#their pasts inform their worldview and actions and— | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

femmefatalevibe · 10 months

Text

Femme Fatale Guide: Tips To Become More Emotionally Intelligent

Embrace self-awareness & self-reflection: Observe how you feel, behave, and how people generally respond to your words/actions in different situations

Practice self-regulation: Learn to differentiate between your feelings and the actions that would be appropriate in a specific setting or interaction. Internalize that feelings are fleeting and non-factual. You're in control of how you respond/(don't) act on these emotions

Engage in active listening: Pay attention to what others are saying with the intent of understanding, not responding

Focus on emotional differentiation: Understand where your thoughts, feelings, intentions, and opinions end and another person's identity/perception begins

Display radical empathy and acceptance: Understand that almost all people's words and actions result from their own beliefs, past experiences, and current life circumstances/priorities. Put yourself in their shoes when attempting to understand their choices, behaviors, and times they come to you to discuss a problem, success, or major life decision. Accept that you can only control what you do. Very little of other people's actions/the world's workings are personal. Things are happening around you, not to you

Let go of your ego: View yourself as objectively as possible with the potential for improvement. Abolish any superior complex or overwhelming desire to prove your self-importance in others' lives and decisions

Remain open-minded: Question your own beliefs and opinions. Stay curious as to why you believe them to be true/authentic to you. Allow your opinions to change or have the capacity to modify your beliefs upon hearing new information. Understand your worldview and values are valid, but they're not definitively correct beliefs, just because they resonate/feel comfortable for you

Be receptive to feedback: Embrace constructive criticism as a self-improvement tool. Approach it with curiosity and optimism, not as a personal attack

Differentiate between your feelings and capabilities: Your thoughts are not facts. Remember you can do things you don't feel like doing most of the time (work, waking up in the morning, working out, etc.). Learn the difference between being a slave to your emotions and genuinely running out of energy

1K notes · View notes

writing-with-sophia · 4 months

Note

How to get into the mind of a character? Honestly this can be for your OWN character or a fictional character. I'm wanting to write for characters- headcanons and fanfictions- and I'm so afraid I'll write them so uncanny to how they actually are.

How to get into the mind of a character?

To get into the mind of a character, you have to understand that character, believe in that character, and even "live" the character's life. But we all know each individual is different, and we cannot live different lives. A normal person who grew up in peacetime cannot fully understand the hardships of a warrior, and a doctor cannot know the thoughts of a mafia boss.

So, how can writers create believable characters? How can they possibly offer a believable soldier, cop, detective, alcoholic, or any given character type if they themselves haven't lived as them? How can they possibly offer a believable character in a situation that they've never been in?

Here are some tips you can use to get into the minds of characters:

Tip 1: Observe real-life people

To create well-rounded characters, observe real people around you. Pay attention to their behaviors, mannerisms, speech patterns, and thought processes. Take note of how they express emotions, handle conflicts, and make decisions. Drawing from real-life observations can add depth and authenticity to your characters. You can also search for novels and movies with different themes, study how characters with different pasts, biographies, occupations, and personalities act, behave, gesture, and speak. The best way is to prepare a small notebook and a pen so you can carry it with you wherever you go.

Tip 2: Create a detailed character profile

Develop a detailed character profile that includes information such as their age, background, beliefs, values, goals, and fears. Consider their relationships with other characters and how these dynamics influence their thoughts and actions. Delve into the character's past and explore significant events that have shaped them. Consider their upbringing, traumas, successes, and failures. These can provide you with a roadmap for understanding the character's mindset.

Tip 3: Use internal monologues and journaling

Imagine the character's internal thoughts and dialogues with themselves. Consider what they might be thinking in different situations, their hopes, dreams, and fears. (And why do they dream of that? Why are they afraid of that thing? What in the past made them afraid? Always asking questions.) Writing internal monologues or journal entries from the character's perspective can help you delve into their mindset and gain insight into their unique voice.

Tip 4: Consider their external influences

Characters are influenced by their environment, culture, and society. Reflect on how external factors such as family, friends, societal norms, or even the story's setting impact their thoughts and behaviors. This will help you portray their worldview more accurately.

Tip 5: Study the source material

If you're writing about an existing character from a book, TV show, or movie, immerse yourself in the source material. Pay attention to their dialogue, actions, and interactions with other characters. Take note of their personality traits, motivations, and backstory. This will help you develop a strong foundation for understanding the character. For example, recently I suddenly became interested in Nightwing (do you know him? Nightwing from the Batman series!), and I wanted to write a few short stories about him. So I found all the comics and movies that featured Nightwing and watched them one by one. I don't take notes because I have a pretty good memory (especially for characters I like), but I still recommend taking notes on special things to note.

Tip 6: Practice free writing

Set aside time for free writing exercises where you write from the character's point of view. Allow your thoughts to flow without judgment or editing. Just write, write, and write. You can reread and make corrections after you're done. Remember to gather your posts in one place; otherwise, you'll lose or forget them (like me!).

Getting into the mind of a character is an ongoing process that requires continuous exploration and refinement. The more you invest in understanding your character's thoughts, feelings, and motivations, the more compelling and authentic your writing will become.

Additionally, you can read my articles on how to write an effective character here:

How to create a superbad villain

How to make a villain's appearance memorable

Basic questions for your character

Describing a villain's appearance in a natural way

Create an effectively past for character

Common character motivations

How to create a good main character

How to avoid the instance where a secondary character stands out more/ is more lovable?

Character flaws

Writing a good Anti-Hero

Character positive traits

How to write an elderly main character?

Protagonist who is a ballerina

How to write a believeable egotistical character

183 notes · View notes

novlr · 25 days

Note

what is a good way to introduce side characters into a story without being overly descriptive

Interesting characters are essential to telling a great story. While your main characters are the stars of the show, side characters play a crucial role in adding depth, complexity, and realism to your narrative. However, introducing these supporting players can be a challenge, especially if you want to avoid the dreaded info dump. Let’s explore some effective ways to introduce side characters without overwhelming your readers with too much information at once.

The importance of side characters

Before we dive into the techniques for introducing side characters, let’s take a moment to appreciate their significance. Side characters serve many purposes in a story, from providing comic relief to offering a fresh perspective on the main plot. They can also act as foils for your protagonists, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses through contrast. Additionally, well-developed side characters can make your fictional world feel more authentic and lived-in, as if it exists beyond the confines of the main storyline.

Introduce side characters gradually

One of the most effective ways to introduce side characters without info dumping is to do so gradually. Instead of bombarding your readers with a character’s entire life story in one go, reveal details about them over time. Start with a brief description of their appearance, mannerisms, or role in the story, and then sprinkle in additional information as the narrative progresses. This approach allows readers to get to know the character organically, just as they would in real life.

Show, don’t tell

While it’s almost cliché now, another key strategy for introducing side characters is to show, rather than tell, who they are. Instead of simply listing a character’s attributes or history, demonstrate who they are through their actions, dialogue, and interactions with other characters. This allows readers to draw their own conclusions about the character based on what they observe, rather than being told what to think.

Use dialogue to reveal character

Dialogue is another powerful tool for introducing side characters without info dumping. Through conversations with other characters, side characters can reveal their personalities, motivations, and backstories in a natural and organic way. This allows you to convey important information without resorting to lengthy exposition or narration. For example, a side character might mention a past experience or share an opinion that sheds light on their worldview. By weaving these details into the dialogue, you can create a more nuanced and believable portrayal of the character.

Connect side characters to the main plot

To make side characters feel integral to your story, it’s important to connect them to the main plot in meaningful ways. Rather than having them exist in a vacuum, show how their actions and decisions impact the central narrative. This not only makes the side characters more relevant but also helps to create a more cohesive and interconnected story. For instance, a side character’s seemingly minor decision could inadvertently set off a chain of events that alters the course of the main plot. By establishing these connections, you give readers a reason to care about the side characters and their roles in the story.

Include a subplot

You can develop your side characters by writing them into a subplot. By giving them their own storylines that intersect with the main plot, you create opportunities to explore their motivations, challenges, and growth. These subplots can also serve to heighten the stakes of the main narrative, as the actions of side characters may have unintended consequences that ripple throughout the story. By carefully crafting these subplots, you can add depth and complexity to your side characters without overwhelming the reader.

Summing up

Introducing side characters without info dumping is a skill that takes practice and finesse. By revealing details gradually, showing rather than telling, using dialogue effectively, and connecting side characters to the main plot, you can create a rich and immersive fictional world that feels authentic and engaging.

Remember, side characters are more than just background noise; they are an essential part of any great story. By giving them the attention and development they deserve, you’ll take your writing to the next level and keep your readers coming back for more.

95 notes · View notes

krashlite · 2 months

Text

In case you found this post before the Start Post, I’m going through and looking at the matching wounds for every LimL team! How they were hurt in past seasons and how this season addressed that harm

Starting off strong with TIES! The name calls back to team BEST, however I wanna point out the differences between the two. First of all and most notably, Bdubs has been swapped for Impulse- and that greatly changes the group! They both fall into the habit of being a yes-man, but where Bdubs tends to be very ambitious with his support, Impulse is a lot more cooperative in a group setting. With this, TIES is able to set very clear, achievable goals and accomplish them without all the bells and whistles. We need a tower? Tango’s got it! It’s crooked, but he’s got it. Skynet? It looks scuffed but they’ve got it!!!

NOT ONLY THAT but TIES and BEST have a different fundamental worldview! TIES values the group above all else. They need to be there for each other, to stand by one another and to uplift the group no matter what. They’re bound by their Tie to each other (ha). But BEST? BEST valued their IMAGE above all else. They’re the good guys, they needed to set an example for the server. It didn’t matter what was going on in their team, they needed to project a strong image, they needed to be the Best (ha 2).

And that’s One piece of the matching wound in TIES: they all come from dysfunctional alliances

This is especially true of Tango! Tango, in 3L and LL, was cast to the side in every alliance he tried to join. Not only that, but in the alliances he Was a part of, he always ended up getting physically harmed. In 3L it was the firing squad, and in LL it was when Bdubs turned red the first time and then when Bdubs was the boogeyman. Not only that, but in both seasons he was only valued for what he could physically provide.

In 3L it was partially beef/leather, but mostly information. The only alliances that stuck were the ones that wanted information from him as a double agent. The second he picked a side, the other went after him. This is despite the fact that he Did have a day1 alliance in the form of the village people, but that alliance barely made it to the fourth episode, with Etho and Impulse sharing the wool castle and Tango being left to fend for himself. Then in LL, BEST had a tendency to use him as a Life dispenser, if someone got hurt then Tango’s there. Outside of that, he really wasn’t valued- something he even confronts them about throughout the season. It’s to the point that Tango’s dying action is to trap BEST, to destroy the place that caused him this much harm (granted his death was unintentional)

Impulse was on the other side of things- yes he did tend to be overlooked in many of his alliances, but really his downfall in those alliances came from him overlooking others. Let me explain- in 3L he tried to play all sides and subsequently sabotaged every single alliance he was a part of. Throughout all of it he kept Saying his heart belonged to the Crastle, but his actions continued proving otherwise. He overlooked their concerns because he thought he could prove himself, but only turned them against him. And of course they turned on him! Of course Bdubs specifically turned!! Impulse’s loyalties had been dubious at best and it was hard to know where he stood despite what he said

Then in LL he tries to be a part of a functional team, except the Southlands was on constant rocky ground, especially when people started dropping down to Red. Impulse’s immediate reaction wasn’t to try and bring them back, it was to treat them as an unavoidable threat. So stealing the wither skull from Joel and Grian’s bunker and trying to plan for when Mumbo eventually came back to trap their towers. He’s not the only person to do this both in the southlands and in LL general, but to me it feels like a contradiction. If you want the team to stay together, keep them together! Don’t turn your back the second someone becomes a danger to themself and others

Admittedly, I haven’t seen much of Etho’s side of things so sorry if his is off! But for Etho, he has a tendency to try and act alone. Yes his group has a plan, but he always has a side plan like the enderporter in 3L. What’s unique about this is it’s usually something that only directly affects him should it go wrong, but if it goes well then the entire group benefits. He shields other people from getting hurt at the expense of himself- except they don’t see it so they don’t know to step in. In fact the only person who knew to step in was Bdubs, as seen throughout LL but ESPECIALLY with the Wither fight. Afterwards he even remarks “Etho couldn’t do it without me, I Gave Him The Courage”

However, the opposite is also true. When he acts alone, consequences don’t follow him as closely as they probably should. In 3L it meant when he moved to the swamp he accidentally split up the village group- leaving Impulse and Tango stranded and actually starting them on their arcs. Yes they followed him out there, but that was basically an Invisible alliance, never really getting called upon outside of what Dogwarts needed. It also meant when he started conflict between Dogwarts and the Crastle with the tnt missile attempts, Joel ends up taking the brunt of that

Etho inadvertently hides himself and I think that’s very fascinating

But overall, something Tango, Impulse, and Etho all have in common is that their issues all started in 3L, continued into LL, and were addressed in DL.

Tango finally got an ally who loved and cared for him through virtue of being himself. Impulse was not only Seen in his alliance, but he was paired with someone who he couldn’t ignore or avoid. Etho’s consequences were linked to his soulmate, meaning he couldn’t hide himself no matter what he did. They were encouraged to be there for their partner and took that in stride

But again, their issues were confronted. Skizz’s issues weren’t

For Skizz, he has a habit of putting his team before himself. In 3L that meant following Ren to a T, being the exact soldier Ren needed him to be and doing everything in his power to help Dogwarts succeed. It meant keeping his cool when Ren called for a retreat but Skizz wanted to keep fighting and it meant charging headfirst into the Crastle when it was revealed they had the Red Winter axe. Skizz gave his whole life to Dogwarts! And to quote bojack horseman real quick- I’m not talking about his Death, I’m talking about his Life, he gave his whole Life

In LL putting his team first meant trying to act as leader to this very dysfunctional group. Skizz was the main one coming up with plans, he’s the one that made the meeting room, their shields, everything! But really, he wasn’t regarded as their leader, Bdubs was. Bdubs, who is headstrong and overly ambitious with his plans, Bdubs who was quick to criticize the group’s shortcomings and Bdubs who had a switch like a hair trigger if he turned Red or became the boogeyman, who Split The Fort In Two when he was exiled.

Skizz did everything for BEST and how did they repay him? By running, by leaving him behind when a tnt cannon failed. What Skizz learned there is when you do Everything for other people, you end up with nothing. You end up dead in the enemy’s castle, you end up cornered by the sharp ends of three crossbows. And I think this is what he’s responding to at the end of LL- mimicking Mumbo’s reckless attacks and even going back to get revenge on Ren for his boogeyman trap earlier in the season (said trap Skizz had previously complimented and said he wasn’t even mad about). It’s giving “no more Mr Nice Guy” and I’m here for it. He wouldn’t be the faceless defender of his team, he would be the cause of their demise- being there for Tango AND Bdubs’s deaths while spectating as a ghost

But again, Skizz wasn’t in DL, he didn’t have an alliance where he could recover. He was never given the space to learn to give comfortably, and to learn to receive support from his team.

And with this, I think it’s Fascinating that LimL started off in the way that it did

Skizz was targeted by the boogeymen not once, but TWICE in the very first episode. The immediate response by the server was to form a protection squad around him. It was to Stand By Him. This contradicts the mindset he died with in LL- that the world will take until there’s nothing left of you to give. And I think that’s action was ESSENTIAL to him being able to function as the leader of TIES

In case it wasn’t clear, the three matching wounds for TIES is 1) they come from dysfunctional alliances, 2) they struggle to function as an individual in a group setting, and 3) they habitually give more than they take

So TIES has a pretty strong understanding of one another with their similarities, BUT they also have another thing in common, a shaky past with Bdubs. I touched on this in all of their sections, but all four of them had issues with Bdubs in previous seasons. Tango was singled out by him several times despite sharing an alliance. Impulse was permakilled by him Twice despite being in the same group. Skizz clashed with him because of his headstrong behavior and Etho sidelined himself because of that same behavior.

I don’t even think they realized this at the start, ESPECIALLY not Etho- who had never been directly wronged by Bdubs. But Impulse trying to pry an apology out of him via gifting him a clock definitely conveyed this- why? Bdubs, in fact, did not apologize. He didn’t even see the problem. This is familiar to Impulse, its familiar to Tango, and it’s especially familiar to Skizz, having just been boogey-killed by him

So really it’s no surprise that they ended up having conflicts with the Clockers!

Start Post | The Clockers

#trafficblr #limited life #team TIES #tangotek #impulsesv #ethoslab #skizzleman #not including the Bdubs tag even though he’s very much present for this one

80 notes · View notes

dailyadventureprompts · 3 months

Text

Due to a unique confluence of dashboard alchemy this March 15th (A Merry Ides to those that celebrate 🗡️🗡️🗡️) I had an interesting thought regarding fallout new vegas:

If you strip away the rhetoric and the goofy football pads, you'll find that the fundamental motivating factor of Caesar's Legion is male insecurity, with everything from how they treat women to their primitivist view of technology drawing from the same fear of immasculization that fuels all "redpill" movements.

(This is to say nothing of the use of roman iconography and the "retvrn" dogwhistle about abandoning modern "decadence" and harkening back to the rigour of an imaginary past)

This casts Caesar as our Andrew Tate figure, a charismatic ideologue who pitches a worldview that promises to impose order on the frightening chaos of reality. His philosophy is a salespitch targeted directly at his listener's insecurities but meant only to benefit him: " you are afraid of being weak. I know what strength is, listen to me. by internalizing my words and spreading my message you will become strong." Of course the difference is that Caesar's empire is built on expansionist violence where Tate's is built on insecure teenagers feeding misogyny into the algorithm for the sake of engagement. Either way it creates a hierarchy that doubles as an information bubble, where position within the hierarchy is determined by who best can adhere to/rebroadcast the leader's message, identical to how an mlm ships product.

This quite fits with a watsonian reading of fallout: the wasteland is a hostile and terrifying place formed in the shadow of an objectively failed 50s (styled) traditionalist patriarchy. Though society may have collapsed, the people who survived inherited that society's rigid view of what a man should be like (strong and driven by the acquisition of material and status) a view largely incomparable with the new environment (starvation, radiation, and mutant dinosaurs will kill you no matter who you are or how much stuff you have). Since institutionalized masculinity had failed, people in the wasteland were forced to look for new paradigms of what masculinity (read: strength) looked like, a void into which Caesar's ultraregresive worldview fit perfectly.

From a doylist perspective however, I'm not sure the writers were really thinking about gender all that much during the rushed development of FNV. Like just about every other aspect of legion society that wasn't cut for time, everything about them seems to be evil for the sake of evil. However If there's one thing you can say about the underbaked concept it was a real hit with social regressives incapable of reading deeper. Unironic pro-legion discussion of Caesar's ideology has been an on ramp to turn insecure nerds into fascists the same way that ideologies like Caesar's have been turning insecure jocks for decades. It's poe's law in action: the developers gestured at fachism but failed to do enough with it to prevent a portion of their player base from becoming radicalized.

#dapper digresses #fallout new vegas #ides of march

131 notes · View notes

elcucurucho · 10 months

Text

The thing about q!Roier is he doesn’t really… talk about his emotions. He’s pretty outgoing, and he can be jokingly dramatic about some things, but when something really matters to him he gets quiet. It’s not him ignoring his emotions or repressing them, to me it’s more that he has a very deep understanding of his own emotions. When he feels something, it’s a fact of life. He doesn’t feel the need to explain because to him there’s no ambiguity, it just is. Why would he talk about how he feels? It would be like talking about how the sky is blue.

Roier is very pragmatic. He likes to make jokes, but he has a very firm grasp on the reality of a situation. How he feels is a tool to inform what his next actions will be. He doesn’t emotionally lash out when things go wrong, he adjusts his internal worldview and then continues on. During the abueloier situation he was very clear about how the situation made him feel and what he needed moving forward. He hates the federation, but he has no power to do anything about it so it doesn’t come up unless someone specifically asks. When Bobby died, he wasn’t as emotionally expressive as Jaiden because it’s not how he operates. He deals in facts. Physically, there was no changing the past or bringing Bobby back, he was just gone. Emotionally, if Roier could do anything to bring him back he would do it in a heartbeat. To Roier, both are equally true pieces of information, and they don’t contradict. So instead of talking about it, which would do nothing, he keeps building his city to honor Bobby’s memory.

#qsmp #roier #he’s such an interesting character and I feel like it gets overlooked bc he doesn’t explicitly state his emotions out loud a lot

212 notes · View notes

kyrieren · 26 days

Text

Yashiro and/ versus Kageyama: The singularity of humanhood

Warning: Wall of text (about 1500 words) (ʘ‿ʘ) (ʘ‿ʘ) (ʘ‿ʘ)

"People ... are full of contradictions. They’re lonely. And then they’re not. They’re missed. And then they are not."

This monologue of Yashiro reveals the reasons why Kageyama and he are unable to forge a romantic relationship. The ways they deal with the outer world and themselves contradict each other, rendering them incompatible. Their respective mental burdens billow whenever they are together during high school. Yashiro confronts his homosexuality head-on, embracing it aloud, while Kageyama conceals it, even from his own awareness. It's a tragic paradox, where two individuals grappling with the same matter yet employing starkly contrasting coping mechanisms, making their interactions all the more painful to witness. However, no one is really at fault. People are just different, living in different universes, which entails the ultimate singularity of humanhood.

Yashiro has always been that observant and astute kind of person, perceptive enough to discern much about others, yet conversely, is taken into account and understood too little by other characters. Seeking for torture, aware of the world's inherent cruelty, Yashiro adopts increasingly questionable behaviors, inviting insults and even physical assaults, and hopefully Kageyama's notice too. This self-destructive persona becomes his armor against past trauma, a role he convinces himself to fully embody, albeit at a cost that may appear excessive to others, leading Kageyama to perceive him as self-centered. Despite the fabrication of his persona, Yashiro is candid about one aspect of himself: his attraction to men, a truth that challenges Kageyama's own understanding of himself.

On the contrary, Kageyama's obtuseness isn't inherent but rather a chosen path in life. Ignorance and conformity are his chosen coping mechanism. He follows the footsteps of his parents by enrolling in med school and becoming a doctor; dodges the “danger” of not being straight by finding a woman whenever somebody forces him to confront his true sexuality. Kageyama is that typical type of person who meticulously adheres to social norms, blending in with his family and the heteronormative world around him. However, this self-protective mechanism also endangers Yashiro whose deepest fear lies in rejection and emotional pain.

In this analysis, I’m going to consolidate Yashiro and Kageyama’s dynamic in two symbolism systems: the perceptions (lens vs glasses) and the defense (umbrellas, 2 vs 1).

1. The perceptions (lens vs glasses)

Lens

Lens is typically associated with observation, perception, and worldview. Yashiro’s act of stealing Kageyama’s lens case manifests his desperate yearning to be "seen" by his crush. Through various actions, Yashiro strives to show Kageyama who he is as a person and his aspirations for their relationship: he attends Kageyama’s father’s funeral, shares deeply personal information with Kageyama, and even sexually assaults his classmate to provoke a reaction from Kageyama.

As Yashiro takes the lens case, his inner monologue speaks, “But if he ever rejects me, it’ll probably hurt me. This is… obviously not… something I’m used to feeling.” Yashiro is acutely aware of the potential emotional toll of pursuing this unfamiliar feeling. Despite the risks of rejection and mental anguish, he still bravely proceeds for the desire to escape his perpetual solitude. All he truly seeks is someone who cares about him. Actually, he is asking for just a tiny meager.

Nevertheless, Yashiro's intense persona, shaped by childhood trauma, becomes too much for Kageyama to handle. Consequently, Kageyama consistently avoids and evades the possibility of being gay, which Yashiro persistently presents to him. In fact (or figuratively), Kageyama has given his answer before Yashiro even mentions about the matter.

This rainy scene involving Kageyama, his girl, and Yashiro conveys a profound message about Kageyama's stance. Though the simple dialogue is about Kageyama losing his lens, the underlying theme is about him losing his ability to truly "see" because he chooses not to. He deliberately avoids "seeing" Yashiro to avoid confronting the uncomfortable truth about himself and his sexuality. The girl's remark, "What a waste," goes beyond the monetary value of his loss; it hints at the greater losses Kageyama can imagine at that moment. He loses the world in its true form and his true, authentic self - which navigates us humans throughout life. He reserves himself by never letting that self interact and be reflected from people, leading to a gradual decline in his ability to empathize and grow emotionally. Ironically, his attempt to protect the self eventually ends up destroying it. That's why he grows into such a dense and apathetic bloke.

Glasses

I believe the glasses on his face are meant to be sarcastic. His eyes are not presented in the above panel, instead only his glasses. Glasses are typically a tool for better vision, yet in this particular case, become a symbol of his self-imposed blindness. As Kageyama can’t “see” the world with his own eyes, he chooses to rely on external aids – the social norms, to filter the world for him. A man with glasses is actually a blind man.

2. The defenses (umbrellas and 2 vs 1)

The visual storytelling in these panels is masterful, capturing the intricate dynamics and stark contrasts between the characters and their internal struggles. Here we have black vs transparent umbrella, being accompanied vs alone under the rain. Let’s not forget about the rain – the befallen suffering, and in this particular scene, it could be interpreted as the looming threat they pose to each other or the mental barriers they avoid confronting. Yashiro doesn’t want to be rejected and get hurt, while Kageyama is reluctant to acknowledge his homosexuality, given the societal stigmas.

The umbrellas

I once wrote an analysis including my interpretation of the transparent umbrella Yashiro gives Aoi, if you’re interested, please scroll to the end of this post to read. To summarize that part, that umbrella represents Yashiro’s deep empathy and the wish to end the suffering of somebody who experiences the same trauma he endures. Transparency stands for “being seen”, or at least, in this scene, the wish to be. With all normal to absurd acts, despite the risks, Yashiro is trying to make Kageyama realize who he is as a person (yet of course, acting out on his façade simultaneously). On the contrary to Yashiro, Kageyama’s black umbrella symbolizes his coping mechanism, blocking any outcast that possibly derails him from the safe uniformity. Yashiro, the friend behind him, becomes the epitome of the abject, representing Kageyama's own fear of straying from social norms.

2 vs 1

Additionally, the contrast between Kageyama being accompanied and Yashiro walking alone adds more weight to the scene.

Kageyama's aversion to be odd out drives him to seek validation through external factors, such as his relationship with women, to anchor himself firmly within social norms, which also echoes in “Don’t stay gold”. By being with someone, Kageyama subconsciously affirms his belongingness and shields himself from ostracization.

On the other hand, Yashiro, though broken and “twisted beyond repair”, is risking facing his utmost terror of being emotionally damaged. Walking alone signifies the will to keep himself survive without the buffer of external relationships or societal validation. It must have taken him aggrandizing bravery to reach that point of vulnerability, risking facing his utmost terror of being emotionally damaged.

As Yashiro persists, Kageyama withdraws further. Ultimately, Kageyama’s avoidance calls for Yashiro’s ultimate fear of rejection. The risk becomes too overwhelming for Yashiro to endure, prompting him to halt his pursuit. Eventually, they both settle into a common medium of ceasefire, which is friendship. While Kageyama maintains a superficial, pitying and somewhat indebted concern for Yashiro, Yashiro secretly harbors his unrequited love that spans a painfully long period, nearly two decades.

3. The singularity of humanhood

The oneshot closes with the scene where Yashiro cries at the balcony while clenching Kageyama’s lens case.

“People are… full of contradictions. They’re lonely. And then they’re not. They’re missed. And then they are not.”

Yashiro and Kageyama’s encounter invites an opportunity for a break from their homeostasis of solitude, yet eventually, it plunges them deeper into their initial mental state. Despite being friends and their shared attraction to men, they are universes apart, operating on different systems. They can't find solace from each other. They’re both lonely and yet they’re also not. They both exist, yet they also don't.

Yashiro has always been alone. However, he resembles a stray cat. A stray cat only becomes pathetic if adopted, petted, loved and then abandoned. If Yashiro is never rejected, he is never pathetic or truly lonely. He may be abjected, have nothing or nobody, but he retains the one constant: himself, the only ally that can accompany, protect and keep him survive.

On the very contrary, Kageyama, in conforming to societal expectations for safety, sacrifices his authenticity and inner connection. He may be with others, but he can’t be with himself. Kageyama is so empty inside. Living a life without an authentic self can be just as tragically lonely as physical solitude.

Now who really is the lonely one? Who will be missed and who will not? Yashiro the ever outcast with an overwhelming persona but nobody is taking him into account? Or Kageyama the self-deprived, while conforming to social expectations, lacks a genuine identity?

Read my other analysis including the transparent umbrella of Aoi here:

20 notes · View notes

cobwebcorner · 7 months

Text

How to Character

Was reminiscing for the days when I, as a small teen, wrote horrendous zelda fanfic and how I really really wanted to be able to write everyone in character but I had no idea how. I ended up giving everyone one or two Quirks or Bits and that was it, that was their character. I made Skullkid a pervert and gave Ganondorf a gambling problem. It was the best I could do at 16. In service to past me, I thought I'd put together a ramble about how to write a pre-existing character In Character. Maybe it'll help someone who's just starting out.

Point 1: He wouldn't Fucking Say That Check the canon and determine how the character talks. Are they formal or informal? Do they use sayings from a particular region? Do they swear or not? In most cases older characters aren't going to be using the most hip slang, and will be a little more formal. Also, no one should be talking like a therapist (unless they are a therapist. Hannibal fandom gets a pass). Here's an example of a character voice breakdown: Albert Wesker speaks somewhat formally, is likely to use complex vocabulary or 'science-y' language (fucking complete local saturation goddammit) (but he does not do this as often as you'd think), and doesn't swear unless it's a dire situation. He also doesn't use slang.

Now there's another layer to dialog to consider too: directness, lying, euphemisms, and hypocrisy. These are things that can vary depending on which characters are talking, what they're talking about, and if they're in public or private. In general, you're more likely to be direct and truthful with friends and loved ones, while strangers are more likely to get told white lies, vague euphemisms, or to be redirected entirely off of sensitive topics. This isn't true in all cases, so it's another thing to watch out for in the canon. An example: Luis Serra and Leon Kennedy (Remake edition) are both very cagey with each other from the start. Leon has to badger Luis multiple times just to get an answer for why Luis is helping him. Luis is exceptionally good at dodging questions he doesn't want to answer, and for his part, Leon has no interest in explaining his mission or backstory to this shady guy.

Point 2: He Wouldn't Fucking Do That Here are some aspects to consider when plotting a character's actions.

Morality: What are the character's values? What are their hard lines in the sand, and what do they see as a gray area? What are their goals? How important to them are those goals, and what are they willing to sacrifice to reach them? What kinds of things can push them to break with their values, or even rewrite them completely?

Intelligence: This isn't just 'how smart are they' on a pure IQ level. How much do they think things through, versus acting on instinct? Do they panic? Do they have a plan or are they flying by the seat of their pants? Do they think quickly, or do they need time to process? Are they really confident about some inaccurate piece of information that could lead them to wrong conclusions (see also: distorted worldviews, best applied to villains)? What are their biases? Are they observant or do they miss a lot of things?

Emotions: Are they repressed or are they in touch with their feelings? Do they mask their feelings, or are they openly emotional? Do they compartmentalize? How much self-control do they have? Are they hot-tempered or cold? Once they've been angered, does it burn out quickly or do they hold a grudge for ages? What scares them, and how brave are they when they have to face those things? How about their emotional intelligence? Do they have any idea why they're acting the way they are, or are they not thinking about it? (It's fine and normal for you, the author, to understand how a character is feeling more than the character does. Also, more importantly, there's ways to convey how they're feeling other than just having the character say it out loud) It's better to think of all these things as sliders instead of modes.

Point 3: Shipping. Yeah I know why you're all here This is an area where we have to make up a lot of stuff ourselves. Either the canon doesn't dwell on the romances and leaves us lacking in detail, or the two characters never got together in canon (or, cough, never even met), so we have to figure out how they would work in a relationship by our lonesome. How do you do that while keeping people in character?

Step 1: build up each character's sexuality, their relationship with their sexuality/sex in general, their taste in other people, and how they react to feelings.

Example using canon reference: Ada Wong has a canonical soft spot for Leon Kennedy. You can then look at Leon's character traits / actions and use that to figure out what Ada's tastes are. She rarely expresses this softness openly, and enjoys teasing him and running off. From this, we can guess that she's probably not the type to settle down as a domestic housewife and invest in a serious, traditional long-term relationship. Example without canon reference: Vergil Sparda managed to make a son, but we've never seen him in a relationship of any kind and we know very little about Nero's mother (other than she was in a cult that worshiped Vergils' father so…there's some interesting implications). Instead, we can make guesses about Vergil's tastes based on what he values, as well as his own character traits. Vergil's a proud perfectionist who values power above all things. He is constantly driven to prove himself. So, it's a safe guess that he would be drawn to people who are strong fighters or otherwise highly skilled in their field, or people who boost his ego (again, see: one night stand with a woman from a cult that worshiped his father).

Building up what two characters' tastes are, as well as what things they might hold in common, is very useful for the 'getting together' stage. If you're shipping two characters, you probably already have an idea why you think they would work together. Just invest that into their characterization as they encounter each other.

Step 2: staying themselves while staying together I think it's tempting to start following a "this is what characters in love do" playbook once you've gotten your lovebirds together, instead of considering what the characters would really be like in a relationship. I see so many of those 'headcanon' posts going around that just sound like generic lists of behaviors instead of things a specific character would do based on their history and personality. I'm going to point back up to the 'emotions' paragraph and say that this is a really big thing to keep in mind when writing romances. Emotional expression versus repression and emotional intelligence play a huge role in how two characters will act and react to each other. Do the characters even realize what they're feeling for each other? Once they've accepted it, how do they act on it? Are their feelings more important than other goals in their life? Where does their new partner rank on their list of priorities?

By all means, let characters change a little around their partner. People have many facets and often shift what face is showing depending on who they're around, so someone who is loved and trusted will get to see a different side than Joe Nobody on the street. However, the change can't be so drastic it's unbelievable. Any really significant change in characterization needs to have work put in for it to happen. Also, try to avoid the tired trope of the magical healing cock. Relationships don't solve people's problems. If anything, they can add a lot of new complications.

Step 3: getting spicy As someone who finds 90% of written smut so boring I skim over it, let me just get up on a soap box for a minute and point out that using it as a form of character study makes it so much more interesting. Not every sex scene has to be about two characters doing everything right and having totally optimized sexy as possible sex with their flawless bodies. Let them goof off, let them mess up, let them banter, let them be weird and gross and human. Kink, especially, has a deep psychological aspect that is fun to explore with different characters. I keep a little file with some general characterization notes for my major players, and part of that is a list of what they're into, what they're 'meh' about, what is a hard "no" for them, and why. It's a fun exercise.

#writing advice #writing fanfic #characterization #this is mostly for people writing fanfiction

29 notes · View notes

satanicallypanicky · 16 days

Note

If it's not too personal, would you mind sharing how you view Satan? Is it from a relatively Christian perspective (like i do)? if so, how do you see the Christian God in all this? What does each of them represent?

That's so complicated. Please accept this extremely long post about my personal theology. I didn't type it up for you but pasted it in from my files.

It is in constant flux and I update it regularly with new information. This is not the complete version, only the relevant parts to your question (I think). It is 5/22/2024 so if I learn something as the result of reactions to this absurd post, it will officially be out of date. You're allowed to reblog this and I accept constructive criticism as long as you're not an asshole about it.

With regards to gods generally, I believe that:

gods exist.

we don't really know if the gods are real or not, even if we believe in them or worship them or think they might exist. There is no objective truth to be found, only subjective perception and shared gnosis. Treating the gods as if they do exist, even as archetypes, can bring objective knowledge of one's self, the nature of the universe, and (most importantly) can bring meaning to a life that might otherwise feel devoid of it.

my belief in the gods exists in a half-agnostic, half-theistic middle ground of reasoned-yet-pious unknowing and positive nihilism.

belief in gods is not a good reason to ignore or reject science; the two are not mutually exclusive nor is one morally superior to the other.

gods are NOT "real" or "flesh and blood" being that inhabit other realms.

man made the gods. We invented (and continue to invent and re-invent) them through worship and myth-making.

the gods are given the powers and domains by the faith of those that believe in them (they are powerful, influential, and semi- independent egregores).

if there is a cosmic creator god that created the universe or started the Big Bang, it is not invested in the least in what humanity is doing and thus doesn't care if we worship it or not, so we might as well not.

the gods either ARE their domains (when it comes to natural domains such as "water" or "lightning" or "death") or have some measure of control over their domains (human constructs such as "music" or "motherhood" or "law"), but the line there is really thin and open to a hell of a lot of debate.

there are gods that are invested in humanity and that actively respond to attempts to build relationships with them.

there are gods that accept physical and symbolic offerings as well as "actions as offerings" and that respond by bestowing favor on the worshipper in the form of blessings (the Gifting Cycle).

according the their own myths, the gods are not wholly benevolent, but have their own ambiguous and independent wills. They chose when and why to answer prayers, if at all.

no god is stagnant. Gods change with time and with people's changing beliefs about them. The gods of ancient people remain powerful but the beliefs surrounding them have morphed and changed over time, creating newer versions of the same old gods.

because no god is stagnant, it's impossible to worship the exact same god as my ancestors even when they are called by the same name. Too much knowledge has been lost, and the culture surrounding me and the gods in question have shifted and changed dramatically.

ancient polytheists incorporated new ideas and myths into their worldviews all the time and were not jealous of other gods/pantheons - in fact, many gods were "adopted" into pantheons or syncretized into becoming a part of one or more of their old gods.

other gods beyond those of my direct ancestral lineage are both worth worshipping and open to being worshipped (within reason and with appropriate consent of the spiritual traditions to which they belong).

engaging in the Gifting Cycle with people and gods/spirits I respect brings us into greater community with each other

With regards to the Christian God, I believe that:

a local god of the Canaanites, known as El, and gradually became conflated and syncretized with other related gods such as Yahweh, an early Israelite god of storms and warriors. This god became the god of the Jewish people. With time and differences in theology, a version of this god eventually became the god of the Christians.

the Christian God and the Jewish God are not the same god, in the same way Thor (Norse) and Thunor (Anglo-Saxon) are not necessarily the same, or Zeus (Greek) and Jupiter (Roman) are not necessarily the same. They share an origin and have a great deal of similarities and can be easily conflated, but Judaism perceives their god much differently than Christianity perceives theirs. Thus, references to the Judeo-Christian God are at best overly simplistic.

J!God's early insistence on monolatrism and later monotheism led to the violent displacement and literally "demonization" the other gods and spirits of the Levant. This continued into the C!God. As Christianity spread, this process was continued against the gods and spirits of the places where the C!God was carried by his worshippers and where they proselytized.

neither the J!God nor the C!God created the universe, this world, or humanity. No record of him exists until the Bronze Age and humanity did a hell of a lot of existing prior to that, not to mention the world and the universe.

it is likely that J!God's existence is a direct antecedent of the Jewish people, meaning he effectively created the Jewish people, in that they would not exist as a people without J!God.

it is possible that there are two versions of the C!God- a patriarchal and jealous version, and a progressive and loving version, who are conflated by Christians themselves and perhaps worshipped by different Christian denominations. The loving and progressive version might just be Jesus.

Jesus' existence in Christianity is at least in part a function of Buddhism's influence on Greco-Levantine philosophy and mythology.

Jesus' gospel of forgiveness, generosity, mercy, and hospitality is both excellent and completely out of character for the C!God, who is shown to be violent, jealous, and unmerciful.

the C!God is not omnipotent or omniscient.

the C!God is real and powerful, especially to his followers. This god affects their lives in concrete and measurable ways, many of them beneficial.

The C!God (at least one version of him) is occasionally openly hostile to the pursuit of human knowledge and achievement, and his followers violently reject any non-Christian religious or cultural knowledge as being "of the Devil" and seek to destroy it.

the foul actions done in the name of the C!God by modern and ancient Christians alike (Christian dominionism, Christofascism, religious and cultural genocides, crusades and the actions of Crusaders, conquests and the actions of Conquistadors, honor killings, nigh-apocalyptic destruction of the Earth because Jesus is returning soon anyways, White Supremacy, etc.) are precisely in keeping with the goals, powers, and domain of the C!God, or at least the patriarchical and jealous version..

Jesus is marginally more worth worshipping, but by his connection to the C!God and his/their monolatrism (trinitarian monolatrism?) is fundamentally excluded from worship from non-Christian polytheists.

With regards to Satan, I believe that:

Satan originated as a spirit/demon in early Judaism called ha-Satan ("the Adversary") that was an ally and accomplice of the J!God.

Satan gained a reputation as an evil and powerful demon over time and with the influence of the Christian church. People of all Semitic religions (both modern and ancient) have constantly contributed to the mythology of Satan.

Satan is a god that is made powerful and fearful both by his own worshippers and the fear and recognition of Christians.

Satan is the god of rebellion against authority, particularly the harmful and destructive cultural and religious authority that the C!God and Christians attempt to place over all of humanity.

many other spirits or beings have become connected to the name Satan and can be included as "Satans" or having become an aspect of the being called Satan. For me, these include Azazel, Leviathan, Belial, Asmodeus, and Lucifer. These each have powers, personalities, and domains of their own, but are all included when I call upon the god called Satan.

Azazel is the spirit in all people that leads them into temptation. It is "goatish" but formless, somewhat ghostly or shadowy, and creeps around the edges of your vision. It represents all that is "sent away" from people who consider themselves holy or pure- questioning authority, base drives and desires considered by some to be sins, corruption, impurity, disobedience, temptation, and all manner of wickedness.

Belial is shadowed and mysterious. He is the god of practicality, strength, physical labor and wealth, steadiness, patience, responsibility, and perseverance. He is connected to wickedness, at least the Christian idea of it. Many evangelicals believe that anything not done in the name of their Lord is evil- thus working hard and being patient and responsible in the name of Satan must be extra evil.

Asmodeus is the Devil that tempts people into the pleasures that others call sins. Where Lucifer is suave and sexy, Asmodeus is brash and lustful. He rules passion, courage, pride, and destruction. He inspires sex, drugs, and rock n' roll. He wants you to let go of your inhibitions and give in to sins with your whole heart. Asmodeus is, however, also a demon of wrath and destruction. After all, giving into emotion with ones whole heart sometimes means smashing things with a hammer. He is also a compassionate and healing force.

Leviathan represents the unknown, the subconscious mind, chaos, and madness. Leviathan is both male and female. They are the Serpent of the Abyss, the unseeable monster that lurks in the vast unknowable depths. They are the coiling snake and grasping tentacle and divination and intuition and initiation. They are loneliness and despair and darkness.

Lucifer is a man- charismatic, suave, and sexy. The Morning Star is the lord of rebellion and an enemy of tyranny. He is the light that emerges from the darkness, beckoning exploration of dark or forbidden realms to attain knowledge. He bids indulgence, pleasure, and sex as well as revolution, destruction, and enlightenment.

Satan is the circle surrounding the five-pointed star. He is all of the other five at once, a god/demon of knowledge and pleasure and rebellion and perseverance and despair, an Unholy Spirit that unites and sets the five aspects as a whole in opposition to unjust authorities of all sorts. He is the true god of humanity. He is the god of sin and blasphemy and edginess, death, fire, and the underworld. He is the god of psychological dominance, of obedience, of punishment, of power. He is both the Enemy, Opposition, and Adversary… and the Master.

Satan rules a realm called Hell. The Christians believe this to be a place of eternal torment where only the unworthy are sent. And for them, perhaps it is, eternally separated from their god. Not all of un-Christian humanity goes there, however- their spirit goes where their belief system takes them. For the devil-worshipper, Hell is anything they want it to be, from a quiet place of gentle repose to a non-stop Bacchanalia to a hall full of honored non-Christian ancestors waiting to welcome you home. It's also entirely possible that it's not a "real" place, but having a conception of an afterlife can bring peace to the living.

Satan is a god of many things, including "evil" (as in a mindset or acts that are in opposition to the predominate religion or culture of a place), Jung's "shadow self", fire, power, psychological dominance, and death; rebellion and rejection of authoritarianism; justice, trials, accusations, and punishment; temptations and the "sins" of pride, lust, greed, etc.; secrets, forbidden knowledge, challenging dogma, magic, and the rejection of Christianity.

early Christians equated Satan with the wilderness and with other pagan gods seen as being "outside civilization". This connection remains - Satan is both a god of wilderness/wildness and of rejecting civilization as it currently exists in favor of replacing it with a more just and equitable one for all of humanity regardless of their faith. Satan represents a wildness of spirit and exhorts his worshippers to "become ungovernable".

worshipping Satan and choosing to rebel against Authority is an inherently anarchist act.

Satan enthusiastically responds to the Gifting Cycle. He bestows power, confidence, and knowledge, among other things.

worshipping Satan involves integrating the darkness within (Jung's shadow) with the outer self entirely- accepting all of one's flaws and hidden pieces as being a part of the "true self" that is presented to the world- fully living into your pride, lust, greed, shame, and fear, and thus receiving the wisdom and power of being ones true self openly.

Satan rejects a single coherent sense of morality outside of a very anarchistic "live and let live". He wants all people to be free to do as they please, to honor the asking and giving of consent, to destroy bigotry and hierarchy wherever they take root, and to seek out pleasure and truth wherever you can because nothing else really matters anyways. Be true to ones' self! Eat drink and be merry! Be queer as fuck! Liberty or death!

#theistic satanism #ask #theology #LONG POST

10 notes · View notes

saraswritingtipps · 1 year

Text

A quick guide to creating character backstories:

1. Understand the Purpose: A character backstory provides depth and context to your character. It helps you understand their motivations, desires, fears, and past experiences. Consider how the backstory will connect with the present story and contribute to the character's development.

2. Start with the Basics: Begin by outlining the essential information about your character. This includes their name, age, physical appearance, and basic personality traits. Having these details will give you a foundation to build upon.

3. Family and Origins: Explore your character's family background. Where were they born? Who were their parents? What was their family dynamic like? Understanding their upbringing can reveal significant influences on their behavior and beliefs.

4. Significant Life Events: Identify key events that have shaped your character's life. These events can be positive or negative, such as the loss of a loved one, a life-changing achievement, or a traumatic experience. These events should be pivotal moments that have impacted the character's development.

5. Education and Skills: Consider your character's education and skills. Did they receive formal education? Are they self-taught? What areas are they proficient in? This can help define their expertise and abilities, as well as their knowledge base.

6. Relationships: Explore the character's relationships with others. Who are their friends, allies, or enemies? Are they in a romantic relationship? How do they interact with different individuals? Understanding their connections can reveal dynamics and conflicts within the story.

7. Goals and Motivations: Determine what drives your character. What are their goals, dreams, or aspirations? What motivates them to take action? Understanding their desires and ambitions can add depth to their decision-making and provide direction to their Journey.

8. Flaws and Weaknesses: No character is perfect. Identify your character's flaws, weaknesses, or vulnerabilities. These traits make them more relatable and human. Flaws can also create internal and external conflicts, driving the character's growth.

9. Cultural and Historical Context: Consider the cultural and historical context in which your character exists. How do these factors influence their beliefs, values, and worldview? Incorporating cultural and historical elements can make your character more authentic and immersive.

10. Present Story Alignment: Finally, ensure that your character's backstory aligns with the present story. Connect their past experiences to their current situation and the overall plot. Look for opportunities to reveal elements of their backstory as the story unfolds, creating a cohesive narrative.

Remember, this guide provides a general framework, but the specifics of each character's backstory will depend on your creative choices and the requirements of your story. Have fun exploring your characters and bringing them to life!

#character backstory #writing tips #writing #character development #writer on tumblr #writblr #writerscommunity #character background #creating ocs

59 notes · View notes

endreal · 1 day

Note

hey endreal, recently prismatic-bell reblogged one of your posts with an addition. i wanted 2 let you know that xe is a zionist, and if you'd like proof fleshdyke on here has compiled screenshots in a recent post. thought u might want 2 know.

I'm going to set aside the claim you're making for a moment, not because of any particular truth or untruth about it, but because it's veracity is irrelevant for what I want to respond to.

recently prismatic-bell reblogged one of your posts with an addition

what post was it? what was the addition? how long ago was recently?

I hardly consider myself to be tumblr famous but my blog is, to me, pretty busy. When things are fairly normal I average ~3500 notes a week. Currently I've gotten almost 1200 just in the past 24 hours because a post of mine ended up reblogged by someone with a large following. I frequently miss posts/reblogs/replies from bloggers I am personal friends with because there's just so much. I have no anchor point for the addition or the post or even the timeframe you're referring to.

xe is a zionist

is this claim relevant to the comment left on the post that was reblogged? I, like most people, tend not to be thrilled when someone whose ideologies are significantly different to my own is actively engaging with my stuff but also, in this instance, why does it matter? if I don't want to engage with zionist content then tumblr provides pretty standard mediocre tools to curate one's online experience via blocking, tag blacklisting, etc. Those tools allow me to curate my online experience, which can also include limiting people who respond to my content in ways I find objectionable. But the fact of the matter is a post I made that was reblogged or commented on by another blogger is now part of their online experience, and my responsibility as a creator is to put things into the world that reflect my worldview and values, but beyond the extent to which they are engaging in objectionable ways with my content, do I have an obligation to curate my audience?

if you'd like proof fleshdyke on here has compiled screenshots in a recent post

citing the existence of evidence is not the same as providing evidence. when making a claim like this the onus of proof lies on you to provide, not on me to discover. Also, who are you? Behind the veil of anonymity I have no impetus to trust you to be telling me things with my best interest in mind.

lastly, if you'll pardon me for being blunt: so what? people generally don't usually send messages like this unless there is a purpose to it. Your stated purpose is "u might want 2 know", and now I do know. I know that you have made a claim and cited that another user has evidence to it. that's what I know. what I don't know is what's your purpose, what's your intention, and specifically what action are you trying to motivate me to take.

I recognize that a lot of things in this response are going to sound critical and inhospitable, especially because I suspect you sent this message with intent to share information you felt was important. But whether the information you wanted to share is true or not, what this message actually is? Is gossip.

16 notes · View notes

femmefatalevibe · 5 months

Note

Hey, I love your account!❤️ I started my journey of being the highest version of myself. I wanted to ask some tips on how to be more intelligent and do you have some suggestions on podcasts, people you can follow that active on politics/history? English isn’t my native language.

Thanks! ❤️

Hi love! Thank you so much <333 I can't think of any specific podcasts/blogs at the moment, but sharing some other advice below. Bisous xx

Here are some of my tips:

Read books, articles, blogs, studies, and journals from credible & fact-checked sources

Watch & listen to evidence-based documentaries and podcasts

Take expert-backed courses and classes (from universities, industry leaders/certified organizations)

Attend forums/lectures from industry leaders museums, libraries, etc. (Virtually or in-person)

Talk to people in different fields and from different walks of life

Travel (globally, domestically, or locally), explore museums, parks, and stores in your area

Ask for feedback on your creative or skill-based projects and work; or insights from trusted people in your life on different situations in your life, from your past, or their greatest life lessons

Remain curious and diligent regarding your pursuit of knowledge. Live as a lifelong student

For emotional intelligence:

Embrace self-awareness & self-reflection: Observe how you feel, behave, and how people generally respond to your words/actions in different situations

Engage in active listening: Pay attention to what others are saying with the intent of understanding, not responding

Focus on emotional differentiation: Understand where your thoughts, feelings, intentions, and opinions end and another person's identity/perception begins

Be receptive to feedback: Embrace constructive criticism as a self-improvement tool. Approach it with curiosity and optimism, not as a personal attack

85 notes · View notes

the-fae-folk · 7 months

Note

You’ve said much of the world of faerie, fascinating things few people have seen. But what of humans? Humanity is fascinating. How do they survive in a world like this? How do they not know?

You would be absolutely astounded by the sheer number of things that humans do not know. In fact, I believe that I could safely say that the number of things we don't know outnumber the things we do in the same way that the grand totality of the universe is much more vast than a single walnut. And humans have an utterly fascinating set of capabilities whose primary purpose appears to be to preserve their life and sanity so that they can continue doing necessary and useful things such as gathering food, having families, and generally trying to make life better for all those who come after them. However, those capabilities also sometimes prevent them from seeing things as they are. Cognitive Dissonance is what happens when humans have ideas, beliefs, or actions that are inconsistent with other ideas, beliefs, and actions. It is an uncomfortable feeling, but more than that... it is a state that is actually quite a lot of hard work for the human brain to handle. So the brain will try to find the most efficient way in which to resolve the dissonance. Now an ideal way to deal with the problem would be to do some careful research on the matter, process and logically parse through all of the information, and finally adapt the new information into your existing worldview in order to form a more comprehensive cognitive state that is free of the bothersome dissonance. Unfortunately, this scenario is a lot more rare and more difficult to achieve than anyone would really like. You see, a great number of our decisions on a daily basis are made entirely within the subconscious. We make those trillions upon trillions of tiny decisions without even thinking about them in our conscious brain. When decisions that are significantly more important are made without the input of the conscious brain they can go unnoticed for a very long time until dissonance forces them forward into the focus of your attention. Everything you do is fueled by your motivations and instincts, and even your conscious logical reasoning can be affected by it too. So even when you're finally made aware of some sort of dissonance in your own mind, it's not actually an easy task to stop and truly think through the full scope of the problem. For example: without even realizing it, a person whose unknowing motivation is to maintain their positive self-regard can discount information that is unflattering or troubling if it contradicts their self-image. This is the brain's attempt to shortcut its way past the dissonance; it takes less energy for it to dismiss the contradictory information than to carefully reexamine and adapt the existing framework. This sort of problem effects everyone, and interestingly the effect becomes magnified when concerning any subject to which the person's self-identity is directly connected to. One might be tempted to believe that only the highly educated can elude the grasp of this unintentional survival skill gone wrong, however that would not be the case. In fact, there is a good deal of evidence that suggests that the highly educated might be MORE susceptible to this phenomenon in general due to their more comprehensive and structured worldviews. It is, of course, a useful survival tool, and it is possible to work around the inclination, but it always requires a significant amount of effort against the tendencies of one's own brain. Why do I mention all this? Well think, if someone going about their everyday life happened to see or hear something that went against all of their fundamental conclusions about how reality worked, it would be very easy indeed for their brain to simply... dismiss it or find some logical way to explain it out of existence, or simply to forget it because it doesn't fit. Who knows what wonders we might have missed because our minds couldn't make sense of them?

#fae #faerie #otherfolk #cognitive dissonance #humans #humanity #fairy

20 notes · View notes

grrrlsoverdramas · 2 years

Text

I feel like Minwoo in this episode (and throughout the show so far) is a great example of the thin line between prejudice and more insidious supremacist belief systems. Like racism vs white supremacy or sexism vs the patriarchy.

He chooses to ignore the way ableist systems make things harder for Youngwoo and is more predisposed than others to make rude judgments or assumptions about her. But his anger stems almost exclusively from feelings that she’s his competition or she’s taking “his” place. He dislikes Sooyeon for her background but doesn’t spew the same vitriol about her because he feels he’s better than her, or that it’s possible for him to surpass her. He doesn’t like how society is unfairly more biased toward the rich/elite (he complains about this consistently enough), but he’ll put up with the CEO being CEO due to nepotism because it doesn’t limit him at this point in his life. But the moments he recognizes that Youngwoo has skills he can’t compete against are the moments where he cries foul.

It makes me think of recent American news stories where many people who don’t have “strong” anti-trans opinions are suddenly against this idea that trans women should compete in sports at the elite level because they’ll win. Like, it’s ok if you’re different from me but only if you are less than me. Instead of thinking about how this reveals that our way of gendering competitions is arbitrary and flawed, and trying to find solutions to how we could level competitions more fairly for everyone, there is a kneejerk reaction to simply exclude your competition and then some sort of mental gymnastics to justify why you (be that as an “abled” “cis” etc person) deserve to be prioritised.

Or, like a book I read this summer about the history of craftsmanship in America that talked about how white male labor organizations consistently argued for the exclusion of or codified low wages for black workers or foreign workers or female workers whenever they felt that these groups “threatened” their pay or employment, instead of arguing for fair pay and fair labor practices for all. And employers would use black, foreign or female workers to pit against or undermine their white male workers, but white men rarely responded with solidarity.

Ultimately, Youngwoo deserves to have her job and the only reason she needed “nepotism” (which isn’t what happened... her dad didn’t ask for her to get her job... if anything she was hired in part because could be used against a rival lawyer, which is weird but not nepotism) was because of ableism. And I do think Minwoo understands that on some level, but he can’t see past this idea that everyone has to compete with him with the exact same skills and background he has or it’s unfair. Once again, he has literally no empathy. His entire worldview is informed by how things affect him and how he feels.

We’re on this emotional journey with him, seeing how personal biases like ableism, sexism and selfishness can morph into actions and stances that exist almost purely to uphold deeply prejudiced and unfair systems of class, patriarchy and abled supremacy under the guise of “fairness” or NIMBYism.

#meta #its very upsetting because it's so irrational and gross when he gets all mad about her being there #but like.... this is really what People Are Like #extraordinary attorney woo

372 notes · View notes

potatoobsessed999 · 2 years

Text

Thinking about the commonalities in Dracula between cutting-edge (for the period) innovations and traditions from past centuries that have passed out of common knowledge. (I do want to mention that according to the text these traditions clearly haven’t passed out of common Transylvanian knowledge, but since Stoker treats traveling eastward as functionally equivalent to traveling into the past, for our Western-European protagonists it comes to more or less the same thing.) Under the cut for length.

The protagonists have been using both modern innovation and forgotten tradition to try and thwart Drac - Jonathan’s use of shorthand and even his journey by train to Budapest are both modern, but the crucifix the innkeeper gave him is more traditional; Lucy is kept alive via modern blood transfusions and traditional garlic flowers (which themselves are only available out of season from a modern greenhouse); Van Helsing has to return to Amsterdam to get his books, which presumably cover folkloric traditions such as the garlic, but he’s only able to go back and forth so quickly because of modern transportation.

I know quite a few people in the tag have already brought up this mingling of old and new, but what’s really striking to me is how much Drac operates in the lacuna between these two sources of knowledge. I remember someone mentioning that Mrs. Westenra was probably brought up believing in miasma theory, which would explain why she thought the garlic smell would be bad for Lucy’s health - but she was not brought up on the superstitions/folkloric traditions that would have warned her Lucy’s illness was not mundane, and that the garlic’s presence was protective. The Transylvanian peasants’ traditions obviously didn’t prevent Drac from terrorizing them, but they did help - if they hadn’t, he would presumably not be bothering to move to England. (I also think the relative infrequency of Drac’s and his roommates’ feedings while Jonathan was in the castle might be due to those traditional protections making vulnerable prey scarce.)

One thing that’s really interesting to me about this dynamic is that it positions the Enlightenment as - not necessarily a bad but a dangerous thing. By pivoting to a new worldview, a new philosophy of knowledge, Western Europe has discarded old beliefs that did genuinely hold great value - and even as technology improves, gaps are left where old knowledge would have served but new knowledge has not yet advanced enough to fill. The suggestion seems to be that an inaccurate scientifically-based worldview is more dangerous than a folklorically-based one - see Mrs. Westenra and miasma theory. Neither is the folklorically-based worldview devoid of truth or merit. I do think the text suggests that the scientific worldview is superior - look at the Transylvanian peasants’ cowed terror and their purely defensive anti-Dracula measures, vs. Van Helsing’s proactive blood transfusions saving someone who’s actually been bitten already - but it isn’t presented as infallibly accurate, and without a supplemental reliance on tradition it leaves dangerous gaps in the characters’ understanding. (Such as Seward’s complete misunderstanding of the reasons behind Renfield’s actions.)

Ultimately, the most important thing is knowledge, whether that knowledge is old or new - and the protagonists are best able to combat Dracula’s efforts when they combine those sources, patching holes in the one with information from the other. Conversely, Drac relies on others’ ignorance, whether that be Jonathan’s dismissal of the villagers’ warnings as baseless superstition or Mrs. Westenra’s mistaken belief that bad smells will make her daughter sicker. And it’s by friendship, cooperation, and interchange of ideas - both between individuals and between worldviews - that the protagonists are able to fight back.

#jonathan harker #van helsing #mrs westenra #dracula daily #dracula #dracula meta #whee look at me i’m supposed to be writing an overdue paper for class #instead i’ve written one about dracula to post on tunglr dot com #oh well #maybe my brain will now be in writing-papers mode and i can focus on the one i actually have to write

203 notes · View notes