#implied yes but implied is a lot different then explicitly stated

[murfpersonalblog]

AMC, is this Talamas.ca website CANON?

Imma just assume everything on this site is legit, cuz it's more fun that way, duh. 😅

"de Lioncourt de Pointe du Lac," IS THIS CANON, AMC? 👀 Did that Black girl LEGALLY walk around in Jim Crow NOLA with TWO DIFFERENT MEN WITH TWO DIFFERENT LAST NAMES' & TWO DIFFERENT RACES' surnames? Explain!!!!

Ok, confirmation that Sept 21st really is Claudia's birthday. So it's NOT the date that she was Turned? (I assumed she was Turned sometime between Sept 1st - Nov 12th.)

Uh, NO ONE in either season has ever referred to Lestat as "the Brat Prince." Yes, Louis said in 1x6 that Lestat was a brat (derogatory) for not killing Antoinette, but he didn't call him a prince. So where is the Talamasca getting this information from? Is this something DANIEL calls Lestat in the actual book/tour?

I like that the Talamasca is letting it be known that the Cloud Gift is NOT a "baseline vampiric power." This is NOT something the average vamps can do by default. The Cloud Gift is the mark of an exceptionally strong vampire, and it's a BIG deal that Lestat can do it pre-QotD, cuz it implies that he drank A LOT of Akasha's blood the very first time in the 1700s, unlike book!Lestat. Which means Les is MUCH more powerful than he was in the books. And also means the Ep5 fight was NOT EVEN.

Lestat is "KNOWN" to Turn humans against their will--wuuut? 🫖👀 Wait--how are they gonna spin Lestat turning Nicki then? 👀 Cuz the argument can 100% be made that neither Nicki nor Louis were in the right or healthy mental/psychological state to properly CONSENT to become vampires, esp. since Nicki was actively losing his mind and Louis was roaring drunk & suicidal. And ofc Claudia said during the Trial how "that f****r didn't ask, gave me no say!," directly paralleling Lestat with Magnus. But is David Talbot actually gonna be a thing?! 😱😩 PLEASE say it ain't so, AMC, I can only take so many racist old white men on the same show, and that slot's already been filled, thank you very much!

Previous lovers are indeed Lestat's weak spot--and Rhoshamandes exploited TF outta that factoid in the PL Trilogy; GOD I hope AMC gets that far with the books!

Why bother greying out Louis' profile and put it all the way at the end of the list? (Thank you @crazykuroneko for the unblurred image!)

Ok, confirmation that Louis' birthday really is 1877, and that the 1878 & 1879 dates in the other episodes were dead wrong.

Claudia called Louis the "BLACK Angel," not the "Dark Angel" wtf

It's not human "emotion" that makes Louis empathetic, it's about humane treatment & giving people the DIGNITY & RESPECT that HE was never given as a Black man in racist AF America. He hates the "extravagant/sadistic" killing of Lestat & the "cruel, barely motivated violence" of the Theatre coven. It has nothing to do with human "EMOTION;" he just tries to prove that just cuz vampires are monsters doesn't mean they have to behave monstrously--Jacob said Louis tries to be "elegant" and rise above his biology, even when he too wants nothing more than to swim in blood. Who TF made this website? This can't be canon. 🤦

"PRESUMED deceased." 👀 Jfc are they bringing him back for S3?

The shapeshifting & dematerialization etc only counts while Lasher was a GHOST--that isn't a natural Taltos ability though. Their records should've specified that--I HATE that Esta didn't stick to the source material, where the book was VERY explicitly a GHOST story about a haunted house/family of witches.

The Talamasca should know what Taltos abilities actually are now, since they now have all of Cip's biological GRANDCHILDREN (Lasher's kids).

And I guess this also confirms that The Talamasca DON'T have Emaleth in custody, which means she really is missing. 👀

Yawn, as usual.

TL;DR: I hope this website isn't canon, and if it is, I hope they edit/update it with more accurate/precise information. Cuz this ain't it, chief. For a Talamasca database/bestiary website, I'd hope/expect them to be on their A-Game, esp. since they know what a "rabid/unwell" fanbase they have, and that book readers are also watching what they do with the lore.

[captain-space-kin]

Some of y’all need to calm down about people who are not that into lostshipping. I don’t see y’all raising the pitchforks at people who don’t like Lava, or literally any other ship for that matter (not to say that it doesn’t happen, cause fandom is fandom but still). But god forbid someone isn’t invested in Lost, that must mean they’re homophobic! Or whatever other label we can ascribe to them that makes them a Bad Person tm

I’m sorry but if people are allowed to ignore Jaya/Pixane/Kailor, I think it’s fine to ignore Lost. Especially since **AT THIS CURRENT MOMENT** they are probably the least compelling ship on the board right now. Hoping they get some development in season 3, but they are kind of just a pairing that exists for me at this point.

[mofsblog]

Defending Ending 2

Okay I've seen a lot of discourse around the "True Ending" of Clinical Trial and I just wanted to give my take on it. Spoilers under the cut

I know a lot of people didn't like Ending 2's light and happier tone and it being the True Ending and felt like it absolved Lee of any consequences and just put Angel in a dangerous shitty position, isolated with a murderer and argue that it goes against the whole point of the game… But I just really don't view it like that. To me, Ending 2 reinforces some of the game's central themes surrounding consent, neurodivergency and societal neglect.

While I do think Lee can be manipulative (ESPECIALLY in the Reject route) and consistently hides things from Angel, I do think the Accept route that leads into Ending 2/the True Ending is a product of Angel's own anatomy as much as Ending 1 is. While Angel chooses to forgive him initally for the shrine thing, they don't dismiss or downplay what he did either. While they do display some unhealthy thought patterns (the idea that they never thought someone would ever pay so much attention to them <- which is a belief absolutely fueled by self hatred) that could contribute to their forgiveness, they don't let that blind them from the inherent fucked upness of what Lee's done. This isn't a "Wow, you did nothing wrong. Let's date!" situation. It's a "You fucked up and you hurt me but I'm willing to give you another chance, if you change for the better" situation.

Same thing with the revelation of the murder. Angel does not downplay how upset they are to appease him. Even when they acknowledge Lee killing Brandon probably prevented him from harming future victims as he's a repeated offender who likely wouldn't stop, Angel still acknowledge that Lee didn't know that when he killed him. Angel is consistently able to voice their grievances with him and call him out on the wrongness of his actions, which is why I feel pretty comfortable stating that Lee and Angel's relationship, no matter how fucked up, toxic or unhealthy, is not an abusive one because Angel is always able to voice their issues with him and he is more than willing to listen.

The player, and by extension, Angel is also explicitly given the choice on whether or not to forgive him with both revelations (I especially like that Angel's given the choice to basically back out of the relationship, even after they accept the shrine thing, after the murder reveal), highlighting their agency. Yes, you can absolutely argue that Angel's decision to forgive Lee twice is likely influenced by their loneliness and need for connection and that does make their relationship a bit unhealthy (and interesting/hj) but again I don't think it's abusive.

I also want to point out that even if the Accept route, Angel gives Lee conditions. They don't just accept him willy-nilly. They want him to actually listen to them.

I think that Angel's ultimate decision to forgive Lee isn't just to date him, it's to give him another chance at becoming a better, more rounded person. A large part of the whole game is about how society (the education system and the medical system) tends to fail neurodivergent people, especially those most in need of help. Angel and Lee literally bond over their different experiences of neurodivergency (or implied neurodivergency on Lee's end) and how ultimately society failed both of them (with neither of them managing to succeed in ways they wanted because the system wasn't built for people like them).

There's also the prevalent mentions and implications of past punishments that we can observe through some of Lee's dialogue. He's canonically an ex Mormon, who was probably consistently punished (and abused) for any wrongdoing (some of which we can assume could come down to traits of his neurodivergency as it's not too uncommon for autistic children to get misunderstood and mistreated). Similarly, we know that Angel was put some level of physical abuse and mistreatment by their school in an attempt to "correct" their left handedness and even then it's implied that's only one example of them being abused by the education system.

Both Lee and Angel know what it's like to be punished and hurt after displaying a 'weakness' or a mistake. They've both been hurt by the notion that punishment is necessary to improve a person, which is why I find the Accept route so powerful. I've seen a lot of people complain that Lee doesn't go to jail or face "tangible" consequences but the way I see it, prison would make him worse and remove any chance he has of healing. While fucked up, illegal and his fault, his actions are still partially a product of his upbringing and the lack of support and therapy for him. He specifically mentions that he never went to therapy so he could get his job. Lee is partially the product of an unaccomodating society as much as Angel is. (Also I could go on for hours about how his Mormon upbringing probably skewed his entire view on how relationships are supposed to function and probably made him think love has to be in the form of devotion)

The way I interpreted it. Angel wasn't coerced into staying with a dangerous, harmful person. Angel sees parts of themselves in Lee and is giving Lee a chance neither of them were ever given in a life. They're creating a new life together where mistakes and fuck ups aren't instantly met with punishment or harm. Yes, Lee fucked up horrendously, violating their trust and ignored their wishes but they're both willing to acknowledge that and work on it because maybe for once, one of them's allowed to fucked up without facing an abusive 'punishment' afterwards. Maybe for once, one of them's allowed to fuck up and be given room to grow and improve. And maybe for once, Angel gets to choose how they want their life to go.

No, most people probably wouldn't have made the same choices as Angel but its still their decision to make. Yes, it's likely influenced by their pre existing loneliness and trauma. Yes, Lee would have to put a lot of work in to change himself and that will take time and there's likely some unhealthy beliefs he'll always struggle with. Yes, Lee and Angel's relationship is far from conventional or completely healthy, but fuck man, I think they're giving eachother room to figure it out together and idk, there's something beautiful about that to me.

They're both very mentally ill but they're trying and there's something about that that I find oddly comforting. Most media with the yandere trope never really provide the option for the yandere character to actually try to reflect on their actions and maybe learn better ways to cope and honestly I was so sure that both endings would involve someone dying in some way because these types of stories don't tend to go well. Usually, after a certain point, a character's just framed as "too" far gone, "too" mentally ill, "too" fucked up and beyond saving and they usually die a tragic or poetic death (i.e like Ending 1). But Angel looks at Lee and his actions and decides fuck it and to say no to that. They make the choice to give Lee another chance any way after what he's done because they don't see him as irredeemable. I just really like the way they both get to live in the end and make a better life together and what that says about neurodivergent and mentally ill people.

[mrs-chonk]

everytime someone denies that Caitlyn is Asian an angel loses its wings PAINFULLY

gonna use that gun on one of u if I keep hearing these lies edit: sorry to come back just to bitch and moan abt this but IT FRUSTRATES ME, yall will see a character this is very obviously a certain ethi=nicity or poc and if they arent given a horrific stereotype of that ethnicity/race or it istn explicitly stated yall will ignore it or swap their ethnicity with something that fits better into a different stereotype?? like sevika, she is obviously indian but yall saw she was a mean masc lesbian so you took "mean" and "masculine" and said "ah yes, this MUST be a black woman" woah buddy, you're implying a lot there ... and just cause caitlyn and her family don't talk with intense broken English and wear fetishized versions or traditional asian attire, suddenly no one can see that she is obviously viet or thai (or some other south-east Asian country at least), she has a British accent and isn't fetishized for her asian-ness and suddenly we cant tell if shes asian or not ?? its weird

[shiongenkai]

A Note on 'Eldest Son' in TKDB

One last note on the wiki. I don't know if this is interesting to nearly anyone else other than me, but this little idea of 'Eldest son implies other siblings' has come up multiple times recently, so I researched a little into the nuances of what Eldest Son (長男) actually means in Japanese. It got a little bit long though, so under the cut it goes.

So... What this is referring to is the breaking news broadcast in reference to Jin, where they refer to him as 長男, AKA Eldest Son.

In English this carries an implication that there are Other Sons, or even Other Daughters, or so on so forth. When you hear someone referred to as Oldest (Something) you automatically assume that there are Younger Ones to compare it to, which is also what route the wiki takes.

However, this isn't the case for Japanese. While 長男 can imply Other Children, and often does in conversational Japanese, this term does not always mean younger brothers exist. What this refers to is a sense of succession, for one, and exists as a general term in order to refer to someone in paperwork, regardless of whether they're an only child or not. If some dude has an older sister and no younger siblings? He's the 長男. If someone doesn't have any siblings? Yep! 長男！It works for both. So can it be that Jin does have younger brothers? Yes, technically, but it's not explicitly implied with this line specifically.

How can I be sure of that, though? Wouldn't it help to have another example, you say? I fully agree! Which is why I have one! Here it is!

Here is Ritsu calling himself the 長男 of the Shinjo family! By this logic, we could technically assume that there are other Shinjo kids too, right? But then in Episode 16 he states Directly that he's an only child.

So in his case, he's both an only child and the eldest son. It sounds weird in English, but it still works naturally in Japanese. Another thing to note is that this line in Japanese has him refer to himself as 'The only Son', which Once Again could open the door for 'But wait!! What if he has siblings!!', but there's also nuance in That Word (一人息子) has less of an emphasis on the 'son' part and more of an emphasis on the 'only' part.

'Only son' in English has an unspoken emphasis on Son. If you hear someone say they're the Only Son of their family, and your first language is English, you'll probably think to yourself 'Oh, they have sisters then,' because that's what that phrase implies. The Japanese phrase, however, seems to emphasize the 'only' part. If you were to hear this phrase, you might think 'Oh, he has sisters,' but you could just as easily think, 'Oh, he's the only child'.

You can think of it as like.... Adding context into the noun. They are an only child, who happens to be a son. The only son. It's the same with 長男. They are the oldest son even if they are the Only Son.

So while it's not explicitly stated in canon that Jin does not have younger siblings (whether thats brothers or sisters), it's also not really truly implied he does. At least in Japanese. And there's really no good equivalent to the whole 'eldest son' thing in English anyway. Successor, I guess, is the closest, nuance wise? I guess? Shrugs.

Anyway, family words in general carry a lot of specifics in them in Japanese. You can't just call someone your Brother unless you're Zenji and using 'Brother' in English. Even Lucas refers to his twin as 'my younger twin brother'. Subaru's sister is his Older Sister, etc, etc. This is another one of those 'baked in specifics' type words that has different implications in JP vs ENG, and which makes it very, very easy to assume things that aren't necessarily true. Context is also important, because if it HAD been a casual conversation then it'd be different, but the broadcasts use very formal Informational Type Language, which renders 長男 neutral in terms of 'Is there more siblings or not'.

[sonik-kun]

Can somebody tell JC antis that fiction is always up for interpretation unless explicitly stated otherwise by the author. You can read between the lines, but not everyone will find the same answers. And that's okay. That's what makes fiction fun to debate so we can offer each other different perspectives on the character and how they see the world. You don't have to be patronising about it.

But at the same time, if you read everything through a black and white lens (which oddly enough, is often what MXTX warns readers in her works), you'll come out with a very one dimensional character, lacking any depth.

The problem with JC antis is that you read JC as a one dimensional villain. You don't understand the nuance to his character. Yes, he is flawed. But he is also not evil. Morally grey is a better word to describe him as it is to describe Wei Wuxian.

And no. JC did not continue the cycle of abuse. Contrast his relationship with his parents to his relationship with Jin Ling, and you will see that. Also contrast how Jin Ling turned out compared to him. You'll see that Jin Ling had a better upbringing because of Jiang Cheng's and Jin Guangyao's care (who may I remind you, it is heavily implied they each spent a lot of time together with. Jin Ling trusting Jiang Cheng enough to always call for his help whenever he is in trouble despite being the heir to a way more powerful sect than the Jiang. Not only that, it is implied that he inherited a lot of Jiang Cheng's mannerisms. The two constantly look out for each other as we see at the end of the book. So yes. I think it's safe to say that JC and JL had a secure and happy relationship, despite the former being stern with him. I implore JC antis to remember the historical context and the parent and child relationship at that time, also. It wasn't the same as ours, so we shouldn't judge it by modern standards.)

Take off your main character goggles and start reading more into the other characters. Once you drop all main character bias, you'll see what we mean.

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Hello! It's me again. I'm probably pestering you, lol. I think a lotta people give flack for the Octavinelle trio being ruthless and "behaving like a Mafia." But I think considering where they live it makes sense? They live in the ocean. And the ocean is a kill or be killed environment, where you have to the strongest and toughest. If not? You at least have to be quick witted and unable to be seen, otherwise you'll be dead. If the trio become too soft they'll be fish meat.

I think the fandom is pretty divided when it comes to perceptions of what the Coral Sea is like. On one hand, you have the people who think of it as like living in Atlantica, which is basically just like living in a peaceful and pretty city (but underwater). Then you have the people who think the environment would be so different it would shape its inhabitants to behave differently as well. The second one tends to be a darker or grittier interpretation which aknowledges dangers such as other undersea creatures and treacherous living conditions.

Personally, I lean on and enjoy the latter, since TWST rarely ever designs purely for the aesthetic of it; one example of this is how the twins are confirmed to be bioluminescent in the Magical Archives. This is a decision that was not made “because it would look cool”, but because many deep sea creatures rely on this trait to intimidate potential predators. It would make more sense for the cold waters of the Coral Sea to change its people rather than merfolks’ cities simply being civilizations moved several leagues under, especially seeing TWST time and time again really consider the geography and history of each new location and how those inform the cultures that form there.

However, I want to state that the Coral Sea would be very different depending on which area you’re in, just like how there are nice parts and bad parts of a city. It’s not ALL nice or ALL bad. For example, the Atlantica Museum in book 3 appears to be in a more photic zone, so there’s more sunlight and it appears pleasant to be in. Even the merpeople there seem to be different than the Octatrio; they less so resemble specific sea creatures and are much more akin to being human-like. We have yet to really see how the benthic zones are—but we do know they must be harsher, since Floyd has mentioned exploring shipwrecks and various dangers there (like sharks).

I also want to point out that there are subtle signs in dialogue which could imply merpeople prefer traits that promote survivability and adaptability in the ocean. Azul’s bullies are noted to taunt him for his weight, but also for his bulky tentacles and inky tears. Now why those traits specifically??? Because these impede his ability to swim swiftly (making it harder to escape danger) and easily give away his location (if he’s in hiding or camoflauging).

I’ve seen others suggest that maybe these comments are because of racism against octopus merpeople, who are a rare kind of merfolk. This is entirely possible, yes! But thinking about it like that… Isn’t it also possible that there aren’t a lot of octopus merpeople at the moment because it’s more difficult for them to escape or to hide from predators? Which then informs and perpetuates preexisting prejudices. In this context (plus the bullying), it makes sense why Azul may have “hardened” as a defense and survival mechanism. The same goes for the twins, who were explicitly taught how to defend themselves (although this also goes into the Leech mob family theory, which is a whole separate matter) and have often made references to fighting others in the Coral Sea. Their upbringings also play a part in their personalities, but so does the environment they grew up in. Like Azul and the twins, you’d have to harden mentally or physically to some degree to ensure your survival through tough circumstances.

It’s hard to say for sure though! A lot of this is speculation based on current but infrequent lore, and the Octatrio themselves are a very small portion of all merfolk. They may not be representative of the behaviors of all other merpeople, and we should keep this in mind when referring to them as our exemplars. That’s why I’ve been hoping for a Coral Sea hometown event so we have a more concrete idea of what life under the sea is like 😭

[bethanydelleman]

Hello!

I rewatched Pride and Prejudice and it's surprising how my thoughts on it changed over the years 😃

When I was a teenager, Elizabeth Bennet was the plucky heroine that I wanted to be (lol) , now I'm older with a mortgage and responsibilities/bills, I'm like what was her plan in life?

Because she wasn't really educated per se (im thinking about how she answered lady Catherine about what she has to recommend her re:drawing, playing the piano etc) so I guess a 'career'(no matter how little it would be available at that time) was out of the question, but accepting marraige to the (admittedly obsequious) Mr Collins was also out of the question as well as Mr Darcys first proposal (which I get why sge turned it down!) ...I guess I'm asking what Elizabeth's plan for her future.

I've heard this from a lot of people upon re-read, "Why isn't Elizabeth more worried about her future?" I think there are a few things to note.

Early 1800s or not, Elizabeth is 20 years old when the novel begins (the average age of first marriage for women was 23). 27 year old Charlotte is in more of a future panic, but Elizabeth is still young. She has done practical thing like learn to play piano, but like most young people, she's probably just hoping for the best. And it's not like there is much she can actually do, Elizabeth is putting herself out there, she's dancing, she's playing piano, but otherwise she can just hurry up and wait. Her mother's marriage schemes are seen as vulgar and mostly backfire, and we would hardly want Elizabeth to act like Caroline. We read across Austen's novel's that women are largely stationary and it is the men who move in and out of their lives.

Also, I think a big part of Austen's point is that women are in a position where they feel the need to accept any and every proposal, because as Mr. Collins says, they may never receive another, but that this leads to misery (just look at the older couples and how many of them are unhappy!). While somewhat foolish from a financial perspective, Elizabeth is thinking about her long term happiness. She has watched her father turn bitter in an unequal relationship, she does not want that for herself. Elizabeth is choosing possible spinsterhood over being married to a person she knows she could not respect. Marrying for love, or at least on a basis of respect, is a big theme in Austen's novels. Let me add this quote from Mansfield Park to illustrate this point:

“I should have thought,” said Fanny, after a pause of recollection and exertion, “that every woman must have felt the possibility of a man’s not being approved, not being loved by some one of her sex at least, let him be ever so generally agreeable. Let him have all the perfections in the world, I think it ought not to be set down as certain that a man must be acceptable to every woman he may happen to like himself.... And, and—we think very differently of the nature of women, if they can imagine a woman so very soon capable of returning an affection as this seems to imply.”

So yes, Elizabeth Bennet isn't being financially prudent but she is being sensible in preserving her happiness. And for realism, we know Austen made this decision herself! She turned down an eligible offer.

Next, Mrs. Bennet is somewhat exaggerating: they are very unlikely to starve or be destitute. While it is never explicitly stated, Mr. Gardiner seems to be doing very well, and would probably very happily take at least Jane and Elizabeth if Mr. Bennet died. Mr. Philips is also doing well for a country attorney, he could take in his sister-in-law and nieces. It is going to suck, the Bennets should have planned better, but it's not the end of the world. We also do not know Mr. Bennet's age, but he may well only be in his late forties. He's no Mr. Woodhouse who may die tomorrow in a stiff breeze.

So what is Elizabeth's plan? She doesn't have one, she's 20. She's hoping life will throw her a man with a decent income that she doesn't hate. It works out in the end, but I don't think she would live to regret either turned down proposal if she had never met Darcy again.

[semi-imaginary-place]

Lord of the Rings is a batman story. Literally.

"Frodo and Sam's relationship, I think, would be quite common in the First World War, in which Tolkien served as a British soldier. British officers (i.e., lieutenant and above) would have a soldier, typically a corporal, that was their batman or orderly and he would cook for them, help with various chores, etc. Memoirs from WW1 refer to these assistants all the time, and assume the reader knows what they are. The very fabric of British society was very heavily classist prior to WW1 and the war itself ultimately eroded these class distinctions." (sneaky_imp)

"The most likely source given is the relationship between an officer and his “bat man” in World War One. A kind of master/servant relationship with a lot of vulnerability and knowing each other well.

A class difference is also standard in implied but not explicitly stated homosexual relationships in books of the period. If Tolkien were trying to write a queer romance he would have done it like it appears in the book. The physical comforting each other. In the novels (unlike the movie) there is no real conflict between Frodo and Sam. The only time they come close to conflict is when Sam returns the Ring to Frodo and offers to share the burden. Frodo gets angry and jealous but that quickly passes and Frodo begs forgiveness for his harshness. The language of “small creature defending its mate“ when Sam faces Shelob and all the kissing.

Sam gets a hero’s reward but the whole thing is incomplete until he can both live with Frodo and with Rosie. Then Frodo has to leave. Partially due to his wound and partially because Sam cannot be whole when torn between Frodo and Rose and Frodo leaves so Sam can fully devote himself to his family. Then, when Rose is dead and his children grown he can pass beyond the sea to join Frodo in Valinor where they can grow old together and die in a land of bliss.

In the unpublished epilogue Sam’s daughter calls Frodo Sam’s “treasure” and compares their love for each other to that between Celeborn and Galadriel.

Was Tolkien intentionally doing this? We will probably never know for sure. If he was he had to hide it. Frodo and Sam’s relationship was a lot deeper and more intimately portrayed though then the standard master and servant relationship. Frodo pulled Sam up to his social level in the end which was not a standard trope. While his cousins Pippin and Merry poked a bit of fun at Sam’s relatively rustic origins Frodo never did." (XenoBiSwitch)

While the published epilogue ends with Sam shutting the front door and entering domesticity, an unpublished epilogue ends with Sam hearing the call of Aman even as he enters Bag End. Which is importantly since Sam's story doesn't end in Middle Earth, as revealed by the Appendixes Sam does follow Frodo across the sea.

There's no way Tolkien intended Frodo and Sam to be gay, small minded conservative Catholic that he was. However Death of the Author, lotr ends up really gay in the same unintentional way Naruto or Ghibli's Ocean Waves ended up unintentionally gay. I personally prefer the platonic interpretation but the romantic one has a lot of potential textual evidence.

(enki2 I wish i knew how to merge reblogs). Note: Baggins is not an old respected name but Frodo is several times over the richest person in the Shire and yes Frodo, Merry, and Pippin are likely all landed gentry they don't have jobs.

[ballsbalb]

It’s so frustrating how much racism f1 fans are willing to put up with, especially when that’s coming from other fans

I don’t see it anymore because I am more than happy to block folks, but the amount of awful, hateful, antisemitic bile that gets thrown at Lance just because a bunch of people on the internet, most of whom have never met a Jew, got told that all Zionists are actually Kahanists even though 1) they never stopped to ask the 90+% of Jews who identify as Zionists whether that’s even how we would define the belief (it’s not) and 2) fifteen years ago, none of us would have had to explicitly identify with the term because it was just accepted as part and parcel of what being Jewish is until people outside of our community started demanding we abandon it.

Like, why do you think the Strolls pointedly don’t talk about being Jewish? Why do they even have to use the name Stroll? Why does the fandom gloss over all of this?

alright, this is gonna be a long one.

i’m incredibly sorry you have seen so much anti-semitic stuff online, and i agree that a lot of f1 fans/fan groups online have significant issues with racism & prejudice.

however, the link you draw between zionism & judaism feels incredibly disingenuous. the 90%+ figure is also not accurate, as very few studies have been done on the actual % of jewish people that identify as zionists. the studies/polls that have been done are often flawed, biased, and/or not able to keep up with the constant changing state of the political reality of Israel, especially since the israeli government began its most recent attempt at the genocide of the palestinian people.

saying that being a zionist is “just part of being jewish” seems especially problematic to me. does that mean you don’t consider non-zionist jews to be jewish? because if so, that is in itself anti-semitic.

yes, there is a difference between zionism and kahanism; however, when the state of israel has, throughout its history since its founding in the 1940s off the back of the mass displacement & ethnic cleansing of Palestinians during the Nakba, the ideology of zionism has taken the form of pushing out palestinians from their homes since its earliest days. zionism, in principle, would not be problematic— however, we do not live in a world of principle. we live in a world where zionist ideology has not been exercised in a manner where the preservation of the safety of Jewish people has been the sole priority— as the definition of the word suggests— but one where zionism has, since its inception as a widely-held belief in the past century or so, been used as a tool of oppression, ethnic cleansing and apartheid against Palestinians. in that way, zionism has become more like kahanism than it is the original definition of zionism.

i liken it to the US republican party. the core beliefs of the original idea of Republicanism is small government, individual rights, and little government involvement. however, that is not what the modern republican party is; it has become a white supremacist, uber-capitalist, oppressive party that serves only the interests of the rich & wealthy. however, you wouldn’t know that if you were to only read the definition of what an American Republican is, the same way you wouldn’t get the full picture/context of what modern zionism has become by simply reading the definition of the word. it’s like how Nazis weren’t actually ‘national socialists,’ despite what they called themselves.

i mean this in the nicest way possible, but one cannot simply ‘define’ a belief in the way you imply you can with zionism. zionism as a belief has been used for a century to justify the existence of an apartheid state in Israel, the oppression of Palestinians, and the ongoing genocide against them.

nobody is demanding you abandon zionism. i’m sure that, growing up Jewish, it was likely portrayed to you as an ideology that would provide safety and security to a historically marginalized, oppressed community— but that isn’t what zionism is in actuality. we don’t live in a world of simple definitions; we live in a world where everything is defined by its context and its history, and zionism’s context & history is one of oppression, racism, apartheid, and genocide.

aside from that, i do believe it’s unacceptable that jewish people are still being made to be afraid to talk about their religion or their beliefs, or change their names for safety. it’s incredibly sad that the Strolls had to change their names, like you said, and that they so rarely talk about their religion out of fear of anti-semitic backlash.

i just think equating judaism with zionism is unfair, historically ignorant, and often anti-semitic in of itself.

[lycheedr3ams]

Ahhh please please yes könig analysis and characterization please 🙏🏾

I feel so bad, I forgot to respond to this when I posted my first König character analysis post. Here's the second one!

König Character Analysis

Part 1: His past | Part 2: König's MBTI

I know the validity of the MBTI/16 personalities is debated in the psychology world, but I personally think it can be a good baseline guide to understanding someone's personality. My MBTI is accurate for me and a lot of people I know, so I wanted to do König's. The MBTI is a personality assessment based on the following traits: introvert/extrovert, sensing/intuition, thinking/feeling, and judging/perceiving. you can take a test to see which traits you fit (I like this one) for example, I'm INTJ: introvert, intuition, thinking, and judging. see here for more detailed info (I take quotes from this source throughout the post)

I think König's MBTI is...ISTJ (more details at end of post)

Introvert is obvious, we all know könig prefers to be alone. it's never explicitly stated, but heavily implied based off his bio about being bullied and misunderstood. he also wears a sniper hood all the time. mans is not social

Sensing may be less obvious, but this is what it is: "People who prefer sensing tend to pay a great deal of attention to reality, particularly to what they can learn from their own senses. They tend to focus on facts and details and enjoy getting hands-on experience." I think this makes the most sense for konig. as someone who has been bullied and needs to be hyper alert to stay alive at work, sensing makes much more sense for him than intuition. konig doesn't seem like someone who has much intuition, or even trusts in such things. Being Austrian, konig is also likely very practical and to the point, so he wouldn't have any need or place value in an intangible thing like intuition.

Thinking is obvious for konig, I think. I'm not saying konig doesn't have emotions of course, but he doesn't seem like the type of person to live by his heart. Again likely a cultural difference, Konig would be practical and value facts over feelings. About people who are thinking: "They tend to be consistent, logical, and impersonal when weighing a decision." Also as a mercenary, there isn't any room for emotionally-charged decisions. Konig is for sure a thinker. I don't think a feeler would do well as a mercenary personally.

Judging suits konig better than perceiving: "Those who lean toward judging prefer structure and firm decisions." Of course konig values structure, he went into the military when he was 17! This is also another cultural thing most likely, since Austrians tend to be very formal and respect hierarchy. I'm not saying every Austrian is like this, but you get me. Also as a mercenary, konig must make firm decisions, unlike perceivers who "lean toward perceiving are more open, flexible, and adaptable." I don't think konig is the type of guy to sit down and have a democratic discussion. it's his way or the highway and you can't change my mind (unless it's coming from a higher-ranking officer). konig knows he's damn good at what he does, and he's going to make the best decisions for the team. listen to his voice dialogues, he's constantly telling people that it's "better off in my hands" or to give something to him for safe keeping. if you want something done right, do it yourself, is likely his motto

This is my reasoning that konig is an ISTJ

...

Here's the 16 personalities website description of ISTJ:

"People with the ISTJ personality type (Logisticians) mean what they say and say what they mean, and when they commit to doing something, they make sure to follow through. With their responsible and dependable nature, it might not be so surprising that ISTJ personalities also tend to have a deep respect for structure and tradition. They are often drawn to organizations, workplaces, and educational settings that offer clear hierarchies and expectations."

taglist: @osteawb, @sleepystaarr, @vvampir3s, @simpxinnie, @majocookie, @sharkyyyyyyyyyyyy, @marysdelrey, @kybeth5, @chaos-on-stand-bi, @shannonswizzies, @arcadia509, @bloodstoneruby, @cumikering, @skystreamchan, @junkratssheila-09, @kit-williams, @tangerynsbaby, @dreamdiaries777, @royalbxstxrd, @non-satanic-panic, @theweirdchick, @kiyomisan, @maylif, @mortimoshi, @eneiss, @daughter-ofthe-forest, @celi-xxmoon, @mangoguy, @babypeanut02

[jaycewithawhy]

Starting to get mildly frustrated at the thing where canonically asexual characters are presumed to not be canonically aromantic even when all evidence points to that conclusion.

And, like, I get that a lot of time it's coming from alloace people who are tired of being presumed aro and I don't exactly blame them for being defensive, but I do think they need to take a second to familiarize themselves with the way a character's asexuality is actually handled in canon before rushing to assure everyone that the character doesn't have to be aro too or implying that anyone presenting the character as canonically aro is only pushing a headcanon.

Because I have on multiple occasions seen people who openly admit to not being familiar with the source material confidently state that a canonically asexual character is not canonically aro despite the character in question explicitly tying their experience of "asexuality" to a lack of interest in dating and romance. But because they didn't use the term aromantic within the text itself it's not treated as canon. And, like, author intention/coding shouldn't always be considered canon, but it's also not great to say that a character's clearly intended queer identity can be discounted because the author didn't use the most up-to-date chronically online terminology to communicate their intentions.

With any other sexuality, people are generally comfortable assuming that a character's romantic orientation is the same as their sexual orientation unless otherwise stated. Yes, aspec people as a whole are more likely to use the split attraction model. Yes, technically that romance repulsed character could be gray-romantic or demiromantic. Yes, there's no reason an asexual character should be assumed to be aromantic if it's not indicated either way.

But... like... if it is indicated that the character is aromantic, then not acknowledging that is erasure, plain and simple.

I'm not saying anyone should harass people who write romance with canonically aroace characters, or that there isn't value to writing characters across the asexual and aromantic spectrum, even if it means deviating from those characters' canon identities.

All I am asking is two things:

1. Familiarize yourself with what canon actually is before jumping into a conversation about a character's canon sexual and romantic orientations.

2. Take, like, two minutes to think about what you're saying and whether you would still feel comfortable saying it if the conversation was about portraying (for example) a canonically gay character as biromantic in fanworks. If you wouldn't, maybe think about why those two scenarios feel different to you.

And I do genuinely mean think about. I'm not trying to push any specific conclusion here. My ultimate goal is for people to be more thoughtful about how they engage with this issue, not for everyone to agree with me.

[millenniumfae]

Let me get some things straight.

These are all explicitly Christian concepts:

'God' is analogous to your father, your male government ruler, and your husband. Being antagonistic to any of these is a mirror of faithless misdemeanor

Humanity is predispositioned (or born) to commit a list of behaviors that are Bad, and these are called 'sins'

Gambling is a sin

Pre-marital/recreational sex is a sin

Same-sex relations are a sin

Nudity and the human body is something shameful

Humans have a true self called a 'soul', and it's immortal

Heaven is where god lives, and its where humanity should aspire to go when you die

You need an officiant and witness to get married

Owning land and property should be one of your adult aspirations

You are being protected as part of a 'flock', and there are inhuman beings trying to lead you astray

Obedience as a virtue

Faith as a virtue

Labor as a virtue

Yes, I'm also talking about (insert obscure Christian sect) here. Yes, I'm also talking about (insert school of Christian philosophy/mysticism here).

And yes, I know that your neighborhood church might not promote ___. I know that your childhood Barnes & Noble exclusive bible may have implied some things differently.

But they likely didn't.

What's my point? The western world takes for granted what it's like to have Christianity as the reigning faith. There are sooo many concepts and philosophies and lifestyles out there that don't mesh with christian culture.

Your shit is not universal or innate.

There's a lot of nuance within the christian world, for sure. But for all its complexities, it's still just one of the fish in the ocean. Japan, China, India, Vietnam, Thailand, Taiwan, and many other countries have their christian population in the single digits.

And all those other people have 'universals and innates' that are very different from christian ones - such as the idea of regularly giving god(s) the middle finger, or humanity being the true composer of fate and destiny, or sapience and human-superiority NOT being a desired state of being, or 'souls' not actually existing, or recreational sex as a worship practice, or silence and forever-death being an aspiration, and so much more.

People speak of christianity as a monolith because in comparison? It truly is. It's a world distinct 'cause of its cultures and beliefs, nuanced as they may be.

[genericpuff]

Turns out it's been a while since I've talked about Rachel's medical fetish art so it came as a shock to people when I mentioned it in the last post (I've got quite a few asks about it lmao) So I'm gonna enlighten y'all real quick on what I'm referring to, and yes, it's probably exactly what you're thinking of when you hear the word 'medical fetish'.

CONTENT WARNING: DISCUSSION OF MEDICAL FETISH ART AND DEPICTIONS OF NEEDLES!!!!

So the name "used_bandaid" is one Rachel started using back in the early to mid 2000's. She went by a LOT of different pennames back then, including but probably not limited to:

Pepper_maid

madame_issue

Usedbandaid/used_bandaid

Rach Alex

Rachel Royale

Raquel

Medical Tophat/Medical_Tophat

Frill_house

Gingerbreadcoffin (? this one's kinda weird because the link itself with this username just goes back to her used bandaid MySpace account , so idk if she ever actually used it or if it was even affiliated with her lol)

Now you're probably about to ask, "Puff, how do you know these are all her?" and that's because Rachel still had all of these accounts interlinked through her projects, primarily The Doctor Pepper Show. She seemed to change up usernames often just for the hell of it.

Anyways. I'm not gonna show much of it here because I do think it's better to leave certain things in the past, but there's a LOT of her old work that implies the stuff that's questionable/problematic in LO has always been a part of her identity as an artist (DDLG, hot pink self-insert MC, etc.)

One such example is "madame issue":

This is such a 3-in-1 smoking gun for everything we see in LO. The reference to bandaids (see: used bandaid, which was part of her URL slug for her old flickr where this drawing comes from), the hot pink color palette, and of course, the fact that this character is almost DEFINITELY a self-insert of Rachel, thanks to that shared name.

She's also stated in old commission/print posts that Madame Issue was the one print she wouldn't sell.

She doesn't explicitly say why but I think it's pretty safe to assume it's because Madame Issue is her.

We also have Eva, "the queen of medical fetish". And the tags are... pretty self-explanatory.

That said, that's as much as I'm gonna go into with her old art, because a lot of it does get quite personal with her and I don't really think it accomplishes much more to continue digging up old skeletons, at least not unless they can be seen as parallel to LO (which some of them are and I'll likely be sharing more of those ones in a later post).

That said, there ARE still pages that are accessible without the use of the Wayback Machine that advertise her as a medical fetish artist without the need for extensive digging. If you search up The Doctor Pepper Show on Google, you'll actually find a reddit thread asking what happened to Rachel's old work, and there are comments with loads of resources to access her pre-LO content. You'll also find the listing for The Doctor Pepper Show on The Webcomic List, which literally describes it as a medical fetish comic: "This is a comic set in a world where evil doctors rule, girls wear frilly underpants and people use their manners. *May I please blow your f**king head off?* This comic features Gothic dandys, EGL (Gothic lolitas) and medical fetish fashion. (Neo victorian setting)"

I'll let y'all do your own digging from here, there's a LOT to unpack honestly and while I can't keep you from doing your own research, practice due diligence with what you choose to share. Again, I don't think it's a crime in and of itself for Rachel to want to distance herself from her past as a medical fetish artist, so I think it's only really relevant to show the things that are clearly still influencing LO (like her love for the movie Lolita or the very clear sexualization of youthfulness). While we can try to leave the past where it is, she does still write LO with a lot of the most problematic features of her former identity, and it makes it all the more bizarre that if she is trying to distance herself from it all, then why would she stick with one of the pennames that's the most easily tied back to medical fetishism?

TL ; DR: Rachel started off online with medical fetish and gothic lolita art (at least as far back as we can trace it) and elements of that past are still present in LO today. Use that info responsibly lol

[serotoninisheldinkiwis]

https://www.tumblr.com/serotoninisheldinkiwis/779037290491183104/give-me-a-character?source=share

bumblebee ?

oooohhhh okay okay! i LOVE this man. so much. you haven't provided a continuity so I'm going to do one of the personal most interesting Bees to me, Earthspark!

Honestly, I really think what this guy needs is like. a genuine vacation, a good long nap, and quality time with the people he loves. the entire plot of earthspark has bumblebee being thrown in over his head with things and managing to swim to the surface anyways, and the amount of different ways he's gotten hurt is both concerning and impressive!! his interactions with the Terrans are generally pretty sweet- his scream when Nova Storm collapsed the tunnel with them in it.... honestly, I don't ship many mechs with this Bee (which actually is kind of a constant?). I'm not hardcore, but Starbee is pretty fun, and Breakbee is fun specifically for the potential of angst that there is. A non-romantic OTP... him and happiness /j but for real, I think Dot and Alex are really good friends with Bee. Alex kind of has the hump of getting over his hero worship of Bee, but Dot was a soldier and likely fought at Bee's side at least once- she understands war, and they can bond over being soldiers!! My unpopular opinion about him... ngl, most of my unpopular opinions are things that other mechs do and he reacts to, so i have NO clue if that works jfbhfdh

And one thing that I wished happened in canon.... I could go the easy route and say the voice ripping, but honestly, I think it'd be more fun to have an episode diving into how the war and its conclusion affected Bee. We got an episode to see how it's affected Megatron, but honestly the show doesn't seem to show much of the side effects of war for anyone else? As much as it's funny just to say 'Bumblebee PTSD episode', I genuinely think it would be another great way to break down the wall even more between hero and living being that Bee tries to hide behind in the beginning. I would also love to see actual discussion of the 15 years in hiding and the fact that it's implied Bee had to change his alt mode when he didn't want to- even if he does like his current alt mode.

Overall, I think this Bee has a lot going for him that the show doesn't explicitly state. Earthspark set down a lot of plot points- Bee struggling to connect with his own home team in a significant way, his alt mode changing because his cover was blown, etc- and never truly elaborated on them. I would love to see the show elaborate on them- an episode where it shows Bee struggling to connect with the other Autobots (as a precedent has been set already for that) and the Terrans helping could be really interesting- but I've already settled w the fact I likely won't get it :') but yes, ES Bee is such an interesting critter to me and I really like speculating abt him <33

[calciumcryptid]

I liked the QToey first time scene a lot.

As an asexual person, I get the disappointment in the show runners not carrying over the conversation from the novel (especially since we got a canon asexual character this year in Wandee and on all levels a demisexual character in My Love Mix-Up) and not having Toey ask Q to wait until graduation; however, I do think the asexuality is there just not in an explicit way.

I keep saying this but Q reads heavily as demiromantic on several levels, but they never explicitly state it. It is in the way his friends recognize he experiences romantic attraction/feelings differently, and how there is a clear marker of when Toey unlocked Q's romantic feelings (the pencil box) and the way he is besotted with Toey.

I feel like it is there for Toey in a similar way. I may be wrong, but I never recall a moment where he comments on Q's looks (especially in comparison to TanFang and PhumPeem who are constantly remarking on each other's looks), and is more invested in Q's accomplishments as a person and his passion and interests rather than his appearance.

Then, the actual (implied) sex scene makes some interesting decisions. For example, Q asks for consent but Toey never explicitly gives it in the scenes we're shown and looks a bit fearful. Q is going to notice that, and ask about it. There is such a clear and big jump between the far shot of shirtless Q crawling onto Toey and then the actual (tasteful) sexual activity where we have a close up of their mouths and of Toey's hand grabbing onto Q.

Compare that to PeemPhum who don't have a nearly as big jump in time. QToey probably had a conversation, a conversation I would've liked to see, but something happened between those jumps. QToey's no clothes scene also was a lot more tender than PhumPeem's. PhumPeem are emotionally tender, yes, but are physically more compared to QToey which is simultaneously emotionally and physically tender.

Then, after the sex later in the episode, Toey remarks on Q's looks! He argues with Peem over who has the more attractive boyfriend and even gets handsy in a more deliberate way with Q!

Asexuality, more importantly the demisexuality, is there it is just understated in comparison to the other shows released so far. And you know what? I'm glad Thailand is experimenting with conveying asexual/aromantic identities in different ways this year (we have, what, four in a single year?), because it is a hell of a lot more than other countries do. They may have stumbled a bit on Toey, but it is an effort.