#different people. its like the whole words vs actions thing. ppl would say words to me and i would parrot them thinking i was being | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

avenger-hawk · 3 years

Note

Hi you have a great understanding of Sasuke's character and awesome blog. Could I ask you for tips on how to write Sasuke right in fanfiction? When I try I never seem to get him right

Hello and thanks Anon. First of all, y’all don’t get offended if I’ll destroy some of your fave tropes in fics...I don’t judge ppl writing what they want in their fics, it’s their own fic so ofc they write what they want and how they want it and if they have fun with gay-uncle-Izuna, CEOItachi and sluttySasuke good for them...but when ppl impose their OOC Sasuke (or Nar or Itachi&co) as the real thing, and boy if they do....well. Nope.

Anyway I replied to similar asks here, here and here, so I’ll copy-paste some parts. My Sasuke tag. More Sasuke meta. More headcanons. More essays tag.

Sasuke is not dominant. He’s not bossy. He’s not assertive. He’s very passive in relationships and he values individual freedom, his own and other people’s. Ppl mistake his determination in pursuing his goals with assertiveness but it’s a totally different thing. He never makes the first move with ppl, unless he has a goal and he needs them, and even when he needs them, like Taka, he never imposes his will on them. He first freed them then he asked their help for his own goal, saying that he would accept if they refused. He never imposed himself on his brother (a child wanting his big brother’s attention is not being dominant, it’s natural) and he never did it on Nar or anyone else.

Sasuke is not selfish, he is the most selfless character in the whole series. He respected people, he didn’t see himself above them. He didn’t see himself as a genius or anything. He worked hard because he had a low self esteem, he was always compared to Itachi and he always lost. He was humble enough to ask others’ help, like asking N*ruto how S*kura was able to climb the tree with chakra in the beginning, or asking Team Taka’s help to find Itachi, asking Kakashi to make him stronger and following Orochimaru for more strength. And during all these, he was thrown in his face parts of the tragic truth about Itachi and his clan and he always had to get back on his feet and fight more. His world crumbled so many times on him and yet not only he reacted but he always was able to help those around him. Not with big words like N*ruto but really, freeing Orochimaru’s prisoners, Taka, and earlier protecting his team from Gaara, protecting N*ruto from Haku, and later proitecting N*ruto from Kaguya and then protecting the whole world from her, protecting Itachi’s ideal, his sacrifice from those who threatened to make it useless. He was ready to become the world’s only enemy to keep them together, following what he thought Itachi had taught him indirectly.

Sasuke is neither possessive nor jealous. He never showed any sign of possessiveness or jealousy towards anyone. He protected Taka and N*ruto. He defended Itachi’s name, unlike too many like to think: when he threatens Danzo to stop talking about Itachi it’s not because he’s jealous but because he doesn’t want that bastard to talk shit about his perfect brother, especially cause that bastard was the reason of his ruin. He was defending his name from an enemy and it was pure and selfless, not possessive at all! Proof of this is when Hashirama praises him instead, Sasuke is happy. He likes people to speak about his brother in a good way! When they were children Itachi always dismissed Sasuke who pouted but never got really angry or jealous at Shisui for example. And at the end of the fight vs Kabuto he aknowledged Itachi’s resolve to leave even tho it broke his heart to lose him again, and he let Itachi go with the saddest face but the utmost respect.

Sasuke is not arrogant. He has a low self-esteem. He was raised in the shadow of his genius brother, he suffered for his father not noticing him, he later developed an inferiority complex towards N*ruto as well because of his quick progress, compared to his own that he perceived as slower and not enough (that’s why he joined Orochimaru). When he brags it’s not because he’s the bragging type (aka N*ruto, Kiba &co) but it’s because he’s either making fun of N*ruto, since they were rivals/friends (not to mention it’s a shounen trope) and, even more so, because he is proud of his achievements. He worked so hard always and when he created a jutsu or smth he says it. Because he has low self esteem but he’s not socially awkward or shy or whatever (see later paragraph). So he is proud of his own results. (which is also a very TE thing, for those who care about mbti stuff).

Sasuke doesn’t value his life much. This is a result of his low self-esteem, which leads to poor sense of self-preservation (to prove that he’s strong, like when he was a genin and he trained so hard,and later to pursue his goals, for which he’d give his body to Orochimaru and his life over and over). Also he is so determined to achieve his goals that he’d do anything for them. He was ready to die on many occasions in canon for this and even later, after the ending, he’s seeing himself as a tool. Also, he never really got over the sense of worthlessness first caused by his father and then by Itachi’s words the night of the massacre. Not in a real life trauma-like thing, but as a way to see himself. this means that all those stereotypical rocking back and forth, cutting, whatever behaviors are not like him, who always got back to his feet and lived, although not for himself but for his goals.

Sasuke is not bitchy or spoiled. If he was he would have a great self esteem, and he clearly showed to have a very low self esteem instead. He never made anything about him actually, as all his goals were about others, his family, his brother, and so on. He was the one who did better teamwork in team7 actually, and he protected his friends and comrades, not to mention he freed Orochimaru’s prisoners and fought for the village and its people. How is this spoiled or bitchy, and btw, bitchy ppl do get offended and he never paid attention to offenses towards him, only towards his brother.

Sasuke is neither the haughty élite type nor the shy/socially anxious/‘emo’ type. He is neither Neji nor H*nata. He is aloof, he is always lost in his own thoughts and he doesn’t care about socializing because he wants to become strong, because he cared more about his family and goals, because he cared more about their opinion than the opinion of classmates. He valued strength since the beginning, being raised the way he was raised, so he valued the praise of strong people and not of the others, unlike those who seek praise from everyone. On the other hand his being aloof doesn’t mean he can’t have normal interactions, and the fact that he doesn’t use honorifics doesn’t mean he has socialization problems. Only that he doesn’t pay attention to these things anymore. He was always pragmatic, and after the massacre he became pragmatic to an extreme level, cutting off all unnecessary things, manners included. It doesn’t mean, though, that he doesn’t respect some people (=those he deems strong. Including Team Taka). He just shows it through actions.

Sasuke is not se/xually aggressive/dominant/whatever. He is too busy with his own goals to have se/xual or romantic thoughts (unlike other characters both male and female, not just Karin but also S*kura, Ino, and ofc N*ruto). I wouldn’t define this being asexual tho, because their universe is not ours and I’m sick&tired of all the real world/Nar universe parallels. He’s passive in relationship and on many occasions he showed indifference to se/xual anything, not disgust. Just, it wasn’t his thought. Because he is on a different wavelength. So even when he told characters to not be so close to him or smth, he didn’t move away, he just told them, which kinda proves my point once more of how passive he is towards ppl and relationships, he just lets them be. On the other hand, aceSas is better than hornydominantSas that is so OOC it hurts, be it with Itachi, Nar, S*kura or whatever other girls/boys.

Most MAIN characters didn’t understand/didn’t try to understand him. The ones who understood him more are unexpectedly not his friends. Not counting Taka ofc.

Sasuke is passive. He is the yin and N*ruto is the yang. In case this isn’t clear. It’s canon. Kishi used a yin/yang parallel for him and N*ruto, so while N*ruto is yang/sun/warm/ positive/active/male principle in nature/masculine, Sasuke is yin/moon/cold/negative/passive/passive/female principle in nature/feminine. Passive doesn’t mean weak. It means receptive, adaptable, flexible, which Sasuke is, since he’s the one who adapted his life and goals to new events, truths and changes, unlike most others who just kept going their own way no matter what (see N*ruto or Itachi). Many see him as assertive because he faces every situation in a very determined manner, taking actions and deciding everything independently. But being an independent thinker has nothing to do with being assertive or passive. I say he’s passive because he actually always reacts to what life (or Itachi) throws at him, every time. His reactions are quick and strategic, so it’s easy to miss this, but still, again, Itachi or N*ruto actively engage the environment and life, and influence other people, not Sasuke. He’s also passive with people, in relatioships. He never seeks anyone unless it’s for practical reasons, he only reacts to them approaching him. And he reacts in a very calm way, quite mild compared to how determined and detached he is, considering that a lot of characters invade his personal space or more, in the whole series. When he chases after Itachi it’s because he’s his younger brother and it’s natural for them, and mostly because Itachi set up his life so that he would focus on him, still it’s Itachi who is assertive, and he reacts in return. He makes a deal with Orochimaru, to obtain strength and give him his body in return. When he forms Team Taka, before asking their help, he first gives them freedom and only then he asks them to join him, making it clear that he won’t force them if they’ll refuse. He gives them something before asking something in return. This is not just a passive thing but something more because he is not selfish, like I said before.

Sasuke is an independent thinker. Unlike other smart thinkers like Itachi or Madara, to whom the story associated him, Sasuke was kept in the dark about many things, so he developed his own view of the world later, but when he did it was original and unique, just like his fighting style and strategy.

Sasuke is private about his thoughts and feelings but he’s also honest about them. Itachi is mysterious and not honest about his feelings, not him. He is aloof, it’s different. Just because he doesn’t trust many people and he’s lost in his own thoughts it doesn’t mean he is a shoujo mysterious character lol.

Sasuke is goal oriented. He does whatever it takes to achieve his goals. He would have given his body as a vessel for Orochimaru, not caring about what would happen to him, as long as he could have his revenge. He would have lived an eternity in solitude so that the world would have lived in peace. And, again, his goals are never about himself.

Sasuke wanted to die after he killed Itachi, but then when he woke up and was told the truth he had another purpose, and so he lived on.

Sasuke admires and respects strength but he’s not power thirsty. He wanted to become strong because he wanted to be worthy of Itachi and his father, than because he had to avenge his clan, then he had to avenge Itachi. It’s because he had low self-esteem and was selfless that he sought power. He wanted to be beside his father and brother, not to surpass them, actually. It’s Itachi who talked about surpassing.

Sasuke is very smart and logical, but he is easily manipulated with the right arguments. Like using Itachi, or appealing to his low self esteem, his feeling of worthlessness, his emotions. Because people who are logical are actually not emotionless. In fact they have a hard time controlling their emotions when they feel strongly, and this can be seen clearly every time Sasuke loses control. He becomes more impulsive than N*ruto who instead gets calmer, because he’s more in touch with his emotions (lol ofc he is, everything is always about his own emotions and feelings). Sasuke puts his feelings and emotions aside to reach his goals, he acts logically and pragmatically, he observes, makes plans, finds the better ways to do things, no matter how hard or dangerous for him they are. He has logical arguments even though they appear ‘crazy’ to other characters, and it’s sad to see how in the end he was belittled by N*ruto, as if his arguments were meaningless, they were not addressed at all, just deemed wrong, not with counterarguments but with illogical emotion based words that just made him feel unstable, as it happens when you have logical arguments and they tell you ‘you’re just depressed, you don’t get things right’.

In the end, he was tamed into submission. He was defeated, put in jail, isolated, guilt tripped and berated because of his ideals and goals, denied the justice he rightfully demanded.

All these can be observed directly. Others, more subtle things about him I wrote here, towards the end of this long post.

#sasuke #I don’t have much motivation to reply to asks tbh but this is important I guess #Anonymous #vivalarevolution: visions #vivalarevolution #vivalarevolution: not crazy but desperate

120 notes · View notes

fatphobiabusters · 3 years

Note

So I have a question about how weight gain/loss works and I can't find any studies that don't seem reductionist or oversimplifying.

So, I assume you guys and I both agree: weight gain and loss is way more complex than calories in - calories out. It HAS to be. For instance, I was underweight until I started taking certain medications which made me gain upwards of 70lbs in the span of a few years. My diet and activity levels have not changed. My mom eats worse than I do (legit she sometimes only eats sugary cereals and ice cream some days, I try to only eat whole grains in contrast because I like their taste better and they're more nutritious) and she's not nearly as fat as I am. I also exercised a lot for a good year or two and while I gained plenty of muscle weight my total amount of body fat didn't change.

Meanwhile a friend of mine is chronically underweight and we eat very similarly and have the same activity levels, and he actively LOSES weight if he doesn't eat upwards of 2000+ calories a day.

I know that's anecdotal evidence, but I hear very similar stories from many people and simplifying weight down to just calories seems like it's missing a whole big picture somewhere. The body obviously has some very complex systems in place regarding the storage of body fat and when it chooses to use it vs keep it.

Seeing as you guys are skeptical of reductionist science when it comes to body fat and weight, I was wondering if you had any studies or research on hand about how weight gain and loss actually works. It seems like a fascinating topic ripe for plenty of research and experiments regarding the biological pathways of how energy is stored and used, and why it uses fat stores sometimes and not others, and why it differs so greatly between people! It feels like if it were any other field people would be pouring grants and work into figuring out this really cool mystery but because it's about fat people nobody wants to bother.

So, we have posted a lot about this.

I recommend spending some time on @bigfatscience, since this is their actual area of expertise.

I’m also interested in this in a sciency way, but as a fat person I worry about ppl focusing too much on this and not on radical fat acceptance. It shouldn’t matter if someone is fat because they choose to eat a lot and do no exercise. That’s their right as a human.

I posted this graph [cw: o word] a while back. It’s not perfect, but it’s a start in thinking about weight systematically and in a more complex way.

-Mod Siarl

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296290/obesity-map-full-hi-res.pdf

last time the embedded link didn’t work so I’m just putting it here in case that happens again.

---

I’m going to throw my tuppence-haypenny in here. Mod Siarl already gave an excellent answer, I just have my spleen to vent also 😎 engage RANT:

The calories-in/calories-out thing bugs me a LOT because it’s so simple for people to throw out, and takes FOREVER to debunk. It’s like a Gish-gallop debating tactic: make the other side look daft by casually dropping it into a discussion and watch the other side have to faff about with a big answer.

I don’t know if this comes up much in US education, but there’s an old adage:

“Physics can’t explain how a bumblebee is able to fly.”

It’s patent nonsense. Of course Physics can explain it. The problem is mis-stated: Physics, as taught to 15 year olds, is too simplistic to explain how a bumblebee is able to fly.

Physics, as taught to post-16 year olds and in higher education, is perfectly able to explain it.

Calories is EXACTLY like that, IMO.

“Just expand more calories than you take in and you’ll lose weight. SIMPLE.”

It’s an oversimplification of biological process that, yes as stated is technically correct but it bears no resemblance to reality. It’s mis-stated.

When you restrict calories, your body will react. The reaction varies on person, circumstance, metabolism, genetics and societal conditioning. It may include, but is not limited to:

‘Starvation’ mode: your body chemistry adapts to lower calorific intake and preps for a famine. Fat is one of the last things to go, because it’s your body’s last line of defence against starving to death. (https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/starvation-mode#metabolism)

Depression/mental health. Not only are you depriving yourself of something that may make you happy (tasty food you like), you’re interfering with the societal use of food (social eating, with all its positive connotations for interaction), changing your body chemistry AND setting yourself up with a “I can’t have X otherwise I’m a bad person” mentality. (https://www.consumerhealthdigest.com/general-health/dieting-mental-health.html - refs at bottom)

Decreased activity. Fewer calories == less energy. Body stays the same shape (https://www.livestrong.com/article/454212-fatigue-while-on-a-calorie-restricted-diet/).

Reduction in muscles. Fat’s your last line of defence against starving (https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/calorie-restriction-risks#TOC_TITLE_HDR_7).

Fat loss. Yep, it might happen 🤷‍♀️ depends on all the factors above.

Weight gain. Guess what happens when the calorie counting ends? Your body tries to get back to its previous weight ASAP (https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/smart-people-don-t-diet/201501/5-lies-the-diet-industry).

Yes, there are also studies that show calorie restriction makes you smarter, live longer, able to jump tall buildings in a single bound and blah blah blah, all of which rely on self-reporting from subjects (which is laughably unreliable), small sample sizes (womp womp) and significant differences in the baseline stats of the participants (eg this gushing report https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/caloric-restriction-intelligence/ which buries these huge methodological faults in the ‘further questions’ section. FFS.)

Why the disparity? Why is slim evidence given SO much credence rather than correctly being interpreted as ‘hm, interesting. More research needed’?

Being fat is just taken as fact to be a problem. Any study showing otherwise is immediately analysed until someone can explain that the study was flawed (see the obesity paradox for this in action - what if we just discount any thin person with cancer? Job done. Now fatties look bad again. And there was much rejoicing.)

The reverse is true for any study on calorie restriction: any methodological flaws are buried in the footnotes, because it fits the narrative.

Whether being fat is healthy or not doesn’t matter. Your body, and changing it, take a long time and concerted effort for slow changes. You’re under no obligations to any of that and deserve to be allowed to live in peace with respect. Maybe you like being fat. Maybe you like your lifestyle. Maybe there are factors more important in your life than your weight. Maybe you accept you will die at the end regardless, so to an extent your just choosing between cancer, heart disease or Alzheimers (sorry for being flippant - that’s a big topic right there).

(Why is this ‘the narrative’? If I had to guess, I’d follow the money: public health is expensive, so any excuse to turn it into a problem of will power/individual deviancy is embraced by people who want their taxes lower rather than paying for healthcare for the masses.)

So yes. Calories-in/calories-out is twaddle is the take-away from my TED talk/rant 🤣

NOTE: I’m not a biologist, nutritionist, doctor or anything else. Always go to the study source, check the methodology, check the conclusions (which regularly get utterly misquoted when reported) and make up your own mind. Don’t take what I say as fact, because I might be completely backwards.

-- Mod K

#science #weight science #calories #exercise #o word #celepeace #mod k #caloric deficit #caloric restriction #Medical fatphobia #fatphobia #bad science #mod siarl

22 notes · View notes

irnwithdiego · 4 years

Note

omg pls rant abt Lila i also have.. a lot of issues with her and how ppl have reacted to her character

okay well first and foremost: i Love ritu. i absolutely adore that woman and im so happy that she's finally getting the attention she deserves, i support her and david dating too - so my opinions are genuinely not based on anything to do with that. just bc ive been accused of that by people who didnt realize ive been rooting for them since last summer lol.

anyway.

my biggest issue with lila is the fact that she was introduced as a chameleon. as brilliant or clinically insane as the situation requires. unpredictable. to me that sounded so incredibly interesting, because right from the bat i knew she was gonna turn out as the bad guy, or at least one of them and i was HOPING she would. i was really hoping she would be going batshit crazy on them, doing her thing as the evil person, then when s2 came along she got revealed to be the handler's daughter which to me made it even more exciting? because thats potential to get REAL crazy.

in the end, what we got was half-assed and incoherent and neither here nor there. we didnt get a chameleon, we got a mirror. lol. i expected her to be able to adjust to situations and people perfectly, charming them maybe, yknow. chameleon stuff. (would've loved it if she for example looked different to everyone and nobody actually knows what she looks like, alas. that would've been too creative i suppose)

and yeah her humor was "twisted" in a way, and she was charming... in a way. not to me, not to five, and i think the fact diego fell for her is really just him latching onto another problem/person/situation he needs to fix. the guy with the biggest trust issues on the show, openly telling her he prefers to know what people are even lying about, trying to cut her off multiple times the entire season, getting kidnapped and drugged by her to be shown off and introduced as "boyfriend" (??), turns out to be in love with her. okay. makes little to no sense, but i suppose you could partially blame it on her ability to be unpredictable and a chameleon (i still dont even know what they meant by that, where is the logic in calling her that-)

her undressing diego down to his underwear was creepy as hell to me, she knew exactly he’s only been stabbed and there was nothing else. she patches him up and climbs in bed with him as if they’ve known each other for ages. diego seems a bit "eh" at first, then just decides to fuck her. alright. a) diego, the guy with the biggest trust issues- b) i could see it as a letting off some steam thing tbh, just destressing or whatever. but he still had the stab wound that he allegedly almost bled out/died from so..... lmao. makes sense. in the end it wasnt just a quickie, it was ~love~ and that just doesnt sit right with me.

she lies to him from the get go, she manipulates his every move, she's invasive as all hell, she cant take a no in most situations, but sure. its love. sounds healthy.

the whole clusterfuck about their weird asylum relationship got completely drowned out by her "trying not to fall for diego", which essentially just made her character seem to be all over the place. she seems unfinished, like they disnt really know what to do with her, started off strong and then went off track and couldnt get back on. it seems like they changed a lot of things last minute and i cant make sense of her actions, especially not the way they wanted me to. its clear they were trying to keep up this guessing game about whether she would turn good for diego and his siblings or betray him. it was executed so poorly though, it just feels incredibly incoherent. she contradicts herself more often than not, and fine, lets say they wanted her to look confused about her situation and everything - it was still executed so poorly idk how else to put it. she was neither crazy enough for me to believe the character sheet we got beforehand, nor was she innocent enough for me to believe she really wanted to join them.

she literally tries to KILL all of diego's siblings and him in the end. she only seems to be considering joining them very last minute, like minutes before diego's little speech she was about to erase the entire hargreeves family. and she looked like she was having fun doing it too lmao. just doesnt sit right with me at all. diego proclaiming he loves her after all THAT doesnt sit right with me at all. like what, he tries to get away from her pretty much all season but decides she's worth it only after she tries to kill his family? diego??? im- come on.

i appreciate the thought of a redemption arc, but she wasnt nearly evil enough for me to even believe her original intentions, so i dont really know what her redemption would even look like.

and last but not least - the chameleon vs mirror thing. :) bro. that annoyed me so much. she essentially just goes and god-modes the entire season within 10 minutes, to say it with the words of a friend. like what was the point of that? the logic? how did they even know she could do that, if they allegedly dont know where the other kids with powers are? who did she train her powers on? plus, this is the oldest trope in the history of sci-fi/fantasy stories. someone turns out to be able to copy/mirror back the great powers of somebody else and overthrows everything. yawn.

what makes the others special if she can do whatever they do. maybe its just me being nit-picky at this point but i really dont want it. its so boring.

i had such high hopes for lila, i seriously was so excited to see her and it Still feels like such a let down just thinking of how s2 turned out. dont even get me started on all of them NEEDING a love interest apparently. because you cant be happy without one. thanks, but no thanks.

"s2 is gonna focus on the siblings' relationships!!" my ass. lila and diego's ~bond~ was as unnecessary and illogical as klaus' powers suddenly tenfolding and his paranoia of the spirits just lowkey vanishing with no real explanation other than "he's sober now ❤"

so yeah, all in all lila just seems the least fleshed out, randomnly thrown together and a Bit forced on the romantic part. i would've preferred her just being the big bad and going mental in the end. that would've been an interesting character choice for her.

from the bottom of my heart: why not.

sorry if this is too long, i couldnt help digressing here and there.

#also sissy and vanya having to cheat on her abusive husband in order to be together #why cant we have lgbt rep without issues #just give me one unproblematic rxship i Dare you at this point #tua negativity #thanks for the prompt tho #it felt really good to just get it off my chest in one bit tbh

8 notes · View notes

kendrixtermina · 5 years

Note

You seem like pretty knowable about Edelgard lore and motivation, so I've been meaning to ask. What exactly was the catalyst that made Edelgard hate the Church of Seiros so much? I know they've done a ton of shitty stuff in general, but what made Edelgard dislike them personally? I looked on the wiki and it either wasn't on there yet or I just didn't understand it. (I want to be able to eventually explain it to my sister who so far thinks Edelgard is evil, she hasn't finished the AM route yet).

IDK if this is something one can be “knowledgeable” about I just played the same game everyone else did, I’m no authority I just like analyzing fictional works for fun.

And whoever added that recent lengthy edit to the wiki article… let’s just say their opinions are discernible. But they might say the same about me.

Good vs Sympathetic

First there are some interesting premises hidden in this question - why would a personal motivation be more convincing that a net negative impact on the world at large? It’s the latter a much better reason?

Like there’s a big difference between saying “they had legit reasons for their feelings/actions” (you could say this even about rhea) and saying that someone’s a force for good. Being understandable and consistent isn’t goodness; IT’s just good writing, and “they can’t help it, of course they acted like this, look at what happened to them” is more an argument for someone being sympathetic/understandable than good. Murder or manslaughter? How much can we blame them for their bad deeds.

You might have very good personal reasons to hate someone or something, and pursuing that hate at the expense of others could still be a very selfish thing. There are your feelings, and then there’s how you act on them. There are many ways to act on the same feeling.

Conversely, it is possible to be repulsed by evil or mismanagement just because of its own wrongness/stupidity. If you read about how some evil deed happened to total strangers in a foreign country, you would still be angry and you might even vote, sign petitions or attent protests so it doesn’t keep happening.

If the Church of Seiros is doing objectively bad stuff, is that not enough to oppose it? Not only does Seiros/Rhea rule everything from the shadows, she’s accountable to no one, and she’s doing a bad job at it. TWSITD are her enemies too but they’re running rampant under her nose and in the recent past, deposed the Emperor and assasinated the king of faerghus to install their own agents.

Rhea may not have intended to let xenophobia, inequality, corruption, obsession with crests and instability to fester but that’s still what happened - and people can’t file complaints because she’s ruling in secret and anyone who complaints in branded a heretic. Almost everyone in the cast has been affected by those issues - the “peace” at the start of the story is illusory. Also, this whole shadow war between Seiros and Agartha is being carried out on the backs of the ordinary people who have no say in anything. At least if you know who the king/lord is you know who to rebel against if there’s no bread.

It’s no good. And as the heir to the largest territory, Edelgard is one of the few people who have a chance to stop it. It’s not easy for her either, given that the empire is thoroughly infiltrated by TWSID agents who would never have let her butt touch the throne if she didn’t play ball, or at least not without a bloody fight that might well end with the empire in splinter factions, aafter all, her father had already been reduced to a puppet ruler (see what happens to Dimitri when he returns to faerghus - Arundel is said to mantain his own personal army)

And since it was one of her ancestors who sold out Fodlan to seiros for power, she might feel that it’s her responsibility to put it right.

The real power isn’t with the people or even the nobles and the rulers of the three factions - it’s with Rhea and TWSITD. They keep burning up people without end for their own causes that have nothing to do with the people themselves, they both see humans as “beasts”… Shouldn’t that be stopped?

To stop evil is a much better motivation than petty personal grudges.

Edelgard’s thinking

The first thing to understand with Edelgard is that she’s a big picture thinker through and through. For better or for worse she looks at and decides everything based on how it will look in a history book a few centuries down the line. (For prime examples of evidence look at the Dorothea support or some of her lines after fighting Dimitri)

This isn’t to say that she doesn’t have bias or personal influences like everyone else, but she values and strives for objectivity. That means questioning herself alot (something you wouldn’t see that much on routes other than her own as she keeps the tough leader face on in public), it means putting what yields the best results over what she wants or likes, and it means looking at the greater whole.

She doesn’t just want to get revenge on the specific people who wronged her; She wants to ensue that it never happens to anyone else. She wants to undo the whole situation that allowed for it to happen - even if that means postponing her own revenge and working with those she hates the most. This is very much her putting efficiency and the end result above her own feelings.

It may well have been Thales and his henchmen who cut her open, but they couldn’t have done it without the cooperation of the corrupt imperial nobles. (likewise, they worked with xenophobic kingdom nobles who didn’t like Dimitri’s dad making peace with the foreigners to orchestrate the Duscur nonsense)

Why were they in power? How were they convinced to allow for such a thing and give Thales the ressources he wanted/needed? Because of the social system that Seiros set up so that crests are equated with power.

There will always be assholes and evil people, but how much damage they cause depends on wether the system they operate in lets them get away with it.

Also, even when you look just at TWSITD’s involvement, Edelgard’s siblings were butchered to make her a mighty tool for the shadow conflict. Just as Rhea in turn did her own experiments to revive sothis and “regain all that she lost”

So even on the most direct level, what happened was a result of the shadow conflict.

And it is instrumental to keep in mind that Edelgard wants to remove both shadow factions.

Her beef’s strictly with them - she knew that the Kingdom and Alliance would probably fight her if she went against the church and was fully prepared to pay that price, but that’s a side effect of going where the enemy is - she handed out letters and pamphlets informing ppl of the church’s evils and asking them to choose sides.

TWSITD have fearsome power and have infiltrated the empire, but they’re few. The Church got its claws in most local governments. Why not throw the power of the former at the latter, to take down the stronger enemy, and then take out the Agarthans when your power’s consolidated? It’s a decision not about whom to fight, but about whom to fight first.

Also because of her big-picture thinking she looks at the absolute numbers. In her own words, she’s going for the path of least casualties.

PPl tend to judge harm caused by action stronger than harm caused by inaction but actually the harm is the same. Acting to remove the two shadow factions will have a cost (the war) but not acting also has a cost - that the dysfuction goes on and on forever.

She doesn’t particularly want power if it were up to her she’d have chosen a normal ordinary life and she says so on many occasions. But she can stop it, stop the endless sacrifice and dysfunction, so she can’t just let it continue and do nothing.

Of course with that sorta logic you always have to consider how each action impacts the end result so you don’t destroy all you want to protect because you tell yourself that it will pay off later, after all ‘the many’ are just an abstraction for a lot of individuals. But Edelgard’s not really losing sight of that, she keeps looking to minimize the casualties where she can, she offers people a chance to surrender, you get some lecture questions where she’s genuinely considering what do with rhea if she DOES surrender.

It’s worth noting that on her route, the war ends the quickest and only the Kingdom lands get significantly wrecked (and the Kingdom always gets wrecked even if it gets rebuild afterwards, it was already in a lot of chaos before the war even started). You have to fight the peeps you don’t recruit but that’s no different in the other routes. Claude manages to seize control of the Church without going through the knights so he manages to pull off an at least equivalent end result (both shadow factions removed, society permanently changed) while offing fewer of the named characters, and lets not fail to give him credit for that, but he might not have, if Edelgard hadn’t conveniently removed Rhea and just generally blazed a convenient trail for him to, in his own words, “finish the job for her”. Taking in the church with Rhea still in place didn’t work out too well for poor Dimitri, I seem to recall that she used the poor man as a meatshield and set his capital on fire - which is why Claude wisely didn’t touch that hot potato in any route where he doesn’t have Byleth as a bargaining chip.

Of course that said, going too hard on the comparison would seem to miss the point. While Claude’s and Edelgard’s routes are about their respective grand visions for the future and their badassery as great inspiring leaders, the Church and Kingdom routes are more about people coming together to weather difficult circumstances. Dimitri isn’t really cut out to be a good ruler; but the beauty of his story is how he eventually does his best to become one anyways through the aid of his loyal friends. It’s an underdog story.

If your sister prefers that sort of story (or just Dimitri himself, as a more emotional, relatable type of hero and a well-crafted, compelling and memorable character) that’s just her personal taste/ good right.

Edelgard’s personal biases

She surely has a bit of “broken pedestal syndrome” going on, the very human tendency to absolutely reject things you once idealized once they’re proven to be flawed, to assume that if you were lied to often enough, then everything must be a lie… she sure reads what she learns of Seiros’ past actions in a bad light and assumed that Seteth & the others are guiltier/ more complicit than they actually are.

The problem with Rhea is that she’s selfish, not that she’s a dragon. But if she were the only example you know for what a dragon is like? You might not be too fond of dragons. It’s not like she protests if Byleth spares Flayn and Seteth.

She doesn’t really know Rhea’s motivation so she has to judge her by her actions and the results of those, and her actions, for all that they come from fear and loneliness, are indistinguishable from power lust by the time that Rhea’s subjugated 30 generations of humans for something their remote ancestors did 1000 years ago. Would she ever have let them go?

So it doesn’t matter that she only got the partial story on the relics, it’s not the relics she took issue with, but the current state of the world. also Rhea is the one who erased the true records. So the 10 elites totally had it comming, fine - but Rhea’s the one who disseminated the myth that they were heroes in the first place.

Claude only gets the truth by squeezing it out of Rhea and even then only at the very end, ppl who say that Edelgard “acted on false information” act like Claude just stumbled across the truth with minimal effort. That’s actually more unfair to Claude than to Edelgard if you ask me.... he’s a man who has gathering info as his top priority 24/7

Edelgard’s certainly more steeped in the perspective of her home country where the church is awarded significance and if it turns out to not be good then it’s utterly vile. Claude has the sort of more detached perspective that he has because he happened to come from another country. Edelgard’s aiming for detachment but that’s only possible to a certain extent when something ruined the lives of nearly everyone you know

At the same time whatever her personal sentiments may be (and im not gonna deny that she does hate the Seiros religion), as far as her actions and decisions go, the engage conversation she has when you have her fight Rhea at the battle:

Rhea:

No matter your reasons, I cannot permit you to go on living any longer!

Edelgard:

The feeling is mutual. I must put a stop to your reign of tyranny!

Rhea:

You must know what a fool you are. The greatest of sins is to make an enemy of the goddess herself!

Edelgard:

I have only made an enemy of the church, not of the faith.

She says in several supports that she personally considers relying on the goddess to be an overly dependent attitude that doesn’t do people good, but that’s just her opinion, she’s not stopping anyone from praying in the privacy of their homes cause thats none of her business and she’s not a tyrant (see what happens if you recruit Marianne or Mercedes, her support with Manuela or the Marianne/Ferdinand support on the CF route, which reveals that he’s actually a believer.)

She just wants the Church, and Rhea specifically, out of politics… exactly what we have in any modern-day country that isn’t Saudi Arabia or the Vatican.

Megalomania seems the most likely or politically expedient thing to claim but in the end her beef’s not with Rhea’s reasons but the results of her actions which is stagnation, mismanagement and repression.

Your Actual Question/ Personal Reasons and Catalysts

Honestly? If we’re talking on a strictly emotional/personal level? (As much as that’s an incomplete picture with such a reason-driven character)

She probably bawled for the goddess to save her and her family down in the dungeons, again and again, and no one answered.

She spent much of her early life just being dragged around, first being kidnapped by Arundel and held captive in the kingdom, then she was thrown in a filthy dungeon where she endured relentless pain and could do nothing but watch as her siblings died one by one.

She was utterly helpless, a passive plaything of destiny - and then she decided she was done being passive and letting the universe kick her around. She was going to be proactive and do all she could to be in control of her own fate.

See also the inspiring speeches that she gives to Petra and Lysithea at various points - “Don’t surrender yourself to your fate!”

Blind reliance on the faith, to her, represents that very surrender, so she rejects it.

This fear and rejection of being helpless and having zero control is also one of the reasons why she consistently chooses death on her own terms over life on someone elses’.

That would still not be a valid justification if she wanted to, like, stop everyone from praying, but that’s not what she’s doing.

#fire emblem: three houses #fire emblem three houses #edelgard von hresvelg

16 notes · View notes

sol1056 · 5 years

Text

git along little nonnies

Got a whole bunch of you on related themes, so I’m just gonna do this all at once: a bunch of questions about DW, spinoffs, merchandise, business, management, support (and protest) and whatnot. In no particular order.

Ok there are petitions and peaceful boycotts directed at DW but problem is they aren’t addressing the EPs and things they, not DW, did so how are we to sign them, how to handle this when this could at best confuse the situation and not give any results and at worst, make matters even worse about what we want regarding DW addressing things?

Here’s what companies care about: money. Everything else is gravy.

If you want a corporation to pay attention to your complaints, then you need to figure out their sources of income, and find a way to threaten that. If the social reprobation is high enough, damage to the brand can translate into lost sales, but the tempest required to make that happen must be much, much larger than anything I’ve seen the fandom manage.

I’ve been saying this all along: voices are far more powerful than signatures. If twenty thousand people wrote or called in, and said what they liked vs what upset them, that would have a far greater impact. Certainly a lot more than a list of names with no emotion beyond a request that may not even be something DW can, or would, fulfill.

And don’t even get me started on mailing stuff in. Cute, but hardly actionable.

Do you know what kind of contracts DW sign, as in, are they obligated to air all seasons, can they choose not to air them, do the companies they work with (netflix, wep) have a say or more say than them? Who gets the last word? Is airing all seasons squarely on DW or more?

As I’m not a corporate lawyer employed by any of the signatories, I can’t tell you what the contract stipulated. What I can tell you is that a contract of the magnitude of the DW-WEP-Netflix agreement probably had a dissertation worth of riders covering the different types of possible defaults or breaches, and the penalties for each. Additionally, the contract also likely covered what constituted ‘satisfactory delivery’ of the product.

To take it down to a really simple level: you place an order at a restaurant. You expect to get it, eat it, and pay for it. You don’t expect to be told, “hey, we burnt your steak and we’re out of butter for your sweet potatoes, so have some green beans instead,” and then be told you still owe the full amount, anyway.

Netflix wouldn’t settle for ordering (and paying for) something never delivered, anymore than you would. Sure, any corporation worth their over-inflated stock options would try --- but that’s the point of contracts, to make sure they can’t.

Netflix paid, DW delivers, end of story.

...do you think ppl in charge didn't think EPs would tell they made changes and also thought they'd manage to bury it? And then they got in trouble and DW is going thru changes for that reason? -waves at DW goings on and silence.

I got lost in all the pronouns, there. Who’s the first ‘they,’ the EPs or DW execs? Is the second ‘they’ referring to the same as the first? So... I’m not really sure what you’re positing, but if the ‘DW is going through changes’ is implying DW’s got a shakeup and/or is promoting its head-of-TV to president and that’s somehow connected to two newbie EPs screwing up?

I’d say the chances are so infinitesimal as to be nearly in the negative. (I should also note, the press release listed successful shows Cohn oversaw, yet oddly did not include VLD.) DW is not a three-person start up; it has stakeholders and a board and a C-suite to satisfy. Cohn got that promotion ‘cause she’s got a track record going back thirty years, most recently growing DW’s TV division from 8 to 800 in five years.

Most corporations tend to announce their new CEO or President like someone woke up that morning and went, hey, I’ve got a great idea. Truth is, it’s usually in the works for at least a year, sometimes several years, or more. The only thing that has me side-eyeing the announcement is the silence around who’ll fill Cohn’s previous position.

But that’s again less to do with a single series, and more to do with what it says about DW as a whole, business-wise.

What meaningful changes could the new president Margie Cohn make that would be different than the last one? Also I'm sorry if your getting a bunch of Voltron/DW questions lately, you just seem to be the most knowledgeable person on this platform.

I’d be willing to bet I’m far from the most knowledgeable person; I’m just someone not bound by an NDA, and curious enough to do a bit of digging and jaded enough to talk about (most) of what I find.

A president can have immense impact on a company’s direction; that’s kinda why they exist, to set that high-level strategy. That said, Cohn will be bound by all contracts signed by her predecessor. The TV side (barring someone filling the shoes she left) will probably continue as it was. The theatrical side (which she’s taking over) will be where we’ll probably see any major changes.

And even those aren’t likely to be on films currently in production. Hell, given theatrical animation can take up to five years, I’m not sure that’d show much change, either. Look instead to changes in investors, new deals, and new properties.

What do you think DW will do about a sequel if there’s really no bible? Theres tons of plot holes & abandoned storylines. VLD will never feel satisfying, and fans already argued with different interpretations based on conflicting content, without a nice satisfying explanation...

I know this is the first of a three-part ask, but I’m skipping the rest because the only answer possible is to your very first question: the bible doesn’t matter.

Any new series --- even a continuation --- will construct its own bible. Same as we’d do in fandom: they’ll patch together what they can, fill in blanks as they need, and gloss the rest, or retcon it outright. Even if there were a bible, diligently followed, that doesn’t mean the next series is automatically beholden to it. Some franchises would care (ie Star Wars) while others might let a reboot mess with the details (ie Star Trek).

For every continuation, there’s gradations in between, since otherwise what’s the interest for creative minds, if you’re obligated to follow someone else’s script exactly? So, no. The absence of a story bible doesn’t preclude the next iteration making its own, as it needs, to whatever extent it requires.

I was wandering around the hot topic online store, and i noticed a shirt that raised a few flags and questions. it's the 'Voltron Location' shirt. it has all the paladins in different places in a star globe chart thing? with what might possibly be planet designations. plus Lance is the only one not inside his blue colored bubble. Keith is in Red and Shiro in Black again. it's interesting at least.

Nearly all the shirts use the same base images, just changed up. It feels a little like someone handed a designer a half-dozen images with a request for forty-something designs --- and now HT is just throwing them all at the wall to see what sticks (or sells).

HT’s stuff has been pretty consistent, from what I’ve heard: Shiro is Black, Keith is Red, etc. Considering the t-shirts seem to be selling out regularly (along with various other sidelines), I’d say someone is savvy as to the fact that the segment of fandom spending the most money is also the segment that prefers the S1/S2 lineup.

If that’s what customers want, it’s smart business for DW to provide.

(Yes, that applies on more than one level.)

There are VLD comic books being released by LionForge Comics, are those considered canon? Do LM and JDS have any involvement? They take place before Season 7and8 but I don't wanna support the original EPs.

Every fandom has its own stand on what counts as canon. Sometimes (especially with adaptations) you’ll find fandoms being explicit as to whether they’re book or movie (ie HP and LotR). I expect the same will eventually shake out in VLD’s fandom, too.

From everything I’ve heard, Hedrick and Iverson were handed the comics and ran with it. I suppose that would argue for seeing the comics as canon, being they were written by people also writing the main series... but from what I can tell, it’s one-way. The show affected the comics, but nothing in the comics ever affected the series.

That said, your purchases have nothing to do with the original EPs. All you’re doing is telling DW you like the VLD-iteration of Voltron.

What are your thoughts on the final vld poster? I feel like it’s missing the end. Allura is randomly staring back into nothing.

It’s a clever idea to do a poster for each season, but it’s not something I’ve ever paid any attention to, really. If it were drawn by the head writer? That might mean the artist had more insight than, say, a storyboarder or animator. But even then... cool picture, still not-canon. I’m only interested in canon.

Do you think that Voltron was rushed purposely by the EP's. [...] Wouldn't this effect the quality of, well, everything? I feel as if they got frustrated with the show at that point and just wanted out.

Dude. There are times I sit here and just stare into space, bewildered yet again not just at the thought of 39 episodes released in one year --- but doing that with 26 as a last-minute cut-and-paste rearrangement. All I can tell you is that what I’ve seen from animation people and aficionados (and friends) is that three full seasons in one calendar year is just bonkers.

If DW hadn’t wanted the schedule that packed, the EPs aren’t the ones getting the say. That’s a DW-Netflix thing. I really wonder whether DW used VLD as a guinea pig. TH went a year between S1 and S2, and the numbers slumped badly. Perhaps DW wanted to know if more episodes, more often, would keep fan interest high? DW has experienced execs, but they’re all from broadcast; how you arrange and time things in the brave new world of binge-watching is a completely different beast.

So, it’s possible it was less of a rush job to get the show out, and more from a desire to see what'd happen to release so much, so close together.

I still think it’s a bonkers schedule, though.

"Relaunch the whole property" sounds like they won't continue expanding the whole vld universe and they'll make a new itineration. Though if they do a spin-off it'd likely be on the vld universe surrounding the new "Legendary Defenders" from the epilogue. And "especially given the response" do you think after the negative response from s8, wouldn't be better for WEP to not keep working with Dreamworks? Or maybe they need to clean their brand from vld fiasco? What can you say about all of this?

I can say you might try re-reading, because boy is that a radical interpretation of the text. Remember, Jeremy was speaking before S8, and all indication is that he was caught off-guard as much as the fans. Re-read in light of Jeremy (at the time) appearing to expect S8 to be a crowd-pleaser.

...I'm becoming more confident in my belief that DW has something planned for Voltron. I mean they are still heavily promoting the show, LionForge is still publishing Voltron comics, and merchandise is still being made. These don't seem like the actions of a company trying to get people to forget a show.

You’re not wrong. Up to the last few days of 2018, DW gave every indication they wanted S8 quietly buried. Nothing they’ve done since has fit that pattern --- including the anomaly of failing to announce their 2019 series. Something is going on, that’s for certain.

Did DW really just throw the VAs to the wolves [for] three days? and there's still no official stance? One panel was enough. They had [the VAs] take the heat for them? But thankfully fans felt sorry for them? Which could also have been the goal, shut the fans up [with] the VAs of the characters who got the worst treatment and who love their characters ... Yes DW this really makes me trust you /sarcasm/

I don’t think that was the original plan. Let’s pretend DW released its 2019 schedule via press release in the first few days of January, and among those was an announcement of a VLD sequel or spinoff, coming late 2019.

People wouldn’t be fussing over putting the VAs through three panels. They’d be complaining we didn’t get the biggest room for every panel. The majority of the fandom doesn’t trust the EPs, and is wary of DW --- really, the only ones who retain any goodwill, at this point, are the VAs. So who better than to assure a nervous fandom about the goodness of the second iteration than the VAs whose characters were most shafted by the first iteration?

What breaks this is that immediately after S8 dropped, Josh and Kimberly went silent on twitter. AJ slipped into passive-aggressive snarking; Jeremy fell off the radar and usually he’s pretty interactive with his fans. Bex pretty much wiped VLD from her stream, possibly including deleting older tweets. Neil tried to engage and made a hash of it, bless his heart.

Josh and Kimberly are consummate professionals who reliably promote the series after every season drop, but their radio silence continued for almost two weeks. This wasn’t the first season that came saddled with controversy; if there was a time to go quiet, it was after S7. Something else was going on.

I have strong suspicions backed by research, but if I’m right, I’d be stepping on a major legal landmine. In the interest of not getting blown up, I’ll only say that the VAs appearing for those three panels (and their low-key and mostly diplomatic hedging around VLD’s conclusion) was a good sign that all parties involved are willing to work things out.

[DW was] quick to handle the Season 7 backlash and have stayed mum on what is arguably a much worse reaction to the 8th and final season.

and

I believe the S8 of voltron we got was not the original ending we were supposed to get and highly edited. My question is why? What was the point of changing the original ending? [The] radio silence from DW and the cast is driving me nuts. I wish DW would make a statement.

DW is in an interesting place. Its TV side is barely five years old, but dominated by execs with long-time broadcast experience, predating vibrant interactivity afforded by platforms like twitter, tumblr, or instagram. DW’s background as a theatrical company also seems to incline it away from any ongoing engagement with the audience. It releases a movie and by the time that hits theaters, DW is onto the next thing.

It’s a strong contrast with production studios like Zagtoon (Miraculous), who penned an open letter to their fandom about production delays. Or little studios like Wonderstorm (The Dragon Prince) whose deft use of twitter and tumblr sets their brand apart. Or Federator (Castlevania), with their witty marketing campaigns and willingness to engage with fans. Even Disney was willing to be open about its errors with Tiana, and to make clear how it was striving to do better --- so there’s no excuse that only small studios do such outreach.

My guess is that DW's core leadership is from the school of business in which admitting a mistake is tantamount to ritual suicide. Don’t blink first, or maybe the rule is never let them see you sweat, but whatever it is, DW is turning into a textbook case of how silence can damage a brand.

Companies have multiple avenues to reach customers directly, now. Our modern technologies are a two-way street, and good companies leverage that to create not passive fandoms but active communities. It takes work, careful planning, and some level of transparency --- something old-school execs find highly uncomfortable, to be honest --- but in this day and age, those are crucial building-blocks to achieving any kind of audience loyalty.

DW isn’t going to render itself obsolete (at least not overnight), but it's on a track to end up as the studio whose work audiences only watch when there’s nothing better being offered. Unfortunately for DW, there’s a hell of a lot of other studios out there, and they're all offering something better.

#vld #voltron #television production #marketing #business #sol thinks about stuff

92 notes · View notes

rosirae-a · 6 years

Text

first, context. ok so i already wrote abt it in the replies of this post but i figured this would be easier for people to reblog in this format & i can maybe write a bit more abt it.

the reason why cisswaps, rule 64/63 or whatever the rule is, also known as GENDERBENDS are transphobic are the usual reasons: invalidating trans ppl, etc. etc. etc. i won’t repeat that, because if you weren’t listening then chances are you won’t now.

though even KNOWING JUST THAT—that it invalidates trans ppl—y’all cis ppl won’t stop. like c’mon that’s all you should have 2 kno tbh. there’s already sumthin wrong w that.

still, though, hopefully i can clear things up a lil bit, & PLEASE TALK TO ME if u have more questions instead of vaguing at me or w/e. i’m so sick of seeing genderbends tbh. final note: i’m not tryna attack you, so don’t use that as an excuse to not listen.

so sum1 brought up the following idea (which i’m glad they did, since y’all need to tell us what’s confusing u so we can explain it. maybe logic will work ? who would’ve thought — sorry i’m salty):

Its funny how many people will say “I won’t interact with cisswaps they’re transphobic whats in their pants shouldn’t matter!” yet a lot of the time when they make muses trans they’ll usually swap their birth sex, usually to take a canon male muse and making them female-at-birth but now a transman instead of making them a transwoman or something, or just leaving them as their canon sex in the first place. Because what’s in their pants doesn’t matter, right. Has no one else caught this hypocrisy?

frankly, i can see where you might be a lil confused, if u’re viewing it that way/ so lemme clear a couple things up. i think a lot of the problem is people not seeing how writing characters as trans isn’t cisswapping/genderbending/w/e.

NOTE: the following is mostly applicable to mtf & ftm, though people who are other genders may also identify as trans, like me, whomst identifies as masc nb. this is not to ignore them; i would like to recognize them but focus on what the community generally identifies as a trans person when they’re writing noncis characters, since typically they’ll just call those ‘nonbinary,’ which they are as well. (it’s an individual choice to be called whichever, or both.)

first of all, whether the interpretation of the muse is cis or trans, the idea is that they end up with their canon gender.

this means that even if you have a muse that’s ftm (born female, identifying as male,) but they’re canonly identifying as feminine, that’s bad. that’s transphobic. we’re not excusing that, that’s some nasties who think they can get away with it cause their muse is trans ‘uwu u can’t hurt us !!!’ nope. still bad.

EDIT: I WROTE mtf INSTEAD OF ftm IN THE ORIGINAL POSTING OF THIS. mtf WOULD’VE BEEN FINE.

why is it bad? because that is basically cisswapping, but trying to cover it by saying that “no it’s just trans hcs.” that’s just as bad, so don’t get that idea in your heads that that’s okay, either.

if you say that a cis masc person is the “same thing” as someone who is trans mtf, by following the idea above of it being okay (since it’s “not really transphobic,” as some people claim, which the op of the confession noticed & rightfully identified as wrong) that’s nasty because it’s insinuating that even if someone is trans, it’s their sex that matters. cisswaps work similarly.

why are either of those bad? first of all, because trans people say so. but that’s not enough for you guys, clearly, so let me try to explain it another way:

it isn’t a cisswap when someone is trans mtf when their canon gender is female. that entire thought—that someone is cisswapped if their gender doesn’t match their sex—is inherently transphobic, because it’s saying that their sex is more important than their gender; that they aren’t “truly female.”

it’s okay that you may have thought that way. recognize it for what it is—a transphobic thought—and move on. you may think transphobic thoughts, but you can recognize them for what they are & move past them. it’s a significant step.

also, please note that y’all, when focusing on sex vs gender, ignore the fuck out of intersex people, whether y’all are cis or w/e. that’s a whole nother can of worms, though, so i’ll move on.

what we mean by “what’s in their pants doesn’t matter” isn’t that sex doesn’t matter—it does, to some extent. it changes their experiences if they are trans (having to bind, general dysphoria, etc.), & i can see that some of y’all wanna write about that.

but recognize that if you’re just trying to make them the “opposite sex” (again, real quick, reminder that intersex ppl exist,) to change that, you’re also harming millions of people. so maybe lay off on that. instead, you can have them deal with that but also be the same canon gender. that’s chill.

trans ftm ppl have to deal with sexist actions on the daily, just like cis fem ppl, or generally fem presenting people do. so y’all can have ur little ‘what if’s without being transphobic. y’all can write abt how sexist things are, or the different expectations that both men & women face (talking about them as society views them, as again intersex people) without being transphobic.

if you want to write that sort of stuff, just change their sex, not their gender. some mtf people will face sexism, though, to be clear, notably if they look female/passable for “naturally” female. (again, gross, since that implies being trans isn’t natural/it’s a choice beyond whether to actually transition.) however, it is because of that concept that you don’t have to cisswap to write your ‘uwu how’d it be different’ stuff.

they’re the same person, no matter what sex. their personality, won’t change, though maybe their views on how they experience the world — that you can easily also address by just writing a trans character. it’s that simple.

however, you should not write about transitioning & other trans experiences if you yourself are not trans. again, another can of worms, though. just take my word for it—and the hundreds of other trans ppl in our community that have to see themselves being invalidated & misrepresented every day.

when you have a genderbend, you’re saying that what’s in their pants does matter, past their daily experience (that tbh is often sexist bc often they’ll be written as shyer if they’re a female or w/e but another can of worms)

before you tell me you’re not saying that, rmmr that you’re insinuating that the character can’t be the same gender even if they’re another sex by saying that it’s cisswapping.

to finish this already too-long post:

your muse can be whatever sex you like, just keep the gender the same. (loosely, ofc, as they can be interpreted as being a diff gender canonly, such as demiboy or w/e)

#ok 2 rb /#actually pls rb if u can #( * ∘ ∙ ——ᴘssᴛ ɪ ɢᴏᴛ sᴏᴍᴇᴛʜɪɴɢ ₂ sᴀʏ. / psa )#long post /#transphobia /#discourse /#i haven't read this over #so i might edit tomorrow #but yeah #i think a lot of the problem #is ppl not seeing how cisswapping #& writing a muse as trans #is different #hopefully this helps !

33 notes · View notes

sonreiv · 7 years

Note

i absolutely despise when ppl paint katsuki as an abuser when horikoshi doesn't even say he's an abuser. Bullying and Abusing has some similar aspects but they are different at the end of it. Katsuki is. a. bully. Izuku recognizes that Katsuki is a jerk and what he did was wrong/bad (and he actually has stated that he hates katsuki, twice) but still sees his strong qualities that make him admire him

(This ask has been sitting in my drafts for the longest time and I thought with the upcoming episodes it was the perfect time to stop procrastinating and finally finish it. Sorry for the wait, nony! I mostly agree with you, but I want to further discuss some points so I hope you don’t mind I got a bit lenghty. You got me an excuse to ramble up some meta haha.)

A TL;DR beforehand: canon analysis supports that Katsuki should not be interpreted as an abuser, but an early bully at most. I also did a little analysis on the early middle school chapter and how it shows BNHA’s society/the peers Deku and Katsuki grew up around set up a bullying enticing enviroment, and how bad translations have us interpret their relationship as more aggravating than it really is - Deku NEVER said he hates Katsuki, for instance. Not once.

I agree that Katsuki is not to be interpreted as an abuser. He does not want to pursue Deku in order to hurt him; instead, he wants to push Deku away from himself. There’s a difference between “I want to possess you, to make you stay around me and hurt you emotionally and physically” - and “I don’t want anything to do with you, go away, don’t interact with me or else”. The first one is abuse. The second one is what Katsuki felt about Deku for most of his life (albeit very simplified). At the times when Katsuki did hurt him - threatening him in middle school, getting out of hand during the heroes vs villains team trial, punching him during the end of the term exam, etc - was because he felt threatened; so his response was to push him away with violence, with an attempt at “teaching” Deku to stay away from his lane.

This is not to defend Katsuki’s actions; this is only a reasoning, not an excuse. His violent behavior towards Deku is still inexcusable. I only want to make clear there’s a difference between “I want to go out of my way to hurt you” and “I will smack you if you push me”, even if his concept of being pushed is distorted to his own experience and it still does not make his violent actions okay. He fears and despises what Deku did at those times: talking to Katsuki as if Katsuki isn’t on the pedestal he grew up believing he was on. This is the core of Katsuki’s feelings. He does not want to abuse Deku. He wanted him to go away, and he WOULD physically/verbally assault him if that meant pushing Deku away from him. And the rest of his threats/aggressive banter is just really how he talks to everyone else.

Even in canon it’s explicitly stated Deku was the one who insisted on following him because of his admiration, and that was what Katsuki couldn’t stand; he wanted him to be away.

And that was way before. The game is changing, and the development of their relationship is one of the core points of the series. Katsuki recognized him as someone who is not allowed to lose, someone worthy of All Might’s trust, and just very slowly started talking to Deku like he does to everyone else.

I also believe that affirming Katsuki would be an abuser in a romantic relationship with Deku misses the point if the person is okay with it if it’s a friendship/platonic relationship, or if they ship Katsuki with other people. Someone who is abusive does not isolate their behavior to one single person, nor does abuse happen only in romantic relationships. Abusive friendships exist. If one thinks katsudeku is okay as long as it’s platonic, if they believe in their growth and healing enough to believe they can start and share a healthy friendship, then the same should be applied to a romantic relationship. Also if Katsuki were to be an abusive partner to Deku, he’d be the same to other partners. If he were to be emotionally manipulative, possessive, constantly putting him down and hurting him while also keeping him - he’d do it to any other partners. The thing is people who ship katsudeku usually don’t ship it hc'ing that Katsuki keeps his ill behavior towards Deku in the relationship - we cherish the character’s growth and development. The canon Katsuki, the Katsuki with the bad behavior in the older chapters, as stated above, didn’t even wish to keep Deku around as a peer, let alone to form some kind of deeper bond. The romantic katsudeku ship I personally want is the kind where Katsuki grows and changes (as it’s slowly happening in canon) enough past his insecurities towards Deku to be okay with approaching him like he does to other peers. No possessiveness, no emotional abuse, because I personally don’t see that coming from him.

Since we got to this point, something interesting and relevant that I don’t usually see being pointed out is that in the very beginning of the story, it wasn’t only Katsuki opposing to the idea Deku could enter UA while being quirkless. The entire class laughed at him, and the teacher didn’t bat an eye.

This is not to gloss over the fact Katsuki did show unexcusable behavior towards Deku, but I think the scene was set up that way to show it was not only Katsuki’s isolated behavior, but the system, BNHA’s society is shaped to mock and discourage individuals who believe they can become heroes or achieve certain things despite the conditions of their quirk(lesness). The way the society is shaped was Deku’s childhood bully. He was mocked by his peers as young as 4, while at the same time Katsuki was put in a pedestal because of his quirk - which led to his massive ego complex. We can’t analyse their personalities and relationship without taking in account the context they grew up in. Many people frame Katsuki as the single-handed culprit for Deku’s bullying background without taking this whole context into account, while also casting Deku the role of a submissive, persecuted victim when he deliberately chose to stick around Katsuki, and just generally shows to be a character with a lot more agency than that.

And what’s interesting in this scene is that Katsuki didn’t laugh along with everyone else when Deku says he wants to apply and he might have a chance. Because Katsuki takes that seriously. He takes that as a personal offence. The whole point of Katsuki’s ill feelings towards Deku were always that he

feels as Deku is mocking his efforts by believing that himself, a quirkless boy who didn’t do any kind of physical preparation for a heroics course - has chances of becoming a hero as much as Katsuki, who is a born genius AND presumably prepared himself to apply to UA, with training and studying, going as far as scolding his colleague for smoking because he wanted a clean student record.

he feels threatened by Deku because ever since they were kids, as much as Deku admired him, he also saw Katsuki as someone who was able to get hurt and could have a hand offered to like anyone else; Deku saw him as superior in terms of skill, but an equal as a human being, while all the other kids did not. And that made Katsuki not stand him. Because he’s scared of being anything less than the very best, he’s scared of being someone who can be offered help - in his eyes, someone who can be pitied and looked down onto.

And that’s why he reacts with hostility. He wants to intimidate Deku out of even trying to apply to UA. It’s even stated by Katsuki’s colleagues he got out of hand this time, implying it’s not normal behavior for Katsuki (and I’ve seen people saying it was confirmed by Horikoshi himself, though I don’t have sources so don’t quote me on that). Again, he will only seriously smack Deku down if he feels threatened. He does not go out of his way to put him down on a daily basis because he doesn’t want to interact with Deku to begin with.

Also, Deku actually never stated he hates Katsuki. Not once. What he actually says is closer to “he may be a jerk, but-”, which is how the official english translation translated it, as seen above (stole the picture from this post by @kiraelric because it’s where I found it faster :P). Here’s a post explaining it, and I quote @sugarmagic who gently broke down the first panel - which FA translated as “I hate his guts” - for me:

Basically the word 嫌う, the verb form is “to hate” but 嫌な奴 is “unlikable/disagreeable guy.” So what I’m pretty sure happened is that they didn’t realize な was modifying the word to be an adjective. It’s not describing Deku’s feelings, it’s describing Kacchan’s character. The reading of the kanji is written as “iyana yatsu,” versus “Kacchan ga kurai” which really would be “I hate Kacchan”. Then again, even if they read it that way, the furigana explicitly shows the reading, so I don’t even know what they were thinking.

The translation group Fallen Angels takes way too much freedom and completely distorts some lines, and the dislike of Bakugou/his relationship with Deku in the western fandom was heavily influenced by interpreting it via FA’s aggravated translations. I had people who know japanese tell me how gratuitously innacurate the translations are - as an example, FA translates Deku thinking Katsuki is difficult to deal with as Deku thinking Katsuki causes him to be aware of his own flaws (source). The translations paint Bakugou’s character and his relationships, specially with Deku, unnecessarily harsher than they really are. In fact, something the localisation usually fails to translate is how Bakugou’s “die!” and similar threats are not be taken as seriously in japanese as one would in english - but rather pretty immature and petty (source).

So! If you read up to this point and you’re interested in reading other meta on Katsuki and Deku’s characters and relationship, you should check @explodo-smash’s meta tag. They’re a pretty smart team and can explain/analyse things better than me - in fact their meta helped me a lot understand better their dynamics post my bloody Fallen Angel readings. That’s all for today, and thank you for taking the time to read.

#katsudeku #bakudeku #izukatsu #midoriya izuku #bakugou katsuki #bnha #boku no hero academia #bnha meta #sonrei answer #bnha answer #I hope this isn't too long for no cut #reblogs are appreciated and encouraged!#Anonymous

855 notes · View notes

popsidick · 6 years

Text

hc. actions speak louder than words

[ part 1 TBA BCS I FUCKING DELETED THIS ENTIRE PART SO IM GOING TO GO BACK AND REWRITE THIS ANOTHER DAY BUT BASICALLY ITS JUST HENRI AND HIS REPUTATION + HIS ATTITUDE TOWARDS DEATH AND LIVING + HOW HE PROTECTS HSI COMRADES DURING BATTLE VS HOW HES SEEN / EXPECTED TO ACT AND THAT WHOLE SHABANG ]

he p much straight up says im going to use my magic on you, leaves to prepare, and then comes back to do it???

and that’s the most important thing. he goes and prepares. henri takes pride in what he does, and what he does, he is very, very good at. by preparing beforehand, even for something relatively simple, he minimizes the risk of using dark magic and makes the process as safe as it can get, which admittedly with the nature of dark magic isn’t really a lot?? and most people in the shepherds, esp his victims, wouldn’t necessarily agree w/ that bcs of how dangerous it is, but that doesn’t take away from the fact that he is trying to be as safe as possible. when he’s on the battlefield, there is no time for that. no preperation, no precaution; it’s straight up combat magic, meant to kill, to agonize- its not at all a pretty sight, and i dont doubt that if it weren’t for the fact that henri is on their side and that the battlefield leaves little time to sit back and people watch, a lot of people would probably loose their lunch at the sight of his victims. so yeah- there’s a difference between how he hexes his allies and the magic he drops on their enemies. but honestly?? outside of his conversations with his children, which arguably irrelevant considering intsys and their habit of reusing supports- this is p much the only time where we see henry so uncomfortable?? he’s been called out multiple times, “seen” through his bullshit and facades, but he’s always just brushed it off or laughed, or turned the tables on them and saying its just their imagination and they’re just making a big deal out of it?? but here, he literally has nothing to say. he’s genuinely caught so offguard- and really, i dont doubt that no one else has seen this, because henri’s reputation?? and the bias towards him??? the infamous oli.vi.a support is p much the prime example of this. people see what they want to see/expect to see, and during battle v few people have the time or care to people watch when their attention span is limited to themselves, their immediate allies / partners, their enemies, and at times the overall position of the group?? and to be fair, henri’s discrete in explosiveness. he takes such glee in what he does, and he does it with such eagerness and with horrific results and its so obvious that he’s having fun that few people, even the ones he saves, think its anything but henri being henri??? and im sure more than once ppl have taken note and jsut sort of shuddered before forcing themselves back into the mindset of battle bcs damn they’re so glad he missed them?? and they werent caught in the blast? bcs who would think that henri of all people would be trying to keep them safe? and when henri’s in combat, despite being a mage unit, he goes all in. he’s not at all shy about getting up close, about potentially getting injured as he inflicts dozens and dozens of curses on his targets, leaving often with wounds that he doesnt even notice until much, much later. to literally anyone else they’d say he’s suicidal the way he throws himself at the enemy- and honestly, yeah. yeah he is. but its not just that that, its confidence in his ablities. henri doesn’t believe that they can kill him. he has full confidence that he will get to them before they even come close, and if he’s wrong?? well he’s always wanted to die anyway so thats no harm done, right? henri finds amusement in his reputation. its hilarious, that people are so afraid of him. it’s not like he’s that ignorant- he knows he makes people uncomfortable, and he can see the effect he has on them- but its so much fun to play the fool, and to see the disgust on their faces. its not jsut that though?? by doing what he does, by being so superficially honest, he’s keeping himself in denial and hiding from the rest of the world. he cares. he does care. but he doesn’t feel like he can show it. again, referring back to his support w/ libra, when confronted he straight up says maybe you confused some of my mindless slaughter for protection? ?? a defense libra shoots down immediately and to which henri has no reply.

basically what im getting at is that though henri is very vocal in his wish to die and adament on his “creepy” reputation, there are hints of his true intentions, and they come to the forefront in the original world where the children are from and in the before past conversations. once he has his child, as the situation gets more and more dire, especially like in the case w/ severa where his s/o died first and he is all she has left- henri doesn’t necessarily stop his strange habits / interests / way of speaking?? like he still touches on death a lot, is still as bloodthirsty and enamored with dying- its v much who he is, a fundamental part of him that would drastically change his character if removed ( coughs ), but??? at least during battle, he’s long dropped the pretense, at least for his child. there’s no mistaking that he’s protecting them, and there’s no mistaking that though he is still having enjoying the battle, he’s no longer as excessive in his spell use as he used to be and he is much more focused on protecting / covering for his child and allies than he is, as he pretty much was in his younger years, a glass cannon waiting to explode. he also??? has a drastic shift in attitude????? in that while he does embrace death, at that point in time he refuses to die?? because he used to be much more self centered- but his child doesn’t deserve that, and to him, his child is more important than anything else??? more than his own desires, they will always be a priority- and in his child’s original world, he knows that if he were to die, it would be one less protecter, one less person to stand between them and their endless foes-- and that he would be leaving them behind to face the horrors of the world w/o them. and he can’t do that. he isn’t willing to be so selfish, so self absorbed that he would continue to purposefully aim for death when it would bring about such consequences, no matter his own wishes. of course, its inevitable that in the end he would pass as well, but instead of alone and with the casualness of his youth, he breathes his last breath trying to give his child another chance to survive, and i don’t doubt that with his death, he took with him a not insignificant amount of risen, though with grima and the ever constant corpses, in the end it didn’t stop their world’s inevitable fate.

#「 ⧫ 」 headcanon.#gore //#death //#suicide //#suicide ideation //#family //#violence //#ask to tag //#im so fucking salty i accidentally deleted the first half of this meta alskdfj

3 notes · View notes

whitewolfofwinterfell · 6 years

Note

the problem is that it's like female characters are not allowed to make mistakes without getting shunned and hated on. they're automatically unforgivable and a bitch and ppl completely disregard everything else, in this case nancy was more focused on bringing the fucking government down and was determined and dedicated and did that™ but no she hurt steve and now bc he's everyone's fave and he can do no wrong she is the bad guy

See, I completely disagree with this. Maybe we just operate in different spheres of the fandom, but I rarely if ever see hate against female characters (probably because I’m following all the right people and I avoid anti tags like the plague) and if anything all I ever see are posts like this ask that demand for female characters to be liberated, appreciated and allowed to make mistakes without being shunned or hated on. So I’ve never been able to understand where those kind of posts about hate against female characters come from because personally, I never see it. Off the top of my head the only female characters I can recall getting unnecessary hate in the fandoms I’m part of are Emma Swan, Elena Gilbert and Lori Grimes. Besides that all I ever see is love and appreciation for female characters. I’m not saying that there aren’t people out there that hate on female characters, because obviously there are, but I think it gets generalised and turned into a stereotype that people hate unnecessarily on female characters when it’s simply not true. People are allowed to have negative views on female characters just as they are with male characters and I don’t see it as being an issue whereby only female characters get treated this way. Just as many male characters are disliked in fandoms and ridiculed for their actions as female characters. Using Nancy and Steve as an example, I see just as many people advocating for Nancy as Steve so it’s not like everyone is unnecessarily hating on Nancy and painting her as the bad guy.

Warning: under the cut is slightly anti-Nancy and anti-Jancy

The thing is with Nancy/Steve is that it’s become a Nancy vs Steve type situation (which are always the worst situations in fandom because they spark ridiculous wars and arguments) and anyone that takes Steve’s side is automatically perceived to be a fangirl that only likes Steve because he’s cute and funny etc. and that they hate Nancy. But one again, that’s just a stereotype. I don’t think Nancy is “the bad guy” at all and nor do I completely disregard everything else that happened or hate her. But the truth remains that Nancy did wrong in season 2, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with pointing that out and discussing it. Nancy is a young girl living a complicated life and it’s understandable that she’s gonna make mistakes (tbh, if she didn’t make mistakes I’d have no respect for her as a character because that’s simply unrealistic of any human, but particularly a young teenage girl). The problem is that on moral level what Nancy did was wrong and I’m not saying that makes her an irredeemable person that can never be forgiven, but I don’t like the way it was portrayed on the show. There was no acknowledgement from her or indeed anyone that she was behaving unfairly. And it’s not just because she hurt Steve, because if she’d treated anyone that way I’d feel the same way because it was wrong. She knew she didn’t wanna be with Steve but she stayed with him anyway, why? She could’ve just stayed single, she didn’t have to remain in a relationship with him and pretend they were happy when deep down she wasn’t. And then the whole scene where she was drunk and saying, “Bullshit” is one of the worst scenes I’ve seen in terms of how Nancy came across and I understand she was drunk and emotional about Barb, but she didn’t have to do that. From Steve’s POV he’d been in a relationship with Nancy for a long time (I’m not sure how long exactly, but it spanned over a period of months), he loved her and he thought they were happy. For Nancy to get drunk and basically shoot Steve down in that way and break his heart was terrible and the worst way she could’ve done it. She didn’t even give him any explanation she just kept saying the word “Bullshit” over and over and over again. Steve didn’t even really know what was going on and when he asked, “You don’t love me?” she still had the audacity to reply, “Bullshit.” It was rude, disrespectful and completely unfair to the boy that was her friend and boyfriend for months and even if she didn’t love him or have romantic feelings for him, she should’ve had enough compassion and respect to let him down in the right way.

It would have been so easy to have Nancy make up for that mistake but the writers chose to make it even worse. The next day she didn’t even remember what had happened, she didn’t bother to apologise to Steve and there wasn’t even an ounce of care in her towards Steve. She just didn’t seem to give a shit that her actions had hurt him and that isn’t right. I don’t care how much is going on in her life, if that was me I’d feel so shitty and hurt that I’d hurt someone I cared about that I’d have to do everything I could to make it right. So Steve was left wondering where the hell he stood and what was going on because she’d said that when she was drunk but then the next day acted like everything was normal and didn’t even give him an explanation. Just imagine how you’d feel if the person you loved did that to you. I’m sorry, but it’s unacceptable.

And to make matters worse Nancy hadn’t even spoken to Steve properly about their relationship and what they were doing moving forward, she didn’t even openly tell him she didn’t want to be with him or express that she had feelings for Jonathan (even if these things were obvious, its common courtesy and respect to tell your goddamn partner where you’re at) and proceeded to sleep with Jonathan behind his back. In my eyes, that’s cheating. When did Nancy explicity tell Steve their relationship was over? When did they sit down and talk about what she’d said and what it meant? They didn’t. To me a relationship is still a relationship until one or both of the people involved state that it has ended.

To top it all off, Nancy and Jonathan sleeping together was portrayed as something we were supposed to be happy about and excited for (like, hello, did D&D not realise how disgustingly immoral the whole thing was?) and afterwards Steve was the one that felt guilty and labelled himself “a shitty boyfriend” because Nancy made him feel that it was his fault. But guess what? It wasn’t his fault. Steve had done nothing wrong to warrant Nancy not loving him or wanting to be with him, she just simply had feelings for Jonathan instead. That wasn’t anyone’s fault and it wasn’t wrong for Nancy to have feelings for Jonathan, what was wrong is the way in which she handled it. She messed up and she didn’t even try to fix it, and that’s my issue with Nancy or should I say, the way in which Nancy was written (because I do place the blame at D&D’s door for this).

I just think the writing was poor in season 2 where Nancy/Jonathan were concerned and that bled into the situation with Nancy and Steve too. There’s nothing wrong with a character - any character - making mistakes. It’s a good thing, it’s what helps them grow and develop, but the problem I have is when it’s a character that’s supposed to be good and decent and there’s no acknowledgment of those mistakes or any evidence that they’re going to make up for what they’ve done and that’s what happened with Nancy. I’m not saying she’s a bad person because obviously she’s not but it’s kind of hard to root for and care about a person that could hurt someone else in the way she hurt Steve and then not even show an ounce of compassion, remorse or regret.

#answered #my meta #stranger things meta

2 notes · View notes

kendrixtermina · 7 years

Text

Tritype made Easy: It’s not that deep

So tritype. Somehow it’s garnered this reputation of being super complex and “extra”.

- complete with the occasional oldschool purists chiming in & presuming various ad hominem-type things like “You just want to be more special”, “You’re just box-checking type stereotypes“ or “You’re substituting this for deeper spiritual study of your core type”

It’s not.

First of all - You don’t really need an ulterior motive to want to refine or specify a tool, isn’t completeness sake enough? It’s not like you either determine your tritype (a finite process) OR work on core-type related issues;

I’d even agree that the core type strongly predominates but, like, if more info exists, why not have it (or check out if it exists, if you call that in question), besides, it enables you to identify yet more possible problems & understand ppl’s reaction patterns in a more dynamic fashion (ie, relative to different situation)- I’d agree that ppl of the same tritype can have more in common that ppl of the same core type but with wildly different fixes.

It’s actually not a complicated thing at all, there’s a very simple basic logic to it, so simple that it seems almost No-Big-Deal inevitable.

Let me elucidate:

The Reasoning Behind it

It’s as simple as this: It’s pretty uncontroversial that the types can be grouped into triads, based on various similarities - And one such grouping is based on what the predominant or most-relied upon or most driving part of the psyche seems to be - abstract conceptual reason (5,6,7), emotions/social processing “heart” (4,2,3) and for (1,8,9)... is it instinct? Is it will? is it action? Are these separate? Informal terms include “gut/body”. Personally I would say will but either way ppl generally get on an intuitive level what is being meant.

There’s many complimentary, clear cut ways of fleshing out the distinction -

“head” center - concerned with beliefs, thoughts & fear

“heart” center - concerned with feelings, value judgements, image & shame

“gut” center - concerned with action, boundaries, impulses & anger

and within those centers, each type has a different approach or filter on perception, which then causes the further characteristics of the type.

But, it follows, quite simply, without any need for vagueing or speculating let alone posturing, that no matter which part is ‘predominant’, we all have all of those parts, we experience & deal with all three emotions, and we all have characteristic patterns for how we handle feelings, beliefs and action.

So we can think of the 6 possible fixes in each ‘center’ (9 if you count ‘balanced’ as an option) as possible “settings” for your attitude toward the corresponding part of the psyche or reaction pattern concerning the relevant emotion.... and suddenly we not just have an at least internally consistent theoretical underpinning for the whole system, but the implication that we might have a “setting” or “pattern” for each center or emotion -

Which, when you step out of the theory speak & look at RL isn’t a wild claim. Different people have different ways of dealing with different emotions. We always knew this. Tritype just offers a way to somewhat classify it; it doesn’t even have to be an exhaustive one / describe “everything”, just what it does describe, ie, for example, wether a person deals with fear by “all freeuze”(5w4), “some freeze some fight” (5w6, 6w5), “some fight some flight”(6w7, 7w6) or “all flight”(7w8). Although that equivalency may not be a 100%/ obfuscate things.

But basically: These are 3 common strategies, two of them are opposite, so which one is yours? “All A”, “A but also B” “B but also A” “B but also C” “C but also B” “All C”.

Of course just because something is a nice theory does’t mean it is the truth, just that it’s a possible one depending on how it tests against further observation, but, ppl caught Antimater, Gravitational Waves and the Higgs Boson this way, and it is worth noting that the people who came up with tritype didn’t arrive there from the theoretical side - instead they were practitioners who saw a large number of people using the “simple” 9 type system and realized that their clients exhibited fears and traits related to 3 types. beyond just “universal relatability”

- Note that this is something more natural & elegant that the basic theory created just through observing & sorting humans (who, after all, have been around for the observing since the cognitive revolution gave us sophisticated abstractions some 80000 - 70000 years ago; It would be stranger if ppl didn’t make worthwhile observations) - we start counting at ‘1′ even though 1 belongs with 8 and 9.

In a way this is actually less arbitrary & more structured/ a better grasp on what the system actually measures (or maybe that’s too exact a word; ‘Sorts by’ or ‘approximates’ perhaps) than just “these are the types, you’re exactly one of them, because new-agey number symbolism or something.” Though you can of course still have the symbolism if you want, no one’s stopping you, nor are these mutually exclusive. You could see them as complimentary.

This system, when properly understood & explained, might actually eliminate confusion, especially since ppl tend to mistype within their tritype - so instead of deliberating forever on “Well I have some traits of 4 but also some of 7, which one is it?”you can reach an answer like “You have traits of both”, & proceed to figuring out which one is the core type. Same with ppl who are like “But I don’t fit every single trait of [core type]” - who might still very much be that type, & the little incongruity can now be given an explanation (secondary fix) rather than having to be discounted or being a “con” & just shaking ppl’s confidence in the system in general - for example a sp-blind 7 with a 9 fix may be less manic & more stationary, but all the more prone to the rose-tinted glasses syndrome.

- Of course, with the caveat that there parts are all interconected and that the core type tends to impose a characteristic organizing principle (ie each type has its own way of handling emotions, self-image or social interaction - but there can be seen as a consequence of the core type being the ‘final arbiter`.) Also in reality it’s probably not 100% discreet like there’s more or less pronounced wings, although the very purpose of a “automatic/reflexive fallback/survival strategy” probably ensures a certain convergence.

It’s also interesting to note the existence of coretype-specific tendencies. - for example, I’ve read that its not uncommon for core 5s in particular to have a hard time figuring out their “gut” fix. (and indeed, I spend some time deliberating on 548 vs 549 even if it’s rather... apparent in hindsight that it’s definitely not 9)

The Conclusion, boiled down

So your tritype is simply a markdown of how do you deal with these emotions/situations, which basic strategies to use, in a simple, succinct notation - nothing complicated, obscure or contrived about it.

I’m not saying this to call people dumb or anything - it’s easy to see how one might at first glance, be daunted, confused or sceptical, seeing that there’s 27 tritypes, 6 orders, and endless wings & instinct combinations, but all that seeming complexity is grounded on very simple basic principles/ “alghoritm”

- it all boils down to there being just 3 options for each center (or 6, or 9 if you want wings/ add ‘balanced’ but that’s just further specificity, not really more complexity) All you need to do is to pick one of only 3 options for each center/emotion. Go through each center/emotion, consider how you approach it, and tadaa! Your tritype. The tritypes’ specific traits smply follow as a consequence.

As for the order, well it’s basically a priority ranking. Observe yourself as you react to things in day-to-day life. If you’re a 153, you might, for example, act first, form thoughs & opinions following that and form an emotional judgement later, if at all.

One way I’d describe it is that 2nd fix is a steady undercurrent, while the 3rd is more something that surfaces when triggered by a situation or emotion - eg. if gut fix is last, they’re likely not a very action-oriented person, but you may find out if something makes them angry & they react in telltale ways.

When in doubt, just look at the core fears and notice which one gets the stronger wince out of you.

Consequence: Typing Advice

So, of course “How many Angels fit on the head of a pin” type arguments over the theory of what is a made-up system are fun exercises but of limited interest; What people are often looking for is so that they may use the system as a tool (for self-awareness, understanding others, making observations etc. )

For each center, the person either embraces it (4,5,8), modulates it (2,7,1), or is indirect about it.(9,6,3)

When the person’s not very functional and/or not particularly self aware, make that “indulges/wallows in”, “represses” and “is out of touch with”

- For example, a 4 is obviously all about feelings, a 5 is obviously all about thoughts, a 8 is obviously all about asserting themselves. At best, you get someone who takes this aspect of human existence in full, at worst, you get a self-indulgent crybaby/smartass/tyrant, there can be a failure to rein that part in.

There’s also a negativistic tendency to these types.

-2/7/1 meanwhile have a strong selectivity about their center - you can probably still tell that thought/feeling/action is important to driving them, but it’s important that they be only good actions/feelings/thoughts. - A 2 “caring” or “loveable” sentiments while rejecting “selfish” ones, a 7 want to think fun/happy thoughts rather than anxious ones, a 1 wants to dogood actions & is afraid of doing bad ones etc.

These are more positivistic. (not the same as positive, though 2 and 7 could be described like that as well)

- with 9, 6 or 3, it is less obvious that they are profoundly driven by thought/feeling/boundaries. The center is very active but its activity is “sublimated”, there’s not this direct connection where they come out & say “This is what I feel/want/ conclude.” - at worst a 9 can seem doormatey, a 3 unemotional or shallow, a 6 like a spineless follower that can’t think for themselves, but you’ll clearly see that this type of energy is at work but it will burst forth in a warped manner (the 3 will react with dramatic jealousy, the 6 will hammer you with ideology, the 9 will get super stubborn about mantaining the status quo that they want, all without admitting or even realizing that it’s their feeling/opinion/ want) -

They just go about it indirectly. Which needn’t be a bad thing, despite the above examples - Underneath, the 3 is clearly driven by fulfilling emotional needs (where else would they get all that relentless energy/motivation from? From feelings.), the 6 has a lot of at times frantic mental activity (Hence their admirable alertness & scepticism), the 9 actually expends a lot of “will” mantaining their homeostasis, even if they’re passive-agressive about it. - (What they “want” just happens to be chill, harmony & unity)

These are the best at adapting to their environment because their “indirect” means of feeling accepted/secure/in-control will be whatever the environment affords them.

In the end it’s a matter of strategy. Say, a person is snubbed by their classmates. That hurts no matter what -. If they have a 2 fix, they might deal with it by trying to get into the classmates good graces’ by doing something to make them like them & win their approval. A 3 fixer might approach this more from a problem-solving perspective (even if they’re totally hurting!) & fix it through social maneuvering or doing something impressive that will make them popular. If they have a 4 fix instead, they will conclude that their classmates are quaint meanies anyways and that comforming to please them isn’t worth it and perhaps befriend someone from the form classdown the corridor, or write an angsty poem about it; In either case the person may master the situation and come away with a (wholly different!) important life experience. Similar examples could be concocted for the other centers. And there’s a potential for misunderstandings here - person A with fix X may see person B with fix Y deal with their problem in a manner characteristic for fix Y, and conclude that since they’re not doing it the fix X way, they’re not dealing with the problem at alll...And of course all tritypes can fall prey to just doing a counterproductive automatic reaction rather than truly assesing & responding to the problem.

(Usually it is the Ne I apologize for but this post got very Ti (I think? Barring mistypings I may not yet be aware of), it’s been floating ‘round my head for a while. I hope the highlighting & subdividing helped ppl find the parts helpful for them.)

#enneagram #tritype

224 notes · View notes

kendrixtermina · 7 years

Text

So, this intelligence Center Thingy

It was something included in one of the 12gram books as a qualifier/addition to your 12gram.

I did not detail it in my initial series because I did not think it added terribly much or had particularly unique distinctions but at some point I added my classification to my description more for completeness’ sake (maybe one day a person familiar with it will come along?) and some people (namely @jerdle) got curious as to what was meant by “Queen of Diamonds”, so I guess now you can decide for yourselves. This cost me a day, slightly a token of friendship but mostly mysself being ridden by my completionist urge. I hope one or two people appreciate it.

Reviewing it here has actually made me think of how it perhaps does add some dimension not otherwise captured.

The Theory

The whole thing is based on yet another idea of a “Soul Anatomy”/ Subdivision of the psyche and the idea that certain parts are more pronounced in certain people, that we have what they term a “center of gravity”. a part we default to unless we’re paying attention.

Unlike the 3 in the classic enneagram, this theory subdivides the mind into 4 intelligence centers:

The instinctual center. The inbuilt software and base drives, as it were. This is also what allots all higher functions their energy, hence why ppl often commit to more than they can actually do once they feel worn out. (Indeed i wrote this sentence right before interrupting this article for a lunch break. Lets nom some leek gratin.)

The moving center - Learned skills and reactions. Rule of Thumb: If a baby can do it, its instinctual (though babies can do alot more than ppl assume), if it has to be learned or trained, it’s moving. A baby knows to suck, look around for things to nom and cry if none is available, but they need to learn to hold a bottle or spoon. This seems somewhat analogous to Jung’s Sensing function(s).

The intellectual center - NOT strictly mbti Thinking since it also involves abstract thought, symbols and concepts.

The emotional center - Your FEEELINGS, including both basic emotion & sophisticated social and ethical processing in the sense of Jungian “feeling”. Aesthetic distinctions are also here.

Each of these has a “positive” or “negative” part or a central dialectical contrast (relevant later if combiined with either postivistic or negativistic Essence types)

For the intincstual center, thats comfort vs discomfort, pleasure or pain. For the moving center, it’s moving vs rest, for the intellectual, it’s yes/no or true/false, whereas for the emotional center it’s like vs dislike or right/wrong.

Depending on their dominant center, a person may describe the same events in different ways or pay attention to different aspects of experience -

Picture, for example, four people at a restaurant. An instinctually centered person will notice the quality of the nom stuff, the temperature of the room, the ratio of price to portion size, wether the chairs are comfy etc. A Moving centered person will notice the spatial positions of the tables, how easy it is to maneuver between them for the waiters, funny background events, what various people are doing & with how much skill,(eg. a clumsy waiter balancing things wrong) - meanwhile an emotionally centered person would pay attention to the people most of all & notice stuff like bored children, couples arguing etc. & focus on keeping their conversation partner engaged, all the whiletheir intellectually centered spouse blabbers on about some article they read, say, about the relation between currency exchange rates and political unrest.

According to the author you can easily pick out someone’s dominant center by hearing them talk, at times easier than it is for the person themselves, who, after all, sees their usual PoV and way of operating as simply “normal.”

When asked to tell you their life story, for example, a moving-centered person might tell you all the places they went and used to live, and recount activities or sensory impressions, whereas an emotionally centered person will phrase things in terms of relationships and their reactions & feelings about things

the instinctually centered folks are usually determined by principle of exclusion (or thatr’s what the author did) as they simply don’t communicate as many preoccupations & perceive things more as sensory images than semi-verbal judgements.

In addition, each of these can be further subdivided into a “mechanical” part, an “emotional part” and an “intellectual” part - And out of a given center,

“the mechanical part” represents actions that can be taken without paying attention, because they have become learned/ automatic

“The Emotional Part” is in charge when your attention is held by an external object or stimulus that you react to. This part is emotional about the center’s functioning, whatever it happens to be, & thus the seat of enthusiasm.

“The “Intellectual part” pertains to behavior/ actions done when you sustain attention through deliberate effort beyond where your whims would lead you

These which may or may not roughly with the classic eneagram’s instincts but it already doesn’t match in my case so yeah, not equivalent.

“Dominant Center + Dominant Part” would then be your full typing possibly tacked onto whatever your 12gram/ Essence type happens to be.

Because spelling out stuff like “The emotional part of the emotional center” gets clunky soon (& uses the same word to mean different things) and because these esoterics ppl are all so damn extra, they refer to your classic western card game for terminology:

Mechanical Part: Jack

Emotional Part: Queen (I know, I know... -.-)

Intellectual Part: King

Instinctual Center: Clubs

Moving Center: Spades

Intellectual Center: Diamonds

Emotional Center: Hearts (no shit sherlock)

So you can comfortably replace the afore-mentioned clunky term by “Queen of Hearts” - and yes, the book did make the obvious reference/joke.

The idea is that the mechanical parts can be, and often are doing completely independent things, whereas the ‘Queens’ can influence each other and the kings can consciously cooperate, and functionality/enlightenment can be seen as a measure of how much your centers are in alignment, doing the same thing rather than goin on autopilot (here we find some overlap with the classic enneagram philosophy wise)

There’s also a concept of ‘process’ here in that new information usually catches the attention of the ‘queen’ where interest is generated, then the ‘king’ must put in effort to understand & master the thing, until it is eventually stored in the mechanical part so that the ‘jack’ can now do it at any time.

One exeption is the instinctual center whose ‘mechanical’ part de facto consists of inborn biological programing and is a hardware limitation, so to speak, although i suppose epigenetics could have some influence.

BTW: the author briefly mentions mbti at one point and says than an intellectually centered Lunar would get INTJ... which i can see for some INTJs but mine are, as it happens, both Mercury-Saturns in the 12gram. IDK about this thing, gotta think & introvert about it.

The Types

Jack of Clubs

Here we find the mantaining of basic homeostasis and largely unconscious body functions, the stuff we don’t normally think about unless we are cold, hungry or sick. We may note sudden fluctuations such as an adrenaline spike but usually what we’ll pay attention to is its cause.

A person centered in the jack of clubs will not necessarily be a hypochondriac (though they can be), but they’ll automatically look out for, and invest energy in their wellbeing and comfort without needing to be reminded - This is also the friend who may not have the most exciting stories (as they tend regard adventures and explorations with mild alarm and don’t hugely seek out novelty for it’s own sake), but looks out for your welbeing & comfort and can give great advice on such matters that can be of huge practical use in everyday life & help you free up energy for other things through a new diet or napping regiment or something that helps you chill.

Speaking of chill, their concern with homeostasis primarily generally makes them even-tempered, mellow and cogenial folks without much drama potential, though some might wish for more stimulating companions. They’re placid, unobstrusive everyman types who go through life without much fuss or bother who prefer the familiar and wholesome. If they do travel, they might be fussy about what to bring in order to fulfill every possible need & be comfortable.

Others might find them a bit mysterious because they don’t seem all that concerned with, and certainly aren’t constantly ranting about, abstract ideas, activities or other people’s business. They are often good at their jobs but not overly invested beyond a level of detached competence.

Queen of Clubs

These are basically the Appetites - the emotional part of the instinctual center is emotional about sensations. It’s the process of taking in stimuli through the five senses and deciding wether they’re pleasant or unpleasant (not necessarily the same as wether they’re actually good for your survival - see suggary food. ) - It evaluates the stimulus itself more than its context so this is where we can be lead to indulge cravings or bad habits. Usually the ‘stimulus’ or ‘object of attention’ is something more benign tho - like when you are tired and keep thinking of sleeping, or when you’re hungry and see a delicious Pizza.

People who are centered in the Queen of Clubs will naturally be more aware of pleasant and unpleasant sensations, so they will try to create comfortable and pleasurable environments full of nice things to appeal to their senses - pretty furniture, nice smells, rich fabric etc. They’llbe inclined to be a bit of a gourmand, connoseur or aesthete and might even turn this into their job, for example as an interior designer or someone who sells handmade ceramics.

They’re often considered very attractive regardless of their appearance (often without being aware of it or thinking it a big deal) because of their natural sensuality and “animal magnetism” - besides, their interest in pleasure and comfort usually extends to others, or as a bonding activity: They want their friends to be well-fed, comfy and enjoying nice things. This totally extends to their sexuality as well - they frequently have an “If it feels good, it’s good” attitude & might not be the world’s most responsible people, as they tend to be focussed on things that hold their attention. This none-too -disciplined, impulsive quality is the whole basis of consumer culture - people will have their attention occupied by having better/more/shinier until they get gratification & then the fun begins anew.

Despite this, they can also have a pronounced maternal quality & strong caring/mentoring instincts - after all mother instincts are crucial for the survival of the species which ppl can seen as being the same as one’s own survival in an evolutional sense.

The thing with all the queens (and a crucial thing to know about people centered in them) - is that since they’re all about these strong “good/bad” judgements, they have a lot of those and their can chance and fluctuate as the person becomes more or fed up with whatever held their attention so they’re not the most reliable or steady folks. If you date on of these be aware that they’re a package deal - you can’t have the liking & vivacity without the revulsion and dislike.

King of Clubs

While the emotional part of the instinctual center is rather liberal with expending it’s energies, the intellectual part is cautious about preserving it for when it might be needed to sustain one’s life - It is the cunning and perceptive animal mind, the fight or flight instinct, something that strives to observe & keep track of its surroundings & the other processes the person is doing without being all too detectable itself- as such, it can ever seem mysterious, even a bit sinister.

Unlike the other intellectual parts it doesn’t have its attention directed by the person, but is a background process type of thing, which, for most people, kicks in in exceptional times,the exceptional awareness, preseverance and reaction speed of high-adrenaline situations - sudden alertness, time slowing down, pain being blocked out until later, small unatlethic parents lifting heavy objects to save their trapped children, that sort of thing.

A person centered in the King Of Clubs, then, is someone very in touch with their strong, pronounced survival instincts and likely to seem formidable to others - they’re not really approachable or comfortable to be around unless one has come to know them quite well, and that only occurs if and when they wish for someone to know them well - They can be intimidating when they want to, at times verging on seeming brutal, almost as if they could errect an invisible wall to repell unwanted advances.

With the survival calculations everyone does in the background much closer to their conscious awareness, they can be quite suspicious, perceptive and exceptionally aware of their surroundings, and calculating about many things in life. Some of them can also have or develop great charisma and exert much influence over others.

As it represents the highest developed part of our animal nature, it’s probably no coincidence that, as an archetype, this sort of personality is often found in movie villains - or think the archetypical gunslinger.

Jack of Spades

This is your repertoire of learned movements, all manner of complex procedural knowledge, from how to catch a ball to using a keyboard, driving a bike etc. all of the complex movements we do everyday which we once had to learn but can now do without thinking - like when you are walking and thinking mostly of where to go or typing and thinking of words, but having little awareness of your actual feet or fingers - this is never more clear than, say, when one walks or drives the wrong way out of habit.

the same time this unconscious procedural knowledge often does actions more efficiently than we would if he had to figure out every step (See the centipede’s dilemma - ppl confusing themselves & having a hard time getting back into the rythm of an action after thinking about how they’re doing it/ when paying more attention. There’s a reason why all those meditation audios tell you not to listen “while driving or operation machinery”)

A person centered in the jack of spades is usually a creature of habit: steady, down-to earth, efficient and consistent in performance with great tolerance for routine or repetitive motions that would bore or tire others beyond endurance - as such they make perfect employees for a great manner of jobs from everything to repair, data entry, farming, accounting or warehouse stock control - and luckily enough it’s a very common center of gravity, humanity as a whole does seem suited to taking care of the various stuff that needs doing.

One way to identify one of these for sure (as opposed to ppl who just do automatic drudgework because they have to, as all of us do) is to watch if they resort to repetitive motions in time of stress - people cutting up vegetables, agressively cleaning or mowing the lawn after an argument with their spouse, for example, perhaps leading the spouse to wonder how they can be concerned with such banal, mundane things at a moment like this - They’re not being insensitive, it’s just their coping mechanism, they’re doing the best they can to deal with their emotional pain in a constructive manner. People are, in general, much more likely to revert to their ‘default’ center when under stress.

Sometimes you have to make the diagnosis by principle of exclusion - relatively steady, don’t seem overly concerned with emotions or ideas, etc; while the intellectual part of the moving center will lose interest in something after it’s fully mastered, these folks don’t mind doing the same job all their life or living in the same neighborhood.

Queen of Spades

While the Jack of spades is characterized by its steadiness, the queen is dintinguished by a lack thereof - as with the other emotional parts, it gets the feels about this particular function (in this case, movement) and has its attention held by a particular object, in this case an action, movement, kinesthetic experience or spatial problem - its the part that enjoys sports, or watching sports (though the patience & rigor to become exeptional - indeed seeking thrills can end in the hospital instead)

Here lives the need for speed, the enjoyment of fast cars, video games, amusement park rides, action movies and physical comedy, and if we consider how much cash we as a species spends on such things you get an idea of the moving mind’s importance.

A person centered in the Queen of Spades is often flashy and extravagant in their movements, moves more than necessary for a given activity. They like novelty and can flip from obsessively practicing a new activity to losing all interest in it once they get bored - as such it should be little surprise that they like traveling, often to new unusual places rather than the hugely monetized tourist hangouts.

They might be the sort willing to make do with very little and lead a bohemian vagabond hippie lifestyle in order to escape the ghastly fate of working a boring repetitive job and staying in one place for too long, chasing cool & worthwhile experiences such as mountainclimbing, wild water rafting or karate lessons in more of a breadth than a depht approach.

King of Spades

The kind of physical action that requires sustained attention - such as operating heavy machinery where one moment of inattention can end in severing an important water pipe or power cable, or losing a finger. This part of the moving mind operates much slower and more deliberate than the others - the domain of careful, intentional movements.

As such, it is inextricably linked with tool use, crafting and technology, the search for finding better, easier, smoother and more efficient ways to do all manner of physical tasks - it is also what we use to figure out objects and how they work - you may be able to assemble an ikea chair, lego or a tricycle all on your own just by looking at the parts and how they fit together - or you might resort to reading the manual for a little help from the intellectual center. (It’s worth noting that procedural knowledge is indeed in a wholly different brain region than abstract knowledge or biographical memories - you could have complete amnesia and still know how to fix a bike or learn gardening.)

It is of little surprise that people who have this as their primary center are in high demand in our current technology based economy - not only are they neede to invent, refine and improve all sorts of devices, they are needed to fix them for the technologically challenged. Such people are capable of greats effort of sustained attention when trying to solve a particular problem, be it to break new athlethic records, design video games or new techniques for animaztion or to improve some vulnerable part of an engine, they can focus their attention on the problem for days, months or years until it is finally solved.

But while they find great satisfaction in problem-solving, they easily lose interest once the basic question has been solved, at times leading to a trail of unfinished projects or more endurant people perfectingtheir new techniques for them.

Movement in the strictest sense isn’t their only province, but also an understandng of spatial relationships and composition - meaning, this is a kind of skill than an architect, engineer or surgeon would need.

Jack of Diamonds

As with the other centers, this is kind of the “memory” where already acquired knowledge goes to be recalled - Information on facts or cause and effect relations as simple data. This is where you keep all the basic information you need to function in the world, and when you think of it it’s quite amazing how much of that even relatively “dumb” humans contain - At least one language (in some areas you need way more), knowledge of abstract systems like money and numbers, some idea of what one needs to purchase so they and their family can live, where to get a cheap deal, the history & mythology of where the live, some trivia about their favorite, and a bunch of politcal opinions for which they might be willing to shoot their neighbor, so yeah -

This is where we return to the adage: “Knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is not putting it in a fruit Salad.” The Jack of Diamond is more like the mind’s file clerk, it retrieves data with a “true/false” label attached upon a certain trigger - like a question or related topic, leading to many a mental or conversational wiki walk. Rote memorization obviously has its limits, especially where discernment needs to be applied or many contradictory factors need to be considered, or where Data needs to be updated and there’s a danger with sticking with the first information you got “filled” with as the only correct one.

If you challende a person who has their center of gravity in the Jack of Diamonds to a pop quiz or game of trivial pursuit, you will lose - They are always in the process of acquiring all kinds of raw, exact information and can recite a lot of it very quickly, often to the effect of impressing nearby people and garnering a reputation. The death & birth dates of celebrities, the ingredients in food, any funfacts about historical events... they stockpile it all just for its own sake, if perhaps in what others may consider a dry or dusty manner.

They are not necessarily overly enthusiastic or exited about the information but they kinda take it in for completeness’ sake. This is more the sweatervest nerd than the passionate one, but they do pretty well in academic disciplines that require rigor, attention to detail and turning raw data into publishable work. , doing statistical tests or methodcal analysis (Including in literature/ the humanities)

Queen of Diamonds

As with the other Queens, the queen of diamonds is marked by animation and enthusiasm, though it can be as transient as an object keeping your attention - in this case the objects are ideas, theories, facts, ways of thinking and ways of thinking about thinking, but non indiscriminately or all at once - rather there’s a pattern of changing “current obsession” - In other words, this is the seat of curiosity and fascination and “exiciteable” nerds.

A commontrait for ppl centered in the Queen of Diamond is owning a stack of books they bought because of interest in the basic concepts but then they don’t always get around to reading or finishing them because something else occupied their attention.

Even so, they’re often sought out as friends and companions because they provide stimulating conversation that might distract you from your instinctive or emotional quagmires - who doesn’t like some nerd humor or interesting debates?

More a breadth than a depht of knowledge here, they might be too exclectic for the rigors required of scholars, but make good generalists, enthusiastic teachers and good science-related communicators, though they might have a problem with staying on course or doing the repetition expected in a teacher’s role one they grow bored of something.

King of Diamonds

This is where the fruit salad comes in, or rather, study time! Sustaining attention to intellectual matters even when it seems like drudgery, and ultimately a necessity for functioning in academic settings, even in matters one is reasonably enthusiastic for to reach understanding & pass exams, one must study even on you ‘off’ days and even the less exciting topics - on such days, attention needs to be explicitly focussed through sustained effort, and that is where the King of Diamonds comes in.

It’s one of the slowest moving parts of the human mind - in contrast to the quick, repeated answers of the Jack of Diamonds, this is a long, laborious process that comes with the understanding that we cannot have all the answers because there’s still much we don’t know - rather than applying quick good/bad or true/false statements, this part understands the relativity of context and how a precept that may be helpful in one situation may be inappropriate or even criminal in another - rather than seeing the facts and ideas as individual data points it tries to fit them all and their connections together into a whole like a precariously balanced house of cards.

People with their center in the king of diamonds tend to be quiet and wait long before speaking and so, might ironically be mistaken for dullards (Doesn’t help that this type is supposedly fairly unusual.) - they are so tentative and careful about ideas that it can be hard to tell that they are, in fact, quite absorbed in ideas - it’s the part that knows that it doesn’t know. They are hesitant to make assertions unless they are certain - while knowing that you can never fully know - indeed if you asked one of them what their center of gravity is, they’d most likely answer that they don’t know.

Jack of Hearts

So, let us think. What would be an ‘automatic’ or ‘memorized’ response in regards to... social processing? (as if I had to read through/eat the author’s anti-intellectualism again, I get to stress that as much as they are as sophisticated as abstract reasoning and all parts of a whole, social processing & value judgements =/= emotions)

Well, this would be “politeness/manners/habitual pleasantries”, automatic responses we produce in relation to others - this is also where cultural sensibilities and attitudes are encoded, deeply rooted and difficult to observe - but all to obvious if we spend a while in a different circle or culture and find that the responses we have taken for granted are no longer appropriate - volumes have been written about the various subtle differences in the way that people from different cultures handle things like time, personal space, relationships to family members and strangers, business transactions dining andmany others complex interactions of social life.

We learn these mechanical responses by imitation when we are very young, long before we even realize that we’re learning anything - and often those differences in responses can be recognized very early on in toddlers and babies - no wonder we don`t always realize that they are learned. These responses can produce many of the same emotions we find in the ‘queen’ of hearts, but compared to those, they are much less intense & ebb away once our friends and relatives lose interest in the matter, since they are merely being imitated. - This mechanism is also what’s responsible for “crowd emotions”, huge groups of people being swept up in fervors ar concerts, sporting events and political rallies... or after tragedie, crimes and disasters, mass hysteria etc

Wether restrained or violently demonstrative, this automatic imitation of the group’s emotional tenor is one of the most characteristi manifestations of the jack of hearts. This part of the psyche can be sentimental and affectionate, but just as easily cold & rejecting, depending on the stimulus - Loyalty toward one group can turn to violence against the other, prejudice may be absorbed alongside otherwise helpful socalization, there’s a risk of us vs them thinking & sheeple groupthink - Though in its proper context when balanced by the other parts of the person, the Jack of Hearts has an important function to perform in providing the social lubricant necessary for unfamiliar people to interact within the same society and offset initial instrinctual-level suspicious (exactly what is sometimes missing between members of different cultures, allowing those latent suspicions to take over) - this is also how ppl pick up their culture’s aesthetic sensibilities and tastes.

A person centered in the Jack of Hearts will usually have a friendly and gregarious demeanor (unless they were raised by total bigots, or had very negative experienced growing up, which might lead them to meet others with a lot of fear and suspicious) - typically, though, they are cheerful and positive in most social situations and appear caring and warm in most relationships.

This type is very attuned to the little social conventions of friendship - expect lots of birthday/christmas/aniversary presents, thank you notes for any favors or gifts, get well cards for any illness and condolences for any misfortunes. They know the appropriate attire for every occasion, so ask them if you’re ever in doubt.

However, these conventional, reflexive ways of showing concern are kind of how they do it and beneath this some of them can seem, or actually be somewhat shallow and insensitive - since the jack of hearts operates by imitation, they might only be aware of the surface manifestation of emotion and to mimic the general emotional tone without deeper awareness of what is occurring - this part of the emotional center is automatically oncerned with people and relationships and is fond of gossip without awareness of what harm might be done by talking indiscriminately about others.

Their tastes are also likely to be conventional - sentimental movies, love songs, stuffed animals, soap operas & mass-produces decorative objects appeal to this type and will be found in abundance in their surroundings - men will make lots of jokes, be loyal to their favorite sports team and have a favorite tavern where he socializes with a few good buddies. When functioning from the negative half of things, the same person can then turn spiteful and petty with a tedency for jealousy, vindictiveness and cruel remarks disguised as humor, like subtly insulting nicknames

Queen of Hearts

The emotional part about the emotional center is emotional about, well... emotion (they keep using that word...) but what all this actually means is that this part of the human mind enjoys emotion for its own sake and values those impressions and experiences that create emotion - preferably intense emotion, be it positive or negative. Where the jack of hearts likes or dislikes, the queen hates or loves passionately. Where the jack may be pleased about pretty easthetics, the queen is gonna be ecstatic and where the jack’s programmed reactions are relatively consistent, the queen is prone to dramatc moodswings and changes in opinion. This is where we fall and love... and also what fuels axe murders pretty much. Anytime we’re experiencing strong out-of-control emotions, we’re probably in Queen of Hearts mode, having our attention held by whatever we’re emoting at and since the emotional center is first and foremost concerned with interpersonal relationships, it’s likely to be another person.

It s the part of us that identifies with other people and can be liable to lose sense of our own worth in concern of what people thing of us - or what judges others. This part is greatly interested in what others are doing, especially in their own relationships, and wether others are living up to the tenets of moral behavior - and if they’re not, it’s what wants them punished and creates outrage, be it about celibrities or public figures, or in personal life where it can lead to possesiveness or jealousy in its extremes.

However, it’s also what allows us to enjoys intense emotions in fiction genres such as horror and drama (At this point, I shall risk the claim that her majesty is also the part that writes most fanfiction - IDK why the author thinks dark art is a negative, cathartic fantasy is about the safest outlet there is for anything. Or rather I know why but I don’t buy it nor the premises it stands on, but FYI they see it as a masturbatory thing somehow or that’s their reasoning)

- and also the seat of noble and altrustic emotion, charitable and philanthropic impulses as well as religious fervor (or course you wanna be careful with that one and the author actually agrees with me though they mght not recognize their flavor of woo-woo as ‘religion’ or ‘belief’)

If this is your center of gravity, you probably have a lot of feelings - since the queens grow bored easily & may change opinion relatively quickly (and none more than this one because of the intense energy involved in Feelings(TM) ), you may experience them mood swings and have an affinity for the extremes, moving between exstatic enthusiasm and bleak despair, seldom finding a moderate middle ground.

Having the attention hel by an object and that object being emotional, this would be the type of person who would rather feel anything, no matter how painful, than nothing. - sometimes, they might pretty much provoke an emotional exchange in order to feel something. They always find someone to love or hate, sometimes that’s the same person for reasons that have more to do with their internal processes than what the actual person did - they might also apply the same fluctuation inward, alternating between grandiose self-love and self-loathing - all this often attracts people who are more repressed or subdued themselves and look to experience a little of the intensity for themselves, though they might fail to realize that whole “if you can’t handle me at my worst you don’t deserve me at my best” deal.

This storm of feels does, however, command a huge amount of passion & energy that can be put in the service of great things if the person knows how to channel it (just think of the feats of endurance or foolishness we can perform for the ones we love)

King of Hearts

Ya did not honestly think we were escaping the obligatory alice in wonderland reference? Well apparently one poignant way to explain the ‘King of hearts’ is to look at the infamous royal couple from that book, including its less memelicious half - the angry queen who wants everyone beheaded and the mild-manared little King who walks after her and pardons everybody.

Forgiveness is a good example of a process that is without doubt emotional/social/ethical in nature but also takes work & might require a person to get over themselves, the parts that require continous effort. These tend to be emotions that are more quiet & contemplative rather than loud & demonstrative - compassion, empathy, consideration, patience, humility, and the drive toward self-improvement and growth - effort levels are not the same for all people & I still think there’s some ideology lodged here but at the same time they’re not completely off with the “true love/care” business & how it requires sustained concern and comitment - this is where we consider whats best for another rathen than freaking out about what they think of us, where we dont just want to be understood but also to understand others, where we dont just want to be loved but to actively love, the constant effort to do right.

If you believe in that sort of thing this is also where you would supposedly find the door to all that spiritual enlightenment/salvation mumbo jumbo whatever your preferred flavor is - or perhaps those are just names we give our ideal selves not understanding that they’re just part of us. In any case, artistic discernment of a more relative kind also lives here & this is the point where it goes beyond like or dslike and you can appreciate that there’s different things for different contexts.

People who have this as their center of gravity are less apparent in being emotionally centered, because they can seem relatively even-tempered or even detached (in a zen kind of way), able to examine possibilities with compassion but without immediate identification, to understand that appreciating one thing doesn’ equal putting down another or praising it to all heights...

(I would now say that I don’t think to flatter Mari but that she may well be one of these, in case she’s reading this, (if she’s not a queen of Spades but she seems way more humble & considerate than adventurous),but then I remember that Mari does not have internet right now because she is currently having a ValuableLifeExperience(TM) on a tropical island, no doubt exercising her deep thoughts & aesthetic discernment to its fullest and being all sweet & considerate to everyone.

I miss my sisters, they moved across the country, gotta visit them one of these days. )

#typology #extraTypology

4 notes · View notes