Hot take (?): The End of Evangelion is not hopeful.

Shinji is offered a dissolution of identity during Instrumentality. He initially accepts: “They can all just die.” But changes his mind and realizes that the fake peace of the collective isn’t worth the absence of others. He wants real relationships, even if they bring pain.

But Shinji comes out of Instrumentality worse, not better. He’s traumatized, angry, isolated, and dangerous. Nothing about EoE’s ending tells us that he’s a better person.

The final choke is a deliberate choice, not a trauma-reflex as some interpretations suggest. That act, and the hospital scene earlier, all show his deep dehumanization of Asuka. He is trying to kill her before she can hurt him again.

The card “I need you” is a test. Shinji says he needs Asuka, but strangles her. He fails the test of humanity.

Asuka’s touch is more ambiguous. She caresses Shinji’s face, possibly out of compassion, possibly as a “fawn response” to defuse the violence. She cannot speak, so she gives the gesture she knows might stop him.

This is why I originally pointed out that EoE should flip your initial assumptions about who is the kind one and who is the cruel one.

A major theme in Evangelion is the contrast between their personas and their vulnerable true selves. Shinji seems gentle, but lashes out in violence by the end. Asuka appears aggressive, but reaches out to him in kindness in the end.

Shinji stops choking her and breaks down crying. This may be the first time he sees her as human again. Or it may be the first time he realizes what he’s done, too late.

Shinji’s story is about someone who could have connected but let misogyny and self-hatred twist him. The opportunity was there, and he chose the wrong path again and again. Eva is about how trauma and abuse change people. Shinji is not “evil” but becomes someone who harms others.

Shinji does express guilt for what he did. He tells Misato, “I’ve done terrible things to Asuka,” But this guilt doesn’t stop him from doing it again.

EoE makes a deliberate point out of contrasting the very final scene with episode 1: - Episode 1: Shinji sees a hurt Rei → reacts with care. - EoE: Shinji sees a hurt Asuka → reacts with violence.

People often excuse Shinji more than Asuka. He gets “he’s just a kid” or “he’s traumatized.” Asuka is given no such generosity.

This is misogyny: viewers erase female suffering and complexity to focus on a damaged boy’s redemption. The narrative also centers on Shinji’s pain while muting the depth of Asuka’s.

Asuka survives the apocalypse alone with the boy who abused her. There is no justice for her. The cost of Shinji’s “hope” is her continued pain.

The final line can be read many ways. Asuka’s disgust may be at him, herself, the world; or all of it. But it is not forgiveness. Shinji is left at a crossroads. He can begin to repair, or become another Gendo. The film does not show us which – because that’s not the point.

The film’s message is for the viewer, not a promise about the characters. EoE is a warning: being a victim of trauma doesn’t absolve you. If you refuse to do the work to confront your harm, you will pass it on.

Real human connection is painful – but worth it only if both people are seen as full, equal beings. Shinji fails this. Asuka pays for it.

“Anywhere can become heaven… it will be all right.”
But only if we choose to do better.

The ending is not a promise. Shinji may change, or he may not. The film deliberately leaves this unanswered to shift the burden to us, the audience.

asuka did not “abuse” shinji.

asuka is confrontational. she’s loud. she’s rude. while shinji is passive and introverted. but she didn’t abuse him lol. asuka calling shinji names is not abuse.

shinji sexually assaulted her at her lowest, then strangled her when he demanded her to be nice to him even after she confronted him about using her as a “side-dish”, and then attempted to kill her after he realized it was only the two of them now.

asuka wasn’t particularly nice but she’s all bark no bite. the real shinji underneath his soft boy persona is all bite, no bark.

it’s not to start drama but i’m just looking through some old responses, and you see a lot of replies like this – where asuka actually does this AFTER shinji almost sexually assaulted her in her sleep, and here asuka literally asks for consent before they kiss.

she’s not a perfect little feminist angel who can do no wrong, but the series literally makes a point of how when shinji is interested in doing stuff to her, he assaults her (or tries to). when asuka wants to, she does NOT do that.

and even if you wanna hate on a woman, misato is closer to that than anything asuka ever did. she did sexually abuse shinji. i think the series makes a point in discerning her intentions as differing from when the men in the series do it, but she also lashes out sexually.

my point is basically that the majority run to defend shinji and villanize asuka even though he did far worse things is telling of the audience and a mark of how they’ve missed the very critique the series indulges in and decides to center the ending of the movie about it.

a) “liking women means you can’t be misogynistic”

b) “shinji brought asuka back to life” ok and then strangled her? lol

c) not to mention shinji didn’t bring her back. asuka chose to come back. hence he was shocked to see her and then strangled her.

d) etc, etc. whatever.

it stems from people thinking that labeling some of shinji’s views (which his behavior stems from) as misogynistic is some hate on shinji. it’s not. it’s just a facet of his character. i like evangelion and i like shinji. and this is an interesting thing about him.

a major theme in evangelion is the contrast between their personas and their vulnerable true selves. shinji seems gentle, passive, and incapable of harm. asuka appears aggressive, arrogant, selfish, and cares about nobody but herself.

but when the story peels back their layers, when given the actual chance; shinji chooses violence against asuka when she cannot be what he wants. and asuka is the one who’s vulnerable and responds with kindness.

the series makes a point out of this by making it THE VERY FINAL SCENE. shinji strangles her once more. and asuka, “the supposed abuser”, does not retaliate. instead, she reaches out, touching his face – not with anger, but something closer to pity.

asuka has her own problems, but in terms of how she is mean to shinji; a lot of it is merely verbal. he’s the one who actually acts on it and violates her. asuka’s issues manifest in more interesting ways, imo. so why rush to defend shinji when he did much worse things?

i think evangelion makes a point that out of the cast, the people whose issues similarly manifest in sexually volatile ways are both shinji and gendo. and i think the series makes a point of making their behavior (at least partly) misogyny-motivated.

umineko is a post culprit mystery novel

the police being absent and the blurring of victim/victimizer as categories sort of begets a vague anti-carceral stance or at least the beginnings of an argument for one.

for example, the blurring of victim/victimizer can be seen in how natsuhi and eva both suffer patriarchal abuse, yet use their class to mistreat the servants. and in how eva perpetuates the misogyny she endures onto natsuhi, due to the internal hierarchy of the family.

umineko is saying that crime (and abuse), as phenomenon, is a voice (that can’t be ignored) from people too desperate to speak any other way. and that the conditions that create it are much more in need of criticism than the harm done by the individuals involved.

i paint btw

people don’t seem to get that belinda was always a mom. why else did she see poppy in the story and the engine? reality going a bit wrong like the sweden/norway border moving also happens when poppy disappears. the correct reality was the one in which poppy was always real.

there’s no the doctor forces belinda and rewrites her life to become a mom. belinda was always a mom. we just saw the edited version of her life. belinda asks the doctor to correct things and bring poppy back. he didn’t change her story, he just brought it back to her.

the gatwa era has thematically been about lost families and how non-normative forms of it are valid. family is not biological. family is not heteronormative. family is chosen, not given. belinda’s arc had to tie into that theme somehow.

it frustrates me a bit that people are just going “belinda was reduced to motherhood”. she wasn’t “reduced”. yeah sure, davies *always* brings his companions back down to domestic life after their time in the tardis. i also prefer moffat. but it’s not done so here for no reason.

belinda doesn’t give up anything else? she’s still a nurse, so her career is intact. she’s not in a romantic relationship. she’s not married off. she raises poppy as a single mother. she wasn’t absorbed into some idealised nuclear family. she was just reunited with her daughter.

and more importantly, belinda’s arc actually engages with the core thematic substance of the gatwa era. this entire stretch of the show is about abandoned and lost children, and the people who find them again.

ruby and carla. belinda and poppy. goddess abena. splice. even the doctor himself; trying to make sense of susan and what family means when you’re queer, immortal, and childless. this era is full of people who are not biologically related but are still bound together.

having belinda be a mother is part of that larger vision. she gets to be a single mother. she gets to keep her job. she gets to be strong and competent and compassionate. nothing about that reduces her. it places her within the emotional and thematic fabric of the era.

now yeah there are valid critiques to be made about how davies often handles female companions. and yeah, it’s definitely fair to say that belinda being rewritten to fit a broader theme sacrifices some of what made her unique when she first appeared.

actually i think the same thing happened with ruby. he set up very clear signs about how something about her was supernatural, but then he rewrote her to fit his thematic idea while sacrificing a lot of what made her initially compelling for other reasons.

but to say belinda was simply reduced to motherhood misses the point when it’s in a story that is clearly trying to show that family can look like many different things outside the confines of heteronormative expectations.

people will go “she was just locked in a box for the finale” uhm for like 10 minutes out of a decision she did to protect the emotional anchor of the entire narrative? for most of it, she was out too. actually, the entire third act is emotionally centered around belinda.

ruby gets some action, sure, but the story isn’t about her like it is about belinda. hell, it is belinda we check in on one last time. it’s belinda 15 says farewell too. not ruby. doesn’t that say something?

”nothing more than a mother”

what’s with you guys? she’s still a nurse lol. just *also* a mother now. a single mother even, without the need for a husband

people also talking about how the doctor can’t call himself a dad if he can’t biologically have children. it’s very weird behaviour from the fandom which makes you say reactionary crap.

i like that for ruby they just went uuuuhh cause just like belinda both of their arcs ended with them explicitly not in romantic relationships with anyone

Series 15 is Doctor Who uncertain of renewal under the shadow of streaming collapse and cultural apocalypse. It flickers between brilliance and boredom, baroque and basic. But it still has things to say about the cost of believing in stories and the danger when they stop working.

i’m ultimately onboard as long as rtd is running things (and will tap out when mctighe succeeds as showrunner) but it’s fundamentally a different feeling show than series 1-10. but i guess that’s how it goes with doctor who. it changes a lot.