#I don't care whether or not you agree with me I'm just presenting the concept

[dragonsdomain]

Random Convo: Never learned how to read

AO3

Dark Pit: So... how was the Aurum invasion?

Pit: Oh, it was great! They had such cool jazz music! If only you'd bothered to show up.

Dark Pit: Nobody told me about it!

Pit: Oh.... sorry.

Palutena: We managed without you, but next time there's a world-ending invasion, we'll be sure to ring you up.

Pit: "Managed", huh? That's an understatement. I almost died!

Palutena: I doubt you would've wanted what you yelled as you were falling to be your final words. You might want to workshop that.

Pit: You heard that?

Palutena: You yelled it, Pit.

Dark Pit: What did you yell?

Pit: Nothing important.

Palutena: Aww, are you getting shy about it? Come on, tell him.

Pit: ...I said ...”I never learned how to read.”

Dark Pit: Wh‒ huh?

Palutena: I admit, I was a little confused too.

Dark Pit: You know how to read.

Pit: Yeah. But I wanted someone to teach me.

Dark Pit: But you know how.

Pit: I just wanted to learn it! It sounds nice! Like, practicing making my letters pretty in a book with lines, reading about a girl saying “go, Spot, go!” and getting praised for doing a good job!

Palutena: Oh, Pit! That's so adorable!

Pit: Augh! Stop! Let's talk about something else!

Dark Pit: You don’t want to learn how to read, you want a childhood.

Pit: Well, just lay it bare, why don’t you?

#Kid Icarus #Kid Icarus Uprising #KIU #Pit #Dark Pit #Palutena #my fanfics #KIU random convos #get headcanoned #I don't care whether or not you agree with me I'm just presenting the concept #I don't even know whether I agree with me so there #headcanon #spoilers #KIU spoilers

[iliveforyouilongforyouvesuvia]

Hello, my dear friend! 😎

I hope you're having a wonderful day. I've come to fulfill my noble quest, as promised.

So, we've already had pregnant MC, which I adore and cherish, like all your works. What you do is amazing, and I hope you know that. You bring the kind of joy into our lives that I think does wonders for our weary souls. On top of that, you're one of the kindest souls I've ever met, and I'm lucky to have you in my life and be able to call you my friend. Seriously, you're a miracle and you make the world a better place.

But to my actual request. Could you please do headcanons about the M6 being pregnant? Seahorse dads are very much encouraged 👀 I often think about having children with Nadia, but I don't really like the idea of being pregnant myself (although our dear Countess does make me want to consider it every once in a while. The baby fever is very strong with her.) Plus, I'm certain there are other people like myself who prefer not to get pregnant or they simply can't for various reasons.

Thank you! Hugs to you and much love 🤗❤

Ps.: I'll kiss you if you do it (in a friendly but still very gay way)

The Arcana HCs: When M6 get pregnant

@theintrovertbean I'm here to collect my platonic but still very gay smooch, please :3 (In all seriousness though, I keep rereading your kind words and trying not to cry, that means so much to me. I'm so glad I get to call you my friend too!!)

-- CW for mpreg (obviously). for headcanon purposes, all members of the M6 want to have a child with MC and are happy with being the partner to be pregnant. whether this happens by natural means, depending on what reproductive system you headcanon them as having, or by *magic*, said baby is 50% your DNA and 50% theirs. --

Julian

Did the two of you take active steps to make it possible for him to carry your child? Yes. Did he think he would be fortunate enough for it work? No. Is he surprised now, even though it's planned? Yes

The most freaked out about what his body is in the process of doing. Again, this is something he agreed to and genuinely wants, but it's just so surreal to him that he keeps needing to rationalize it

His way of rationalizing things is to study them

This does not help his ever-present anxiety, especially when he has to limit his caffeine intake and his mood swings are even more intense than normal. He is going to bury himself in research

And then completely freak himself out with the assorted random weird facts, unhinged medical theories, and pregnancy horror stories that he encounters. Which isn't good for the baby

Speaking of, he keeps swinging wildly between being hyperaware of the tiny creature he's growing and completely forgetting about his state. Suddenly his self-care directly impacts someone else

Spending nine months with limited caffeine intake and 0 alcohol was actually very good for him. (even if it made him cranky at first)

The overall process was fairly smooth for him - he didn't have a lot of awful symptoms, and the only health scares were his own anxious "what if" spirals after reading horror stories before bed

Kept working the whole way through (though with considerably fewer hours so he could get more sleep), and generally did a great job whenever he wasn't thinking too hard about it all

Asra

They never actively envisioned this happening in their future, but when you brought up having kids in the first place they were already fairly open to the idea of being the one to carry the baby

There was definitely magic involved in the conception. He's too extra for there not to be (plus, a little boost never hurt anybody)

For such a normally chillaxed person, they did not take this decision lightly. Everything from planning, to conception, to preparing to raise a kid is full of intentionality

He wants to ensure that his kid gets a childhood that lasts as long as they need it to and a happy, safe environment to grow and explore. His baby fever wasn't intense but his nesting habits are

They get in several last crazy adventures before they start to feel the pregnancy and then spend the rest of it either sleeping, getting the baby's space ready, or eating the most unreal food combos

Seriously, you expected weird cravings, but considering how unusual his tastes already are you didn't think it could get much weirder. It can get so, so much weirder (he even managed to finally pry open that jar of kool-aid pickled garlic and put it in custard)

Between their parent's enthusiastic support and Nadia and Julian providing full medical backup, they are well looked after

Not to mention the pregnancy glow. He makes it look ethereal

They aren't fond of physical discomfort, though, and it makes them unusually broody and cuddly. Please give them snuggles

They spend weeks creating the most whimsical nursery

Nadia

She was actually the one to bring it up when she started talking about her expectations of marriage with you after proposing

For how strained her own relationship with her family is, she's more excited about starting one of her own with you than you expected. When you tell her that you want kids too, she's all for it

Sets a rule as soon as she tells her family that she won't be accepting more than two visitors at a time. Namar nearly revolts

Her pregnancy was not easy, at all. It was months before she could keep a full meal down, she was in near constant pain, and the fatigue was unrelenting. And she never let on in public, at all

Seriously, the only people who knew how hard it was were her close friends, trusted Palace people, and doctor. From the outside it was as if she couldn't feel it at all and life carried on as usual

The biggest noticeable difference (aside from her growing bump, which she somehow managed to make her draping clothes look even more regal with) was having Portia deliver speeches for her

Towards the final few months, it caught up to her enough that she couldn't be nearly as active as she used to. She turned one of her side chambers into her office and took all her meetings there

It also became evident how much the Palace staff loves their countess - the cooks worked tirelessly to find easy meals for her (and satiate every craving beyond the laws of culinary art)

Not to mention that the garden was immaculately kept

The amount of gifts for the baby took up several small closets

Muriel

He didn't bring it up. No, you brought it up, because of how out of hand his baby fever was getting. He'd gone from begrudgingly letting kids climb on him to actively offering to help watch them

Which turned into a lifestyle - he started spending all his free time carving toys so he could carry them in his pocket in case some shy toddler looked like they wanted one. You're running out of firewood

He offered to be the one to carry the baby, if you didn't want to

The psychological aspect of it is much harder for him than the physical. He knows his own body, he knows his strength and capacity for survival, and he's comfortable with what he's doing

But that is a whole other person-to-be he's growing, they deserve the best they can get, and he's not convinced he's the best

Is this ... selfish of him? Is this greedy? He knows he'll put everything he is into being a good parent, but what if someone else's best is better than his? MC, what are we doing??

These anxiety spirals happen frequently, either when he's gone too long sitting by himself or when the pregnancy insomnia makes it impossible for him to sleep the amount he normally likes to

On the plus side, the mood swings actually make it easier for him to express what he's feeling (and for you to know what's going on with him) so that you two can navigate it together

Asra is so excited to have a nibling that they stop by almost every day with baby gifts (and supplies from Nadia, once she knows)

He full body freezes every. single. time the baby moves

Portia

Oh, she's wanted to have a house full of kids since she was a kid in a house full of kids. She brought this up with you as soon as she started talking about a future together and she is so pumped

Literally nothing about the concept of it fazes her. She's helped with plenty of pregnancies and births, she's seen the good, the bad, and the ugly, and she is fully confident with you by her side

In her mind, this is the first of many (assuming all goes well, which she fully believes it will) so this is her chance to take things as they come and note them down for future reference

Keeps a daily journal with all her pregnancy observations, plus doctor's notes from weekly check-ups and plans for the baby

You didn't know pregnancy could make somebody more powerful but somehow she's done it. You expect it to catch up to her at some point and for her to take time off to rest, but she doesn't

The pregnancy glow is real and it is named Portia Devorak. You've never seen her hair so bouncy and full (shedding increases x10)

The biggest downside is that she can't stand the smell of cooking or baking anymore, which has long been one of her comfort activities. You'll have to manage meal prep (or partner with a chef)

Speaking of, half the Palace is asking for updates on a daily basis (which she happily provides). Nadia's showering her with more supplies and maternity leave than Portia wants to accept

Julian panicked about being the doctor until Mazelinka shoved him aside and took over as midwife. Portia's in skilled hands

Lucio

This was not planned. This was a happy accident. (Though Bob Ross never painted such a surprised, panicked, violent tree)

Whether because protection didn't work, or because Lucio saw a glowing orb in a weird dream and decided to mess with it while he was sleeping next to you, neither of you were remotely prepared

It doesn't really compute for him at first. The growing thing in his stomach is about as real as the tooth fairy - it's a concept that people tell him about before he goes back to daily life

It's a concept he's fiercely protective of and wants the best for

On a practical planning level, you two take advantage of his relatively easy first few months to take on a bunch of high paying jobs and revisit villages that seemed like a good spot to stay in

He's almost symptom-free until the bump really starts growing and his body starts adjusting for the extra weight. Thankfully by then you've found a place to settle down and reliable income

Lucio, understandably, becomes a complete diva once you do

He's pretty darn proud of what his body is doing, and he's relieved beyond words that he's having an easier time than what his mother described, but he does not like the way he looks

Or the aches and pains, or the breathlessness, or the way his whole body feels swollen and sore. (at least his hair looks nice)

You've never had such a hard time keeping him to his intended budget. He sees one (1) baby item and his wallet flies open

His sweet tooth gets 1000 times bigger than it already is

#ask arcana brainrot #the arcana #the arcana headcanons #the arcana hc #the arcana game #asra the arcana #julian the arcana #nadia the arcana #muriel the arcana #portia the arcana #lucio the arcana #asra alnazar #julian devorak #nadia satrinava #muriel of the kokhuri #portia devorak #lucio morgasson

[queerfables]

So following this extremely silly conversation about Maggie being Crowley and Aziraphale's secret love child, @azfellandco and I got to talking about what having children, as a hypothetical concept, would actually mean to Crowley and Aziraphale.

We both agreed that we had very tender feelings about the generalised concept of Crowley and Aziraphale raising Warlock together, but that it was hard to imagine them actually wanting to parents. It's not something they relate to or feel they're missing out on. But like, maybe sometimes they wonder.

I'm posting this conversation with Mir's permission because I felt like we covered some really interesting ground.

@azfellandco: They've had every other human experience together and they have forever to keep having them, but part of the appeal of the raising warlock together subplot to me is that suddenly they both Don't have forever to be with each other and Also they're presented with this child that isn't theirs but (they think) isn't really Earth's either and it's like, what if. What if this Is the end, despite all their work, and what if they never got to have this? Sort of preemptive grief, I guess.

@queerfables: Oh yes, that's such a good way to put it!

I feel very strongly that having kids would Not Be For Them, and that whatever needs they have that might be filled by kids, they meet in other ways. I think there's a lot of crossover with the way they aid humans where they can, for one.

But I can ABSOLUTELY imagine them like. Thinking about it. And the world is coming to an end and they still can't tell each other even a fraction of the things they really want to. But they can have this. Not really theirs, but not really not. The way the world and humanity always was, I think.

@azfellandco: "Not really theirs but not really not, the way the world and humanity always was." Yeah, exactly this.

@queerfables: I definitely think we've hit on something there.

@azfellandco: It's also about like. The way in which the inability to do this preempts the ways in which it would be merely inadvisable. They can't have a serious talk about whether they would be good parents because it's impossible for them to have a child (by circumstances, by their roles in the war, by the oncoming apocalypse, by biology as far as they're aware). So what would be the point?

But the impossibility is also a source of grief. That they'll never have the conversation is a source of grief. And because they can't talk about it seriously, it never gets grounded in anything real. It's something they think about while knowing that the way they think about it is superficial and would dissolve in reality. And so it becomes a stand-in for the way they think about their relationship pre-armageddon, too. They'll never have an opportunity to test it to see if it would work. It remains ephemeral, something to fantasize about. But god, sometimes they want to Know.

@queerfables: Oof.

I think there's something there as well about like. Hmm. They can't love and care for a child the way a human would because they are not human. And yet even asking the question about this is SO human. There's just, there's no concept of parenthood for angels and demons. There's no concept of childhood (although there is perhaps a concept of innocence, and loss of innocence). So where does that put them, if they wanted to raise a child? Like you said, it's ephemeral and impossible.

What sort of child could they raise? There are no children among immortals. Would they raise a human, who might need things they can't give and who is going to live and grow old and die while they're still just - moving through the world the way they always have? The idea of never having a child is, for them, a phantom grief that's largely grounded in their fear of losing the world and each other and all the experiences they could have had. But to actually love a child they'll inevitably lose again, because there's just no alternative for two immortals raising a human, would open them up to real, tangible grief on a scale neither of them has ever truly imagined.

This is why, I guess, Warlock is such a perfect case for them to try it, to have something of what it's like. Because if their plan doesn't work (and maybe there's a part of them that never really thought it would, even though they hope with everything they have) then at least they won't have to live with grief of losing him, really, because they'll be losing everything including very likely their own lives.

@azfellandco: Yes yes yes to all of this, absolutely. And I think in growing to care for Warlock and think of him as theirs, there is this sense of like. Well, what do they want to be true? Do they want the world to go on, and them with it, and inevitably this little family they're playing at having will be something they have to reconcile with the reality of immortal existence? Or do they want (or at least expect) this to be a desperate, futile effort and that the world IS going to end? In a way, growing to love Warlock is the same kind of hiding in a story that Aziraphale's Jane Austen ball is, I think.

@queerfables: YES. I totally agree with you. And that's why I think they would never try to find Warlock again, after the world didn't end. None of it was really real, and it would hurt to be faced with that.

#good omens #good omens meta #fable talks good omens

[darlin-djarin]

what are your favourite Din Djarin headcanons? :D

RAHGHHHH YA HABIBI AD-DIN "ABU GROGU" DJARIN

ok so i'm a BIG deaf din truther. that boy is deaf, no doubt. he uses his helmet as an aid and he's learned tusken sign language from the armorer (who i've fully accepted as a tusken raider or something similar). he can read lips, but whenever he takes the helmet off, he can't hear much of anything, which is why he's so confused when the imperial started talking to him, etc etc. i have another huge post about deaf din and all of that stuff, so i'm not gonna go into it, but deaf din is something i hold so dear and close to my heart.

i also definitely think he's autistic, in some way. i've talked about it a lot with some of my autistic and neurodivergent mutuals and we've all come to the conclusion that he's definitely neurodivergent. a lot of people, i've noticed, have found comfort in his character and personality because they relate to him a lot on that sort of level. his mannerisms and his interactions with other people is something a lot of autistic people can relate to, and i think that's wonderful!

another headcanon i personally enjoy is the aroace one. he may or may not seek out romantic or sexual attractions, sure, but i think the most important thing in his life is grogu, and he doesn't really have time to settle down with someone else. even though i enjoy him in certain ships and whatnot, i still thoroughly believe that din should just stay as just a father to grogu, and romance isn't and shouldn't be a main point in the show.

i also love trans/nb din!! whether he's transmasc or gnc or whatever, i like the idea of din, and mandalorians in general, initiating absolute genderfuckery. mandalorians are very gender inclusive and completely neutral. mando'a doesn't have gendered pronouns or terms. i think mandalorians' concepts of gender and gender roles are very fluid, and don't hold a lot of meaning. for some reason, favloni made the women in s3 have y-visors and men have t-visors which is the stupidest fucking thing i've ever seen. like. what. and anyway, i think din and other mandos would be super ambiguous with their gender anyway, not caring how they present because it doesn't matter. there's this little concept me and a mutual enjoy (to poke a lil fun at favloni) that whenever din feels a little more femme, he switches his helmet from a t-visor into a y-visor LMFAOO 😭 anyway, trans/gnc din my beloved

i think one of the last of my fav headcanons would be that din is very arab coded- indigenous as well. i know i project a lot as an arab onto other characters but just something about din gives me the idea that he'd be a very good equivalent to an arab indigenous man, palestinian maybe. the idea is just very comforting to me, even if people don't really agree. i draw a lot of comparisons between his culture and religion to my culture and religion, which is where i guess the headcanon came from. still, it's one of my favorite headcanons that i love to stick by whenever i can

THANK YOU so much for asking me!! din djarin is just my guy 🫶🫶 i love him so much and i love talking about him, esp about his culture and character. so glad you asked!

#star wars #the mandalorian #din djarin #grogu #star wars headcanons #clan of two #oil.

[anneapocalypse]

I like your post about gray morality in video games! On the other hand I wanted to add that the gray decision-making you're talking about can have its own pitfalls (distinct from the pitfalls of centrist/apolitical "both sides are bad" apathy). I'm thinking of gritty action heroes who are presented as morally gray because they're pragmatic enough to torture and kill in the name of Truth, Justice, and the 'Murican Way, or just in the name of a macho revenge fantasy. To be clear, this isn't an indictment of gray morality, which I love when done well. Hell, the stories I'm complaining about tend not to be THAT gray in practice, as the bad guys are often SO exaggeratedly bad that there's not a real question of whether the hero is willing to Do What It Takes in the end. My point is more just that that's what people often mean when they condemn "gray morality."

Hi! Sorry this has been sitting my ask box for a while, I got busy and didn't want to just dash off a response.

(We're talking about this post, for those who haven't seen it. RIP my notifications.)

Anyway I'll just say here for the record that yeah, gray morality in fiction can be done poorly! While the line for "done poorly" is going to be different for everyone, I can certainly think of examples I've disliked.

(This got long, sorry in advance. 😩 Also, spoilers for Fallout 3 and all the Dragon Age games, if anyone cares!)

My go-to example of one I think is a real stinker is the Fallout 3 DLC "The Pitt" where the critical decision is... whether to free a bunch of people from being enslaved in horrible conditions! But! in order to free them, you have to kidnap a baby from... the enslaver. Because something something the baby's genetics are the key to curing the illness that afflict the slaves from their horrible working conditions... you don't actually have to hurt the baby, though, she'll be fine. She'll just be taken away from her parents. Who are, again, slavers. I promise I'm not making it sound any stupider than it sounds in the game itself. :P Like the whole concept of putting an infant in your video game inventory and making a break for it is just a little too wacky for me to take seriously, but it feels like you're meant to take it seriously, and apart from trying to inject some ambiguity into the decision, I'm not sure why the whole baby plot would even be there. Honestly, Fallout 3 isn't a game about moral ambiguity. (I think both New Vegas and even Fallout 4 do that kind of thing better.) Most of its major decisions boil down to "Do you want to do the Good Person Thing or the Evil Bastard thing?" That's the game. No one is trying to inject moral ambiguity into blowing up Megaton. It's just a thing you can do if you want to roleplay an Evil Character. I love Fallout 3, I'm just saying, that's what it is. And I think "The Pitt" would have been both more thematically appropriate and less stupid if it had just skipped the whole baby plot and been like "Hey! Do you want to be the Good Person who frees the slaves, or the Evil Bastard who allies with the slaver?" It's morally simple, but the thing is the baby didn't actually make that story or the decision any more interesting to me, so it might as well not have been there at all.

But Fallout 3 isn't the kind of thing I was thinking of when I made that post. I was thinking a lot more about things like the decisions in the Dragon Age games, which don't usually fall neatly into The Good Option and The Evil Option, and are more likely to ask the player to make their own judgments. And a common criticism I see of those games is that they're "centrist" and try to "both sides" in-universe issues because the game doesn't explicitly tell you which choice is The Good One, or it doesn't explicitly reward one choice and punish the other, and that's... not really an interpretation that I generally agree with? But that's a much more involved discussion, honestly. At some point, I'd like to write a post about how I feel Inquisition presents the mage rebellion, because it's such a big topic and big game (and by "I'd like to" I mean... I already have a draft started, whoops). That's just more than I have time to get into today!

But I will say this: I find the plot decisions where you're given an obvious "best option" to be the least interesting choices in the Dragon Age games. The Redcliffe decision in Origins is the most obvious one to me, where I think the option to save Connor from possession should at least have been much harder to find, because in the lore, the fact that mages even can be saved from possession and not just killed is widely unknown because it goes against the templar party line, and the fact that Ferelden's First Enchanter is just like, "Oh yeah, sure, we can totally do that, pack up the lyrium boys" just doesn't really mesh with everything else we're told about the Circles and conventional wisdom on magic. Plus, the fact that there's no consequences for leaving Redcliffe for days with Connor possessed just... makes the decision too easy, for me, because in-universe it feels like it shouldn't be that easy. There's also the werewolf decision, wherein the Lady of the Forest just tells you straight out that Zathrian can break the curse with his own death, presenting you with a "best option" that it feels both stupid and sort of comically evil to disregard (like, from a purely pragmatic standpoint why would you fight the entire pack of werewolves or an entire clan of elves when you can just make Zathrian solve the problem here and now).

The ending decision of DA2 is an example that I feel has a really stark moral contrast to it (which I've discussed before), and one that I think does place certain constraints on role-playing, but in that case I think it's appropriate to the themes of the game, so I don't mind it.

But my favorite plot decisions in Dragon Age are things like the Landsmeet, the Winter Palace, and even the Orzammar quest line. Not just because I love fantasy politics, but because you have to work with what you're given in a way that feels realistic to the setting and the story. No matter how much of a hero you are, you can't waltz into Orzammar or Denerim or Halamshiral and brute-force a perfect solution. Unless you're a dwarf yourself, you're an outsider who doesn't know anything about dwarven politics and no one is particularly forthcoming about the situation because everyone has an agenda! and yet you have to solve this conflict in order to get aid against the Blight. You have to make a decision based on very little information and almost none of it concrete. At the Landsmeet, you may want justice, but it's your word against Loghain's with no proof of what really happened at Ostagar, and if you want to win you need provable charges, you need to show the nobles that you support their interests and not just your own, and no matter which butt you put on the throne, you're faced with the very real possibility of another succession crisis a few decades on so congratulations, you've just kicked the can down the road.

And oh, the Winter Palace, my beloved. You cannot make Briala the Empress, no matter how much you might want to! You cannot abolish the monarchy. You cannot force Orlais to relinquish the Dales and re-establish the Elven state. Your options are: keep the empress whose reign overall has been sympathetic to elves and commoners and relatively diplomatic toward her neighbors, but who also may have just done a good old fashioned massacre to crush a rebellion and maintain her power; let her be killed and put the militant expansionist on the throne; get Briala and Celene back together (maybe with the hope that Briala will continue to influence her); help Briala do a blackmail which surely will work out totally fine and not backfire in anyway; or force them all to shut up and play ball for now, basically just kicking the can down the road. None of these options are perfect by any means! There are interesting and believable in-character reasons you might choose to role-play any of them. And every one has the possibility of unforeseen consequences later on, positive or negative.

I made the original post, in part, in response to condemnations of the kind of decisions I enjoy in these games. And at the end of the day, it's okay not to like those decisions, to prefer more unambiguous choices or more room to indulge in the fantasy of fixing everything. But that's not always the kind of story a game is trying to tell, and I think that's fine, and personally I enjoy the complicated decisions more. And I feel like sometimes those complicated or ambiguous choices are read as if they're either presenting all options as morally equivalent when they're not, or that they're "punishing" the player for a choice if it has any kind of negative outcome, and I don't think that's the case! I think it's fine and good in fiction to explore the ways in which trying to change things for the better can be difficult and how a choice with some negative consequences may still be the best one available, and so on and so forth.

Anyway, I hope I didn't get too far afield here, and thanks if you read this far!

#gray morality #this is so long i'm sorry #anne apocalypse making you sorry you asked since 2011 #blunders of thedas #fallout 3 critical #prewar parkstrolling #ask anne #who cancelled roger rabbit

[lich-of-the-golgari]

Wedge Discussions

Inspo goes to @monorayjak, this was such a cool concept I wanted to build off that.

Sultai Edition

Blue: Here we are again

Black: So it would seem.

Green: What could they possibly want?

Black: Who cares? The question of what the user wants is arbitrary, what do WE want?

Green: That's not how we do things. That's not how ANYONE does things.

Blue: Oh stop bickering. Listen, we need to come up with what the user wants.

Green: Fine.

Black: Fine.

Black: What I want is to be in control of my destiny. I don't want to be beholden to anyone and anything. I am tired of life, which tries to restrict me from my ultimate goal. I want to become more powerful and control the world around me, and I don't care how I get to that point.

Blue: I guess I understand. I want mastery, perfection, knowledge, and the means to achieve them. I don't care if I have to use artificial methods, I WILL become perfect.

Green: I can understand your desire to grow, but I can't agree with either of your methods. I think the true method of becoming better is understanding the natural processes of this world, evolving as a person, and becoming stronger through our understanding of our interconnected nature.

Black: Yeah yeah, we all know green, things need to be natural and survival of the fittest, but isn't ambition and trampling on others the way to effectively grow?

Green: Not necessarily. We all are a part of an ecosystem, whether we like it or not. By trampling on all prey, we starve ourselves. By having individuals stronger than us, we are motivated to grow ever still. Being at the top of the food chain doesn't mean we succeded, it just means we have fit in our role.

Blue: Why does it have to be that way green? Not everything has to be about nature and ecosystems and all that. While we are a part of the world to some extent, if we want, we can separate ourselves from that entirely.

Black: I can't believe I'm saying this but listen to blue. With artifice and undeath, we can remove ourselves from the struggle to survive and just focus on ourselves. Why care about the natural order when we can supersede it?

Green: Because no matter how distant you are from nature, no matter how unnatural your existence, life and death exist in a seamless continuum. Even if you were to become a lich, your corpse would still decay, you would still become food for the microbes, mushrooms, and bacteria that are present around you. Even if you become artificial, the forces that power you will eventually be grown over as your power sources decay. Nothing is truly eternal, nothing will truly last forever.

Black: I mean, you are right that nothing escapes death, even undeath IS just another form of death. However, the ego can survive after death. How it's stored is irrelevant, as that can last the tests of time. Look at Yawgmoth. While Phyrexia was a disaster of plane, it did show that the ego can survive an eternity. Yawgmoth was present in the mind of all of Phyrexia.

Blue: Again, I do think that black has a point. Through innovation the mind can last forever. However, I do see green's point. Most of what we do won't be able to last. How do we achieve our goals if our goals are fundamentally separated?

Green: Well what do we value?

Black: Myself. Power above all else.

Blue: Knowledge. The pursuit of perfection through craft and thinking.

Green: Growth. The pursuit of connecting myself to the ecosystem and to fulfill my purpose in the food chain.

Blue: So we all value improvement of the self?

Black: We disagree on the methodology.

Green: So how do we unify our thoughts to become one force?

Blue: The survival of the fittest is inherently self-motivated.

Black: As is the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge's sake.

Green: And Death is a natural part of life.

Blue: But things don't need to end at death.

Black: We all serve a vital role in our ecosystem. Without death, things can't get fertilized.

Green: And without cultivation, we become stagnant.

Blue: So it's important to find a balance

Black: And it's better that we are the ones to be in control, since we are the ones studying it.

Green: And as long as we keep to our positions

Blue: We all can get stronger

#mtg #i'm writing more #magic the gathering #magic the card game #blue #green #identity #color #mtg colors #color philosophy #colors #mtgcolor #wedges #mtg wedge #Black #Simic #Dimir #Golgari #Sultai brood

[goldenpinof]

Hi. original alienation anon here. I'm happy to report that my fears (so far) are unfounded :)

I'm going to try to explain why I found dd to be alienating as succinctly as possible.

I get that he was basically trying to make the YT version of the Eric André show, but it didn't work for me for a number of reasons. Firstly, YT is not a good platform for that kind of content. The Eric André show is on a network that is known for bizarre, offensive shows. YT is not that. It's a personality-driven platform that runs on the parasocial relationships between creators and their audiences. Dan was also not the best person to pull that concept off. Eric André is and always has been known for his chaotic, rude, unlikable persona. Dan is not. He built an audience by being likable and relatable. So for him to suddenly do a total 180 and become this rude, mean, cold person was alienating to me and other viewers who had built a parasocial relationship with the person he presented himself as in his videos.

Secondly, and this is gonna sound harsh, Dan is not as deep as he thinks he is. DD isn't good satire. He basically just made the content he was supposed to be satirizing and dressed it up in this pretentious concept of a dystopian variety show. He clearly was pressured into making those videos to promote WAD and it shows. His commentary on the concepts he talked about was surface level. he didn't say anything that countless video essayists who are smarter and more educated than him haven't already said. I also agree with the person who said it felt overproduced and cheap at the same time.

My third and main problem with DD though, is how mean-spirited it often felt. I watch dnp for light-hearted entertainment. I don't want to watch someone I usually like being a dickhead to their friends and family for 20 minutes, whether it's joking or not. There were times when you could tell that the guest was uncomfortable, but Dan just didn't seem to care? The worst was Louise. I felt so much second-hand embarrassment watching that video. She clearly felt uncomfortable but Dan just kept pushing it. The cringiest part was when he said that thing about the 2012-2014 YT era being nostalgic and Louise said "it wasn't a good time for me. I had a 2 yr old and was going through a divorce." Yikes! That just made Dan come off like a self-absorbed, inconsiderate asshole to me. Obviously we don't know how Louise really felt or what went on behind the scenes but that video left a bad taste in my mouth and completely changed how I viewed Dan.

Here's my conclusion. I think Dan needs to play to his strengths. social commentary and irreverent comedy are not two of them. People like him mainly for 3 reasons; his ability to relate to others through his own personal struggles, his chemistry with Phil, and his aspirational relationship with Phil (whatever the nature of that relationship is). DD pretty much destroyed all of that in one fell swoop. Even though I think that was entirely intentional, it was a very, very bad move. He can't just toss his entire image in the fire and expect it to work out for him. Not without doing the work to win over a new audience, like say, Joji did when he went from being Filthy Frank to a serious, sad-boy musician. I'm glad he got the chance to try new things, even if they didn't work out, but I think he's smart for going back to doing what he's good at and I hope for our sake and his that he sticks to it.

I said succint and then this turned into a whole essay lol. Sorry. I know some people are not going to like what I said, but that's how I feel.

hi! so sorry it took me so long to get to this!

i agree with some things and disagree with others. just so people won't argue with me because of your perception of dd, i'll list disagreements (and the hardest agreements, i guess). but it's totally cool to feel what you feel, and youtube content is made for people to have different opinions and obviously, we have different reactions to intentional harshness and rudeness. also, i'm so so glad you gave dnpgames a chance! we're back and stronger than ever!!

putting under the cut to not disturb the dnpgames euphoria <3

i agree that youtube , and specifically Dan's main channel, wasn't the best place to put this type of content on. maybe his 2nd channel would have been better, but it would have given even less views. so like, the point? because now his main channel looks all over the place. the usual content flow was interrupted by a video trashing youtube and the whole conceptual series of dd. and even dd was interrupted by the 2nd wad trailer and the memes video. right now it looks, dare i say, ugly. if he ever returns to actual youtube content and not promo videos, he will have to swallow this hard pill.

your 2nd reason - agree. but i don't think it's a bad thing, considering the circumstances (dd being made under pressure to somehow promote wad. with limited time and budget). lots of people comment on the same things and happen to give the same remarks. it's fine, it's still interesting to hear. (ironically, that's youtube and its algorithm for you)

hard agree on Dan (almost) destroying his image, especially in relation to dnp™. but we're still here, he can't push us away no matter how hard he tries.

disagreements :))

i think the video with Louise was good. that comment about 2012-2014 (the prime Brit crew times specifically) being nostalgic - i mean, it IS. for some people more, for some people less. it can be nostalgic and not a good time equally. i have personal examples when it's both. and i rewatched that moment. Louise said, "I loved those years for the most part." Dan went on to question WHAT exactly she loved, and only then she had to specify that it wasn't actually that simple. Dan likes to say how simple life was "back then". "back then" being any time in the past lol. "simpler, better times" is a phrase i still quote, and it was said years ago (i don't even remember where). he was rude in the video, but not ruder than with others. motherhood is a more sensitive topic for Louise than for Dan and, may i say, the majority of us. but they are friends, and at the end of the day, she could literally say "shut the fuck up and stop" and that would be accepted.

i also think that Dan would be amazing at social commentary if you give him more time to prepare scripts and find the right tone. his liveshows are a good indicator of that. he wasn't trying to punch anyone with his words while delivering his thoughts. he was giving his opinions and explaining them. 2017 has so many amazing quotes from his liveshows. and none of them felt like dd, despite touching on politics, sexuality, mental health, youtube as a platform, our community, the internet as a job, etc. he can do that, he can comment and criticise without trying to prove something. dd had a concept though. he was that obnoxious character playing by "youtube rules". "youtube likes this, this and this. so i'm gonna do all of it, and you're gonna see how bizarre it looks thrown in your face at once and deal with it." social platforms' algorithms are dystopian, he's got a point. his version of satire isn't ideal and you can clearly see that dd was rushed. and that's unfortunate!

anyway, thank you so much for explaining your dd experience. i'm sure there are people who relate to it. i'm sorry, if i sound rude, or like, pushy. i'm not trying to be. actually, dd is probably the easiest topic to discuss because of how ambiguous it is (in a good way).

#oh i just felt limits of my english vocabulary like it was 2013 again #no english words head empty #using the simplest language. the level of a 12 yo and still struggling rehdfsiefjw #sorry about that #answered #dd

[lazerith]

Attempting to fix The Dawn of Yangchen, Pt. 1: "Okay, but why tho?"

Spoilers for The Dawn of Yanchen, The Rise of Kyoshi, The Shadow of Kyoshi (minor)

Obligatory disclaimer: these opinions are my own and you do not need to agree with them if you do not wish to. I am just a writer who is trying to figure out why I don't like certain pieces of writing and adore others.

Compared to F. C. Yee's other installments in the Avatar: The Last Airbender series, The Dawn of Yangchen is definitely one of his weaker works (I have not yet read LoY). The plot feels profoundly unexciting at times, and I've seen people complain that despite Yangchen's name being plastered on the cover, the book sidelines her in favor of Kavik.

That's not to say this is a completely incompetent book with no redeeming qualities; if you haven't noticed already in his previous works, Yee is really, really good at writing character dynamics. Kavik and Yangchen's relationship is really fun, especially at the beginning. But as the story progresses and these two spend more and more time apart due to plot reasons, it becomes harder and harder to ignore the issues with the larger story.

There are a lot of things I think could be fixed in DoY. But in this post, I'm going to talk about what I think is the biggest issue: character motivation.

Most people are probably familiar with the concept of a character's want. Different writers use different terminology, but to simplify things, in this instance, I will be referring to a character's plot goal; it is the "thing" that they're chasing after, whether it be to kill Jianzhu (Kyoshi's want in RoK) or to capture the avatar (Zuko's want in 1st season of atla).

But when presented with a character's want, audiences often have the urge to ask: "okay, but why tho?"

It's a fair question, because what the question is actually asking is: "okay, but why do we care?"

"Why do we care if Kyoshi succeeds in killing Jianzhu?" "Why do we care if Zuko captures the avatar or not?"

The reason, of course, is because there is a deeper motivation driving these wants. A motivation that we, the audience, can relate to.

Let me introduce you to the idea of a character's Ghost and Lie.

Again, terminology varies, but when I talk about a character's ghost, I'm referring to an event (or events) from the character's past that continues to haunt them in the present.

Zuko's ghost is the event that gave him the ghastly scar over his eye: the Agni Kai against his father.

Kyoshi's ghost (in RoK)……i think is the moment when Jianzhu leaves Yun to die with Father Gloworm? I'm honestly a little lost, because Yee doesn't seem to subscribe to the idea of "ghost", but it's still helpful for us to examine character motivations.

From a character's "ghost", births their "lie".

The lie is a limited perspective that a character holds because of the traumatic event that is their "ghost", which then influences their want.

Think about the relationship between "want", "ghost", and "lie" as such: Ghost -> Lie -> Want, where each creates the next.

For Zuko, his lie is some variation of: "I must regain my honor at all costs." From his lie, he deduces his want: "if I can capture the avatar, I will regain my honor."

For Kyoshi, her lie is some variation of: "Jianzhu is much stronger than me and he will harm me if he finds me." From her lie, she deduces her want: "if I kill him, I will be safe from him."

And though we might not personally empathize with Zuko's desire to regain his honor or Kyoshi's desire to murder Jianzhu, we can understand why. We root for Kyoshi and Zuko because we understand why they are doing what they do, and because they are highly motivated in chasing their want.

Now let's take a look at Yangchen's want, ghost, and lie in DoY.

Yangchen's want: to bring prosperity to the people of the Shang cities.

Yangchen's ghost: Jetsun's death at the hands of the spirits.

Before we even get to Yangchen's "lie", does anyone see a problem with this combination of "want" and "ghost"?

If you said, "they have nothing to do with each other," you're right.

Thus, this creates a situation in which we, as the audience, ask the question of "okay, but why tho" to Yangchen's want, and are unable to get a satisfactory answer.

You can see this play out in the book itself. When Yangchen is in Jonduri, she gets a message from the Saowan clan and immediately jets off to help them deal with their spirit problem. And you, as the reader, is left asking, "okay, but why tho?" Why are we taking this detour?

Sure, she's the avatar and she's the bridge between humans and spirits, but this has nothing to do with her main goal, which is to basically "eat the rich". The detour feels inorganic, manufactured, and it almost makes you question whether the whole thing was just a ploy from Chaisee to distract Yangchen.

Or it's the other way around. While we follow Yangchen around the Shang cities, trying to enact change, we are left to ponder the question of "okay, but why tho?". Why does she care about any of these people, beyond the fact that it's her duty as the avatar to serve them?

But believe it or not, there's an "easy" fix that more or less keeps the events of the novel somewhat the same.

The "lie" is the critical piece that is missing in Yangchen's story. Right now, she's got a clear ghost and a clear want, but no lie that connects the two:

Ghost -> ??? -> Want

I see two different lies that could work here.

Lie 1: Spirits are evil and I must protect people from them as best I can.

Rather than having the Shangs hire head-kickers to maintain control over the cities, maybe have it be rumored that they have some great and powerful spirit on their side.

It kind of seems like Yee was building up to this lie a little bit, considering how the effects of Unanimity are first seen by the people of Jonduri as spirit disturbances, and it is also the official cover that Yangchen adopts at the end of the novel to hide Unanimity from world leaders.

Now it makes sense that Yangchen cares about the people of the Shang cities, not just because she's the Avatar and serves the people, but also because she has a personal interest in defeating the "spirits". With this setup, the detour to the fire nation to aid the Saowan clan makes sense as well.

Lie 2: Jetsun's death was my fault, and I must honor her memory as best I can.

This lie would also work, but is in my opinion much weaker than Lie 1.

Honoring Jetsun's memory would mean that Yangchen would commit wholeheartedly to aiding others in need, pacifism, and other air-nation values. It would give her a reason to get involved in the Shang cities in the first place.

This lie would also somewhat explain why Yangchen jets off to the Saowan clan; they are in distress, and she has dedicated her life to protecting people, believing it the only way to honor Jetsun's memory.

Of course, these lies need not last the entirety of Yangchen's story; after all, for every lie, there is a truth.

Again, terminology varies and there are nuances, but when simplified, the truth is something a character learns by the end of the story, as a result of everything that has happened.

The Truth to Lie 1: People are the real culprits to blame for the world's suffering

DoY kind of suggests this truth during the Saowan outing, when it's revealed that the humans encroached on spiritual territory and violated the deal that Yangchen brokered.

You could very well contrast the honesty that the Phoenix-eels present to Yangchen (however harsh) with Kavik's betrayal (however sweet in the moment).

And though unanimity is not the result of some spiritual disturbance, we still see how it is due to human greed that it becomes a weapon.

Now, does this truth correspond with depictions of Yangchen later in her life? Not really. Especially at the end of SoK, where she admits to siding with the humans over and over again the spirits, and how that was a mistake. But adherence to cannon is a problem for another time.

The Truth to Lie 2: I must carve my own path in the world, believing that Jetsun will be proud of me either way.

The problem with pairing this truth with the current story is that Yangchen is already an unconventional Avatar. Kavik notes this throughout the story: Yangchen uses disguises, hires errand-runners, engages in espionage, and lies to high-ranking officials.

But there is also an "easy" fix (because nothing in writing is ever easy, everything takes set up), which is to take Yangchen back; back before she adopted these tactics, and have her arrive in Bing-er as naive and trusting as they come.

Meeting Kavik introduces her to this world of shady tactics, and while Yangchen might not be as confident as she is throughout DoY, the idea of Kavik teaching the Avatar to spy on people and wear disguises could be really fun, me thinks.

I'm not going to get into Kavik's want, ghost, and lie here because I don't want to make this post longer than it already is, but hopefully, this has given you some food for thought.

#avatar: the last airbender #dawn of yangchen #atla #f. c. yee #rise of kyoshi #kyoshi novels #writing critique

[sizzlingpatrolfox]

read your TS post and honestly just find it quite interesting that so many things you criticize when it comes to bts whether some members as people or artists...are all present in TS if not even more, and suddenly when it comes to this white woman that is an awful performer, write the same kind of dull repetitive music always clutching at the same topics, doesn't renew herself as an artist, is full of white feminism bullshit, and a chart obsessed person are all things you never seem to mention. Like the biased perspective when it comes to her is quiet something by all her fans.

Because I don't discuss Taylor Swift in this blog. This isn't a freaking Taylor Swift blog.

And also, because I don't care. She never promised anyone anything, she never set herself up as a role model or beacon for social injustices like BTS did. Taylor fans either aren't running up and down every known platform screaming how much of an activist she is the way armys do with BTS. Taylor isn't called BulletproofGirlz and her fans aren't called Adorable Representative M.C. For Youth. She never went from being Yes I'm the voice of the underdogs and the misunderstood to it being just a concept and god forsaken debut name.

You sound insufferable so I won't really reply to more than this and I won't look for the post myself, but there's actually a post where I make fun and criticize armys who were "disappointed" in BTS because they said something misogynistic or homophobic. I actually think it's on the verge of IDIOTIC to look for artists to stan/like only so you can bring up their "good deeds" and make yourself feel better. Because you're literally the only one cares about this online moral competition.

In that same post I said I don't care that BTS don't speak on feminism because they're not women, and because I have real people, local heroes to look up to.

In fact, the only time I ever mentioned being slightly disappointed that they didn't use a gay couple, was on the permission to dance MV. If anything, most if not all my posts are actually making fun of armys for believing BTS to be, and talking about them as if they were the biggest activists that ever lived. I don't even talk about them, I talk about the perception army has of them.

And if you're that Beyonce fan, let's not even go there. Link me to Beyonce's many acts supporting feminism. Representation is not enough, I mean donations or posts calling awareness to women's isuess. She doesn't write her own music, either, which is something I have repeatedly seen seen pjms/hive call out vkook for.

Also another thing Taylor never claimed to be: a performer. Everybody knows she's not a performer. She knows she's not a performer. She never promised people anything, so why would I expect her to put on a show? Why would I feel cheated and robbed if I went to her concert and she didn't do full choreography when I know she never did?

I don't think she's a bad songwriter at all, and even the moments when she is (because there are songs I don't like and songs I never listen to), I'm okay with it, too. I'm not a fan of people only to say "look at me I'm a fan of this person that makes me so much better than all of you". I've always liked her songs, and I still like them and I do think they're good. If you don't think so, I really don't give a fuck.. like seriously.

You know what, if you wouldn't have had the need to just argue for the sake or arguing, you would've seen me post an ask I have on drafts about her album where I specifically mention that I agree her sound is stale in this album. Because I do like people a lot and still have my own personality and opinions.

I've always liked her for her music, and I still like her music. If I criticize BTS is for things they used to do, but stopped doing. It's about things they used to be, but stopped being. If someone goes from making good music, to doing music I think it's terrible of course I'm going to have an opinion. I love Harry Styles' first two albums but think as it was is ugly and the whole album is terribly wrong - and I've said it. Like two tweeks ago I was here, sharing old BTS songs because I still think those songs are good. Why am I not allowed to say that at some point they started making bad music? Why amd I not allowed to say they used to do great coreographies and now they're all out of synch and dance poorly?? Taylor never did some of that and then stopped doing it, so what exactly am I going to call her out for?

"The things you never seem to mention" have you realized that I just don't discuss Taylor in this blog? Because it's not a Taylor blog, it really isn't deeper than that. We're only talking about her now because of her album, otherwise I've posted about her what - 5 times in the span of years???

I thought Jimin crying in MOTS concert online was kind of silly considering he was paying million dollars for rent at that time while many people were out of jobs. I can empathize with him and it was sad to see him cry because I'd been rooting for him to go on tour and do everything he wanted to do, because I like Jimin as a person and an artist - so I'm simply rooting for him. I can feel all that while simultaneously being aware of how privileged he was, and still is. And that his pain was bad, but when put in the context of the pandemic, his life wasn't on the line. Jimin himself said in an interview that he was thinking about how young he is and how much money he's earning and what to do with it. Not in an obnoxious, arrogant way but as a form of self-reflection. I respect that. He knows that he's got more money than the regular person, but he also goes through hard times mentally.

Jimin donates so much money every year and has been doing it for a long time - I think that's amazing and I share the posts that report on it because I really believe it's awesome and It's exactly what I would do if I had the money. I was particularly moved when he donated money to buy polio vaccines.

But I'm not asking him to do any of it. I'm not waking up every other thinking "I hope Jimin does some charity today so I can yap about it to losers on tumblr." It's simply not something I think about Jimin or ANYONE. If he does, it's good. If he doesn't, I'll still like him.

I bring this up to repeat something I've said about Jimin and BTS a million times: I don't pity them.

I don't pity Taylor either and I'm not asking anything from her.

Likewise, I'm able to read the lyrics "you wouldn't last a day in the asylum where they raised me" and know that it's just a lyric and giggle at the memes that make fun of that because she's lived a fairly awesome life. That's songwriting to you, btw. Not everything is literal.

I've never been interested in Taylor Swift's life, and I've spent literal years not knowing one single thing about it, but if she said "new music this friday" you bet I was going to be there, waiting for it. Same goes for Harry Styles and so many other people I listen to. And I've talked a dozen times about how I'm hoping it'll get to the point where I'll be able to be that kind of Jimin fan, as well. Where I don't care what he does or where he is, but I'll still be always curious to hear his new music.

[moonshine-aqua]

wait how are you actually gonna recommend "i am a transwoman. i am in the closet. i am not coming out" as like a useful pro-trans guide?

the author of that piece is very clearly extremely misogynistic, and recommending that cis women read it is probably not a good idea, because if they are told that this is how trans women think of them they will likely start to distrust trans women. and frankly i couldn't blame them for it lol.

did you actually read the piece? if not you should, it's very dehumanizing towards women while very empathetic towards men. it essentially confirms every transphobic woman's fears of what trans women really think of them. it's not a good idea to recommend cis women read it, or to imply that it accurately demonstrates how trans women think

Reply:

I would have loved to be able to reply to you personally because I think we got some really different things out of that 'article' and I don't think broadcasting your ask is the best way to respond.

But I do feel like I should respond in case this was in good faith.

I didn't consider the (less of an article, more of a diary entry) as a guide at all. It's an experience. I think it's important to read people's experiences even (or especially) when they don't match up with a general consensus. Especially this one, because it exposed flaws in the way I've thought and acted in the past, which is why I recommended it. I'm unsure where you read it as being dehumanizing towards women since I didn't get that at all. I'd love to hear your perspective because without getting to engage with you in dialogue there is just no knowing.

The general sentiment of the post rings true to me. Things like 'men and boys are not inherently Bad, actually'. Or 'the writer's statements and ideas wouldn't be more true if she came out as a trans woman'. But because they present as male they do not get to be taken seriously or listened to and I think that's wrong. I think it's a fine line because many men do speak over people without engaging deep enough and/or are trolls (which the writer admits and discusses as well). But in close friendships I think it's important to let men speak, to listen to them and challenge when (you believe) they are wrong- but in a way that is compassionate and not dismissive. In a way where they get to question you, too. I also agree with the writer that putting masculinity and femininity as opposite forces that cannot support one another and instead cancel each other out is a really damaging idea that the writer of the post rightfully pushes back on. I agree with them also that making fun of and shaming people for any physical trait is wrong and it doesn't suddenly become okay because the target is a man or the feature is generally found in men specifically.

To me the post reads as a perspective of what it's like to be on the 'other side'. It's a peek into the problems with telling men they need to shut up and listen. That's not to say that it can't be necessary to do sometimes, but I think it's important to keep the nuance in mind. Not all people you view as men actually are. Not all women telling men to shut up and listen actually care whether they are a closeted queer person because they wouldn't welcome them anyway. Besides- men also live in this world and thus have experiences with and opinions on concepts connected to the human experience like 'femininity' and those thoughts and opinions are not inherently bad or not worth listening to, in my opinion. The post struck me as a very personal story of someone sharing what it's like to be lectured about your own lived experience because the other person doesn't even consider it might be yours. In a way that got to me and I felt it was worth sharing.

I'm very curious which parts of the article gave you such a different impression than me. Genuinely. Maybe I missed something. Maybe I interpreted things differently. It's hard to reply to you since you sent me this ask anonymously and I'm not sure what you expected me to do. Re-reading my tags I also don't think I implied this single post is 'how trans women think'. I would be very uncomfortable doing so because, like any group of people, they are not a monolith. I kindof trust that people reading the post can remember that for themselves.

If the blog post makes anyone distrust trans women then I don't think the post is the problem. If any single person's experience makes anyone dismiss a whole group of people I would argue that maybe they need to take a step back. Being empathetic towards men is not bad. Sharing a negative experience with cis women (women this person cares about and is close friends with) is not misogynist in and of itself.

Implying otherwise is a bit of a red flag to me. And assuming you're genuine I'd ask you why you are so preoccupied with whether or not transphobes will get more transphobic from reading a single trans woman's experience. Just because- what? it doesn't fall into a narrow definition of what a trans person is allowed to be? That doesn't sound right to me, either.

Link to the post in question, if anyone is curious.

#ask #answer #queer #trans #idk what you want me to do anon :) #I did read it #I came to a very different conclusion from you it seems like #I don't think that's bad either #You're entitled to your experiences and opinions too #But assuming I did not read it because you can't think of why I'd want to share it is a bit weird #I think you're implying some very unfortunate things in your ask #And I wanna challenge you to take another look #Assuming you were asking in good faith #Which I kindof doubt #I'm not great at recognizing dogwhistles but you're giving me a Vibe

[geminibabble]

Learn to say no to people pleasing!

Hello babblers! :) I guess it due for my first official heart to heart on here. Today's topic hits close to home for many of us: setting boundaries, saying no, and the dreaded people-pleasing syndrome.

Let me start by saying, I've had a rough go of it when it comes to saying no and wanting everyone to like me. For the longest time, I believed that by saying yes to everything and everyone- being the perfect yes man- I would win people's affection and approval. With this came the inability to say "no" without feeling a pang of guilt. Sound familiar?

But, 2023-present time was truly a "new year, new me" whether it was on my new year resolutions list or not. I have opened my eyes to the harsh reality that no matter how much you do for someone, how much you care or try for them, there will always be those who find fault with what and what you do or how you do it. And that's okay. Those people are not meant to be in your life or at least just kept at a distance. Let's not forget- just because someone doesn't agree with you, the way you live your life, who you are as a person or a friend does not make them a bad person or toxic. People are entitled to their own opinions, just as you are. This isn't about having a victim mindset or refusing to accept your faults; its about recognizing that people pleasing still doesn't guarantee universal approval. True acceptance, love, and friendship come from those who embrace you for who you are, flaws and all.

Now let's talk about boundaries- the invisible lines we draw to protect our mental, emotional, and physical well-being (or at least we try to). For the longest time, even today occasionally, I struggled to set boundaries out of fear of being seen as selfish or uncaring. But here's the thing: setting boundaries is an act of self love, not selfishness.

Even though it seems so simple, distinguishing between self care and selfishness is something I have yet to fully understand and put into practice. It is all about the process to shed these people-pleasing tendencies, and while I don't have all the answers yet, I'm letting myself sit with these feelings and learn from them. Any advice would be helpful.

I have found myself in sticky situations, all because I couldn't muster up the courage to say no. But you know who suffers when you say yes? You. And when you say no? well, nobody who truly cares about you suffers.

People pleasing? It's a disease, plain and simple. It's this deep-rooted belief that your worth hinges on other people's approval, but it is just extremely toxic.

I do not usually like using the word toxic anymore ever since it became a skewed concept in today's society, but this mindset truly is toxic to yourself. Now when it comes to other people, it is important to recognize genuinely harmful relationships, but not every disagreement automatically makes someone toxic. Sometimes people drift apart simply because they no longer align with our values and decision which is perfectly okay. So, instead of labeling people as toxic, I think it's helpful to shift the focus on understanding that our paths all diverge at a particular point in our lives.

Ultimately, every relationship, whether it lasts a lifetime or a season, teaches us valuable lessons about ourselves and others. In my case, so far, I have learned how to say no and honoring my own needs since it is crucial for personal growth and self-respect.

Thanks to whoever is reading my thoughts. Remember, it's not always about casting blame on others because you are too uncomfortable to say no; it is about honoring our own truth and respecting ourselves in the process.

my thoughts are subject to change, as I do a lot as I learn more about myself, but currently this is my truth.

#healthy boundaries #respect #self reflection #personal growth #recipes #therapy #people pleaser

[deviantartdramahub]

I apologize if I'm misunderstanding something and this is culture shock in a kind of way. I'm F14PA, was previously sheltered in an Amish family (still am, but my parents have been lenient about the web), and was introduced to DeviantArt. I posted someone's work and I guess this is taboo on the internet? I don't understand. Someone explained to me this thing called copyright. Treat what I'm about to say as stupid, but I was told I can't do what other people do and to post here if I have anything to talk about. What's going on?

"To every cow belongs her calf, therefore to every book belongs its copy."

~ Ancient Irish King Diarmitt Mac Cerbhaill, right before a bloody war (you might like the Amish friend of mine who posted that, they need friends)

The fact there was a war over copyright in 560 AD only goes to show it is what we might call "divisive", but anyone who understands the importance of honesty will understand where the basics come from. An honest person wouldn't say they invented something when they didn't, wouldn't say they weren't the cause of something when they were, wouldn't steal something they didn't earn, wouldn't cheat in a game whose rules they agreed upon with the other players, and wouldn't say something if they didn't 100% believe it to be true, whether that's because the source is untrustworthy or their own memory is unreliable.

A good way to think about the "concept" of copyright is to compare it to the "concept" of grace. If care over our mortal lives be deemed a gift from God, many see it fitting to acknowledge that, as we sit down for the most universal part of humanity's day, dinner. Of course, our gifts have many sources. The vocables we read were the brainfruit of people whom they came from, so it is reasoned tribute be given, hence the conflict in the first link. You may also be thinking about the second or third commandment (I've seen Amish replicated dolls for one).

There are some who are stricter than Saint Finnian was, unsatisfied with any form of tribute, for reasons also discussed and will be discussed. And there are some who are looser, lenient, unscolding... when it comes to my work, I am close to that.

You may have heard about the AI-related feuds, they are everywhere and have diverged in thought.

If you were to research copyright from past to present, mention of incidences of distortion may commonly come up. It has often been a concern that certain gestures are made to imply that the source was to convey something it didn't. One instance of this, you could say, happened during the Vietnam War. Love or hate the communist manifesto, the United States tried to make modified copies and release them upon the Vietnamese, one of the new "planks" being to line up by the road so it can be seen who is a communist. If it had literate synergy before, the tampering ruined it. History will, of course, tell you that Vietnamese Communists eventually did win over. You could ponder similar stories about the Catholic order of the middle ages when you read about a demon they taught about, a servant of the one true Lucifer you might know as Titivillus. Chinese whispers comes to mind.

You might say it comes off as just another derivative of the classic conflict between the concept of freedom and the concept of etiquette (I'm surprised if, as an Amish teen, you've never encountered a situation with one of you shyly hiding from a camera, the stereotype has even been you all think cameras steal souls), but, as media comes with loads of context, and their presence loads of implications, a question about this never hurts.

[stop-breaking-my-heart-telltale]

do you have any unpopular opinions/controversial opinins/hills you will die on about twdg?

Of course. I think everyone has at least one hill they’ll die on or an unpopular opinion they’ll never change their mind on. I’ve actually answered this type of ask twice before. Once in 2019, and once in 2020. Some of my opinions have changed since then.

Okay look…. I’ve stepped away from this blog and the fandom for a while. I needed a break. I wanted to get back into my personal writing/art, I’ve gotten into Dragon Age and exploring its fandom, I’m reading through Tillie Walden’s other works in preparation for the Clementine comic and the review I’ll do of that. This time away has been good for me- I’ve done a lot of soul searching, looking deep inside myself as I reminisced about how the fandom has progressed over the years, all the good times and the bullshit, anons getting pissy with me, and I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t give a shit anymore.

So before I tell y’all about my unpopular opinions and show you all the hills I’ll die on, here’s a disclaimer that should be obvious and yet in this fandom it needs to be explicitly said: These are MY opinions and how I view twdg and it’s fandom. I’m going to say things like “I hate this/this choice is awful.” There’s a certain ship that I’m going to call bad. I’m going to criticize certain parts of the fandom and their behaviors I disagree with.

Understand that Bad/Worst DOES NOT EQUAL Invalid.

Whether you and I like it or not, ALL of the choices presented in twdg that don’t end in an YOU ARE DEAD screen are valid and canon. I don’t give a shit if you hate, let’s say… the ending where you don’t trust AJ and Louis or Violet die saving Tenn, for example. I don’t care if you think that ending is garbage, or it doesn’t count because it’s a determinate choice, or if you don’t understand why someone loves it. It’s still a valid and canon choice players can make.

You’re allowed to hate choices, characters, and ships or think one is better than the other, but that doesn’t make it the more or less valid choice. If you disagree with my takes, that’s fine. I respect that, and my feelings about the choices are not a reflection of my feelings toward you. You are allowed to do that just as I am allowed to disagree or agree with you.

And really, the only people I'm side-eyeing are the people who don't respect this.

You’d think that after all this time we would learn the concept of “agree to disagree,” instead of taking the Kenny route of “Agree with me or fuck you.” but here we are.

We have different experiences with these games, and no amount of shitty anons or petty vague posts are going to change that. If you think I'm a piece of shit for anything said here, good for you. Have fun with that.

I’ll start off with the more mild things and get spicier as we go. Cool? Cool. Buckle up, it's a long post.

Wellington is the best ending in S2. There’s no changing my mind about that, one of my hills is the Wellington ending.

I’ll fully admit that some of my meta knowledge plays into this. As someone who has played these games over and over again, I know Wellington exists even if the characters don’t. I know there are things that don’t add up about it, but despite those things, for me it’s the best chance Clementine and AJ have after all the bullshit they went through.

It’s the most satisfying ending, story wise. I don’t like Kenny, lemme just throw that out there. I view him as one of S2's antagonists, just to a different degree than Carver. By the end of s2 I just want him the fuck away from Clementine and AJ, but I won’t deny that it’s emotional watching him finally let them go because he knows this is their best chance, even if it leaves him alone again in the end. He's so possessive of them to the point where it endangers them so to see him immediately give them up? for their safety? It's like he finally gets it.

Staying at Wellington and watching Kenny go gives you an uneasy feeling knowing that by doing this, Kenny could fall onto one of two paths- self reflection and healing where he sees who he's become and actively tries to change his behaviors moving forward, or utter destruction that pulls him into a tragic grave. His fate is unknown. It’s so good.

I’m aware Wellington falls eventually and I’ll always be salty that ANF doesn’t give as much attention to it as the others even though it’s the best. Before it falls, Clementine and AJ get to feel safe in a community, have their own room together, be around other people and socialize. They’re away from Kenny which makes me feel better, they’re behind high walls, and they get some sort of normalcy back before everything goes to shit. It makes it feel like something was achieved. We lost everyone along the way, but Clementine isn’t completely alone anymore. She has AJ, and she has a new community that will feed them, keep them warm, protect them.

My only big gripe with the Wellington ending is that I have to let Kenny kill Jane in order to get it. Being completely honest, even though the part with Kenny in this ending is good.... if I could go to Wellington with Jane, I would. Which… uhhh….

I like Jane. She’s a good character.

I know, how dare I? Don’t I know “Kenny good, Jane bad”??? Liking Jane goes against at least three of the Boat God’s 10 Commandments! I’m practically a sinner for liking this fictional video game character who is not real. Pray I repent lest my soul gets swallowed by the unruly locks of Kenny's beard.

Cheeky absurdities about the extreme Kenny stans aside, I do genuinely like Jane. She’s not a favorite character or anything, she's definitely not making it into a top 10 list or anything, but I will jump to her defense when the mood strikes me. She gets a lot of criticism, and I totally get it. I have my own issues with her.

Where it starts to lose me is claims that Jane is the worst for being a manipulative asshole who hates children, for gaslighting Clementine into thinking the way she does and turning her against Kenny, for attempting to murder little baby AJ, and Kenny is the better option because he cares about Clementine more so we should all happily put our guns away and let him stab her. All those things are one way to interpret events. All of which I disagree with to a degree, if not entirely.

Honestly, I could do a whole deep dive into Jane’s character but for the sake of not making this a million words long, we’ll keep it contained and I'll go into detail about claims that Jane doesn't care about Clementine, yeah?

If Jane didn't care about Clementine, she wouldn't have helped her and Rebecca get out of the walker herd, she would've ditched the second she was free. She wouldn't have taught Clementine any survival tricks or engaged with her about personal stories about herself and her sister, something that's still a sore spot.

A big issue with Jane is the Sarah stuff, and believe me, I agree that leaving Sarah behind the first time is the wrong move, but I recognize that's a response she's having after having flashbacks to what happened with Jamie.

But y'know, when Sarah's second death comes along, Jane will try to save her if Clementine asks her to. Jane will put her safety aside to help Sarah and it's not her fault that she couldn't be saved. It's not her fault that she was staggered after getting hit with a piece of wood and couldn't get Sarah out before the walkers got to her. And she is genuine in her apology to Clementine for Sarah's death.

Jane leaves, but she comes back for Clementine, and ends up saving them by killing one of the dudes attacking them.

Oh and you wanna talk about Luke's death scene? if Clementine goes after Luke and falls through the ice?? Who is the one to pull Clementine out of the water and carry her in a panic to land and only cared about starting a fire so that she didn't fucking freeze to death?? Jane. Like... if Kenny cares about Clementine sooo much more than Jane ever did, then why the hell was he so hyper focused on beating the shit outta Arvo than on the fact that Clementine could drown or freeze to death? Kenny always puts Clementine first? No, Kenny always puts his feelings first.

Jane actually listens to Clementine and puts in an effort to see things through her perspective, even if she doesn't agree with it. She tries to tell Clementine that if all else fails, she can survive on her own. Jane makes it clear that she's not very comfortable with babies, but will still hold AJ when Clementine offers and tries to her best to bond with him.

And yes, the final fight is stupid. That's a huge mistake on Jane's part. She left AJ in a car to prove a point that if something ever happened to AJ and if Kenny saw it as Clementine's fault, this is what would happen and she felt this was the only way to make that clear...... it's not a great plan and she fucking knows it if you shoot Kenny.

I'm not claiming that Jane is the best character in s2 or that she doesn't deserve criticism, but I don't think she's nearly as bad as some insist she is. I could write more but hhhnnngggg long post is long, and we still have a lot of hills to climb.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT ANF DID A COMPLETE CHARACTER ASSASSINATION OF JANE'S CHARACTER AND THAT RIGHT THERE IS A HILL I WILL DIE ON. THEY DID HER DIRTY.

....Anyway. Speaking of ANF- Kate should’ve died in place of Mariana in ANF. I don’t hate Kate or anything, don’t love her either, but I will die on the hill that if ANF had killed Kate off and completely removed the terrible love triangle aspect of the story and instead focused on Javi, David, and the kids, it would’ve been soooo much better.

A story where Javi and Kate canonically end up together romantically. They’ve raised Gabe and Mari this entire time, they raised those kids and had each other through it all. But then Kate dies, and not only did Javi lose the woman he loves, he lost his partner to helped him with these kids. Everything rests on his shoulders now, he is completely responsible for them… and not only that, but Gabe and Mariana lost their step-mom. Everything hurts, we still could’ve had the burial scene in you stayed with Clementine to finish things or to go with your family because Mari got shot instead, or Gabe got shot.

So these kids are all Javi has left, and one of them is shot and could possibly die. He’s desperate to save them by any means necessary, even if it means appealing to those who are responsible for the wound and for Kate’s death…. Only for David to show up. It all worked out in the end, right?

Well, Richmond doesn’t like Javi and he has to leave, and the kids can’t come with him. David IS their father, they’re HIS children… but Javi raised them from the beginning of the apocalypse and taking them away from him feels fucking cruel.

THAT is sooo much more compelling of a family drama than just “aw shit man I kissed my brother’s wife because I thought he was dead but he’s not dead oh no better not tell him I’m in love with his wife until she tells him at the worst possible moment”

Again, don’t hate Kate, but letting her shine in one episode is better than her downward spiral over the course of the season.

Alright, ready to get extra spicey? Because the hills are burning from this point on and we're outta marshmallows.

Louis getting all the blame for voting Clementine and AJ out when he wasn’t even present as Mitch suggested they take the vote and everyone else went along with it only happens because certain Violet stans view him as a “threat” to their ship so they want to find any excuse to make Louis an asshole, including ignoring his trauma and everything else canon with his character, to fit their narrative. ..... Yep. Uh-oh.

To me, if this WASN’T the case, these people would give Ruby, Omar, Willy, and Mitch waaaaay more shit, but Louis is singled out because he's the other love interest.

Louis is not the sole reason Clementine and AJ were kicked out and acting like it’s all his fault that AJ was shot is blatantly ignoring the fact that Ruby, Omar, Willy, and Mitch also voted them out. Mitch gets heat for it sometimes, but the whole “Louis’ vote could’ve made difference! It could've made it a draw so the group would have to discuss further!! It’s ALL his fault, he’s such a shithead, he doesn't get to feel bad for what happened because he voted them out! Clementine would never love him when he put her and AJ at risk by voting them out like that!” argument is weak.

Ruby’s vote could’ve ensured that they stayed.

I guess that makes Ruby a shithead for kicking them out, too.

If she had voted for them to stay, they would’ve been tied and had to discuss it more. She was also upset about Marlon’s death, and was mad at AJ. Surely Ruby knew if they were voted out that AJ would get shot. How could she put Clementine’s sad murder baby in danger like that?? Being mad at AJ AND voting them out is enough to ensure no positive relationship can grow from that point forward. Because Ruby voting them out is always gonna be there, y’know? Ruby might as well have shot AJ herself when she voted them out. AJ is just a big ol’ baby boy who shouldn’t be held accountable because he’s a baby child! He doesn’t know any better! No one taught him anything!

It’s going to be a constant thing on Clementine’s mind at all times every time she talks to Ruby and she will never forgive her for that one vote she made when she was grieving because her grief doesn’t matter when it doesn’t benefit me. Ruby’s reasons for voting them out do not matter because the only feelings that are valid in this situation are Clementine’s and everyone else who voted for her to stay. Y’know, if only there was a way for Ruby to get shot in the arm as karma for her vote. That would show her for having feelings that I don’t like, make her regret ever crossing Clementine! And if she ever apologizes for voting Clementine out [which she never really does] I’ll tell her to fuck off because that is what she deserves. Let the raiders take her, I say! It's what she deserves for voting them out!

...Have you had enough or should I keep going? Because if I keep going, the Ruby crowd might get mad and start poking me with pitchforks and I don’t need them upset with me while I already have the Violet crowd shooting arrows at my hill.

Now someone who is of the opinion that Louis is the worst and clouis would never work because he voted them out might look at that and politely point out, “Well CJ, Louis and Ruby are different. Ruby forgave Clementine and AJ the day after the vote when they came back to the school. Louis didn’t forgive her until two weeks later.”

And to that I say you’re right. Louis and Ruby are different.

Ruby, to our knowledge, never actually apologizes for her vote. Louis does.

Ruby’s forgiveness happens sooner if you help her bury Ms. Martin as she’ll tell you that she’ll tell the others she’s changed her mind about you. Louis’ forgiveness doesn’t happen so soon or as easily.

Louis had a stronger connection to Marlon. Ruby didn’t.

Now my point with all of this is Ruby doesn’t get as much shit for voting them out, even though her vote could’ve possibly prevented AJ from getting shot just as much as Louis’ vote. She was in the same position as Louis and gets no shit. It’s easy to change her mind about you once you come back, and she’s not a love interest for Clementine, therefore she isn’t viewed as an interference, if you will.

A big point of argument against Louis is him putting AJ in danger with his vote, and as a love interest, that makes him a bad one whereas Violet voted for them to stay, hence not putting them in danger. Violet in her full romantic route never puts AJ in danger, but in his full romantic route, Louis does.

Except I would argue that Violet does put AJ in danger at least once in her romance route: in ep3 while they’re on the boat. The moment Violet chose to stay with Minerva she not only put AJ in danger, but the rest of the group as well. She could’ve easily left Minerva there and gone with Clementine to get AJ. She could’ve helped Aasim carry Omar [who was still shot] and Louis [who had his tongue cut out], but she didn’t. Despite the emotions she is feeling, she should be aware that if she lets Clementine go alone, something could happen, the danger on this boat is immediate. The raiders won't hesitate to kill Clementine if they have to, they won't hesitate to hurt AJ. Violet knows this.

“But CJ, that’s not fair, that’s not comparable. Violet stayed with Minerva because of her past trauma! She couldn’t leave her to die on the boat, she has abandonment issues! It’s not okay to blame her for that when it’s not something she can help!”

That's fair. I understand that Violet has her reasons for staying with Minerva, and while I may not like that she chooses Minerva after stopping her from murdering Clementine, I won’t invalidate reasons that I as someone watching from the outside may not understand.

But may I ask why is Violet putting anyone, not even just AJ, in danger as a result of those things seen as understandable, sympathetic, better… but Louis doing the same thing isn’t?

Louis found out who Marlon really was after years of blind faith. Marlon admitted to murdering Brody and pinning it on Clementine. If you appealed to him, then Marlon pointed a gun right at Louis and had to full power to kill him right there and yet, he didn’t back down. If you appealed to Violet, Louis saw Marlon with the power to kill his friend. Marlon admitted that he gave away the twins, admitted that he would do it again if he had to. All in a short period of time.

Then Louis watched Marlon get murdered…… and you assume that wasn’t traumatic for him? You assume that he’s turning against AJ and Clementine because he’s just a shit head and not because what he saw not only hurt and horrified him, but is something that he will carry with him for the rest of his life? He’s not having a response to trauma, he’s purposely just trying to screw you over?

Just get over it, Louis. Marlon was a murderer, and AJ apparently doesn't know any better. This pain your feeling? Stop it. You don't get to vote us out and feel bad.... right?

No. Ignoring all of that just to make an argument that he sucks and isn’t a good love interest for Clementine doesn’t sit well with me. Choosing to get him shot in the woods by Abel as an act of karma for his vote, being offended that he doesn’t grieve on your time schedule, getting annoyed that he has conflicting feelings about Marlon because to you it’s cut and dry that Marlon was bad and Louis should just get over it, telling him to fuck off after he makes an effort to repair your relationship, romantic or otherwise...

And y’know, whenever I see someone condemn Louis for taking two weeks to grieve before going to Clementine and forgiving AJ but praise Violet for taking the same amount of time after AJ shoots Tenn to grieve but isn’t ready to forgive him, it screams double standards, hypocrisy. Violet is allowed to lash out at AJ when she’s hurt, allowed to snap at him for killing Tenn and take as long as she needs to grieve, she’s allowed to not forgive AJ right away for hurting her, but Louis isn't because you don't like him and don't want to respect/acknowledge his issues.

I know we always get upset and insist on not comparing trauma because each character is different and they handle things differently, and it’s not okay to invalidate that….. But it’s also not okay to ignore those things just because they don’t benefit your favored ship. It says a lot.

I could go on and on, I’ve written several posts about Louis in ep2. at this point if you still don’t like Louis or clouis, that’s fine. Agree to disagree.

And just to be crystal clear, this isn't a dig at Violet. Her issues and pain are understandable and I respect that she handles things differently. Just because I don't prefer her route that doesn't mean she's invalid.

Now if I didn't have any unburnt bridges left, let's rip the bandaid off: clemerva is a bad ship. I fucking hate clemerva.

I don't care if it's in an au or taking place in canon, in my opinion it's a terrible ship that's built on a canon where they try to kill each other. Clemerva is about aesthetic because most Minerva stans care more about her looks and sexuality than they do her actual character or the bullshit she went through.

Now this bothers me so much and the reasons I will die on the hill that clemerva is bad deals with a lot of little personal things.

Firstly, I have a history of not liking Minerva. Go back to posts from a year ago and you'll find me saying things about how I can't stand her, I don't like her, I don't get why people love her........ and things have changed.

I fucking love Minerva. She is such a fucking tragedy, her role in the story and how it's executed makes more sense now, and she's fascinating. What changed my mind was throwing away everything people have said about her and playing the game by myself and looking at her character, making my own interpretations, drawing conclusions.... and it clicked. It makes sense, Minerva is great!

And this change of heart only made me hate clemerva more because it does such a disservice to her character all for the sake of making her kiss Clementine, someone she fucking hates. Like... that's it. Throw her at Clementine, who cares if Minerva would NEVER want her.

If you want a more in depth look, I have this post I made about Minerva's character, and the only thing that I would change is that I don't dislike her anymore. I am a Minerva fan now.

it just gets under my skin that a wlw ship with two queer girls who physically harm one another on several occasions- the spitting thing really gets me because spitting at someone is so demeaning and gross and ugh .... y'know, that's why Lilly's character is ruined the moment she spits at and calls James "it"- they have no friendly chemistry and Minerva is too far gone at that point... that's the wlw ship people insist is good and that I'm wrong for not liking it and like...... you can't just argue that away.

You can't convince me that Clem and Minerva could eventually have a healthy relationship in canon if Minerva made it back to the school without erasing her trauma or the murder attempts.

And when it comes to AU's where Minerva wasn't taken by raiders or whatever... I can understand someone who likes Minerva wanting her to be happy and so they make an au where she didn't get traded to the raiders. That's fine, I don't have a problem with that. I want her to be happy, too, even though I know it'll never happen. My problem is the fact that shipping her with Clementine is viewed as more important than anything else.

if anything, some fans are kinda like Violet where they have this ideal, romanticized picture of her in their heads but the difference is Violet sees who she's become and eventually accepts that, she doesn't try to erase it. but when certain Minerva stans see her in canon..... no, don't like that, she doesn't fit the mold I made of her when her character was first teased and I am going to blame the writers for giving her ugly bits that I don't like, they are wrong for not giving my redemption arc, I want to see the tall, pretty, happy, queer girl I made up in my head kiss Clementine or Violet and you're wrong for not giving me that. I will use her trauma against anyone who criticizes her but I won't actually take it into account myself because that part of her isn't important until I say it is.

I can't with clemerva, it usually erases Minerva's character and replaces her with an OC wearing her face and it's just not for me.

You can vague post shit about me or send me anons like "wow imagine hating clemerva lol couldn't be me'" or "if you don't ship clemerva you are a coward lmao" or "clemerva haters are sexist/lesbophic/biphobic" all you want, it's not gonna make me change my mind about a ship between two queer girls who canonically try to kill each other on several occasions, where one spits blood in the other's face, and the other shoots her. Sorry that I don't think all Minerva needs is a new girlfriend instead of a therapist to overcome a years worth of trauma and brainwashing.

Look, I hate the ship but remember what I said in the beginning? Just because I hate it, that doesn't mean I hate people who like it. You have your reasons and I respect that, and I ask that you respect my reasons for not liking it. My only annoyances are with those fans who try to change my mind because I'm "wrong" or shame me for it by completely ignoring my issues in the first place.

Ugh..... anyway, there they are.

There's all my dumb unpopular opinions and hills I'll die on. Wasn't that fun? I'm gonna go make myself some tea because my salt train doesn't end here- I have asks about the Clem comic to answer next sksksks

#asks #long post #twdg clementine #twdg louis #twdg clouis #twdg aj #twdg violet #twdg aasim #twdg ruby #twdg willy #twdg lilly #twdg minerva #twdg mitch #twdg marlon #twdg jane #twdg kenny #twdg javi #twdg david #twdg gabe #twdg mariana #twdg kate #twdg omar

[zombie-boys]

count on me, zombie-boys, to discuss something that happened in st2... a day before st4 comes out. i know, i know, my priorities are all upside down, but i just realized this last night and i have to talk about it.

i have to talk about "zombie boy". (warning for mentions of suicide)

for the duration of the week after will's disappearance, the majority of hawkins' residents thought the boy to be dead - this prevailing notion was thought to be confirmed when what looked to be his body was found in the quarry.

however, after joyce and hopper were able to rescue the boy - seemingly from out of nowhere, mind you - it was certain will was still alive. somehow.

will had already been through enough, but to add insult to injury, kids at school started bullying him for... coming back to life? what's that all about?

in st1 it's clear that most of the kids didn't care if will was dead or alive. only three kids in the entire school liked him to any capacity (not including jennifer hayes, who cried at will's funeral), and the rest either ignored him or bullied him.

this came to a head when will was thought to be dead, though, as it was made apparent that some kids seemed to be happy that that was the case. at the very least, troy and james in no way minded his loss. that on its own is disturbing.

bit in st2, after he had "come back to life", bullies started to call him "zombie boy". zombies... the undead. bodies that are supposed to be lying still underground, but instead have risen from the grave. living people who should be dead.

"zombie boy". the boy who should be dead.

and no, this isn't just a matter of surprise on the schoolchildren's part, surprise that somehow will was still alive even after they found his dead body. no, they were making fun of him for being alive in the first place. by calling him "zombie boy", the bullies were telling will that they wished he had actually died.

the most disturbing thing about this situation is that will accepted the identity of "zombie boy". he accepted the fact that many kids at school wished he were dead. (warning for suicide mention under the cut)

it's almost as if he agreed with them. and that's incredibly disturbing, especially since this possibility of will being suicidal hasn't been resolved since - not to mention how there's reason to believe that his suicidal thoughts were present even prior to st1.

the whole "will they, won't they" with whether or not will was alive in st1 now seems to be representative of something, especially considering where his 'body' was found - at the quarry. the concept of self-sacrifice is already linked to that location, as mike was willing to jump off the cliff to save dustin's life there. state had planted barb's car by a bus stop to make it seem like she had run away; perhaps they planted will's body at the quarry to make it seem as if he had escaped in a different sense.

i guess i'm just hoping that, even if they don't deal with this specific issue, that they do cover will's mental health more in this season and the next. i'm all for max having a guidance counselor to talk to after the death of her brother, but will also needs help. dr. owens did not help much by way of will's mental health, you have to admit.

will is still experiencing ptsd and abandonment issues (mike!) on top of the issues he was already dealing with pre-st1, including suicidal thoughts and possibly anxiety (like that of his mother). regardless of the specifics, will is not doing well by st4. he is getting a new beginning in cali, but that won't fix everything.

i just hope will can get some relief this season, some love, and be reassured that it's a good thing that he's still alive. that he isn't a zombie boy... but a miracle.

#stranger things #stranger things theory #will byers #will's christmas lights #tw suicide mention #suicide mention tw #the gravity of 'zombie boy' as a nickname just struck me last night #and goodness gracious. it's horrible that anyone should call him that #will. will my darling. it's a blessing that you're alive #so please stay that way :')

[burntlikethesun]

love and monsters or school reunion

Love and Monsters:

'What I'm trying to do is sum up the Doctor. What he means to us- What he could represent and what he should represent, and what he never won't represent... sort of thing'

This episode is good and I will die on that hill- it's a very affectionately drawn love letter to fandom. The opening sequence of Elton being present for Autons, Slitheen ship and Sycorax was so thrilling to me when I was a kid, I caught the beginning but had to leave to go to a party my parents friends were having and I was so mad at having to wait until we got home to watch the rest! LINDA are adorable and heartbreaking as they get picked off one by one, the scooby doo, YOU SAID BLUE/I SAID NOT BLUE bucket chase is so funny, Camille Coduri shines as Jackie- the only thing that drags is down is Peter Kay's Abzorbaloff - I just think he plays it too broad, he was a lot more sinister as Victor Kennedy. He was almost cast as Elton but I don't think that would have worked either, I think he literally just needed to tone it down a bit, and also the costume just looked a bit silly, but like.. it was designed by a child so... Mr Kennedy works when you've been in Doctor Who fandom and encountered the mean spirited gatekeepers that he represents. also I don't really care about the paving slab thing, people act like it ruins the whole episode but it's a few seconds and an off colour joke about a love life, that children such as myself just assumed meant kissing. Ten probably visited them on the farewell tour and gave her a new body seeing as he apparently visited Novice Hame lol.

School Reunion

'The universe has to move forward. Pain and loss, they define us as much as happiness or love. Whether it's a world, or a relationship, everything has its time. And everything ends.'

Adore this episode, always have, even before I'd seen a Sarah Jane episode, but it's just been solidified after seeing her original run, SJA, and now that Lis Sladen has passed. There are weaker aspects like the 'Sex and the City' angle Whithouse was going for and Kenny and co. child acting their way through the script, but so many strong elements that hold it together - Anthony Head as the oily (pardon the pun) Mr Finch is a great villain, for a one off episode he properly commits to acting the hell out of this orphan devouring monster who is pleased as punch about a reporter for the Sunday Times doing a feature on him. The Krillitanes are a great concept, and I'm surprised they were never revisited beyond a spin off novel. Love Sarah Jane and Rose's issues coming to ahead with them rattling off the things they'd seen (THE! LOCH NESS! MONSTER!) only to collapse into giggles when they starting making fun of the Doctor and leave each other with a promise to reconnect, one day- also at the heart of it, their problems were never about each other! Rose was experiencing the gut punch that he'd never mentioned any of his companions to her before, and is terrified that will be her some day, just pushed back and forgotten - while Sarah was never given closure about him leaving, he dumps her on Earth not because either of them want to separate, but because she can't come to Gallifrey when he was summoned- but he never comes back for her, (despite saying 'Til we meet again') AND he leaves her in Aberdeen! No wonder she never processed it properly.

K-9 is great too. I'm so glad this ep got made and Lis agreed to it, because it lead to so much more, with the whole of SJA coming off the back of it. I always end the episode with a bee in my bonnet that the thread of Rose being annoyed at Mickey joining is abandoned by Moffat in the next episode along though.

#doctor who

[jojotichakorn]

my thoughts and opinions on "lovely writer": criticizing the critic

tw for discussions of age gaps, rape, and sex

before i turn into the mean and constantly dissatisfied archer that we all know and hate, i just want to say that i liked this show. i think it's great, actually! gene and sib are appropriately cute, the premise is nice, and the attempt at criticizing the industry is... well, an attempt, which is better than nothing. moreover, "lovely writer" came with gifts because it gave me my new favorite character, so you can't go telling me i'm trying to completely obliterate it or something.

besides, this specific post isn't going to get into analyzing the show as a whole anyway. i won't be talking about any irrelevant plot points, cinematography, sound design, or anything like that, though i could probably write a post just as long as this one about that side of things as well. however, i am here to specifically look at the problematic things that were both criticized by the show and included in the show without any criticism. i'm going to talk about the more serious side of things here, which means i'm going to get serious. and i'm going to be harsh. very harsh.

gene and nubsib: yes's and no's

overall, the relationship between gene and sib was a fair attempt at showing something complex, yet ultimately quite healthy, which i appreciate. there were some things i was especially glad about. the fact that sib dated other people before settling on getting together with gene, for example, makes the whole situation a little less codependent. however, as much as this show prides itself on not wanting to romanticize problematic relationships, there are at least two major problems with genesib.

the age gap (and why it was not needed)

i've tried my very best to give this entire concept the benefit of the doubt. at first, i was convincing myself that they were simply close childhood friends, then i was trying my best to believe that even though sib did have a sort of crush on gene (which sometimes happens to little children), gene only saw him as his younger brother, but eventually, the show gave me no choice, but to deem the entire storyline problematic, because they did their best to romanticize that relationship - from gene's dad seeing the "early signs" to the counting and kissing the cheek turning to counting and full-on lip-locking in the last episode.

i could go into how this could all easily be mended if little sib was shown as kind of obsessed with his older friend, but gene was shown as not being anywhere near interested in the kid. but the real question is - why was the age gap needed at all?

i've researched the age of the boys during the flashbacks to the best of my ability and it seems that gene is 11 and sib is 6 or 7. if sib was the same age as gene (or maybe just one year younger, but not any more than that), not only would none of it feel weird, it would also be quite appropriate to explore that first glimpse of romantic feelings some of us experience exactly around that age. i don't think it's necessary for sib to be much younger than gene (children can be just as impressionable at 11 as they are at 7, and as for gene being surprisingly nice and helpful and the other kids not wanting to play with sib, he could have easily been - for example - bullied by his peers instead, which would have the same effect).

moving forward to the present, i don't think the lack of an age gap would affect the storyline that much either. even if they desperately needed sib to be a university student, they could have that one-year difference i've talked about before, which is not as significant. sib could be in his last year of uni, while gene could have easily written his very first novel during his university years, which would actually make more sense (since that guaranteed him employment and freedom to write after he finished uni; and i would rather believe that he had time to write his first novel in-between classes than in-between shifts at work, which he would surely need to have if he started writing after finishing university).

so that brings me back to my initial question - why was it needed? and much like the show often does, i will leave this one up for your interpretation because i do not have any sensible answers myself.

the issue with sex and consent

"but archer!" - i hear you exclaim - "lovely writer is known for explicitly denouncing rape romanticization in bls, how could there possibly be any problems with consent here?" and i hear you, my dear reader. and you aren't incorrect, "lovely writer" is indeed very explicit at calling out bls for having rape scenes (and i do appreciate that). however, as i'm sure you know, there are different ways in which consent can be taken from a person, and there are different non-consensual acts that someone might perform. for example, there are many different forms of coercion, such as the person being persuaded until they feel like they have no other choice, but to say yes. touching someone or kissing someone without asking for permission are also non-consensual acts. i can go on and on, there are many examples outside of what so many people consider rape.

now, what if i tell you that though there (thank the gods) has been no rape present in "lovely writer", not all scenes with gene and sib are consensual? well, that's what i'm telling you because it's the truth. both the first kissing scene and the scene where gene and sib "try out different poses" have clear coercion in them. the entire "joke" of the scene before gene and sib's first time is literally built upon the concept of "a person is trying to run away from someone, who wants to have sex with them" and it is NOT funny. the later reveal of gene actually looking up how to have sex seems to be there on purpose, to show that everything that's happened is "ok" because gene was thinking about it. as a sensible person, i will only accept actual enthusiastic consent and not someone possibly maybe probably considering it. not to mention that right before having sex, sib asks gene one last time if he is sure, which is great, except it is immediately followed by "i'm not going to let you change your mind anymore", which - daily reminder - you are allowed to stop having sex at any point during the act if you start feeling uncomfortable with it. that's absolutely normal.

now the problem that we seem to run into here is that "lovely writer" appears to think that it's ok to push someone to the limit until they either finally agree or confidently and loudly disagree. the drama has repeatedly shown us that actually forcing someone to have sex is not ok; however, persuading and otherwise coercing someone, as well as taking an approximate guess of them wanting to have sex based on some marginally related factors, is ok. i would like to once again remind everyone that all of that is not ok.

one more issue i want to bring up in connection with sex is something i wish was common knowledge: it is NOT supposed to hurt during your first time. whether you are planning to have vaginal or anal sex for the first time, it should not hurt. and if it does, something has definitely gone wrong and you need to stop. you are not supposed to experience any pain or discomfort during sex, including your first time (outside of desired and therefore intentionally inflicted pain, but that's not what i'm talking about here). i have seen this misconception brought up many times in bls along with the other person "thanking the person who got hurt for bearing the pain to bring them pleasure" and absolutely none of that is normal. stop. please, just... stop.

criticism of the BL industry

there are certainly quite a few things i liked about the way "lovely writer" criticized the many problems that surround bls. i think they dealt especially well with the fan aspect. the breaches of privacy that are considered normal, the toxicity of social media that encourages people to comment on other people's personal life, harass and stalk them - all of that was shown in its full glory (or rather horror) and clearly condemned. it was also interesting to see how easily everyone around sib fell into the routine of having to hide genesib's relationship, just because "that's what's supposed to be done in these situations" - even tum did that without thinking twice.

however, i have not spent the past three years hating gmm for a show trying to criticize the industry not to focus on criticizing the production company and everyone professionally involved with the making of bls. don't get me wrong - they didn't completely overlook that side of things, but i found the way they approached it dissatisfying.

like yes, tum fights with his sister (aka sib's manager) and calls her out for her terrible actions, and the publisher (bua) eventually apologizes for what she did, but all of that feels a bit too... personal. i do not care about these individual stories. i care about you saying that the whole system is broken because it very much is. i wanted manner of death but with the bl industry, and instead, i got an "uwu the fans are demanding we do this, and our hands our tied" (which is a lie) and "uwu i'm just trying to make money" (which i mean... if you feel ok milking even more money than you already have by doing something unethical and immoral, then be my guest, but also go fuck yourself). besides that, i didn't see any criticism of tabloids or exploitative celebrities either (both of which we had examples of in the show), and that was kind of disappointing.

coming back to the fans for a moment, i also think that the criticism of real people shipping was entirely unsuccessful. we basically mostly got an "oh, what if this person's partner thinks they are actually dating", which... if a bunch of people on the internet who do not know your boyfriend personally and make all their judgments from screenshots and their imagination can convince you that your boyfriend is cheating, i've got some bad news for you and also a number for a therapist. partly i know why it was so complicated for them to get into it properly - the issue with real people shipping is an issue of privacy, boundaries, the perception of celebrities, acceptable interests, and many other complex topics. however, it's better to not criticize something than to criticize it badly and inaccurately (because the latter usually leads to even more encouragement of whatever you were attempting to criticize).

aey: the flamboyant villain

aey certainly starts as a promisingly complex character, but the farther we go from his backstory and his family, the less complex and the more evil he gets. eventually, the trauma he goes through is no longer enough to give him a get-out-of-jail-free card, and he loses all remaining sympathy after sexually harassing gene and pretending to drug sib. and i did start this post by saying that i am not to analyze any plot points or characters from the show here; however, i'm saying all this to prove a point that aey is a clear villain in the show. this is further cemented by the fact that by the end of the show he loses the only two people who cared about him, and the very last moment with him in the show is literally just him crying for about 3 minutes. there was no redemption arc, no pity, no revenge - he was left alone and broken, clearly punished by the narrative. and i've got a bone to pick here as well.

one of the first things that we find out about aey is that he is gay, and quite openly so. he is repeatedly described as very feminine by many characters, he flirts with men, he talks about being good in bed, and his entire character is built upon being gay (half of it directly, and the other half due to the fact that his entire backstory and therefore personality is also built upon the fact that he is gay). he is - for the lack of a better term - the gayest character in the show and the only one who is loud about being gay not because he is in love but simply because it is a part of him and he doesn't want to hide it. and he is the villain. not the disgusting publisher or the terrible manager - no, this guy was specifically chosen to ruin everyone's lives. and i can't say i'm particularly happy about that. *british voice* seems a bit homophobic love

not quite queer enough

as i said, aey is openly gay. gene and sib also eventually say that they are gay, gene's father teep is queer, so are tiffy and mhok. but it just doesn't seem to come up as much as it would in real life. the only time anyone has a problem with any of the characters being queer is when we deal with the parents. but knowing actual queer thai actors in real life, we are all aware how hard it can be for them, but it has not come up even once for aey, gene or sib (with genesib only being a problem because they are a "non-shippable couple"). being queer is far from being a non-issue in the industry, and i found it incredibly weird that it was never brought up (and i would also prefer if they brought that up instead of showing the unaccepting parents plot for the millionth time).

same goes for the lack of conversation around queer people on set. i think we all have a wonderful example of how much better a bl can get simply when it involves a queer director and/or screenwriter (gods bless p'aof), gay actors, etc. i also thought it was a missed opportunity that gene being a gay man writing a bl novel was never highlighted. if anything, everyone made a big deal out of him being a man writing a bl - never mind that he is a gay man that is far more qualified to write bls than a straight woman.

in conclusion, there are simply not enough queer issues talked about here for a show that is about queer people facing difficulties while making a queer drama.

tiffy and tum: the good, the bad, and the ugly

overall, tiffy and tum are quite cool. outside of my own personal feelings, i really liked the clear reversal of gender roles they have going on: he knows lots about make-up, she knows nothing about it, he knows how to sew, she knows how to repair a car, etc.

tiffy is also a nice addition to the precious few queer girls we have in bls. however, the way her being bi is executed... it isn't great. when she first talks about dating girls to tum, she says things like "even though i look like this" (implying queer girls have a certain look?) and "maybe it seemed normal because i was at an all-girls school" (which wtf does that even mean?). i think the worst thing, though, was when she assumed tum was gay. my best guess is she thought so because she initially thought that tum and gene were a couple; however, she should be the first person to know that just because he likes men, it doesn't mean that he doesn't like women or any other gender. even though there was nothing explicitly leading me to make this conclusion, this whole thing did kind of feel like the old "flipping the switch" stereotype (meaning, she used to like women, but now she likes men, and both of them can't happen simultaneously).

make it make sense

i think i've never been more confused in my entire life than when i found out that the director of "lovely writer" also happens to be the director of "th*arnt*pe". and if at first, i was asking a lot of questions about this peculiar individual, who went from working on the worst rape-romanticizing show we have ever had to a show that explicitly states that rape is not normal. but the more i thought about it, the less i was interested in him, and the more i was interested in whoever made the decision to hire him. there are dozens of different directors that have worked specifically on bls, and even more that haven't. yet out of all those, you decided to choose this one. the dude, who before your show has only directed the show with the biggest rape-y vibes. that casts a particular kind of shade on the entire show that i simply do not like.

conclusion

at the end of the day, i think what "lovely writer" tried to do was very interesting. it succeeded in some ways and failed in others. frankly, i think this show could have easily been made better if someone queer was involved in making it. that's always true, but especially so, when we try to talk about the issues of making a queer drama. either way, it's certainly a good start to this conversation; however - as i said - i'm still waiting for my manner of death but with the bl industry. this was unfortunately not it.

#it is here it is queer it has some controversial hot takes #archer speaks #lovely writer