#part of me sometimes thinks that the reason people hold these beliefs so strongly

[sangre]

heh 😏

the magician,  the hierophant, the lovers,  justice, the world for catarina & his guardian 🙈

major arcana headcanon prompts / ask.

ty SO MUCH naomi i got so excited when i saw this ask. HEE HEE! guardianstuff 😳🙈 SDBHKGSDFKHB

the magician – how does your muse feel about fate? do they believe they can change their own destiny?

i don't think catarina believes in fate so much as she believes in cycles? there are cycles of everything. like karma, the dragon whose blood supplements her family's lineage. what goes around comes around – she adheres to that a lot in life and believes that people always, always get theirs. things come in threes. the more things change the more they stay the same. people repeat themselves. in some way or another, there's always a cycle of something.

but because destiny isn't really something he expects to chart the course of his life, he strongly believes in the power of like... decisiveness and strength of character/conviction. you choose the future and the path you walk, for the most part. to that end, sometimes she'll help instigate 'karma' according to her own judgement. and the same applies to the whole of her life, i think. where she sees fit to but in, she probably will. if she didn't believe she could change her lot in life, i don't think she would make the journey post-tadpole in the first place; she definitely sees herself as capable of like... doing something. if this doesn't end the way she wants it to, she at least did her damnedest to get close.

and naturally, i think her guardian is compelled by a sort of pragmatic approach to changing the tide of fate. in their own ways, they're both sort of hellbent on mending their own wounds before the world can get any worse for them (and others consequentially).

cont. / 5

the hierophant – what are your muse’s morals / ethics? do they follow their moral code strictly?

OH MAN!!! it's definitely chaotic neutral for a reason. she has a sort of personal code she adheres to... in terms of being very protective of innocence, he won't let certain things go unpunished/ignored. that said, catarina can be a little selective in terms of what justice means in different corners of his life. i think in times of really great despair or considering the greater good, he tends to look ahead rather than into specifics. he doesn't make excuses for shitty choices, he just has his own priorities and has VERY little care for what others think of him.

it's like. yes she will follow her own beliefs but probably not to a hard T – there are grey areas (like. Late Game Stuff has grey areas that he's like. Well that's awful. That's an awful lot in life. But I can't save everybody and make everything right. There's a whole world at stake.) there are things that haunt him but never ones that are trivial. she holds herself to pretty high standards and has trouble forgiving herself for losses she tried to prevent, though. it's like this deep and turbulent sense of guilt that's been buried 7 leagues under the sea and goes unaddressed.

i think it's because of his carried, quiet sense of guilt that almost no one sees that the guardian can reach him emotionally in the first place. like... he disarms it and reassures her. it's not your fault the world is wicked. is that for his own good? is it for hers? to her, she knows what he's doing. they have to work together, and catarina suspects he's being used as a means to an end from the beginning. but there's this looming tenderness that i think sort of neither of them know what to do with. like. you've saved me and i'm your sword and this is going to hurt but then why do you let me in like this. YOU KNOW. the guardian inspires a lot of like. catarina's urge to be saved. and he knows that obviously. so even as she resents him for it... onward they move. and sometimes the rules get bent for the sake of that to keep poisonously blooming.

the lovers – how important are relationships to your muse? do they value having a significant other?

catarina grew up in a HUGE family like huge (so many brothers) and her parents' marriage is one full of love. two of her elder brothers got married before she even left home and they're like very fulfilled/have a strong sense of love and judgement and she sees it as a very like... when your life is settled down you'll know what you want/you'll know what's right for you. he's had quite a few flings so far but nothing very serious. i think she had a very sweet significant other about 10 years ago but it didn't last very long? like... it was too sweet and not quite fast enough and didn't do it for her.

me making this character in the bare bones stage like: yeah there's no way idk what to do she feels doomed to end up in a mcr romance (and obviously got one). she's not dependent on love, never has been, has been perfectly fine not falling in love and didn't see it for herself for a while in fact! but. The weight of desire when it disgusts you and you're digging your own hole that is not your grave and so on.

buuuuuuuttt likeeeeee GBHKDSGSD:LFKSGL:K

yeah he falls in love:( and it's like the best and worst possible thing. illustrious codependency woohoo! they become inextricable from each other! but catarina at least finds comfort in that she's not alone. her guardian didn't intend for it to wind up what it is, either. it's important for her to turn that measure of control he wields on its head. she likes him vulnerable 🤔. i digress

tl;dr catarina def has like fable-adjacent dragon tendencies. she is possessive and greedy and delights in whimsy with her pretty shiny thing. so he wasn't seeking to add to a hoard but when u find a jewel what are u gonna do... Leave it.... When It's Making Sure U Don't Turn Into a Mindflayer... Give Me a Break

justice – does your muse find it easy to be impartial in emotional situations?

not at all. he's relatively course/stoic in terms of disposition but high tension makes his temper flare. he's not the one to find if you need a cool head. catarina is like... more likely to breathe fire than to make sense. i think the guardian is her voice of reason (when he's not urging him to EAT WORM). he's a lot more realistic than she is when there's a lot at stake. her resistance melts and she throws tiffs.

the world – is there one thing in life that your muse must accomplish? what will they do when they complete that goal?

i think catarina's goal is more like his birthright, which is to protect the vestige her family watches over. he has to live and die making sure that thing stays safe and cared for. being the most draconic of her brothers she feels the most connected to it as well, so that definitely plays a part too! otherwise, i think her ambitions rest more in seeing what more the world has to offer, and assuring her family's security and happiness. he tries not to think too hard ahead, or about the end. an everlasting ambition is more comfortable.

his guardian is... trying to protect the world from absolute destruction, heheG:JSDGLKSHDF. once things settle down, i really do not know what either of them will make of that. i haven't beaten the game so i'm not even sure where to start 😂 BUT i think! they have things to work through. afterward. ASAP. GG to them. time to go hiking in Spyro 2: Ripto's Rage: Magma Cone world.

#catarina #bg3posting #THANKS AGAIN FOR SENDING :DD #s: i am still dreaming of kissing your claws

[painted-crow]

hey so i'm looking to figure my sorting out. i'm p sure of my secondary but honestly i've gone in circles so many times that i'd believe anything lmao

so i guess to start like. i'm fairly sure i'm an idealist, but with a twist. i care about making the world a better place-- i'm kinda infamous among my friends for being a little TOO outspoken about my opinions. on a small scale, i have strong opinions about a lot of things, but on a larger scale... idk. i don't think any one person can know what an ideal world looks like cause there really is no such thing. there are literally countless variables when it comes to implementing even small systems, countless ways to fuck it up, so i don't think i'd be choosing some grand ideal over the people i love anytime soon.

that being said, i think my idealist streak gets directed into something else most of the time. i'm very focused on understanding myself to a fault. i want to know why i do the things i do, why i believe certain things over others. when it comes to my beliefs about the world, they're strong but take it or leave it, but when it comes to myself they are not a good idea to push. i've ended relationships over not feeling like myself with them or feeling like i'm losing myself or they're pushing me to be someone i'm not. i make strong instant decisions about what the "right" thing to do is when it comes to how it impacts my perception of myself, especially with intimate relationships (i'm a lot less impulsive with things like friends and things i'm less personally involved in). i NEED to know who i am, way more than i care about any one specific person or thing. obviously i love people very deeply and would do just about anything to have both, but if i don't know who i am, if i'm not true to myself, then i have nothing. losing people happens.

the issue is, because i'm prone to doing that and not thinking as much about how it'll impact people, i've been called selfish a lot over my lifetime. recently i've started thinking more about how my actions impact people and their feelings, and i'm feeling a lot more torn. i want to do what i want to do, what i feel is best, but i feel immature for doing it a lot. i've started worrying a lot about being a bad person and hurting people, and i've been thinking about how the "right" way to be is. i went through a phase where i was repressing myself to make the "moral" choice, but i just felt so flat. ultimately i realized that it doesn't really matter how good i am if i have to repress myself to get there, cause then all it is is performance. tldr is i feel super guilty for making "selfish" choices rn, especially as i've gotten more aware of other peoples' feelings.

what i think is probably going on is that i'm an idealist primary with a badger model, but i'm not sure between lion and bird, and i'm still open to badger. pretty sure i'm not a snake.

the section on my secondary's gonna be a lot shorter, sorry this got so long! so i'm p sure i'm a badger secondary. considered lion and snake secondary too. whatever i am, i have a p loud lion model over it. i've always had a gift for making people trust me, for acting. i kinda blend in and become what i need to to both help them and get them off my back so i can do what i need to do. i have a serious passion for helping people with tough love (i like to think of myself as a p good advice giver, since i can both tell people what they need to hear and really get in their shoes and be kind where other people might not). i think i judge myself the least when i can kinda toe that line between pushing boundaries and stepping back-- i track where peoples' boundaries are constantly so i can push them to the limit without stepping over them. i'm very fluid when it comes to presentation in reality, even though i think people actually think of me as kinda controversial. i tend to see people who are ACTUALLY overstepping boundaries as lowkey selfish at times, even though i also really respect them. i like to do things the "right" way as long as i give a shit about them. the catch is, i don't want to blend into the background, and i don't think i do. a partner of mine called me a fox cause he noticed the way i constantly toe that line where i can get people to notice me and still keep them off my back, still make them comfortable. i'm also NOT a planner. people constantly give me shit for only ever feeling things out in the moment, and honestly thinking about the future freaks me out. i don't want to plan how i do shit i'd rather just get in the zone and figure it out from there. tldr i'm pretty sure i'm a badger secondary? but i could be convinced of snake. definitely see elements of both but my gut's telling me badger so take that how you will

anyway! thank you so much for taking the time to answer this, i know it's a lot.

also sorry one thing i forgot to add about my secondary! i think my lion model got so loud because when i do the shifty presentation thing, i have a tendency to lose myself and start perceiving myself as whatever i'm presenting. it's made it really hard to figure out who i actually am and so i started just being as clear about it as possible.

for my primary, i really care a lot about being right. i try to take every side into consideration to make sure i get the best conclusion. i can be super stubborn when it comes to certain things, but i don't want to just... hold to perceptions that are wrong. that being said it's important to me to trust my gut and i take it as a big input. i'm very felt out for most things, don't really have a strong system of how to be. i really wanna be able to trust myself but i just don't. i have a big habit of relying on other people to tell me what to think, which is uh. yeah.

Primary

You're a Bird primary with a Lion model, and you're trying on some Badger ideals. That's one of the easier Sorts I've done, lol! Possibly because your primary and models actually House match mine :p

Your reasoning process screams Bird xD and so does your writing style and just the length of the ask. Birds love self-analysis, it's part of how we make sure our systems stay as close to true as we can make them.

You've got some Lion too, but it's a model. It sounds like your Lion and your Bird have come into conflict before, and like most Birds with Lion models, it bugs the snot out of you when your Lion's intuition (which is important data!) doesn't line up with what your Bird knows.

You've prioritized Bird's conclusions before, but (as with many Birds) you don't entirely trust your own system and you're wondering if your Lion might have been right and you should give its reasoning more weight.

Also, you're consciously deciding that maybe Badgers' way of doing things is more moral than yours, and you're pulling in some of those ideals. That doesn't make you a Badger primary. Birds are notorious for this kind of thing actually 😂

The line between whether some ideals you've pulled into your Bird system vs. what counts as a model is fuzzy. It's up to you really, how important those pieces of Badger are to you.

For me, I think the line might be--is it wired into your sense of self on its own, or does it get filtered through your Bird and Lion? It really sounds like your Lion is a strong part of your sense of self: if you ignore its advice, you feel not totally like yourself. You don't have to feel all your models equally strongly, but thinking of it that way might help.

(It's also hard because Birds often feel like they kind of are their systems, or they are their ability to reason, that's a core part of their identity. ...It's complicated.)

Secondary

You sound really really Snakey. I'm not sure where you're getting Badger, actually!

Badgers are more than the mirroring ability. They also bury themselves in work or community, and it can sometimes look like they're neck deep in so many responsibilities that they couldn't possibly handle any more problems--and then they do have a problem, they do need something, and they stand up and all that stuff they were buried in turns out to be armor and tools.

Snakes, otoh, are improvisational and tend to be very aware of their surroundings. Unlike Badgers, the Snake brand of social shapeshifting involves a lot of keeping track of other people's reactions to what they're doing--trying something and then watching the response, then adjusting, rinse and repeat. You turn yourself into exactly the right person for this situation.

Badger mirroring is usually simpler. You reflect the other person's energy back at them: it's an empathetic response that says we're alike, I accept you, you're safe. A lot of Badgers do this without thinking--it can be hard to turn off.

Snakes also don't go in for prep work as much, it tends to trip them up (Snakes with Badger or Bird models notwithstanding). They're Improvisational secondaries, unlike Bird and Badger which are Built and rely heavily on some form of preparation.

The Lion model sounds legit, but just check for yourself: you might be learning to use Snake's neutral state. Snakes will sometimes drop all their layers of acting and maneuvering and suddenly they're just themselves. Different Snakes have different relationships with neutral state. For some Snakes, it's a relief to drop the mask; for others, it feels vulnerable and they only trust certain people with their full authenticity.

It does sound like you really admire Lion secondaries, though, so you might indeed have a model there! This is just something else you could check on.

Hope that helps!

- Paint

#first post in a while huh folks #gotta remember how to tag... #ravenclaw primary #gryffindor primary model #slytherin secondary #gryffindor secondary model #asks #paint speaks #sortinghatchats

[luthienne]

Hi dear, do you have any good words on emotional courage?

hi my love, you can check out this post and this post; here are a few more:

“I know a lot about pain… and I know it is bad for people, eats away the spirit, but how about courage, what is it for if not to use when needed?”

Martha Gellhorn, Selected Letters 

“This is in the end the only kind of courage that is required of us: the courage to face the strangest, most unusual, most inexplicable experiences that can meet us.”

Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet 

“You don’t realize it, perhaps, but you are turning these delusions and illusions of the past into criminal things. Relinquish everything. Stay in bed until you feel so shock full of energy, hope, courage that you bounce out of abed. You can only aid the world–if you still believe the world needs our individual aid–by retaining your faith in life. Your body may be weak, but I know you still have wings.”

Henry Miller, A Literate Passion: Letters of Anaïs Nin and Henry Miller

“I… want to inherit the witch in my women ancestors—the willfulness, the passion, ay, the passion where all good art comes from as women, the perseverance, the survivor skills, the courage, the strength of las mujeres bravas, peleoneras, necias, berrrinchudas. I want to be una brava, una peleonera, necia, nerrinchuda. I want to be bad if bad means I must go against society—el Papá, el Pápa, the boyfriend, lover, husband, girlfriend, comadres—and listen to my own heart, that incredible witch’s broom that will take me where I need to go.”

Sandra Cisneros, A House of My Own

“I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand. It’s when you know you’re licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and see it through no matter what.”

Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

“Many people seem to think it foolish, even superstitious, to believe that the world could still change for the better. And it is true that in winter it is sometimes so bitingly cold that one is tempted to say, ‘What do I care if there is a summer; its warmth is no help to me now.’ Yes, evil often seems to surpass good. But then, in spite of us, and without our permission, there comes at last an end to the bitter frosts. One morning the wind turns, and there is a thaw. And so I must still have hope.”

Vincent van Gogh, The Letters of Vincent van Gogh

“In the winter I am writing about, there was much darkness. Darkness of nature, darkness of event, darkness of the spirit. The sprawling darkness of not knowing. We speak of the light of reason. I would speak here of the darkness of the world, and the light of———. But I don’t know what to call it. Maybe hope. Maybe faith, but not a shaped faith—only, say, a gesture, or a continuum of gestures. But probably it is closer to hope, that is more active, and far messier than faith must be. Faith, as I imagine it, is tensile, and cool, and has no need of words. Hope, I know is a fighter and a screamer.”

Mary Oliver, Winter Hours: Prose, Poems, and Prose Poems

“There is always some miracle left; and though miracles do not happen, they might happen. Who knows? Perhaps our intelligence, our instinct, our senses, in spite of their daylight clearness, are leading us astray. Perhaps the one thing needful is just that unreasoning courage which follows hope’s will-o’-the-wisp as it burns…”

Jens Peter Jacobsen, Niels Lyhne

“But if the deepest loss, […] / can be, not just survived, but made into the matter / of hope, made into song, not into a hatchet / to cut off the offending parts, made into poems / then blessed be the end of things, the loss of whatever / secures us blindly and mutely to our lives.”

Julia Alvarez, The Other Side/El Otro Lado

“I run / stumbling, expectant. / Impatience is hopelessly / desperate. Hope / takes time.”

Marie Ponsot, Springing: New and Selected Poems

“How lightly we learn to hold hope, / as if it were an animal that could turn around / and bite your hand. And still we carry it / the way a mother would, carefully, / from one day to the next.”

Danusha Laméris, The Moons of August

“Do not get lost in a sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, or a year, it is the struggle of a lifetime. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble.”

Representative John Lewis

“Where does such a force come from? What does it mean? A voice very faint, and inside me, offers a possibility: how shall there be redemption and resurrection unless there has been a great sorrow? And isn’t struggle and rising the real work of our lives?”

Mary Oliver, Winter Hours: Prose, Poems, and Prose Poems

“Don’t forget that apparent impossibility of something is the first sign of its naturalness—in a different world, obviously.

Marina Tsvetaeva, from a letter to Anatoly Steiger

“Grieve. Have / hope.”

Jorie Graham, Swarm

John Berryman, “The Heart is Strange”

“Skin had hope, that what’s skin does. / Heals over the scarred place, makes a road.”

Naomi Shihab Nye, “Two Countries”

“I am quite troubled in the depths of my soul. But that will pass,”

George Sand, in a letter to Gustave Flaubert

“Let’s dance a little before we go home to hell.”

Muriel Rukeyser, A Muriel Rukeyser Reader

Hélène Cixous, Hyperdream (tr. Beverly Bie Brahic)

“That most moments were substantially the same did not detract at all from the possibility that the next moment might be utterly different.”

Marilynne Robinson, Housekeeping

Ada Limón, “Dead Stars”

“Listen, everyone has a chance. Is it spring, is it morning? Are there trees near you, and does your own soul need comforting? Quick, then — open the door and fly on your heavy feet…”

Mary Oliver, New and Selected Poems

“Get to the bottom of this intensity and have faith in what is most horrible, instead of fighting it off—it reveals itself for those who can trust it, in spite of its overwhelming and dire appearance, as a kind of initiation. By way of loss, by way of such vast and immeasurable experiences of loss, we are quite powerfully introduced to the whole.”

Rainer Maria Rilke, from a letter to Countess Alexandrine Schwerin, June 16, 1922

“…only one thing is urgently needed: to attach oneself with unconditional purpose somewhere to nature, to what is strong, striving and bright, and to move forward without guile, even if that means in the least important, daily matters. Each time we tackle something with joy, each time we open our eyes toward a yet untouched distance we transform not only this and the next moment, but we also rearrange and gradually assimilate the past inside of us.”

Rainer Maria Rilke, from a letter to Adelheid von der Marwitz, September 11, 1919

“Continue to believe that with your feeling and with your work you take part in what is the greatest. The more strongly you cultivate this belief inside of you, the more it will give rise to reality and world.”

Rainer Maria Rilke, from a letter to Elisabeth Freiin Schenk zu Schweinsberg, September 23, 1908

“…I have known with certainty that the worst things, and even despair, are only a kind of abundance and an onslaught of existence that one decision of the heart could turn into its opposite. Where things become truly difficult and unbearable, we find ourselves in a place already very close to its transformation.”

Rainer Maria Rilke, from a letter to Anita Forrer, February 14, 1920

“…he says, it will be all right.

“It is not the saying of an oracle or a prophet. They are words you might speak to a child ... and somehow I am comforted. He does not mean that it does not hurt. He does not mean that we are not frightened. Only that: we are here. This is what it means to swim in the tide, to walk the earth and feel it touch your feet. This is what it means to be alive.”

Madeline Miller, Circe

“Right then she knows herself even less than she knows the sea. Her courage comes from not knowing herself, but going ahead nevertheless. Not knowing yourself is inevitable, and not knowing yourself demands courage.

Clarice Lispector, Complete Stories; “The Waters of the World”

“Recovery (which includes return and renewal of health) is a re-gaining—regaining of a clear view. I do not say “seeing things as they are” and involve myself with the philosophers, though I might venture to say “seeing things as we are (or were) meant to see them”—as things apart from ourselves. We need, in any case, to clean our windows; so that the things seen clearly may be freed from the drab blur of triteness or familiarity—from possessiveness. Of all faces those of our familiares are the ones both most difficult to play fantastic tricks with, and most difficult really to see with fresh attention, perceiving their likeness and unlikeness: that they are faces, and yet unique faces.”

J.R.R. Tolkien, from his essay On Fairy-Stories

Camille Norton, Corruption: Poems

“Keep busy with survival. Imitate the trees. Learn to lose in order to recover, and remember that nothing stays the same for long, not even pain, psychic pain. Sit it out. Let it all pass. Let it go.”

May Sarton, Journal of a Solitude

“I have the fervour of myself for a presence / and my own spirit for light; / and my spirit with its loss / knows this; though small against the black, / small against the formless rocks, / hell must break before I am lost;”

H.D. from Collected Poems; “Eurydice”

Denise Levertov, “Epilogue”

“The days go numb, the wind / sucks the world from your senses like withered leaves. // Through the empty branches the sky remains. / It is what you have. / Be earth now, and evensong. / Be the ground lying under that sky. / Be modest now, like a thing / ripened until it is real…”

Rainer Maria Rilke, from Rilke’s Book of Hours (tr. Anita Barrows, Joanna Macy)

“I know your sorrow and I know that for the likes of us there is not ease for the heart to be had from words of reason and that in the very assurance of sorrow’s fading there is more sorrow. So I offer you only my deeply affectionate and compassionate thoughts and wish for you only that the strange thing may never fail you, whatever it is, that gives us the strength to live on and on with our wounds.”

Samuel Beckett’s words of consolation to his friend, Alan Schneider

“What matters is not to allow my whole life to be dominated by what is going on inside me. That has to be kept subordinate one way or another. What I mean is: one must not let oneself be completely disabled by just one thing, however bad; don’t let it impede the great stream of life that flows through you. I have the feeling of something secret deep inside me that no one knows about.”

Etty Hillesum, from a diary entry featured in An Interrupted Life

“You have been told that, even like a chain, you are as weak as your weakest link. / This is but half the truth. You are also as strong as your strongest link. / To measure you by your smallest deed is to reckon the power of the ocean by the frailty of its foam. / To judge you by your failures is to cast blame upon the seasons for their inconstancy.”

Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet

“Try to keep what is beautiful to you and what you can use for today and now — You must not let things you cannot help destroy you —”

Georgia O’Keeffe, from Georgia O’Keeffe: Art and Letters

“What we love, shapely and pure, / is not to be held, / but to be believed in.”

Mary Oliver, from Evidence; “Swans”

“In time of the crises of the spirit, we are aware of all our need, our need for each other and our need for ourselves. We call up, with all the strength of summoning we have, our fullness. And then we turn; for it is a turning that we have prepared; and act. The time of turning may be very long. It may hardly exist.”

Muriel Rukeyser, from A Muriel Rukeyser Reader, “The Life of Poetry”

“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places—and there are so many—where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.” 

Howard Zinn, A Power Governments Cannot Suppress

“But don’t lose heart, dear ones—don’t lose heart. Don’t let it make you bitter. Try to understand. Try to understand. The world’s already bitter enough, we got to try to be better than the world.”

James Baldwin, from Another Country

“You do not have to be good. / You do not have to walk on your knees / for a hundred miles through the desert, repenting. / You only have to let the soft animal of your body / love what it loves. / Tell me about despair, yours, and I will tell you mine. / Meanwhile, the world goes on.”

Mary Oliver, “Wild Geese”

#ask #anon #quote compilation #emotional courage #words #lit #poetry #long post #of hope to bite on like a bullet #yeah ok i have no chill #also no explanation for how my brain works and ties all of these together #compilation

[serpentstole]

Luciferian Challenge: Day 25

What is the most valuable lesson you have learned from this path?

Speaking specifically about Luciferianism or similar practices: you can be adversarial, heretical, and defiant against aspects of your previous religion without being a dick about it. 

Blasphemy is absolutely an aspect of my religious practice. I venerate a fallen angel. I incorporate the mother of mankind, who is recognized as a saint in some branches of Christianity, into my Luciferianism. I celebrate the Original Sin (as it’s understood within the context of Christianity), I want to make devotional jewelry and prayer beads out of chains from antique rosaries, and I refuse to surrender my appreciation for a blasting pipe organ or some stained glass. The reversal of my baptism, by nature, also has to be a very heretical rite. Part of the reason I say that my Luciferianism cannot be divorced or even distanced from Christianity is because if it was, none of this would matter. You can’t be a heretic or blasphemous if you don’t on some level acknowledge the laws and rules and expectations of that faith.

But I try not to rub it in anyone’s face, you know? It’s personal to me, not performed openly for the sake of making a statement or purely to offend.

Yes, there might be people who come into my house and take issue with the origins of the beads I used, or the cathedral architecture in my banner. However, they’re just as likely to take issue with the fact that I’m a Luciferian at all. For the rest, I strive not to be confrontational or publicly self indulgent about it. I get no joy from making others uncomfortable, or from shock value, or from offending people. My use of the heretical is my own, my adversarial nature is reserved for those that truly deserve it, and being nasty for the sake of it seems to me like it’ll do more harm than good. 

I’m not going to wring my hands and pretend that here in North America, Christians are oppressed. In both Canada and the United States, Christianity continues to be the dominant religion, and the way it exists within our culture absolutely impacts things like education and lawmaking despite claims to the contrary. I also won’t say that everyone who faces hostility from Christian individuals should meet it with perfect grace and poise, and that losing one’s temper in the face of such abuse is a failure. When someone else is initiating a confrontation, it can be very stressful and we can react how we might not have with a clearer head and a little distance. I know I’ve fallen victim to this in my life.

What I think is that sometimes it’s better to just disengage, to ignore, to block, or to otherwise distance oneself from those who have no interest in learning. They won’t walk away from the exchange feeling thoroughly owned, and you aren’t likely to sway their followers, as those are the fans of their content and message. They’ll walk away thinking Luciferians and Satanists are edgy assholes whose only religious purpose is to try and own Christians with sick burns on the internet. I also think those that seek out Christian bloggers or communities just to insult them or troll them are wasting their time and doing far more harm than good, regardless of what the blog in question is saying. Yes, even if they’re an Evangelical fundamentalist.

This might seem like a strange stance to take as someone who believes so strongly in social progress and empathy, but please remember what some of these communities can be like. That they might have grown up being told anyone unlike them won’t understand the way their church and family does. That people who don’t hold their specific ideals are worse off for it, and that Lucifer, Satan, and the devil is synonymous with evil and that anyone who venerates such beings are monstrous and trying to harm them.

Reinforcing those existing biases and assumptions will not help anyone. Everyone likes to escalate. To champion their cause, and get flustered and worked up over it. Don’t give them the enemy they crave. Do what is right for your beliefs and your practice, but in whatever sacred and personal space or corner of the internet you’ve set aside for it, and leave them to fester alone with their thoughts.

And if their posts only have like three or four notes, you’re only broadcasting those talking points to a wider audience, including those whose days might be ruined by having harmful ideology plastered all over their dash. Let them holler into the void. No one was reading it anyway.

Also, as a side note, way more occultists/people within the witchblr community are Christian than you might think, and you kind of just look like an stupid asshole if you’re taking pot shots at the concept as if you think every Christian is a funeral picketing turbo bigot.

#luciferianism #theistic luciferianism #blasphemy #heresy #30 Day Luciferian Challenge #30dayluciferianchallenge #illumine

[daydreamreality]

Thinking about actor availability, and how that affects my perception of Jess and how strongly I feel about shipping Literati.

Really thought this would only be a few paragraphs going over the points where Jess could have disappeared never to be seen again, but it turned into a freaking essay so LONG POST warning if you decide to click ahead. 

If the last we saw of Jess was hanging up the phone in the season 3 finale: "Well, it was fun ride while it lasted. That's about how I thought this would end." Still have a lot empathy for this kid and wish him well, but you screwed with Rory's heart like I knew would happen. Was that intentional? No. But he was so immature, out of control with his emotions, zero communication skills, not trusting in others...the list of reasons why he wasn't ready for a serious relationship, even if the feelings were serious, goes on. There was no way Rory wasn't going to end up as collateral damage in his personal breakdown that I could feel was going to happen. And this is the thought I had as a teenager with no dating experience watching this show for the first time. Did I want to date him? Hell no! I could see that trainwreck from a mile away. Rory was naïve to put her heart in his trust but that's part of her good qualities - she's sees the best in people and champions for them. I could go on a tangent about why exactly Jess was such an important character to me when I first watched the show (and probably why he stuck around unconsciously until I decided on a whim to rewatch GG in lockdown) but...I don't know, maybe some other time.

In the context of the entire show, I would look back at the relationship as my favorite one to watch of Rory's in the series (The build-up! The connection! Their deep belief in and respect for each other! The angst!) and Jess being a really fun character to root for (and yell at) but endgame? It was a short lived but important relationship. It’s fun to think about what ifs and how circumstances could have changed to make it work, but we can move on.

The ill-fated spin-off: I have no idea what this show would have been about except focusing on Jess and Jimmy and I’m not about to theorize. I still like Jess at this point so it would probably make me like him more since we’re getting a deeper dive into his character, but in regard to shipping him with Rory, this opinion would not change unless he all of sudden showed some great maturity. But I doubt this show would have even gotten a whole season so that probably wouldn’t happen. And then he’s living in California…this is too much, moving on.

If the last we see of Jess is in season 4: About the same feeling as above. Life, as expected, has not been treating Jess well. At all. His jadedness and hostility is at an all-time high when he shows up to get his car. Do I see the reasons informing his behavior and have empathy (once again, for a KID)? Yes, but he's also being a jerk. "The years don't seem to have hardened you." Well this year sure has!

I love the "I love you" scene but too little too late, buddy. That's probably why I love it, it's all a bit hopeless. Just keep shoveling the angst at me. I do like fics where this scene is reimagined with Rory running after him to give him a piece of her mind or Jess finding some other words to say (I really feel like he had more to say there but got overwhelmed), and coming to a tentative reconciliation: exchanging numbers, "don't fall off the face of the earth," but getting back together? No. You hurt her and you're feeling the consequences. Rory is not obligated or responsible to reciprocate those feelings, nor is she in a place to do that right now. 

But season 4 does cement that Luke and Jess's relationship is one of my favorites in the entire show. There's probably a whole other post in me regarding that so I'll keep it brief. Because of his respect for Luke, Jess makes tentative steps towards maturing in interpersonal relationships. He shows some vulnerability and honesty with a veil of sarcasm and awkwardness because, well, it's JESS.

But then of course this all goes to hell when applied to Rory. Sometimes I like to think how this dorm scene would have gone down if Rory stepped back for a second and went, "Hold on. You're not making any sense, chill out," and they could have talked a bit and had a similar reconciliation like I said above because I really think that’s all he was going for - to talk to her, apologize, and make an attempt at reciprocation like he did with Luke. But getting back together here? Canonically, he hasn't made enough progress. He set aside his personal feelings to be in his mother's wedding and used the knowledge from the self-help book to apologize to Luke, but I don't think the book's message has sunk in all the way yet and he’s still got a massive chip on his shoulder preventing him from making a good life for himself. Getting rejected by Rory here is an important moment and I really like it. It's fun to think about the AU if Rory had said yes (hello road trip!), but it's very in-character for her to not be able to handle Jess's crisis and just shouting "NO, make it stop." This is one of my proudest of Rory moments: Protect your heart girl, he ain't ready. The seeds have been planted that Jess will continue to grow and I wish him well on his journey. Endgame material? Nah. Goodbye forever, take care my friend...

Even though this scene doesn't feel like closure at all, I really thought this was the end of Jess Mariano. So imagine my surprise when -

SEASON 6: HE'S BACK. Coming out of the shadows, [literally] it's Jess Marianoooo *air horns* *confetti* *jazz hands* *Jess rolls his eyes at the fanfare*

Alright, that's out of my system. But for real that's what my mind did at this point. For context, the way I watched this show for the first time was getting the DVDs from the library while a couple of seasons were still on the air; when a new season was available to borrow, I would rewatch all the seasons up to the current point so my memories and favorite parts of the show are seasons 1-4. Because I was not bingeing the show all the way through, seeing Jess here seemingly so different didn’t feel out of place. A shock, yes! A happy surprise. But nothing about him seemed OOC. A year had gone by, we’d seen some signs of maturity in him, and getting rejected by Rory was a big kick in the ass for him to start making bigger changes in his life. I really cannot emphasize how satisfying and sensical his positive character development felt to me. 

The slight maturity we see in season 4 in its full potential. Jess is still Jess: guarded, self-deprecating, and a bit prickly but he shows a sense of calm and feeling more comfortable in his skin. This is really satisfying to see as someone who always "knew" there was a kind and capable heart underneath the exterior just like Rory did, and that tough guy, must protect myself at all costs posturing has melted away. But that side of him isn't gone, it's not like the writing did a complete 180 on his character. I love this. He's just...more at peace with himself but he's not a different person, and he's found something to direct his focus and intellect on. He's made his peace with Luke, and now he has something of worth to show Rory to try to mend that hurt as well.

Yes, it would have been nice to see how and why he decided to write a book and work in publishing but this course of events is not out of left field, nor is Jess enough of a main character at this point for scenes like this to be necessary to the show unless they were tied to Luke and showing another side of him. Jess has shown in the past that he has a good work ethic if he feels it is worth it. The problem wasn't him being lazy, just poor decision making and focusing on RIGHT NOW, "I need to get out of Stars Hollow and live my life," and not considering the consequences of his actions. Which as an immature kid whose life had told him he can only depend on himself...not out of the ordinary. The dude’s life passion is literature and has probably read every book he can get his hands on, it’s not crazy that he had his own story in him. 

Here is where Literati becomes endgame material for me. Prior to the revival it was always my feeling that post-series they would reconnect while Rory was on the campaign or afterwards. It would be low drama (except for Lorelai criticism), slowly gaining trust in each other again, and eventually starting a committed relationship within a year or two of being friends with sexual tension (lol). They made their adolescent mistakes, hurt each other, but learned from it and started over on infinitely better footing.

The match just makes sense to me at this point for many reasons; I don't feel like I need to list them all out because you can go to any pro-Literati post and I'll probably agree with the majority of the points. The biggest issue they had was timing: “Right heart, wrong time.” I like especially how they even out each other's more extreme personality traits. For example, Rory learning from Jess to consider her own feelings instead of sacrificing herself for others, and Jess considering others before himself all the time. Or professionally, I can see Jess encouraging her to step away from her ultra-organized, “everything has to be just so” ways when it benefits her to seize an opportunity right now, don’t worry about the details, you got this. Maybe Jess has another book in him, but his self-deprecation and disorganization prevent him from getting it done but Rory helps him be more objective and focused. There’s this…synergistic energy I feel with the two of them: they’re great by themselves, but form something better together.

Judging from Rory's reactions towards him in this season, I don't think it's OOC for her to have romantic feelings for him again. She's extremely proud of his accomplishments and not unhappy to see him (not holding a grudge). They fall back into their comfortable dynamic even if it makes them both a bit nervous. Now some could argue that this means that Rory only wants to be friends with him but...when have Jess and Rory ever been just friends? If "Another Year in the Life" comes out (I've got serious doubts but would love to be proved wrong) and Rory rejects him or he's not even a part of it, fine! But I just don't see anything in canon that says explicitly she'll never feel romantic towards him again.

Now the kiss...there's a lot of ways to read that scene. Do I think Jess was in the right to assume "everything is fixed" as a go ahead? No. But that's part of why he is such an engaging character: he's impulsive and acts in accordance to his feelings, and yes, this gets himself and others in trouble. 

Do I think Rory purposefully went to the open house to "use" Jess to get back at Logan? No. I think she genuinely wanted to support him, and Logan being out of town meant she wouldn't have to explain why it was important for her to go. I see the kiss paralleling the one in 2x22 but instead of Rory not being able to hold her feelings in any longer, Jess initiates. The way I see it is she was unaware she still had lingering feelings towards him (not out of nowhere, I mean their relationship has "unfinished business" written all over it) and that scared the crap out of her, just like at the end of season 2. So she runs away to the "safe space" that is being with Logan. Because she's in love with Logan, she has a sense of obligation towards him, and Rory has shown many times that she does not react well to change and highly emotional situations.

Is this scene a deal breaker for a future relationship between them? I don't think so. Jess says that he isn't sorry she came, which I take as "I'll never be sorry to see you no matter the context." Yes, this hurt him and made him pretty mad, but I don't think he's holding a grudge against her for this; even in the moment he's more concerned that someone cheated on her and her safety getting to her car. He sets a boundary that he doesn't deserve his feelings to be pushed around like this and Rory agrees. Not that I condone this sort of tit-for-tat hurting of each other (which I don't think Rory was going for in the first place) but it's almost like...that cycle is now broken. The whole scene is so open ended, it doesn't feel like a "good bye forever" to Jess.

"But Rory is so in love with Logan!" I don't know about you, but that "I'm in love with him despite all the bad he's done..." sounds so defeated and sad. It's almost like she's resigned herself to being in love with Logan. The first time I watched this, I thought this was foreshadowing that the relationship was on its last legs. To keep them together, Logan almost dies so Rory will bury her hurt out of guilt for holding a grudge against him. She is completely entitled to feeling hurt by Logan's actions, and I hate that she feels like she has to do this. But it happened, moving on.

"But Rory is a cheater!" When I think about Rory's characteristics, "cheater" doesn't make the list. She feels entitled to the men that she's loved and this isn’t super great behavior, but I don't view her as inherently unfaithful or okay with cheating. I give her leeway on the season 2 Jess kiss because she was a teenager with a lot of conflicting emotions and everything around her was pushing her to stay with Dean. The season 4 Dean debacle...she was still very young and naïve. I put most of the blame on Dean for manipulating her; I say most because if Rory really wanted to be with him, she should have been more sure of the status of his marriage, but I repeat: he manipulated her and she was very young and naïve. I dare to say she has been conditioned to view Dean as nothing but safe and trustworthy so why wouldn't she believe him... Season 4 was all about her being out of sorts when away from the Stars Hollow bubble and trying to reclaim some normalcy. Narratively, I see why this makes sense and I don't think the intention was to say “Rory is okay with cheating,” but to show very explicitly that Rory isn't perfect. This show goes to extremes, at this point I kind of just accept it and don't jump to "this person/character is terrible!" Certain characteristics and behaviors I have less patience for (mild) or will make me lose all respect for a character (extreme - honestly very few GG characters fall into this category for me); you may feel differently and that's fine. When other plot points in this series are much more bizarre and OOC, while this turn of events makes me uncomfortable and angry, at least it makes sense to me.

The 6x18 kiss I've already said that I don't think Rory had premeditated intent to cheat on Logan judging from the fact that Jess initiated it; yes, she went with it nor was it a complete surprise, I get this. The "I couldn't even cheat on him..." line I think is an outburst of guilt and regret, not her saying she had a plan in mind. Maybe I'm being too soft on her, I don't know...she did stay there late but maybe she just got lost in the book while waiting to say bye. We've seen her not know how to deal with conflicting emotions and change to her status quo, and attempt to distract herself when life isn't panning out the way she wants and not think about the consequences in the moment, so I don't find this scene OOC or intentionally cruel. The revival...I don’t think I can even go there right now because it would just be me screaming incoherently about how much I hate "full circle" and how bizarre the entire thing was. Maybe something of value would eventually come out with a lot of editing. XD

This isn’t to say I’m 100% on Rory’s side all the time. Pretty much every character in this show has at some point made me smile, made me laugh (generally with them, but some characters it’s more like at), made me want to give them a hug, made me roll my eyes, and made me want to throw something at them. That’s why I love it so much! Even if the drama is turned up to 1000, I still get the sense that these characters are human. My favs end up on my “will protect at all costs” and “shit” lists throughout the series, no one is immune. Except Lane. She really is the best person in this entire show. #JusticeForLaneKim

If ASP had written season 7: (Remember there being some sort of theme to this post? Only two episodes in s6, but Jess sure does make an impact.) I bet Jess would show up at some point. MV is loyal to the creators and not the show, if it was important for Jess to be there I’m sure his shooting schedule would have been accounted for. Storyline would have been similar to the revival because AYITL is ASPs season she didn’t get to do without considering how time passing affects the characters (I’M STILL SALTY) except Rory is at Yale and I think the book was a new idea. Shipping as endgame doesn’t change, and I bet there wouldn’t be a nice little Literati ending because we’ve got to end it the same way, right? I don't even need them to be together at the end because Rory has greater plans to focus on, but just a moment! One moment is all I asked for... I don’t know if this makes me mad because I felt like the narrative had been pushing us along this path for so long even if actual "endgame" was going to be offscreen or if I kind of like just having it in my imagination. Little bit of column A, little bit of column B. In any case, it could have been cool to see Jess present for the birth of his half-sister and giving Luke some support. 

Like I said, I'm not touching AYITL right now. The whole starting point of this was, "huh, if MV never came back to the show, how would I feel about Jess and Literati?" And he was in it so it doesn't really fit into this even though we've gone on a meandering journey as pieces of discourse that have never sat right with me but didn't quite know how to express that disagreement until now popped in my mind. So there you go. If you’ve made it to end, claps to you, what a champ.

At the end of the day, Literati is the ship that makes me feel the most things, it's kind of just a gut thing. This really isn't any sort of argument just an outpouring of love for the show and these characters. I don't know how well that's communicated, but hey, I try. I’ve got a lot of nostalgia for the pairing and I always viewed Jess as being Rory’s, and only Rory’s, choice.

#Gilmore Girls #Literati #rory x jess #Jess Mariano #I've been writing and editing this for 2 weeks and just accidentally pressed post and uhhhh #I don’t think there's more you can do self #Just run with it

[michaelevans27]

I've got to leak somewhere at this point regardless of the vulnerability of the dodgy 1 way mirror that can exist. When you're in a position of trust with another person and depth of entanglement and deliberate growth around and with someone and yet consistently have the vines of life leave the sunlight and spread sidewards and pull the sweet fruits/berries into the shade or start to find this vine you are building with help question where you can flourish and blossom it leaves you with so much uncertainty with what you have left when the growth works to pull apart. Sometimes plants have to be seperated for the benefit of their respective health. Sometimes they take too much of each other's sun or they struggle to work synchronously. Sometimes plants will grow and find themselves tangled again. Vines and gardens and plants all beautiful but all unable to know their own needs. It takes a skilled gardener to know what's best and sometimes even then it's not an absolute.

Humans are not plants, we are far more complicated, we are filled with emotion, judgement, issues and conscious thought. Who are we to know what in the fuck we want? How are we supposed to trust in others when we can't even trust our own opinion or struggle to form one? Whether through my own twisted lense of perception, gaslighting or struggles and moments of first experiences and dealings with the many complications to any moment with many people and feelings and topics all that came to my mind was feeling like a robot like maybe my emotions aren't with as much depth or good enough or come out wrong. Yet without the comparison of the past and the need to be clear and therefore properly understood, with the simple and only requirement being to myself... well it doesn't get easier to know your own thoughts but at least it's clearer the depth and strength of feelings one has. The kind of feelings that make you question what feelings are and how you might interpret them.

The ones that are so fiercely strong that you can't tell if you're angry because you're upset or upset because you're angry, whether you're upset because you're thinking about a happiness or upset because you're thinking about the pain, the kind of feelings that tell you you're an idiot for not protecting yourself sooner while also telling you that you ought to not need to protect and all emotions and thoughts between. They say pain makes you stronger but they fail to ever say how it makes you stronger. How one converts or ignites strength from or through the pain, whether pain is to be replaced or forgotten or constant. At what point do you stick true to who you are or maybe were, possibly either foolishly trusting and quick to do so whimsically or refreshing and positively quick in trusting or maybe even both at once since it comes with benefits and goodness but through enough exposure and unfortunate chance you'll be able to have it taken advantage of.

Are there any right answers in the end? Any correct paths to take? In such a perfectionist world high on emotions low in patience and so particular and picky in tastes will there be any humanity able to step back and be hopeful but not condemnful? Any chance of understanding and fair expectations while not sacrificing oneself and not settling for less than ideal but the composure and treatment one would hope in return in this world? I want to be myself, my ideal self in this world, the young man with dreams to do it all and be around for all, to be interactive and caring and trusting with all as I can be, to do as much as I can with my time and to build a pure family with no distances with energy to spread something further with cosiness and trust and openness I was so ready for all of that, I was so ready I took on more than I could, I rushed about the place, I grew tired and pulled in my sphere expanding from a quiet furnishing floater to much more too quickly. I saw my vision in even the worst of times even with each moment of collapse where it would feel like there was a poisonous atmosphere out to get me, with little mind of my mind but there was always enough to keep me going. Didn't matter whether it was external or internal when it mattered most it was internal, when my mind and opinion wavered on whether my feelings were in need internally if needed I'd smooth over and repair as best I could whether I was reckless and blind excusing the damage or smoothing over without the proper external material or against external or internal counterparts is a matter somewhat. What matters to me the most though is having a hold on understanding, ironic how often it can be to feel misunderstood and to not quite understand the new or unknown around you and yet worst of all not have enough perspective and capacity or perhaps too much of the capacity to think so much and not understand yourself.

So much blabber that might not make sense but ultimately it comes to this, I've felt deeply, and strongly regardless of how many times I've felt empty from depression and of the opinions of others. How do I know I've felt that strongly about something? Well for starters I already knew it in each moment where there was effortlessness and yet knowing the moments that had and would take all the effort which meant so little amounting to effortless when achieved. It was clear in the way I'd feel when things would seem to co-incide literally with moments that would match and I'd tell myself that it's a tie at a level deeper with fate, souls, voodoo whatever shit you can think of that becomes your own metaphor keeping minds and states and moments as one or close to one. It's so much more that told me so much about myself and my insides that it'd be a disservice and silly to bother for many reasons to go on.

The biggest thing that told me about the strength of my feelings and opened the Pandora box and decided to make me feel like I finally understood my robot belief and build the knowledge of not knowing what I know or feel or what to trust even within my feelings as to which is central rather than which is in control, the biggest thing that ripped it all open was playing to my biggest weakness, my desire to help anyone that needs it, especially those important to me. My eagerness to drop everything for now and focus on what matters to me most, being there for someone that I trust and I see as positive as a person who simply feeds that fuel of what's good and feeds into a future I know I can keep working for because those people can show me or make me feel there's a positive world and that I am not fighting against an ocean but a stream wide as you want but never endless. I trusted and eagerly took into place the most important and sacred and meaningful things to me in being there and I always will trust in even people that in now way or form have had a chance to earn it, but yet that trust was broken, it isn't often I let my upset take control of me, I keep my emotions in check as much as I can so I'm not hurting others because you can be upset and share upset without doing harm. The most important thing and pure thing I can ever feel like doing, something I struggled to do in moments that I was never prepared for, something I'd do without even noticing in smaller moments, something I do no matter the distance or the positional issues and yet my trust was taken freely advantageously whether maliciously or not, my feelings plain and simply feeling shit on all the while sharing the best of them freely.

Knowing what you truly are feeling and thinking, wanting or needing is hard enough on a basic unaltered state, figuring it out while having no real trust on your own understanding or trust in your ability to trust alongside the deservedness or maybe the potential usage of that trust is an entire different level. People will do all sorts of things in life and may change who they decide they'll be whether it follows their best version of themself, their best vision for themself or just what they feel they ought to be or can only be. There's no way of ever knowing whether someone is reaching out to you and asking how you are to simply do their part in the world, to spy on you and judge or wonder and simply update their info on you, potentially care about you, keep you at arms length as a controlled growth that's simply a body to have contact upon just due to having been part of their life or hell anything under the sun. There's no knowing if it's in your interest to respond and be accomadating to become the next generic and used person in their life that is simply kept up on tabs to know for the sake of knowing or if you'd be accomadating the a simple position where you'd be simply supplying gratification or comparison to their journey, maybe it's in your best interest to share with them regardless since it's progressive in some way? No idea what way or maybe through accomadating the asking of how you are and asking back it would do some good to them and you or even just good for them and it'd be better to do the non-selfish thing and likely what you'd want being good for them by helping them out by doing so but leaving yourself with no betterment from the exchange maybe even worse off. You're supposed to wish people well if you care about them but if you care about them that much don't you also know that it'll hurt ever knowing that would be a case.

Maybe I'm more emotional than I ever realised or maybe people would call me emotionally immature or say that I'm toxic or selfish to not immediately stray towards the most beneficial befitting accomadation of another but last time I did that it made me feel like an object a used object. When it's constantly on loop and stuck on your mind is their a reason? Is there a purpose or direction the universe is pushing you deliberately with all this stuff all these strong deep entrenched thoughts and feelings never giving any long pause of rest? Is it supposed to be a reason to go against in spite of it and trust and respond and engage or is it to follow and close up to, is it stupid to trust someone without constant proof and effort from them showing trust? Is it supposed to stick around and be the way it is for any connections made? Or is it a shitty curse among a strong memory that keeps so much in long term storage that never let's you forget anything. Am I supposed to avoid or forget about or hate or enjoy or be indifferent of little details that I couldn't forget even if I tried, should I be able to forget details. Thinking about it a robot was never a good representation of myself because it focused on a lack of or a disconnection with emotion, feeling miles away from emotion capable and shared by so many more normal people who fit into society or whatever dodgy society may be around, it didn't focus on the confusion of and difficulty with emotion, it didn't focus on the overly believing attitude the childlike expectancy to things working out no matter what and to everything being possible without any sacrifice, the sensitivity to even some violence and small issues among bigger moments thinking everything can be perfect with some ease the rarer of the idealistic over the top optimism moments. At least a robot can know or think and decide in a certain way. It will always make a decision based off of something and wouldn't be unsure of itself. At the end of the day I don't care about it's label because it's the outside world or the stagger into the dark that'll eventually tell me something about my thoughts even if it never comes or my mind is changed more than once. I do really hope it being the first birthday I'll be so seperate from that it'll somehow be as personal and enjoyable as any before, I wish I could somehow have any factor on it but I also wish I'd stop wishing because there's plenty of reason or stories I'm sure to explain that there's nothing good from such stuff being wished since it's at my own detriment maybe. I think that's enough to look back at and know roughly my own thoughts and hopefully give me some peace on it all for a while. Maybe I'll not have to use this ever again.

P.S Michael you might not even understand half the crap you're writing but at least it's been written also there's a wasp and who cares about readability or thinking more about this until it has a reason to be thought about more with a wasp

#diary of my brain #why trust #things aren't simple #are well wishes well wishes in a certain state of your own mind #what's good #still figuring things out #not a writer for grammar

[gatheringbones]

Denise Kulp, “On Working with My Brothers: Why a Lesbian Does AIDS Work.” Off Our Backs, vol. 18, no. 8, 1988, pp. 22–22:

["A few weeks ago, on my day off, I got up early, jumped in the car, drove to another part of the city, and went to a demonstration. A little while later, I grabbed the hand of a man who has been my best friend in the world for twelve years, and the hand of a woman who has become a close friend over the last several months, and ran out into the street. Six people went with us. We sat, holding hands and chanting, for over three hours. And then we were arrested. It was my first act of civil disobedience. I was arrested for demonstrating about AIDS.

It seems strange that it's taken me so long to be arrested. I've spent twelve years being politically active, and there have been many actions and issues about which I've felt strongly enough to consider CD, but I've always decided it was inconvenient. But when the idea of committing this CD arose, I decided immediately. I planned ahead to take the day off. I made financial arrangements. I made sure at least one other woman would get arrested with me (and there were four of us, finally). And then I did it. 

I come to my work as an AIDS activist full of anger, and with a long-held commitment to change. Recently I had a disagreement with a gay man who said that action born of anger was ineffective, while action born of love was positive. My position is that people I love are dying, and that makes me angry. I am making my anger powerful by turning it into action, to change the way things are. And the people I love are dying. At least part of my definition of feminism is that I love women. And AIDS is killing women. Especially it is killing black women. And it is killing prostitutes, who are being blamed for spreading AIDS into the heterosexual community when in fact they are more likely to get it than to pass it on. 

But I came to AIDS work through my concern for gay men. I have never called myself a separatist, and the major reason for that is because I love gay men. Part of the reason I love them is because so many of them were kind to me when I was coming out. I've always felt a kinship with gay men, an understanding; and I've always responded to a certain joy in life which many of the men I've known have shared. But the primary reason for my love of gay men is the very significant relationship I've had with Tim. We have been each other's closest friend since we were seventeen. We give each other emotional support; we hold each other; we cry; we laugh, a lot. We want to have a child together. The thought of Tim dying, of anything happening to him, terrifies me. And so the threat of AIDS, originally, was brought home to me in a very personal way. But it didn't stay personal. It expanded to the whole community of gay men. And then, of course, it expanded past that. 

For the most part, I work on AIDS with gay men and lesbians. I share ideas, energy, and politics with gay men, and I have not had conversations with other friends about my work, but I've heard what they've said. (I am much happier when my friends talk to me). There seems to be a concern that women, feminists, lesbians especially, are going to forget about doing "our" own work and give most of our energy to gay men. There seems, further, to be some concern that in the focus on AIDS, lesbian issues and concerns are going to be waylaid, forgotten, buried. There seems, in fact, to be anger and resentment about this, and a belief that when it turns out that when lesbians are up against a wall, gay men will just walk away and forget all about us. They've never really been concerned with our issues anyway, right? What makes us (lesbians who work on AIDS issues) think gay men will change? 

Okay. Fine. I never said that all gay men are non-sexist and perfect (although I do think Tim is perfect). I never said that I expected all relationships between gay men and lesbians to change over night. But I will say other things.

First off, why do we say that gay men never cared about our issues? We seem to be thinking of gay men as a monolith (which is almost as bad as thinking of them generically, as I have, above). There have always been some gay men who have understood and supported our issues, as there have also been gay men who have totally different politics, as there have always been Lesbians who don't agree with "our" politics. (Now who's the monolith?) (And besides, don't you believe there are lesbian anti-abortion Reagan supporters?) But, more importantly, when have we asked gay men to support our issues? Almost every political group I've been a member of has been women only. We haven't wanted men involved. We've wanted to develop our own sense of power, our own way of doing politics. Men, if they like, can do child care at women only events. But we want our own space. There are all things I support.  But we can't really expect gay men to understand lesbian issues unless we take the time to explain, and to ask for their support. We haven't done that.

There is an assumption that because some lesbians are working on AIDS issues with gay men that we are giving all our energy, emotional, political energy only to gay men. This isn't true. Women are dying. WOMEN ARE DYING. When I do political work, I think of the gay men I know who have died, the men I know now who have AIDS, of the friends of my friends. But I also think of the seventeen year old black prostitute who died blind, who was the buddy of a friend of mine. I remember that there are recorded cases of lesbian-to-lesbian transmission. I know who's dying. And I know that it's because of who was dying first that so little government money has been spent on this disease, that it has taken so long for people to be concerned. Public hysteria didn't start when faggots were dying; it started out when we found out AIDS passes through blood, and that straight men can die too. And when faggots started dying, it was other faggots, and some lesbians, and some straight women who took care of them. I feel fine about giving my energy to those faggots. I'm just mad it took me so damn long.

Will those gay men stand up for me when lesbians are against the wall? Yes. I am trusting them. I look at these men I'm working with, and I see a facilitator who actually tries to facilitate, men who support an anti-sexist, anti-racist statement as soon as it's suggested, men who want to be told when they do or say something sexist, men who choose a lesbian as a spokesperson when they go to trial, men who actually listen to the lesbians they're working with because maybe these women have some more political experience than they do. Yes, I am trusting these men.

I look at the lesbian and gay movement as it has developed over the last twenty years, and I see it as dichotomized. There is the mainstream lesbian and gay movement— Democrats and Republicans, task forces, advocates, defense funds, and campaign funds— and I see it as a meeting place where lesbians and gay men come together, but as a place where mostly men are involved. More men have traditionally been invested in that game. But right-on radical lesbians have played that game, too. (Heavens, I even dated one!) (Wait! I think I was one!) It's one way of doing things, and it gets things done— anti-discrimination laws, for example, at least sometimes, at least some places.

And then there's "our" movement, the lesbian-feminist one. We're national, certainly, but more grass-roots, or even closer to the ground/land. And we have always been more radical. We have a different culture, a different vision, an analysis. In college I did a big paper on the gay rights movement, and I remember feeling so superior when I realized that lesbians have a theory (tons of them, actually) and gay men don't. Historically, lesbians and gay men have looked at the world separately and differently. We haven't tried to engage them in our struggle, and they haven't a clue about how to engage us in theirs. But a lot of things are changing that, and AIDS is one of them. If we can keep down the barriers that some of us are breaking through, maybe, when the immediate crisis is over, we can work together, carefully, to a new place.

Like I said, I'm trusting the gay men.”]

#denise kulp #AIDS #lesbian literature #history stuff #pride month #ACT UP #cw slurs #terra preta

[strangertheory]

What’s all this confusing jargon?

Heteronorma-what? Comp het? Projection?

This past week I've seen a few different conversations here on Tumblr in which fans clearly demonstrated that they do not understand certain struggles that the queer community deals with, and many fans have been misunderstanding theories involving compulsory heterosexuality and emotional projection as  making a character a "bad person."

Because I've seen this crop up multiple times this week, I wanted to create this post and address misunderstandings while also defining some terms and concepts that some fans might not be familiar with.

For the purposes of this post I'm going to be referencing the Stranger Things fan-theory that Mike is gay, that Mike is participating in compulsory heterosexuality, and that Mike is projecting his feelings for Will onto El. (This theory is one that I've seen garner the most criticism, but I'm sure that there are other queer-coded characters in Stranger Things that fans have argued over as well.)

The majority of this post is dedicated to defining terminology so that fans can better understand queer-coding and queer theory as it applies not only to the Stranger Things fandom but also to any other fandom’s discussions, but I’ll also offer an explanation and summary of one tiny part of the much larger theory that Mike is gay in order to contextualize this discussion a bit.

When fans theorize that Mike is "projecting his feelings" for Will onto El, or suggest that Mike is "pretending" to have feelings for El, some fans get upset and angry. I know and respect very much that these fans are not necessarily angry because they are bothered by the idea that a character in Stranger Things could be gay. Not all rejection of certain theories and popular ships stems from homophobia (although they very often do, and the fandom needs to be more aware of this.) But I understand that because some fans see the idea of a gay character choosing to have a heterosexual relationship as being dishonest and selfish and manipulative, they do not want to see a character that they love and respect (Mike) as knowingly “using” and “lying” to another character that they love and respect (El.)

Let me reassure you that is not at all what this theory represents, and that is not at all the angle that is taken by fans that interpret Mike as participating in comp het. 

In this blogpost I’m going to do my best to explain some terminology that is often used in theories about queer-coded characters and narratives. I’m also going to discuss why queer people that are dealing with comp het, internalized homophobia, and projecting their feelings (knowingly or unknowingly) onto straight relationships are not bad or maliciously dishonest, and they are most often motivated by a desire to do what they believe is best for not only themselves but for everyone in their lives that they care about due to their mistaken beliefs about their feelings.

Internalized homophobia is when an lgbtqa+ person has within their mind negative ideas about homosexuality which impact their judgement and perception of themselves. Internalized homophobia often heavily influences their self-esteem, their decision-making, and it might encourage them to participate in compulsory heterosexuality in order to fit into a prejudiced community. The way in which internalized homophobia affects everyone will be different and it’s a very complex issue. Even lgbtqa+ people who have been “out” for years and that outwardly might seem as though they don’t have any insecurities might still suffer from internalized homophobia caused by the biases and toxic ideas that they’ve been exposed to over the course of their lives.

Compulsory heterosexuality (frequently shortened to the phrase "comp het”)

com·pul·so·ry /kəmˈpəlsərē/ adjective required by law or a rule; obligatory.

When fans of queer-coded pairings discuss that they believe that certain characters are participating in "comp het" they mean that they are behaving in a way that is strongly influenced by their culture's strong focus on heterosexuality, their community's biases against homosexuality, as well as perhaps their own internalized homophobia. Compulsory heterosexuality does not necessarily require that a person is even aware that they are not heterosexual yet: oftentimes, a person might grow up in a household that has never given them any examples of happy queer community. A person may not even know that being lgbtqa+ is an option. As a young person grows older and tries to do what everyone expects of them (ex. dating) they might only then start to realize that they aren't like all of their peers, and their compulsory participation in "what is expected of them" is not working out as they anticipated. This can result in a lot of frustration and confusion when all alternative options have been hidden or stigmatized by their family, friends, and neighbors. Many lgbtqa+ people often end up participating in compulsory heterosexuality before they fully realize that they are queer because their community treats being straight as the only way people can be. They haven’t had the opportunity to consider the existence of alternatives. 

It's important to understand that compulsory heterosexuality is not done out of malice or intended selfishness. The main focus of most people that are trying to be straight is doing what they believe is the "right thing" or the "acceptable thing" in a heteronormative community. There are places in the world that have laws and punishments, often very severe ones, against the queer community. Not all countries are safe for lgbtqa+ people, and historically the US has not been and is still very often unsafe and intolerant even today. And because of strong biases that exist against homosexuality in many cultures: anyone that is trying to be straight does not recognize this behavior as dishonest or manipulative, they see it as something they believe they are expected to do, that they can figure out how to do, or that they believe they can choose in order to be accepted by others. Sometimes they might feel obligated to return the feelings of someone that expresses interest, and they might feel guilty that they don't feel the same way. Other times they might think "well, maybe I just need more practice with learning how to fall in love and be in love!" This is a very common feeling that young people might have when they first start dating. "Maybe I just haven't found the right person!" or "Maybe I'm overthinking things and this is how I'm supposed to feel, and this is love and it's a lot like friendship but with kissing!" People still trying to figure out their feelings or that believe they have to figure out how to be cishet are not "liars" and they are not manipulative or selfish, they're simply people trying to do what they truly believe they are "supposed to do" according to their community's "rules." Many are still in the process of figuring out that they aren't straight in the first place. Many, especially in time periods without the internet, might think that their experience is unusual and unhealthy and that they're alone in their struggle. And many might believe that being straight and being in a heterosexual relationship is the only allowable option available to them, and their behavior represents that.

Heteronormativity is the belief that romantic, marital, and/or sexual relationships between a cis man and a cis woman are ideal, preferred, or "normal" compared to alternatives. A heteronormative person dismisses and ignores the possibility that anyone they meet in their daily lives could be lgbtqa+ and behaves under the assumption that everyone is cishet when the truth is that humanity is infinitely more diverse than that. Heteronormativity causes parents to raise their children assuming they'll be straight and only teaching them about cis men and cis women falling in love and having families rather than offering them a broader perspective on all human experience. So many people that claim to be "allies" to the lgbtqa+ community will often behave and speak as though they assume that most people they meet are straight because deep down they still hold a very strong bias against accepting that a person being queer is just as "natural" as a person being straight. So many people that claim to be “allies” to the lgbtqa+ community will also judge queer people and queer fictional characters differently than they judge their straight and cisgender friends. The Stranger Things fandom is notoriously littered with a few heteronormative fans that only complain about the idea that two middle schoolers might kiss or have a crush on each other (they’re too young!) when it’s the idea of two boys or two girls kissing. Statements such as “they can’t know that they’re gay yet and they can’t have feelings for another boy or another girl yet because they’re too young” are heteronormative because these statements prioritize the false idea that heterosexuality is “natural” and that homosexual feelings cannot arise equally naturally for a young teen as they grow up and as they start having romantic interest in their peers.

Projection is, in simplest terms, taking feelings and directing them onto a new subject that is not the actual source of those feelings. The reasons that people project their emotions can vary. People often project their feelings when they believe at a subconscious level that their feelings are either inappropriate when directed towards the original source OR they feel powerless to do anything about the source of their original feelings and so they try to find a new target to blame their feelings on instead. Projection is one method by which people seek to manage and express their feelings when they are unable to express them directly. Through projection we often seek to avoid confronting the real source, reasons, and issues behind our feelings.

One simple example of emotional projection is how we treat others when we’re having a bad day! Let's say that I had a bad day at work. My boss yelled at me and reminded me that I'd forgotten to do an important task. I'm upset, but I don't tell my boss how I feel and I bottle up those emotions. The second I return home my spouse politely reminds me of something small that I needed to do. Right now: I'm angry. I was unable to yell at my boss because I recognized, either consciously or subconsciously, that this behavior would be unacceptable and that there would be adverse consequences. Now someone telling me what to do at home reminds me of my boss telling me what to do at work, so I explode and yell at my spouse. I have now projected my feelings towards my abusive boss towards my spouse instead even though I'm not really angry at my spouse at all: I'm angry at my boss. In my mind in this moment I see my spouse as being just like my boss at work! My spouse won't understand why I'm treating them this way: they'll think I'm unkind and unreasonable. I might not know why I reacted that way either, but I might know enough to recognize that I've had a long day and work was hard. The truth is: I wish I could yell at my boss, but I can't, and I've been bottling up my anger all day because I wasn't able to express my feelings. I've found a sudden outlet for those feelings that reminded me of the situation in which the feelings started: my spouse telling me I forgot to do something.

When Stranger Things fans speculate that Mike is projecting his feelings for Will onto El they have multiple canon circumstances that might logically support this interpretation of the story. I’ll summarize a few of them, but please keep in mind these are far from the only examples in which Mike might be projecting his feelings. (Both @kaypeace21 and @hawkinsschoolcounselor and many others have written about this interpretation of Mike’s character before. I highly recommend visiting and following their blogs if this subject interests you further.)

The first time we meet El is while Mike is out looking for Will. El enters Mike's life when Will goes missing and while Mike is upset and feeling as though he's "the only one that cares about Will." Mike’s new friend El says she knows where Will is, and by the end of season 1 she helps Mike find Will again! Then yet again in season 2 we see that El returns to Mike's life right when Mike is terrified that Will is being taken over by the Mindflayer. Yet again, Will is in danger and El arrives and she saves Will. We see Mike tell El "I can't lose you again!" when El returns to help save Will, and she reassures Mike "You won't lose me." But this is precisely during a moment in which Mike is absolutely terrified of losing Will who is unconscious in the other room and has been dealing with the Mindflayer. Mike was upset he lost Will in season 1, and then he was upset that El was gone in season 2, and then yet again at the end of season 2 right when Mike is afraid of losing Will again El shows back up in his life and Mike is relieved. But El is emotionally directly associated with how Mike feels when they "save Will" because that is what she has done two seasons in a row. The girl that has been helping Mike find and rescue and save Will is a repeated subject of Mike's affections, and yet he has only known her for a very short amount of time and is otherwise, in many ways, a mysterious stranger. Both Mike’s kiss with El in season 1 and the "I can't lose you again!" line in season 2 are delivered while Mike is in the middle of being terrified of losing Will. Could Mike be projecting his attachment to Will onto this new person in his life because she's there and she's a source of reassurance and hope? Does El subconsciously represent reassurance that Will is going to be okay because whenever she shows up she saves Will? If El is there, then Mike knows that Will is going to be rescued and that he will be okay. That’s a comforting feeling. A happy feeling! Mike knows he feels happy and safe around El, but he might not know why he feels happy and safe with her. Is Mike finding comfort in the thought that Will is going to be okay every time he sees El, rather than finding comfort in any feelings he might have for her? It is, of course, just a theory. But the way  in which Mike experiences (arguably) his strongest romantic impulses towards El while being terrified for Will's safety is fascinating to consider. If you were to ask me whether Mike seemed most romantically affectionate towards El when she showed up to save Will in season 2 or whether he seemed most affectionate towards El while pulling her hands away from his face and breaking away from a kiss in order to sing along to a song that just hit the line "Just a little uncertainty can bring you down" to continue it with a loud voice and yell "And nobody wants to know you now, nobody wants to show you how! So if you're lost and on your own you can never surrender!" then... my vote is that he was the most enchanted when El showed up in season 2 to save Will. But until the show is over and the credits for season 5's final episode have rolled we can, of course, agree to disagree regarding who Mike is "in love with."

The theory that Mike is projecting his feelings for Will onto El is just that: a theory. But it’s not a baseless theory. It is logical to a good number of people and it resonates with many queer fans who have experienced comp het and internalized homophobia while growing up in circumstances similar to Mike’s. Before dismissing this fan-theory I believe it is important that fans recognize the validity of these ideas and the way that they reflect many very real lgbtqa+ experiences even if they disagree or decide that this is not their preferred interpretation of the story. Most dismissals of these kinds of theories that I have read tend to demonstrate a certain level of ignorance towards lgbtqa+ experiences and reinforce heteronormative worldviews.

However. To return to my original point!

Hypothetically, Mike would not be a "bad person" for trying to date El and trying to love El even if he was aware that he's gay. He'd simply be Mike, as he always has been: the paladin that just wants to do the "right thing" and do what he believes his friends want him to do. He would see loving El as what he is supposed to do and what he thinks she wants and deserves.

I hope that my earlier explanations in this blogpost regarding what comp het, heteronormativity, internalized homophobia, and emotional projection are will help fans respect that people and characters that do these things are not bad, selfish people and they are not malicious or dishonest. They are seeking to be what they believe is "good." Homophobia exists. It's a real problem. And it impacts every single decision that lgbtqa+ people make when they're growing up in a conservative, heteronormative community. When fans speculate that certain characters are lgbtqa+ : they understand that queer characters would not see their compulsory heterosexuality as being unfair to their love interests. They would see their behavior and words as what their love interest wants and what they think they need to want for themselves, too. They're trying to do what they believe is right and to make other people happy. There is nothing evil in that intention. There is nothing selfish in that intention. However, it is true that everyone will be happiest when they are able to safely embrace who they are and choose to be honest with their loved ones without any judgement or prejudice. That is one of many reasons why homophobia and transphobia and acephobia are such destructive forces in society.

#gay mike wheeler #stranger things theory #stranger things theories #stranger things #anti mileven #byler

[chatonyant]

im just so sad about this funky crow ninja

Listen

Listen

Itachi is just

Such a tragic character and it makes me so sad

Like he's a pacifist at heart but he was forced to be the literal opposite at such a young age and I'm just so sAD ABOUT IT

(Under cut cause it’s long and it’s about the uchiha massacre if yall would rather not read bout that But it also has some soft ideas down at the way bottom if yall wanna just speed scroll to the bottom)

How he came to the choice he made regarding the Uchiha massacre totally makes sense to me. It wasn't a good decision, it wasn't a decision best suited for the situation, but it made sense. And it gets worse once you realize that he was 13. Thirteen. No wonder he couldn't find/use a third option. He's still a child, even in this world of child soldiers. He bloodied his hands and wore a mask so that the home he loved and the brother he adored could be safe.

I wish his story could've been written... better, for a lack of proper words. Maybe that is the right word. But I want to see him do more for Konoha. He became a missing nin for Konoha to spy on Akatsuki/Madara but we don't see the results of that. What information does Konoha get from him? Because we know that he's still loyal to Konoha after all this time. Did he do anything to slow Akatsuki down? Did he do things to benefit Konoha or stop something from badly impacting it? What did he do?

And then he dIES AND HE JUST DOESNT GET A BREAK AND IM HHHHH :((((((

And he was sick and going blind too!!!! I swear he was the universe's punching bag (though one of many cause the naruto universe just Be Like That)

Fuck ok I came on here to ramble about Itachi in my au but then got sad sO AU TIME NOW

For one I want to make him.... more sympathetic? A redemption works best when its shown from the start that there is more than meets the eye. Like Zuko, for example. He was a jerk, but there are moments where it's clear that he's not as much of a jerk as he could have been. And I wanted to do something similar with Itachi (and a couple other villains tbh but it's also a matter of "Should you survive" coughObitocough I love you but idk if you survive in this au or not but I have ideas nonetheless but that is for a later time)

Anyways, morally grey but more clearly Itachi

Honestly I've got more ideas for his ending than the beginning. Which is... very annoying. This is unfortunately the case for many... many of my ideas....

An idea I've been juggling with is Itachi not killing everyone. He definitely kills everyone who's activated their sharingan and anyone who is/was a shinobi. So everyone who's not a civilian. So,,, the survivors are very very little and are civilian mothers and civilian children too young to even attend the academy and like the occasional shop owners. The massacre was to stop the coup and prevent it from ever happening, so those who have the power to set forward this coup are any shinobi. And unfortunately, the Uchiha clan is an old shinobi clan.

Itachi is not a blank mask and does cry when he kills his parents and they leave their parting words. He's 13, forced to commit a crime that goes against his every wish, moral, and beliefs. Plus I believe the Uchiha are naturally every emotional- or at least feels it more intensely than others. Their whole defining ability has to do with emotions. They feel Very Strongly.

And thus by "cry" I mean he cries a lot. He almost has a breakdown right then and there when little baby Sasuke crashes in and see his crying older brother holding a bloody blade over his two very dead parents. 

For someone willing(ish) to murder a(lmost) a whole clan for the sake of his little brother, Itachi sure does directly hurt Sasuke a lot. Like genjutsu torture? Placing responsibility of avenging a whole clan on his tiny, angry shoulders? Oof, Itachi, bad ideas. 

So Itachi wants Sasuke to be safe. To be happy to the best of his ability. So instead, he uses a milder form of Tsukuyomi to place a suggestion in his baby mind that Itachi was in fact a cold hearted murderer. But the human mind is a strange thing that is difficult to understand, so for years Sasuke has nightmares of that night with his perception of Itachi varying wildly between a stone cold face and a tear-stained one. 

Itachi doesn’t do the whole “hate me and kill me for vengeance” because, again, he wants Sasuke to be safe and happy. Considering that he lives in a shinobi village and just had a highly traumatic experience, both are hard to come by, but the least Itachi can do is not have Sasuke’s whole life be overcome by hatred. Curse of Hatred is a very real thing, Itachi. I know you want Sasuke to have a goal to drive him forward and not waste away but bad idea Itachi. Maybe he says something else. Maybe he tells Sasuke to get stronger (but not in a “so you can get revenge” kind of way). I don’t know. But he doesn’t quite plant the idea of vengeance in his mind, so Sasuke’s motivation and drive ends up differently. Butterfly effects oho Also since Sasuke unlocked his sharingan during the massacre... is it possible to activate mangekyo as well? Cause he loves Itachi most, yes, but he also loved his parents, his mom especially. Would that be enough? Wiki says “death of someone close to the user”, so it’s possible, I think.

So many ideas about the massacre holy shit

Like Shisui. I’d totally love to make him live but frankly, I’ve got no idea how. :”D sorry Shisui, you’ll have to stay dead until I can find a solid reasoning as to how you survived and why

As for Madara/Tobi, well in anime he went after the Police headquarters while Itachi went after everyone else so there’s that, not much to change there

Then there’s a whole bunch of aftermath hijinks

Itachi is said to have aided Konoha within Akatsuki, but it’s not very clearly shown. Considering how we aren’t shown what exactly he passed on, that will be uh.... perhaps expanded on later. 

Sasuke and Itachi interactions before Shippuden would be different due to Sasuke’s own differences, but those differences haven’t be set yet so that will be explained later.

Ok, now the whole Itachi dying and being reincarnated shebang. Fourth War sure is wild as fuck. “Let’s mass reincarnate people!” what.

I don’t want Itachi to die. I want to let him rest. But not in death. 

So the general idea I have for the “end” of the story is:

He becomes legally blind. Not completely blind, but very close. His chakra coils are fucked and his sharingan are stuck in a way that he can kinda see chakra but very vaguely. 

His illness isn’t completely healed, but it’s much better than before; Sakura and Tsunade are legendary at what they do

He returns home to Konoha. Not sure how he will be accepted into the village but I was thinking the village makes a half-lie half-truth story pinning the blame on Danzo (Cause when in doubt, blame Danzo. Or Zetsu. But Zetsu isn’t blamable here)

He may not be imprisoned, but he isn’t free to roam. He’s monitored and has a (temporary?) seal placed on him limiting his use of chakra.

Itachi is surprisingly ok with all of this. He gets to retire from a shinobi life and he’s unraveled the story to Sasuke and was gifted a form of forgiveness. Life’s chill.

He works at the Yamanaka flower shop. It’s calming, peaceful, and it’s run by Yamanaka, powerful shinobi and also knowledgeable on psychology.

His crows are now seeing eye crows. They sit on either his shoulders or head and squawk whenever Itachi is too close to bumping into something. Sasuke very much enjoys when the crows are on Itachi’s head because when he tosses little treats at the birds, sometimes they land in Itachi’s hair.

It’s very hard for the shinobi to fear this honestly tiny man (because Itachi is small, fight me) who’s humming while watering plants with a bird on top of his head while the various heroes of Konoha take turns tossing treats at the bird like it’s a dog. 

“Nii-san. Nii-san stop squishing my cheeks.” “But Sasuke I want to see your face.” “Nii-san-”

oh my god so much brain power used on the massacre just so i could make itachi have a very domestic ending

#naruto #uchiha itachi #naruto shippuden #uchiha massacre #au #nart au

[panharmonium]

okay, honest question about 5.11 -

are we seriously supposed to watch this episode and still come down on arthur’s side?

i’m not saying that’s what the show wants us to do.  on the contrary, i think they actually do a pretty good job this episode of NOT hammering us in the face with “you’re supposed to root for camelot,” which i appreciate, because there have definitely been other times when they’ve approached the moral dilemma of magical oppression and have kind of punked out at the end - most noticeably in ‘the sorcerer’s shadow,’ when they finally force us to look merlin’s cognitive dissonance in the eye by putting him in the position of saving uther from a magical youth fighting for freedom, and then they back off from that uncomfortable question by having kilgharrah say “you, like i, must hold hope that arthur will bring about a new age, an age where the likes of you and i are respected once again.”  

they don’t quite do that in this episode, which i really appreciate, because i just cannot see how they would have been able to pull it off without sounding ridiculously disingenuous.

arthur is WRONG.  

(i’ll get to merlin later, he’s...he’s got a whole different issue going on, but let’s just deal with arthur first.)

that whole conversation where he interrogates kara in front of the court - just look at it:

were you part of a cohort of saxons who attacked an arms shipment bound for camelot?

yes.

and were you acting under the orders of morgana pendragon?

what i did, i did for myself.  for my people, and for our right to be free.

i have no quarrel with the druids. 

i have spent my life on the run because of my beliefs, and seen those i have loved killed.

once, maybe.  but i’m not my father.

you don’t kill those with magic?  it is not i, arthur pendragon, who needs to answer for my crimes.  it is you.  you and your father have brutally and mercilessly heaped misery on my kind.  it is you who has turned a peaceful people to war, and it is you and camelot that will pay the price.

are we supposed to look at this girl and condemn her?  nothing she says is wrong.  

whenever we encounter these magical rebel types, the show always tries to play it like ‘well uhhhhhh they’re a little extreme......i mean......they kill people 0.0,’ as if camelot’s regime hasn’t been killing magical people all along.  like - kara stabs that soldier when she’s escaping from the cells, and the show kind of plays mordred’s reaction as...‘omg she killed someone oh no what a baddie,’ but dude!  the soldiers are about to kill her!!!!!  she’s running for her life!  killing a guard is nothing merlin and arthur haven’t done a hundred times, when escaping from captivity on their own adventures, but it’s never been framed as some sort of evil thing, for them.  why is kara the only one branded as a sinner?  a knight’s life isn’t more valuable than any of the children uther drowned.  a knight’s murder isn’t more deserving of reprisal.  

the girl’s murdered innocent men in cold blood.  we are at war.  i must be resolute.

we hear arthur say that and we kind of just want to shake him like - CAMELOT has murdered innocent people in cold blood!  if arthur can use “we are at war” to justify killing someone who has magic, then the same justification should apply to magic-users attempting to kill him.  camelot declared war on magic-users decades ago.  these people are fighting for their lives.

arthur is showing his father’s reasoning here.  his own rules don’t apply to him.  his rationale, his justifications, they only go one way.  there is so much to pick apart in his response to this situation - he tries to make it sound like ‘the problem isn’t magic, it’s that you murdered some guys,’ (he tells kara “you stand before the court not because of an act of sorcery or sedition, but because of an act of murder”) but literally in the previous episode he sends out a squadron to hunt down finna (and merlin, unknowingly) just because gaius said finna practiced the old religion.  

finna had killed no one.  she’d done absolutely nothing wrong.  but arthur went after her and said she ‘must be found and brought to trial.”

brought to trial?  for WHAT????  she hadn’t DONE anything.  nothing except be a follower of the old religion.

and his hypocrisy!  ‘it is [people like morgana] that have terrorized camelot and forced us to outlaw such practices’ - really, arthur?  literally two episodes ago, you went the cauldron of arianrhod and used magic to save your wife from an enchantment.  at the beginning of season 5, you used magic to summon your father’s ghost.  at the beginning of season 4, you used magic to try to save uther’s life.  

arthur has always been willing to use magic for his own purposes, when it suits him.  all while continuing to restrict others from doing the same.

this show is big on pushing the narrative that “arthur’s different from uther” - and he is - but how different, really?  seriously.  in the end, how different are they?

i feel like because we are fond of him - because we’ve gotten to know him personally, in settings where we can temporarily forget the impact of his policies - we’re sometimes asked to sort of look past the real harm that is constantly being done in his name.  like - ‘it’s okay for us to let it slide when arthur persecutes people with magic, because he has valid reasons to think magic is a threat.’  but what, then it’s not okay for someone like kara to want him taken out?  

she has valid reasons to think ARTHUR is a threat.  he IS a threat!!!  to people like her!  that’s the reality.  these people have every justified reason to want arthur off the throne.  they have every rightful reason to riot.  they have EVERY RATIONAL REASON TO REBEL AND REMOVE HIM FROM HIS SEAT OF POWER.  

if this were star wars, they’d be the rebellion.  we’d be rooting for them!  it is not wrong for an oppressed population to rise up against their oppressor!!!!!!!!!!  we all know this!!!!!!!!  just because we like arthur on a personal level doesn’t make it less true.  we CANNOT fault these people for refusing to just sit back and wait for arthur to someday wake up and give them their rights.  that never happens.  that is never how people become free.  we can’t fault these people for not choosing to be like merlin, for not choosing to hover in a morally questionable limbo for years and years and years and become complicit in their own oppression.

(and again, i’ll...i’ll deal with merlin later.  he keeps fucking up and i hate to see it but i also have to remember that he is a victim of the same oppressive policies as kara and mordred so it’s like...his case is more complicated.)

but arthur.  i honestly feel like the most telling moment is when he gives kara that opportunity to “repent,” which is supposed to be like ‘oh wow look how benevolent,’ only the thing is he’s completely missed the point.  the point is not that she needs to apologize for her crimes.  the point is that she hasn’t done anything wrong.  

no.

it isn’t.

the way they cut to merlin at that particular line is devastating.  it’s this...reminder of how far we have wandered, from who he used to be.  he used to think this, too.  he used to fight for himself, too; he used to come home to gaius angry and upset saying “i want to be seen; i want to be free.”  and now he’s just...locked into this impossible place where he can either ignore the veritable chorus of dragons, seers, and literal gods who keep telling him he has an absolute responsibility to make sure arthur triumphs, or listen to their counsel and thus betray himself, and his own people along with him.  and all this while still living under threat of execution himself - what is he supposed to do?  

this episode calls back so strongly to ‘the sorcerer’s shadow,’ which is the first place where the show confronts this problem so directly, when merlin outs himself to gilli and gilli challenges him about his choices:

i know how it feels.  i understand.

then you understand why i have to fight.  if uther is killed, so what?  how many of our kind have died at his hands?  how many more will?  it's time those with magic fought back.

gilli - 

you can't tell me what to do!  

you need to learn to use your magic for good.  that is its true purpose; it's not meant for your own vanity.

i'm not going to apologise for who i am!  you can be a servant and - and pretend you're less than them -

no, that is not what I do - 

no?!  you're defending the king!  protecting a man that would have you dead!

i'm protecting you!

you've been pretending for so long now that you've actually forgotten who you are.

merlin gets so upset by this.  he’s visibly shaken, and on the verge of tears, and he weakly protests, and then the next shot is of him lying awake in his bed, agonizedly stewing over it, because deep down he knows that gilli is right.  

this conflict has never been resolved.  i would add, as we move toward the spot where i am now in season 5, that it’s not so much that merlin has “forgotten” who he is, exactly, but that he’s been forced to abandon who he is, for the sake of his mission.  and most of the time he tries not to think about that, because it’s the only way he can survive, but he feels deeply conflicted about it still.

watching 5.11, it is so easy for me to get frustrated at merlin, because i feel like he should do more, in this episode, and do the Right Thing, but honestly at this point the only way for him to do the right thing is to reveal himself.  that’s it.  there is no other option for him.  we’ve exhausted all other avenues; there is no other step he can take.  he is trapped, in his current situation, and his deception is not just hurting him, now, it’s...it’s an abdication of his responsibility to everyone like him.  

i don’t like saying that.  because in real life it’s never okay to just say like...’oh, you need to out yourself because you have a responsibility to the community.’  that’s never okay.  a person’s primary responsibility is to their own safety, when they’re living as a marginalized, threatened person.  

so in real life, i would never say that.  but this is fiction, first of all, and it’s more complicated than that, for merlin, because he is already in a position of responsibility over these people, whether he wants to be or not.  the decisions he makes are things that impact their lives.  

and secondly - how threatened is he, really?  he is supposedly the most powerful sorcerer who’s ever lived.  do we really think arthur could successfully get merlin up on a platform and hang him?  do we really think arthur could hold merlin in a cell?  when merlin was newer to intentional magic and unstudied, absolutely, yes.  but now?

the risk merlin faces now isn’t necessarily to his life.  it’s to his lifestyle.  he might have to leave camelot.  he might lose all his friends.  and these are valid fears and i UNDERSTAND, because merlin has never felt safe and he has so rarely felt loved and i UNDERSTAND how paralytically frightening it is for him to consider doing anything that would jeopardize even the tiniest bit of belonging that he has been able to scrape together for himself, but i do not see that he has another option - not one that doesn’t poison his soul, at least.  he knows that what is happening to kara in this episode is wrong.  he tells arthur “free them both.”  he knows that’s what should have happened.  but then arthur executes her, and merlin does nothing to stop it, and i hate to put one more burden on merlin’s young shoulders but the fact of the matter is that this cycle of violence will never end until merlin ends it himself.  merlin cannot continue to stay trapped here between the dictates of destiny and his own sense of right and wrong.  it is killing him, and now it’s killing other people, too.

it is not a crime to fight for the right to be who you are.  

merlin desperately needs to remember that.  he needs to remember it for his own sake, not just for the people around him.  he is one of them.  their struggle is his struggle.  it is not the magical community’s fault that merlin has more information than they do - how are they supposed to know that arthur is supposed to be some kind of great saviour?  without knowing that, why would they ever choose to bow to him?  he has done nothing to earn their trust.  they have no reason to approach this situation the way merlin has, with infinite patience and a willingness to suffer constant injustices.  

merlin has to understand that.  he has to know that.  he can’t condemn them for fighting for their freedom.  they haven’t done anything wrong.  and i think he does know that, deep inside.  but he is trapped, where he is now, and the only way out is for him to tell the truth.  

the truth will set you free.  it might upend your entire life, but it will set you free.  and it is past time that merlin was free.  from camelot’s oppression, and from the oppressive dictates of destiny, too - if destiny had shut up for two seconds about ‘don’t trust mordred,’ we wouldn’t necessarily be in this situation now.  

i guess overall this episode leaves me feeling pretty grim.  and sad, i guess, because honestly like - it’s hard to for me to even root for arthur, as we enter the finale.  i can’t condemn mordred for running away to join the rebellion.  i don’t think morgana’s ideals are exactly pure, obviously; we’ve already seen several seasons ago how her goals have slid from ‘liberation’ to ‘power’ - but mordred is only motivated by the fight against injustice.  he’s in it for freedom.  and i can’t fault him for that, because he isn’t wrong.  i can’t fault him for giving up merlin’s identity, either, because merlin’s been treating him like crap from the very beginning (and again, yes, it’s more complicated than that - merlin is in an impossible position; he has reasons to trust all of the people who make prophecies at him - but still.  that doesn’t make mordred less wronged.)

so it’s kind of like - i’m going into the finale feeling like i shouldn’t really be rooting for our heroes.  which is kind of...depressing.

i mean.  yeah. 

he kind of does.

#the once and future slowburn #meta #merlin S5 #long post #this is such a...i don't know #it's just...a bummer #like i appreciate that the show is kind of allowing us to sit with the complexity #and for once not telling us that 'arthur's right no matter what' #they haven't quite gone the 'guess we were right not to trust mordred route!' yet #they had arthur say 'i shouldn't have trusted him' but i don't believe that's their endorsement of that position #and i'm glad #because that's just...demonstrably false; after this episode #but i also don't trust them not to take that tack later because they have a history of that sort of thing #so who knows? #right now i'm just in a place where i feel glum because i mean...how can i even root for the heroes? #like #mordred strides off to morgana's fortress and i was like 'good! you go! you march over there!' #he's been wronged! how can i justifiably ask him to just roll over and take it? #it's not fair to ask that of him #it's not fair to ask that of any of them #and that **includes** merlin #merlin should never have had to do all the things he's done for this regime #i know why he's done them; and he won't complain; but he's been wronged as well #he's made mistakes but he's also been victimized so it's just...it's a mess #i just can't envision a scenario where this turns out okay for anyone #even arthur and merlin 'winning' doesn't seem like a good ending to me #because like...why does camelot deserve to win right now? #i don't know #it's hard to explain #it's just...a disaster

[moons-and-stars-and-shit]

Helloooo! ! Can I have a star matchup?

(Also thank you so much for opening these)

I'm a Gemini sun, Aries moon and Aquarius rising (because I love astrology so much istg)

Self ships: no idea which one I should choose. Let's go with nishinoya, sugawara or akaashi

Note: correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere tat your rising sign is how others see you, moon sign is how you see yourself and sun sign is just a general description

And for me, my sun mainly 'controls' how I communicate while my rising and moon make up most of my personality

Alright thank you!!!

𝕊𝕥𝕒𝕣 𝕄𝕒𝕥𝕔𝕙𝕦𝕡 𝕎𝕚𝕥𝕙 𝔸𝕜𝕒𝕒𝕤𝕙𝕚

𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒𝑡𝑠 🪐.

Gemini is ruled by Mercury (Communication) and Sagittarius is ruled by Jupiter (Luck).

Mercury lends Gemini their chatty, intellectual demeanor

Jupiter is about both luck and philosophy, and lends Sagittarius their constant questing for knowledge and truth.

This is a great match — Gemini comes up with a new idea and Sagittarius jumps right on, ready to explore it to its limits.

𝐸𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑠 🔥💧🍃🌬

Gemini is an Air Sign and Sagittarius is a Fire Sign.

This is quite the active relationship!

Air spreads Fire far and wide, helping it increase in power. Gemini and Sagittarius together have just this effect on one another.

Theirs is a very fiery, passionate connection; there’s always something going on.

Sometimes what’s going on escalates into a real argument and actually hurt feelings; these Signs are opposite one another in the Zodiac, which means they have quite a deep and complex connection.

In other words, when it’s good it’s very, very good, but when it’s bad it can be terrible.

These two may fight most about who’s in charge; they both have competitive streaks that can flare up at inopportune moments.

The good thing is, although they may disagree often, their differences of opinion don’t last long — Gemini is too busy moving on to the next challenge to hold a grudge, and Sagittarius can forgive anything but a lack of respect from their Gemini lover.

𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑠𝑡 🤞

If anyone can understand the need of their partner to not be faithful, it’s these two.

Strangely enough, this can lead to ultimate faithfulness, for there will be no more excitement in the secrecy and mystery of parallel relationships.

Sagittarius is not someone who can tell a lie and keep a straight face, and they are usually really disturbed by the lies of other people.

Gemini can tell a lie with such ease that they sometimes don’t even know they’re lying.

When they get together, this all becomes something to have fun with and they could play a game of trust until they build it on strong foundations of mutual respect.

𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑚𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 🤝

Wow!

This kind of understanding is truly something to cherish.

A problem can surface when they are both preoccupied with chasing their personal values and don’t see what they have with each other.

As opposing signs they complement each other in general, but this is strongly sensed in this segment of their relationship.

With Gemini’s ideas and mind flow, there is nothing Sagittarius can’t learn or share, being a student and a teacher at the same time.

The curiosity goes both ways and they will spend days just learning about each other and absorbing shared experiences.

The only thing that can interfere with the quality of their mental connection is the possible fear of intimacy that builds in the meantime.

That strength of personal exchange stops being mental and starts being emotional at some point, and as two signs that aren’t exactly emotional to begin with

they can be frightened by the intensity of emotions that are surfacing when they are together.

In general, this is a couple you want to hang out with, every day. They will literally share happiness with one another and with those around them.

They can inspire anyone to love and to smile, because when in love, they will laugh so sincerely and have so much fun together.

The “here-and-there” nature of Gemini will get new meaning and purpose through the eyes of their Sagittarius

while the search for the ultimate truth can be so much easier for a Sagittarius with the mind of a Gemini.

Their optimism and their eloquence will multiply, day after day, until one of them gets scared and decides to take off or death do them part.

𝐸𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 😠😔😊

It is kind of strange to think about the emotional side of the relationship between a Gemini and a Sagittarius.

Both signs have a non-emotional feel to them, but their contact develops so much emotion that maybe neither one of them will be able to cope with it.

They are not used to feeling that much, and when they “click”, Sagittarius could discover the new meaning of life and Gemini a synthesis that they’ve never had a chance to experience.

This can truly be a fascinating love story, if only they don’t run away from all that emotion.

𝑉𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒𝑠 🤲

There is this important thing they both value – things that make sense.

As opposing signs it might seem that Gemini is scattered and superficial, while Sagittarius is collected and deep, but in fact they have the same core in the fact that everything needs to make sense.

Usually, we would connect this with the sign of Sagittarius, but Gemini has it in their approach to words and everyday actions.

Their Mercury can’t deal with senseless words, stories without meaning and purpose, whatever that purpose may be.

𝑆ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦𝑠 💪

Not only will they share every activity that any of them thinks of, but they will also laugh all the way, whatever they decide to do together.

This positive emotion and pure joy they can share, becomes something like a happy drug to both of them and they no longer want to be apart.

As two mutable signs, they understand each other’s changeability and flexibility, perfectly capable to find all the right reasons why everything they do makes perfect sense.

There is a point when they will get irritating to their surroundings, like two spoiled children without a care in the world, but while they are this happy – why would they care?

𝑆𝑢𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑦 💕

Gemini and Sagittarius make an incredible couple, probably being the most innocent one of all oppositions in the zodiac.

They don’t often find each other right away, but at some point in life it is almost certain that a Gemini will find their Sagittarius and vice versa.

Their relationship has a strong intellectual connection, in which they will gradually find deep emotions.

There is no real prognosis how this will end though, because the emotions they feel could easily scare them away and their relationship could end only because of fear. If they decide to give in and find out what they could share, with Gemini’s ideas and Sagittarius’ beliefs, the sky is the limit. Or is it beyond?

#haikyuu!! #haikyuu fandom #haikyuu hcs #haikyuu fluff #haikyuu headcanons #haikyuu matchups #akaashi keiji #akaashi #300followerevent

[mbti-notes]

My esfp brother has recently started saying racist things, talking about how white men have it worse in this country than anyone, etc. I’m having a hard time dealing with it. I’m intp, so my instinct is to counter with a factual argument, but this is not an effective way to communicate. For one, he tends to see challenges or contradictions as personal hostility, even when they’re gently stated, and a debate usually ends up with him digging in, raising his voice, and resorting to statements (1)

[con’t: like “It’s just my opinion” or “You just hate me no matter what”. Secondly, he has a slippery relationship with facts and not a lot of philosophical integrity, so logical debate is pretty pointless; sources that confirm his argument are real and ones that don’t are Fake News, and he’ll also freely change his line even if it contradicts what he was arguing yesterday. For these reasons, our family doesn’t usually take the bait when he picks fights or says something outlandish (I think in our interactions, he’s motivated to be racist because he likes to provoke and knows it’s one of the few things he can say that will consistently get under my skin, and also because he thinks I look down on his alt-right friends (he’s right, though I’ve always tried to be diplomatic about why I find that worldview disagreeable). I don’t want to think my brother is a lost cause, and I don’t think he’s as invested in the ideology as some of his friends are at this point but I still don’t know what if anything I could do to get through to him. Any ideas?]

I often hear people say that they hope to have “a reasonable debate” about controversial issues, but then what they proceed to do is not debate but rather squabble, lecture, preach, proselytize, compete, or browbeat. You know that constructive debate (i.e. one that reaches a satisfying conclusion for both parties) can only happen under very specific conditions, including:

good faith: the willingness to give fair consideration to the opposing viewpoint as well as the willingness to allow fair critical examination of your own viewpoint

higher purpose: a commitment from both parties to seek out the truth and put it above personal ego and pride

critical reasoning: the ability to carefully construct and deconstruct arguments such that one can draw logically valid and sound conclusions

I’m not making any statement about you or your intentions. I think you’ve shown patience and restraint. I’m simply pointing out the fact that most people are not prepared to have a proper debate because they do not meet the conditions for being able to debate well. This matters in the sense that you should ask yourself whether it’s worth it for you to engage in debate with someone who is obviously not debating in good faith. This also matters in the sense that, if you are the person who isn’t able to engage in good faith, then you might be part of the problem in creating and continuing the conflict, despite whatever good intentions you possess.

I think many of us know someone who likes to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. Perhaps they like the drama of provoking people. Perhaps they like the feeling of being “special” in going against the grain or belonging to an “underdog” tribe. Perhaps they hide behind victim mentality (i.e. claiming “persecution” of their beliefs) because they don’t want to feel responsible/guilty for their ignorance or complicity. If someone is irrationally motivated to hold on to their beliefs, they’re not open-minded, in fact, they might even “debate” you just to use you as an excuse to double and triple down on their beliefs. It would be nice if everyone in the world were rational and came to their beliefs rationally and listened to reason all the time, but humans are just not that simple.

People at low levels of ego development have a very difficult time admitting when they’re wrong, often due to misplaced pride. Also, Fs use their moral beliefs to define who they are, which adds an additional obstacle to changing their mind. ESFPs are not particularly serious people, and that can be an advantage because it means that they are mentally flexible in terms of easily getting bored with any one idea. If you are right that your brother is only “flirting” with these beliefs and doesn’t actually believe in them wholeheartedly, then you should be careful about pushing him the wrong way. You don’t want to push him into a position where he is: 1) too embarrassed/ashamed/guilty to admit to being wrong, and 2) too personally identified with these beliefs to change his mind.

Fs are often insecure about their intellectual abilities, so perhaps it is difficult for you to understand how they feel when they have to admit to being wrong - it is a vulnerability for them that serves to harm their self-esteem. Different types have different vulnerabilities, but most people don’t like feeling vulnerable and do what they can to avoid it. Therefore, if you want to change someone’s mind, do it in a way that lets them maintain a sense of dignity in their vulnerability. In other words, make it easier rather than more difficult for someone to change their mind by being sympathetic (e.g. by creating a “we all mistakes” social atmosphere) rather than indulging the desire to humiliate or punish them for their mistakes. 

If he’s just trying to provoke you to get your attention, then he’s not interested in debate, right? It’s a “game” that he plays with you, on repeat. ESFPs are mostly about having fun because they are easily bored, so perhaps this is his way to create some interesting drama between you, though it isn’t fun for you. If you take it too seriously, you push him into defending his beliefs, which has unintended consequences. Studies have shown that simply being asked to defend a belief for a few minutes leads people into identifying more strongly with it. Therefore, avoid putting him on the defensive too often, otherwise the beliefs get gradually subsumed into Fi, and then he really won’t budge.

Also, note that he may genuinely feel that he has it tougher as a guy, etc. Something that people often don’t understand is that inequality hurts everyone. It doesn’t hurt everyone equally, but it does hurt everyone in some way. For example, men also suffer from rigid gender expectations in that they are extremely limited in the ways they can express their identity. Maybe this is the point he’s trying but failing to make. If so, you’d do better to acknowledge the feeling itself while not agreeing with the subsequent conclusion/belief. Of course, you know that feelings do not equal fact, but he doesn’t, because FPs treat feelings as facts. You coming in to counter him with your facts doesn’t work because you’re ignoring that his beliefs don’t come from "fact” as you define it, rather, they come from his personal feelings. Instead of letting him bait you into conflict and invalidating his feelings, tell him that you respect his right to have his feelings/opinions, though you disagree. 

Explicitly establish that you agree to disagree, and you stop playing your role in this game of his. Show people that you understand why they have their beliefs (despite them being wrong), or let them know that you will continue to love them (despite disagreeing with what they stand for). Then they have little reason to feel defensive and hold even tighter to their beliefs. When people approach you with the attitude of “winning” or getting the upper hand (though you have nothing in particular to lose), you should NOT join in and try to get the upper hand over them, because this will make it harder for them to change their mind, since they will perceive it as being “defeated” and then feel “inferior”. Leave people their pride by remaining as neutral about them as possible, then they are more likely to calm down and be reasonable. 

Remember that Fs value relationships and, deep down, they often want nothing more than to be validated and loved. If they have psychological development issues, they may choose the wrong methods for seeking love and attention. In that case, it’s up to you to be the bigger person if possible and avoid playing their game of “bad attention is better than no attention”. He already knows your beliefs at this point, so there’s no need to debate him in circles over and over again. You can simply say that you disagree and leave it at that. If he suddenly shows the willingness and capacity to examine his beliefs, then by all means guide him. But, until then, don’t give him an excuse to engage in tribal mentality and fashion you into his enemy, especially when he’s already feeling “aggrieved”. Focus on the fact that he’s your brother and you care about him. Remember that “to err is human; to forgive, divine”. From there, your approach should be empathetic enough to create the space that is necessary for him to change his mind without losing too much face. It’s hard, but sometimes you have to admit that you can’t help people who don’t want help and/or you might not be the right person to help them at this time.

Yes, some beliefs are quite morally abhorrent and difficult to stomach. But the fact is that they exist out there. The point isn’t about eradicating them, it’s about trying to discover the best strategies for reducing the number of people who believe. One subject I came across in my studies was about people who had been politically radicalized and then later de-radicalized, e.g., incels, terrorists, white supremacists, etc. If you are interested, you might benefit from reading a book or watching a documentary about why people get radicalized so that you understand how it happens and how to avoid exacerbating the process.

#intp #intp relationships #conflict #debate #communication #empathy #relationships #politics #ask

[hatari-translations]

Dancer interview on A Song Called Hate - translation

This interview in Fréttablaðið, published the day after the premiere of A Song Called Hate (but taken before it), features Andrean, Sólbjört and Ástrós discussing the film, their experiences in Israel and Palestine, the stress of the spotlight, and their passion for human rights.

A difficult reckoning after Eurovision

Andrean Sigurgeirsson, Ástrós Guðjónsdóttir and Sólbjört Sigurðardóttir, the dancers of the band Hatari, say the premiere of the documentary *A Song Called Hate*, which was shown at Reykjavík International Film Festival last night, brings mixed feelings. The film is about Hatari's participation in Eurovision 2019 and the controversial placement of the contest.

As the nation knows, Hatari went to Tel Aviv on Iceland's behalf last year and caused a kerfuffle by holding up banners with the colors of the Palestinian flag on the live broadcast on the night of the finals. "I still avoid thinking about the final night and the feelings I was experiencing," says Sólbjört, who believes she had a nervous breakdown that night.

"It was really hard being out there and I was afraid I'd never see my child again and couldn't get home." The experience of irrational anxious thoughts was synonymous with the stay in Israel. "That's why it's been uncomfortable to think about."

Processing the experience

The dancers are all still processing the experience of the trip. "I realized later that I'd disconnected from my emotions just to get through what we were doing."

Andrean agrees and says he's still taking in this test of endurance. "I think there's a certain group of people that only see the glamour shots and don't know how difficult this has been for us, both emotionally and professionally as artists."

Ástrós is the only one who has seen the documentary from beginning to end, but the others say they haven't been able to bring themselves to watch it yet. "I've only seen a fraction of it and it tore open all these difficult feelings," says Sólbjört, who preferred to be surprised by it in the arms of friends and family.

"It was uncomfortable looking back. There's still so much you're processing and have been avoiding thinking about for some time," Ástrós muses. She says it was strange to experience these things again from the outside. "But it also gives you a good distance from what happened."

All eyes on them

When it was clear that Hatari would go to Israel, the artistic team became the center of the media and public discourse in Iceland in one fell swoop. "It happened so fast, all eyes were on us and you got scared of making some misstep," Andrean admits.

Everyone had an opinion on the act, and friends, acquaintances and strangers were divided, for or against, participation or boycott. Andrean thinks people don't necessarily realize how difficult it is to be the target of so many opinions. "You just get so confused and want to listen to everyone and please everyone, but still trust your own beliefs and sense of justice."

Wanted to fight this battle

Sólbjört and Andrean both went out with the aim of unveiling the whitewashed image that Israel had drawn up of the contest. "You decide to fight this battle, and then you become aware of how your friends and loved ones also have opinions, which don't necessarily rhyme with your own," says Andrean. Even within the group there were arguments about the best way to support Palestine. "We wanted the cause to be in the foreground, and there were endless back-and-forths about what would be the best way to do that," Sólbjört adds.

"Most of us really wanted to see it up on stage, but of course that never would've been seen because of the playback [delay], so we decided to act when we were live for real," says Andrean. They did the best they could in the situation. "We waited and waited for the camera to be on us and then finally we got that chance towards the end of the televote points."

Sólbjört says she was terrified that night, and in fact for the entire trip. Nonetheless, she never doubted fighting for the cause, even if sometimes her emotions took over.

Privilege blindness gone

Ástrós had a somewhat different experience from the other dancers. "I'd been to Israel before, and didn't originally go for the cause, but for the trip and getting to work with them." But once they were out there, her purpose changed, after the team traveled around Palestine.

"When we visited the refugee camp in Bethlehem, there was some transformation within me." People told stories of their lives, and it made Ástrós think. "I couldn't help thinking about the injustice of these women having to give birth in dirty alleys, while we have all this privilege back home."

As the youngest member of the group, Ástrós had never had to face her privilege before. "It really cut me deep how unfair it was that I'd been born into this white privilege and had never even had to think about human rights as a question." When she looks back, the feelings come flooding back. "Number one, two and three, I just re-experience how unjust the situation is out there," she says, visibly emotional.

Forced people to see

But it wasn't only Ástrós who learned from this experience; the whole group experienced the importance of foregrounding the Palestinian struggle in the contest. "That was the reason we participated in Eurovision and the reason we made this movie," says Sólbjört.

Andrean agrees. "I've always been an activist at heart and fight passionately for human rights to be respected and human dignity to be upheld."

Despite a blend of good, bad and horrible days, the three of them don't regret taking part. "It forced people to see what was being hidden, and that's why it was worth it," says Ástrós.

It raised awareness and pushed people to take a stance on an issue that would otherwise have been easy to ignore. "It also got various activist organizations to consider if this is a good way to create a conversation about big issues." Andrean feels art is often underestimated on that stage. "Art gets people to think outside the box, and I think the union of activism and art worked out well in this context."

Sent the singers to their rooms

The dancers also hope it's clear that all of the group's decisions were taken as a group. Even though the band was the face of the team, all voices were heard. "People varied in how radical their ideas were," says Andrean, who fought strongly for the waving of the banners.

"I really remember how I'd stuck the flags under my underwear and in my socks and I thought everyone had." That turned out not to be the case and Andrean had to send the singers back to their rooms to get their banners. "It was kind of a circus at times."

The constant presence of the camera also disrupted things to some extent. "We could never be alone, we were constantly being watched," says Ástrós. As a result, sometimes they had to repress their emotions. "The focus was on supporting the fight for human rights and showing what it was like, more than taking care of our mental health and our soul as a group."

The fight is not over

Personal conflicts within and without the group are not the main subject of the documentary. "I think people will be surprised that it's not just about us and the drama around Eurovision, but a much bigger and wider-scope problem," says Sólbjört. The film is largely about the oppression that comes with daily life in Palestine. "What I learned from this, and hope others see too, is that human rights matter for everyone, always, and it's not justifiable to look the other way," says Ástrós firmly.

The premiere of the film marks a certain reckoning with this time, among the dancers and the others on the team. "We're still in contact with Palestinian artists who plan to come to Iceland when the situation allows, so perhaps this is the end of one chapter and the beginning of another."

Hatari's act didn't stop the bombing of Gaza or the illegal settlements in Palestine, but opened the door for conversations and collaboration. "Even though this act is at an end, human rights are still being trampled in Palestine and we hope people continue to be aware of it and take a stand." The fight isn't over. "We just hope the film continues to draw attention to it."

#hatari #a song called hate #andrean sigurgeirsson #sólbjört sigurðardóttir #ástrós guðjónsdóttir #interview #translation #politics

[hi-i-try-to-be-kind]

A letter to tumblrstake

When I first got a tumblr at 13 years old, I had no idea that there would one day be a CJCLDS community on this site. I didn’t find it until years later, if I remember correctly about the time that I made this specific account. Now, in my 20s, I’ve come to love this little community, even when the rest of this site has been so, so harmful to me and my growth as a person. I really love this community—I must stress this. Even though I’ve mostly been a viewer who didn’t interact, this community has meant a lot to me, especially as a late teenager, and has positively impacted the way I interact with people. I truly believe that everyone here is doing their best.

But now I’m leaving tumblr completely. And a huge reason for that is certain patterns that have started to encompass the tumblrstake community. And I believe that if I don’t say anything, no one else will.

Before I go on, I ask that you please try to listen. I know it’s hard—there’s even a Harvard (I think it’s Harvard?) study that shows that in the middle of an argument, someone cannot change their own mind. But while writing this, I practiced something that I hope you will too. I asked myself, ‘Lord, is it I?’ And while I certainly have plenty of responsibility for how I view the comments of others and how they affect me, I also believe that there are some serious problems that almost no one is addressing.

This community, especially at conference time, has become spiritually poisonous. Yes, part of that is how I look at comments, but I’ve come to believe that it’s not just me, but also that the comments are thought of and posted without any consultation with the Spirit. Today, I felt the Spirit during the talks given by Elder Cook, Elder Oaks, and Elder Rasband, up until I got on this site.

With Elder Cook, there was a lot of criticism of how he didn’t acknowledge that the church had a racist past—but he did. It was brief, but he said something that I don’t think could have applied to anything else. But this was ignored. From my perspective, his argument was using our spiritual ancestors (specifically our non-racist ones) as an example for how we should pattern our lives. But I’ve seen no one mention this interpretation. It seems clear to me that, in argumentation terms, he was not shown the ‘principle of charity’ (1). Maybe this is because he didn’t use the vocabulary that people on here associate with what he meant to say, I don’t know.

With Elder Rasband, there was criticism that he was trying to make a legal process within the church into something spiritual. But when I was listening to the talk, as someone who has struggled with being worthy to hold a temple recommend, it meant a lot. It gave me a more thorough understanding of my goal. And it can also be applied to general temple worthiness—and my belief is that anyone who didn’t need the words about temple recommends and still gave his words the ‘principle of charity,’ would see past his plain words and to the spiritual meaning beneath. I didn’t even understand why people thought of his talk the way they did, until I realized that he came after Elder Cook—in other words, because people were already primed to take his words badly, they did.

Last of all was Elder Oaks, who stood up strongly for what he believes, and what he believes that God had told him to say during the months of preparation he spent for this conference—and when I listened to the talk, I heard equal condemnation of racism and violence. My friend heard a more direct message against racism. Yet in this community, people criticized him for it. Specifically, people criticized him for being America-centric when he opened the talk by acknowledging that it was going to be so. With Elder Oaks, of course it has a history. He’s very direct with what God tells him to say, and at times that has led to people, especially members of the LGBT+ community, being hurt. But when I went back and watched those talks about the LGBT+ community, without the angry comments of this community to distract me, I saw how much he spoke of loving the members of the LGBT+ community, those very same people that this community perceived him as only speaking of hating. And in this latest talk, I have no doubt that the difference between perceptions comes from the fact that people who believe his previous talks were harmful refuse to give him the ‘principle of charity.’ When he says that we should love our enemies, they see it as condemning only their side, while not realizing that if they truly listened, it would not only be a condemnation of both extremes, but also, and I don’t know how to say this more gently, a rebuke of their own unloving actions within this community.

I remember years ago (I’m sorry I don’t have the post saved so that I could show you proof of this), there was a post going around that many people took to be pro LGBT+, and included some sentiments that indicated that people shouldn’t listen to the prophet above what they personally believe to be true. A member of the community took issue with this, I believe voicing that it was extreme. They were jumped on by many other members of the community who took their comment to mean that they were anti-LGBT+. As I recall, the comments were not cruel, but they were certainly not understanding or kind. The member who was jumped on only said something in the tags along the lines of ‘Hmm. I believe I have been misunderstood,’ because if I recall correctly, they were pro-LGBT+. I believe they left tumblr, or at least tumblrstake, not long after that. (If I’d taken a screenshot, I could show you—let this be a lesson in keeping your sources lol)

After all of the things that I’ve outlined above—and these are only examples, not the whole story—I don’t know how to say this gently while still being direct. This community needs Elder Oaks’ talk. This community does not love its enemies. This community does not give anyone the benefit of the doubt. In some ways, what I just said is untrue—ex-members are not pushed away or mocked. People who have problems with the church are not dismissed. And what wonderful attributes these are! I adore this community for how universal these attitudes at least appear to be! But the very prophets and apostles that God directly tells us, in the scriptures, are to look out for our spiritual welfare—the very prophets and apostles that love and worry for all of us—are the people that this community has decided are its enemies. If they are your enemies, and you truly believe in the gospel of Christ, you need to treat them like Christ told you to treat your enemies, to love them by giving their words the benefit of the doubt, to show them the ‘principle of charity.’

When you dismiss the prophets and don’t treat them with the same civility that you justly would an ex-member, or dismiss members of the church that don’t treat the prophets the same way you do, you cannot expect to create a spiritual environment. Especially during conference time, when spiritual strength can be found in actually listening to what the prophets are saying, and not just straw-manning them and assuming that they say either exactly what you want them to say or exactly what you don’t want them to say.

I hope, even in this criticism, you’ve been able to feel the love that I have for this community. I believe that every member in it is a good person, who truly seeks the Spirit and to do what is right. But just as the church continues to grow and change to become more in line with God’s will, this community must change too—and with every year I’ve been here, there has only been a steady decline towards hatred and straw-manning. And this community can be so much more! I’ve seen it be a great place for people to grow spiritually together. I’ve seen it be a refuge for LGBT+ members of the church! But at conference time, whenever a speaker steps up and people perceive (sometimes objectively correctly) a disagreement with their own beliefs, it stops being that place.

I’m leaving now. Love you all.

TLDR; I love this community, but it is slowly becoming a spiritually poisonous place that does not give the prophets the benefit of the doubt or seek for spiritual meaning in talks they disagree with. I’m very bad at TLDRs, so please read the whole post.

(1) I’m using the term ‘principle of charity’ to mean the concept of listening to someone’s argument as the strongest version of their argument that it could possibly be—giving the benefit of the doubt, basically the opposite of straw-manning, etc.

P.S. I wanted to get this out before the second session but editing bled into the second session, so I delayed it so that people could have no interruption in their spirituality if nothing happened in the second session. That’s why I only addressed things in the first session.

P.P.S. Whoops I meant to schedule this. Sorry!

#tumblrstake #ldsconf #cjclds stuff #cjcldsconf #general conference #Genconf #religious

[hobbitsetal]

Hobbs’ Dating Advice, Compiled

i’ve been married a whole year, so obviously i know everything.

...okay, definitely not, BUT I have had the benefit of wise advice from wise people and the benefits of seeing various friends and family members go through this whole dating thing, so let’s lay it out!

Before you date someone:

1. Figure out what you want from a relationship. I personally have always wanted to get married. I went into dating relationships with the knowledge that either we would marry or break up, and I went into relationships with the mindset of figuring out which outcome I wanted. You can communicate and set goals more effectively when you know what you’re working toward.

2. Figure out what you want in general. Where do you want to be in 5 years? in 10 years? What would you want to share with somebody? Do you want a family or do you want to be a free spirit? Feelings will fade, but goals can remain and unite. I personally want the whole white-picket-fence-and-kids deal, and I wanted a man who shared that goal. I want to take dance lessons and travel, and I want someone who will do that with me. My sister doesn’t want to marry. If she ever goes out with a guy, it’ll probably be just for fun and without an eye to anything serious.

3. Figure out what is non-negotiable. What are your deal-breakers? Figure those out now because you should have a set of standards to hold your relationships to, not a relationship to form your standards. I want kids. I want to be a stay-at-home mom. I want someone who is welcomed into and becomes part of my family. I married a man who fits these values. Religion and faith fits into this category. How important is spirituality to you and what would you want it to look like? I was very specific--Reformed or bust--but many people are comfortable marrying someone of different background--Catholics marry Protestants, Buddhists marry Christians. It depends on how seriously you take your beliefs. I have thoughts on this, but let’s pretend I have chill. This should be a mixture of common sense and personal. Don’t date someone who has anger issues. Don’t date someone who lies to you. Don’t date someone who wants something completely different from you. For me, it’s common sense to marry a fellow Christian. But it’s entirely personal to marry someone who shares my specific vision for how to serve in my local church. Less is more. These are your deal-breakers.

4. Build a circle of people whom you trust and who value you. Friends or family, you should have someone who has your back and knows you well. Relationships tend to be a tangle of emotions and giddiness and hormones. Friends and family aren’t the ones daydreaming about your lover’s eyes; they’re the ones asking if your lover respects you. You need people who can evaluate your lover objectively.

When you’re dating someone:

1. Evaluate them. I think it’s easy to discourage yourself from being “too intense,” or “throwing them out too soon,” but remember that list of non-negotiables? That comes into play here. I’m not saying ask them to lay out their five-year plan or say how many kids they want on the first date, but I would strongly recommend figuring out their goals as soon as possible. First date, figure out if you like them. I’m a huge fan of dating someone who’s already a friend, but that’s not always possible. My husband and I met while he was going to school in Kentucky, while I live in Louisiana. Our first conversations were over text message and Skype, and we talked about theology (a shared passion, as well as evaluating each other’s beliefs and compatibility with our own beliefs), books, movies, fictional characters, and tv shows. We got into the “so, how many kids do you want?” discussions after we entered into a formal dating relationship. But we also worked through our checklists of important things as early as possible. If he hadn’t wanted kids, no matter how charming and fun he was, I would have ended the relationship. If he hadn’t fit any of my non-negotiable items, I would have ended it. They’re deal-breakers for a reason, and that reason is that I decided long ago that I would not want to build a life without those values and goals.

2. Spend time around other people. This goes back to your circle of trusted people. They know you and they can see better than you how you and your lover interact with each other. When I dated my second boyfriend, I was much less interested in him than I thought I was, and my poor mother attempted to point that out to me. When he came over and played video games with my brother, I’d hang out with my mother in another room. I was so caught up in the pleasant feeling of being liked that I truly did not see how little I was actually interested in the person who liked me. Outsiders saw it. Outside viewpoints are crucial. The flip side is what do other people think of your lover? What do they think of you? A major factor in my relationship with my husband was how highly his friends spoke of him. They could tell me his flaws, if asked, but in between teasing him and flirting with me (thanks, David), they went out of their way to tell me what a great guy he is and how lucky I was to be dating him. He had no reason to impress them. He had every reason to impress me. Their opinions mattered a LOT. And related to the flaws, other people may see stuff you need to work on. Maybe you’re not communicating well. Maybe one of you speaks meanly to the other. If an outsider can comment on the flaw, the two of you have a chance to work on the flaw together. This will help you determine how well this relationship stands up to adversity.

3. Learn to communicate. There’s a reason this piece of advice seems to pop up whenever dating is mentioned, and that reason is that if you (or they!) cannot make your preferences and desires known effectively, your relationship will be doomed to frustration. Whether one of you is afraid of upsetting the other, one of you is adverse to conflict, or one of you has been trained to prioritize others to the point of personal detriment, if you cannot overcome blocks in communication, you cannot learn to function as a team. One of the hardest and most rewarding aspects of dating my husband was learning to call him out on his flaws. It hurt, it sucked, and it was miserable for both of us, but I learned I can trust him and he learned he can trust me. I can trust him to work on the things that hurt me and to prioritize my emotional, mental, and spiritual well-being. He learned he can trust me to be truthful with him at personal cost to me, and that he can trust me to be true to our shared values even when, in the short-term, compromise would be easier. And speaking of compromise, good communication should make that possible. Whether it’s where to spend holidays or where to put the couch or what movie to watch, good communication and good compromise takes your partner’s needs and desires into account and balances them with your own.

4. Figure out how you treat money. I’m putting this one early because this needs to be a consideration. Which of you spends, which of you saves? What are your money habits? Can you trust each other to respect financial boundaries? My husband spends; I make Scrooge look philanthropic. But since we communicate well, we can talk about when to spend money and on what. Sometimes I really do not want to buy that thing he swears he needs and cannot accept his reasons. More often, it’s truly important to him and we agree to buy it. But it’s a team effort and we both enter the discussion fully aware of the other person’s spending habits.

When you’re getting serious:

1. Ask yourself if you can live with this person’s flaws. If they never learn to stop name-calling, if they never overcome that road rage, if they’re always emotional over silly stuff, can you live with that? Everybody has flaws. Nobody is perfect. You will never find somebody who lives up to all of your ideals. So can you live with this person’s flaws?

2. Have you had a chance to see each other at your worst and at your best? I spent part of our early relationship chiding my husband for sulking over stuff. He had the opportunity to call me out on some bare-faced hypocrisy when I chose to throw a fit over something. I’ve seen him road-rage; he’s seen me weasel out of commitments and pretend desperately I am completely unaware of this Very Important Deadline I’ve been procrastinating on. And I’ve seen him apologize for certain behaviors, prioritize something he’s not interested in for the sake of loved ones, learn to bite his tongue to promote peace in familial relationships, and accept challenges and hardships for the sake of crucial goals. His best makes the flaws easy to accept. His best tells me he is worthy of my trust and my admiration. His best makes me want to live with him and share my life and soul with him and help him overcome his flaws so he’s the best all the time. His best makes me want to write essays on why women should envy me. His best has to outweigh his flaws.

3. Does your trusted circle agree that this is a good person for you? My family loves Alex. Their concerns and caveats were heard and discussed. Sometimes we worked on issues; sometimes we determined that their viewpoint wasn’t completely accurate. But my family as a whole agrees that he and I are well-suited to each other, with common interests, common goals, and complementary personalities.

Remember every relationship is different because every personality is different. It’s okay to date multiple people (me). It’s okay to date one and be done (my husband). Your life is always going to be somewhat different from other people’s lives.

#relationships #dating advice #we're just going full mom today

[lady-plantagenet]

♦ for all three sons of York! 😄

Asked via the Headcanon Meme: https://lady-plantagenet.tumblr.com/post/634584063141920769/headcanon-meme.

Darling I apologise for the delay 😭😂, hope you enjoy this semi-historical train of thought. You indulge me xx ☺️☺️ (rest of you get ready for a similar level of uncalled for ridiculous levels of detail)

♦ - Quirks/Hobbies Headcanons

~Edward IV~

Ok, one more grounded in reality and some more Headcanonish:

So, in Lord Edward Lytton-Bulwer’s ‘Last of the Barons’ I uncovered a fascinating (and primary-sourced) fact about our Edward: He engaged in international trades of his own. Apparently, he had his own ships and vessels that would jettison wool to and fro Burgundy. The trading classes, with whom Edward was always on great terms, were initially thrilled and felt a bit of sense of connection because of this. However, it became a bit of a bother when his self-given exemption from custom and duties gave him an unfair competitive advantage. Since reading that, I’ve always seen Edward as someone whose hobbies revolve around these types of matters rather than military ones. I really headcanon trading as a genuine hobby of his. With that, I would also connect other practical as opposed to artistic or conventional pastimes. I always saw Elizabeth Woodville as the big account manager (based on how she ran her crown property), so I headcanon Edward as liking to meddle in the external more merchantile matters, which translates to enjoying himself by making wagers/bets with those around him and always winning whether it be on personal matters or businesses (sometimes even in appropriately on women of the court). Not to mention a talent at games like cards and dice. If he lived today he would be the grand master of monopoly 😂. He wasn’t the most intellectual of men (he was at one point planning on defunding Eton College to get funds), but I always headcanoned he was pretty strong at maths (which was part of a nobleman’s education, but at that time it was mastery of the arts that granted you the reputation of a smartman). Of course, this fits in with his historical interest in alchemy, which I headcanon he was also partly interested in because of the potential of it yielding gold, but upon his marriage, the mystical side beckoned him too.

~ George Duke of Clarence~

I’ve done one for him here, which you can check out. But hell, do I have a lot of headcanons about him so I’ll do another here.

Our George was by all accounts a talented demagogue. His performance in the inheritance dispute indeed adds stock to what chronicles such as Rous Rolls and Crowland have said about his oratory and reasoning talents (which allegedly were rival to Edward’s own). Though some personality quirks could make him appear like a bit of a (popular Headcanon nowadays) himbo: penchant for airing out his grievances, flamboyancy and a great pride which combined with a famous sense of humour leads to instances where it verges into innappropriate levels of macabre (his own death being the prime example).

N.b: and yes I do in fact believe he was drowned in a barrel of wine and by his choosing. I don’t need Shakespeare to tell me this, I need only look at the strong evidence proposing this: a) Margaret Pole’s barrel charm, b) The fact that his head was reported as attached to his body when his body was exhumed centuries later. Drowning in a bath is another possibility, but then again, it was famously a womanly execution and I doubt a man as self-important as George would have been alright with the association, c) The fact that contemporaries such as Mancini (among others) have stated that this is the manner in which he died. Shakespeare’s play just further reflects that at that time (as in closer to 1478 then we are now) this was the consensus. Not to mention that in Richard III he wasnt technically drowned but stabbed and then thrown in a barrel. Arguments against center around ‘this seems just a bit too crazy’ but stop there.

So where was I? Oh yes. So in spite of that, I headcanon teenage George as very resentful of those who thought him bumbling, giddy and unserious (young Richard especially), because well, he was very touchy about his pride and saw himself as a prince worthy of deference and gravity (multitude of evidence for this). His charming nature never left him even as he grew bitter but instead he learned to harness it into a mask in order to induce others into error and subestimation. Indeed, much of his earlier successes hinged on the fact that Edward didn’t expect that level of planning (and betrayal) from him. Nevertheless, he never hid his talents completely, he had a very astute legal mind and I headcanon him as having a hobby for the law since he was a young boy and realised how useful this knowledge would prove in time and loved it on an intellectual level as he engaged with debates on matters from trusts laws to constitutional canonical and jurisprudential matters, first with his tutors, then his brothers, then Warwick and then his chief supporters and friends at Warwick and Tutbury when he became a magnate post-1472. Of course, I feel like this fits in with the impression of an argumentative and opinionated man as exuded from the historical figure. I also headcanon him as being delighted to have had Caxton’s Games and Playes of Chess (1474) dedicated to him (becoming one of his patron around this time historically). It remains the second book printed in English (first being Anthony’s dictes and sayings of philosophers - I think) and I headcanon him as doing the head in of all those around him with discussions and debates around the book’s message XD.

~Richard III~

Richard gets a reputation in fiction (where other people get most of their headcanons from) as being extremely serious. I personally share this Headcanon and I feel it was the most striking difference between him and his brothers’ personalities. I think he had very little ‘quirks’ as it were. Though there was this author (haven’t read the book) Jonathan Hughes who somehow manages to write an entire book about Richard’s interesting divination. He draws onto some vaguely paganistic symbols among Richard III’s choice of clothing and such, and posits that he had some interest in pre-conquest Northern religious culture. Anne Neville who by all accounts seemed to have had some interest in mysticism (read and discussed Ghostly Grace by a German mystic with her mother-in-law at length) I headcanon bonded with Richard over conversing on these types of topics. Therefore, I headcanon him as having a (very very lowkey because, as I said, he took great care in presenting himself as conventional and unsuspicious) hobby for northern paganisms, myths, prophecies and the like. I think it would explain what appears to be the historical figures ‘apparent hypocritical personality: Only banning benevolences after first trying to acquire them, having Shore pay penance when he himself had fathered bastards (John probably during his first year of marriage if Kendall’s reasoning is right) and aspiring and holding others to strict chivalric values of which he often fell short. The signs of stress found in isotopic analysis on his bones however makes me think that he was aware of these contradictions. Of course, he could have been stressed around the time of his death for other obvious reasons, but I’m not getting into that here. I suppose my headcanon of him as very utilitarian (yes I know Bentham came centuries later but, you know, he didn’t exactly invent this manner of thought) in his beliefs classifies as a quirk? Haha. As for hobbies, I think his scoliosis made him eschew some of the more physically demanding types of sports, so I see him as fairly bookish and like his brother George, extremely interested in the law as a hobby (though nowadays we wrongly see it as a rather vocational discipline). Though he shared the interest in matters of jurisprudence with George (about which they both strongly disagreed Richard taking the less fiscally conservative stance), he was more interested in criminal law matters (which checks out as he had made reforms on the criminal law and bail). I think he was genuinely concerned with justice, just a bit self-contradictory in his approach and diverse in his spirituality (the last more headcanonish)

#to everyone: this meme is still open ☺️☺️ #there you go sorry sorry for the delay #but as you can see I do love my detail #a bygone era #tagged that for AO3 future chapters reference #george of clarence #edward iv #richard iii #🍷❤️ #will add read more function soon #basically I love them all #I love making fun of them but nothing will convince me that they weren’t indeed talented young men full of talents and smarts #which by all accounts accords with historical fact #george plantagenet