i’ll freely admit i was a big my little pony fan in my teen years (the last episode i remember watching is the one where they go to that town where no one has a cutie mark / everyone has the same cutie mark; i was like 16 by this point and coming out of that phase) and i’ll still have moments where i sit and be pulled back towards it a bit because it just has so much potential like, world-wise
like
cutie marks, okay? they’re your talent+passion and demonstrably completely unique. so if you’re on the run for whatever reason, is your cutie mark put up on the wanted posters alongside your headshot?
what are the cultural attitudes towards tattooing your cutie mark? in crimes where someone might damage a person’s face, that sense of control and robbing of identity, are cutie marks also disfigured in this way? do some ponies choose to reject their cutie marks and have them tattooed over or otherwise defaced? would some cultures consider it a crime in itself to deface your or someone else’s mark, even consensually?
and if you’re in, idk, witness protection or something, do you need to get it tattooed? are you forced to abandon your greatest talent and joy because that in itself, engaging in it, could get you recognised? what life are you left with? is it even a life worth living at all?
and in areas with lots of ponies, how does the socioeconomical aspect of a cutie mark function? how does every location seem to have every individual needed to function, like food, healthcare, education, etc?
is there some latent biological hive mind that decides ‘oh this village doesn’t have anyone in the agricultural sector—we need a couple harvester or farmer cutie marks so people can still eat’? in which case, what is the nature of free will and identity?
is the concept of a cutie mark a biological incentive to make propagating the species seem innately pleasing, like the rush of hormones after someone gives birth so the pain of childbirth is offset and they bond to the baby and they’re more likely to go through it again, furthering humanity?
like, your genes making you truly, deeply believe that harvesting food is your special talent, and your favourite thing to do, but is that just because the local area needed some more food workers and your personality, your self, evolved to fit that niche?? what even is free will?! what is selfhood??
or if not, is there a concept of being ‘reassigned’ to an area because hey! this city needs more teachers so we’re forcing some teacher ponies in this area with too many teacher ponies to relocate?? or are ponies whose cutie marks aren’t particularly ‘useful’ forced to do something as a job that isn’t their passion because elsewise they can’t pay bills? what’s the cultural consensus on NOT having a job related to your cutie mark? is it viewed negatively, or is it seen as noble? if it’s negative, does that negativity fall back on the system of government forcing them into this situation, or is the individual themselves deemed as defective by denying their true self?
would hiring for a job be swayed by seeing a pony’s cutie mark and knowing how well they fit? is asking for ponies with ‘X-type cutie marks’ allowed? is cutie-mark-discrimination a thing? is it illegal? is it even frowned upon?? or is it justified as ‘you want someone who will be the best at this job’? are you required to cover your cutie mark in job interviews?
what about those whose cutie marks aren’t easily accessible? what if yours is a creative endeavour but you can’t afford to make a career out of something so fickle as writing or singing or acting? it takes time to build up notoriety/a portfolio to the point you can live off it, so are you forced to take other jobs in the meantime? or are there ‘cutie grants’ where you can apply for money to pursue your cutie mark?
in that episode with starlight glimmer we get an idea of the cultural attitudes towards not living as your cutie mark indicates you should live and work as your mark indicates, but then also you have things like prince blueblood whose cutie mark (and therefore his talent and purpose) is uhhhhh being a prince?? so is the concept of an absolute monarchy just baked in to this species’ genetics? blueblood doesn’t even rule!! what does he do? at least with bees the queen is the one giving birth to all the new bees!
what if someone’s cutie mark is just, fucking, idk, murdering other ponies?? like they get that cutie mark as a preteen-ish and… are they just locked up for the rest of their lives, as a precaution? is the nature of pony society honour bound to find a way for them to explore and fulfill their purpose in some manner? and if we refer back to the biological niche theory, what would this mean? is it a sign that this area is too densely populated and the local land cannot sustain its size?
i’m going to extremes here but like… the worldbuilding, guys. the implications.
4 notes
·
View notes
Back to the topic that @yonemurishiroku presented to me (i reblogged it just scroll down like 3-4 posts) imma give some input
And no this post is not about who is more powerful or better or whatever so leave if that’s what you want.
Okay so in the leadership or better fighter (not by tactic by presentation) aspect, personally I think Jason is better.
Not because Percy is dumb. Don’t call my boy dumb. My boy’s fatal flaw is also loyalty which is why this is much harder for him.
Percy immediately jumps into action when he sees someone he cares about hurt, he starts fighting out of blind anger and whatever skill or tactic his body uses.
Percy’s loyalty, for those he shows it to, is very very strong. Extremely powerful. Like defeating the Minotaur and jumping after Annabeth into Tartarus etc…
The thing is, he only stays focused on that one person. Not to everything else around him.
Jason on the other hand, does. In my opinion he thinks like Annabeth in certain situations.
Jason is not a healer, so leaving whatever position you are in just to go after someone else (who is probably too stubborn to want the help) doesn’t seem ethical. This was also the way Jason was raised.
Jason’s fatal flaw is his selflessness, he’s rather sacrifice himself in order to end a battle and as a vengeance for the person or people that are hurt.
Jason in my opinion has a better tactic because he thinks to the worst possibility ahead of time. He overthinks before said battle or war happens. When it does he has plenty of skill to show for it.
Percy starts off the same way. Thinking of tactic and what to do next or the sequence of events to follow their plan.
Until someone he loves steps into the scenario of the battle. Then all strings are cut loose. Because Percy only thinks about that one person. It’s generally Annabeth, Sally, or Grover. That’s his loyalty to them.
Percy is a extroverted introvert and those are his people. His main people. That’s where his loyalty lies.
Jason, who also is loyal to his friends and peers and those he is with, is shown in different ways.
Jason doesn’t believe he has people because he grew up around adults and an army who all were just coworkers. Yes, he has friends at CJ, but they all were in that same position so it didn’t always matter.
Jason is the selfless type to a much farther extent.
Percy is the loyal type to a much farther extent.
The each have both of those qualities.
Basically my hot take is that loyalty isn’t always the best thing to overrule while I believe selflessness is.
Anyways….
6 notes
·
View notes