#if only because she knows it will affect any post-War politics

[a-secret-bolton-vampire]

Something has been bugging me lately; why is it that so much of the ASOIAF fandom hates romance? Like, this is a problem I've noticed and it's honestly kind of weird. To be sure, George's view on what is romantic is, uh, dubious at best, but to outright be so against it the way I've seen some people be against it is quite bizarre, to say the least.

Rhaegar and Lyanna? Of course there's no romance there! Rhaegar clearly was just using Lyanna as a baby factory to produce a super prophecy child because that's all there is to his character!

Jon and Daenerys? They won't be getting together like that dumb show! And if they are, it will be purely a political marriage! No lovey dovey stuff there!. After all Dany likes "bad boys" (which somehow translates to "evil men") so why would she like a strong, assertive man like Jon? And why would Jon like her? Not like he likes strong fiery tempered women!

Those are the two biggest examples but there is more. Daemon Blackfyre and Daenerys Targaryen are more ambiguous since they are historical characters, but a lot of people are convinced it was 100% unrequited love.

I've even seen fans complain about the line from Barristan where he thinks about how Bittersteel and Bloodraven's rivalry over the affections of Shiera Seastar caused the Blackfyre Rebellions. Like sure it wasn't the only reason, but to think that jealousy and romance didn't have an effect on those rebellions is a bit weird.

Yes, I am aware these are some problematic pairings, not least of which because most of these are pretty incestuous. However, the complaints about these romances do not stem from a moral quandary. In the case of R+L, you see people calling Rhaegar a groomer and pedophile (see my post on him on my full thoughts there), but the majority of it is simply "well it's stupid because they told no one and caused a whole war, the selfish brats" (bonus points if someone specifically targets Lyanna).

Okay, setting aside the fact that, like with the Blackfyre Rebellions, Robert's Rebellion was caused by far more factors than their elopement, why does making it an abduction Rhaegar did simply for a magic messiah baby make it a better story than the fact these two were in love and desperate to escape situations they felt trapped in, leading to shortsighted decisions that had an unexpected affect on many people?

With Jon and Dany, the backlash is "but that's so cliche! George wouldn't do something as cliche as two of the biggest protagonists falling in love." As if George doesn't constantly engage with cliche storybeats as often or even more than he subverts them. Even when the evidence for the two getting together is literally so overwhelming that you'd need to be willfully ignorant to ignore the foreshadowing (plus the fact George literally said that their union is "the point of the series").

And again, I must ask; why is Jon and Dany marrying to secure a political alliance without any real love between them a better story than an epic, doomed romance between two people who have gone through such similar struggles and have such similar personalities? What does R+L=J even exist for if they are just a couple of convenience using each other?

I'm not saying you have to love and ship all these people together. Because we sometimes forget our little fandom bubble, most people are not okay with even fictional incest ships. That's okay. Sometimes it's not even incest ships, but again, that's okay! We are all different and have our preferences! Some might not even care much for romance.

But the way a lot of this is criticized doesn't read like that. It's always focusing on the negative aspects. Especially with Dany's love interests. I'm not a fan of Daario and Dany, personally, but it is a bit uncomfortable how she is targeted so heavily for thinking and getting horny about him. Like... let a girl be horny and infatuated? Lol, I don't know!

With Rhaegar and Lyanna, Prince Duncan the Small and Jenny of Oldstones, the "problem" is that their disregard for political betrothals and following their hearts makes them stupid monsters who are directly responsible for the deaths of thousands. That is absolutely not the way we should take these romances.

These doomed, tragic affairs aren't about how people are selfish. It's about the power of love. The way love makes people act rashly. The way love consumes someones thoughts and feelings. Love is powerful, it is transformative, transcending. That is the point. Even in spite of the death and chaos occurring around it, the love these people have for each other is something that cannot be broken.

I feel like the fandom has taken the wrong approach to this series tone and themes. I'm not George's biggest personal fan, to be quite honest, but he is a self described romantic. Turning Rhaegar from a lovestruck prince to a selfish crazed maniac is not romantic. Turning romance or potential romance into cold political maneuvers is not romantic.

The point of all this is that, yes, the world is dark. It's scary, it's cruel, unforgiving, and cold. But in that darkness, there are pockets of light that shine and make you feel safe, and warm, and happy. It makes you forget all the troubles around you. That light, that warmth, that love, is worth fighting for, even if it's all that is left, even if it doesn't last.

I am of course, slightly biased in my assessment, lmao. You could say that me, being a bisexual polyamorous transfemme, is maybe a bit of a big fan of romance and love! Yet, it still saddens me that people try to keep romances from just being romances, and try to make the story and world more bleak as a result. We already have Ramsay, Joffrey, Gregor, Euron, Randyll Tarly. We have people who use love against others for their own gain or outright reject it violently. We don't need more of that.

#asoiaf meta #asoiaf #jonerys #rhaegar x lyanna #asoiaf discourse #watch out i might be poking more at the fandom in later posts #i just have a lot of thoughts and need to put them down somewhere otherwise they drive me crazy

[decepti-thots]

Related to this last ask: the Arcee-Optimus dynamic is criminally underrated in exRiD and OP, in my opinion. She has NO awe about him, she lived before 'Prime' was even a thing and knows exactly how much it is a political affectation, she sees through his world-weary insistence he knows more than the people around him from age or experience (because as she points out, he's young compared to her), she wasn't in the war so she only really sees him as. A Guy. A Person Doing Stuff. She doesn't flatter him or demonize him, she's literally just like 'he's the guy currently in charge, and that's all'. Punctures his ego in a way I can only imagine IDW OP finding relieving, and in turn he respects her more than almost any other Autobot in the post-war stuff. She's not his old friend, but I think if OP finds even one friend in those comics, it's clearly Arcee, and it doesn't feel like a coincidence she's the one who memorializes him as a complex, real person and not a saint or sinner in OP #25.

#have i mentioned today that OP number 25 is one of my favourite comics ever #WELL IT IS!!!!

[mylight-png]

How do I explain to a very close friend that what is happening hurts me, an American Jew? That seeing people deny Jews as having a homeland in the area that is Israel reinforces antisemitic stereotypes and that stating there is an imbalance of power where the Jews/Israel have more power is inherently antisemitic. One of the things that hurt me the most was her inability to say that Jews had a right to live in Israel; she couldn't say what a solution would be, even when I have explained the idea of a two state solution, even when I would have been fine with some kind of generalized "I believe in a world without borders and everyone is equal". She played the "antizionism is not antisemitism" card. She kept stating "all the research I have done shows me x" but wouldn't say where that research was done. I care about this person deeply and in all other regards in politics she seems completely able to grasp the nuances and complexities of situations. What are some resources and ideas of how to start a conversation?

First and foremost, stay very up to date on what's happening. It is so so so important to understand that, a lot of the time, these awful views come from ignorance. These people are only seeing one side, the side Hamas wants them to see. Being informed, both on what they're seeing and what makes those things untrue, is central to battling misinformation.

Ask your friend if they would define the hatred for any other minority. Would they tell a Black person what anti-Black racism looks like? Would they explain to a queer person what is or isn't homophobic? Would they say that it's important to see the ableist's perspective to a disabled person? It's important to recognize and point out those double standards.

Also, what happened and is happening in Israel affects all of us around the world physically, mentally, and emotionally. I don't know whether you have any blood relatives in Israel, but I know you have family there. About seven million. We are all still in shock and mourning over what happened, and that is completely valid. But also, there has been a drastic spike in antisemitism globally. I know that as a Jewish college student living on campus, I am not safe. It's not just that I don't feel safe, I'm not safe. None of us can be safe or feel safe while Hamas propaganda is so rampant in our society. The fact that what is happening in Israel affects you as an American Jew is not just your opinion or perception or point of view. It's a fact. Anyone who denies it is ignorant and/or antisemitic.

The inability to recognize the indigenous heritage of Jews in relation to Israel has been so so so harmful in this issue. I highly recommend Rootsmetals on Instagram for learning more about these things, she makes very comprehensive informative posts.

Antizionism is antisemitism, because Zionism is a foundational Jewish value, and to deny it is to deny Jewish heritage and history. In the Torah we are referred to as one of two things. "B'nei Yisrael" and "Am Yisrael", children and nation of Israel, respectively. Every year after pesach we say "next year in Jerusalem" and this isn't new. This is an ancient tradition recognizing our roots there. During the Amidah prayer we turn to face Israel, yet again highlighting our connection to the land. The letters written on our Hanukkah dreidels vary depending on whether they were made in Israel or not. Heck, Hanukkah itself is a holiday about us reclaiming our homeland from Greek imperialism.

Also explain that Hamas's foundational goal is the genocide of Jews. Their charter is available on the internet, if your friend doesn't believe you she can read it herself. This isn't a war of land. This is a war of survival, and it is a war Israel did not start.

I'll be honest with you. All of the facts and rationality in the world will not be enough to change some people's minds. If that is, G-d forbid, the case with your friend, then it'll be up to you how you deal with that. There is no pressure to cut her out of your life if that doesn't seem like the right option to you, but you also shouldn't feel like you have to stay friends with her for any reason if that makes you uncomfortable.

Frankly, there are two questions that pose the ultimate test. How does she feel about the October 7th massacre, and can she confidently say that Hamas is a violent terrorist organization.

Failure to condemn both or even one of those is despicable and inherently antisemitic due to the goals of Hamas.

I'm sorry if this wasn't much help, but it's all I have to offer.

Am Yisrael chai, stay strong.

#Israel #am yisrael chai #jumblr #jewish #judaism #antizionism is antisemitism #antisemitism has no place here #fuck antisemitism #fuck hamas #discussion #advice

[fitzrove]

So... what really would've gone down if Mayerling 1889 didn't happen?

Under the cut for speculation & surface-level research... I may write a better post about this someday later. Tysm @baldandersss for inspiring this hehehe

This is a favourite topic for many a "historian" (lol) online, people love to think about what would have happened if Rudolf hadn't died in 1889. Setting aside other things that could've killed Rudolf (we don't know for sure if he had syphilis, Brigitte Hamann sometimes says no - gonorrhea only, but he believed it was syphilis and therefore progressive and uncurable - but in later interviews she switches to yes, it was syphilis; also, maybe stephanie would've eventually gotten tired enough and murdered him (JOKING)), let's pretend for a moment that he actually managed to survive until the 20th century and beyond lol

Now, it's late and I'm not going to google all the stuff that happened between 1889 and 1914 LOL rip, but the thing with 1914 is:

I'm not altogether sure it would've made a difference in the grand scheme of history, ie. Rudolf could not have prevented WW1 from occurring

unless a bunch of people got cool about a bunch of stuff really quickly

according to wikipedia The Bosnian Serb students who planned out the attack mostly cited larger anti-imperial motivations (= the attentat was conceptualised as a heroic bid to free the homeland from decades of tyranny and forced organisational/governmental/political assimilation - omg fun fact this also happened in Finland in 1904 for similar reasons but nobody cared so there was no war xD), but there was also a slight personal aspect to it, because Franz Ferdinand had advocated for even further imperial consolidation, and the assassin actually stated that one of his motivations was to prevent further developments in that vein from occurring by removing FF from the playing board.

-> would a "fairer" archduke - or crown prince - have made a difference? More importantly, could we assume that Rudolf would've actually held substantially different views (in terms of political thought Rudolf was "fairer" to the Slavic peoples of the empire than many others at court, but he was still an imperialist at heart, he didn't want A-H to break apart into independent nation-states - which is the opposite of what radical nationalists all across Europe wanted), AND even if he did, could we assume that evidence of his views would've been widespread enough to make the nationalists hope that once he became emperor, things would get better?

There's simply too many questions, I don't know if it could've worked out... Of course, maybe the overall political line of the court would've been different if Rudolf lived, but that would've necessitated actual power and influence for Rudolf... and idk if any was forthcoming especially once he started to be viewed as mentally unstable and/or morally repugnant by family members, members of the court and the general public (in the late 1880s). So in general I would assume that Mayerling as an event actually isn't historically as momentous as people sometimes say - it's a symptom, not a cause. Really, the real tragedy is the build-up of a political system that's so hostile to idealist liberalism that people in power (or adjacent to power!) who go/think against the system don't have a chance to affect change AND find their very existence unsustainable

(of course there was a level of personal tragedy too, not being able to cope with everything AND having limitations to how you could solve your problems because status made many things impossible for Rudolf, but...)

Also, @baldandersss pointed out that this version of events would've made Rudolf alive at the time of Elisabeth's death - surely a tough blow, especially given the circumstances...

#anyway yeah. rip rudolf sometimes things dont get better because too many ppl simply want them to get worse hahshdhjgj #i still think he shouldve done the thing he talked abt once and fucked off to become a politician/civil servant in france xD #history #ramble

[horizon-verizon]

I would like to ask your opinion on this links, Where is argued that Rhaenyra's reign would never have been stable as long as there was a viable male heir. I think that would be slightly true except that we have Jeyne Arryn right there who yes, she had to lock up some of her cousins ​​(I think) for trying to usurp her and yes, there were conflicts after her death because she chose a successor and some decided not to respect it.

When one of the worst crimes is kinslayer and we see within the universe examples of how it is solved peacefully. I don't understand why everyone jumps to yes, without a doubt murder is the only way.

https://www.tumblr.com/bbygirl-aemond/707496074526523392/what-would-you-think-would-happen-if-the-greens?source=share

I would say that there is a male candidate under her reign who would keep those who wish to destabilize or usurp her hopeful, but the line between hopeful and actually plotting/active in this case is thicker than this person thinks. Yes, with Rhaenyra being female there are always people who will prefer any of her maniac brothers. And yes, Jeyne Arryn had trouble getting her seta having to imprison her own relatives who later stopped her chosen heir from ruling after her death. However, as I and others have already said--several times, really!--how many people actually would do something against her or try versus those who supported her and fought for her and therefore--if she had ruled--would stay behind her? Especially if greens stans and some "neutral" fans realized that it's so much less likely for dragon-less Andal lords to actually seriously harm them with their dragons outnumbering the original 3 conquerors' dragons by more than 10 if the green characters (and I mean Alicent and her kids and father) had left well enough alone.

As for Jeyne Arryn, is it not strange how it is after Rhaenyra dies and loses that another woman-ruler's wishes/authority declines after her death? What would have happened if Rhaenyra had survived and ruled without as much as she went through, how would she have responded to her Arryn cousin's will ignored? The same cousin who--unlike the Rosby and Stokeworth girls who were not blood-related--actively and personally supported her in the war? A woman who ruled her dead mother's homeland, the same house whose' sigil she added to her own wartime banner? And it's important to note that Jeyne Arryn, like Viserys, expressly vocalized/declared who her heir was while Rosby & Stokeworth's fathers did not as far as anyone knows. Finally, it's a lot easier for Rhaenyra to support Jeyne's heir or avenge them because unlike here, w/Rosby & Stokeworth she had the pressure of choosing what would make her immediate supporters happy for her immediate needs. If she had won, that pressure would have been much lighter. So if one argues that Rhaenyra would treat Jeyne Arryn exactly as she did Rosby and Stokeworth, they're not reading through the text. And if this makes Rhaenyra sound self-interested, I never said that she wasn't. In other posts, I explain who I think Rhaenyra was as a person and how she became that (pre-KL and marriages) into her becoming her later paranoid self. But I am speaking not of an individual's morality but of one very important effect of her fall on the politics of greater Westeros. Once again, Rhaenyra's loss and inability to stay as a queen affected noblewomen's ability to justify their places as rulers in their own right, which has implications for what women are able to do versus men's. To downplay that is to ignore the implications for even Daenerys, how Arianne Martell vs Stannis Baratheon use precedents and customs to explain or promote their decisions and bids for positions, etc. It is to ignore how Targ women get weaker and farther from the central seat of royal power until we have Rhaella and Dany--both literally sexually and physically abused by their own brothers. A long way from Alysanne, Visenya, and Rhaenys. It is to say, "patriarchy and thinking women shouldn't politically participate and decide for themselves how they navigate life and get any sort of support from their families/government/etc is actually good, or 'not as bad as you'd think'". Using Rhaenyra's self-centeredness and then exaggerating its quality or effect to make her pre-KL personality into something evil is making a victim a perpetrator before they actually become said perpetrator. As well as a lie. Which ironically tends to actually make perpetrators, pushes them into darker places.

Because textually there is nothing to indicate she performed any truly distinctive or evil act before or after her marriages nor her time at Dragonstone ruling it by herself. The reasons why some at Dragonstone turned against her were because some believed a man should come before a woman, because they thought that they'd gain some benefits or just survive the greens, because they wished to see the person who allowed their relatives to either try to claim a dragon or died during the Battle of the Gullet, or they were like Alfred Broome who felt that she didn't give them as many privileges as another person and for personal greed ("Rhaenyra Overthrown"):

The greed and envy part aligns with the greens' own reasons for usurping Rhaenyra. As for the Sowing by itself, those people chose of their own free will to try to ride a dragon, that's not on Rhaenyra. In the Battle, you could argue that disobeying an overlord would be enough to hate any lord and this is correct and valid except as a way to vilify Rhaenyra out of all the lords and ladies who, for centuries, have also used commonborn people for their wars. Yes, Rhaenyra is a typical aristocrat in that sense, so why should she be singled out for this specific thing? (This is not to those commonborn, but to those readers and in-story green supporters who would try to say Rhaenyra deserved punishment for this. The commonborn, just like with other lords and vassalages, can and often do, resent lords for lost or disabled relatives from war).

We already saw/see how many came out and fought for her, how they outnumbered those who didn't. (Links to a list of her supporters versus him and what he did--EXCEL SHEET; QUOTE#1 /QUOTE#2; A TUMBLR POST). Don't believe me? Check out this wiki page of the official wiki: The Greens vs the Blacks by the end of the war.

To clarify: going by how many supported Rhaenyra in the actual war, we can surmise that she had way more support than she did without. And I mean "support" by those willing to fight for her whether by the value of oath, to help their own claims, belief in her herself, or all of the above. All the while, you have to also realize that Alicent had to have tried spreading the rumors of Rhaenyra's sons' "bastardy" and Rhaenyra's own "licentiousness"--Borros' comments about her being a bitch and Lucerys her "whelp"--as to ruin her and their reputation and get others to turn against her. Didn't work for most people, evidently.

The reason why the Lannisters and Hightowers (the two main and biggest green supporters aside from Borros/the Baratheons) ever thought to rebel and participate in usurping Rhaenyra was that Viserys allowed an in to the Hightowers by marrying one of their most Faithful, conservative members and having 3 male children with her. And the Lannisters (namely Jason and Tyland), while they definitely thought males were better were not as invested in supporting the greens as far as they could capitalize on their win (and for Tyland, safety, as he was in the castle when it all went down). Rhaenyra had already rejected Jason Lannister in the show while Viserys ignored Jason as a potential husband for her in the book/original lore, so the Lannisters chose a different avenue to influence in the royal family and power. They were all so emboldened partially because they had dragonriders on their side: Aemond, Aegon, and even Helaena if they ever made the excuse to put her out there (though I seriously doubt they would) plus the hightowers' resources and influence.

Finally, when we asses why people would not "respect" Rhaenyra's rule or her heirs' vs why sometimes men and their male heirs' are not "respected" throughout "Westerosi" history, there is a clear difference. If we went back to TWoIaF, there are many examples of men and their male heirs usurped or not "respected" and killed because they were physically weak, too young, weakminded, outmatched, unlucky, etc. They were generally never killed because they turned down an offer of marriage that would benefit their spouse more or just because they were women and seen as unfit based on that alone (the first one is a society woman's plight). Meanwhile, women receive more socially sanctioned sexual or turned-up regular violence, or simply those surrounding them decided they'd rather be led by an invited male--even those men who were a past-enemy/conqueror--than have a woman/girl from the past male ruler's direct relation rule in her own right: Agnes Blackwood; Argella Durrandon; those women that Ronard the Bastard "claimed" from those he conquered; Gerold III Lannister's unnamed daughter who married Joffrey Lydden, the first Andal to rule the Rock and like Orys took his wife's name as to continue that lineage but still would overrule her; Arlan III the Storm King offered to have Roderick Blackwwod's daughter/his own good-daughter Shiera to rule with him jointly after his conquest of that part of the Riverlands, but the lords protested and said they'd rather have him than a girl so that he just added these lands to his own Duurandon domains and it ceased to be "Riverland" for a time. One can check out why this happens more often HERE, by mononijikayu. You can't choose when and where history matters and when cultural/societal ideologies matter in how they shape the present.

#asoiaf asks to me #rhaenyra's supporters #rhaenyra's characterization #westerosi society #westerosi sexism #fire and blood characters #fire and blood #fandom misogyny

[thespianinthebackcorner]

Thespian is dainsleif a good father figure or am i just insane.

How come we ALWAYS see people say NASTY ARCHON USERPER ZHONGLI is a father and papa and granpops🥺🥺 but NO ONE ever considers DAINSLEIF, THE TWILIGHT SWORD, HUMANITY ADVOCATE, CAPTAIN OF THE ROYAL GUARDS a father figure. He has (had) a STABLE INCOME, has (had) A GOOD POLITICAL PLACE, has (had) SO MANY KNIGHTS WORKING UNDER HIM. SO MANY AUNTS AND UNCLES (halfdan rip he's in a better place than other khaenri'ahns now), has (had) EMOTIONAL STABILITY (i think. it looked like he had from that one halfdan cutscene), AND WOULD GIVE YOU THE MOST JUICY LORE WORTHY DADDY ISSUES POST CATACALYSM.

STUPID ZHONGLI HAS NONE OF THAT EXCEPT MAYBE THE AUNTS AND UNCLES POINT like yeah cloud retainer or whatever🙄😒 but is she as good as YNGHILDR/HALTAF/EDGETHO/HYGLACG/SERKIR/BULIWYF/RONETH/HERGER/RETHEL???? (various black serpant knights we kill for one gloomy statuette we use to level up ayato'a weapon) NO!!!

This is quite the ask do you need sleep? Don't hate me for the response please-

Right, so I think this ask requires a bit of standardizing as to what a "good father figure" looks like. I'm gonna put it in dot points.

Stable income

Emotional stability

Kindness

Has worked with kids before (optional)

Knows how money works

Has a place where you can certainly go to find him (work or home)

Wants or is comfortable working with kids

Family members they can rely on as backup

I think part of Zhongli's "father figure" reputation is because he actually has kids in a sense (the Yakshas) and hangs around kids a lot (Hu Tao and her friends). It's also affected by his personality, since he has that old man stereotype of not really knowing how new things work. He's six thousand years old and acts like it- he is literally old enough to be someone's granddad. Zhongli is also connected with Xianyun, Madame Ping and a couple other people he has for backup, like you said. He's also quite kind towards the Traveler, as well as other people he sees in everyday life. So he checks off most of my little list:

Stable income ✅

Emotional Stability ✅

Kindness ✅

Previous Experience with kids: ✅

Money knowledge: ...❌

Place to find him: ✅ (Wangsheng)

Comfortable with kids: ✅

Backup family members: ✅

Dainslief, on the other hand, disappears quite a lot, is constantly tracking down the Abyss Order and going into dangerous places, is generally very apathetic and from his treatment of Paimon probably doesn't like kids all that much. Since I used current Zhongli instead of Prime Zhongli for my analysis, I'm using current Dain for this too. And current Dain also has the issues of trauma from the Cataclysm, being sought out by the Abyss Order, not having a stable income because of Celestia, and also the constant pain from Celestia's curse iirc. So he's generally got a lot of problems. He's kind, but in an apathetic way, where he tends to leave his problems to himself and tells you to solve your own- it's only when there's a common interest that he helps. So going back to the checklist Dain doesn't do much.

Stable Income: ❌

Emotional Stability: unsure but I'm going ✅

Kindness: ❌ not to a father figure degree

Worked with kids: Unknown

Money Knowledge: unknown, Khaenri'ah might have had their own currency

Place to find him: ❌

Comfortable with kids: ❌

Backup family members: ❌

Not much there. Now, if we knew any more about Prime Dainslief, he'd likely check off a lot more- like you said, Prime Dainslief has a stable income, a home you could find him at, backup family members/friends to help, and depending on who he was pre-Cataclysm might even have been willing to work with kids. Having said that, if we compare Prime Dainslief to Prime Zhongli, then Dain would absolutely win (since Prime Zhongli was in the Archon War) but since it's Current Dain and Current Zhongli it's different.

So yeah, though they're both considered daddy they're not equally viable for dad status.

#genshin impact #genshin #dainslief #zhongli genshin impact

[stan-rabelais-et-diderot]

I'm 32, I read all of Cassandra Clare's books, but then again I read a lot of books, so I don't engage in fandom for those books, these pieces of media much, or at all.

So I'm quite surprised & a bit alarmed to see how virulent people commenting & following her work seem to be of the person Cassandra Clare.

She hasn't done or is currently committing crimes she hasn't faced justice for.

She doesn't use the money from her books to fund hate groups.

Therefore, I don't understand why she is the target of so much speech that seem to attack her, as a person.

I think we all know we all share this Internet. Anything we write on a public space, anyone can read. People can read what we write about them. It's fair game to review books, to criticize books, but I'm a bit perplexed by how much more personal it gets for female writers.

Male writers aren't asked about this or that, they aren't being held to the standards female writers are all the time. For the same issuee, of a male writer it will be said that it's "out of their control", for a female writer "they just don't care about" it.

I understand we are passionate & female writers can be shitty, just like everyone else. But what I don't understand is why we have to shit specifically on what we love (or the people who write the things we love). I've never gushed about Cassandra Clare, but I've never said anything negative either. In fact, I don't write about her. I don't know her. I've read her work. That's it.

Authors don't owe us things. It's nice when they keep their word about dates of publication or finishing what they start, but ultimately, buying a book is a gamble. Sometimes it pays off & it's a great book, sometimes it doesn't. We are happy when it's a good book, disappointed when it's bad, but let's reclaim some agency, no one forces us to buy those books. If you don't like an author, stop buying their books, don't read them, leave a bad review explaining why you didn't like the book.

That's acceptable. What's not acceptable is writing personal attacks of writers in public online spaces that can be found so easily that you can be sure the authors sees them too. And it weighs on them.

Personally, I've invested a lot of time reading those books, so I want to stick it through the end. Only a handful to go. I will buy those books because I enjoy the world building (especially the political structures) & if the author decides to retire or not finish the books because she has had too much, received too much negativity, has lost joy in writing those books or for any reason doesn't publish them for any reason related to the people who enjoy her books being shitty to her on the Internet, I would lose something that brings me joy as well. Again, not that big a deal, it's just books. There are more important things. But it's absurd that the attacks come from inside the house. I'm inside the house too, so I thought I should say something.

People think twice about posting. Ask yourself why you are doing it & if it contributes positively to yourself & other people. Be kinder & imagine other people complexly. If you want to attack bad people on the Internet, you can & should join groups that do stuff like monitoring & reporting neonazis, fascists, incels... You can harass politicians's offices in order to pressure them into pass laws to end child mariage or stop wars, you can harass companies into paying farmers higher prices so that they don't enable slave labour or shame the UN for who they are taking money from.

Plenty of worthwhile targets of anger. If that's what you're into. Authors of books, when they don't fund hate groups on the side, are just people who write books. They don't have much power to do anything other than write books. They are people & when they get insulted, they get hurt & sad. Let's remember they are people and write about them on the Internet with the knowledge that they can read what we write & be affected by it.

#seasons of shadowhunters #cassandra clare

[paracunt]

I love hayley but I always think about that time she said at a concert that she’s very comfortable talking politics and I do think a large part of that is true but all of her political stances have been very US-based only with the exception of “the news” where the band referenced Ukraine. This is something that a lot of celebs do so I’m not blaming hayley alone on this but I remember when she rightfully called out trump on her insta stories multiple times for being a very loud and outspoken bigot but Biden is funding a genocide now so it’s disappointing that she’s not criticising him too. Biden might not be as loud of a racist as trump and desantis but the way he talked about the Palestinian people is dehumanising. A lot of white celebs are only brave enough to call out politicians who are very right wing but Biden is just as bad as them if you pay attention to his speeches and review his actions

I will never see celebs as a moral compass but I do think it’s very important for Americans to speak out cause knowing that Biden is using my tax dollars to fund the IDF makes me sick. I don't know how many times I sat in a history class, learning about genocides and wondered "how could anyone let this happen?" now I'm asking myself the same question while one is actively happening. The least the band could do is sign that artists4ceasefire letter and share ways to call Congress to demand a ceasefire. The band decided to release a song like “the news” and they’re gonna probably perform it hundreds of times again. They decided to be political in this era so it’s highly upsetting that they’re silent about all of this. Palestinian people are living in a nightmare situation and all they asked of us to use social media to share updates, to remember them and their culture and to amplify their voice. It’s such a simple request from people who are going through an ethnic cleansing. 

if they keep performing “the news” next year and never speak on anything that’s happening right now, I’m gonna look at them very differently cause ignoring and moving on as if nothing happened is exactly what the IDF wants. They’re 3 white people from Nashville, do they think it’s unsafe for them to speak on this? Famous women of color like dua lipa, bella hadid, kehlani, and kelela are being harassed by zionist daily but they still share donation links and information cause they know it’s more important than the Israeli government's official account constantly tagging and bullying them. Hayley was with rep Justin Jones and he posted a caption “fighting fascism with @yelyahwilliams” a few weeks ago,  So where’s all of this energy when our president is giving money and weapons to Israel only

Thank you for sending this ask, I appreciate it.

The truth of the matter is, i’ve realized that Paramore only talk about things that affect them or their friends and are morally “just” or “right”. If they are gonna be labeled antisemites they aren’t gonna say anything, (let me reiterate there is nothing antisemitic about wanting justice for palestine, for the brutal capture & tortures to stop happening, for the genocide to stop happening) because they don’t want to look bad. Ultimately they are just three white people who are rich & sheltered and won’t talk about things that will get them in hot water like this. If Hayley was really comfortable talking about politics she’d put her money where her mouth is, as would any other member of Paramore, but that isn’t happening.

I feel obligated as someone who fucking cares about people to say something, seeing all of the videos of children being pulled from rubble, Palestinians being tortured by IDF, the IDF soldiers laughing and making fun tiktok videos like they aren’t raping and murdering and torturing and committing war crimes on the daily; i cannot be okay with that. Joe Biden is nothing but a slimey little snake and like many old white men before him he will never be anything but that to me. It doesn’t matter how much he panders or whatever, the blood is on his hands and he is complicit in Genocide of the Palestinian people.

But, like many white liberals who are sitting on their comfy couches taking “mental health breaks” cuz they can’t stand to see another video on social media about the war because it “bothers them too bad” all i have to say about it is: How do you think the people who are being fucking mass murdered, living in constant fear, who run from place to place in the Gaza strip praying that they aren’t going to be bombed when they find somewhere where they think they may be safe, for even a moment, until another bomb drops? So yeah, I’m not gonna be nice about this, because personally I don’t give a fuck about acting like it’s okay for them to be silent, because it isn’t and it never will be and I will remember this for the rest of their careers.

and personally, I don’t ever want to hear another political speech from them until they say something about this, because now it just feels like a load of bullshit.

I love Paramore but we are allowed to be critical of them.

#ask

[subzeroparade]

Hey hey I just read through Litanies, which was bloody phenomenal by the by, and had a lore ask I was wondering about. Since in your headcanon the Healing Church begins to introduce blood healing after the events of the fishing hamlet, thus inducing all the fun blood shenaniganery in Yharnam such would entail, would you then theorise that Cainhurst would only have gotten their 'cursed' blood after the fact? Or would it be a case of a rogue prospector making off with forbidden blood in the early days of Byrgenwerth? I'm only speculating, largely due to the description of the Rakuyo implying that the use of blood weapons within Cainhurst predates Maria, alongside the fact that if we take her boss fight to be Maria "in her prime," inferring that she was also trained in utilising her blood. I'm genuinely curious as to your thoughts on the matter, as I'm currently rethinking my own interpretations and thoughts on the lore of Bloodborne due to both your fic and posts here!

Thank you, glad you enjoyed Litanies! I had a great time writing it. 

Tbh this is something I’m thinking about now because I’m writing a Healing Church-era work that touches on the Executioner’s attack on Cainhurst, so in all likelihood this will eventually make its way into a fic. The thing with my writing - which affects my interpretation of lore - is this: I don’t get stuck on particular footnotes or sometimes contradictory points if I want to tell a story. I don’t actively try to break canon, but I always prioritise storytelling over lore. I do my homework, but the last thing I want is for my storytelling to unravel into some kind of gratuitous lore dump without any kind of compelling interpretation, or risk letting the minutiae of lore dictate how well I can weave a narrative (I am also a trained historian, so I can say that some of the hyperspecific lore interpretations I’ve heard make me both laugh and cringe, so I’d rather let actual human history guide some of my lore interpretations, rather than the description of one item. But that’s just me).  

For Cainhurst specifically, I am sticking with the idea that the so-called massacre ordered by the Healing Church and carried out by the Executioners happens early in Church history, as a result of the blood ~somehow~ making its way there (via a Byrgenwerth scholar if you are so inclined to take the game at face value, but unreliable sources are one of the fun parts of historical analysis). But that animosity towards Cainhurst is longstanding - as in, 1000-year++ English/French style skirmishing (my interpretation of Cainhurst is heavily inspired by the Norman Conquest). 

So for my own narrative purposes, Cainhurst acquires the blood early in the Church timeline (post Fishing Hamlet). But the hatred of Cainhurst folk, the vileness of their blood, so to speak, is a longstanding sentiment of Yharnamites - for outsiders, and especially for a once-powerful nation like Cainhurst who may claim Pthumerian ancestry (and thus potent blood in the eyes of the Great Ones) and have always been a threat to Yharnam’s independence. Vileblood here is just another way for Yharnamites to be aggressively xenophobic to outsiders (in the same way that Central/Northern Europeans, for example, have longstanding hatred of Southern Europeans trying to establish themselves in their countries, and see them as lesser or a threat). The thing that sets off the actual massacre is Cainhurst’s acquisition of the Healing Blood, thus justifying the Church’s holy war/crusade (led by Logarius and the Executioners, who we know are religious fanatics). 

Don’t know if that answered your question, but again, I’m pretty liberal with my interpretations and I’m more interested in the Healing Church’s hold on Yharnamite society, their religious propaganda, and how their political need for a scapegoat (some kind of Other) to blame is what eventually tipped the scales into modern open conflict with Cainhurst. Because this is literally out of a history textbook.  TLDR thanks for your patronage, here is an old Maria sketch -

#ask #lore #bloodborne #lady maria of the astral clocktower

[dimiclaudeblaigan]

You know, I can almost understand the decision to make Hopes "unsatisfactory" in order to not step on 3H's toes (I say almost because the choice to make a fanservice game unsatisfactory for the fans is um... a choice that exists), but then you look at SB and like. Realize that nothing really unsatisfactory happens to Edel/gard?

Like she gets basically everything she's ever wanted in SB. The Kingdom is on the ropes, the Alliance either falls upon Claude's death or is flat out helping her get what she wants, all of her friends live (Randolph is a mook not a friend lmao), and she doesn't even have to dirty her hands trying to kill Rhea and Thales because they kill each other for her. You can even argue that on GW she also gets pretty much everything she's ever wanted, because Clyde gift-wraps and hand delivers her Fodlan by the end of the route. AG's the only route she ever faces struggles (without someone bailing her out of trouble that is COUGHclydeCOUGH) which is a bit different than what the other two lords got.

Makes Hopes look less like an AU where the lords have to make do without Byleth and more like "what if Edel.gard was allowed to get away with starting an imperialist war" :/

I think the most unsatisfactory thing that happens with EdeIgard is more that she can't defeat the Kingdom or Alliance, thus can't conquer Fodlan. Technically she doesn't defeat anyone in this game, because Thales and Rhea took each other out. Even with the help of the Alliance they couldn't really take out the Kingdom, and its top two most important people are still standing (Rodrigue died in SB but Felix didn't, and Felix was the current Duke so they didn't actually do as much as damage to Fraldarius as they did in Houses when he dies in the third to last chapter in CF).

As far as her not having anything bad happen to her, I guess you could argue it's really only Claude who gets a bad ending. If EdeIgard ended her war post the final playable battle there would definitely still be huge issues in Fodlan's political landscape and it would still be a mess with trust in each territory, but she kiiind of got something she wanted I suppose, i.e. Thales and Rhea dying.

Dimitri has a pretty happy ending and is really the happiest ending if you have Rodrigue alive, because the truth of Duscur was concluded and everyone in Fodlan was allied, and all their enemies defeated (save EdeIgard who was just in no state to fight anyway). Chances are pretty good that AG Claude wouldn't have bothered fighting Rhea because there was no need for violence with the war over, and he was definitely much more in a negotiating mood in AG.

For Shez, even though Arval disappears, Shez did get a pretty good ending in all the routes, and if Byleth survived then Byleth fans get a pretty good ending overall too. The mercs are no longer solitary fighters, have friends, and helped their new leader reach their goals in Fodlan (though yeah, Claude's goals are kinda ??? ??? ??? very confusing and don't make sense based on what he says/does).

Teeeechnically Dimitri did bail EdeIgard out of trouble when Thales showed up and attacked her, but you could argue he had pretty legitimate reasons for that. Duscur is a personal thing for her, yeah, but it affected and related to a lot of people, as well as his army's current situation (i.e. having Duscur as allies helping his army, and clearing their name is a huge goal for him as king).

I do agree EdeIgard didn't face repercussions though, so while she didn't get everything she wanted (reminder she could never get past Arianrhod in any route. In AG that's when she got attacked by Thales, in GW that's when she needed the Alliance to save her neck, and in SB wah wah, I am sticking to my joke that Miklan didn't show up in that route bc he was too OP to be defeated in the other routes so they had to stay consistent and thus couldn't show him in SB or you could simply never win and move on in the story lel), she did get some of it and was generally happier according to the devs.

I don't really count AG as a "repercussion" for her for the war itself either. That was more because she betrayed Thales and he retaliated accordingly. If it was war based, I'd say something like maybe she survives but loses her position as emperor or something. AG did a good job showing what would happen to her if she betrayed Thales (at least so outright).

Generally I think it was largely unsatisfactory for SB because it was just a retelling of CF, except that I think they were trying to cater more to Dimitri and Felix fans because they're both so popular, hence why they both survived. Claude can die in CF or SB, so that just stayed the same, even if the lead up to it was a lot different. A lot of people are also annoyed at SB for having none of the characters really debate EdeIgard on her goals.

For me personally, it was the altering of characterizations that made SB annoying rather than simply unsatisfactory as a story. Them changing Ferdinand's whole character and relationship with her was a huge negative point for me. Like, while I could argue Dorothea is just CF Dorothea (versus AM/VW Dorothea), I can't argue that Ferdinand is anything similar to his Houses counterpart. Pretty much all the characters in SB that you're allied with are adoring of EdeIgard and never call her out (re: Ferdinand especially).

Honestly, I find Hopes to be a mixed bad for how they handled her because on one hand, they did actually have Dimitri remain the same with calling her out and being on the reasonable side of their arguments/fights, so the game did still say "what she's doing is unjust and there's someone to tell her as much".

On the other hand, this game definitely caters more to her in the sense of her happiness and wellbeing, as well as the overload of "she's the best thing ever" to her allies and people being unreasonably willing to love her, respect her or in Claude's case, save her life when reasonable mister Lorenz outright said the plot we should've gotten.

I do agree for sure though that she gets away with everything in SB and GW. I know they did it for her popularity, but I definitely don't like the way IS focuses more on her popularity than a coherent story. It wasn't as messy as GW, but it was just... kinda... dull. It just wasn't anything new.

The only reason she does in AG at least is because Thales already did his damage, so by then for Dimitri there was just no point in continuing anything because she was effectively out of the picture. I guess that's why AG's ending doesn't bother me as much as GW's, because it does feel like an at least complete story with a proper ending. Loose ends were tied and I think it was a good way to incorporate the whole Empire versus Kingdom versus TWS, because the ending still had a piece of TWS' effect on everything even with them gone. It felt like a three way fight with a three way result, if that makes sense. When you have a battle like that, it makes sense that there's an outcome caused by all involved groups.

#DCB Ask

[artist-issues]

I’ve been running frequently and must catch up on reactions, though I’m sure art will follow:

— I WISH FIVE HAD BEEN THE ONE TO SHOOT IAN.

— Peter is Simon?! How? How, how, how??  — Where do you think you’re going, Janine, you’re the only counterbalance for all the straight-up goofiness the other characters bring to the table.

— PETER IS SIMON! SIMON’S ALIVE! YESS!

—On Season 6 now and I like the new politics-and-cold-war plotline they’re running with. Lots of “characters fighting their inner demons” tropes, too.

— Aw, Jody and Tom! That was weird when they were hinting at it before. Maybe because she’s the panicky runner who likes to knit and he’s a half-insane war veteran who once kidnapped an infant and tried to carve words into his sister’s arm with a knife, but now their little love story is growing on me.

— SIMON! IS STILL! AROUND! I missed that guy!

— Still don’t like Amelia.  — STILL hate Moonchild. Keep thinking we’re done with her hippy-dippy crap, and she keeps popping into Five’s head at the worst moments, and now they’ve apparently CONFIRMED that it’s really her?? She’s not just a post-traumatic stress reaction or a hallucination? Five has “Moonchild Syndrome?” Do you know what this MEANS?

IT MEANS I HAVE TO KEEP LISTENING TO HER STUPID INANE COMMENTARY.

It also interestingly means Five, as a character, has some more autonomous character development going on. Like, Runner Fuve can’t just be going through this Moonchild thing ambiguously, however the player wants to interpret it. In-canon, Moonchild is really in the character’s brain and is affecting the plot directly. So. Neat. But annoying.

— People keep mentioning Five and Sam “drifting apart” but I am sensing literally none of that so far.

— HOW is Simon alive? I mean, I’m not complaining or anything. But can we establish how? And how the new face? And why everyone at Noah Base just…vaguely gradually realized it was him, without any bug reveals or conversations, but Jaimie didn’t recognize him? I’m confused but just happy he’s around

#Although #there’s a disturbing trend in media of being able to re-name and re-identify yourself and have everyone treat you like you’re a new person #but more on that later #peter lynn #simon lauchlan #runner 4 #runner 3 #zr #zrs5 #zrs6 #season 5 spoilers #season 6 spoilers #sam yao #runner five #5 #5am

[alightineverydarkness]

October 9th, 2023

I'll try to write while I still have the sanity to do so.

So, the wonderful people at NTS Radio have just announced a list of new residents, which includes a Russian musician — and one of the most miserable ones, Yana Kedrina, better known as Kedr Livanskiy. Her existence has been largely okay in fascist times — she has been docile and regime-friendly enough that she even gets invited to play at events funded by President Putin's Fund, seemingly (well, the Presidential Fund For Cultural Initiatives, at the festival Novatoria, and another festival, whose name escapes me, was mentioned in the comments). She knows full well how incriminating and pro-fascist this makes her look — in fact, I have a screenshot of her requesting her fans take videos of only her "singing head" at Novatoria on her Telegram channel, so that the banner "SUPPORTED BY THE PRESIDENTIAL FUND FOR CULTURAL INITIATIVES" right behind her can be at least cropped out of frame. She also, embarrassingly, discouraged people from filming the name of the festival, Novatoria (not everyone obliged — that's why I have screenshots of her playing there). I guess her real life under fascism destroys the fairy-like magic that she so desperately chases on her social media, in her pictures always smiling, always dancing, always charming and carefree. I am so sick of this cowardly bullshit, of these people hoping someone doesn't notice who they really are, always hiding, always lying. I am so, so sick of this shit.

Upon my comment about how inviting a seemingly pro-Putin artist, whose life hasn't even remotely been affected by a war she allows, is probably not cool, and speaking to her about her politics (does she have any?) would probably be "a thrill", she posted a story about how she was going to share the "happy news" that she is now a resident at NTS Radio, but "the Ukrainians have commenced shitting all over me, so there is no happy news". She also alludes to some kind of slander — I assume the only thing that is relatively debatable is her like or dislike of Putin. Here, it is important to point out that like or dislike of Putin by a Russian is completely irrelevant to me. Whether Yana Kedrina is an ardent Putinite or a "dissident" who is just quiet as a mouse and takes some bloody money from fascists from time to time, is of no consequence to me — bullets still fly the same; it is simply a convenient indicator. Her attitude towards the war she allows (which I have not seen her express anywhere at all) does not stop the rockets and tanks her taxes paid for. It doesn't matter what she thinks of Putin in her private, unpublished moments, the only thing that matters is what she does, because the only thing that matters to me is ending the war, saving Ukrainian lives. Like I already said, the only hope of being a "good Russian" these people have is literally becoming a soldier that is the equal and opposite force to one of the thousands of Russian soldiers currently murdering us. That's it — it's too late for posts, for charity donations (not that she made any); the genocide has already long begun. The only answer possible to it is stopping the Russian Army in the only way they have shown to understand — by force. There's no talking them back out of it.

And I could give two fucks about what some singer, whose music is of no interest to me, thinks way deep down inside about whether I deserve to be killed or not. I want actions. I wanted them for 20 months.

Hypothetically, let's say, she at least posted something about the war once in a while. Let us say, on her hollow and "magical" profile, where you can't even tell anything is happening at all, two words appear, the oh-so-difficult for your dissidents НЕТ ВОЙНЕ ("NO TO WAR"). Let's even say her whole profile was filled with pictures of us, with evidence of war crimes, with screenshots of donations, with regret, guilt, understanding. That wouldn't even be close to make it okay to invite a Russian artist as your resident, my friends at NTS. It would make it seem like you can basically ignore fascists coming to power, finance them, make deals with them, and then just post a little bit on the internet and it's all cool.

Let's say she never played a Putin festival — because that was never my main issue with her. She had played multiple times in annexed Crimea, entering it from Russia, which is generally a big no-no in terms of not only the way Ukrainians see you (as a fascist supporter), but even in terms of international law. Let's say she never did that either. How come it's even remotely okay to invite a Russian to do anything these days? How come it's okay to reward people for being cowards?

I think a very important consideration that people don't usually take into account is the question of "what would it take for a Ukrainian to live like this?". Meaning, what would it take for a Ukrainian in 2023 to live like the ignorant coward Yana Kedrina does: have no friends or relatives cruelly, intentionally murdered; lead a carefree life without daily air raids, shellings, interruptions to sleep, work, rest; to make music that is largely disconnected from any negative emotion, largely fantasy-world-based; to work with NTS at all? None of this is possible, I'm afraid, possibly save for being an NTS resident — not that they would offer this (there were no Ukrainians announced as residents).

I was invited by a producer I know to record a guest mix for NTS around the same time Kedr Livanskiy was playing the Putin fest, in August of 2023. I replied that in the military I just have my iPhone, and there is no time, no possible way to record anything, to even begin thinking about it. It's funny how the people who are responsible for the war can be full-time NTS residents and the innocent people (and I also consider myself a much better producer) can eat shit and die for all they care.

And lastly, I guess, I'd like to say that I have never seen a Russian take criticism from a Ukrainian adequately. They never acknowledge any wrongdoing, no matter what we say and how factual, to-the-point we can be. It's always "oh I'm getting shat on by Ukrainians/they're all bots/it's all trolling/that’s racist/you’re a Nazi/liar/and I used to support Ukraine and this is how you treat me/how dare you".

All our criticisms of Russians are systemic, not personal, yet all they hear is an attack, never a call to action — because action is, for them, unimaginable at all.

Good luck to NTS Radio on their future endeavors with Russians and the utterly mediocre music they make and will continue making. I fully understand that the brilliant, exhilarating music I will keep making after we win would, certainly, seem a bit out of place.

P.S. After I posted about this on Instagram, someone reached out and told me that in the early days of the war they were discussing a possibility of a new show on NTS, but their condition was that they would not put on music by Russians, or artists that have not expressed their opposition to the war. As they tell me, the people at NTS took a long time to think this over, and finally sent back a morose reply that claimed they were uncomfortable with such a (astonishingly radical in it's logic and reason) concept.

[camelliagwerm]

Can you describe Leonelle and Valerius' morning routines? What is Valerius' biggest regret? What is the hardest decision Leonelle has ever had to make?

Thank you!

MORNING ROUTINE:

for the purpose of consistency, I'm saying this is for their post-epilogues. Both of them are religious, yes, but they worship deities whose faithful go through their religious duties at night, which is why they're not mentioned in this routine.

VALERIUS: usually he gets up before it is too light outside so waking up is less harsh on his photosensitive eyes and either goes for a spar or taking his horse, Dason, for a ride. That is usually a couple of hours and usually by the time that's all done, Camellia is awake and will join him for breakfast. Breakfast for Vali at least always includes a black coffee and is generally pretty hearty/filling - eggs, cold cuts of meat, bread (usually with a salted butter), polenta - while Camellia usually goes for something sweet like a pastry or a bowl of fruit. Usually it's in companionable silence as by then he has his daily itinerary delivered to him and he can look it over, and Camellia doesn't have much patience for small talk. And then he'll prepare for the day - a wash (bathing tends to happen in the evening when he has more time on his hands), attending to his hair, nails and teeth, get dressed - before going into his day. When the twins are born, he'll usually stop in the nursery to spend a few moments with them on his way into meetings.

LEONELLE: she, on the other hand, prefers to lie in. She absolutely must not be disturbed before 8am at the very earliest, but preferably 9am. Her bed partner of choice might have already risen by then - Kanerah likes to make use of as many business hours as possible for her business ventures, and with Jaethal it ultimately depends on how late into the night she has either been working or catching up on all those indulgences she's missed when she was undead over whether she is still there. If they are still there, then Leonelle usually wants some morning affection. If they're not, then she'll send for a maid to help her dress and prepare for the day.

VALERIUS' BIGGEST REGRET:

What happened to Ember was never his intention and he is ashamed of how jealous he got over an orphan girl, and that she was getting her own following in the city. It made him feel threatened and he responded by shutting her congregation down wherever possible. Had he known it would have led to a descent into madness, he would have never have done that.

LEONELLE'S HARDEST CHOICE:

During the war with Pitax, Leonelle found out that her father had been trying to make contact with her - because why wouldn't he? In her experience, Asmodean priests are addicted to power - but neither Bartholomew (her grand diplomat) or Jaethal had - at first - allowed any of the letters to come through to her. Jaethal already knew about the situation between her Queen and her estranged father, and when the Cardinal started addressing letters to Delgado, Jaethal instructed him to make sure they do not get to the Queen because they will make her lose focus on their main concerns (Nyrissa and Irovetti.) But eventually, she knew it was a problem that needed to be rectified once the letters started implying blackmail, and she offered Leonelle a choice - her father could be assassinated (although it would mean interfering with the Church of Asmodeus and Chelaxian politics.)

Leonelle...did not know what to do. Her father's death would only bring her relief, but it would leave her mother and two youngest siblings without any support - and considering all three of them were devilspawn tieflings in Cheliax, they were unlikely to benefit from his death while they would at least still be comfortable if he was still alive. It was only after the war with Pitax was resolved that she eventually allowed Jaethal to go ahead with the assassination - she even had it made to look like it was a hit from someone else in the church; at the encouragement of both Kanerah and Kailkke, she arranged for her mother and youngest siblings to join her in Tuskdale.

#fashionablyfyrdraaca #answered #oc: leonelle #oc: valerius #pair: valerius x camellia #pair: leonelle x jaethal

[navree]

i cant see jonsa happening 😭😭😭 id ont hate the ship or anything but i just cant see how itll work out. jon couldn't even be with dany after he learned that she was his aunt even though they never really knew eachother and never got to emotionally know eachother as aunt and nephew. sansa may be his cousin but he was raised alongside her as her brother and he sees her as his sister. this might cause a lot of issues

Said it once and I'll say it again: ship what you want guys, it's only fiction and if it makes you happy go for it. And if Jonsa is your passion then let it be your passion, do your thing, I support y'all.

But personally, for me? Yeah, no, it's not for me. I don't hate it virulently but it's not for me. It's a combination of things, Jon's not my favorite character by a fair stretch and while I love Sansa's storylines (tho she's been doing some stuff of late that is just Not It for me) I don't really like her as a character at all, to the point of active dislike almost. And we don't see any hint of a relationship in the books that I could build on for shipping, and by the time they got any sort of relationship in the show I'd completely written off the writing is stuff that was pissing me off (and post-books show!Sansa is just......ugh, I could not stand her I'm sorry) so I was never able to get into it. So for me, between that utter lack of Anything from them in iterations I can tolerate, combined with the fact that, yes, he was very much raised to view her as a sister and was socialized that way with her, not dissimilarly to the way he was with Robb and Bran, and that there is an actual blood relation (acceptable by Westerosi standards but still), not a fan.

(I'll admit to some slight hypocrisy cuz of my Jonrya beliefs, but also they're at least giving me shit to work with so far)

I don't necessarily ship Jonerys either, mostly because again, it is incredibly rare for me to pull something out of total wholecloth with two people who've never even met and barely know of each other's existence, if at all, though they had some moments in the show and the theme Ramin made for them is one of my favorite love scores. But I do think that it's the more likely option cuz like you said, I don't think Jonsa's happening. Not in the books, not in the story that GRRM has created. We've got five books out of seven and Sansa, sorry, is in like bottom tier of people Jon thinks about from Winterfell, I could make a more compelling argument for Jon/Robb than I could for Jon and Sansa. More importantly I don't think it would serve any purpose in the narrative, not when Jon's got three potential love interests kicking about (Val who he's already got some affection for and is at the Wall, Dany for the Ice and Fire motif and her importance in the war against The Others, Arya for their prior connection and the fact that GRRM did plan for them to fall for each other in his original outline) and Sansa's story is more tied to the Vale and to the politics of Westeros rather than things like Northern Independence (which is still a bad idea for an endgame I'm sorry) or The Others.

So with all of that combined, not only is it bordering on nOTP status for me, it just seems so incredibly implausible to the point where if it did happen I would absolutely call bad writing that I literally cannot get into it, and I certainly don't believe it's gonna be canon or even hinted at for canon.

That being said, if it's your jam, go for it! Make your fics, make your gifsets, make your art, the ones I've come across are incredibly lovely even if it's not for me, and like I said: it's fiction. Do what makes you happy <3

#personal #answered #anonymous #yeah tbf i just don't care that much about jon so anywhere i fall on the stupid 'jonsa/jonerys debate' #is more about the fact that i don't like sansa and idk i like dany fine and i really like her plots #thing is if people ask me about favorite characters from the main series you're going to be hearing about like #tywin and ser barristan and mostly a lot of pre series people from like f&b or twoiaf or oddly enough aeron damphair #(i have a lot of feelings about aeron damphair i know he's gonna die but i wish he wouldn't) #so my feelings about jonsa are basically just '-_- nah' and then i move on with my day

[birdiereviews]

Long Live The Queen by Hanako Games, reviewed by Jay Sapinski

Long Live The Queen (Hanako Games, 2012) is a management visual novel with a complex skill building system and a wide range of outcomes and choices. You slide into the shoes of the Crown Princess Elodie of Nova as she navigates politics, war, and love following her mother's death. Because she's too young to ascend the throne (only 14 years old!), you have to survive 40 weeks until she turns 15 and is able to become queen.

This, as it happens, is much harder than one would think. Threats are around every corner. Your first run (but also most likely your next few runs) will undoubtedly end with Elodie perishing in any one of the startling 11 ways to kick the bucket.

The screen that the player returns to after each week.

The core of the game is selecting two classes to take every week, keeping in mind the skills that you want to build as well as Elodie's mood, which affects how well she learns. This is followed by reading a short event where, if applicable, skill checks are displayed, making it easier to understand where you can make different choices in your next run. During the event section, you will sometimes be able to make a choice about an action that Elodie can take. You then select a location for Elodie to visit, helping to alter her mood to suit your needs. Although repetitive in theory, this loop is a safe and enjoyable circle, allowing you a structure from which to impact the story.

The menu showing how well Elodie understands or is skilled in a particular topic.

The story is paced well with excellently crafted dialogue that distinctly sounds like each character. The choices in event sections make sense and aren't polar extremes without reason. Skill building management as well as mood management is crucial to both Elodie's survival and your ability to explore the various plotlines available. Certain events are fixed but many require you to pass a particular skill check to begin. It is, without a doubt, worth replaying to search for these hidden plotlines.

Elodie responding to another character during an event section.

Certain events are influenced by foreign policy decisions, and while fine in of itself, this could be aided by an easily accessible map of the region as well as a family tree (there is none in game but Hanako Games has posted a map on their forums and fans have created family trees). Understanding the motivations of the nobility is an important factor in making appropriate choices that protect Elodie from their plots. Even if Elodie doesn't know this information from the start, if a player passes certain skill checks, the information can be added to these diagrams.

Long Live The Queen is an excellent management visual novel, hitting all of the major requirements to be both a good read and a fun game.

Long Live The Queen can be purchased for $10 through the Hanako Games website as well as through Itch.io and Steam.

~

Jay Sapinski (they/them) is a college student studying English. They are an editor of their college’s literary magazine as well as a fiction editor of miniskirt magazine. Jay loves Japanese culture and Japanese style media and consumes it whenever possible.

#reviews #long live the queen #visual novel #vn #recommended #hanako games #review #jay sapinski #management game #stories #story #completed

[wanderingwomanwondering]

Strange New Worlds Commentary/Meta

**this post is NOT spoiler-free** AND **long post!**

We’ve gotten 4 solid eps of Strange New Worlds so far. Ep5 dropped today but I haven’t seen it yet. Overall, I like the show and I also have some constructive criticism. Here are my thoughts:

Episode 1 - Strange New Worlds

This ep was fun and it was GREAT to meet the main characters, especially Uhura. She was more fully presented and developed in this one episode than she was in TOS. Overall, I enjoyed this episode. I’m a sucker for cosmetic genetic modification for away missions lol. 

What I did not love (at all) was the paternalism shown toward the citizens of the war-torn, warp incapable planet. The leader that Pike and Spock spoke with made it clear that she and her people had no intention of listening to their plea they not use warp technology as a weapon in their war efforts. Pike pushes the issue by waving the entire damn Enterprise around AND inviting himself to a meeting of the warring factions to force an Earth history lesson on them to discourage them from obliterating themselves.

On the surface, that seemed like a fine tactic on Pike’s part but scratch the surface and the persistent paternalism displayed is staggering. Pike has zero right and zero jurisdiction on an alien world. Period. Of course, if he had left it alone after the original demand that he and Spock leave, it would have been a very short episode lol. So, for entertainment purposes, it’s less concerning to me that Pike took it upon himself to (paternalistically) instruct an alien world on how to lessen their growing pains and is more concerning that no meaningful discussion of that action was supplied within the narrative. They chat for like 2 seconds about the precursor to the Prime Directive but then explain away their social and political interference with the aliens by saying that the only reason the aliens had warp technology in the first place was because of the war with Control in Discovery. 

Mind you, the Federation has no way of knowing how many other pre-warp worlds may have been negatively affected by what they saw in their night sky during that epic battle with Control (or any other space battle for that matter). Does the Federation plan to scan for ill-gotten warp-signatures in every star system where a space battle ignited the sky in inhabited systems? 

The Federation is not a “divine power” that can or should play with the destinies of worlds, which is why the Prime Directive among other regulations was established in the first place. But without some full-on, in-depth discussion within the narrative about these situations and the parameters for intervention (if any!) the show is buying into and perpetuating harmful logics that erode the agency and autonomy of worlds in the name of paternalistically-driven harm reduction. It’s...a problem LOL one that I hope they actually talk about a lot INSIDE THE NARRATIVE. We as long-time viewers of Star Trek know the basic ethical issues being alluded to in the episode but without a real exploration of those issues in the narrative (which is harder to do, but not impossible, in an episodic format) we are left only with the problematic implications of the “solutions” worked out by one Starfleet captain.

Another issue: Pike’s thinking about what his future disability will mean for him has been framed in an ableist way so far. I sincerely HOPE that framing of his thought process is on purpose so that the audience can go with him on the journey of deconstructing his ableist attitudes and changing them!! Seriously, if that doesn’t start happening in earnest soon, I’m going to have more to say about how deeply problematic his current conceptualization of his future is. *side-eye emoji*

Episode 2 - Children of the Comet

Super fun ep! Uhura, my beloved. Anyway, what I did not enjoy was the name calling (e.g. zealots), Like. How dare an alien species blend religion and science I guess??? It was an interesting choice of words for a man that regularly discussed the spiritual implications of the Red Angel while they were all figuring out exactly what was going on in s2 of Discovery. I had a lot of side-eye during the episode.

I did appreciate that at the end, Uhura (my boo!) presented scientific evidence that Ma’hanit was in fact runnin’ shit in the galaxy LOL. Just as Spock flying his shuttle mission factored into Ma’hanit’s role in seeding greater life on the planet (and Ma’hanit had foreknowledge of this), the Shepherds’ reverence and defense of Ma’hanit was important too and factored into the overall positive outcome. Arbiter of Life and Shepherds for the win!

Again, what I wanted was some engaging discussion of these issues/ prejudices/ assumptions and a visible/overt shift in crew viewpoint in light of the information Uhura shared. Preconceived notions + one scene where those preconceptions are proven wrong is nice but in 2022 it doesn’t feel sufficient imo. Within the Star Trek universe, there are a lot of lessons to be learned at this point in time in terms of the Federation’s and Starfleet’s development. I don’t know about other fans, but I want to see how the mind-changing sausage is made LOL.

Episode 3 - Ghosts of Illyria

I liked this ep too! It hit another Star Trek plot trope that I love: alien virus that makes the crew go a little cuckoobananas. Yes! Bring it! Also, we got the superhuman alien trope, my beloved. I was winning with this ep lol.

Overall the issue of genetic engineering was fun to explore. It’s been a theme throughout Trek and is hotly debated every time it comes up and I always find it fascinating. Those issues were at the center of a few eps involving Dr. Julian Bashir in DS9 and it was fun to watch. So I loved the reveal about Number One being Ilyrian. The Illyrians genetically modify themselves (instead of terraforming) in order to fit with a natural environment. They are contrasted with the Augments and I hope like hell we get more discussion of the (perceived) similarities and differences between the groups. 

Anyway, at the VERY end of the episode, Una offered FANTASTIC commentary on the consequences and problems inherent in being designated as an exception to a series of stereotypes (”one of the good ones”, a “hero”, etc.) by a person in power (Pike in this case), then the personal log entry was deleted, the ep ended, and I don’t know if they will carry it forward in BOTH small AND large ways. I mean - we will probably get a big moment in the future where Pike defends Number One to Starfleet a la TNG’s The Measure of A Man but who knows. Still, I wonder about the small ways that we’ll deal with Una’s identity among the crew and the day-to-day intraship politics of that now that it’s known. That pathway wasn’t really made clear and highlighted in the ep. We got Una’s discussion with La’an but I doubt that same level of interpersonal challenge will come through for Una ship-wide especially given Una’s rank. So where/how/to what degree will that character arc get to take us viewers on a meaningful journey?

Episode 4 - Memento Mori

Dire stakes. Mental health issues. Grief. Mind meld. Ingenuity. More backstory for La’an. Great character beats for Uhura (my love) and Hemmer. We glimpsed a possible love connection forming with M’Benga and Una. Nurse Chapel was in excellent form. Ortegas being snarky. Pike visibly feeling the weight of the captain’s seat. I was winning with this one yall. YMMV.

Ah, the Gorn. A faceless, predatory species easily glossed as “monsters”. The ep doesn’t do much to deal with that highly problematic characterization of an entire species but I think they laid the groundwork to approach that issue later in the show?

La’an noted that because of her past traumatic experience losing her entire family to the Gorn, she does not feel that empathy is possible and that they are true monsters, though not supernatural. That’s a big friggin statement and they HAVE TO come back around to that in a meaningful way. New life, new civilizations and all that. Conflict is of course a part of the mission but the demonization of one’s enemies, while very human and understandable is STILL A PROBLEM. 

Be enemies if that’s how it has to shake out because one side won’t see you as a human/person worthy of not being violently consumed but demonization feels beyond the pale (for Star Trek). Yeah yeah I know this is an way early in the ST timeline but still. They have to unpack that in the show (right???) otherwise what the hell are we even doing here???

Pro & Con of the Episodic Approach

I understand the fandom’s collective longing for the “simpler”, “easier”, episodic, exploration-driven times that defined the STU prior to Discovery. DS9 sort of started to break that mold in its final few seasons when the war with the Dominion began, but Strange New Worlds seems to be bringing back the episodic approach for the franchise. My basic point is that has a big con and a pro imo.

The big con I think is that the episodic format limits what they can really say/do AND FULLY ATTEND TO over the course of the season. We get snippets of deep/meaningful stuff but then those MAY get lost over the course of the show???

The pro is that the episodic approach is less “heavy”. We get mostly bottle episodes that exist in their own right and don’t require us to think and feel about the same/consistent cultural/social issues very deeply from week to week. Like. All four eps so far were good but they aren’t connected by anything but the characters themselves and their mission to seek out new life and new civilizations etc. 

I have theories about deeper connective elements at play across episodes but the show hasn’t been very loud about any of those yet. That’s understandable since the show is still very young, but it does make me wonder where we’re going in a deeper sense than just “the mission”. Like. What does that mission mean? How do we accomplish that mission? How, why, and to what degree must we grow and change to truly accomplish it? These are my questions and I think they are the show’s questions too? I just haven’t fully seen it on screen in SNW quite yet.

Season(s)-long narrative arcs imo allow for stronger clearer statements about key social/cultural issues presented in the narrative. Check out my post here to get more of a feel for what I mean. SNW returning to the episodic format is nice in many ways but my fear at this very early point in the show is that key character issues and larger/in-depth social commentary may not be as fully developed and explored as they would be in a season(s)-long arc format. I know some in the fandom may prefer this and I understand the various reason why but it still kinda concerns me.

#star trek strange new worlds #star trek snw #star trek snw meta #star trek meta #christopher pike #snw spock #nyota uhura #number one #la'an noonien singh #strange new worlds #ghosts of illyria #children of the comet #memento mori