#i can't think of any big theories that i disagree with | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

genderkoolaid · 9 months

Note

hi! i was wondering if you'd be willing to do an analysis of the aromantic manifesto thats been going around? most of the ppl ive seen so far have been from either non-aro queer ppl or non-loveless aros and i cant find any loveless aros talking about it, and ik thats something youve talked abt b4 (loveless aros i mean) id love to also see your thoughts on it.

So funny enough I saw this manifesto a while ago, but didn't really have any thoughts on it because I had too much trouble reading it for brain reasons, because its just. A lot.

So @spacelazarwolf compared this to lesbian separatism/radical feminism and I think that is pretty apt. Radical feminism takes accurate criticisms of the patriarchy (such as gender as a tool of oppression and misogyny) and comes to the conclusion that gender is, in all forms, inherently oppressive, men are inherently oppressors, and that to personally identify with gender roles or men in any way contributes to oppression, so we must take on political lesbianism to reject this.

This manifesto seems to do the same with amatonormativity. There are real criticisms of amatonormativity in queer spaces here; aromantics have talked a bit about how focusing queer liberation on romantic love as a reason why we shouldn't be oppressed is alienating, and how queer spaces often reinforce amatonormativity. But it then comes to the polarized conclusion that romance is itself oppressive, identification with romance contributes to oppression, and that we must take on (essentially) political aromanticism to reject this.

Which, like political lesbianism, is just... unnecessary? This is not the only conclusion we can come to as a result of these criticisms. And these conclusions prioritize abstract political theory over people's real lives and autonomy. Which is a big reason (although not the only one) why radical feminism fell apart, because eventually women got tired of having to structure their entire lives and identities around acting out Good Political Theory instead of being able to. y'know. Be themselves? But also, these kinds of conclusions are so absolute and polarized. They assume that nothing about gender or romance can grow and be improved.

There are parts of this manifesto I like. The line "The first big ruse of romance is that it is ubiquitous because it is natural, and it is natural because it is ubiquitous" I think is actually pretty cool and can be adapted to all kinds of things; for example, capitalism does the same thing, taking over as much of the world as possible & erasing other ways of life, and then using its dominance as evidence thats its just how humans naturally are. It brings up criticisms of love that are big parts of lovelessness, like the idea that love is inherently a good thing when it can be harmful and still be "love."

But then it takes the... strange path of saying that if people can't help how who they love, then neither can racists and transphobes and fatphobes, which is why romance is inherently oppressive. But like. Even within relationship anarchy, where all hierarchies are rejected, this problem won't disappear. Its a problem of attraction & how social systems shape how we think.

I also disagree with how it frames private vs public life:

Public life concerns the interests of people as citizens and is regarded as a legitimate sphere of social intervention. Private life concerns the interests of people as consumers/individuals and is nobody’s business but those privately involved. While the domestic sphere fashioned by heterosexual kinship relations has been historically designated as private life, queer intimacies have instead been regarded as a matter of public concern due to moral panics associating them with predation and perversion throughout history.

I disagree with this framing of private life as something which is seen as "nobody's business." Maybe that's true on the small scale of social politeness and ideals. But on a systematic level, to me, this is absolutely untrue, and its something I've been doing some thinking about with regards to modeling the patriarchy.

The patriarchy is greatly concerned with the private lives of individuals. In order to keep its control over society in general via gender-sex-sexuality, its important to control how people interact with others. Even heterosexual, cisgender relationships haven't been free from patriarchal scrutiny; the wife must submit to the husband, the children must submit to the parents, and the queers must be kept outside the home. Again, on the level of neighborly politeness, people are going to say "what happens in the home is none of my business." But a relationship where the wife is the breadwinner and the husband stays at home is easily subject to scrutiny because it threatens the patriarchal norms, which causes unease.

Romance, as a construct, is a tool of oppression in multiple ways. But the physical reality the construct is built on top of is not inherently evil. The feeling of romantic love is not inherently corrupt, the same way the feeling of gender isn't.

Their advice for abolishing romance also feels kinda... vague and unhelpful and messy. I'm still not really clear on what "abolishing romance" even entails because most of the things they list can be done while romantic relationships occur. It just reads like they took the ideas of relationship anarchy and made it political lesbianism 2

I, as an aromantic, find the idea of political aromanticism to be pretty gross. I know how it feels to be pushed towards a certain relationship with romance and I don't want to seen it done in reverse, and tbh I don't like the idea of making my identity into a political stance. Being aromantic absolutely influences my politics, but its also my experience as a person. Again, similarly to why it would be uncomfortable to have lesbian spaces be full of women who are not in any way attracted to women but are making a political statement.

It disappoints me that this manifesto's conclusion is that romance itself must be rejected, the same way radical feminism does. Because there are good points here, but all-or-nothing conclusion, to me, is more divisive than connective and that's a big problem. My feelings about gender abolition are that, if we achieve true liberation from the patriarchy, our construction of gender is naturally going to be very different. Perhaps those people will no longer use gender, or they'll just use it differently- but trying to force a specific outcome is unhelpful and clashes with individual autonomy and culture for the sake of political theory. Same goes for this. Maybe in a post-amatonormativity world, "romance" will lose meaning, or at least be very very different. But trying to force that outcome isn't helpful.

Anyways I hope these takes were interesting! Honestly given how much arophobia I've seen I'm worried people are going to see this manifesto and get hostile to a lot of aromantic ideas. So I wanna suggest that people check out I Am Not Voldemort by K.A Cook, which is where the concept of "loveless aros" came from, as well as The short instructional manifesto for relationship anarchy by Andie Nordgren, which created the concept of relationship anarchy. Both of these essays do a much better job at criticizing love & amatonormativity than this manifesto.

#m.#ask box

180 notes · View notes

es-draws · 3 months

Note

Why are so many of us are so turned on by weight gain? Where do kinks come from? I'm curious if there's any science behind it. Which part of the brain is involved? Sorry for the multiple questions in a long ramble

No worries, I had the same question! Probably the top thing I think about with this kink. I've done a lot of research, and what I found is that we really don't know where fetishes come from.

Psychologists are split into two camps - it's either something you develop and learn, or something that you were innately born with.

Some research suggests that fetishes are developed in childhood, and are learned through exposure to specific scenarios and instances that end up "triggering" a sexual response. The most common example here is spanking - Freud and those that subscribe to his theories believe that spanking during childhood leads to sexual urges for spanking as an adult. With feedism, I've heard people say that being exposed to fat admiration at a young age triggered their kink. Listen to Fat Bottomed Girls if you want to hear an example of how a fat naughty nanny can cause you to enjoy big butts.

But many psychologists now believe that fetishes are innate. There's some prominent research on foot fetishes that shows that the neurons for feet and genitals are close enough to overlap. But just like how we once thought that anything that wasn't heteronormative was "learned", it is now much more commonly believed that sexual preference is something people are born with. The precise cause can't be easily found neurologically, but it seems likely that some are innately attracted to things that aren't as common as others.

As for me personally? I have always found weight gain attractive. I can think of no life experience that triggered or developed this kink for me. And I know many, many other feedists who say the same thing. So I personally would ascribe to the "born this way" hypothesis, but I also know that others might disagree, based on their own experiences.

And as a final note, I think we should be wary of the "fetishes develop in childhood" theory. Why? Then it becomes easy to say that this fetish is something that "went wrong" with you. You were exposed to trauma around your body weight, that's why you have this weird kink! You had an ED and body issues - see? It's all just a mental problem. Your feedism fetish is just another disorder. You should get therapy so we can "fix" you. Sounds a bit like how they used to treat other marginalized folks, don't you think?

This is just my opinion, but I'd be curious to hear other people's experiences too, of course!

#es-answers

59 notes · View notes

revletter · 7 months

Text

In the SMRPG remake, Geno is still around for the postgame fights. Here's a simple and awesome way they could explain that.

(I SO hope they do something even loosely resembling this. I have so many feelings, I made gifs about it.)

Up to this point, we know that there'll be post-game content where you get to fight bosses over again. And look, our blue guy, there he still is!

From this, it's safe to assume that in the remake, after Geno leaves to repair the Star Road, he turns right around and comes back.

Which is KIND OF A BIG DEAL. Because in the original game, it's heavily implied that for all practical purposes, he's certain this goodbye will be forever.

(😭)

For some time, I've had a little theory. I kind of desperately hope for some version of it to be part of the remake. Here it is:

Due to the events of SMRPG, ♡♪!? gets a merit promotion. Maybe, at the beginning of the story, he's not a full-blown Star Spirit (or whatever verbiage). But - as the one little star guardian valiant and capable enough to go down to the world to help save the entire Star Road - now he's become one!

And that comes with more freedom. Just imagine him crashing back down to Earth like "Yo GUESS WHAT PEOPLE, now I'm a STAR SPIRIT (or etc.) and I set my own schedule!" He can go back and see his friends! It's amazing!

And it fits exactly! With not a single caveat I can think of!

IN FACT, you might even say it's supported by a little discrepancy in some 27-year-old pixel art:

Remember the difference between Geno's first appearance and his last? He goes from this tiny lil twinkle guy... to a much bigger 5-pointed star. This is never explained....

((( Read on for my rationale, more gifs, and even more feelings )))

(the doll being bigger is not explained either, but humor me)

(and yes that IS him lighting things up like the Main Street Electrical Parade. I noticed that almost exactly a year ago and it rocketed this fandom back to the front of my So Cal Disney Kid brain so hard that I can't believe it took me so long to make this blog)

(only fitting that he would also usher in the remake reveal after an end like this. :'''D)

... But to me, it seems plausible that the little star's gotten stronger and grown! 💙

In the remake trailer, because I'm the kind of dweeb who does this, I went frame by frame trying to spot any telling differences -

(^ the scene where he's possessing the doll - this could just be a homage to the little twinkle he looks like in the original. even if that's all, I love the devs for it)

(more five-pointy? maybe? rev, did you just superimpose all the frames where Geno looks most five-pointy just so you could not quite prove anything? ABSOLUTELY)

Make of that what you will; all I can say so far is that we only see him kind of blobby. But what I'm secretly hoping is, maybe that's on purpose, so they can make it clearer in the game for the purpose of some big reveal like this. 😀

Anyway...

Wouldn't this be such a fitting and meaningful thing for Geno's character arc? I know one of the complaints among people who consider Geno overrated is that he doesn't really have an arc. Of course, his fans (myself included) either aren't bothered by that, or straight-up disagree, since he's central to the entire plot and goal of the game, and also literally the Mario universe equivalent of an angel, and maybe he was so reserved because he was trying so hard not to get attached even though we all know he totally did,

and also if he got an arc anywhere near Mallow's he'd be so compelling that he'd basically be the main character and they'd have to call it Super Geno RPG BUT ANYWAY,

I can't fully express, no matter how long I make this post, how much I hope they take a narrative route like this. It would be the actual best. My nerdy little heart would never be the same.

#in this essay i will #geno #geno smrpg #smrpg #super mario rpg #smrpg remake #my headcanons #my wishes #gif #my gifs #please nintendo please #i made so many gifs for this

74 notes · View notes

ingravinoveritas · 23 days

Note

Just popping by to say how much I appreciate you. Thank you for always keeping a level head. Even when you're disagreeing or calling out bullshit, you still manage to stay diplomatic and respectful. And of course, you always focus on the important things, the main one being that Michael is David's #1 fan (and vice versa)

Aw, thank you so much for this! I can't tell you how nice it was to get this message in my inbox (and apologies for not replying sooner, as I've been entirely swamped and am now trying to catch up on my Asks).

Given that this was from two weeks ago, I'm going to guess that this is mainly in response to the whole situation with David's BAFTA nom and some of the reactions that have occurred as a result. I think a lot of people have said a lot of clumsy things (looking at you, Neil) and while some may not have meant to take away from David's big moment, that still seems to be what's happened. I absolutely believe David is more than deserving of the nomination and it is long overdue at this point. He should've been nominated for Des, or even before that, his role as Alec Hardy in Broadchurch, but I am so glad he's finally gotten a nomination now.

I think the reaction a lot of people had was borne out of how tied together David and Michael's performances are as Aziraphale and Crowley, and the thought that if David were to be nominated for that specific role, then one hopes that Michael will also be nominated for his role as Aziraphale at some other point in the future.

But to your comment about my keeping a level head, I find it interesting that, in the midst of all the theories flying around about why Michael wasn't nominated and questions I got to that effect, this post showed up in the tags the same day you sent me this Ask (blog name is cropped out):

This was very obviously in reference to this Ask that I received and had answered just prior to then. This person didn't even have the nerve to mention my blog by name, but had no problem calling me an "rpf fucker" (really nice...). The question pertained to whether Michael's lack of a BAFTA nom could have been because of Anna's off-putting social media posts prior to the announcement, and I indicated in my response that I did not believe this was the case. I am not about to place blame on Anna for something that she had no part of--which I suppose this person was hoping I would do, to give credence to their ludicrous claims of sexism--and I made my position on the matter clear.

So to your comment about me disagreeing, this was exactly what happened...and yet this person had to twist what I wrote so far around (to the point of lying by omission) just to make their point. And yes, I took that Ask seriously, as I take every Ask/Anon that I get seriously, even the ones that attack me (which is also why it takes me for-freaking-ever to answer the questions in my inbox). According to the above blogger, however, instead I should've responded to the person who sent the Ask by mocking them and telling them how ridiculous and stupid they are. Because just politely disagreeing while still allowing someone the space to share their thoughts is so horrible, but telling someone to fuck off is apparently the height of discourse. Ugh.

In any case, I am very much grateful for this message, and for you and everyone else who follows my blog and has been so lovely. It's your encouragement and kindness that gives me the drive to keep posting, so thank you! ❤️❤️

#genderqueer-hippie #reply post #personal post #and yes Michael is and continues to be David's number one fan #bless his bisexual Welsh chaos #fandom woes #to the people who keep coming for me and other RPF blogs on here #please have several seats #and try reading what i actually wrote instead of accusing me of ridiculous things #people can be awful sometimes #but then people can be wonderful too #and my followers are awesome #thank you all you lovely people for being here #<3

28 notes · View notes

am-i-the-asshole-official · 8 months

Note

AITA for not wanting to talk about a fandom with a friend?

We've been friends for 6-7 years, but we're not close. Just your regular internet friendship where we both have close friends and seperate friend groups, but us two were in the same fandom initially and that's how we know each other.

She's in a lot of fandoms casually but her ult fandom is massive, I'm in a smaller but still big fandom. We're both fandom olds, we both know fandom etiquette and behavior, we're both adults with our own lives etc. Please don't assume we're unattended teens in a petty fight.

We have both shown interest in each other's fandoms, we both understand we can't be more involved there than we already are. That's all fine.

I used to talk about my fandom with her initially, about 2 years ago, but I gradually stopped since she's not that interested and I have other friends to talk to who are already into it. Besides I have a short social battery, so I don't *need* to talk to everyone all the time.

The issue is: After not showing that much interest for months and me not talking to her much, she's trying to talk to me about it now. But all she sends me are theories from people I have blocked or people dragging this media and expecting everyone to laugh with them, outlandish mischaracterization, hot takes that are just fans insulting the creator over their own piss poor reading comprehension, memes that have been done to death etc. All in all it's things my fandom friends and I are sick of.

And it's particularly bugging me because my friend here faces and rants about the same shit in *her* fandom! She gets my issues with mischaracterization or creator bashing etc same as I do with her! But it's as if she never paid any attention when I said 'This and This are untrue or hurtful' or 'I hate when This is said' or correct her on anything that from insider pov is borderline offensive. Ofc I wouldn't expect her to know... except I *have* told her many times and I share a lot of posts talking about it so anyone following me would have a general idea even if we never spoke?

This is partly why I stopped talking to her about it because for the last full year and some more, every few weeks she brought up the same bad fanons. And after I debunked them she said 'Oh that's terrible!', then after a couple weeks same old same old. Ofc that's really frustrating.

We stopped talking about it like I said, but she's now back on it and I'm not reciprocating. When she wants me to look at her memes or talk about the ships I make it clear that I don't want to do that. She has other friends from my fandom who are into those tired takes she shares, she's not speaking into a void. I'm free to talk about anything else but her behavior for over a year is pulling me away from her tbqf.

I feel like I'm being a bad friend, it's just fiction. But she takes her own fiction just as seriously and rags on people she disagrees with way more than me. So I don't know, I like my friend but I hate talking to her about anything fandom related. Did I make it bad for myself by sending her things in the beginning when she was probably saying odd things to signal she wasn't interested? I think so.

PS: If any of you think about replying with 'Eh who cares fanon is fun, take a joke' etc, control yourself. Thank you.

What are these acronyms?

#aita #am i the asshole

78 notes · View notes

butchsophiewalten · 8 months

Note

Man this is so random but this theory is stuck in my head and I wanna see how other people feel about it because I don't see people talk about it a lot (I have no clue if the link will go through properly since I've never put a link in a ask box)

https://www.tumblr.com/art-w0rm/667910993425350656/theory-time

Oh god not this theory again. I really truly try not to be mean to people for no good reason on this blog, but this theory is literally one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever seen in my entire life. I don't talk about this theory because to me it's like the walten files theory equivalent of that tubby custard mechanically separated chicken post.

Most of the time I genuinely don't even consider it worthy of my time, because it's nonsense, but this is a very nicely worded ask, and I really don't mean to dedicate any of the vitriol I hold towards this theory to You, poor anonymous person, so I will deconstruct it. I will go through the theory point-by-point and deconstruct why I disagree with it.

First up, this:

Showbear is not a character in The Walten Files anymore. Showbear was fully retconned and is never going to appear in the series again. He was effectively just a cameo of ThunderingStatic's (one of Martin's friends) OC, but when The Walten Files blew up and people started assuming Showbear was Martin's character, Static decided to withdraw his character from the series and focus putting him in other projects.

Martin talked about this on Twitter forever ago, but I wouldn't be able to find that tweet now. But here's a bit from the interview he did with KnowYourMeme back in 2021 where he talks about it:

Now this:

This is just stupid to me? Like a complete logical incongruity? I barely even know how describe what is dumb about this because I can't even fathom how anyone draws this conclusion from this information. How is it strange for a man to say 'if my wife isn't home by the time she said she was going to be, let me know, in case something happened.'????? Why would Rosemary be out cheating on her husband with her fucking daughter with her??? If Rosemary was cheating on her husband why would her whole life collapse when he went missing? If Rosemary was cheating on her husband why would she show up at the restaurant every day after he disappeared asking if anyone had seen him and hoping to find him alive??? Why would she make paintings of herself and him together after he disappeared????? What the fuck are you talking about?

Ok now this:

Whatever. This is maybe the most coherent part of the theory, to me. I definitely agree that Sha evokes a 'wolf in sheep's clothing' sort of aesthetic, but I do remember Martin saying something in a Twitter Q&A at one point about how that wasn't actually intentional, and that Bon was the character he actually meant to seem unusually predatory. I looked for a while and couldn't find a screenshot of that, but I did find this one where he says the thing about Bon:

So whatever. take that with a grain of salt.

I don't even know what to say. here. Whatever. sure she was rolling in the hay

yeah Rosemary is asking if she's still beautiful because she cheated on her husband and not because she was chopped up and stuffed inside a big animatronic sheep. I think this is correct and is the True Deep Lore.of the walten files. I'm sure this doesn't have anything to do with the recurring motif of the double-meaning behind the word Beautiful either.

I don't know why it's weird that the lost lingering spirit of a mother would be calling out to her only living child. I Don't know why that needs additional explanation involving this batshit infidelity conspiracy theory.

Sha's chest is also ripped out

So is Banny's, honestly? Just a little less?

ok now this:

I guess I can't disprove this except that I think this is dumb. I think this is a really incredibly stupid logical leap to make. Y'know I really meant to go into this levelheadedly and very calmly go through every point and talk about why I think it's Decisively Disagreeable or whatever but I can't. I really can't. I just cannot keep my patience with this sort of thing.

You'd think if there was an infidelity aspect here it would've been lampshaded in some respect, at all, in the old /sophiewalten findjackwalten page text. Where it's literally Sophie talking to Jenny about what she remembers about her family.

Especially if the idea is that Sophie is meant to have been there. You'd think something like that would have come up here. Not 'she was nice and a good mom until my dad disappeared and her mental health started getting worse'

#ask #this theory always feels like someone's pulling a prank on me. like they're trying to see how much stupid bullshit they can say convincingl #before i notice and get mad #i'm sorry i couldn't keep it together for you anon I really dont mean to make anyone feel like an idiot #i just really don't have the patience for something like this today I think.#we haven't seen a lot of rosemary's characterization in the walten files yet #but everything we HAVE seen externally characterizes her as loving and compassionate but also sharply protective of the people she loves #and also so very deeply incredibly in love with her husband #and there's actually a decent bit of positioning her and jack as equals in their relationship which isn't exactly usual for the time #yknow. she has her own car and she has a job (even if its working for her husband's company.)#she's headstrong and ferociously talented and her husband is very supportive of her and of her artistic endeavors #yknow. the tragedy of jack and rose isn't that their relationship was bad #it's that their relationship was great and it was cut short over factors outside of their control #and now it lingers through the hallways of abandoned buildings as a broken facsimile of itself #there was a wonderful family full of people who loved each other intensely and had their whole lives still ahead of them #and it took one summer for all of it to be gone

49 notes · View notes

anotherghoul666 · 1 year

Note

Okay so the thought:

Alkaline is about Sleep.

In the song, Vessel sings about how the subject of the song has changed him (this one's pretty obvious, Vessel was presumably just A Normal Dude before Sleep came to him and chose him), how the subject is undefinable (like how it's been said that Sleep is a very reductive name for what the deity is), and there's also how the song discusses the subject in contrasting terms, like how Sleep gives humans both dreams but also nightmares.

It's less a theory and more just like jumbled thoughts, but a lot of their songs too can easily be read as either love songs or songs about Vessel and his relationship with Sleep.

And we are back with another “AnotherGhoul goes fucking overboard about Sleep Token” essay once again!!! Under the cut: pronoun use in songs, the heteronormativity of the music industry, and a full lyric analysis and break down of the song “Distraction”!

I agree 100% with your “Alkaline is about Sleep” theory. In fact, I personally interpret a lot of Sleep Token's songs as being about Sleep, or about Vessel's relationship with Sleep, or their history through the years. Probably more songs than people would think. It's just my opinion of course, I don't know the guys, I don't know everything, people are gonna have wildly different interpretations of their lyrics I'm sure. There's a lot of "Vessel talks about an real life abusive relationship he's been through / someone he pined for" floating around and that's completely valid! Interpretations are just that, they are subjective to our own lenses and biases and they are wholly personal. I tend to have a big bias of religious trauma, the damages of out of control zealotry and religious mania, and I read Sleep Token's lyrics through that lens. I don't disagree with the abusive relationship interpretation for instance, I just see it as an abusive relationship with your god / your church, while people see it as an abusive relationship with a woman / partner. Both are totally valid.

And when I say most, if not all, Sleep Token songs could be about Sleep, yes I mean even the ones that use she/her pronouns for the subject. In fact, the use of she/her pronouns seems very on purpose to me.

Clearly the band knows how to play the pronouns game in terms of lyrics. Because in interviews and official texts, they do refer to Sleep using he/him pronouns. But I also believe they know how to play the commercial game so damn well (I'd be SHOCKED if Sleep Token was any of these musicians' first band, especially Vessel and II. There is no fucking way you have this level of skill raw on a first project. And I'm not saying this because of technical skill; you can develop excellent technical skill just practicing at home, without any live music experience. I say that because of how confidently Vessel displays voice faults and cracks and the raw jagged edges of his vulnerability; because of how confidently II shits on conventional drumming conventions and techniques for the benefit of his organic flow. Imo, and I say that as a drummer, confidence to mess up and fail while keeping completely in style? You can't get that from playing for yourself alone. Anyway, I digress.)

My point was about commercial sales of music and maintaining the "sellability" of a band. I believe the team at Sleep Token are aware of how male-coded Vessel's voice is, how he'll automatically be assumed to be a man, and thus he'll also be assumed to be straight. So for the intensity and the visceral nature of the lyrics to land with the wider audience, using he/him as pronouns to sing your undying love to and desperation for when you're a male-coded singer? Unfortunately still not possible in today's culture, at least without turning the entire focus of the band into who is Vessel, is he gay, and who is he singing about. Since it's extremely obvious Vessel and the numbers do not want the band to be about them in any way, as stated by their efforts to maintain perfect anonymity and also how they flat out said it in interviews, it would be counterproductive for their mission to have all of the listeners’ attention on Vessel as a man and on his possible relationships. Plus, they also need to make sure their music is commercially viable and reaches the widest numbers possible, because the more numbers, the more worshipers for Sleep. While a male-coded vocalist using he/him pronouns in those heavily romantic / co-dependent lyrics would make them a sensation in the greater LBGTQ+ community, the sad truth is it would alienate a non-negligible portion of the white-cis-straight-men that unfortunately make up most of the fan base for genres like metal, rock, prog, etc, AKA very male dominated genres.

All of that to say: Sleep is She in some songs, Sleep is You in some songs, and there's even an argument to be made for Sleep being I in some songs too. Sleep is the omnipresent prism from which to evaluate and interpret Sleep Token's lyrics.

Which leads me to! Another interesting example of this “Sleep is She” theory. Distraction.

Distraction is the 8th track in Sleep Token’s 2nd full length album, and 4th release overall, This Place Will Be Your Tomb in 2021. This places the lyrics fairly far in Sleep Token’s journey. I view it as a sort of “here we go again, getting even further into the cult than we anticipated” type of song. So I do view it heavily through the religious / devotional lens, and that leads to a good example of Sleep being spoken about with she/her pronouns.

Oh, and I know I can tell I'm falling further again But I won't turn away, it's far too late for me

I assume, given song writing being credited to Vessel and II, that the I in these lyrics represents Vessel himself and/or the numbers / vessels as a whole entity. I will use the term Vessel from now on but if you want to read it as “the whole band” it will be coherent too. Vessel’s indoctrination to Sleep is getting stronger and stronger. It’s now been five years since the beginning of the band (and presumably Sleep’s visit to his dreams). His life likely has completely changed in those five years, and it shows no sign of stopping anytime soon. He’s falling further into the rapture of Sleep, into his worship, into this cult of his, giving the deity more and more space in his life. He can’t stop it or back away either. Not anymore. Not after he’s made his whole life revolve around this band and their god. He’s gone too far. A sort of sunk cost fallacy he’s trapped himself into: can’t back out when you’ve been this transformed by a deity, when you’ been this engulfed and consumed by feelings and emotions for your new god. That’s why people stay in abusive relationships for decades (another nod to the “Vessel is in a metaphorical abusive relationship with Sleep” thing I have firm belief in). That’s why people stay in churches or organized religions or cults for their entire lives. It’s so much harder to disentangle yourself and back out from something if you’ve not been in long. The longer you’re in, the more you’ll feel it’s too late to save yourself.

'Cause I am broken into fractions

Now, the fans of the “the she/her pronouns songs are about a woman in Vessel’s life” interpretation will probably take this like as meaning Vessel’s heartbroken. He’s into pieces after this relationship fell apart or got hurtful. Which, valid interpretation, as I said. But. I also see this as religious and related to Sleep. A core tactic that is used in organized religions and cults is thought reform. To super simplify a complex process performed over months to years of a person’s life, to reform someone, essentially, is to break what the person was initially, and rebuild it as the religion / cult wants. Reform. Re-form. New form, new shape. Reformation, to be reshaped and assume a new form as intended. Sleep breaks the human and reshapes it into the vessel that he needs. This echoes the “Vessel was just a normal dude before Sleep chose him” thought from the initial ask. Vessel has been broken down into fractions over the last five years. Potentially physically, transformed into a non-human creature as the fandom likes to riff on. But at the very least mentally. He is little percentages of himself reassembles and put in new sequences, fractions to make bigger, new equations he can’t even begin to understand. He is numbers to the mathematician that is Sleep. Moving parts, broken pieces to move around at will, tools. Vessel is a tool for Sleep. Sleep holds his pieces together. If he moves away from Sleep, what’s left? Pieces, fractions, not a human. He will never be able to go back to who he was before Sleep. Without Sleep he’s a pile of jumbled numbers without meaning. Then, because I am in deep deep love with Lovecraftian horror, and I see Sleep as a cosmic horror / eldritch old god type of creature, I also have to mention the mind breaks. In Lovecraft, when a human lays eyes on an Old One, or obtains knowledge of these cosmic deity’s existence, it shatters their minds. It’s something that happens in almost every eldritch creature encounter, or when forbidden knowledge is attained, because the human mind, the brain, is too feeble to understand and contain such knowledge. The human mind doesn’t know what to do when faced with something so unfathomable, so unnamable, so truly profoundly insane, as an eldritch god, so the mind breaks. Shatters. Becomes pieces. Fractions. When Vessel saw Sleep in his dreams the first time, his mind probably broke. Which is partly why he’s so unhinged and feral on some of his lyrics. Human morality and what is “normal” doesn’t have a hold on him anymore. His mind is unchained, yes, but shattered.

Oh, and I am driven to distraction

I especially love the word play in this line, because with the way Vessel accentuates and pronounces “distraction”, it sounds like “destruction” too. Distraction, because Sleep has taken and will take, foreseeably forever, the entirety of Vessel’s brain space. He is distracted from normal life, normal human responsibilities. Distracted from the mundane. Because what could be more important than the deity you’ve dedicated yourself to. Everything pales next to Sleep’s will, his strength, his mission. Vessel’s mission. Of course he’s distracted from everything else. He hasn’t been able to concentrate on “normal” life since Sleep appeared to him. Destruction echoes what I’ve touched on before. Whoever Vessel was before Sleep has been destroyed. There are some parts left, but they’re jumbled and glued together wrong. They’re Other. He was destroyed and rebuilt by Sleep. I just really enjoy how this lines plays on both fronts, a seemingly innocent one, and a much deeper, darked permeation of Sleep in Vessel’s core.

Which finally leads to the she/her pronouns lines: Oh, and I swear she is not like any other, no Something much more than I could ask for (It's too late for me)

That’s Sleep he’s talking about. Like the original ask said about Alkaline. This is about Sleep. Sleep is not like any other. Not like any other god or deity Vessel might have encountered in his human life before. To worship Sleep is unlike anything he’s been taught or potentially forced to worship before, in his youth, etc. Sleep is a whole different breed of god. Of creature. Of living being. And Sleep is too much. Maybe he was too much from the get-go, as I touched upon before with the Lovecraftian mind break theory. Maybe he became too much as Vessel got closer. Maybe he demanded too much and pushed Vessel part his limits. Whatever ways it manifested, it’s clear Sleep is Too Much for a human to handle or comprehend, so for to be chosen by him, to bear his scepter, to wield his words, to lead a now world-wide church in Worship, that has so be so incredibly heavy to bear. No wonder Vessel says it was more than he asked for.

And then the lyrics repeat safe for this one line that differs once: Oh, and I am driven to distraction With each and every interaction (it's too late for me)

Which still hints at the same idea, that every time he interacts with Sleep, he falls further and further in. He becomes less and less human. He breaks a little more every time.

Tl;dr the “she” in this song is so clearly Sleep in my opinion, the walls are lined with religious/cult and devotional references.

#asks #sleep token #one more Sleep Token essay down the hatch guys XD I will never stop hahahahaha #thank you so much for the ask Agent and for the super interesting thought thumble you've sent me down on! I loved it! I appreciate you!!

148 notes · View notes

pikahlua · 7 months

Note

I'm not sure I'm entirely convinced but smashing theory as usual pika 🫡✨️ Is it okay if I ramble about a few misgivings I have? It's a long one, sorry! but there are multiple points I want to mention as assisting ideas

First, I still think that a 1v1 setting battle seems likelier than a 2v2 (bkdk duo vs shigAFO) - since we already had a bkdk duo in the movie ending, and Hori *did* say after that he had a different thing in mind for the actual ending (which I'm not sure should be a classic shounen "Battle of The End" actually, but wth we have been in this war fo so long now? More than a year! it may as well "end" in its conclusion ig). In which case I think we'd agree that 1-to-1 pvps would very likely feature Izuku & Shigaraki and Katsuki & AFO. Speaking of which: I also still think kacchan parallels and juxtaposes moreso with AFO than Shigaraki, so it might make more sense for him to "inherit" AM's struggle in this way, as a battle with the "Big Bad" AFO - not to mention it'd be another extremely cool twist to have the boy who ended AM save him by winning the fight, imo. I'm not sure how much of that metaphorical oomph would transfer to him fighting with "Stray Lamb" Shigaraki/Tenko...

In any case lots of people seem to support the 2v2 option. I understand that the most popular cases are: Katsuki "saving" Tenko by "winning" the fight. Izuku "winning" the battle with AFO to "save" the world. But then, I think the story'd be disregarding Izuku's wish to save Tenko, first spoken of in the vestige realm, which I don't believe is quite likely. We had so many breadcrumbs leading up to Izuku asking "Is Tenko still there?", so I still think a 1v1 and Izuku vs Tenko would make more sense.

I suppose people still want to see Katsuki's "save to win" in this final battle? He has always been a character that has struggled and fought internally with himself foremost - contrasting the mostly external opposition and fights that matured or broke other character's beliefs/ideals. Katsuki is destined to "Win Over His Self", yes? I'd argue he already has done that, (nailed it actually, right in the kokoro) 🎯 😅 which is why I don't really think he has to show it again, that he has learned to "win by saving/save to win". Which is another readon why I think a showdown with Tenko is kinda unnecessary

Meanwhile, I'd argue we haven't seen Izuku's "save by winning/win to save" quite yet, not with Katsuki's grandeur, in any case. I'd argue he finally has the opportunity to do this with Tenko's fight. And I'd think that since OFA is now a "power to save" rather than a power "to defeat AFO", (after class A's intervention and welcome intrusion into that), and since I think Izuku might be the one doing the "saving" for Tenko, it'd make sense for all of OFA's vestiges to bear witness to that "saving", to their "new purpose", if you will, and I think AM's vestige should be included in that if he's truly a part of OFA.

.... If, by chance he's a different component to OFA, like maybe something that serves only as a power maximizing "coefficient" rather than a full blown "variable" in OFA's power "equation"? Then yeah, him leaving OFA might make Izuku slightly less powerful but would make more sense in terms of Katsuki's arc so far. After this battle I doubt Izuku is gonna need that power excess anyway. It'd also make sure he can't become the Symbol of Peace powerhouse on his own and let him play on a more equal field with his peers, which is best fir his sacrificing mentality. And I do think that Katsuki could do with at least the "gaze" and "support" of the mentor Izuku has had 95% of to himself so far...

Welp, that's that! Sorry I even went into a math analogy there 😳 If you've read so far thanks for bearing with me!!!

((This complete thing is utter shit if AM actually won against AFO btw))

I like you. I like your thought process. I like your courtesy in explaining yourself even when we disagree. I want to emphasize all of that because I think your essay here is WORTHY of being challenged. Or rather perhaps it's that I want you to challenge my thoughts, which I hope are also worthy.

(And please bear with me here, my brain fog is rearing its ugly head today.)

1. The problem with 1v1s:

Let me step away from the predictions for a moment with this point. Will Horikoshi ultimately go with a 1v1? He could. I actually have no way of knowing. But I would like to explain why I think it would be a mistake for him to do so. This has nothing to do with Heroes Rising and everything to do with the MHA manga canon.

MHA the story has spent so. much. time. emphasizing how necessary teamwork is, how going alone is not feasible, how everyone has limits. It's not just a platitude it throws around occasionally because it has to. Entire arcs are structured around this idea. Hell, trimesters and curricula in-universe are built upon this lesson. And the story is called "My Hero Academia." How is this a story about Izuku's hero academia if the primary lesson his hero academia taught him gets eschewed at the end? What was ultimately learned if not this?

For Horikoshi to turn his back on this moral, for Horikoshi to go with the standard shounen formula ending when he has famously twisted such tropes in the past, would be to betray his entire story. This story about how society has perverted the ideas of heroes and villains to avoid personal responsibility and stifle social progress ONLY to see the light and view heroes and villains as humans DEPENDS on exalting the virtues of cooperation, of empathizing with one's fellow humans, of desiring everyone to come together, and of contributing to that goal as a piece of the whole. No one is alone. There is always hope. And people are given that hope by having it ignited in their hearts by others (by the symbol of All Might, in many cases).

Remember, "this is the story of how we all became the greatest heroes."

And I do believe Horikoshi wants to maintain this moral as best he can. This final arc has showcased that. Even in the battles we've seen concluded now, while the primary focus may have been on one person's conviction (Shouji's, Mina's, Shouto's, Ochako's), that conviction was backed up and magnified by another person (Kouda, Kirishima, Iida, Tsuyu). And you'll note that some "fought" and some did not. Some played supporting roles or contributed with non-combat assistance (speed or negotiation, perhaps). So at the very, very least, if we end on a 1v1 fight between Izuku and Tomura, Katsuki must support Izuku's conviction to save Tenko in some vital way that tips the scales in Izuku's favor.

The question is, has this already happened?

One might argue it has, that Katsuki's death and the efforts by others to save him have had a clear effect on Tomura. Katsuki's death was the catalyst that allowed Tenko to swallow AFO's ego and regain control of himself.

But we could also argue that, while this potentially contributes to Tenko's salvation, it is NOT an example of Katsuki sharing in Izuku's conviction (that of saving villains). And I argue that this much is a REQUIREMENT.

That said, there MAY be another example that could be construed as Katsuki sharing in Izuku's conviction.

We REALLY don't talk about chapter 358 enough. It may turn out to be a crucial hint about how future events play out.

That said, it's debatable on whether this is truly the same conviction Izuku professes or if it's just the lesson Katsuki has learned, in which case...

Would that not beg for a moment where Izuku backs Katsuki's conviction up, too?

So, sure, you may get your 1v1, but I'm willing to bet there will be enough of Katsuki present in it to construe the "1v1" as otherwise :P

2. The idea that Katsuki parallels AFO more than he does Shigaraki:

At the risk of sounding pedantic, I want to earnestly, powerfully emphasize the idea that this is not a competition: everyone parallels everyone. I have showcased many times how many ways in which Izuku and AFO parallel each other, it's not just Katsuki and Tomura.

But note how this is really possible with ANY TWO CHARACTERS in the whole series. They all parallel each other. It's because everyone's learning the same lessons.

And parallels don't necessarily make for a good 1v1. I don't really think about the parallels that much in terms of setting up FIGHTS. Most "fights" in MHA are barely fights at all. They're conversations, arguments, debates, just sometimes with some action in the middle.

What I really expect from these parallels is a resolution. Some sort of reckoning. Anything at all really. Someone challenging someone, someone talking to someone, someone reaching out for someone. It doesn't matter who does what in most cases, because I expect all four to interact.

3. "I understand that the most popular cases are: Katsuki "saving" Tenko by "winning" the fight. Izuku "winning" the battle with AFO to "save" the world."

Yikes, are these really the most popular options? I hate them. I hate them so much. Can I offer some better ones?

What if Izuku fights Tomura long enough to subdue him and reaches Tenko's heart but can't physically reach out to save him, so Katsuki has to act as Izuku's extension to take Tomura's hand and save him?

What if Izuku fights to his last strength and saves Tomura (and maybe Baby AFO, who knows where that's going) but can't get all of them out of physical danger, so Katsuki is the one who gets them out?

Or maybe Izuku just can't save HIMSELF and Katsuki rescues him?

What if Katsuki reaches Tenko's heart through speech, through relating to him, and it disarms Tenko enough for Izuku to save him?

What if AFO and Izuku have a tug-o'-war over Tenko and Katsuki tips the scales? Or Katsuki AND All Might tip the scales?

What if Izuku fights Baby AFO (or it's something like another Dabi explosion situation) and Katsuki relates to AFO himself as a child and that disarms AFO enough for Izuku to save the day?

What if ANY of the above but add more Class 1-A and other villains to it? What if everyone holds hands to make a human chain to pull Tenko out of some AFO ego void and show him the world cares?

I can go on for days.

4. "We had so many breadcrumbs leading up to Izuku asking "Is Tenko still there?", so I still think a 1v1 and Izuku vs Tenko would make more sense."

But that's just it! Katsuki has breadcrumbs too!

It has been highlighted over and over and over again ad nauseam that Katsuki is a character who must become a hero who can see things from the villains' perspective and REACH OUT TO THEIR HEARTS. Katsuki even names Tomura as the person he intends to face down in the end!

(Of course, AFO fits the bill in many ways too. But like I said, I don't think it's gonna be clean-cut 1v1s, so there's opportunity for both Izuku and Katsuki to show what they're made of in this regard with BOTH villains.)

5. "Katsuki is destined to "Win Over His Self", yes? I'd argue he already has done that, (nailed it actually, right in the kokoro) 🎯 😅 which is why I don't really think he has to show it again, that he has learned to "win by saving/save to win"."

BUT HE DOES NEED TO SHOWCASE IT. OTHERWISE THIS IS JUST LIP SERVICE, BECAUSE NOTHING HAS HAPPENED SINCE HE SAID IT.

While you and I may believe he's already made it, Katsuki himself DOES NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YET. He does not see himself as having surpassed All Might yet, and he believes that in order to do so he needs the help of others.

I mean, does it get louder than "Because saving people is how we win"????? He's set the terms for what his "win to save/save to win" looks like in the end!

6. "Meanwhile, I'd argue we haven't seen Izuku's "save by winning/win to save" quite yet, not with Katsuki's grandeur, in any case."

I mean this super genuinely because I think you need to consider it: How was Izuku's victory over Overhaul NOT this in your eyes?

I think you need to be able to answer that question if you want to make such a claim. I think you CAN make the claim, mind you, but anyone you talk to about this will point to this moment in canon as their first question for you to address.

Until you can answer it, I have to argue that both Izuku and Katsuki have displayed some version of their "win to save/save to win" pieces before, but they have to now apply those pieces to this war where the stakes are astronomically higher.

7. "…. If, by chance he's a different component to OFA, like maybe something that serves only as a power maximizing "coefficient" rather than a full blown "variable" in OFA's power "equation"?"

Kudos to you for the "if"! Yes, in my recent posts, I've been writing under the assumption that All Might's vestige is a piece of OFA. But I'm actually not fully convinced this is the case yet. Everything surrounding All Might's vestige is still very loosely defined and doesn't seem very final. I think it's totally possible there's a twist waiting for us in there.

And anon, I did receive your other messages.

8. "Speaking of which, if AM's vestige is in fact a power "coefficient" then its checks out that Kacchan would rise powered-up!! WTF It makes sense ?! 🥴"

Can I offer you an apotheosis in this trying time?

#anon ask #ask pika #my hero academia manga spoilers #final showdown spoilers #meta #katsuki bakugou #izuku midoriya #tomura shigaraki #all for one #all might

39 notes · View notes

beechicory · 1 year

Text

Seb, a few days before his final race, did a fascinating interview discussing many, many things, including:

his decision to retire being for him

the World Cup in Qatar (and when, or if, sports should go there)

sportswashing and flowery words, and

the need for F1 to put its money where its flowery words are in terms of improving human rights

that human rights, and projects to improve human rights, require funding $$$ and actions, not words and photo-ops

that F1 must be be a) transparent, and b) accountable about the money it gets and where that money goes

It's a really good discussion, and he's really thoughtful - I think that even if one were to disagree with his conclusions, you'd leave recognising his logic and sincerity (and moral conviction).

The interview, with Philipp Schneider of Süddeutsche Zeitung, was difficult to get access to (here's a link to it on archive.ph) so I'm posting the google-translated text behind the Read More. (As always when something is google-translated, we're probably missing some nuance, etc)

I really recommend reading it!

Tw for discussion of homophobia, etc.

-----------------

Conversation with Sebastian Vettel

"I want to experience happiness without having to drive for it"

Nov 18, 2022 at 6:51 p.m

Before his last race, Sebastian Vettel talks about the reasons for the end of his career, the driver's dependence on the car and material - and makes demands on Fifa and Formula 1.

SZ: Mr. Vettel, a face-to-face meeting was originally planned. Now we can at least connect by phone. That saves CO2 emissions and should be in your interest, right?

Sebastian Vettel: Absolutely. That's how it works wonderfully.

Your Formula 1 career ends on Sunday with a final race in Abu Dhabi . And a lot of people get excited because they want to know what you're going to do in the future. Does that surprise you?

Luckily, my decision doesn't affect the people, it affects me. And it's not like I got up in the morning and thought: like that! Now is the time to stop. I've been thinking about this for a long time. And even if I can't say exactly what comes after that - I'm looking forward to what comes after that!

Good to hear.

At some point, every athlete reaches the point where their career can no longer continue, for whatever reason, whether self-chosen or not. I'm not super special in that regard. The big task for me will be to find something that gives me the same level of satisfaction as I did in the years in Formula 1. One thing is certain: the big adrenaline rush and the feeling of sitting in the car will no longer exist. But that was clear to me.

We have a theory as to where the keen interest in your post-career life comes from.

How does it look?

We don't know of any professional athlete who has ever pushed his career with so much momentum during his active time. Lately one had the feeling that you are more often in the beehive than in the car and more of a political ambassador than a racing driver!

yes, good Maybe that's because there's not much to celebrate for me on the track at the moment. The sporting success in recent years has not been so outstanding that one could have said or written much about it.

You are not only leaving Formula 1 as a four-time world champion, but also as an important eyewitness. What do you think has changed the most in the past 15 years?

I think the sport, the genetics or what defines the sport is probably unchanged since Formula 1 came along. Yes, cars are changing, and so are people. But the core of Formula 1 has remained the same. I still love this sport, since I was little I've done nothing else, dreamed of nothing else, nothing else has ever really driven me. So what's different? The dimensions of the sport have grown enormously in recent years. So internationally, in Germany Formula 1 has shrunk.

Is that how you perceive it?

Formula 1 was far bigger in Germany when I started. And of course it was greatest when the boom years around Michael (Schumacher, editor's note) were around, in the mid-nineties, early 2000. Then there was another strong wave at my most successful time. But after that, interest in Germany decreased significantly.

Why is that?

On the one hand, because not all races are broadcast on free TV. But there is another important point: I am afraid that Germany is only a pioneer in terms of its view of Formula 1. There are simply more and more important issues that are coming to the fore. And that's why the question of the relevance of Formula 1 arises for many people.

But are you still a fan?

Naturally! I'm totally euphoric about our sport! That's exactly why I see how important it is to look at him critically. The way we deal with resources is not a role model, we should be much more economical. If that is not the case soon, the question will quickly arise around the world as to whether Formula 1 is still viable. And then interest should decrease everywhere, as has already happened in Germany.

Exciting theory. The general perception is rather: Formula 1 is going through the roof everywhere, just not in Germany and Brazil, because people there don't want to spend money on pay TV.

The problem is deeper. We as a society do not want to underestimate the emergency we are in. In the decades to come, we will increasingly have to ask ourselves the question: What is still possible, what can we still afford? And every sport then has to justify itself for the way in which it is played.

So not just Formula 1?

Not at all. Us first, of course, because in our sport we drive around, burn resources and still need fossil fuels. But a football World Cup, the Olympic Games, the Bundesliga too: every major event has to reinvent itself and see how it can leave a smaller footprint.

From ecological to sporting criticism: The season began with a technology amendment that was announced with great pomp and aimed at pushing the field closer together. Why has the season turned out to be the most one-sided in years?

After big rule changes there is often a gap between a top team and the rest. The goal was to make overtaking and the show better and to make it easier for us to overtake. It's gotten a little better, but the big revolution that was announced with the new rules didn't materialize. It would have been better for the sport this season to have left the rules as they were. However, a process has been started that has the potential to bring the field closer together in the coming years. Also thanks to the budget cap, not only the teams with a lot or a lot of money will win in the long term, but also the smaller teams. However, this will only happen in a horizon of five years.

It was far more exciting in 2010: you only snagged your first title in the last race. Has Abu Dhabi been a happy place for you since then?

(laughs) Well, the racetrack and what happened on the racetrack, yes! I have many fond memories of winning the 2010 World Cup. It doesn't feel like yesterday. And a lot has happened since then.

Red Bull boss Dietrich Mateschitz then said that the way to the world championship title in the next few years would only be through you. And adds: Provided he's in the right car. The sentence was prophetic: it included all the titles that followed, but also your sometimes dreary years in worse cars. A driver drives the competition to the ground in the Red Bull and fails to win a title after switching to Ferrari and Aston Martin . Do you understand critics who say: what kind of sport is that?

The dependency of a driver on the team and material is actually enormous. But even in the Bundesliga you don't really have a chance of winning the championship if you're not FC Bayern.

The difference, however, is that while a player can shine on a bad football team, it's much harder on a Haas or Aston Martin.

Formula 1 has always been like this. In the fifties, in the seventies, and it's still like that today. From this point of view, however, the past few years have been very instructive for me. In the beginning, my aspirations in Formula 1 were very much focused on success. And then success came, very quickly and very powerfully. I rode the wave for as long as the wave was available.

A wave called Red Bull , on which you won four world titles...

Well, and then in the last few years the water has been under my board (laughs) ... or the wind has been taken out of my sails. But that doesn't mean my efforts are any smaller. I learned that there is a midfield and a backfield that I didn't bother with that much before because it was too far away. In any case, something interesting also happens there: the efforts are just as great, but the reward is completely absent.

Completely?

I would say yes. And that is of course a very, very hard bread for the motivation of the teams and also the drivers. They bob around in the back for years, go unnoticed and hope that they will take the small chance to shine when they present themselves. They are not only dependent on their motivation, their skills and talent - but also on the surrounding environment. It takes a bit of luck to be in the right place at the right time. The past few years have shaped me in this respect and taught me a lot, including about myself. In that respect, I don't want to do without them, even if I could have given them all away from a sporting point of view.

When we spoke in 2018, you said: your dream isn't finished yet, you still wanted to be world champion in a red car like your role model Michael Schumacher. Do you now console yourself with the belief that you had no chance of winning the Ferrari title?

We did not make it. So I could say: We didn't stand a chance. Or I could torture myself and ask: what was missing from the car? What slowed us down in development? What was perhaps structurally not ideal? You could have recognized some things and saved yourself some mistakes. But it wasn't like that. We tried everything as a team and gave everything. Even in hindsight, it doesn't feel like I left anything behind or that I was completely off track. Yes, I think unfortunately we didn't have a real chance to fight to the end.

Because Mercedes was too powerful?

You have to be fair enough to accept that the Mercedes- Lewis Hamilton package was the best. They had a better pace of development and therefore drove better than us. Which of course is a shame. I think I can live with that now as well as with the question of whether this is the right time for me to say goodbye. Or whether it might have needed another sense of achievement.

The question then arises as to what a sense of achievement in the Aston Martin could even look like.

What is the right time? Do you need a title to finish? A won race? A fastest lap? Any climax? Those are all questions I asked myself. It's not my fault if people expect something just because it would have been a nicer story. Or when they nag because they think my career is not smooth because I drive around the back and quit anyway. I'm the only one who has to live or deal with my situation. And after all these years I know exactly what I can do. I know what it takes to win races. And I know I don't have any of that right now. I'm still so confident in myself that I say: If I'm in the right package and have the right attitude, then I can get back up there at the front. Still.

When Nico Rosberg retired after his only title, not everyone was pleased either: critics said he fled because he felt he would never defeat Lewis Hamilton again.

Even. The length of time after your career is so infinitely long. Definitely wanting to win another title is not a recipe for success for the 40 or 50 years that follow. And I was lucky enough to be able to celebrate so many titles that I don't even know which one was the best. Just because you stopped with a title doesn't mean your career after your career will be 100 percent great.

After all, Nico Rosberg made it into the TV show The Lion's Den. But because you so often talk about your career after your career and recently said in Der Spiegel that you wanted to do it like Stefan Raab: just finish and then go underground. Anyone who has followed your activities beyond the race track will understand: you want to do things differently than Stefan Raab. They create a new stage for themselves so as not to disappear afterwards.

(laughs) Time will tell. I just said that I admire it when someone manages to transform their life in such a way that they say: I don't need any of this anymore! Maybe you can now simply bring your experience, your strengths and also your knowledge, which you have brought to bear in front of the camera over the years, behind the camera. So maybe you still work in the same profession, but you don't need the limelight as much anymore.

Fortunately, more people work behind the camera than in front of the camera in Formula 1 anyway.

Honestly, I wish I could find something I'm happy with. I want to experience good luck without having to drive (laughs) .

But to your legacy as a critic of Formula 1: Formula 1 is expanding into more and more countries where human rights are not respected. Football fans are protesting in the stadiums against the World Cup, which begins in Qatar on Sunday . Are motorsport fans less political?

Good question. In controversial countries like Qatar, football was kicked off ten years ago. There may not have been a World Cup yet, but that's where clubs held their winter camps.

FC Bayern has been going to Qatar regularly for years.

For example. We as Formula 1 have been organizing races in these countries for a long time. I think our world should keep evolving. That's why certain things can no longer be considered okay.

Qatar's World Cup ambassador described being gay as "mental damage" in front of the camera in a ZDF documentary.

That is not how it works! This is outrageous!

The mantra of the Qatari whitewashers that society is becoming more liberal, you just have to keep going there, organize big events and wait a few years - isn't that obviously a misconception?

Might be. But Formula 1 is booming internationally and is opening up to a younger audience thanks to the Netflix series "Drive to Survive". And when these young people come to the races, they may hear from other spectators that unbearable tone that many women, for example, suffer from. Then the young people can raise their voices and say: Hey, that's not possible! And this is how debates may arise that will help society as a whole. What is definitely no longer possible: that someone in a country where there are human rights violations talks their way out; For example with the argument: "That's just the way it is with us. Get over it!"

Isn't it naïve to believe that such a change is taking place?

That's why I specifically demand that sport should give itself a compass, set up a moral code and then stick to it. There it is then precisely determined what the basic political requirements must be in order for sport to be allowed to take place in a country. Certain things and certain countries are simply no longer there. Too much is too much. And then we say no as Formula 1 or FIFA . And don't just nod politely and take the money or help us with any other perks the country might offer.

For example, it could say: Don't drive in countries where critical journalists are cut up with bone saws. Formula 1 has signed a ten-year contract with Saudi Arabia.

Again: homophobic comments like that of the World Cup ambassador are absolutely unacceptable. And it puts the athletes in an extremely difficult situation: us drivers in Formula One, but also the players who will take part in the World Cup. You all have to ask yourself a very difficult question: Can I or am I even allowed to practice my sport in this place?

Your Answer?

You can't expect the players to get together and decide: We're skipping this moment, this unique feature in our lives, playing a World Cup, for political reasons. On the other hand, that would be an extremely good sign. It's difficult for the players, but easier for the spectators. You just couldn't look. I myself really enjoy watching football and I love European and World Cups. But sometimes I think: If I don't watch now, don't I also punish all the players who do their best for themselves and their team and are passionate about their sport? But when I think about it that way...

Then?

If statements like those of the World Cup ambassador are made, then we simply shouldn't go to Qatar! The saying was more than backward-looking. The sport, the whole association should say: This is not the right place to do sport there.

Especially since the ambassador still gets money to show as friendly a face as possible to the outside world. He proves that nothing gets better just because sport is organized.

There's a chance. Even our Western societies have not eaten wisdom with spoons and can now say: Dear country XY, do everything as we do and everything will be fine! We also have things that should be significantly better. But if you want to accelerate change in Qatar or Saudi Arabia, then as a sport we need transparency: we have to publish the unembellished numbers of how much money we collect from the countries. And we have to clearly communicate how much of it flows back into projects that then really drive change there on the ground.

A very large and a very small number.

Allegedly. But as long as these issues remain in the background and are veiled, as long as no one knows how much money is being spent and what is being done with it, we will remain stationary. It also doesn't help if you meet somewhere and take a picture of banging a spade in the ground or planting a tree.

You went karting with young women in Saudi Arabia and published photos of it.

That was only a small gesture, but social change does not come for free. Many important projects cost money. And if a country has plenty of money to attract big sport, then some of it, even a large part, should be used to improve people's lives.

Some problems in Qatar cannot be solved by projects. Homosexuality is forbidden, the ambassador only said what is the law. So shouldn't the code you're asking for it say: don't drive in countries where same-sex lovers are jailed?

Just as. Fifa, Formula 1 and other sports associations should also consistently demand the implementation of the demands that they formulate in flowery words. And then say: You can bid as much money as you want, but we won't come. At the moment it is unfortunately still the case that as an organizer you can get away with it if you take a few nice photos. The fundamental problem is another.

That would?

There is still no authority that can demand consequences if an association does not meet the requirements it sets for itself. Formula 1 has set itself the goal of being climate neutral by 2030. Nice and good. But why can't it be checked by an independent and critical body along the way? To then live with the consequences and possible penalties, whatever they may look like? What happens if Formula 1 takes a wrong turn on the way to climate neutrality and doesn't meet its own demands? Or FIFA on the way to more equality and diversity? Unfortunately, at the moment it's like this: Formula 1 controls Formula 1, and Fifa controls Fifa.

But who should control the big associations?

There are independent instances that deal with all kinds of tests that could be won. But it would help if you didn't just set an abstract goal, but divided the way there into transparent intermediate stages. And then there's the general public, the fans in the stands, journalists reporting on it. And wouldn't that be a very, very broad, international and good control body? So I don't see why a lot of problems can't be solved with transparency.

It's a pity that you drive your last race. Actually, because of your sense of mission, you should be forced to continue to circle until retirement age.

Oh, I do not know ...

With all his love for Fernando Alonso, it is unlikely that he would be interested in anyone other than Fernando Alonso in his old racing days. And there is no one to be seen growing up as a political driver.

Every driver has his or her own issues... Maybe some drivers are still too young. But the climate issue will also come to the fore with them. Even if they don't want to.

After leaving Haas a year ago, Mick Schumacher is without a cockpit in Formula 1. Various driver's seats have become vacant in the past few weeks, but no team boss has thought of Schumacher. How do you explain that his services are not in greater demand?

It would be a shame for the sport if it lost Mick. We talked about the fact that in some cars you can't shine as a driver. And sometimes a driver and his car don't go together at all. Mick has had a difficult year, but has set his highlights and accents. As high as you sometimes fly in Formula 1, you can quickly fall again. Basically, you are never as good as people say you are. But you're never as bad as people say you are. Of course, I wish that Mick stays in Formula 1, because that would be very, very important for Germany's motorsport scene .

Nevertheless: You won your first race in the defeated Toro Rosso. Michael Schumacher amazed the world in a Jordan. How do you recognize a talent? And how do you recognize when a talent isn't that great after all?

It's a difficult subject for me: I know Mick better than most drivers and have known for a very long time. He has a lot of potential. Although he may not be the type to get in the car and run into everyone like some people are. Mick is someone who can always improve. This is his gift. But will it then come to the point where he regularly wins and competes for the title? I don't know that. Mick is still too young for such an assessment. I can only hope he gets the time to find out.

#Sebastian Vettel #F1 #Seb telling F1 to put its money where its mouth is #Seb telling F1 to open the books and prove it #Also if anybody tries to use this as an excuse to be Islamophobic I will personally come and kick you 👍#Tw: homophobia

285 notes · View notes

larentsbabie · 6 months

Text

Okay, so I have a lot to say about Louis’ little “chat” and I'll start with a bit of a recap.

A few weeks ago, there have been articles that said Louis is single and doesn't have children. Granted, the articles were not credible enough as it is an obvious lack of basic information since Louis Tomlinson has a son named Freddie and it's all over Wikipedia just a click away. But that just means that the general public has no idea that Louis Tomlinson has a son without googling about the information.

Then the LATAM tour was announced. Louis said it himself that he was offered the rooms of same size as the last tour but he wanted to go big and bold so he chose stadiums. To get the general public interested in an artist, the very common thing to do is to bring them into news, and negative publicity gets more clicks. People will click away to see a celebrity be ‘rude' or 'fight' someone for not respecting their space cause tell me how many of y all not love drama. It's tea, right?

Another way to get into public's eye is by getting into a new relationship. Which is what I've been predicting for Louis for a month now. So, imagine my shock when he went and said "NO" to a "stunt" and instead just took a simple path of bashing fans.

This is not the first time Louis has done this.

I've more to say, so read it all before you come after me for disagreeing on something.

I'll spell it out for y'all!

We should all be very thankful that Louis just got the stunt done with a simple foolish reply to a tweet that was totally unrelated rather than going out hand in hand smooching the face off of another girlie.

Because if that had happened, the media would've been out like crazy about that and it'd have gone on for we don't even know how long.

To me, even a 2 month stunt sounds long ass at this moment cause I can't deal with that shit!

Secondly, remind me of all of those times when Louis intimated us prior of a "chat", like proper

"announced" and "invited" us to chat with him with an hour of replies to our tweets. But he did that on Monday. He wanted all of our attention on his replies yesterday cause he wanted the attention to his stunt. If that doesn't tell you something's fishy- there's more.

Half the tweets Louis replied to yesterday seemed hand-picked. Call me a conspiracy theorist but the conspiracy theories aren't just born out of no where. Where there's smoke, there's fire. If he hadn't given us something to build our theories on, there would've been no theories at all. But ALAS!

If he wanted to deny the conspiracy theories of conspiracy theorists as he names it, he would've found hell of a lot of tweets. There's never any scarcity of Larry tweets or posts on any platforms. But no, he went and made a fool out of himself by denying Larry on one tweet where there was no relation to Larry at all.

And if you think he was actually foolish in doing that, you're absolutely out of your mind. That man is a bloody mastermind who destroyed a man like Simon Cowell one step at a time.

Louis would NOT go so unrelatable on replies for no reason at all. He HAD to deny Larry one way or the other. If it hadn't been over "chicken parmesan", it'd have been over something more serious that would've actually hurt us all. So, y'all should be thankful that THAT man was willing to make himself look "confused" while he denied it rather than make us all question ourselves over other sensitive topics.

Now, about "chicken parmesan". My man Louis William Tomlinson got so off the track- it gave me major second hand embarrassment. Like, babe, Louis, I love you.

We will hand craft tweets for you to deny Larry the next time, just let us know beforehand. We'll hand craft tweets in a way that none of us look foolish and the public gets the message, too! What you did yesterday was hysterically funny!

Like, sir, think about it a minute.

You mentioned all through your career of that ONLY DISH you've ever cooked driven by pure romance for the love of your life. The infamous, chicken stuffed with mozzarella cheese wrapped in Parma ham with a side of home made mash.

Not to mention that you used to bring it up every chance you got ALONG WITH the crazy hand gestures. Ooofff!!! And you'd think it's an old story, one he used to tell 8 years ago while in ID. But oh, may I tell you how wrong you are? The latest he mentioned that was in 2019. One would think he'd forget it after all those years but my man always bragged about his one time in kitchen every chance he got even almost a decade later. He even mentioned that he cooked it out of love for his girlfriend. Sure, sir. I mean why not a girlfriend who at the time was vegan? But I'm not gonna question it at the risk of looking like a conspiracy theorist. Absolutely not. Can't afford that.

But when a fan asks for the recipe of a dish WHICH IS NOT EVEN THE SAME ONE HE COOKED AND BRAGGED about every chance he got for a decade, he flips it over and calls them a conspiracy theorist. Sit your ass down, sir. This is a pr nightmare as it is. Like look at that!

If y'all ever need a reason to laugh in life, this should be it.

I have many serious questions but I'll only ask one.

When the fuck did we let you in on our conspiracy theories about your beloved dish? If you know about the fandoms deepest darkest theories, that only means that you go lurking to dig them up for yourself.

And if you're so interested in the theories themselves, that only means that you care about them all cause they are not just theories but the truth of your life.

For someone who says, "I've never been asked about it directly. It's funny. I mean, PEOPLE CAN BELIEVE WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE but it's comes across SOMETIMES a little bit disrespectful to not me but) my girlfriend. Like genuinely, if you google a conspiracy on iPhones, you'll get a conspiracy you know what I mean?" when asked to make a comment to deny Larry, it sounds an awful lot like you know every thing we talk about cause you are interested to know. And to be fair, we know that you care and we know that you know. And we know that you want us to understand and not give up. And we know that you trust us to not give up. So, we'll be here.

And can I take this moment to remind you all of the fact that Louis, when Dan Wootton put him on the spot to deny Larry, has not once made proper eye contact with the camera and fidgeted like crazy while talking about google, iPhone conspiracies and saying obviously, genuinely? And may I also remind y'all that he made Dan fucking Wootton take that interview down very soon after it was released? They LEGIT had to take that interview down cause Louis couldn't handle denying Larry in front of the camera like that!

So, if he had to put a rock on his heart all those times he had to deny Larry through tweets, I'll fucking understand his struggle and be happy with the outcome, no matter what!

In conclusion, I know that was a lot to read so for those who skipped. What Louis did was for the best.

Him denying Larry specially through that one tweet that's totally unrelated was very much his plan.

He wanted to get his job done as his management wanted him to but he simultaneously failed them very willingly and made a mess for them to pick up after him.

That man is a genius and doesn't do things for no reason. It is what it is. Laugh at it while you can and move on!!

#chicken parmesan #Louis Tomlinson #Larry stylinson #conspiracy theorist my ass #parmagate #chicken stuffed with mozzarella wrapped in Parma ham with a side of homemade mash

34 notes · View notes

slightlyrebelliouswriter23 · 1 year

Note

hii emmm i really hope this isnt a weird question or anything but i was wondering if you think holly would ever write a sex scene (or anything of the sort) with oak and wren? she's never been very descriptive when it comes to those type of scenes in her other works, and even in tfota when jude because sexually active she was already 18 (i believe?) while oak is still underage. do you think this will prevent her from engaging in those type of scenes with oak in the future?

hiya nonnie! not a weird question at all, thank you for trusting me with this 🖤

so as a writer, there are three primary kinds of sex scenes:

fade to black- usually goes a little like this: "they removed their clothes and kissed and kissed between the sheets and on into the night" and then the chapter ends, and in the next chapter, it's implied they had sex.

soft focus- in these scenes, there is a pretty brief (0.5-1 page), sometimes very vague description of what they're doing, but it's still clear they're having sex.

explicit- no holds barred. these guys fucked, and i'll tell you exactly what happened.

i'd place most YA sex scenes, including TFOTA, at a 2 (soft focus), although in recent years, things have definitely been allowed to be more explicit in the YA category.

but explicit sex scenes are definitely not required. in Holly's adult novel, Book of Night, the sex scenes are even less explicit than TFOTA. i'd honestly put them at a 1 (fade to black), even though the main characters are about a decade past the legal age of consent.

i think an author's choice to include explicit sex scenes is less about the age of the characters (and i'd say this is particularly the case in Faerie, because sexuality and sex are said to be more fluid/accepted there), and more about the author's own comfort level/how much the plot of the novel pertains to romance.

Holly has said in the past that when she first wrote the sex scene between Jude and Cardan in TWK, her editor made her make it longer. and from an editing standpoint, this makes sense. because (and i know there will be people who disagree but) romance is actually a pretty big part of the plot for TFOTA.

i can't say with complete certainty what Holly will write in terms of Wren and Oak's romance. oftentimes, sex scenes in literature are used to further romantic implications between two characters. this works especially well when it's unclear whether or not the two characters have feelings for each other (i.e. enemies-to-lovers). and i'd say Oak and Wren's feelings for each other are unclear (at least to each other) at the end of TSH.

my guess is, if there are any sex scenes at all in this next instalment, they will be handled in a similar way to the ones in TFOTA.

–Em 🖤🗡️

more theories & analysis

#thanks for the ask!! 🖤#tfota #jurdan #holly black #the stolen heir #oak greenbriar #oakwren #suroak #asked and answered #nonnie

66 notes · View notes

amyisherenowitsokay · 7 months

Note

I was wondering if you've seen MatPats Film Theory on Invader Zim? And if you have, what your thoughts were on the conclusion?

Okay so since I'm sick I finally got around to watching this video to fulfill this ask.

TLDR for the people who don't want to watch the video below the cut.

TLDR: the theory is that Professor Membrane is an Irken, based off of his lack of ears, goggles that hide is eyes, complete lack of mention of who Dib and Gaz's mother is, his random advanced technology, etc. It would also be an interesting self-folly for Dib, who's made it his life mission to seek out the paranormal, never realizing he is in himself a paranormal entity. There's also some hints that while Dib is oblivious, Gaz might know ("I have a squeedily-spooch" quote), and her acceptance/knowledge is why she's Membrane's favorite kid.

Onto my answer:

I can definitely appreciate the thought that went into this video. I'm a big fan of fan interpretations and secret messages. The Invader Zim lore is so open-ended in a lot of areas, leaving hints about character personalities and motivations all over, it's real fun. That being said, I have to firmly disagree with MatPat's conclusion (with the disclaimer of: to each your own fanfictions).

I think the reason we just can't see Membrane's ears are because they're just under his goggles.

I think this is a pretty good angle to emphasize that the goggles don't go OVER his ears, but under. I actually have a facemask that does that, as it's more comfortable than something going over your ears for hours. The heavier duty safety goggles also have thick ass bands. I think Jhonen and the art team just took insp from that and upgraded it to look futuristic, to where they cover his ears.

Another reason I disagree:

Membrane had a childhood. (The comics also show him with his parents, but I'll stick to strictly show material, since a lot of the comics are not canon). Yes, it could be argued that this was just a younger Professor Membrane, when he was still short. However, I think the childhood wonder of still believing in Santa Clause, even as a super-genius, is more pro-human than pro-secret-Irken. Zim studied Christmas, whereas Professor Membrane experienced Christmas, if that makes sense.

To explain his kids, I do think Dib and Gaz were clones. I subscribe fully to the theory that the Membrane also told them already, way younger than was probably appropriate lol. I think if they didn't know for sure where they came from, they'd both have way more questions on the regular about their theoretical mom.

As funny and interesting as it'd be to have Dib be chasing proof of, well, the existence of himself, I think the reason Membrane tries to keep him away from the paranormal is as stated: Membrane believes, and has always believed, that science is the only career worth chasing. He doesn't believe in the paranormal, because the spookies are just things that science doesn't yet understand. I think if we're lending to the clone theory, it'd also trouble him that his clone-son doesn't like science, and therefore is not the perfect clone. Dib's disinterest is a sign of something going wrong in his experiment, which is simply unacceptable. Furthermore, I think we don't give Membrane enough credit for just being a sentimental guy sometimes. Like any other dad, he just wants his son to think what he does is cool, and join in on his favorite thing.

I think Gaz's comment about a squeedily-spooch was just her being a glib little sister. Also, Dib literally had his organs stolen in that episode. Zim stole his organs to replace organs that he don't exist in Irken physiology. Sure, Dib could be part-human-part-Irken DNA, but if that was the case, Zim still would've noticed by now. He literally steals Dib's DNA signature on multiple occasions. Zim turns him into bologna one episode, and the both of them take extensive cultures of their DNA to try and cure themselves from being turned to meat. If not one, the other certainly would've noticed some Irken in there and pointed it out.

I can't find the episode immediately, but there's also episodes where Zim gets electrocuted and we get the humorous x-ray shots. There's also an episode where Membrane gets an x-ray shot. In both, their bone structure is different.

As neat as the idea is, especially in terms of a 'wow Dib's his own worst enemy' idea, I can't say the video swayed me, or that I could be convinced towards adding it into my own personal fanon. Very neat video though. Thanks for the rec homie

#invader zim #zim #gaz #dib #professor membrane #amyisherenowansweringyou #iz #gaz membrane #dib membrane

27 notes · View notes

aeternallis · 7 months

Note

i want to hear all the violence: 14, 16, and 18 !!!

14) that one thing you see in fics all the time

In a lot of Kimchay reconciliation fics on Ao3, a lot of authors like to write Chay running away and going off on his own.

And don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I can’t see that scenario of Chay leaving post-canon events as a plausible idea at all, but rather it’s that I disagree with the impulsivity with which he usually makes that decision in the fic, yknow? The impulsivity is mostly based on how he regards both Porsche and Kim at the moment, instead of it being a well-thought out decision on his part and giving the appropriate weight of consideration it deserves. And by this I mean more often than not, the running away scenario is a result of feeling abandoned or left behind by Porsche and/or the betrayal from Kim.

And see, I’ve always been a firm believer that Chay is a very strong, brave, and rational character, so the running away thing is an antithesis to this belief. Despite his young age, the narrative tells us that he's not as naïve as one might expect, and he knows his own worth and steadfastness. I’ve said it before too that at where BOC leaves Chay in the final episode, he has more reasons to stay than not.

He no longer looks at Porsche with the idealization of a younger brother, but it doesn't mean his loyalty to him is any less than it was before. His anger over Kim's lies and perhaps the sudden changes in his life is clouding his judgement, but it doesn't mean he loves Kim any less, or that he wants to cut ties with everyone in his life completely.

So the Chay running away scenario is something I can see under only specific circumstances, but it's an interesting interpretation by a lot of writers for the KP fandom that this character would completely drop everything based on emotional impulse alone.

16) you can't understand why so many people like this thing (characterization, trope, headcanon, etc)

The babygirl/uwu-fication of one Kimhant Theerapanyakul--//HITS It's a bit vague, but certain headcanons such as:

-acts like a cat / loves cats -not knowing how to act on his emotions -not knowing how to articulate his feelings -no confidence in taking the lead in his relationship with Chay -allowing for Chay to bully him because of his lies, lol

Lol I've said it a lot of times, but I might as well go a bit more in-depth with it on here lol

Okay, see--here's the thing: it's hard for me to see Kim as having any soft edges or any weird, lovable quirks outside of his interaction with Chay and/or his brothers, because throughout the entire show, there's an air of mystery surrounding his character that BOC never quite shakes off. Honestly, my ongoing theory about that is the fact that they may be setting Kim up to be the "true" heir to the throne, as established in the novel. Which again, brings him a little bit closer to his book counterpart.

He's the only character in the show that has no comedic scenes--most if not all of his scenes are either soft/sweet w/ Chay pre-break up, rude to Big, an asshole to strangers, and angst post-break up, lol

He's a very controlled, serious-minded character who is capable of being vulnerable and open with only a select few people, but it's not his default state whatsoever. I don't think it means that he doesn't know how to act on his emotions, since the show shows us the contrary: he's physically affectionate with Chay once the latter confesses to him, and he didn't hesitate to sing to Chay of his feelings and his remorse for his actions that have hurt them both.

These aren't the actions of someone who's awkward with feelings and isn't aware of them; on the contrary, it goes to show that he's all too aware of them, hence his controlling nature from the beginning and his need to know what's going on.

Kim is definitely a character who understands what he wants and the effort he has and is willing to make in order to get it, be it Chay or wanting to know the machinations of his father and their family. Because of this, I just don't want to give disservice to his character by thinking that he's not capable of what he can actually do.

18) it's absolutely criminal that the fandom has been sleeping on...

THIS VERSION OF KORN! He's so different from the Korn in the show who's all scheming and be playing 4D chess with everyone in this life, and I'm just so surprised that not many creatives in the fandom has utilized him????

He just screams divorced male dad energy who miraculously got custody of all 3 kids during the divorce proceedings w/ the ex and doing his best to keep himself and his 3 sons afloat, all the while running an illegal empire on the side. XD

For example, the chocolate factory thing: he wants to get it off the ground for sentimental reasons, and the wrappers for the chocolates depicts his 3 kids. Adshjhjkhfdkj

For reals, I would have loved to have seen how this version of Korn would have changed the tone of the story, yknow? In the book, he definitely gives off that aura of an exhausted father who's doing his best to leave behind a legacy for his children, even if it means at the questionable cost of trampling on everyone else.

The fact that in the book he's divorced and the boys' mama left the family just a little while after Kim was born is honestly an interesting backstory for this guy, and I for one am here for it. LOL

#kimchay #kinnporsche #my ramblings #asks #korn theerapanyakul #meta

29 notes · View notes

dazais-guardian-angel · 11 days

Note

🧡💛💖💕 for the Ask meme! (Tales of the Abyss ;))

🧡: What is a popular (serious) theory you disagree with?

Lmao well..... I think you saw my previous ask 😂😭 Any theory that says Asch or Lorelei or some weird Luke-Asch personality hybrid or anyone else people come up with that isn't just Luke who comes back at the end. It's gotta be Luke; the narrative just falls apart if it isn't. The other day when I was answering the previous ask looking for your "theory" post again I saw the take (put very simply here) that Abyss is a tragedy, Luke's character is a tragic one, so it makes sense that he ultimately dies and stays dead, and I'm just like.... how?? Genuinely I don't understand how his character arc can possibly be read as that his entire struggle to change and for life was just completely futile in the end and that there was no meaning to any of it all, that's such a downer ending for what is ultimately, despite how much sad shit happens in it, a hopeful story 😭😭😭 (one of the main themes is LITERALLY CALLED MEANING OF BIRTH).

Even putting that aside though, I just feel like it makes even less sense for Asch to come back?? Like, his character arc finished when he died. The whole point is that he remained stagnant the whole game and his tragedy is that he dies that way, while Luke was willing and able to change!! What purpose would it serve narratively to bring him back after his very sad yet satisfying conclusion?? Again, by all means, it makes for juicy AUs, but as canon.... there's no way.

💛: What is a popular ship you just can’t get behind, and why?

....I feel like I'm putting myself in danger answering this when it's coming from you 😂😭 But, well, I'm really not that interested in Luke/Tear lol. By no means do I hate it though, I just don't have any strong feelings towards it either way, and honestly part of that is just because I'm not really a shipper in general lol and nothing to do with them specifically. A lot of people who don't ship it say it's because they see Tear as more of a sister figure to Luke because that's how the game initially presents her as (and with the "big sister" title or whatever it's called), but idk... I honestly can't decide what I see her as to him. They just feel like very close friends to me by the end of the game, I guess, and although I like some of their touching scenes, I never really felt the chemistry between them. I guess it's just hard for me to imagine Luke in a relationship with everything he's going through during the game, and also Tear is pretty bland to me herself so that doesn't help. 😭 I know her Japanese voice is very different from her English one and her English one gets some flak, so maybe that's to blame ugh; maybe if I listened to her in Japanese sometime I would become more endeared to her.

💖: What is your biggest unpopular opinion about the series?

...If I had to pick another one that isn't just the first answer again lol, though this isn't exactly super unpopular, but Abyss is the best game in the Tales series, by a wide, wide margin. Not only do I believe it to be the best Tales game, but one of the best games of all time period, and one of the best stories of all time. Yes, I said what I said, fight me. And it has absolutely nothing to do with nostalgia; I played Abyss on my 3DS around 2014-2015, probably? in my early 20s, so I don't have any special childhood memories of it, nor was it even my first Tales game (Graces holds a special place in my heart for that). I just... played it, and it left such an incredible impact on me that has yet to be beaten by nearly any other media I've ever experienced. I don't know what it is about it that makes it so powerful, but it's true. Don't get me wrong, plenty of other stories have come very close to making me feel the same way..... but none of them have ever quite reached Abyss level.

So yeah, a lot of people agree Abyss is good.... but I still believe that most don't recognize it for the masterpiece it truly is.

💕: What is an unpopular ship that you like?

Like I said, I'm really not a shipper lol, but I'm really fond of Guy/Natalia? I just love their scenes together, how respectful and gentlemanly he is towards her, and how her growth is most strongly shown in plenty of her interactions with him; it's so lovely to see. 🥹 and I think about their time spent together post-Eldrant and before the epilogue, them helping each other grieve.... it destroys me so good :' ) they're very sweet together.

Thank youuu sista! 🩷

Ask game

#ask game #replies #tales of the abyss spoilers #i am very confident in my understanding of Abyss' story and themes....... but sometimes i wonder #maybe i am just talking out of my ass idk #i intend to play persona 3 soon which has been compared to abyss a lot (totallyyyy not one major reason why i want to play it ahem-)#and knowing as much as i know about that game...... hm #maybe it will give me new perspectives on abyss #i really look forward to it

9 notes · View notes

maniacwatchestheworld · 1 year

Text

Two-Face ought to be a top Batman sexyman!

Of the candidates left in @batman-heritageposts' Batman Sexyman tournament, in my mind Two-Face is the best suited to be considered the best Batman sexyman, even though unlike Scarecrow, he does not even have an actual entry on Sexypedia! To prove my point, I have gone onto Sexypedia's trope list and taken the liberty of actually compiling a list of all the sexyman tropes that I believe can definitively apply to him. So for your viewing pleasure, the list:

Angst Tragic backstory. Lamenting the life he's lost as well as his own present existence. Two-Face is FULL of all kinds of angst! And given that he used to be besties with Bruce, he even makes Batman angst too!

Chaoslord Comes with the territory of his gimmicks. He is often noted as being Batman's most unpredictable villain because he lets a coin make all of the decisions for him! Even he can't predict what he's going to do next! Chaos vs order is a persistent theme with him.

Criminal Obviously.

Dealmaker More in a gambling way than in a supernatural 'deal with the devil' way. But he often makes promises and deals and will keep to them so long as the coin flips the right way. Also he used to be a lawyer. Kinda comes with the territory.

DILF He may not be a canonical parent right now, but boy does he have the vibes for it!

Distinctive Voice (Two-Face) While Harvey tends to talk in a pretty normal voice, Two-Face often talks in a growl. Depends on the iteration though.

Divorced We know for a fact that Harvey was married... And while in current canon his wife is supposed to be dead, in many canons it's often unclear whether she's dead, they split up for whatever reason through whatever methods, or whether they're still together. Because you know. Continuity! In any case, him being divorced from Gilda isn't an unpopular theory. A valid one, certainly given how he's caught up in a cycle of being at Arkham and on the streets as a criminal.

Dominating (Two-Face) Usually Two-Face, not Harvey so much, and through sheer force of personality. Big step on me vibes here!

Duality The basis of his entire character and gimmick!

Egotistical (Two-Face) Harvey tends to be a pretty humble guy. He certainly has a lot to brag about, being a legitimate legal genius and all, but he tends to keep it on the down-low. Two-Face on the other hand? He ABSOLUTELY thinks that he's hot shit and will brag about it, and will shoot at anyone who doesn't want to listen or disagrees with him!

Eye Imagery His whole asymmetrical deal leads to him having very... Interesting eyes... In many iterations he doesn't have an eyelid on the scarred side, making that eye look bulbous in comparison. Also the whole getting half of his face melted off thing led to his eye color changing in many iterations. So as a minimum, he's usually portrayed as having some form of heterochromia.

Gay/Questionable LGBT Rep The fact that this man who is Bi everything NOT being confirmed as interested in men should be considered a CRIME! Let Harvey make out with Bruce already!

Hot-headed (Two-Face) Harvey can usually keep his cool, but Two-Face is noted for being very hot-headed. When Harvey loses his temper, that's usually when Two-Face ends up fronting.

Intelligence (mostly Harvey) While Two-Face is certainly no idiot, Harvey is likely the smarter one by sheer virtue of he's an actual genius when it comes to matters involving the law. Law genius also translates pretty well to criminal genius, turns out. There was a reason that Harvey was District Attorney. He was just the best damn lawyer in all of Gotham and for good reason!

Knifemurderer Yep! Two-Face sure has murdered a whole lot of people! Two-Face is probably most well-known for deciding whether to kill people or not based off of a coin flip.

Magnificent Bastard In many iterations, fits this trope to a T.

Power of Love In his third ever appearance, he decided to stop being a criminal because Gilda still loved him despite his appearance. Since then, this is a theme that continues to pop up now and again with his character- that so long as people love Harvey, he can be saved.

Questionable Neurodivergent Rep Is explicitly shown to be plural and having OCD. The representation is often... Not so great... Though it does seem to be a thing that many writers are trying to improve on.

Scars Literally half of his entire face, and oftenhis body will be scarred up too! It's where he gets his moniker of "Two-Face" and is therefore deeply tied to his character and gimmicks.

Tall Usually.

Twisted Freaking Cycle Path Yep! Usually with DID.

Unkempt (Two-Face) Harvey usually keeps pretty tidy, but sometimes Two-Face will be unkempt on his side of the body.

Villain Obviously.

Morally Grey Obviously, again. Also this is like his entire deal!

Well-Dressed/Suitguy He's practically THE suitguy of the Batman rogues gallery! With snazzy two-tones suits that are split down the middle too! Definitely among the best dressed of the rogues.

White Hair Often his disfigured side will have messy white hair, if he has hair on that side at all.

Meanwhile, how many sexyman tropes apply to Dick Grayson? I'll be honest, I know nothing about the Talon iteration of Dick Grayson and therefore more of the sexyman tropes likely apply to him than your bog standard Dick Grayson... BUT IS IT 27 TROPES!!!??? Even Scarecrow doesn't have 27 tropes attributed to him on his sexyman page! And I didn't even include the more subjective tropes the require a fair bit of popularity like Johnlocked, Controversial, or Fanon Splintering!

Do the right thing and prove that Two-Face is the best Batman sexyman!

Vote Harvey "Two-Face" Dent for Batman sexyman!

#long post #tumblr sexyman #sexyman #sexyman contest #batman #harvey dent #two-face #twoface #two face #batman sexyman tournament #batman-heritageposts #batman rogues gallery #gotham rogues #batman rogues

62 notes · View notes