#Except warmonger I think | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

goodolreliablejake · 6 months

Text

Fantasy races are an uncomfortable concept, because they present a world that literally works the way racists think that it works. The attempts to mitigate this problem often fail to address the core concern, merely making the idea more palatable.

A big example is trying to correct by changing the language from "races" to "species." This attempt fails for two reasons:

1) Exactly! Racists think that people of other races are a different species. That's the foundation of "race science," phrenology, all of it.

2) Are demihumans different species, though? Like, the interactions between elves and dwarves don't resemble the interactions between different species in our world. They don't act like snakes and lemurs, or whales and krill, or even cats and dogs. More often we've got different groups of people, who may speak different languages and have different cultural practices, engaging in diplomacy or war and struggling to coexist. In practice, they are treated as nations: ethnicities. Except they're ethnicities who are biologically distinct enough to have objective differences in ability.

This is something that puts me on edge in Mass Effect, otherwise one of my favorite games. True, the game ultimately lands on condemning the genophage, and it's not subtle about that. I mean just look at the name... But it's still considered debatable, morally grey, and Mordin Solus remains one of the most charming and enduring heroes of the series. The setting has bent over backwards to make every racist stereotype and talking point as legitimate as possible. In this setting, it is objectively true, scientifically proven that it is in the DNA of Krogans to naturally be violent, warmongering killing machines whose explosively rapid breeding poses an existential threat to the galaxy. That in turn is meant to make us think that maybe forced sterilization is something worth considering. It's hard to ignore the parallels to real life racist propaganda. I don't think it's malicious, just ungrounded and thoughtless; the result of creators to whom these ideals are abstract thought experiments, rather than reflections of real history.

Another big example is Dark Elves. They try to make it okay, to mitigate the message by fleshing them out as characters, by scapegoating an abusive deity rather than an ingrained nature, by erasing the monster manual description that reads "Always Chaotic Evil," by trending skin tone away from black and towards purple, or gray, even pale white. But none of it really changes the core issue, does it? The idea of drow is to equate dark skin with evil, to fetishize that idea, and to tell a story about a subsect of people cast into darkness as a result of sin in a direct parallel to racist Christian beliefs about dark skin being a curse or punishment from God.

So, do I think we need to cancel Mass Effect and stop playing D&D or telling stories about drow? No, not really. I mean... I do all these things. Truth is, I don't have an actionable solution, for myself or anyone. But the dynamic is clearly present and worth describing. And the attempts to challenge it are often insufficient, more about making ourselves feel better about what we're already doing than enacting real change.

#mordin solus #drow #dark elves #fantasy races #fantasy #mass effect #krogan

1K notes · View notes

kerubimcrepin · 1 month

Text

Liveblog - Dofus, livre 1 : Julith [PART 23]

I think after this it's kinda natural that Joris will never ever put his trust into anyone that isn't Kerubim or Atcham ever again.

I am once again asking why Kerubim has these books and what was he doing at devil's sacrament.

He's never beating those necromancy allegations.

There's a canonical name for the evil-ass looking huppermages.

youtube

Once again, this is Them in Dofus 2 when they reveal to Joris that they framed Julith or something. (source: my beautiful mind)

The Dessous comic implies that Marline bought this stuff from Kerubim which is so funny. It's beautiful how little of a shit the man gives for the safety of others.

I may not like Khan in his present form, as a macho gobbowler, but I like the idea of him. Joris, and his little "ghnhnn I have to do what's right, I have sacrifice my happinesss for other people" complex needs someone like that in his life who will buy him alcohol and help him run away from home when he's 14-16.

I'm sure if given another movie, or a show, Ankama's plan would have been to make Khan more likeable. He seems like a ride-or-die friend.

A scene ago he was in Julith's arms. So, she found it important to get him into the arms of this dofus-powered doll. Personally, I like to think that he started thrashing and maybe even bit her.

What did she lie about though? Liking him? Not wanting the Dofus? Being a competent person and not a fuck-up? (I love Bakara and say all of this with affection)

Once again, I empathize, that Julith was gloating about this to Bakara. That she doesn't really care about Joris (and by extension, Joris's feelings.)

She is killing a thousand people, who did nothing to her. These are civilians who came to watch a sports match. How many mothers are here with their sons and daughters who just wanted to look at their idols? If Joris never had Grougalorasalar's soul, if he and Kerubim never learned of her plan, THEY would have been among these viewers.

Julith is a very interesting character because she's ruthless, she has no morals, absolutely no understanding or compassion for others, — even Bakara or her own son, — and yet she is driven by love almost entirely. And that's her one redeeming quality.

But also — does it really change things, when you're driven by love to kill a thousand innocent people? To ruin your son's life? Because it doesn't really change much, to me...

I think there's a tragedy in that. She does love the idea of Joris. She loves what she sees of him, his voice, his face, and eyes. If she learned more about him, she'd probably love the parts he didn't show too. She'd love to see how he grew up.

She'd love how committed he is to those he loves. She'd love his ruthless march towards what he thinks is right that will allow him to close his eyes as he does unforgivable things. The only thing she would dislike is his loyalty to Bonta.

But the reverse will never be true. Joris can become a warmonger, a dictator, and a war criminal, but he would loathe to place his needs above those of others. He wouldn't do horrible things if he didn't think it was for the greater good of mankind.

As a 600yo man, Joris has lived through two apocalypses, — and yet people like Nox and Julith will lose 1-4 loved ones and go insane, killing people. I doubt he feels much for her, except for disgust.

Their friendship is so important to me. But also, somewhere out there, Tatak is crying.

I think one of the great tragedies of Joris's character is that he is doomed to break his own moral code, slowly but surely.

One must imagine Joris Jurgen living happily with the blood of innocents on his hands, because the alternative is more haunting.

One of her main issues is that she projects the actions of a few onto literally everyone in Bonta. Which is a very crazy fucking reach.

But I understand how she arrived at this reach to begin with: I don't think she was ever happy, before Jahash, and when she finally was happy, for once in her entire life, they took even that away from her.

You wanna know who else in this scene is going to have only 2 people who give meaning to his life? Jo—— [I am forcefully restrained by the police]

I just really like pointing out the similarities between Joris and Julith, — and the way these similarities underline their differences.

Once again: she doesn't give a shit about anyone's opinion. She is betting everything onto a nebulous future where Joris and Jahash and Bakara forgive and forget everything she did, and they live as a happy Fambly (in Brakmar, because that's a GOOD city and they will LOVE to move there, after being no longer welcome in Bonta due to the 1000 dead people.)

(Guy whose very emotional and Julith and Joris voice) guys I think she's starting to realize that their familial relationship is going to be unfixable.

Joris and everyone present here are quite aware that stopping this will kill one of them.

They are also very aware that one dead person is better than a thousand.

#ro liveblogs dofus #dofus #wakfu #krosmoz #dofusmovie #joris jurgen #Youtube

66 notes · View notes

tarisbackyard · 7 days

Text

Here's my personal interpretation of this: Big Boss is projecting hard here. He may not see Snake as his son, but he can't help but see himself in him anyway, so he assumes that Snake must think and feel the same way that he does.

Except for that we go on to see throughout the series that Snake isn't like that. He loves live, the beauty of the world, and what he ultimately craves is peace and quiet, despite also loving the thrill of battle. Whatever part of Big Boss made himself such a bitter warmonger, that part was not passed on to Snake.

Also, like, my man is horny af for every cute girl he meets, to the point where he talks to himself about it when he thinks no one is listening. I just can't see a version of Snake who "cares nothing for sex" ._.

#mgs #metal gear #metal gear 2 #metal gear solid #metal gear 2: solid snake #solid snake #big boss #naked snake

49 notes · View notes

zuko-always-lies · 3 months

Note

Hey, as a long viewer of your anti iroh posts, which, as a person who just recently watched ATLA, I have a very controversial theory/headcanon based on my knowledge of general psychology (not a psychologist so disregard if incorrect) and perspective of Iroh's character and by the attitude of his fans that can possibly get me hate messages and even death threats. So I came to the conclusion that Iroh expresses an uncomfortable character of NPD or particularly a certain "sub" that you will, being Benevolent/Vulnerable Narcissim.

Iroh loves to present himself as "wise, kind and fatherly," but his actions showcase the total opposite, and his supposed identity appears far more shallow and self-centred. He never properly mentors or shows to really know Zuko. Instead, he simply uses Zuko to serve as his act of penance, which is why he never meaningfully teaches Zuko to become a better person or to realise that his father is at fault and that his sister is not his real enemy. But no, instead, he lays off to do the bare minimum. He shows less to no remorse for Zuko's predicament that was caused by him for not standing up to his brother when he was banished. Nor does Iroh show any for Zuko's victims. Instead, Iroh operates under the mindset that supporting Zuko and making him Firelord will accomplish his penance. His lack of care for Azula is precisely because she is an obstacle not just for Zuko but for his "penance" as well.

It's also interesting the lack of self-awareness that Iroh has. He calls Azula crazy for doing what he did for decades. The only difference is that Azula genuinely cares for her nation while Iroh doesn't really care except his glory. He sent his son to the front lines to fight his own battles for him, which isn't that different from Ozai's treatment of Azula and Zuko. Oh, and at the finale, what does he do? Send Zuko and Katara into danger while abandoning them to satisfy his selfish desire. Of course, as you mentioned, he also doesn't live up to his own "wisdom" instead using that wisdom to appear smart and confuse others. Because in all honesty, Zuko NEVER applies any of Iroh's suppose wisdom because Iroh doesn't ever think to teach BLUNTLY to Zuko, like any basic teacher can look at Iroh and already have their hands in their face, but of course the further issue is that instead of applying basic healthy logic, Iroh instead utilises the toxic sibling rivalry to manipulate Zuko into becoming his "perfect" son. Zuko becomes a better person despite Iroh not because of him, Zuko's "metamorphosis" (aka breakdown) is the best example of how unhealthy Iroh's parenting is.

Iroh is also shameless when it comes to his mistakes. He never feels guilt or apologises to June for his blatant sexual harassment. He has no shame for being friends with the Rough Rhinos or assisting Zhao in the further conquest and bloodshed of the Northen Water Tribe. He never thinks or comes clean with his crimes against the Earth Kingdom, instead choosing to profit off the very same people he victimised. He never apologises to Zuko for being a shitty mentor/Uncle.

Iroh reminds me of ALOT of narcissistic so called "benevolent" or "vulnerable" people who will appear kind and even express self hatred but only for further validation and without taking risks or responsibility whatsoever for their mistakes, instead blaming others or doing "good" little things to create a narrative that they are "saints" and that people who disagree or despise them are "crazy or evil".

This might be far-fetched, but when you consider that to this day, the majority of ATLA fans have been juiced in this narrative that Iroh = 50 year old warmonger is a Saint who should be worshipped and that Zuko should be "thankful and grateful" of said Iroh, and that Azula = 14 year old abused child soldier who did the least messed up things and is the youngest member is demonised for being "crazy" and even Aang gets treated inferior to Iroh, well it already feels right at home with typical narcissistic narratives

I've had similar thoughts myself, but I really don't like applying medical diagnoses to fictional characters living in a very different society, so I never quite articulated them. Certainly Iroh seems to be an extraordinarily self-centered person who puts major effort into pretending not be so self-centered.

#anti Iroh #anti-Iroh

45 notes · View notes

loopyarts · 6 months

Text

Welp, this happened. It all stared with a simple doddle and now I made Ichiji an adopted mink daughter.

Here’s a bunch of messy doddles of her, also keep in mind this is set way after one piece, like the Vinsmoke siblings are like in their 30s or for Reiju 33. Where Ichiji is king at at this point and changes the business from warmongers to hero’s for hire, so it might as well be an au.

This was made for silly old fun, another is I pictured in my head is it kinda the movie Three Men and a Baby except there's no girlfriend or even the same plot and it a mostly simple dad and daughter with two idiots uncles and smart aunt. It mostly the dynamic I was thinking about, when I made this.

#vinsmoke ichiji #one piece #vinsmoke yonji #vinsmoke niji #vinsmoke brothers #vinsmoke siblings #vinsmoke reiju #Doddles #Fan child oc #I only put effort into one of these doddles :3 #Posting really late probably because I’m probably bit nervous but I’m being brave >.< for you Sangerie #Sangerie your the reason I’m posting this and you gave me the courage when I saw you posted your vinsmoke fan children #If your asking why she named Sora I just find the idea that they’re two Sora’s one being Ichiji and other Sanji’s XD because how are to kno

66 notes · View notes

hadesbullshit · 6 months

Text

I never stop thinking about a good version of spn where they use Micheals character better. After he and Adam are freed from the cage, they are literally planning to just go and live a normal life which is nothing like the tyrant warmonger are we seeing the alternate universe (which I would like to add, is the exact same Michael, except without Adam at 1600 years in the cage). I wish they had explored any of this.

Like they could have had Micheal refusing to help the Winchesters bc they fucked over Adam. and him not aloghninh himself with Chuck. Yeah.

#spn #midam #supernatural #Micheal spn #adam milligan

82 notes · View notes

tagedeszorns · 5 months

Note

Sorry you feel that way towards the fandom! I just got here so I have no previous times to compare it to, but there is something to what you are saying considering I check your blog daily considering you have such a delightful stream of art and texts posts about the 40k boys. And you are one of the few giving the normal astartes members some love too. Care to share some more secondary characters you think are deserving of reading about?

There are a lot of Legions with remarkable Captains and Sergeants who rarely get the spotlight, that's true!

I have to admit I am very biased, so if they are wearing purple, grey-later-red or green I am easy to impress and quick in loving all of them. I have written a lot about my favourite Emperor's Children (In my opinion Vairosean, Kaesoron or Demeter are very overlooked! And of course my favourites - Lucius, Fabius, Saul, Eidolon, Vispyrtilo, Krysithius, Ramos, Narvo, Bellephus, Alkenex ... the newcomers Xantine and Vavisk - so many!), my favourite Word Bearers (well, the usual - Erebus, Saqqara, Kol Badar, Kolos Undil, the Warmonger, Burias, Marduk, Narek the Traitor and brand new - Qaran Tun) and the Salamanders (more 40k, though. But who couldn't love Numeon? The 40k guys are better fleshed out, at least in my opinion. As much as I like Vulkan's Primarch novel, I think the Salamanders don't get much spotlight during the Heresy - their Primarch's spectacular stunts aside, of course!)

But some Legions really get the short end of the stick during the Heresy when it comes to prominent Captains/rank and file. I mean, who do we really get to know from Russ's lot besides Bjorn and Grimnir? Maybe Wyrdmake. But else? Slim pickings!

I would love to see someone get passionate about 30k Raven Guard or 30k Dark Angels! Or 30k White Scars (or 40k WS, by the way. I don't know shit about 40k WS!) Not the Primarchs, mind you! I am NOT interested in people gushing over Primarchs! The little guys! Do it! Go for them! It's free real estate! And so much room for activities!

I know people going feral about 30k Imperial Fists and (a bit at least) 30k Ultramarines. And 30/40k Death Guard. And one Salamanders-connoisseur. Okay, it's always just one person. But it's something!

For some reason, a lot of people go apeshit about anything Thousand Sons. Even if most of them can't name any of them except Magnus, Ahriman and Khayon. But I shouldn't be a snob.

Okay, that was not a very structured essay. But my point is: I would love following blogs about the overlooked Legions! Not Primarchs! Primarchs can appear, I mean, I draw Fulgrim a lot. And Lorgar. And Vulkan. But mostly the second row, please. Focussing on the Captains. And the Sergeants. The specialists. The serfs!

#warhammer #fandom #meta

40 notes · View notes

effervescentdragon · 1 month

Note

*holds out a mic like a reporter* what’s your opinion on the current state of the mcu?

my opinion is that it should have died a long time ago and that everything they do is just abusing the corpse of a frankensteined thing that should have been left and buried a long time ago.

now, i am not that much up to date. i have stopped engaging with mcu after endgame, with the exception of watching the forst season of loki and wakanda forever and i think the eternals, which is good if its taken out of the wider context. my opinion is that the mcu is empty and soulless and a perfect indoctrination into individualist capitalism, warmongering patriarchy and the greedy capital-driven urge of mega corporations and billionaires to replace any sort of humanity with artificially, computer made caricatures of something that once moght have been called art.

i remember that article that tom hiddleston wrote as a response to i believe scorcese sometime way back in 2012, defending superhero movies. i am too lazy to find any refetences so whoever reads this can do their own research and correct me if im wrong anywhere, but i do believe he gave sir christopher reeve as an example. he wrote about the thruths that superheroes explore, how there is not one, but many. how it is the mundanity and the pure humanity that gets amplified and therefore explored and understood through the characters of superheroes, and it all brings us closer to the human experience. that article has stuck with me through all the years ive spent watching these movies and believing in the message - we are all superheroes in our own way. we all make choices, no matter on how much of a micro scale, to do the right thing. to protect, to shield, to fight against injustice. art is, after all, inherently political.

there is none of that in the mcu. ive seen it being chipped away piece by piece over the years, seen the ethical and moral dilemmas we all face in day to day life brought on the big screen to make us understand that there is always a choice, no matter how tough that choice may be, and that every single one of us is capable of both the biggest heroism and the most depraved atrocities, because we are, in essence only human; i have seen all that be replaced with american capitalist war and conquering propaganda, girlboss empty feminism and whatever the fuck those shit "christians" are now pandering and paddling as "family values".

the only god disney worships is obscene amount of money. the only value they respect is how little they can pay and how much they can exploit to get highest monetary value for their shitty cgi-ed recycled propaganda movies. they have turned every character into a twisted version of themselves, assigned value to only those characters who help them propagate their imperialistic capitalist world order, and are fine to spit out dozens of same content (because by now, it is content, devoid of any artistic ideation) and stomp on all that superheroes used to stand for and all that they used to teach us. they also do it in a most insidious way, giving token "other" characters, be it by their race or faith or sexual orientation or gender, while counting on the systematic lowering of critical thinking skills in people to ensure people are dazzled by the shallow representation and never look further away from the rainbow cgi and explosions to understand that mcu has become just another cog in the us imperialist war machine.

i lied. i looked up tom hiddleston's article because i think a shakespearean actor classically trained who quotes tolstoy for fun might have written a better punchline than i could write, in my despondent, disappointed and despairing state of seeing something i've loved with my whole heart be ruined ny human grief. i was right.

"Maybe playing superheroes isn't such an ignoble undertaking after all. "I still believe in heroes," says Samuel L Jackson's Nick Fury in Avengers Assemble. So do I, sir. So do I."

except. except i believe in real life superheroes. in the people protesting against the genocide in gaza. in the people on the ground risking their lives to tell us in the west, about sudan and palestine and uyghur muslims and armenia and congo, in a bid that we might turn our heads and watch the actual real life crises caused by the very imperialists who use these superhero movies to try and save their status quo of opression. i believe in a man who chose self-immolation over being party to the atrocity that is the us military. i believe in my friends in germany who go out every weekend and fight against the rising nazi regime. i believe in every person that has spoken out against the atrocities in the world, every person that has donated and educated and debated and wrote to the representatives and protested. and they still do it, and will continue to do it. these people are the real superheroes to me, and guess what? they are just humans. and those people comitting atrocities right now? they are just humans too.

this is what the superhero comics and movies that i used to watch taught me. that humans are those who have the capacity for the biggest heroism and most despicable atrocities both. we just have to choose. and that is not something that anyone will be able to learn from the mcu anymore.

#never forget to say: free palestine #i woke up angry and i saw this ask about mcu so here we go #this is my opinion on it #effervescentdragonrants #akira answers asks #i guess i truly am a fool. i dont lose hope. still

19 notes · View notes

majorbaby · 9 months

Text

Now I'm thinking about how MASH moralizes competency in the medical field most of the time. Being good at your job is a positive trait for our heroes, and a redemptive trait for our antagonists. Except when Hawkeye mercifully breaks that formula, but I'll get to that.

Frank is a competent military man and an incompetent doctor. Henry, the inverse. Potter is the best of both worlds, but keep in mind that when Potter arrives the show retools its definition of "competent military man" from warmongering patriot to kind-of-honourable-I-guess. Charles is a competent doctor in spite of his questionable morals. Margaret at her most villanous is consistently portrayed as a being at the top of her field, which sets up her redemption arc.

Would we be able to accept the positive trajectory of Hawkeye's relationships with Potter, Charles and Margaret if they weren't all good at their jobs? Potter may be regular army and Charles an old-money upperclassman and Margaret a military-loving career army nurse, but they all save lives. I wouldn't say it's because of that that Hawkeye is able to bond with all of them, but it is one less barrier, and I think if it were there it would matter to him.

Hawkeye's talent and skill as a doctor is central to the character, and yet he's horrified by how that makes him complicit in the war effort. He also cautions Henry against seeing the war as an opportunity to escape his boring life and do some thrilling, fulfilling work as a doctor.

And in "The Party" Hawkeye wrongly assumes his father's practice is more important to him than "the son I [Daniel Pierce] brought into this world." which is a sobering reminder to Hawkeye from someone he loves who is also a doctor that there's more to life than doctor-ing.

Early on in "The Consultant" Dr. Borelli (played by Alan Alda's real-life father, if that means anything to you) warns Hawkeye that kindness isn't an inherent trait of doctors: "You have a great many gifts doctor, it's a pity you can't number compassion among them."

We wouldn't have a show if Hawkeye constantly grappled with the ethics of being an army doctor (even against his will) because it's show about a medical unit, so I think instead it's that much more important to make the point that a job, no matter how honourable it is, should never be what you are, it is only what you do.

And this is why I think BJ is unable to convince Hawkeye that's he's doing something wrong in "Preventative Medicine" or something that Hawkeye will be unable to live with - BJ is appealing to Hawkeye the doctor, not Hawkeye the person. I don't think it's that they disagree on the ethics of their profession, it's that Hawkeye is bound by those ethics only to a certain extent because there are some situations in which they limit his ability to "do no harm". When pushed beyond the limits of what he considers to be morally acceptable, he easily defers to the ethics of Hawkeye the person.

IMO, that was great use of the character because it's a counter to the idea that being good at your job absolves you of the harm you might do off the clock and/or the responsibility you have to think for yourself. Being a compassionate individual made Hawkeye a good doctor, not the other way around. The same traits make it impossible for him to excel in the military by the army's standards.

#this isn't a shot at house md fanwank but it's also not not that #re: mash #local 4077

56 notes · View notes

mama-qwerty · 23 days

Text

The Knuckles Series - Review

Okay. So.

Finished the series.

I have thoughts.

First of all, it was fun. I view it as kinda filler episode material, that if someone watched just the movies they wouldn’t miss much. I watched it with my family and there were times we were all laughing and cheering and just enjoying the ride. It was silly and fun and Knuckles was adorable in every scene he was in.

That said, was it perfect?

No. No, it was not.

Here’s my take on some problems.

~ Setup felt rushed

We had the barest glimpse into Knux’s difficulty adjusting to a life on Earth, which, honestly, just made it look like he wasn’t being challenged enough. He can’t go from being on the run and fighting for his life at every turn to just sitting around playing VR and goofing off. That’s just not who he is.

Not to mention, his interpersonal skills are practically non-existent. He fought his whole childhood away. Presumably, anyone who came near him either wanted to exploit him, use him, or fight him. So he’s used to just doing things on his own, with no one to answer to, or take into consideration. That’s what I saw at the beginning—and honestly, it may have been easily handled had Maddie sat down with him and actually tried to get to know and understand him a little better.

~ Maddie

I felt for her, I really did. And I get that she was frustrated. Tom’s off who-knows-where, and she’s left at home trying to get the damage to the house fixed, while keeping tabs on three super powered alien kids, one of whom is actively attacking handymen, dragging a ton of dirt and sharpened sticks into the living room to make a warrior fighting pit, and dismantling the car to build himself an Iron Throne in the dining room.

She’s frustrated, and doing everything she can to keep herself from snapping. She didn’t sign up for this, but now has to learn on the fly how to deal with three very different, and very special needs kiddos.

But her referring to Knuckles as “our little red barbarian friend” kinda rubbed me the wrong way. He’s not a barbarian. He’s a warrior. He’s a traumatized kid who feels like the honor of his entire tribe rests on his shoulders. He’s struggling with this change and instead of trying to sit down and talk to the kid to explain how things are done on Earth, and see if there was some kind of agreement they could reach to keep them both happy, she just kinda gives up and walks away. Not very understanding, and doesn’t make her come off looking very good.

~ Pachacamac

Okay, this is just weird. Pachacamac, for those who don’t know, in the games is the warmongering echidna tribe chief who led the warriors in an assault to take the Master Emerald’s power for themselves. In the process, they enraged Chaos, the God of Destruction, who all but wiped out the Knuckles clan.

I know, I know, game and movie universes are different. The movie team has taken liberties before with certain aspects of Sonic lore, so this shouldn’t be any different.

Except it is. Canonically, Pachacamac is not a good guy. He’s not even a morally gray character. He is not an honored chief, who trained Knuckles and is now his wise spirit guide. He was the cause of the fall of Knuckles’ entire tribe, thanks to his greed and lust for power.

Making Pachacamac essentially Yoda is like changing Robotnik into a kindly grandfather figure. I mean, what??

The only thing I can think this harkens back to is Longclaw’s little hologram message from the second movie, in which she gives Sonic a quest to find the Master Emerald before Knuckles does. Which, okay, it’s a lost loved one giving a final message to help direct the character on a new path.

Except, Pachacamac isn’t a lost loved one for Knuckles. We did not see any interaction between Knux and Pach. We did see interaction between Knuckles and his father, who would have been a much better choice to send his son on a new path.

(I did, however, see this post that makes SOOOOO much sense in why Pachy appears to Knux, and instructs him to train Wade, specifically.)

~ The Master Emerald

Speaking of, WHERE IS IT? It was referenced numerous times, but never shown once. The absolute least the show could have done was show it well secured, with a Tails’ created security system in place. Show Knux meditating near it, or praying to his ancestors that they can rest easy knowing that the Emerald is safely back in the hands of the echidna once more.

The absolute lack of a presence of it is strange, considering the pursuit of it was what caused the near extinction of both the echidna and the owls. It was Knuckles’ focus for his entire life. Yet he simply leaves it behind without a second thought?

~ Wanda

OMG I hated Wade’s sister. Just, hated her. She was immature, abrasive, abusive, unnecessarily antagonistic with Wade (which seemed to be a life-long thing if the flashbacks are anything to go by) and just struck me as someone who was overcompensating for something. She’s a bully and it’s no wonder Wade is the way he is if he had to grow up with someone like her.

~ No Closure

We didn’t see them arrive back home, where Maddie would hand them their asses for just disappearing like that and not telling her. She was likely worried out of her mind the whole time. And I would have liked to have seen Sonic and Tails try to cover for Knux’s absence, in funny little brotherly shenanigans.

As I said above, I still found it fun. I loved Mother Whipple. I loved Knux’s interactions with her. I loved how Wade grew over their little trip. It was an enjoyable ride, and my whole family really had fun.

How would I have done it differently?

Well, that’s a different post.

#knuckles series review #knuckles series spoilers #knuckles the echidna #wade whipple

18 notes · View notes

warsofasoiaf · 4 days

Note

Have you watched the Fallout show on Prime and if so, what did you think of it?

I watched it. For the most part, it was good - well-shot and well-executed. Walton Goggins stole the show as our favorite ghoul hitman. The Brotherhood was finally and decisively moved away from its Fallout 3 Wasteland Crusaders vibe. I would have liked more of the technological cult of the Brotherhood emphasized a little more, but what they did was fine. Overall, it felt like a Fallout product, albeit a Bethseda one.

And then, the final episode ended up turning into the Mass Effect 3 ending.

Overall, the plot was still the Bethseda "find the family member" plot which is getting quite stale by this point, but having Lucy go through it rather than us going through it ourselves makes the ludonarrative dissonance of Bethseda's "find your family member, but also feel free to dick around literally everywhere" entries into the Fallout series" does make the pill a lot easier to swallow. Her dad being a bad guy was a perfectly fine twist, albeit predictable. I'm not liking how many people seem to keep popping up from Pre-War times as being cryogenically frozen, it keeps losing the magic of the pre-War times with every new Pre-War person.

That being said, some worldbuilding changes I was not happy with. Nuking Shady Sands was something that was desirable for a lot of Fallout devs in terms of wanting to change the world back away from Fallout 2's big established cities to something grittier. But the timing of it throws New Vegas out the window. I believe the writers have said it was a mistake, and it goes back and forth from being an actual outside writer's mistake to a mistake that an in-universe actor made in recordkeeping. To me, it looks like a lack of care for the setting. If that was it, I'd actually be fine with the explanation, but there's a larger pattern at work here.

The change to making ghouls dependent on some magic juice just annoyed me. There was no real reason to change it, and now it opens up a whole of retroactive canonicity issues. It didn't really service the needs of the story except as an excuse plot for the Ghoul to sell Lucy to the organ harvesters in exchange for the magic juice. There were cleaner ways to get the plot to move in that direction without it.

The final episode plot revelations though, about how the US actually won the Resource Wars with limitless power and decided to nuke the world anyway because of the nefarious oligarch business council, was an incredibly stupid plot beat, enough that the series left a sour taste in my mouth. The Resource Wars meant a whole lot to the feel of Fallout, and satirized the jingoist nature of the 1950's Cold War. And what's better is that the entire reason, that they need to ensure a return on investment, makes no sense. The Resource Wars already show us that there's a premium on resources, and the technology level of the Pre-War world is such that having enough power could alleviate all sorts of resource shortages. And it's all under Vault-Tec's control, so there's *no* need to actually get the nukes to start flying from Vault-Tec's perspective. Vault-Tec desires nothing more than money, so it destroys the world to make...a whole lot less money.

That's beyond stupid, and there were so many ways to make it actually work. China attacking the US with nukes in this scenario (which was the prior canon) actually makes sense with this wrinkle - because China has lost and it would rather destroy the world than lose the war. That's well-keeping in line with the themes of Fallout. Even having the US Government find out and attack via Poseidon Energy (a conspicuous absence from the Evil Oligarch Council given the importance of Poseidon to the Enclave). But no, they went with lazy, stupid writing, getting rid of the critique of the warmongering that nearly ran the world to ruin in the 1950's and 1960's for an ineffective satire of the unchecked power of corporations.

That's one of the things that bothers me most in worldbuilding is when lore events are changed, especially for incredibly stupid reasons. It kills the immersion of any series, especially one so dependent on atmosphere and with so much lore as Fallout. It was disappointing to see a series with such potential just fumble the ball in the final minute.

Thanks for the question, George.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

#fallout

13 notes · View notes

viviennelamb · 3 months

Text

If somebody isn't actually Spiritual or part of the >1% minority, nothing they produce is worth spitting at. Egotists are replicas who distribute pompous propaganda which doesn't distill value to somebody who at least lives closer to Reality.

Falsehood is all the rage with people who lie so much that they've gotten high on their own supply of Bullshit. Non-spiritual people think that God-lovers are stupid - the feeling's mutual except Reality aligns with the latter. Guess Reality's stupid cause I don't have to cite a study a man made up in his inseminated head, I can just observe the Present Moment and tell you what is happening right Now.

There will be no "advanced society" if Pure women continue to be ignored and dismissed. To put down your pride, vanity, envy for one fucking second and submit to the Truth instead of submitting to a male and the females who love them is the test of this Dark Age. Man-consciousness is the vast, vast majority of the population regardless of what you think you're looking at.

The state of the collective's is reflecting materially and this world is only getting worse and pure women aren't going to save, protect or help anybody because they don't heed to warnings when times seem good. God has given the most materially unpalatable women everything while the materially palatable has to beg for scraps from dogs... it has always been like this because most people operate under the law of delusion where they think somebody's physical appearance gives them "privilege."

Maybe a Nun will toss you a can out beans out of pity when you're starving, but notice how Nuns hide from the world? The Way to Perfection is to stay the fuck away from the ordinary person and keep strict silence. The gap in intelligence is too large to even begin to explain what is going on in the world, let alone what is happening in Heaven (which people who haven't earned it are oddly curious about).

The evils of the World need to be spoken of extensively before you can grasp anything Good. Those who attempt to skip over what is happening right in front of them because they want Heaven's vibe without putting in the work are the most egotistical and self-righteous pieces of shit who look down on people who got themselves out of Hell while still being in Hell themselves.

It's easy to not be passionate about the Truth when you don't know anything, sweetheart. Knowing what evil is and how close it is to you is the only way you will get motivation to think and act right so you can free yourself from it. The thing is, you don't know how destitute you are when you're in the thick of delusion.

Those who are against Perfection can keep debating about which warmongering psychopath is better than the other when it doesn't matter. You must raise yourself up to the bare minimum of purity of mind, body and soul to understand God and then you will see just how much you are part of the cause of what is happening in the world and how much you've been lying to yourself about being a "good person." All political activism has and will always fail because self-righteous activists wage war on pure women daily and as a result war will be waged on them and nobody will care because they don't care about Karma.

Anybody who goes against the souls that adore God will die painfully forever. Anything you think, say, or do against me will be done to you in return trillion-fold every minute of every day and you won't know it, but you will have a psychiatric diagnosis for it.

The world will never be peaceful if you hate pure women. Why? Because you hate what you are not. If you have the urge to defend sex when a pure woman speaks about it, that means you prioritize sex over purity and women altogether. In the end, you're just another man.

#cannot tell you how many people have messaged me seemingly agreeing with me only to later attempt to convince me that sex is good #ok then have your sex. don't be surprised I don't want anything to do with you when you choose sex over me & real camaraderie.#if you're too socially inept to understand: what you proactively defend shows what you prioritize in your life.#& don't be surprised when the world does the same and chooses dicks over you. If only people defended innocence with that level of vigor...

20 notes · View notes

wishesofeternity · 2 years

Text

Daemon Targaryen rant, incoming

(Warning: it’s really long)

To begin, this is how Daemon Targaryen is introduced in the story:

“Over the centuries, House Targaryen has produced both great men and monsters. Prince Daemon was both. In his day there was not a man so admired, so beloved, and so reviled in all Westeros. He was made of light and darkness in equal parts. To some he was a hero, to others the blackest of villains.”

The problem with this sort of narrative is that is conflates morality with fundamental human nature. The latter is the capacity for good and evil, and the ability to choose, that exists in every human being. However, it means absolutely nothing without morality, which is defined as a system of values or principles of conduct, and is used to understand the extent to which an action is right or wrong. Grey morality is the blurring of those lines, where motives and contexts are so complex that you cannot pin down whether an action or a person is purely good or purely bad.

Daemon Targaryen, like every other character, possesses the capacity for good and evil and the ability to choose. But morally? Daemon was a child groomer and a pedophile who had physical relations with his teenage niece and a 17-year old girl (he was 50 at the time), and enjoyed sampling young virgins at brothels. He was a warmonger and war criminal who began a conquest of the Stepstones, taking all but two islands, ensuring that the people there "learned to fear" his dragon, before abandoning the entire thing because he got bored. He was a child murderer responsible for the brutal murder of a 6-year old boy and the threat of rape to a 6-year old girl. He encouraged the continuation of the Dance and vengeance against his enemies, dismissing his Hand's proposal for peace. He had the selfishness of Aegon IV, the brutality of Maegor, and the tyranny of Aerys II. And that’s just scratching the surface of the things he did, both before and during the Dance. This man was not morally grey. He was not “light and darkness in equal parts”, because that implies a moral balance or moral complexity which does not exist. He had the innate capability to do both good and evil, yes. No one is denying that he could potentially be a decent person, or potentially make better choices. That is true of every human being. But the fact remains that Daemon was repeatedly and consistently awful throughout the overwhelming majority of his life, to the detriment of the people close to him and Westeros as a whole. Nor does he have a Tragic Backstory(tm) to contextualize his actions: he was a prince born to the most powerful family in the continent with an immense amount of privilege that allowed him to get away with virtually everything. Daemon isn't "morally grey", he's just an entitled asshole who does what he wants and suffers absolutely no consequences for it. There's nothing particularly complex or compelling about that.

I think there is also a conflation of grey morality with unpredictability. Daemon was unpredictable, with his sudden elopements and kickstarting of wars and general mercuriality. The moral complexity of this, however, depends on his motives, and none of his are particularly complicated or difficult to morally pin down: he is primarily and consistently motivated by self-interest. If they happen to benefit others, it’s purely coincidental, and always secondary. Unpredictability does not automatically make someone morally grey, and it certainly doesn’t with Daemon.

(And since lots of people have brought this up, I would also like to point out that love is not inherently virtuous. Kevan Lannister loved his family, does that balance out the cause he served and make him morally grey? The Greens also loved each other and fought for each other till the bitter end, does that mean they should be excused in a similar manner? And contrary to what people believe, Daemon has not been explicitly or singularly loving to any family member in canon except for Laena Velaryon, which was more convenient than purposeful. Was he a good father? Maybe, but nothing in the text emphasizes or denies anything. I would also like to point out that his last act in life was literally to abandon Rhaenyra and his children to settle a personal score, directly leading to her downfall and two of his children’s imprisonment. I don’t understand how people bring up his “love” for his family as his redeeming factor at all).

If the narrative had leaned into his awfulness, he could have potentially been a fun villain. But ultimately, the problem lies in the fact that while Daemon is constantly shown to be an all-around terrible person, the narrative repeatedly paints him as someone who is both a monster and a great man, and who is made up of both light and darkness "in equal parts". Thus, all his atrocities are absorbed into a narrative mythos of glorified grey morality rather than outright condemned. In order for him to be a truly morally complex character, a balance needed to be maintained, and in this case, it was simultaneously one-sided and non-existent.

Basically, GRRM’s version of grey morality is deeply flawed. This one in particular was a classic example of telling rather than showing, and a classic example of an author having a particular characterization in mind but executing it very differently in the text, because Daemon is nowhere near as complex or as compelling as GRRM or his stans seem to believe he is.

It is also necessary to remember that Daemon is one of GRRM’s all-time favourite Targaryens, which explains quite a bit of my frustration regarding the way he’s written. Namely, it explains why the narrative of the Dance was single-handedly ruined by the prioritization of Daemon and Daemon's storyline at the expense of virtually every other character.

His wives are all overshadowed by him and primarily defined by their relationship with him. Rhea Royce is an unfeatured non-entity who exists solely for him to hate, and conveniently dies in time for him to remarry. Laena is a beautiful, fiery, perfect companion who dies tragically young and in a conveniently gendered manner, once again in time for him to remarry. Rhaenyra is sidelined and eclipsed in her own war and her own story in favor of him. Nor should we forget his lovers: more time is spent describing Nettles and Mysaria’s relationships with Daemon than actually telling us more about them as individuals. Once he’s out of the picture for good, the former completely retreats from civilization, and the latter is gruesomely murdered by his enemies. Once again, all I can say is: Convenient.

Perhaps the most damning aspect of this blatant favoritism is how Daemon is turned into the essential protagonist of the Dance of the Dragons. He is the “wonder and terror of his age”, with a legendary sword and a famous, fearsome dragon. He is the one driving the events that lead to the Dance and the events of the Dance itself; thus, he completely usurps Rhaenyra, the actual claimant of the throne. While she is being dismissed by their enemies, he is singled out as the most dangerous threat. While she is being berated for refusing to risk herself or her sons in battle and thus costing her allies their lives, he secures a spectacular and bloodless victory by taking over Harrenhal. While she collapses after hearing of the death of her son, he promises vengeance and enacts Blood and Cheese, kickstarting the war for good. While she is unable to maintain control of the city, driving her reign to the ground and dying an ultimately defeated and gruesome death, he achieves a final triumph by killing his enemy and leaves the singers wondering if he ever died at all, while his abandonment of her and role in her downfall is not emphasized in the slightest. Nor is Rhaenyra allowed a single moment of singular glory: her takeover of King’s Landing is explicitly with him by her side, and culminates in his crowning of her. And I really cannot say this enough: none of this is propaganda or based solely on in-universe sexism. It is simply GRRM’S clear narrative bias that favors Daemon at Rhaenyra’s expense. The misogyny of it all is embarrassing.

Narratively, the Greens suffer the most from this. All of them are caricatures meant to oppose the Blacks rather than individual characters in their own right. While this is evident with every single one of them (particularly Aegon II, the other claimant of the throne, and Alicent, the most important woman on her side), nowhere is the bias more evident than the manner in which the narrative depicts Daemon compared to his nephew, Aemond Targaryen. Both of them are clearly meant to be narrative parallels: second sons, dangerous swordsmen, the heavy-hitting wildcards of the war, one of them claiming Visenya’s dragon and the other one possessing Visenya’s sword. Both of them committed heinous atrocities on equal proportion, the only difference being that Daemon lived longer and thus had the time to commit more. Yet the way they are portrayed could not be more different: Aemond is rightfully depicted as war criminal and a murderer, and is both one-dimensional and over-the-top in his awfulness; Daemon, on the other hand, has far more pagetime, is explored in far more detail, and has all his crimes contextualized as part of his glorified and non-existent “grey morality”. (And while this is not a direct criticism, it’s also a little weird that while Aemond is justifiably called Kinslayer, Daemon is not, despite the fact that he was responsible the death of his young grand-nephew, a suspect for the death of his good-brother, and the eventual killer of Aemond himself.) The narrative rightfully condemns one while painting the other as someone who was “made of light and darkness in equal parts”. The bias is very, very evident.

This culminates in Daemon’s final scene: The Battle above the God’s Eye. I get the symbolism: he killed a younger allegory of himself, Satan slayed his son, the vicious circle has ended, etc, etc. It makes symbolic sense. But the fact remains that this gives Daemon a final triumph and narrative glorification that he of all people did not deserve, that no other player of the Dance received. This is emphasized by the way the duel was described: two important people fought, two important people died, and yet it was called “Prince Daemon’s last battle”, which really tells you all you need to know. The duel was meant for Daemon; Aemond existed solely to be his mirror and his final opponent.

(I’d also like to point out that a 50-year old man challenging his barely 20-year old nephew and winning against him is nowhere near as glorious or awe-inspiring as the book or its fans make it out to seem, but is in fact one of the most pathetically embarrassing things I've ever read about. I also don’t think it was realistic at all, and would have made more symbolic and literal sense for both of them to mutually kill the other. But that would result in GRRM’s favourite character getting the equal end of the stick for once, which is probably why it didn't happen)

Basically - Daemon Targaryen was the Gary Stu of his age, and I despise everything about him

#asoiaf #hotd #fire and blood #anti daemon #anti daemon targaryen #anti daemon stans #kinda #fire and blood critical #queue #aemond targaryen #it's so frustrating because i really enjoy morally grey unpredictable characters (especially when they're charismatic)#but daemon is not one of them lmao #mine

257 notes · View notes