Satoru Gojo’s cursed abilities began to manifest at the age of two. By five he could read and write with ease, he could do basic arithmetic, and had better special reasoning than most adults. It was a given that his secondary traits would manifest early, and the clan was happy to welcome a dominant alpha to the family. Except—
He wasn’t.
The revelation that their messiah was an omega, frankly, appalled most of the Gojo Clan, but they wouldn’t deny their interest in a few incredibly powerful offspring.
By the time Satoru had truly and fully manifested at the age of fourteen, they had already thrown a few dozen alpha suitors his way — he had his pick of any of them, he could just drop out and raise children like a good omega. Except— he wouldn’t.
Satoru insisted on school, where it quickly became apparent that he would outclass even the strongest alphas. The clan was once again disgusted with him; the way he behaved, his strength and charisma, it simply wasn’t like an omega. He should be demure, and sweet, and happy to let everyone else order him around. Except he wasn’t.
He showed absolutely no signs of omega tendencies, except for infrequent heats, which were so mild he didn’t even need to take time off school. The clan had hopes that maybe that alpha boy he was always hanging around would get Satoru to settle down and mate, but no luck. When asked about this, Satoru said he found alphas “boring,” and would “rather drink bleach than fuck one.” The clan decided it would be best to wait a few years before broaching the topic of marriage again.
It wasn’t until his final year at Jujutsu High that Satoru showed any sign of libido at all. Lounging on the porch, ignoring his English tutor, staring out as the gardener tended to the koi pond. Then— Satoru bolted upright.
The tutor startled. “What? What is it?”
Satoru pointed. “Who is that?”
It took a second for the old man to spot who he was referring to. Someone else had joined the Gardner at the pond, peering down into the golden arc of fish. “The groundskeeper’s child.” A follow up question formed on his lips, “Why—“
Why are you interested when you’ve never shown an inkling of curiosity about anyone else in your entire life? But it died just as quick.
Satoru was staring at the gardener’s child with a look that could only be described as hungry. The shortened breath, dilated eyes, and flushed cheeks were unmistakable, although the unhinged grin he wore was a bit unusual (and unsettling). Nevermind whatever was going on below the belt.
“I want her,” Satoru said. Unshakable, bottomless lust— now that was just like an omega. Finally, he was experiencing a true heat, triggered by the presence of a potential mate.
Except—
“Gojo… that’s a beta.”
567 notes
·
View notes
I have a lot of complicated feelings when it comes to what Neflix has done with the Witcher, but my probably least favourite is the line of argumentation that originated during shitstorms related to the first and second season that I was unlucky to witness.
It boils down to "Netflix's reinterpretation and vision is valid, because the Witcher books are not written to be slavic. The overwhelming Slavic aestetic is CDPR's interpretation, and the setting in the original books is universally European, as there are references to Arthurian mythos and celtic languages"
And I'm not sure where this argument originated and whether it's parroting Sapkowski's own words or a common stance of people who haven't considered the underlying themes of the books series.
Because while it's true that there are a lot of western european influences in the Witcher, it's still Central/Eastern European to the bone, and at its core, the lack of understanding of this topic is what makes the Netflix series inauthentic in my eyes.
The slavicness of the Witcher goes deeper than the aestetics, mannerisms, vodka and sour cucumbers. Deeper than Zoltan wrapping his sword with leopard pelt, like he was a hussar. Deeper than the Redanian queen Hedvig and her white eagle on the red field.
What Witcher is actually about? It's a story about destiny, sure. It's a sword-and-sorcery style, antiheroic deconstruction of a fairy tale, too, and it's a weird mix of many culture's influences.
But it's also a story about mundane evil and mundane good. If You think about most dark, gritty problems the world of Witcher faces, it's xenophobia and discrimination, insularism and superstition. Deep-seated fear of the unknown, the powerlessness of common people in the face of danger, war, poverty and hunger. It's what makes people spit over their left shoulder when they see a witcher, it's what makes them distrust their neighbor, clinging to anything they deem safe and known. It's their misfortune and pent-up anger that make them seek scapegoats and be mindlessly, mundanely cruel to the ones weaker than themselves.
There are of course evil wizards, complicated conspiracies and crowned heads, yes. But much of the destruction and depravity is rooted in everyday mundane cycle of violence and misery. The worst monsters in the series are not those killed with a silver sword, but with steel.
it's hard to explain but it's the same sort of motiveless, mundane evil that still persist in our poorer regions, born out of generations-long poverty and misery. The behaviour of peasants in Witcher, and the distrust towards authority including kings and monarchs didn't come from nowhere.
On the other hand, among those same, desperately poor people, there is always someone who will share their meal with a traveller, who will risk their safety pulling a wounded stranger off the road into safety. Inconditional kindness among inconditional hate. Most of Geralt's friends try to be decent people in the horrible world. This sort of contrasting mentalities in the recently war-ridden world is intimately familiar to Eastern and Cetral Europe.
But it doesn't end here. Nilfgaard is also a uniquely Central/Eastern European threat. It's a combination of the Third Reich in its aestetics and its sense of superiority and the Stalinist USSR with its personality cult, vast territory and huge army, and as such it's instantly recognisable by anybody whose country was unlucky enough to be caught in-between those two forces. Nilfgaard implements total war and looks upon the northerners with contempt, conscripts the conquered people forcibly, denying them the right of their own identity. It may seem familiar and relevant to many opressed people, but it's in its essence the processing of the trauma of the WW2 and subsequent occupation.
My favourite case are the nonhumans, because their treatment is in a sense a reminder of our worst traits and the worst sins in our history - the regional antisemitism and/or xenophobia, violence, local pogroms. But at the very same time, the dilemma of Scoia'Tael, their impossible choice between maintaining their identity, a small semblance of freedom and their survival, them hiding in the forests, even the fact that they are generally deemed bandits, it all touches the very traumatic parts of specifically Polish history, such as January Uprising, Warsaw Uprising, Ghetto Uprising, the underground resistance in WW2 and the subsequent complicated problem of the Cursed Soldiers all at once. They are the 'other' to the general population, but their underlying struggle is also intimately known to us.
The slavic monsters are an aestetic choice, yes, but I think they are also a reflection of our local, private sins. These are our own, insular boogeymen, fears made flesh. They reproduce due to horrors of the war or they are an unprovoked misfortune that descends from nowhere and whose appearance amplifies the local injustices.
I'm not talking about many, many tiny references that exist in the books, these are just the most blatant examples that come to mind. Anyway, the thing is, whether Sapkowski has intended it or not, Witcher is slavic and it's Polish because it contains social commentary. Many aspects of its worldbuilding reflect our traumas and our national sins. It's not exclusively Polish in its influences and philosophical motifs of course, but it's obvious it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
And it seems to me that the inherently Eastern European aspects of Witcher are what was immediately rewritten in the series. It seems to me that the subtler underlying conflicts were reshaped to be centered around servitude, class and gender disparity, and Nilfgaard is more of a fanatic terrorist state than an imposing, totalitarian empire. A lot of complexity seems to be abandoned in lieu of usual high-fantasy wordbuilding. It's especially weird to me because it was completely unnecessary. The Witcher books didn't need to be adjusted to speak about relevant problems - they already did it!
The problem of acceptance and discrimination is a very prevalent theme throughout the story! They are many strong female characters too, and they are well written. Honestly I don't know if I should find it insulting towards their viewers that they thought it won't be understood as it was and has to be somehow reshaped to fit the american perpective, because the current problems are very much discussed in there and Sapkowski is not subtle in showing that genocide and discrimination is evil. Heck, anyone who has read the ending knows how tragic it makes the whole story.
It also seems quite disrespectful, because they've basically taken a well-established piece of our domestic literature and popular culture and decided that the social commentary in it is not relevant. It is as if all it referenced was just not important enough and they decided to use it as an opportunity to talk about the problems they consider important.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not forcing anyone to write about Central European problems and traumas, I'm just confused that they've taken the piece of art already containing such a perspective on the popular and relevant problem and they just... disregarded it, because it wasn't their exact perspective on said problem.
And I think this homogenisation, maybe even from a certain point of view you could say it's worldview sanitisation is a problem, because it's really ironic, isn't it? To talk about inclusivity in a story which among other problems is about being different, and in the same time to get rid of motifs, themes and references because they are foreign? Because if something presents a different perspective it suddenly is less desirable?
There was a lot of talking about the showrunners travelling to Poland to understand the Witcher's slavic spirit and how to convey it. I don't think they really meant it beyond the most superficial, paper-thin facade.
153 notes
·
View notes
a visual guide to all of hua cheng’s adaptations :D / follow for more hua cheng appreciation posts / transcribed notes + versions without my deisgn below the cut if you want this as a reference!
donghua
(by haoliners animation league) (i found multiple necklace designs in the manhua so i picked the most recent one - the S2 trailer)
very dark gray, straight hair
pointier nose
human ears
slightly paler than xie lian
parallelogram shaped eyepatch
thick braid
tall collar
broad shoulders
low neckline (cleavage)
tunic more form fitting
butterfly + geometric design (on belt and vambraces)
two belts
short red thread
e’ming has large red + white hilt
criss-cross chains (on boots)
white sole (on shoes)
book covers
(by 曰出的小大陽 / tai3_3)
same skin tone as Xie Lian
dark brown hair
trapezoid shaped eyepatch
very long hair + thinner hair
human ears
long nose, thinner face
red liner under the eyes
brain behind shoulder
big necklace charm
simple, loose fitting tunic
wavy + intricate design (on belt and vambraces)
long vambraces
minimal e'ming
endless red thread
lower boots
manhua
(by starember)
wavier, ink black hair
heavy eyeliner / shadow
mismatched earrings
very gray / pale skin
shield shaped eyepatch
arched eyebrow + piercing
lip glos
no hair strands in front of shoulders
beefy / dorito shaped
many outfits + hairstyles
extra straps on belt
pointy vambraces
floral design (on belt and vambraces)
very cool toned red
more detail overall
dark colored pants
e'ming is LONG
my design
(by @lazycranberrydoodles ) (subject to change)
blue / purple toned hair + skin
wolf cut type hairstyle
red & black eyeliner
trapezoid shaped eyepatch
pointy ears
black choker
lipgloss
many earrings (one is a fic reference :))
skinnier (died @ 17)
warmer toned red
big ol sleeves
floral + butterfly design (on belt and vambraces)
extra chain on belt for style
rings
simple e'ming
high boots w/ heel
422 notes
·
View notes
i grew up going to synagogue. i had a b’nai mitzvah, i was even confirmed. but i was also brainwashed also into believing israel was good. the atrocities were glossed over almost as if no one lived there at all. as if palestine was simply unoccupied, as if israel was not a state born of colonial settler violence. this propaganda is something that many zionist jewish organizations have utilized to brainwash their congregations. when I was a child I idolized IDF soldiers, I thought Israel was a shining Jewish state not born of violence but of the Jewish will to survive, I was wrong. I was brainwashed. I was not immune to propaganda. but i realized as a teenager that what i was taught is simply not true and other people also have the ability to learn this as well. israel is a colonialist apartheid state. hamas doesn’t represent gaza or palestinians, innocent people are dying on both sides as a result of Israel’s settler violence. hamas would not exist if it were not for Israeli settler violence. Israel has dropped 6000 bombs on Gaza, as much as was dropped on Afghanistan in a single year by the US. The United States is willfully pushing propaganda to support the colonist state of Israel. You are not immune to propaganda. lets dismantle the zionist jewish propaganda machine together. I want to find a jewish community that I don’t feel like I can’t be a part of because I don’t agree with or support zionism and it’s cruel, hypocritical rhetoric. why do we as jews have any more right to colonize, occupy and commit atrocities than the people who have so many times done the same to us, what makes us different that we can enact that on others without consequence? There is a clear power imbalance at play here and the zionist state of israel is not the victim. ignoring a humanitarian crisis doesn’t wipe the blood from your hands. supporting palestine’s freedom is not antisemitic, and israel is using antisemitism as a shield to continue their genocide against the palestinian people
51 notes
·
View notes