forming loads of different relationships with ppl in chainsaw man. some of them clearer in their nature than others.

let's look at power and denji for example. family. that's an easy one. aki took on the role of the "guardian" at first, somewhat begrudgingly, but it very quickly got reshaped into him being their big brother.

i think seeing this relationship from a lot of different angles is enough to show that he most likely didn't view himeno as his sister.

in his brotherly role, he's very protective. with himeno, even though they were always saving each other, you could feel that their dynamic let him be vulnerable around her too.

he'd allow himself to be protected by her. he'd ask her permission to use the sword. he'd follow her lead and trust her judgement.

equals. even though she ranked higher than him, the mutual respect and trust between them made them feel like a team.

i think there's too many layers to their relationship for me to try and define it. if it's not familial love, is it a bond built around their respect and history as buddies? doesn't really cover all the bases. then is it friendship?

once again, im not sure. have we seen aki having any friends really? is it a coincidence that the two ppl that were somewhat marketed to be his friends are people who either are canonly in love with him or implied to be as such?

is it a coincidence that aki tends to display behavior that can be read as having romantic undertones as well? that he willingly gave years off his lifespan to save both himeno and angel without a second thought?

the answer to that is no, it's not. it's because these characters are way too complex and have a lot of trauma under their belt to navigate through relationships as the average human being.

aki has experienced a lot of loss. he's dishonest with the ppl around him and with his own feelings. he pushes people away to focus on his goal, but keeps making choices that contradict that way of living.

he's stumbling around this duality, almost as if he's in limbo. he's not letting himself have what he wants in the present. he's not giving people what they want from him. he's not dedicated enough to progress towards his goal.

and what does aki want in the present? my guess is: to be close to people. aside from wanting a family, to fulfil the role he missed out on, to get a redo of being a big brother and not mess it up, he wants ppl close in every sense.

that's why when his mask slips up, you can see how wholeheartedly he gives himself over to people.

he breaks around himeno a couple of times, letting his need for her slip through the cracks. he lets her touch him, cuddle him, light his cigarettes. he reciprocates, if a bit more hesitantly, stealing that cigarette standing just a tad too close.

is that attraction? or is it aki letting himself get the closeness he craves bc he knows he can? he knows he's allowed to bc himeno wants him there?

aki has to know himeno has feelings for him, at least in the back of his mind. does that keep him from getting even closer to her in fear of leading her on? would he want to get closer if makima wasn't forcefully pulling his attention to her? more questions i cant answer.

but looking at his relationship with angel as well, aki does follow this pattern. he's again putting up an act. he can't get along with angel, they are like natural enemies.

then the fear of loss creeps in and boom, he breaks. gives up his lifespan and pulls angel against his chest. it's like drawing the curse's sword all over again. he yells at angel for almost dying and nestles his face against angel's hair, holding him tight.

it's this type of behavior that leads me to believe that this is something that aki is deprived of. the closeness, the intimacy, someone to hold and maybe grasp onto. its something he's always needed and kept keeping himself away from.

is it love? is it friendship? is it response to unresolved trauma? a mix of the three? you tell me.

the fact that at no point throughout his storyline does aki have full control of himself also gets me. even if i was to speculate about the type of feelings he has for each person in his life, i know there's someone else ultimately pulling the strings in his brain. and that's a factor I can't break down and take into consideration.

so this is all i can give u by rubbing my two braincells together and not venturing too much into headcanon territory.

istg the inner workings of aki's mind literally keep me up at night.