#especially learning about the suffering and the specific people who were there and their stories | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

allthecanadianpolitics · 1 year

Note

Hi!

I hope that you had a great week and that the long weekend is going great!

Sorry I’m sending you an anon ask, I don’t like doing it because I would rather have a debate around this, but as often with unpopular (one might say controversial in some space) opinion, I know I may be branded as someone I don’t feel I am.

My question will be about the laïcité in Quebec. To sum it up, so you can have a good idea of what my position is before asking you my questions, I don’t not support the full laïcité, French-style, like I don’t support it in hospitals, public administration, like if you want to display your religion as a doctor, I think that you should be able to, as long as it doesn’t interfere with your job (i.e. refusing to practice an abortion because of your religion is not ok, in my opinion).

But for the schools, to be transparent, I am a teacher near Montréal, I teach in secondary, and I’d be inclined to agree with the laïcité of the public school. All of it. I feel like the school system should be a safe space for all kids, and by letting religion, and religious practices inside a public school, we are failing at this mission. I don’t care if you are religious, the job of a school and a teacher is to teach you, regardless of your personal beliefs. Like if you’re a Christian and you don’t want to believe in evolution, well that’s your choice, but you’re still gonna learn about it because this is the reality of our world, and your beliefs system shouldn’t interfere with that. And I don’t want, as a teacher to have to put disclaimer in front of all my classes.

So my question is: why are people (especially left leaning people) so against it? Because education is usually one of the center piece of the fight for tolerance and acceptance but I feel like we’re failing at providing a safe space for kids that grow up in extremely religious household and that would like to get out of it but don’t because of family and peer pressure.

I am not stupid, so if the answer is : because it disproportionately target people from specific faiths that may have to wear visible clothing (i.e. Muslim and Jewish), I guess you are right, but I think it is more important to provide a safe space for kids that want to escape religions.

I may have a bias, as I grew up in a very religious household (evangelical Christians) and my dad was a pastor so I never really had a say in it. I got out of it in the university, but I really wish the public school system would have helped me get out of it sooner.

If you read all of it, I hope I didn’t bother you too much with what could basically be my life story at this point. Thank you!

PS: as you can guess my first language is French, and I really am not an English teacher so sorry if my broken English is awful to read.

"Just as a preface, I'm not the usual person who answers the asks, I'm one of the two people helping the usual admin run the blog while they recover from injury. This is important because I'll be addressing some of my experiences growing up Muslim in Quebec, experiences that the admin is not trying to speak to and is leaving for me to address. First off, I do want to note you're speaking from the perspective of the privileged group causing religious oppression as opposed to the receiving end. As someone who was growing up 'Christian' trying to escape religious impositions from your father, you're not in a situation where your religion is being oppressed and suppressed systematically, nor are you suffering under presumption your religion is inherently violent. This is why your comment on your opinion being "unpopular" makes no sense. Your opinion is not unpopular, it is in fact supported by the CAQ and their adherents. Second, the left does not support this because the interests of the right in making such laïcité laws was never to protect children from religious imposition. When I went to private school, where those rules were strictly enforced only onto Jewish and Muslim students but not to Christians wearing cross necklaces (although ostensibly those rules applied to them too), the result wasn't anyone's religious beliefs being protected nor was anyone tolerated, as I was bombarded by homophobic harassment and bullying from our Christian peers and accepted by my Muslim peers. The result was alienation of the Muslim and Jewish students. You should remember that is the original intent of this legislation is not to protect anyone's rights but to remove them. They are telling Muslims "Leave your religion at the door, or you're not a part of society." This is the practical impact of this legislation, and nothing else. You are harming more students than you are 'saving''. Additionally, your worry that Muslims having a prayer room somewhere in the building is a religious imposition on other students, in your imaginary likely atheist ones, is based in islamophobia. The idea that parents can somehow enforce their children to practice at school just because there is a room that allows them to literally makes no sense either. Your concerns are misplaced." "Removing Muslims' ability to have a room to pray in at their school does not remove any mechanism by which parents can use to force their child to perform religious duties they do not want to do. But what it does is continue the operation of an increasingly hostile and alienating system in Quebec that wants Muslims to know they're not welcome in their own country. Would you seek the outlawing of abortion because many men force their partners to undergo them when they don't want to? No? Why? Because it's a basic human right to have access to that service. And just because people impose it on people in their family as part of their abuse doesn't mean it should be removed as an option for everybody, the majority of whom want to use it for legitimate and sincere reasons."

100 notes · View notes

wendytestabrat · 3 months

Text

why c&k are BOTH narcissists (FROM THE VAULT [i’m guessing 2021])

UPDATE 2024: it amazes me when people will be like “kyle isn’t a narcissist!1!1!” 😩 just bc he doesn’t act exactly like cartman and bc he has empathy. like bitch not all narcissists lack empathy, that’s only ONE npd symptom in the dsm-5. i think most narcissists actually do have empathy (and in my opinion the narcissists who are empaths are wayy more nauseating to be around than the ones who lack it LMAO bc the empathetic narcissists know how to weaponize emotions against u and shit). honestly lack of empathy is seen a lot more commonly in sociopathy/psychopathy than it is in narcissism. or like when bitches try to defend or justify kyle for blowing up canada by saying “he isn’t like cartman bc he felt bad after!1!1” 😫 LOL SO WHAT?! i don’t give a shit that kyle felt remorse after he did that, it was still a shitty unforgivable thing to do that he shouldn’t have done in the first place. kyle feels bad after he does shitty things all the time yet he still repeats the same problematic behavior and never learns from it soooo. i feel like covert narcissism is becoming more widely talked abt now especially after that line in taylor’s song anti-hero “did you hear my covert narcissism i disguise as altruism like some kind of congressman” but yeah i was wayy ahead of my time talking abt this shit before that song LOL. i also feel like a lot of covert narcissists end up as therapists too which is why kyle was shown to be a therapist in the future. that’s honestly why i don’t trust therapists anymore bc i’m convinced the majority of them are just covert narcissists who get a sick kick out of seeing u helpless so they can preach their advice at you to put themselves on a pedestal lol. i’ve had a couple good therapists so i’m sure not all of them are like that and some are genuinely caring people, but the majority of therapists i’ve seen i got this icky feeling from them like they were using my pain and suffering to feel better abt their own shitty lives. bc like no one would choose a career where they get to listen to people’s problems all day unless that person had some fucked up issues themselves lol. i remember years ago i thought i wanted to be a therapist when i used to be an annoying overly empathetic nosy bitch like kyle LOL which was why i took a bunch of psychology and child development classes and now i’m stuck with a useless 2 year degree in that shit that i didn’t even want but that’s a whole story for another day. i don’t want a job where i have to listen to people’s problems all day no thank you 🤮 that subplot in the panderverse special where randy and the other dads were lashing out at colleges for giving them a degree they can’t do shit with hits HARD for me lol. college is an overrated scam i don’t make the rules i enforce them.

don’t get me wrong i think college can be a great thing which is why i loved it, but like only if you can take specific classes to acquire certain skills u need at that time. the whole system where u are rushed to pick one major and get a degree in only that thing is complete bs and doesn’t do SHIT for you. it should be about LEARNING stuff not getting a piece of paper that shows u did.

#KYMANRANTGARBAGE #kyman #south park

31 notes · View notes

a-dinosaur-a-day · 10 months

Note

(Prehistoric Planet person) thanks! And it's okay to take all the time you need, obviously <3

My first question is: how do you feel about it being set in the Late Cretaceous period only? While it is my favourite, I also think it's a little lacking. For example, we only get to see titanosaurs this way. I'd like to see some other sauropods! I want to see what they'd make of Amargosaurus. But, in terms of the narrative, I get why they stay in one period during an episode, at least. So I'm just wondering what your thoughts on that are! Esp if you have time period you'd like them to show.

I also wondered about the bit in the North America episode where the Styginetta are called "duck relatives," but then seconds later the script mentions "but there are also dinosaurs here." It annoyed the crap out of me for the obvious reason of. Well. Birds are just as much dinosaurs as troodontids. So why on earth would they separate the two? Is there a reason? Or is it the face-value slip-up?

Along that line, are there any mistakes that you think they made? I know it was well-researched and all, but surely there's points still to be disagreed upon, right? Or was it overall well done?

Those where honestly my big questions. I thought I had more, but that's kind of it. I guess to end it off I could ask if there's a dino you'd like to see show up in there? (Personally, I want to see Panoplosaurus or Borealopelta :D)

Thanks for taking the time to answer me!

So I get completely why they went with just the Maastrichtian. The whole series is supposed to be "Planet Earth" or "Blue Planet" but at a specific point in the past. All of the animals were, more or less, contemporaneous. So they're trying to show a "snapshot" of the Earth 66 million years ago, as if they were doing Planet Earth then. The whole series reads very much like that - Planet Earth, but 66 million years ago. There are downsides to that, like not highlighting things that existed in other time points, but it makes sense to me. I just want other time points to get similar treatments! Especially because the animals of the Maastrichtian are some of the more famously known prehistoric animals (T. rex, Mosasaurus, Triceratops, Quetzalcoatlus...). I'm hoping the amazing success of Prehistoric Planet leads to more series in other time points. I personally think we need a Triassic series, pronto. It's a weird time period that very very very few people appreciate properly. Selfishly, I'd like a Paleocene or Eocene series, so I have even a 1% chance of getting consulted.

I know the whole story behind the bird-dinosaur snafu with Styginetta, and its not a happy one. The main science consultant on the series, Darren Naish, is one of the leading pioneers in "treat birds like regular dinosaurs you fools" movement - frankly, I learned a lot of what I know from him. He wanted them to acknowledge Styginetta as a dinosaur. It was higher up execs who put the kibosh on that. They literally said no, they would not call birds dinosaurs. The excuses given were crap - something about being accessible to audiences - but we all know that's bullshit. Walking with Dinosaurs called birds dinosaurs in 1999. Jurassic Park called birds dinosaurs in 1993. I don't know what their actual reason is, but whatever it is, it's a bad one. I'm going to blame capitalism and shareholders until proven otherwise. I recognize this sounds like I'm spouting conspiracy theories, but it's not a conspiracy if people involved openly admit this is what happened! Like... damn. this is why scientists and artists suffer - meddling capitalists.

Overall I have very few complaints. I think there could have been more emphasis on the fact that many of these behaviors are our *best guesses* - like, well thought out hypotheses, many even tested, but not fact. In any dinodoc, a lot of the uncertainty about paleontology goes out the window for the sake of storytelling, and that's why I think making of/the science behind features should be part of every dinodoc, not a side note or a podcast or something. They kind of did that in s2 by having the science segments at the end, but that only went into the research for one behavior per episode - not nearly enough to show everything. If people understood more how science works and how research works, we'd have fewer problems... and that's a perfect way to show it to people. Other than that, most of my critiques are really and truly nitpicks, or something I'd want them to show that they haven't, that kind of thing. But honestly, its the best depiction of the Maastrichtian I have ever seen.

I'm personally irritated we haven't seen Thescelosaurus. It's not just a generic bipedal ornithischian! That thing was WEIRD. First of all, we know more about it than most nonavian dinosaurs because we have lots of great fossils. Second off, it had armor on its belly!!! We think they kicked each other like Pachycephalosaurs butted heads!! WHY IS THAT NOT IN A DOC??? Third off, it was just an important component of Hell Creek, which we've now seen in multiple segments, and yet... no Thescelosaurus... wtf, amiright?

And you are very welcome!!! I'm glad I could answer it now :D So yeah, I love PP, but it's not perfect, and there are things I would fix if I could ^_^ That said, huge shoutout to Darren for making this happen. The man is a hero for us all.

#prehistoric planet #dinosaurs #birds #prehistoric life #palaeoblr

56 notes · View notes

heartgold · 8 months

Text

Disorganized ep1 re-read thoughts to sort out properly later, **** and Natsuhi centric

At one glance Natsuhi being the narrative punching bag is fun from the standpoint of Sayo taking out her resentment towards her by writing her into Situations (maybe I'm reaching but the specific accusation Eva throws at her about pushing Kinzo thru the window onto the courtyard below reads like a stand-in for getting to accuse her of having pushed her off the cliff) but it's even more interesting and painful seeing how even with all that, she gives Natsuhi so much narrative focus, Especially with her struggles being a woman stuck amidst the chains of the Ushiromiya family and her feelings of inadequacy as a wife and mother. Natsuhi is relentlessly put through the wringer but also gets to be one of the stars of this episode. The bits with Natsuhi swearing to protect Jessica no matter what because a mother would become a demon to protect her daughter are so painful on a re-read considering what she did. And, again reaching, the part where Natsuhi runs people out of the study when there's a killer out there also reads as a stand-in for Sayo's feelings about having survived attempted murder by the woman who should've adopted and protected her. They even bring up that she would feel differently had it been Jessica instead, she wouldn't throw her beloved (biological) daughter to the wolves. Man.

Like. Underneath the resentment and sadness and anger it reads like Sayo tries to process the trauma of learning about what she did by trying to understand Natsuhi through writing her character and drawing parallels between them. The entire idea of women unable to fulfill the role of wives and mothers being treated as subhuman is presented in the story through Natsuhi's suffering, with the bitter realization later on that it was that very aspect of Natsuhi's pain that culminated into the incident in the first place and passed that pain forwards. There are too many feelings imbued into Natsuhi's characterization, many contradictions. Sayo grieves the adopted mother she never had being also the madam who was horrible to her as a servant her whole life and the reason her life snowballed down a thorny path while also understanding and resonating with her pain more than anyone else. It's a very delicate, bittersweet portrayal. It feels a bit similar to how she sometimes uses Kinzo as a stand-in for herself in a way that reads as very self-loathing, portraying her pain and the parts she hates about herself through the people who ruined her life, except Kinzo is reduced to a narrative spectre and a caricature, written as a pathetic dying old man crying over Beatrice and spouting nonsense about sorcery in the background to obfuscate the mystery from the fantasy, a dead narrative device pretending to be alive, whereas Natsuhi is brought to the forefront and her suffering as a woman wronged and dehumanized by the family are central to ep1. There's an immensity of contradictory feelings in there but it's clear how Sayo's resentment towards those two is on very different scales.

By comparison this makes it even clearer how ep5, the other Natsuhi-centric episode, was a forgery written without love. Besides the obvious with the entire premise of the message bottles being foregone by making Battler an accomplice, ep5 focuses purely on punishing and humiliating Natsuhi as much as possible for those specific aspects of her suffering, and "the man from 19 years ago" is characterized as primarily revenge-motivated when in truth Sayo's actions were a result of the depths of desperation and seeing no other future for herself or the family besides death, there was anger and catharsis in it but they were never the main goal, more like an internal justification for why they all should die alongside her. The whole thing tramples on the original meaning of the message bottles, which is very much The Point of this forgery from both meta and irl angles. The witch trial in the court of illusions reads a lot like an allegory for witch hunters discussing the latest forgery in internet forums in the worst faith possible and tearing the real tragedy apart in the process alongside the dignity and humanity of very real dead people. "Natsuhi wanted to defend Kinzo's honor even with all the torment he put her through? (ignores everything about her character centering being a woman fighting to be deemed worthy after being dehumanized for being unable to fulfill the role of a wife) what, was she FUCKING that old man? lol"

Speaking of that, something that's funny in a horrible way is how ep5 basically retells the entire "how did Kinzo leave the study?" argument from ep1 verbatim but with SO MUCH meta-mockery involved. Eva's receipt is now Erika's perfect seal (countering Natsuhi's defense that the receipt couldve been replaced). The idea that there could be hidden passages is instantly countered by Dlanor using the decalogue. Same goes for Battler's "what if grandpa was hiding under the bed and snuck out while you weren't looking?!" genius theory since Dlanor & co can magically check all spots simultaneously. And then "what if Kinzo was thrown out the window" is back except it's Battler having a midair anime battle with Dlanor (DESCRIBED AS LOOKING LIKE A KNIGHT ON A WHITE HORSE) over whether peepaw would jump out the window and survive and demonstrating it by flying outta there dramatically after dropping some epic action lines then Beato also jumping out and into his arms like a princess escaping a tower. It's hilarious with how it makes fun of everything but at the same time so painful how it tramples on everything ep1 stood for regarding The Heart. I'm just imagining GM!Lambda having so much fun coming up with this scenario because it's such a Lambda thing. Mockery thinly disguised with exciting action and cheesy lines and even a bit of romance. Pop cute etc let's take the piss out of everything and everyone. And also include a bunch of genuine hints and clues despite it all. It's not like I want you to make an epic comeback or anything

#umineko spoilers #◇#maq don't open it's spoiler city

28 notes · View notes

hero-next-door · 19 days

Text

Defending Nathan

(From Every Accusation)

All fact proven & common sense theory

No bullshit.

I suck at grammar. Deal with it.

I've replayed the game far too many times to gather this. I read into everything and even read into and WATCHED people who have suffered the same mental illness and situations Nathan has been in.

What I'll be covering:

Illness, rib breaking, dead animals, bdsm, Chloes pic, Rachel, gun on campus, Kate, Pompidou, Jefferson, wealth and his father.

And dont even THINK about skiping ahead!

Everything here is tied into one another. Read from start to finish. You're on this post to understand right? Or to argue? Im not here to argue so, bye.

Lets start from the top...

Nathans downfall was caused by society and all who failed him. He's driven by hatred of others who don't understand him and the game purposly wrote him off that way. They want players to hate him from what sides of the stories we've experienced. They gave this character controversial hobbies and a cynical bully attitude to really keep you suspecting him and not guessing Jefferson. The game isn't about Nathan. Its about Max. We learn so much about Max and everyone close to her. The tears they shed, the pains they've endorsed. Same with Chloe and Rachel's story. My heart goes out to all of them. We don't get to see that with other characters, therefore we don't care for them...or that's the games intentions. We don't know the ins and outs of Nathan. Only what the game shows us which are all negative. So of course disliking Nathan is only reasonable.

Mental Illness

We start with mental illness. He has Psychosis. Lots of proof, but i'm assuming you've seen it all already. Do people know what Psychosis is? Like do they REALLY know what it is? Because this ALONE changes everything. And not Psychopathy ..Psychosis. Two different things pookie. Psychopathy is the one where part of the brain is missing or disturbed. THEY'RE the ones that don't have empathy. Psychosis is different. Anybody can get it. This illness can take your empathy and awarness away then bring it all back after the harm is done, leaving you to process that. Schizo and Bipolar are also all quite a handful to deal with too. Loud Noises/downgrading voices in your head SO LOUD that people will do anything to calm them. (Dont be shy, youtube: "28- Psychotic Episode" by Collège d'Alma) The feeling of loosing your mind is something I notice a lot of haters dont empathize on especially if they killed or hurt sombody. The brain slips into a state so disconnected that interviews with recovering patients I've seen describe it as confusing and scary and dont recall saying the stories they told and actions they did others. Imagine not being able to remember the hurtful things you've said and done. Imagine being told you killed sombody...with your own hands? And you can hardly remember what happened. Like... how would you react? Think about it. Anybody can get psychosis with enough trauma or a kick in the noggin. Some people that were interviewed that had psychosis said that they found relief when getting high or drunk. Little did they know the symptoms could bounce back up to 5x during withdraw. But they were so desperate to get rid of the voices they abused the drugs. Like....wow the game really did their research to create such a complicated character. Anyway..moving on.

Now lets break down everything else...

Shooting Chloe

Just rewatch it. Aims gun, Chloe pushes him, it tightens grip, ACCIDENTLY shoots her, immediately drops gun and gets really scared of he's done, checking to see if shes alive! If you specifically rewatch the ending of Lis1 when Chloe gets shot, they extend his reaction. He goes back and forth checking her body. If he wanted to kill her, you check pulse then run. Not sticking around crying about it. There's your empathy you're all saying he doesnt have. Other times where he could have showed more empathy ties with his Psychosis. Some people with the illness said that the voices loudly in their head will convince them that everyone around you is your enemy. Everyone is after you. It can twist your brain to feel anger and fear towards others. Nathan is always hung up on how everyone is using him and trying to control him. Which people ..DO use him. So now hes convinced that everyone is. He's not choosing to feel this way. He just needs psychiatric help.

Breaking Ribs

In Before The Storm his entire demeanor is completely different than the Lis 1. He's more cowardly and not loud and aggressive. We'll be mentioning his creepy "pervy" binder, later. Nathan isn't violent until the end IF you let Nathan get bullied and push his life the negative direction. Sure its not Chloe's responsibility but this is the game's way of showing you his downfall. We need to remember the game hides scenes and expect you to make up what happened behind the scenes. He broke Samantha's ribs over ..what? Shes always so desperate to defend Nathan and even gets upset with Chloe when she doesn't help. So if you tell her the wrong option to pressure kindness into Nathan it results in him breaking ribs. How though? Haters immediately hop on and say cause hes a mean and abusive non-empathic nut head. You sure he didnt just push her away and her clumsiness just fell over? She did say she was clumsy. You don't think she wouldnt have tried to hug or touch him in anyway. Ok ok...calm down... lets take a step back.. You get this "breaking ribs" ending from letting Nathan get bullied and embarrass himself during the play that his father pressured him about! Adding a little "..fuck you.." to the audience. Showing his start to his villian career and the start of him hating everyone and you tell Samantha to go hug him!? This is the start of his mental spiral if you let things play out this way. But hurting her with intention? No. Lets tie this in with the other endings to their relationship. You get the clumsy one. She hurts herself differently and Nathan is with her in the hospital. Saying how he feels bad that she got hurt. (empathy bell) And they continue yo talk about her photo or whatever. Tie this with the rib one, tie this with the Chloe getting shot incident and tie this with his mental illness. Come on do i gotta spell it out for you.. Hurting someone is not what he attends to do. Like he quotes in his voice mail. (Speaking of that voice mail, empathy bell.) He does get angry at Samantha and hurts her and we as players dont know the full story. But what was playing in his head seconds before and the entirety of the game that lead up to this IS the reason why he accidentally hurts her. Getting her away was his goal, not breaking ribs! And then.. The good ending. Him sitting beside her smiling. Oh wait! Hes a little psycho with no human emotion? Psychosis has all parts of the brain attached, pookie. For most cases, It can be cured and helped. I can get it, YOU can get it. He has human emotions when he is at his very rare peaceful moments like with this good ending, when with Victoria ig and other scenes we tend to forget. Because painting him as the villian was the games goal. Jefferson was the plot twist.

Daddy Issues, Smug talk and a Gun on campus

Simple guys. Simple. You represent this school. You represent our name. This is a legacy. You will not embarrass me. This isn't about you or your problems!

Sure YOU wouldn't crumble under that pressure but Nathan sure did. Sure child abuse isn't an excuse to "kill" people. But is it the child's fault? Sean-beanbag prescott should be arrested for not taking his boy to the asylum. Instead he argues with a doctor!? Goofy bro. But so many people are fueled with anger towards Nathan Instead. Its whatever. Prescott literally being his name was already a red flag to other characters and chose to hate and bully him over it. Drew hated for what his FATHER did. Nathan did ..what again? Notice how that "rich Malfoy talk" wasnt really present in Before The Storm. Sure he tried to burn Drew with a family financial situation insult but the "Im rich, my father owns everything, I got a lawyer, money this and that" wasn't in his character in the Before the Storm. I believe being a prescott wasn't really in his future goals and he wasnt ever really passionate about it. Its all in the annoyance in his tone with his father before the play. Lis1 he uses it so oftenly to show that hes the boss and in control. Hes Influenced by representation for his family/school, wealth, intimidation, and of course hatred and believing everyone hates him. In his mind everyone is against him, after him and wanting to use him. Again, he doesn't choose to think this way. Let me explain my last sentence clearly though. Imagine being surrounded by a ton of people. All their attention is on you. They hate who you are. They talk about you. You have a defensless stomach sinking feeling and scared because all these people surrounding you, are looking at you and all your insecurities and laughing at you. Well..obviously some of that is not going on in reality. But to Nathan, that IS his reality and he has no control over it. Anyways I shouldn't have to keep explaining mental illness and how it stresses the brain. Bottom line is, His status and waving a gun around is what he thinks keep others out of his head. He can barley throw a punch. He had to use his head on warren and did you catch when Max hit him in that scene? Dude was literally holding onto his face like he'd been battered. Like she did NOT hit that hard lmao. He's weak. He's always been the same tiny Nathan from before the storm. Just now he uses masks for intimidation to stop his bullies and anyone he thinks is "after him." He never meant to use a gun on anybody, just a threat. During the second scene where warren reunited a head butt with Nathan.. If you pull off warren, he barley even aims the gun when he ran away towards his room. Cowardly. He feels that he has to, to protect himself. He also uses his father as a threat, but clearly that never worked. Also notice him crying when you let Warren get crazy on him? Dudes apologizing and sobing? Guess thats not his first rodeo, rip.

BDSM and Dead Animals

Ok..so hes a little frisky. Y'all need to remember this is a fictional game first, okay? Lol Anyway, I can't defend him much here but I got something. Firstly, the game WANTS you to suspect Nathan. Can't keep his room pretty and pink, they have to make it freaky and spooky. They paint Nathan as the villian for you to only focus on him as a suspect. So that everyones jaws are dropped with Jefferson twirls in.

Well start with the dead animals so you can skip the BDSM part if you want.

There is no proof he hurt animals. Thats not really like him. He does have a list of illness but Psychopathy isn't one of them. Y'all can keep yappin but its not. Clearly NOT one of them. He could have hurt an animal during an unaware episode, but there will not be any awareness behind it. Anyways, there are plenty of artists that do the same thing. Nathan is very passionate about photography and protraying solitary but not in the same way Jefferson does. Jefferson certainly uses that manipulation but we'll get to that later. There are artists that like to shine on death in positive light and in sorrow. There's also beauty in anatomy. Not my cup of tea but someone close to me can name me all kinds of gross organs and would be down to disect any animal. Yuck. But to them.. its fascinating and they are the greatest person in my life. In love and in empathy. (NOT comparing my pookie to Nathan, PAUSE.) In anatomy theres Education and surprise. Death is also a theme and style too. Skulls and gore, super "rad" fukin "knarly."

BDSM Skip to next part if needed

Finally...defending BDSM? This can bring trauma to those who have experienced it negativly or view it negativly. So skip to the Frank defense or read more if you want.

Bdsm relationships are very controversial. Some people see it as unhealthy, abusive and sick. But if you have talked to or listened to other people within these relationships they state that its completely consensual, safe, harmless, a breach of deep trust with their partners and simply a fetish or kink. The goal is to have fun at your limit..not pass the limit. There are twisted people who have broke that barrier and made it not fun and abusive. Thats were I can't argue. If you feel that way towards the topic, I completly empathize with you.

Nathan has shown in his other photos a black and white theme of solitary. And you can tell that he might have took those bdsm photos himself. As the quality is almost like the Pompidou photo. Everyone blends him taking bdsm photos with is angry behavior and "non empathic" demeanor. But this is where I loop back to Before The Storm hugging-my-binder Nathan. Its shown that in one of his endings he took photos of Samantha. Obviously NOT bdsm photos, his binder was a school project. But Samantha obviously consented and Nathan was passionate enough to show her. He sees them as art. Naked girls have been models for sculptures and paintings. Its beauty. Thats IF she was naked in some way in those photos. Which I still doubt. School project. Im sure the photos were gentle and strange and misunderstood and Drew was just in his bully era. His reaction would have been a lot more eye opening if he had a face full of tits or straps. Nathan begged for his binder back and even nervously reacted showing he had love for his work and 'took time with it' (as he quotes when Drew throws it). I bring this up here to show that the women in his photos were indeed given consent and if hes passionate about depicting his art, hurting them wouldn't be on his agenda. As we all learned today that hurting people was never his intentions, until drugs and illness met with pressure and intimidation clouds his brain.

I read up on other artists that painted things similar. In their paintings they expressed dread, vulnerability, feeling traped and ..feeling used. If Nathan did find the images he took arousing, then why would he hang them up like everything else in his room like art? I believe that they're depicted in an artful way and in its black and white shading brings a sad darkness. If its anything like the painters I mentioned, maybe Nathan has a deep level of empathy we don't understand.

Frank and Pompidou

I didn't even know he took a picture of Franks hurt dog in the road because you little freaks threw his treat in the street!? This will also tie in to chloes pic but we'll get to that. Frank first, as its pretty simple. Nathan runs some system with frank. And its pretty obvious its the same thing Drew was doing in Before the storm. Nathan clearly doesn't like it as he finds it controling but getting his hands on drugs is a great way to forget his flaws and calm his illness symptoms. Which only created a loop of his symptoms worsening, as talked about before. His illness is very active towards the end of Before the Storm. You can tell by his huge character difference that drugs only made it worse.

Pompidou is a good dog but just remember he's not the one who hurt him. This ties in with what we explained in the dead animal phase. The Imagine is black and white. Its a strange art most people don't understand. Man, I don't even understand it. But these people aren't heartless and they're simply expressing pain. Or..he took it for the same reason he took Chloes pic. To feel that hes in control, thinking this will help his mental reality of thinking everyone can use him, as explained earlier. But i doubt it. One is in color and Pompidou is not. One is misguided and one is "art."

Jefferson, Rachel, Kate, Chloes pic

If i see one more person throw him in the same trash bin as Jefferson im going to puke. Anyway I've twisted my head around this story so many times, begging to see the bigger picture. No pun attended. Jefferson was pulling the strings all along ..you know that right? If Nathan was never there, Jefferson would have still done his disgusting projects. He certainly brought Victoria over without Nathan's usage. He didn't need Nathan, Nathan just made it easier cause he can easily be manipulated. Making Nathan do it all so the consequences will fall on him. Jefferson is smart and knows the right words to say. Nathan is missing the kindness of a father figure, all he has to do is play with his feelings. Nathan falls too easily to kindness. He felt the kindness of Samantha during the good ending and He felt the kindness from Victoria..but Victoria toxic bully nature wasn't helping. Bottom line is Jefferson easily manipulated him and understood his mental reality and used that against him. Adding thoughts into Nathans head. Jefferson learned to use Nathan's illness to his advantage. Nathan trusted Jefferson as did everyone in that school did. Why on earth would Jefferson wrong him? He looked up to him so when Jefferson slowly brought him into his plans of drugging girls, Nathan thought that it was all ..moral. In reality you and I know obviously thats not okay but to Nathan (and his severe illness) he trusted Jefferson was doing no wrong. We don't understand the mental strain he was under, manipulation goes a long way. Heres how he did it. He probaby said things like 'We are the same Nathan, this is art just like yours.' It starts small, Nathan gets him the drugs. Then he pulls him in, Nathan start drugging the girls for me. Start driving them here. Start helping me inside the dark room. Start helping me inject my victims. Jefferson had so much power over him. He was connected with his father. He can threaten his grade, his representation and his future in art. He knew all the right things to say and do. He knew how his head worked. Clog him up with drugs, keep him quiet. Heal his missing father needs and demand him for your needs. Does this not make Nathan a victim too?

Then ...the Rachel incident happened. Nathan was NOT mentally aware of what he's done. The excited "Rachel!" when he saw Max at the diner clearly shows that he truly expected her to pull up. This mixes with the symptoms we've discussed. He only remembers bits and pieces as obviously it was beyond traumatizing. Sending him in an insane spiral and the infamous psychosis drawing. (Don't be afraid, google psychosis drawings. Damn. Just imagine you recovered from psychosis and laying eyes on that and not remembering you drew that..ugh...I'd cry.) Someone with Psychopathy wouldnt feel traumatized from such events, debunking the fact everyone thinks Nathan has Psychopathy. He doesn't have Psychopathy, he has psychosis. Moving on. Jefferson was certainly angry with him and drugged Nathan himself after the incident which really helped Nathan to forget what he's done. But Jefferson's anger and not talking to him tore him apart. His emotional attachment clearly wasn't having it. The note he wrote Jefferson in desperate attempt to bring him back after ruining Jefferson plans goes to show just how much he wants that sense of being cared for. If only it was someone else that wasnt Jefferson ..or his dad can do is fucking job too.

Alcohol was certainly a great method of forgetting what he did. So then comes Chloes interaction with him. We know the story. He did not SA her, I can say that right here and now. Nothing like that was behind this. You can tell by the way Chloe presented the story to Max, there wasn't an uncomfortable tone to her story. She didn't seem traumatized but more shocked and "it was pretty crazy." She also wasn't drugged for that long, she woke up very soon, fully clothed. What obviously happened is that Nathan used this to feel in control like mentioned way above. Drugs and Psychosis is no joke. Who knows what hell is playing in his mind but I unfortunately believe that this was to try to win back Jefferson. He had been angry at him and ignoring him and even tho he hates drugging, his confusion and drunk state led him to this. He's cowardly and his mind is slipping and tries to do what he thinks is right for him. He's misguided and lead down the wrong path.

Nathan did not SA Kate! Kate story breaks my heart into a million pieces but if she was SA-ed, it wasn't Nathan. After everything I said above you can tell that, that isnt in his character. But here I want bring up the voicemail. Nathan claims multiple times that he never wanted to hurt anybody, implying that he felt forced to do harm. Something he DID NOT want to do. Why on earth would anybody have felt forced to SA somebody!? I'm not saying Kate WASN'T SA-ed as I can only assume maybe the boys she was shown with in the video did something or Jefferson. Victoria was Kates bully!!! Nathan wanted to be liked by Victoria and was influenced by her nature. He's desperate for attention and kindness. Victoria did far more to hurt Kate and her reason as to why was shit. You go THAT FAR to one up your photography game. Girl, bye. She spread that video and she still has empathy too? Her regretting everything? Did she reallyy regret? Or she wanted to make herself look good for her representation? She showed regret via text message in Before The Storm too? She doesn't have a mental illness but the game gave her an act of forgiveness and used her as a victim so the audience will sympathize with her. Goes to show you the game controls what they want you to feel. If they were to do that with Nathan..would opinons be different? Taking us into his mind and how he sees the world around him. They could have..but didnt. Well.. We have the voicemail but obviously that didnt stop the haters. It's unfortunate. But the game gave me just enough little clues for me to shine light on in this post. They put so much into his character but never showed the audience the truth.

Conclusion

What we've learned today is that Nathan isn't the villian you think. He's been manipulated, used and needs mental help but im sure my old Nathan-defending friends have said this time and time again. Im here to add something....

Its been PROVEN that he's capable of all human emotions, you just refuse to believe it because you're mistaking his illness and claiming all of this was intentional. Psychosis can be temporary. Its a like a hand that steals your common sense, feelings, empathy, sympathy and you're only left with acting on pure chaos and negative or fearful emotions. After long treatment your sense of reality returns, your feelings, your empathy, your sympathy.. And all you have now is guilt and regret and self blame that you hurt somebody. If you let Nathan kill Chloe, he is arrested. He had doctors aware of his illness and would have been charged with illness in mind. Forcing the treatment he needed ages ago. By the time Lis 2 came out...I wonder how he's taking it all in? What he did to everyone, what he did to Rachel.

He was written off to die, be locked up and blamed. Unfortunately he was caught in the crossfires of the harm of our favorite characters. If he was born in a different family and away from Jeff, he would have never hurt anybody. Matter a fact, he would never have suffered with his listed mental illnesses.

This goes out to all real accidental murder cases. There will always be a great divide in opinions. I hate comparing fictional games with real life but I find it crazy that we call others nonempathtic when they aren't empathic themselves. Its like the word "accidental" is worthless.

Its always a debate..

Do we feel bad for the lives lost and their families

Do we feel bad for the mental crumble of the one who never meant to kill and how their familes have to deal with that.

Are they worthy to walk this earth? Are they worthy to see the daylight again? Are they still human too? Should they die too? Is redemption possible?

Who knows. Peoples opinions wont change unless them, themselves fall onto the opposing team. If they were to suffer the chaos of accidentally murdering someone or the greif of loosing someone from an accidental murder.

#nathanprescott #nathan prescott #life is strange #life is strange before the storm #life is strange nathan #Life is strange nathan prescott #Defending nathan #Defending nathan prescott #Redeeming nathan prescott #grahamscott #Warrenxnathan #Scottfield #mental health #mental illness

9 notes · View notes

etincelleart · 1 year

Note

i would like to know...

what exactly in v9 change your opinion about penny?

*cracks my fingers*

So, basically so far the message that I understood from RWBY was kinda always the same, always coming back in different ways but still : the balance of life and death, like in our world. The thing is that in RWBY it always has been THE rule, especially after The Lost Fable in Volume 6 where we saw the "Gods" ideas about it, it was their main rule. The spirits of the Relics also work according to the same rule, just like Ambrosius who can't bring people back from the dead (I think he could do it, but the rule doesn't allow him to do so).

But even at that moment I was a bit conflicted because the "Gods" didn't seem to be on the same page about this rule. The God of Darkness decided to revive Ozma even if he probably knew about the rule, but he still decided to ignore it because his ego was flattered because Salem went to him. Then the God of Light comes, they fight like child, and they break their own rule multiple times while arguing. They acted like children, made Ozma and Salem suffer and then went like "oh you have to understand the balance of life and death", this seems pretty horrible and completely selfish to me aha, but that's another topic-

So we knew the Gods weren't perfect, but they were still the "Gods". I say "Gods" because in Volume 9 we learn they aren't the real Gods of the RWBY universe, but simply Afterans who had more powers than others, who evolved and decided to experiment and create. But they are still Afterans. They aren't perfect and they aren't allowed to talk about balance when they fought each other from the very beginning after creating the Cat and the Jabberwalker.

In fact, the real RWBY God is a Tree represented in a human form as the Blacksmith, who's a sort of avatar I imagine. But even she/they said that her being the Tree was a simplistic view of what is the Tree and what it does. This avatar is gentle, and most importantly, they're from a world where death doesn't exist.

This still seems pretty wild to me to discover in the RWBY universe a place where people just don't die. They change, they evolve, they are reborn but they don't die. Their soul isn't lost like in Remnant. They go back to the very original place, where everything started, and come back different. It can be understood as some form of death, but it's still a different process than on Remnant.

So, about Penny, I'm not saying she'll definitely have a revival but a lot of things start to make me believe this could be the case, maybe in the near future, OR at the end of the series, because I imagine the Brothers/"Gods" will return to Remnant and the Tree might play its part too.

Knowing all of this BIG part of RWBY's lore now just makes me think that we just discovered such a big thing. The Brothers are so stricts about the life and death rule (that they don't even respect), and I never thought what we learned in V9 would truly be a thing. So RWBY's universe is so much more now, it's not just about it, it's about other worlds and about the Ever After that is this origin, the center of everything. It feels almost like if I had blinkers and suddenly woah, a whole new part of the story we didn't know or expected is here, and now I have like a million questions aha.

For Penny specifically, before Volume 9 I was kinda okay with the fact that she died, and was expecting her death to be announced and to be a big thing for Ruby. But we really got SO MUCH hints and references, almost every chapter except 4, 9 and 10. In a world where death doesn't exist, I think it's kinda odd we have so much references (even if it's mostly for Ruby's pain). Like, when you take a step back and look at the overall arcs and story : Penny' always been in terrible situations that ended by death. Even in V8 her "choice" in the finale doesn't really feel like one to me. Penny's never been near any of her goal and she never had the time or opportunity to do so. She was always too busy to fight for people she cared about, or just fighting to survive, to have her chance, but never truly succeeded. It just feel like her arc isn't done, and again when you watch it with an overall view, we see V7-9 being a big arc for her that only led to tragedies (got framed at the election, got the powers she didn't want, got hacked, and then got stabbed and killed).

After seeing Little being killed and come back as Somewhat, even without their memories but still remembering deep down, I have more faith about the fact that character's death don't undo any suffering or trauma the characters went through, or don't change anything for the viewer. We got some weird parts in V9 (I talked about it more in details in another post) that are a bit unclear, and I think deliberately open to the viewer for interpretation. At least this is how it feels to me. I'm thinking about the Blacksmith saying to Ruby about Penny's sword : "nothing, no one, is ever truly lost". This could mean so much things omg. And knowing how much CRWBY loves details and foreshadowing, maybe it means something for later.

Anyway, there's also the fact that at the end of Volume 9, we see Vacuo and Amity Collosseum is there. Which means that Pietro and Maria probably made it to Vacuo. But Pietro without Penny, it feels weird and so sad to me. I talked about it in other posts as well but he's already the kind of man to sacrifice parts of himself to create Penny, and remake her a second time after losing her. Would he really be able to resist to try to remake her a 3rd time ? Would he really not do that ? Pietro is also important in the series because of his connexion and bond to Penny. And I really don't think he wouldn't at least try to remake her, even if that would mean sacrificing himself...

In general, this is the RWBY lore expension and all the hints that we got that kinda made me change my mind. We had V8 that ended in a tragic way with Penny's death, and we go back with a whole volume about rebirth ? This is kinda odd to me aha

Also, I thought again about some lines from Volume 8, and again knowing how much CRWBY like to foreshadow things and add little details here and there, I'm thinking that Pietro might meet Ambrosius some day at some point. Ambrosius said that he'd love to meet him, so idk maybe, that would be really great-

There's also the fact that Ruby said to Ambrosius "We kinda want to keep her longer than that", and we saw in the finale how much Ambrosius took everything that is said to him literally. Who knows if he didn't do something with Penny to help her to remain resistant ? And this line as well, "we go to Vacuo, all of us", and it's again odd that Penny can't go in the end. Idk maybe I'm biased but I just would love that aha.

Ruby and Penny's journey together are also very important in both of their arc, and as much as I think Nuts and Dolts is endgame, both being together despite everything would be a really beautiful message, a light of hope, and they would both have a really great influence on each other.

I could continue for a long time aha but I'm tired, there are just so much things in V9 that helped me to think this might not be just over yet for her. Hope you enjoyed the reading !

41 notes · View notes

liprairian · 1 year

Text

So You Want To Be A Librarian

Five and a Half Things You Should Know Going In

This is a post, first and foremost, about burnout. Being a public librarian presents a certain category of problems and attracts a certain type of people - namely, the problems of social aid professions and the compassionate people who go into them. The advice in this post comes from my own experiences as well as wisdom distilled from my parents’ combined 60 years of being in the sister passion profession of teaching.

Here goes:

1) Libraries are not your life. Not your patrons, not your programs, not your advocacy efforts. None of it. Repeat this to yourself, over and over, as many times as it takes. If you want to survive - or even just be effective - in this line of work, you cannot reduce your identity down to just ‘librarian’. All the advice on work-life balance and establishing boundaries applies here, but don’t forget to think about the ‘identity’ part specifically, too.

1a) It’s going to be really easy to forget 1) when you’re in the warm, righteous, determined rush of feeling needed.

That’s a heady feeling and it’s going to make you want to ignore your boundaries. Sometimes, you will; that can’t always be helped, and breaking your own boundaries isn’t something to beat yourself up over when it happens. It’s a neutral fact that we’re wired to love the feeling of being needed, or we wouldn’t have lasted this long as a social species. When you come down from it a bit, ask yourself what parts of that experience were rewarding to you. Was it the type of social interaction - teaching, caring, giving? Was it a feeling that you had power over your portion of the situation, power to enact what you thought was right? Where else could you get those things if you needed, so that your job doesn’t have to be the only place you experience those feelings?

2) Most people are not going to remember you after they walk out that library door, so don’t do your job to be remembered by them. You’re probably in this job because someone in libraries had a huge impact on you when you were younger, but you need to recognize when and where you’re making your interactions about you and your own self-image rather than your patrons or your role in the community. This can be especially difficult with kids, since kids can be very intense and make you feel like you’re the centre of their universe. When this happens, ask yourself what need you are fulfilling for them and what that actually, concretely requires of you.

3) Suffering is not transactional. We live in a culture that’s built primarily on Christian values, and the biggest Christian story of them all is the success of sacrifice. Jesus, however, was special - that’s kind of the whole point, as I understand the thing. Basically, remember that the amount of blood, sweat, and tears that you put into something does not in any way correlate to the amount of enjoyment or learning or purpose anyone else gets out of it.

4) Understand the system. Where does the money come from? Can you trace it back, not just to grants from the city, but to the kinds of business and property taxes that fund the city? North Americans are brought up with this background noise of ‘infinite growth’ that you have to consciously tone down if you want to be able to assess a situation realistically. I had a boss once who told me, “When you’re presenting to council, always remember that the fire department is fighting for the same pot of money you are.” There might be more than enough money in the world to fund what you want - but is that money in your town? If not, can you bring it into your town? Knowing what your limits are can help you expand them, yes, but it can also save you from throwing yourself after a mirage of glory that simply doesn’t exist.

5) Everything takes more time than you think, even changes away from horrifying practises or towards things that are objectively morally right. Libraries exist suspended in a web of the relationships between multiple bureaucratic organizations, budgets only happen once a year, and most people don’t spend their working days thinking about their community’s library. You’re going to have great ideas for change, they’re going to be realistic and possible and just within reach, and it’s going to feel grindingly slow. Don’t get mad; remember the fire department. Everyone working with you to achieve this change has their own equivalent of the fire department in their life. Make sure things are moving, but make sure you don’t blame people when they’re not moving faster. It’s unlikely that you’re being obstructed out of maliciousness and even on the rare occasions you are, you will get more help from others if you don’t visibly assume it anyway. Make sure you’re using your anger against injustice to motivate you, not other people.

#librarianing #libraries #librarylife

107 notes · View notes

batrachised · 1 year

Note

AU where Teddy moves away, goes to therapy, and realizes his mother wasn’t just clingy, she’s abusive. Sabotaging someone to keep them isnt love. You can be hurting and still held accountable for your actions. Their reactions to your boundaries are not your responsibility.

Teddy gets a job as a police sketch artist.

He comes back to the island to visit and starts getting Very Alarmed about Dean. He replays their childhood in his head with a new, adult perspective and sees it all click into place.

He talks to his therapist and his law enforcement contacts and realizes he can’t have actually have Dean arrested and that Emily might be too groomed to see what’s going on. After all it took him years himself and he’s removed from the situation and isn’t the target.

He talks to Aunt Elizabeth and Ilse and Perry and they make a plan. (Idk what specifically tbh)

Ultimately it will be up to Emily to leave but they’re gonna do what they can to give her the space and safety to start thinking more clearly about it.

Teddy carefully starts telling Emily what he learned about abuse and boundaries and keeps it all about him and his mother but hopes she’ll think about Dean.

He carefully asks questions and listens without giving her any specific advice unless she asks.

“Why do you feel you owe him? Do you feel that way about other people in your life?”

“It sounds like you feel responsible for his disappointment?”

I keep trying to find a way Teddy (or better yet - Emily) can have Dean arrested but I can’t come up with it.

Man Teddy could have been such a good character and he was just fully wasted. Emileddy even has interesting opposite-but-similar trauma in so many ways.

Lucy Maud didn’t even try with them. 😩

YOU UNDERSTAND MY PAIN ABOUT TEDDY KENT! Normally I try to avoid dunking on teddy because if you like him, great! don't let me spoil your fun! However, emily and teddy are my least favorite lmm pairing

Re: teddy's mom, I think that's something we see appear more than once in LM Montgomery's work--someone who is emotionally abusive or worse but legitimized through being presented as a tragic figure. Unfortunately no examples come to mind, but iirc her short stories can have that theme. An extreme example is the short story of the man who falls in love with a woman, she chooses to marry someone else and has a daughter, he helps raise the daughter, and then MARRIES THE DAUGHTER IN WHAT'S PRESENTED AS A FIX IT SCENARIO.

With Teddy, I honestly think the problem is that he doesn't balance out Emily well. Other LMM pairings go very well together in a satisfying contrast--Teddy doesn't. I still (yes, still) need to embark on my reread of the trilogy (Emily of New Moon is sitting on my dresser as I type), but although my memory could be deeply flawed and downright horrifically wrong (yes i'm still scarred about dean priest), I remember him being too similar to Emily, and more than that--being dull as dishwasher compared to all the other male characters, especially Perry!

Your ideas are very appealing because they make him protective of Emily haha, he needed something...more to his character. If I were writing Emily, although I do not pretend to have anywhere close to LMM's talent, I would probably just give her a love interest with an entirely different personality. What would that look like? I don't know! I do think that Teddy Kent was not a good foil to Emily Byrd Starr, and the book suffered for it (at least for me!)

#the best choice probably would have been to have Emily end up alone but I understand why LMM didn't do it #I for one would have been upset as a child haha #when I think of emily I think of someone who is sensitive and proud #perry was a good foil to her even tho I think they'd be a boring pairing because ilse exists #teddy was not

32 notes · View notes

anonymoushouseplantfan · 1 year

Note

From one of Canada's three major papers

OPINION

Spare me: Prince Harry’s claim of victimhood doesn’t quite fly

PHOEBE MALTZ BOVY

SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL

Copies of Prince Harry's new book Spare at a shop in London, on Jan. 10.CHRIS JACKSON/GETTY IMAGES

348 COMMENTSSHARE

BOOKMARK

Phoebe Maltz Bovy is a contributing columnist for The Globe and Mail.

Some – and I’m among them – argue that rather than being a way to promote social justice, so-called wokeness is about maintaining the status quo. A system of rules and manners that might seem progressive is in fact a cover for material inequality.

One could not design a better example of this than Prince Harry, the world’s premier nepotism baby. In his new memoir, Spare, Harry (he abhors snobbery, so let’s drop the “Prince”), bolstered by therapy, offers himself up as a courageous opponent of stiff-upper-lip upscale Britishness. He’s a modern man, in touch with his feelings. And he’s had it with archaic royal protocol, especially the bit about giving the kingdom to the elder son. Fight the power!

The biggest bombshells coming out of Prince Harry’s memoir, Spare

What Spare seeks to accomplish is to translate the life experience of a Prince who has spent much of his life carousing – a man whose life makes everyday white male privilege seem paltry – into the story of a victim of systemic forces.

When he partied, this was not a prince cavorting. It was a troubled young man finding solace in the bottle, the Ziploc bag.

Apart from the self-medicating, pre-rift Harry was known for having worn a Nazi uniform to a 2005 costume party. Ordinary people have been cancelled for less. But a royal, even a “spare,” is uncancellable. We learn that Prince Charles summonedthe Chief Rabbi of Britain, who told Harry – 20 at the time – what the Holocaust was.

Harry recounts this episode in his usual feelings-speak. The takeaway is not about mankind’s evil depths, but rather about … his own “self-loathing.” And anyway, how contrite did he need to be, given that, in his telling, William and Kate put him up to it?

Indeed, much of the book covers how Harry feels, temperature-wise, while in the army but also in civilian situations. He’s forever either too warm or too cold. (The latter involves a nauseating anecdote about frostbitten nether regions. Harry’s no Gary Shteyngart, and should have left well enough alone.)

He complains that he finds the dining room at Sandringham House “subtropical,” but that the Queen’s corgis objected to open windows (the draft, you see) so footmen would audibly close them. “That loud thump, unavoidable because the windows were so old, always felt like the door of a jail cell being slammed.”

Royalty, for Harry, has been a prison. It’s involved being hounded by paparazzi, and it made his pre-Meghan romantic life a challenge: women were either put off by the lack of privacy, or a little too excited about becoming a princess. That being a royal has also afforded him endless second chances and unfathomable gobs of money eludes him.

The point is not that Harry hasn’t suffered. To lose your mother at 12 is tragic even if you’re a prince. Where things get murky is in Harry’s interpretation of more recent history. Do the grumblings of a second-born royal hold a place in any broader fight for justice? With the exception of the ones specifically about the British tabloid press’s racism against his wife, it’s hard to make that leap. Yes, he moved to California after falling out with his family. But is he right to say he “fled”?

The power that comes with being Prince Harry is his for life, whatever his official role within the Royal Family. Harry claims his father left him “unemployable.” But he canstill do whatever he feels like (such as get a memoir ghostwritten by a fine writer), put a giant “Prince Harry” stamp on it and sell it to rapturous audiences.

The narrative at this point weaves from spring 2020 up to fall 2022. COVID – and the world shutting down – goes unmentioned, except as it affects their travel. A reference to Meghan’s three-bedroom detached property in Toronto as her “little house” offers a subtle reminder of Harry’s perspective. The book is at its strongest when Harry leans into that highly unusual vantage point.

Between the lines, and despite itself, Spare can be a fun, escapist and gossipy read, about a world where homes have 50 bedrooms and young people go on safari with hippos because why not. There’s the thrill of hearing the late Queen Elizabeth referred to as “Granny.” A royal story is worth more than a regular one, a fact that ultimately unites Harry with the tabloid journalists he – understandably – loathes.

On the streetcar home, gripping my copy of Spare, two older women sitting near me discussed the price of cauliflower. Nine dollars. More than these ladies could, uh, spare.

Thanks!

48 notes · View notes

not-poignant · 1 year

Note

Alright, so this is something I realized based on the brushes of worldbuilding you placed in the background of your *Underline the Rainbow* series, specifically, attitudes about omegas based on James's family from *Underline the Black* and Christian's attitude toward Nate from *Underline the Blue.* Even more specifically, the belief about how omegas have "healing powers" they bestow upon whomever they bond with. James's family believed in this strongly enough that, years later, they still work to destroy James's chosen partner because they felt an omega bond would magically heal terminal cancer. They even got journalists on their side, suggesting this idea is common enough in this world to warrant a news story. Thus, it wouldn't be a stretch for those that believe in these magical omega healing powers to "prescribe" an omega as a means of treating PTSD. Of course, you'd want one that isn't suffering from any mental or physical issues themselves, so you choose an omega who had a positive upbringing, like Nate. Christian or his family vetted Nate, picked him, and now are working to make Nate the perfect omega to soothe and heal Christian and his PTSD, someone who will never cause any negative feelings toward the alpha so he can focus on getting better Which is why Nate will always fail. He wasn't chosen as a partner, lover, or even a caregiver. He was chosen to exist as a perfect shadow of Christian, intuitively giving everything to his alpha while not taking any thought from Christian to care for, not even making a face when eating a food he hates or having a fabric he enjoys in his own heat nest that Christian doesn't like. Nate's not seen as a person; he's meant to be a tool with no soul, no desires, no concerns that contradict what Christian wants, and he will never be perfect enough to succeed there because it's an impossible standard. Heck, I'm half convinced the things Nate wants from Christian that the alpha mocks him for during heats are things like cuddling, not the sex itself. So yeah, I'm excited for more of both stories, especially *Blue.* Thanks again for writing such wonderful stories.

Anon, this is really clever and I half wish it was that deep, because you've put a lot of creative thought into this and I have not gone in that direction at all.

Firstly, I really wish fringe conspiracy theories didn't get picked up by the news, but we've learned thanks to the pandemic that this will actually happen a lot if the news is interesting or controversial enough (i.e. news headlines about vaccine injury being pushed by anti-vaxxers as 'proof' that they're right / were right all along). A theory doesn't have to be common for it to hit the news, the folks who believe in it just have to be loud enough. Gary's situation was newsworthy in particular because James was quite a well-known musician in the state, and there are less than 30 peak alphas in Western Australia and very few of them are in relationships, when they enter a relationship, it tends to enter the gossip columns anyway.

As for Christian, it'd be nice if this was something Christian's family was pushing - or not nice exactly, but it'd be nice if there was a broader overarching reason that isn't simply: Christian is abusive.

That's it.

Christian is abusive. He's an abuser. He doesn't believe Nate can heal him or soothe him or support his PTSD. He doesn't subscribe to fringe conspiracy theories. He's just one of the many millions of people out there who believes he has a right to control the lives of others, and to punish them when they aren't exactly the right 'shape' that he wants based on whatever whims he's experiencing in the moment. Abusers get PTSD too.

There is a very simple reason why Nate will always fail in that sense: Christian is an abuser, and he enjoys having power over others. Unfortunately for Nate, Christian's flavour of abuse is emotional/psychological, and Nate has no defences against it, because he never came into the relationship as an equal in the first place.

Christian never wanted perfection. He's gotten it by his own definition many times, and he's the one constantly moving the goalposts on Nate, to make sure he's always doubting and questioning and second-guessing himself. Christian could get everything he wanted in its exact perfect format and when Nate attempted to do the same thing the next day, he'd find a way and a reason to put it all down. It doesn't need to be logical, Christian enjoys subjugating those less powerful than he is, and he believes he has a right to do that.

He could if he wanted to use a conspiracy theory to support it but he - like most folks - disdains those sorts of theories. I think he'd scoff at the idea that omegas could be genuinely healing to anyone, tbh, both because the theory isn't really true, but also because of his general contempt towards omegas.

I'm sorry anon, you've put a lot more creative thought into how this could all sync up than I have! I tend to see all the relationships as quite separate (i.e. the kind of stories that could be read each as standalones), and sort of conceptualised them all very separately.

But also, I think this is influenced by the fact that Nate and Christian are actually a couple from another story of mine, Falling Falling Stars, where there was no conspiracy theories, but there certainly was an abuser, and an abuse victim who became very cynical and closed off after being with Christian, even once he'd fallen in love with Janusz. I saw no reason to introduce something completely new when the shape and structure of the abuse can remain essentially the same!

#asks and answers #underline the black #underline the blue #nate prince #janusz bodanowicz #fae tales au #it's past two am and i need to go to bed #so please forgive any typos or weird sentences #but yeah anon much kudos to you #like you could write some great stories/plots with a mind like that #but that is not where the story is going salkfjasd #i figured i'd nip that in the bud now #to save any future disappointment lol we'll just do the disappointment in how simple my plots are now #there's nothing complex about the plot/s in the Underline series i'm gonna be honest #after Fae Tales i'm just writing like villains and romance and relationships #and not going much deeper than that

20 notes · View notes

proustianlesbian · 7 months

Text

3 movies i saw this week and why you should watch them.

(this is my 260th post but the first one i use a title for.)

i hesitated to write this in french but i choose english to be understood by more people.

i'm starting with the first movie i have seen on monday evening with my mom : "kuolleet lehdet" by aki kaurismäki. so at first, we went there not really knowing what to expect, she had read me the summary just before we left and i almost didn't want to go. however, this movie is amazing. the cinematography and the colors are gorgeous and the characters really endearing. there are a lot of songs in finnish (both sang by characters and outside of the film) that gave this already slow and melancholic art piece several moments outside of time. what i love too is the reality of the characters, the situations : they are just two proletarian workers yet they are shown to be deserving to be the main characters. we see them working, being friendly with their colleagues, having fun with them but also facing exhaustion at the end of the day as well as being seen as negligible quantity and easily replaceable by their bosses. the relationship between the two main characters is really sweet as well as their relationships with their own friends and it shows love in a way i particularly love : there is no need to know the name of the other or to do romantic things, just being together and feeling happy with eachother is enough.

the second film i saw on wednesday night was "anatomie d'une chute" by justine triet, it had won the palme d'or at this year's cannes festival. so my mom and i went to see it, again i didn't really know what to expect except that there was actors i love in it and that it was a trial movie also about medias and how they make people percieve things. and this prize was so deserved, every actor and actress was incredible, some scenes were so well made, especially a play with sound and image as well as what we see, what movements did the camera and what it showed us. it sometimes got so close of a documentary more than a fictional movie. i have so many thoughts about it, truly one of the best movies of the year but many people talked about it so i can't really add anything new to say. but if you can, go watch it.

the last film i have seen this week was "le procès goldman", directed by cédric kahn. i saw it just yesterday, alone and i already knew pierre goldman's story very well, i learned about this movie in may in a french tv emission about cannes and have been really waiting to see it since. it is most certainly my favorite but for very personal reasons. the story seems very niche : it is a huis-clos, set in 1976, of the second trial of a far-left activist, son of jewish partisans from poland (and step-brother of a very popular singer, who is still the favorite personality of french people and has been so for years) who was accused of several robberies as well as the murders of two pharmacists, but if he admits the robberies, he claims his innocence for the murders. this movie is not only showing the faillures of the racist police and racist judiciary systems in france but also has very interesting conversations between the characters about being jewish and therefore racialized. but it also touches a subject that is so specific and personal, i never saw a movie talk about it : the feeling that when you come from a family that suffered and/or fought so much, you feel like no matter how much you fight, it will never be enough to live up to this history, even if you're not asked to. you feel like you never deserved to be born and live when you know what your family went through. there is a sentence he said that marked me : "i was born and died on the 22th june 1944.". to me, it is one of the best way the jewish experience in a racist society and racist country like france has ever been represented. and i really urge you, jewish or not, to go see it and especially if you are not so you can understand what it feels like a little bit more. the acting of everyone is superb, showing so well the intensity that reigns in this room, but the main actor, arieh worthalter, is phenomenal. the actors are well casted and look like their real life counterparts. the realisation is really beautiful even if there are around three or four places shown in the movie. i love how everything about the movie is simple : a basic white writing font on a black background giving us the contexte and the title, i think there is no music as well. the costumes are gorgeous too and i love how many details were put into the fabrics, patterns. i really want to meet the director to tell him how this movie made me feel so seen.

10 notes · View notes

liketwoswansinbalance · 1 year

Text

King Midas’ Speculated Involvement in Fall

These are all the possibilities I can think of. If anyone has other ideas, feel free to contribute! Skip to the bold text if you're not interested in the less Midas-related parts.

A young King Midas was promised to feature in Fall, and the Schools turn gold and glow with a magical aura in the Fall trailer, so I assume that must be his influence. I doubt whether the Schools turning to gold should be taken literally though, considering the dark sea on the cover of Rise was just part of another setting, and the Schools didn’t actually rise out of the sea. However, in the main series, every time the Schools were altered (it happened thrice) the covers were accurate to their current state.

Soman once said (on Twitter, probably?) that there were loads of Easter eggs in the Fall cover reveal video. So far, there’s the popular imposter theory/eye color swap, and the shattered sky. I don’t think I see much else that could be important.

The brothers also have winged shoulder-ornaments and some kind of sternum-jewelry, which I could see as being vaguely Storian-shaped, like in a “you can’t shake off the yoke of fate” way.

I am considering the possibility of wizard wishes and someone’s Celestium being involved because no natural sky looks mirrored like that. The shattered sky or glass could represent Rhian and Rafal’s relationship falling apart, if it is symbolic. And, if Celestiums represent a wizards psyche, that wouldn’t be too much of a stretch, especially if one of the brothers goes “psycho.” I also wonder if Soman’s been taunting us, and that one of the brothers could die from being struck by lightning.

⸻

Anyway, here my predictions for Midas’ role:

1. The parent of a student or alumnus. Seems unlikely given that he’s young.

2. Rhian’s love interest. Possible. Also, maybe, Rhian really does love shiny, attractive things, hence the glass castle he had built. I headcanon that he has magpie/corvid tendencies, and could be lured in by gold. This could function like a “Faithful John” arc with Rafal as John to keep his brother grounded. Midas would be cast in the role of the golden princess.

When we think about it: Who’s easily overwhelmed by splendor and drawn in easily, and who’s not? Who’s the gullible, vulnerable one? Will Rhian trade Rafal for Midas? I doubt it because I think Rhian’s learned his lesson twice, but who knows.

3. The brothers appeal to Midas for support, to save their schools. I’d love to see Rafal forced to grovel before a king, but it's more likely he’d threaten Midas with death? This sounds like that dialogue snippet Soman released, about kingdom’s leaders being difficult to deal with.

4. Midas captures both brothers. There’s a chance he’s a villain.

5. Midas kills one of the brothers or turns one to gold. I bet it could be Rafal. He’ll probably suffer physically a lot in this book. Plus, incapacitating the most powerful (and capable) character makes for a dire situation and high stakes. (Sure, Rhian is of equal power but he’s less willing to harm people.) If this happens, it would alienate Rhian, and I bet it would be hilarious to watch him panic at first. He’d be frantic, desperate to do anything. And, desperation could be a good corruption motive for Rhian to become more Evil.

6. Midas wants to capture Rhian specifically. Maybe, to admire him, keep him as a pet, because he’s golden and alive. This would be presuming Midas’ whole court and all his loved-ones have already been turned to gold. (I think he had a daughter in the original story). There might even be foreshadowing in Rise because Rhian was often described as golden. It could be meant to lead up to this. And, it could be fun to read as well as creepy.

7. Midas could produce gold to bargain with Hook or with the possibly Evil Pan. In exchange for their students, to get them back? To make a trade with another Woods leader? To settle other outlying expenses?

8. Alternatively, Midas approaches the brothers. He’d think they can undo his curse, his golden touch. Since they are known as the powerful, immortal twin sorcerers far and wide through all the Woods, we could assume. So, Midas has traveled all this way, and Rafal recognizes he has a bargaining chip here. Midas is desperate. Rafal probably gets Midas to exchange lifting the curse for support or something useful (the monkey's paw? Thereby sealing his and Rhian’s fate as tragic without realizing it.) Then, he and Rhian can get back at Hook, and recover their lost students. But, it may be a Pyrrhic Victory.

17 notes · View notes