#( LIKE. RIGHT SENTIMENT WRONG EXECUTION )

[sweetestflow3rs]

me when i have an idea of how dod!mean lesbian!vanida looks like ( thanks sua from alst ) but i still have no idea what is her catalyst moment

[starsofang]

everybody had forgotten your birthday. well — everybody except for one person. that person remained a mystery, leaving you a wrapped gift on top of your desk.

the wrapping was pretty, decked in your favorite color with a neat bow slapped on top. it was a stereotypical gift, but it was the only one you’d received for your birthday, and to you, the execution was as beautiful as ever.

one thing was missing, and it was a name. on the tag, rather than saying who it was from, it was a scribbled out heart replaced with a simple smiley face. you didn’t have a clue who the gift could be from, but whoever delivered it was clearly on the fence about revealing their identity.

upon unwrapping the box, you discovered a jewelry box. black, velvet, simple. opening it was an entirely different story.

a lovely bracelet, shiny and new, riddled with little charms of your favorite things. a neat touch of your birthstone was in the mix, as well as a small initial for your name. it was gorgeous, the most perfect gift you could ever ask for, and you desperately wanted to thank the person who retrieved it for you.

you had your suspicions. there was johnny, who could be quite the brat but also a thoughtful friend. or gaz, who was always considerate of your interests and gave you open ears no matter the time of day. ghost didn’t seem the sentimental type, nor did price.

it wasn’t until the next morning, as you walked into the rec room to make yourself a cup of tea, did you know. you adorned the bracelet with pride, the little charms jingling as you poured hot water into your mug.

price stepped in, greeting you with his signature kind smile. you mirrored him, offering a good morning. he joined you in making a tea for himself, the air filled with a comfortable silence. he seemed hyper focused on dipping his tea bag rather than look at you, and if you squinted, you could sense a brief awkwardness looming out of him.

“i see you liked your gift,” he murmured quietly, sparing a quick glance to the bracelet before returning to his tea.

you startled in surprise, eyes wide as you peered up at him while he continued to avoid looking back. “that was you?” you asked.

he hummed in response, finally turning to you to lean his hip on the counter. he lifted his mug, taking a long sip of his fresh tea. “wouldn’t miss your birthday for the world, bug. i was just worried about gettin’ you the right thing.”

“i didn’t know you remembered,” you confessed shyly. you lifted your arm to inspect the bracelet once more, the little initial dangling prettily. “it’s beautiful. i love it. thank you, john.”

price cleared his throat, looking almost flustered. he darted his eyes to your bracelet before looking away again, hiding in his mug. “it’s nothin’, bug.”

“and the crossed out heart on the gift tag was also nothing, i assume?” you grinned knowingly. “the smiley face was a nice touch, though the heart would’ve been cute to keep, too.”

price grumbled into his mug, side eyeing you. “thought the heart might be too much. don’t want you gettin’ the wrong idea.”

“what idea would that be, sir?” you asked teasingly, taking an innocent sip of your tea.

price attempted to hide his smile, but you could see the small quirks on the corners of his mouth, begging to turn up. “minx,” he muttered in feigned annoyance, giving an affectionate pinch to your cheek before stalking off to the exit of the room.

you smiled bashfully, holding the bracelet dear to your chest as you watched him go, the telltale of a smile on his lips leaving with him.

maybe if you prodded him some more, his initial would join yours on the bracelet one day.

[queer-scots-geordie-dyke]

"Today, the similarity between the worldview of modern leftists and Soviet falsification of the period is breathtaking. It is no exaggeration to say that almost all of the Israelophobic tropes in current circulation – that Israel is a racist state, that Zionism is colonialism, that genocidal Israelis are no better than the Nazis, that Israel practises apartheid, that the Holocaust was exaggerated, that diaspora Jews are a fifth column serving Israeli interests and so on – were disseminated by Soviet spin doctors, based on works of classic antisemitism like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

Largely because of Russian efforts, many otherwise well-meaning progressives don’t see what’s wrong with accusing Israel of subjecting the Palestinians to a Holocaust, despite, say, the lack of gas chambers, execution pits or Nazi-style racial discrimination laws in the Jewish state, not to mention the growing Palestinian population. They don’t see what’s wrong with using the slur ‘apartheid’, even though in recent years, an Arab Muslim judge imprisoned a Jewish former prime minister for corruption. (If you visit the West Bank, you will come across large, red signs outside Arab areas warning Israelis not to enter for their own safety. It is hard to sustain the argument that Israel – rather than its neighbours – is the apartheid state.) They happily compare Zionism to imperialist colonialism, ignoring the fact that the Jewish pioneers were not an invading army but a ragtag collection of refugees, dreaming of self-rule in their ancestral home after millennia of life at the mercy of the mob. (As Herzl put it, they simply wanted a place ‘where it is all right for us to have hooked noses, black or red beards, and bandy legs without being despised for these things alone. Where at last we can live as free people on our own.’93 Hardly the sentiments of white supremacist imperialists.)

They take for granted that ‘Zionism is racism’, unaware that this phrase was cooked up in Cold War Moscow and does not survive contact with reality. Even the fact that ‘Zionist’ has become a dirty word in certain quarters today points to the skill of the Soviet propaganda apparatus and the KGB. In the minds of millions around the world, Soviet agitprop succeeded in redefining Zionism from an answer to millennia of persecution to a bourgeois, imperialist project. In this way, it wiped antisemitism clean, allowing progressives to indulge an old hatred by convincing themselves that they were merely taking a principled stand against Israel. Across the decades, the Cold War communists and contemporary Israelophobes both say: we’re not antisemitic, just anti-Zionist. But theirs is a deep and ancient bigotry, resting on disinformation and paranoia. Nearly six decades on, Soviet Israelophobia continues to grip the modern left. It finds an easy target in those lacking knowledge about Israel, Zionism and Jews, and possessing impulses inherited unchallenged from previous centuries."

- Israelophobia: The Newest Version of the Oldest Hatred by Jake Wallis Simons.

[maxiemumdamage]

See, I know people like the idea of Loona giving Octavia a gentle talking to about how her father does care and she hasn’t been abandoned and she needs to give him the chance…

…but I would be just as happy, and I think it might be more realistic, if instead Loona went off on Octavia.

Because realistically? I think if Octavia were asked what Stolas should have done instead in that situation — whether he should’ve instead stayed quiet and not taken the blame and let Blitzø die?

She’d say yes, he should have.

Octavia doesn’t like Blitzø. Of course she doesn’t, her dad acts like a horny weirdo around him, this random Imp doesn’t actually seem to respect or like Stolas to begin with, and she definitely at least partially blames him for her parents divorce.

(Of course she does, she’s not even wrong to — even if their marriage was miserable and abusive before that, Stolas only had the nerve and hope to leave it because of Blitzø.)

But the minute she voices any of that sentiment, I think Loona — who already has a temper, who came so fucking close to watching her own dad die right in front of her, specifically to watching him be executed by a court full of snotty nobles like Octavia, for a crime he didn’t commit that Octavia’s mother and uncle framed him for (which their noble status enabled them to do) — would snap. Rightly so.

Because it really doesn’t seem like Octavia has thought very deeply about…any of the stuff between Stolas and Blitzø and Stella. Of course she hasn’t, she’s a teenager and it’s much easier to pretend her family was perfect until an outsider (Blitzø) screwed everything up.

And now? Now it will be very easy to blame Stolas, say he doesn’t care about her and never did. We know from the season 2 trailer that Octavia will say this!

But Loona has. Uh. Not to compare traumas, but she’s been through way worse. When it comes to parental abandonment and messy family, just the tiny snippet of her life before being adopted was pretty awful. And she’s had plenty of misery with the whole Stolitz drama, too.

I don’t think Sinsmas will be the end of the Octavia plot line, but the beginning of it. It will establish how poorly she currently thinks of everyone involved…

…and then hearing some judgment from Loona, who was previously pretty sympathetic to her familial plight, will make her wake up to how much more complicated the situation actually is. And Octavia will start to actually think about her parents, about Stolas and Stella’s treatment of her.

It’s a good place to set up some flashbacks for season 3 — showing what Stolas’s section of the Goetia family actually looked like, some of the good things that he’s lost with the end of Mastermind. Plus…

Then, just as season 2 opened with the Circus and a flashback to Blitzø and Stolas as kids, season 3 can then give us backstory on Octavia (and by extension Stella) and Loona during their childhoods.

[isabelawritesthings]

The last dance

Pairing: Katarina x F!reader

Synopsis: You are one of the guests at the Black Rose Ball, and your dance partner catches your eye.

Word count: 823

Warnings: Mentions of war and death, mentions of relationship breakups.

An: I know it's just a cinematic, but my heart can't stand seeing beautiful women in fiction and not writing about them 😭 I tried to make it longer but my creative block isn't helping. (In case you're confused and only know Arcane, Garen is her romantic interest in the lore of League of Legends and Jericho Swain is the one who rules Noxus, Demacia and Ionia are regions that are at war with Noxus.)

What happened in Piltover was surprising for all of Runeterra. A simple inventor becoming a kind of God? Even more so in the city of progress? Simply surprising.

Your parents were longtime members of the Black Rose, and with Mel Medarda's return, the organization needed a distraction. And just like in the times when Noxus was a monarchy ruled by an emperor, why not have a ball?

"You look beautiful.” Your mother said to you. “Do we really have to go to this ball? Are we really going to pretend that Ambessa's daughter isn't coming back to finish us all off?" Your mother looked surprised. "You better not say things like that at the ball.” Your father enters the room. "We're going to be late like this, ladies."

It was a masquerade ball, as the Black Rose always liked anonymity, but you didn't care, you wouldn't be wearing a mask that night, you thought the masks were too ugly to wear.

“Honey, do you mind if me and your father go say hi to some friends?" Your mother asked. "No, I think I'll just dance a little." You walk out onto the dance floor, and dance with the first person you see, not caring who it is under that mask. “You dance very well," said the masked person, it was a female voice. "Thank you... Are you part of the Black Rose, or are you just one of those nobles they invited?" The person behind the mask laughed. "You tell me, you're not wearing a mask after all.”

“Those are pretty ugly." You and your dance partner change positions. "I prefer you like this without the mask, you're very pretty.” You gave a small laugh. "You must be the one who's beautiful, redheads usually are." The woman looked you in the eyes. "Maybe we could talk in a more private place." You smiled. "I'd love to." The two of you walked to the garden.

In the garden, the mysterious woman takes off her mask, you weren't wrong, she was indeed beautiful. "Nice to meet you, Katarina." you smiled. "Y/N." Katarina sits on the garden bench. "Your parents are members of the Black Rose, aren't they?” You sit down next to her. "Yes, long before I was born." She gives a shy laugh. "They're all liars and murderers... You don't look like one of them.”

“And I'm not, it's just my parents who have these crazy ideologies of theirs, if I could, I'd be in Demacia or Ionia right now, but I would rule out going to Ionia, there's a very anti-Noxian sentiment there thanks to the war.” Katarina looks at the floor. "Demacia... That name brings back memories." You looked curious. "Are you from there?" Katarina looks at you. "No, I was born right here... It's just that it was there that I lived the best moment of my life, because I found love." You looked even more curious.

“Garen, his name is Garen, he was in the Demacian army, it could never work since we are also at war with Demacia, he would probably be executed for treason if anyone found out.” She looked sad. "Jericho Swain is still going to destroy this country with those stupid wars!" She looked at you again. "I still love him, but it could never work." You changed the subject. "So, what are you doing here? You don't look like a member of the Black Rose." Her eyes looked at you intently. "Let's just say I came to finish something." You thought it was strange that she was staring at you like that.

“You're taking too much of a risk by meeting me in a secluded location, if I were a spy you'd be dead by now." You looked even more surprised. "I... I... It's just that I found you quite peculiar…” She stopped staring at you. "Peculiar? I've heard better compliments... You look like you're also trying to forget a love." She figured it out pretty quickly. "I fell in love with a girl recently, she was in the army, she ended up dying in Ionia." Katarina's face remained still. "I'm sorry." You looked at her. "Don't be sorry, this fate was already predictable.”

You lost track of how much time you spent talking to Katarina on that bench, the more you found out about her, the more impressed you were, like how she had been trained by generals from all over the country.

“I think you need to go now, your parents must be worried." She stood up. "Thanks for the evening, I needed a little chat before I do what I came to do." You stood up too. "You keep mentioning this duty you have to do tonight but you never say what it is." She looks at you. "Let's just say it involves shocking some people at this ball."

She kisses you on the cheek before she leaves, you blush slightly.

[endearing-dalliance]

She-Ra PoP vs Arcane S2

Physically disabled character considered inferior by his society, abandoned instead of being helped

Technological genius who benefits from having a partner

Uses technology to improve his health and quality of life

Becomes fundamentally altered by a force outside his control (with Christian and cult references)

And now here's where She-Ra and Arcane's messages diverge: Hordak is consistently supported and loved by his partner throughout his journey. She doesn't let up when he tries to hide his pain from her.

She does NOT tell him that he is wrong to try to "fix" himself and actively helps him do so. She recognizes the validity of how he choses to deal with his condition, which was caused by genetic "imperfections" during the cloning process. But she impresses upon him that he does not deserve the physical pain or mental torment of being a "failure".

Her message was that his imperfections do not limit him or define him. They are a part of life, part of the world, and a part of him, and he is not a failure for having them.

Meanwhile in Arcane, Jayce criticizes Viktor for "wanting to cure what he thought were weaknesses" and specifically mentions his leg and disease. The two things that brought him chronic pain, progressively deteriorating quality of life, and one would ultimately kill him. Also, Viktor never actually expressed that he was ashamed of them. We as the audience are left to assume that's how he feels, because why wouldn't he? What else would a disabled person feel? Not that he is perfectly aware that Piltover's oppression and exploitation of his people likely directly contributed to both those issues. Not that he values himself for his intellect and contributions to Hextech even though society constantly prioritized Jayce. Nope, obviously he feels so bad about it that he tries to turn all of humanity into robots. On top of that, Christian Linke has explicitly said the Hexcore corrupted him and Sky was a manifestation of it manipulating him. So even if he did feel that way before, he's still not at fault for what's been going on.

And I think a key part of this is the mindset of the team who created this show. Was this simply a poorly executed but positive sentiment, or a symptom of ableist bias from a team of 3 able-bodied people? We can harp on Jayce all we want, but ultimately someone designed him this way, and THIS is what I take issue with. Christian also says in the art book explicitly that Viktor fixing his leg and spine make him lose part of his humanity. If this is the logic behind Jayce's monologue, it is NOT positivity. It is a direct shaming of a disabled person's right to choose how they take care of themselves, said by a character who has already violated Viktor's autonomy and wishes, written by a team that equates self-improvement with inferior humanity.

Amanda Overton has repeatedly mentioned she was inspired by She-Ra, which is pretty obvious here. Unfortunately, this isn't the unequivocally positive message she thinks it is, and she missed all the nuance of Entrapta and Hordak's conversations about it. A huge component of why it works in She-Ra is because Entrapta's wisdom comes from her understanding of her own "failures" and "imperfections" due to her autism, and Hordak reciprocates support throughout the show. One of the key members of her development team is an autistic person who provided a realistic view of what an autistic person can be like.

This is two people who understand each other's pain uplifting each other, NOT Entrapta being Hordak's miraculous savior at the 11th hour. Having Jayce need a leg brace for like 5 minutes does not give him ability to understand Viktor's lifelong struggles that were also killing him.

For future seasons, I hope they bring on staff who actually have any idea what they are fucking talking about.

[pheonix561]

Why on earth wouldn't they give Nancy Parker her Reward Money?

I can't fathom it. It's got to be the stupidest decision all the agencies offering reward money could possibly make.

Luigi is being hailed as a folk hero. Deeply popular sentiment that american healthcare is broken and that people like Brian Thompson were profiting off it. News agencies trying to publish articles and push stories about why Luigi was actually a terrible person, and viewers and readers refusing to agree, no matter the political lean of whatever news outlet is publishing it. Luigi Mangione's got the popular vote.

The people who own these agencies and fund these police agencies offer a reward to anyone who can give information that leads to the capture of Luigi Mangione. They do it from this platform of, "Look, this is the right thing to do. Help us capture this guy who murdered someone in cold blood. The system works, and we want to prove it." And, they manage to find someone who wants to agree with them. Somebody who works a low paying, high stress job where she will always be seen as expendable, who is just not benefiting from "the system" at all, and still wants to cooperate. She spots the suspect, she calls 911, they catch him. And then they tell her "Oh, you're not eligible for the reward, because you didn't do it through the proper channel. It was supposed to be through crime stoppers, and you called 911." Or, at least, that how I understand it this morning.

I mean, just pretend for a second the people who run united healthcare know how terrible their system is for the consumers. As if they can clearly and definitely see from their position how unpopular they are, that some random could execute them on the sidewalk on any given morning and be met with nationwide acclaim. It's just in their best interest to prove to people that Luigi was wrong, and a bad guy, and that good people aren't like Luigi. And they found one person, one everyday working class lady, who was willing to put her name and reputation on the line. And what do they do? They screw her out of the money.

I mean, it's such a perfect example to point to about how health insurance fails in america, and why they're so hated. Is this more of that deny, delay, defend, for the pay out? Are they expecting Nancy to appeal, or to sue, to get the $60,000? She did what they wanted her to do, they benefited from her doing it, and when it comes time for them to repay her in kind, they skip out on the bill because she didn't say it perfectly. Does she get to have Luigi Mangione returned to her, as a refund?

I mean really, I think I've been looking at these companies and alphabet agencies as perfectly intelligent, calculating, and malicious. But by screwing over the lady they were relying on to catch the guy they were looking for, I mean, the only conclusion I can draw is they really are, truly, just greedy and short sighted.

[velvees-archive]

Making my case for ManoSouta, Ace Attorney’s token doomed yaoi

Bronco knew, and still he told nobody.

Ace Attorney Investigations 2 full game spoilers ahead!

Chalk it up to lucky guesswork or my expertly honed writer’s intuition (sarcasm), but so rarely do I latch onto side ships that when I found myself gravitating towards Bronco (Manosuke Naito) x Simeon (Souta Sarushiro, hence ManoSouta) simply because of this line, I knew something was up…

…and boy was I right.

Simeon Saint’s fall from grace was a direct consequence of subjection to a corrupt justice system and equally as corrupted individuals. There was his father, who saw Simeon’s existence as a means to an end (the end being a pharmaceutical “recipe” book that could cure Gusto’s affliction and a shiny world class confectioner title), his best friend, who kidnapped him and almost killed him on his dad’s orders, and—if that wasn’t enough to destroy someone’s psyche—there was the presidential assassination trio, who tormented, interrogated, and dangled their judicial and executive power over him like a special-brand curse.

This is a character who hit rock bottom so long ago he believes nothing is left of him except agony, paranoia, and anger. He crafts an intricate revenge plot that dishes Simeon-esque justice to everyone who wronged him. The acts are performed mercilessly, too, no hesitation, regret, or unnecessary feelings involved in the flawless execution of his plan.

Well, almost.

There was one person in the same boat—no family, no longstanding companionship (barring each other)—who set Simeon’s descent in motion. Ironically, it is also through this person that we’re shown what remains of his humanity.

For me to talk about Simeon’s feelings as shown before we found out he was the mastermind, though, we have to see how he reacted after the big reveal. Upon being fingered as the villain, Simeon makes it clear he does not feel remorse towards any of the people “he” killed. After all, they drew first blood; Simeon firmly believes retaliation was warranted.

That is, until Miles clarifies the following points surrounding Simeon’s kidnapping, his memory loss, and the fate of his and Bronco’s fathers:

The reason Simeon was kidnapped wasn’t so Bronco’s dad could kill Simeon’s; Bronco was only meant to stall Simeon so he couldn’t help his dad win the confectionary competition finale

When a murder did occur, the victim of the murder was not Simeon’s dad, but Bronco’s.

This is how Simeon responds:

“He deserved to die!…Didn’t he?”

This line, in conjunction with the contemplative flashback shown in the video, conveys Simeon’s uncertainty/regret about inciting Knight’s murder, though one could argue this is only in reaction to the revelation rather than a lingering attachment to Knight, who he “stopped thinking” was his friend 18 years ago.

But then he follows it up with this.

“Then what was all this…for…!?”

At this point, you have to ask yourself why Simeon is questioning his entire plan (keyword in the quote is all, not just Bronco’s death) because he realized whose father actually died. Technically speaking, Bronco did still kidnap him. On top of that, everyone else Simeon exacted revenge on still wronged him, so it makes no sense to say this unless Bronco’s supposed role in “Simeon’s” father’s death was pivotal in Simeon’s decision to proceed with his whole plot. In other words, the reason Simeon questions his plot after Miles’ clarification is because this fundamental misunderstanding was what pushed him to take revenge on everyone in the first place. Bronco’s betrayal weighed so heavily on him that Simeon had no choice but to kill him in line with his principles, but he didn’t actually want to.

I’m not saying he wanted to spare Bronco because of the power of friendship or some misplaced sentimentality. It was inevitable that Bronco would die by Simeon’s hand because Simeon vowed to get his revenge on everyone who hurt him. What I am saying is that Simeon’s resolve is clearly shaken once Bronco’s role in his suffering is cleared up. As soon as Simeon realized Bronco’s dad didn’t murder his dad, he regretted killing his only friend. This is the only time Simeon shows remorse.

You might think Simeon’s hatred for Bronco stems from his kidnapping and its consequences, aka setting off the chain of events that would ruin Simeon’s life outside of “his” dad dying. However, Simeon doesn’t hold a grudge over Bronco for anything other than the kidnapping. The statement, “If you hadn’t detained me 18 years ago…it wouldn’t have had to…end like this” is vastly different from “If you hadn’t detained me 18 years ago, none of this would have happened.” His “hatred” for Bronco was a personal grudge he had against his best friend, who also happened to be the son of his dad’s killer. Bronco was on Simeon’s list because his betrayal stung Simeon most. “What was all of this for” really meant, “I wouldn’t have gone through with any of this if I knew you weren’t involved.”

Had Simeon truly hated him, it’d be difficult to justify why he snuck away from his carnival preparations to talk to Bronco. Why did he pay such an incriminating visit when he’d already delivered Bronco’s chess set during visiting hours? And why did he tell Bronco he snuck something into it, leaving him vulnerable to counterattack should Bronco tattle?

Why did he bother saying goodbye?

Simeon’s actions betray logic because try as he might to hate Bronco with all his heart, he cared. Bronco Knight’s betrayal was the straw that broke the camel’s back, but imagine if the misunderstanding had been sorted from the start. Simeon's reaction to wrongfully killing Bronco was a stellar portrayal of his desire for genuine companionship, and a peek into what remained of his humanity before he was unmasked. He really was all alone.

If you’re still not sold on them being the doomed yaoi representatives of Ace Attorney, if a misplaced desire for revenge cutting their time short doesn’t make this tragic enough, then consider this: Bronco legitimately cared for and trusted Simeon, but unlike Simeon, he was left completely in the dark.

He’s legitimately excited to see Simeon’s performance. He happily awaited Simeon’s chess correspondences because he just likes being around him!!

Perhaps the biggest sticking point in all of this is that Simeon admitted he put something in his chess set, Bronco definitely opened his chess set, and yet when it came time for Fifi Laguarde to interrogate him (aka when she discovers the chisel), Bronco does not tell her he doesn’t own it, he does not tell her he’s been set up, and he does not tell her his best friend—who the precinct knows visited him—is the one who put it there. Why didn’t Bronco tell her?

That’s the greatest pull of their dynamic: we don’t know. Maybe everything happened too fast. Maybe he did try to protest. Maybe he ratted Simeon out but Laguarde was already in hysterics. Maybe Bronco didn’t understand why the chisel frenzied the warden so, and paid the ultimate price for it.

Or maybe, just maybe, Bronco already knew the moment he saw the chisel. Maybe he died a knowing victim of Simeon’s retribution. Maybe he thought it better that the knowledge of their past—Paul Halique’s ring and Simeon’s secret hatred— dissolve with his last breath.

Worse yet, maybe he couldn’t believe Simeon would do something like this. Maybe he continued to have blind faith in him despite the damning evidence. Maybe he believed in him.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

I know this sentiment is like, rampant, on any subreddit that isn't transmasc specific

But right now especially, it really hurts

And I don't know what to do

https://www.reddit.com/r/trans/s/hZVLpf6qmq

Aw jeez, that's a doozie of a post. Let's go through this line by line, indents are from reddit, italics are from the Executive Order:

The language of Trumps executive orders regarding trans rights have just been revealed. It is beyond disgusting that his approach to transgender rights was to specifically target transfems and transgender women in his language. 

Well, not to be a pedantic bitch, but Trump didn't write the thing. Stephen Miller did. Anyways, the author of this post is wrong. The order is very unilateral and affects both trans men/mascs and trans women/fems

Some examples:

(b) “Women” or “woman” and “girls” or “girl” shall mean adult and juvenile human females, respectively.

(c) “Men” or “man” and “boys” or “boy” shall mean adult and juvenile human males, respectively.

(d) “Female” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.

(e) “Male” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.

(f)  “Gender ideology” replaces the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa

(b)  Each agency and all Federal employees shall enforce laws governing sex-based rights, protections, opportunities, and accommodations to protect men and women as biologically distinct sexes.  Each agency should therefore give the terms “sex”, “male”, “female”, “men”, “women”, “boys” and “girls” the meanings set forth in section 2 of this order when interpreting or applying statutes, regulations, or guidance and in all other official agency business, documents, and communications.

(d)  Agencies shall effectuate this policy by taking appropriate action to ensure that intimate spaces designated for women, girls, or females (or for men, boys, or males) are designated by sex and not identity.

As you can see, the order talks about both "men" and "women" in it. It's not targeted only at trans women/fems.

Nearly all orders did not mention the existence of transmascs and transgender men, and used dehumanizing terms and phrases to generalize all transgender people, primarily transgender women.

Buddy, did you read the order? It talks about how men are men from birth, which I can assure you, isn't talking about trans women. What do you think "permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa" means?

Us transmascs will not suffer the most- it's clear

Too early to say which will suffer "more" (whatever the fuck that means), but trans men/mascs will suffer

WE HAVE WORK TO DO AND WE HAVE BEEN ELECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF TO STEP UP AS THE MORE PRIVELEDGED PEOPLE WITHIN THE TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY.

Literally what? Babes, honey, of two current elected officials, one is a trans man, James Roesener, and he's a state representative in fucking New Hampshire. The other, Sarah McBride, is a trans woman, and holds a higher position than James. No trans man has been "elected by the government".

Do social work for trans people, participate in campaigns, spread online awareness, stand up for our trans sisters, protest for easier hormone access.

Ah yes, Estrogen, Spiro, and Progesterone, the hard HRT to get. Nothing like those trans men who can just order testosterone off the internet, right? /s

Does that mean that literally anyone can just access feminizing HRT? Nope, but it's definetly a fuck ton easier to get, and actually possible to get, on the grey market, compared to T. If anything, people should be fighting for more access to T, but I guess not.

Even though trans men aren't as targeted as trans women, we WILL NOT STOP FIGHTING for you.

Oh honey, there's still a lot of targeted Trump policy that affects trans men. Have you forgot about the mass protests about the revoking of Roe v Wade? Or how Trump signed another order that revoked Executive Order 14020 which focused partially on access to reproductive rights, 14021 which focused on trans kids rights in school, 14075 which is another bill that gave rights to trans mascs?

Hell, Trump axed a bill that would form an initiative to focus on how to combat the act of corrective rape, which disproportionately affects trans men/mascs, as sexual violence against trans women/fems is usually public/with an audience such as forced genital exposure (Doan-Minh, S. (2019). Corrective rape: An extreme manifestation of discrimination and the state's complicity in sexual violence. Hastings Women's LJ, 30, 167.)

This reads almost like a trans woman pretending to be a trans man, trying to push a narrative that it's the women that are truly affected the most, when in reality, trans men/mascs and trans women/fems are fucked differently, in different ways, with different issues for each.

That whole post gives me the ick, and if the OP is actually transmasc, then I feel bad for his need to prostate himself before trans women and downplay the trauma that his fellow men/mascs undergo daily.

[eatsbooks]

a deep dive into eris vanserra's birth chart

virgo sun — mutable, earth, mercury-ruled

intelligent and methodical. extremely caring but reserved in expressing his full range of emotions. prefers routine and consistency. always structured or otherwise very organized in what he does. knowledgeable and exacting but open to altering his opinions or points of view given new information and adequate reason. sarcastic and humorous. harsh on himself and on his loved ones in an effort to incite growth. ambitious — no-nonsense attitude in completing tasks and seeing them through to their end.

capricorn moon — fixed, earth, saturn-ruled

the moon is in detriment in capricorn, making emotional connections particularly difficult for him — both in expression and acceptance. this moon sign is associated with growing up too quickly and having a strained relationship with the mother. need i say more. prefers logic over feeling. insists on digging deeper to see all sides of a situation before forming an opinion and allowing an emotional response. a general sense of never being quite satisfied with what he currently has, always needing to push on to more, to better. keeps emotions close to the chest, buried deep, until perhaps they are not quite even there anymore, until something cracks down into the core of him and the pressure forces them to erupt.

libra mercury — cardinal, air, venus-ruled

extremely intelligent but perhaps underestimated by others. seeks balance — constantly weighing the pros and cons before executing decisions. can easily read into intentions but not necessarily intuitive when it comes to emotions. tactful when required. would prefer to bottle up personal issues than start an interpersonal argument. not a very confrontational placement on its own, but with a scorpio mars chart ruler and an aries rising, this is outweighed when the confrontation extends beyond interpersonal relationships. an element of justice-seeking to his thought processes — not a binary right and wrong, good and bad, but a sense of, i will see this put to rights, whatever that looks like to me in this situation.

virgo venus — mutable, earth, mercury-ruled

venus is in fall in virgo, making the way eris shows love easy to be misinterpreted and his acceptance of love stilted. shows love through consistency and action. grand, heartfelt, romantic sentiments are unlikely to sway him, and he is not going to participate in them readily. wants to see affection through what others do to prove it exists — because that is how he shows it. needs someone as motivated as himself. initially skeptical and closed off towards love, critical of it even. diligent and practical once he lets the love in. will take care of all the little things so his partner does not have to, will try to quietly perfect everything because way down deep, all he has ever wanted is to be taken care of in that way.

scorpio mars — fixed, water, mars-ruled

mars is in domicile in scorpio, meaning that taking action comes naturally to him. where an aries mars would give him a sort of overt aggression, scorpio mars gives eris that covert aggression he is known for. incredibly strategic, possessive, and analytical. sees everything (bolstering his libra mercury) and knows how and when to act on the information he has to greatest effect. very passionate when working towards a goal or engaging with a subject that interests him. does not like to ask for help even if needed — would rather use information as leverage than reveal any weakness in outright asking. has a difficult time expressing his emotions; they might not be recognizable at all even when the action he takes is in pursuit of them because of how well he hides his true motivations.

aries ascendant — cardinal, fire, mars-ruled

aries in the first house means that eris’s scorpio mars rules his chart, governing the trajectory of his life and coloring his personality. while an aries rising is typically very straightforward and direct, his scorpio mars chart ruler (and capricorn moon and libra mercury) gives him that never-quite-says-anything-plainly affect. intense and passionate, vocal and in-charge; demands the attention of a room without even having to ask for it. can be charming when he wants to be, but when he doesn't, he is hellfire, he is wrath. confrontation does not cow him. knows what it is he wants, and he will get it. does not often need to repeat himself or ask twice — and if he has to, he will do it himself.

[treasure-mimic]

Psychopomp and What Things Mean When They Don't Mean Anything

So if you haven't noticed or you don't follow me, I recently became interested in a small, one-man dev team indie game by name of Psychopomp. As a brief synopsis and pitch, Psychopomp is a game about a woman who seemingly suffers from paranoid delusions, through the lens of this narrator she tells us that there's a labyrinth of catacombs hidden underneath every public building and sets out to explore them to uncover the world's secrets, armed with nothing but a store bought hammer.

The game's intro puts it in words better than I could and more influential than any pitch is just seeing the protagonist's design.

As one commentator states, she looks like a skateboard mascot from the mid-2000s. Like she should be on those posters with a snarky quip just fucked up enough to catch those pearl clutching puritans off guard. I love the style and I love the tone and I love the premise.

This might be the best time to note that if you're interested in playing this game, you should stop reading here, as this discussion will contain spoilers. It's a short game, took me about 3 hours on my first playthrough, and it's pretty cheap, even has a free demo in the form of the base version with Psychopomp Gold serving as the expanded, completed experience.

Anyways.

I've always found conspiracy theories fascinating but in the modern age it can be hard to immerse yourself in these reality-detached belief systems without acknowledging, you know, the racist dogwhistling and tangible physical harm it's causing to society at the present moment. Psychopomp is able to pretty gracefully sidestep this issue by setting its anarchic anti-government sentiments against its protagonist's paranoid delusions rather than adherence to a faith or belief system.

Indeed, the game seems to take systemic beliefs as its central enemy. The entities that are necessary to kill to progress through its levels are defined by the systems they interact in, historical figures of elevated status, keystone positions in industrial manufacturing, even abstract systems like urbanism and DNA composition are posed as societal and oppressive. I'm not saying that there's no way to interpret the game in bad faith and make it directed at marginalized social, political, or ethnic groups, but I also struggle to imagine the person who takes the game literally on its face value?

Which I guess leads me to the main topic I wanted to discuss. The game very obviously has an unreliable narrator (for the record, the protagonist remains nameless for the bulk of the game, I will be referring to her as Venus as it's the closest she has to a name that's explicitly stated within the text itself) with the flavor of one whose intake of reality may be different from what's actually occurring. The game uses a combination of conspiratorial rambling and dream logic to stage its unreal tone; for example, one level delves into the "biology" of buildings, stating that they use graffiti to communicate and that black mold is a pheromone used to evacuate its inhabitants to allow for mating. Loading screens come with "Gameplay Tips" and "Real World Tips", both of which are often dense and inscrutable; for example you might get a pair like "Not all enemies are friends" and "Viruses do not exist. Illness is simply your body punishing you for what you've done wrong."

Surrealism and unreality as stylistic choices can be a bit of a tightrope walk to get right. On the one hand, if you make it explicit that a story takes place in a state that did not happen even within the story's universe, a dream or a hallucination, it can rob the narrative of its stakes, regardless of how well executed the internal metaphors are. Psychopomp very explicitly does not do this, regardless of what it is that Venus is experiencing, the game makes it clear through scientific logs and communications (as well as a brief epilogue set outside of her perspective) that something abnormal is happening, the question is just where in between normality and Venus's experiences does the truth of the game's narrative actually lie.

The other side of the tight rope is literal interpretation, presenting a setting that's absurd to our sensibilities but tangibly explainable, where meaning is supplanted by lore and the cosmology begins to solidify into a set of Calvinball rules that don't make sense, but are still adhered to, and this is the side Psychopomp threatens to lose me on. There is a credible argument to be made that there is no difference, that what Venus is experiencing is her reality without warping and distortion, it's a more credible argument than saying she completely fabricated all of it, and it's an argument I was starting to wonder wasn't the intended interpretation. Until I got the game's second, secret ending.

Psychopomp has one collectible that doesn't serve a direct gameplay purpose, but each catacomb has a key hidden away, often behind false mimic walls that bleed and scream when you hit them with your hammer, and which unlock new rooms in the only permanent location "Home". Initially a gray, cubical, concrete room with a single mattress and a small table with a radio on it, collecting keys allows you to further explore outside(?)/within(?) the home with a unique camera perspective and limited interaction. In the first layer there's a blob man who cries out in torment, demanding to know why you specifically made the world like this, giving some credence to the deification of Venus implied by the game's ending. In the last layer, Venus traverses underneath and past her own brain to unlock a repressed memory.

I take this as confirmation that there's some level of abstraction at play here. Under scrutiny it feels as though there must be some level of abstraction at play here because when taken as a whole, the conspiracies start becoming outright contradictory, even if you try to take the cosmology at play as fact, which are the closest thing to objective facts that we have.

See, Venus's perspective takes place an alternate Earth, one that both seemingly was broken off from the planet and now orbits it like a new moon but also has always existed. One of the locations is a natural history museum which explains the history of sentience on this counter-earth, humans rose, went extinct, were supplanted by a species called the thrait, then humans returned in a mutated form and retook the surface and forced the thrait back underground (though the museum also refers to the thrait as extinct despite being the most common friendly NPC you will encounter). Another location seems to imply that the humans of this world, or maybe only some of them, are artificial clay creatures, reinforced by the arbiters of the DNA factory too being clay alleles. The Human Seedbed even has the game's most effective jumpscare in it, where Venus cannot leave the area without being confronted with a jittering clay facsimile of herself.

But with that in mind, what the hell is Venus then? By no account is she one of these artificial clay people but then how did she get here? The game's introduction implies that she used to be a normal person, or at least closer to, with lived experiences inclusive of complete ignorance to this underworld, the game's endings imply that she's an immortal god-being who has been intentionally working towards her own reawakening, and that is actually one of the least ambiguous plot points within the narrative. None of the pieces of this world lock together to form a cohesive vision of a setting that operates on even the barest of internal rules, and yet the game in the same step refuses to be a character study or subconscious examination, I mean the epilogue is a damn sequel hook that involves assembling the damn Avengers to combat the ramifications of the events of the game.

So, I come to realize, I'm the problem. I might, in fact, be thinking about this too hard.

One of the locations in the game is called "Daddy's Bad Place". It is a single, tiny room of a house or apartment, frozen in a moment of tearing itself apart, that only contains a dusty old TV set with a small, pointless ornament sitting on top. In any other surrealist game, this isolated circle of clarity, a compact orb of recognizable terrain, would be a moment to deliver one single jolt of reality into the metaphor of the protagonist's journey through their own subconscious.

In Psychopomp the TV turns on and delivers a distorted warning about a giant insect which is deadly, deceitful, and above all, not real.

In Daddy's Bad Place I come to realize something. The lore is fake, the characterization is fake, the dichotomy of truth and delusion is fake, the insect is not real. Let's think about what I'm doing here for a moment, right? I'm trying to discern the truth from within a work of fiction. None of its true, none of it happened, what difference does it actually make?

The thing about conspiracy theories is that they don't make logical sense. It's a known phenomenon that conspiracy theorists love to debate, but cannot be reasoned out of their beliefs by facts or logic. There is never a counter, but always a failsafe argument that can be retreated to for safety. What conspiracy theories do make is emotional sense, they make narrative sense. The line that initially sold me on Psychopomp was one of the aforementioned loading screen tips, "All the food you've ever eaten is rotten. You have never tasted fresh food."

Patently false statement, does not hold under scrutiny, but I, as someone who lives in America and lives in a city center and has to get all my food through corporations, can look at a statement like that and say yeah. Checks out. I believe you. We would know if children were being smelted into egg slicers underneath public schools, but it resonates with our emotions about the systems of education we enforce upon children, so it could be true. We would know if buildings were a living, reproducing organism, but it resonates with the feelings of being born into a world where urbanism exists, has existed as permanent fixtures of the world, and is continuously encroaching upon the face of the world, so it could be true.

Anyone who understands the fundamentals of incentives and human psychology does not need to believe that there is a coordinated group of ontologically evil individuals driving the world to ruin for ruin's sake, but that narrative still feels true, it becomes validating in the ways that it plays off of the emotions of believers until it becomes a foundational pillar of belief that cannot be destroyed by logical contradiction.

Psychopomp, in the same way, presents information about its internal systems that cannot be true logically but form self-justification anyways through emotional resonance. It doesn't matter if the lore works because its stated, it isn't wrong, so it must be a truth. This is the way that Psychopomp emulates the unreality of the conspiracy theory in a way that can avoid the disturbing implications of the real world practice. I've made comparison to surrealism by dream logic and surrealism by internal self-reflection, but this is a different mode entirely and the game simply refuses to operate by those tropes at its core. Conspiracy is itself contradiction, not the soft contradiction of two halves of a dream that don't lock together, but the hard contradiction of attempting to apply emotion and narrative to a waking world that rejects either premise. Psychopomp, then, is surrealism by way of conspiracy.

[emblemxeno]

Corrin's probably an easier character to tolerate when they aren't front and center. I get that you adore their compassion, but it's that exact trait that makes them feel uncompelling to others.

First you have how their overwhelming sugary sweet compassion and naivete make them come across as infantalized, but this isn't really treated as a bad thing ever? Corrin never makes mistakes that the narrative treats as mistakes. Corrin almost got their party killed trusting an obvious traitor? That's okay, Corrin wouldn't be so great if they weren't suicidally trusting! Mistakes are only ever opportunities to confirm Corrin's priors and to claim that actually they did the right thing anyway.

Then you have how they never have to kick the dog. Corrin never has any choice but to do bad things in Conquest and characters will line up to take the burden off Corrin's hands or quite literally commit suicide so Corrin never has to do anything that might give them room to grow.

How does Corrin change over the story in any way but the most basic? They're already brave right from the start, and just learning more about the world isn't growth, nor is going from overly trusting to still overly trusting.

They're just such a nothing character if you're looking for anything more than the patron saint of trust and compassion.

I respect your view of things, even if I disagree.

To that end, as to why I disagree, it's because I think there's simply more than one way for a story to move its protagonist from A to B.

Contrary to your point of criticism regarding Corrin not developing, I believe that it's actually intentional. Or rather, the development he gets is atypical of what you'd expect.

As you say, the typical protagonist is expected to develop in a way that signifies a change in their core as a result of happenings in the narrative. Fire Emblem as a series of course, is exactly like this, with most of its protagonists showcasing a maturity or change that you can compare to earlier scenes and visibly see the difference. Leif, as an example, by the end of Thracia would not bum-rush into savior missions like he did at the start of the game.

Corrin, rather, well... when faced with having to save strangers from being brutally executed? He'd do that again by the end of the game as he did at the beginning. That's not a change, because he embodies that trait already at the start of the game.

So what's the deal? I argue that Corrin doesn't need to learn to do things differently or change a part of his personality. Rather, what he develops is the ability to stop second guessing himself or doubting his role in the world.

Trusting people is a good thing. Compassion for other living beings is a good thing. Seeking a world without brutal violence and better conditions for all is a good thing.

But Corrin exists in a world telling him the opposite. His role though, is to prove that sentiment wrong. That when he speaks of peace and unity, he means it, it's not an empty platitude.

I've encountered the same opinion you hold regarding the other characters in Fates supposedly "bailing out" Corrin so he doesn't have to suffer from his mistakes.

Yet the thing is... what mistakes? Yes, Zola tried to kill the party and kidnapped Izana, but Corrin makes a reasonable case to keep him captive as he's unarmed and without a military unit. Anthony made insensitive comments, but he's also physically quite young and small, and didn't actively do anything suspicious, so is it wrong for Corrin to give him the benefit of the doubt?

There's also the aspect of him being family to a LOT of people, including both royal families of the major kingdoms. I think claiming that characters artificially bail Corrin out of bad situations is a bit of a bad faith reading of what's presented.

These are people who care deeply about him, people who want to spare him suffering because of who he is, what he does and how he was raised. Is that not what family is meant to do? Shoulder part of the burden that comes with anything that may put yourself at risk?

Furthermore, Corrin also "bails out" his siblings as well.

In Birthright, were it not for Corrin searching for his brothers who led a charge without him, Takumi wouldn't be found and Ryoma would be stuck playing smalltime rebel without an actual way to meaningfully reach Garon.

In Conquest, were it not for Corrin exploiting loopholes and carefully using words and circumstance, the Nohrian siblings (Xander especially) wouldn't be able to fight Impostor Garon.

Were it not for Corrin giving her the push she needed to be brave, Azura would never be able to express the truth of the world and Valla. Were it not for Corrin, Xander and Ryoma would've killed each other over a misunderstanding in Cyrkensia.

But in that, I also think the verbiage of bailing someone out is very impersonal and not a good way to describe what Corrin and the siblings do for each other.

It also takes the agency of the perpetrators away. Who's truly the people who should be criticized? Corrin, for being a good person who wants to see the best in anyone and everyone? Or the people who would take advantage of that trust?

Why should a person just "learn how the world works and stop being so stupid and naive" when faced with injustice and irrationality? Why shouldn't the world change instead, to protect the ideals for a peaceful existence. Why shouldn't we instead simply punish malefactors who take advantage of good people, instead of blaming good people for having bad things happen to them.

That's what Corrin represents to me. A character who has defined morals and beliefs, who needs to develop the will to defend those things and fight for their existence. To that end, by remaining true to himself and not stooping to the level of his enemies, he gains the unconditional trust, love and support of those closest to him. He's able to turn the tide in his favor, and change the world by being himself, even though said world wanted him to mold him into something different.

Anyway, I didn't say all this to try and change your mind or anything, I just wanted to let all that out because that's truly how I feel.

[neonscandal]

something I wanted to understand, the author said that satoru was quite a womanizer, but then he said that geto was much more popular among women than satoru I didn't understand

Technically, the author said that they didn't see Gojo being faithful to one or a certain woman not that he was a womanizer.

With what we know about Gojo (and Gege Akutami's trolling ways, for that matter), I think that's up for interpretation.

FAN INTERPRETATION

Fans really took that sentiment and kind of ran with it because, to us, Gojo is high spec in every way. Canonically good looking, tall, competent at like.. everything according to Akutami, strong and presumably loaded. Of course someone like that would be a womanizer, right?

Except Gojo is an oversized child who still kinda refers to Digimon in conversation and primarily hangs out with 16 year olds. People project a lot of their BS onto him because they can't imagine ticking all those boxes and not being an asshole. But he’s a corny dork who is seemingly impervious to the outright disdain of most of the people around him. IT’S COMICAL. Personally, I think this interpretation is incorrect, demonstrably.

The other side of the fandom is naturally like... well of course he couldn't stay faithful to one woman. He's been faithful to Geto for ten years! I think we know what camp I've pitched my tent in *gestures vaguely to the rest of my blog* Especially when you bear in mind that Gege Akutami specifically designed Gojo and Geto to be intrinsic complements of one another.

CANON

I'm not so SatoSugu addled (once the brain rot sets in, it's terminal) that I am unable to disclose the secret third way we can interpret this. Canonically, when we look at Gojo as a character... it almost makes sense to assume he's simply not interested in dating at all.

Empirically finds it hard to relate to others

Even when he does care for others, he's still emotionally shallow and aware of it

Gojo clan leader with all associated unpleasantries and responsibilities from a young age

Single benefactor to two children; assumes direct responsibility over two more by staving off their execution

First line of defense for all of jujutsu society

Has a grand design of toppling said jujutsu society

Has experienced devastating loss which informs the grand design of his life's mission and he's always plotting, even when it comes to the seemingly altruistic act of "adopting" the Fushiguro kids or pressing Yuta and Yuji to learn under his care. When you consider that context, it furthers the idea that he's pretty divorced from emotion. Like, he wants them to have a childhood but its still at the pleasure of his convenience and ultimate purpose.

LOOK at this gorgeous, gorgeous boy from pop layer art because I need it and, when I covet, you must also covet. Edit: I'd accidently copied the wrong link there! It's been fixed 💙

In universe, we've seen maybe two canonical couples: Yuta & Rika and Hakari & Kirara (to be animated). This supports the fact that Gege's not really concerned with injecting "romance" into the plot unnecessarily. Undeniably and supporting the SatoSugu agenda, however, is the fact that JJK 0 very much aligned Gojo & Geto with Yuta & Rika with the theme coming to a head in season 2 with Gojo's sealment. For clarity, I mean how love ultimately cursed Rika and Geto after death by Yuta's begging her not to leave and Gojo not properly disposing of Geto's body. Love turned Rika into a curse and allowed Kenjaku to swoop in on Geto.

GETO'S POPULARITY

Geto is, quite literally, popular with everyone in universe and that was before he became a cult leader... which also indicates a predilection for popularity, I guess? As a character, he is principled, thoughtful, gentle and strong. I think, collectively, we tend to toil over the fact that Gojo spent more time missing Geto than he actually knew him. But... that's the same for Shoko and Nanami. After Geto's defection, Nanami couldn't forsake him even if he morally couldn't approve of his actions. Over ten years later as the night parade of a hundred demons is set to take place, Yaga starts saying something along the lines of finally getting rid of the scourge that is Suguru Geto and Shoko makes it a point to leave. I think it's because, after everything, she still holds affection and pity for Geto and would rather not hear him being bad-mouthed for breaking under the pressure of things.

He was the best of them, after all.

[ann7av]

Idk about you but an issue I have with IF is that Violet doesn’t really think that hard about any criticism directed at her family.

Cat asks if Violet wants to talk about the heinous atrocities her family committed after Vi accuses her of being a shallow Pick Me, but this is never really explored. She posts a list of every flier Mira killed and it’s mentioned in such an offhand flippant way, it makes me wonder if Violet actually cares about her sister being a war criminal. I was hoping she’d have a talk with Brennan about his feelings on being “sacrificed” for basically nothing because it’s a sentiment I’ve seen some veterans express irl but they never actually talk on screen and it’s so frustrating.

What are your thoughts on this?

Oh my friend I'm so happy you asked because I have a lot to say about this.

(This is a list of scattered thoughts, please let me know if it makes sense and please know this is a critique of RY's writing and not Violet's moral compass as a character, I love my girl very much)

I had this issue from way back in FW when Lilith pushed Violet into the riders, It would be natural for a child to try and understand why their parent suddenly decided to risk their life in a war college but alas she never thinks about it and we are left with this gigantic "this makes no sense" feeling that progressively gets worse as the story goes.

Then there's rain when she crosses Parapet and yet... no thought on it, Vi? Your mother controls storms? Why aren't you thinking about this?

Lilith asking about her father's research while Aetos asks if Andarna could be used as a study subject and Vi doesn't stop to think WHY would they need it and HOW does it fit with her mother's previous actions?

The GODDAM NOTE inside the book of fables? That later on is revealed to be true? Brennan says he doesn't believe their father knew about Navarre's corruption and Violet never thinks about it or considers it? HOW?

My girl just found out her mother executed a bunch of people who were trying to help another kingdom and she doesn't feel conflicted about it? I was waiting for them to have a screaming match after Athebyne

Cat puts up a list of the fliers Mira killed and I was expecting a line like "It's not like my sister knew she was fighting for the wrong side at the time, she was doing what she was trained to do" but NO.

What also throws me off about this is that, up until this point, Violet is shown being a very empathetic person who really cares about people in general, but she doesn't stop to consider those were Cat's people who died, it was the flier's school that fell and it is their kingdom being attacked (maybe she got desensitized but that feels an easy way out of developing the story)

I could be happy with Violet trying to justify her family's actions to herself because at least it would feel like a natural reaction to have but you're right, the lack of reaction feels like she doesn't care.

She also never stops to have an actual conversation with Mira about any of this for some reason (she barely talks to her sister at all actually), and besides that one talk with Brennan at the beginning of IF there's nothing else that stands out enough for me to remember, which wouldn't be a problem if she had some inner dialogue every now and then, not only about her family and the war crimes but how she feels bout them too.

There are many times when we (the readers) ask questions to try and understand these characters and how they interact with each other, so when those very natural questions like "how do you feel about this?" or "but why would they do that?" are not answered, the entire thing just feels off, and that's not an issue only with the Sorrengails but with most of Violet's relationships.

In FW that's not as big a problem, she has her issues with Dain and is getting to know her squad (Liam specifically) but in IF I was questioning if Xaden dying was that bad of a thing if it meant she would think about literally anything else

To summarize: Violet's family drama could've been a Keeping Up with the Sorrengails level of drama if RY actually did the work to flesh out the dynamic but she didn't bother and chose to rewrite the same Xaden/Violet argument five times

[mike-haters-dni]

Another Unpopular Mike Opinion Post Woah How Do I Still Have Things To Say

Alright, so I know nobody wants to hear this but: Mike as a character does in fact function almost solely in relation to the people around him. Specifically, the Party and Eleven. What do I mean by that? I mean his main hobbies are playing Dungeons and Dragons, something he literally can’t do without his friends, and being El’s boyfriend—which I know is an even more unpopular sentiment but guess what. He exists in the story to be the leader of the Party and El’s love interest. He almost literally never does anything for just himself unless you count those two episodes in s4 where he’s playing/trying to find a sub for dnd—which I kinda do? but also don’t because he's with Dustin (and Lucas’ ghost), and also he has a Leader Moment during the game. Every other character (probably) gets some Thing or plot line(s) they get to do at least partially solo. Dustin gets Dart in s2, Lucas has the basketball team, Max deals with Billy and then his death, Will has the whole possession arc, El....I mean she literally got her own solo episode. But Mike? He barely interacts with his own family, who are mostly also main characters. Really the only time we see Mike alone on screen is in s2 when he’s going through his depression, but he’s depressed because he's mourning Eleven, aka acting as her love interest. But the thing is, that actually is his special solo plotline. Its actually the most significant of the whole show. Or it would be, if it didn't mean that everyone's favorite Main Boy of s1 became a supporting character for the new Mainest Character of the Show, who now gets to do way more shit than him because like, she has magic powers and is the plot. But yeah, that's why people say Mike was ruined after s1 even though he's the same exact guy throughout the show.

But anyway, I think this investment in others is what makes Mike the things people like about him too. Being a character that is solely focused on those around him is what makes him such a natural leader and caretaker, and he was and will continue to be that. And just to prove the haters wrong here is a list of every time Mike acted as a leader in each season:

S1: I mean do I need to explain this one it’s the only season anyone likes

S2: He definitely takes more of a backseat this season (having less to do) but still, he acts like he has the authority to prevent people from joining the friend group and takes charge when Dart becomes a problem. Also, no one else showed up to check on Will and stay by his side to help him through the Events, almost like Mike feels a natural responsibility for his friends or something. At the very end of the season he's right back to form when El needs help and he comes up with and executes the plan to set the tunnel on fire.

S3: Again, he spends a good amount of time being “helped” by Lucas this season, but he’s the one who comes up with the sauna plan (and uses his own voice as bait lol). Also it’s small but he’s the one at the head of the group when they go to sneak into the movies. (Worth noting that Mike spends a lot of action time with Nancy this season, who he is definitely outranked by in terms of group leadership, so he naturally takes more of a backseat. As he should)

S4: You’re expecting me to say he takes a backseat again right? WRONG. He's the one yelling after Eleven that he’s going to fix everything, he's the one who finds the number in the pen, he’s the one who thinks to go to Suzie’s, he’s the one who spots El out in the desert. He spends the whole season bossing Jonathan around and you know, he deserves some credit for that. Also during the meeting with Suzie Mike is in the center of the frame doing the most talking. ALSO, again it's small, but during the dnd game even after his own character was dead and he didn’t have any real input on the situation, Dustin still makes a point to ask Mike what he thinks they should do. Like, he's a leader idk what to tell you.

(Also can I say, god forbid Mike spend a few scenes not in charge. God forbid he get supported himself every once in a while. Like, wtf do people want from him actually. He's a clever kid with a personality so strong it makes all his friends listen to him. Give him a fuckin break.

Personally I don't think any of this is bad writing or whatever. I think its good writing for a leader/love interest to the MC character. I think Mike is someone who, due to his insecurities, defines himself based on his relationships. He wants to be useful and important to people, and this causes him to both selflessly protect the people he loves and freak out whenever he feels like they're pulling away from him. He's useful to the story for both action and drama. And like, realistically, only finding self-worth in other people is unhealthy—but also, valuing your relationships is good and wanting to protect your friends is good. And also he's a character in a story about the power of friendship. And I suppose you could take Will's speech to mean that instead of feeling all this pressure to Do Good to be loved he doesn't need to try at all and its not something he can earn or lose, he's loved because he just is That Guy and always will be. However...if both El and Mike's arcs in s5 involve letting go of responsibility and accepting love and support from people around you just know I called it.

Anyway everyone hates how Mike only ever gets to be Eleven's boyfriend except for ME. Because its WHAT SHE DESERVES

[questh]

HIII i love this au so much ou…. i’m going to yap a lot but here’s a question!!!!! how would each ghost + damon react/feel when meeting a new ghost? like; a new victim/culprit that just died and is a ghost now? thank youuu!!!!

Hello there, this was a very thought-provoking question, so much so that I had to go back to watch the trial of chapter 1. I'm not an expert at analyzing characters or whatnot, but here's how I think the ghosts and Damon would react to a new victim or murder becoming a ghost. Be warned. This is quite a long post.

Damon Maitsu

I think Damon would have expected it happen. His initial plan would be to ignore the new ghosts, but the plan would crumble pretty fast. Ghosts aren't easy things to ignore.

If Damon was stressed when Wolfgang bombarded him with questions as a ghost, he would probably lose his temper later on with new ghosts if they decide to bother him. But deep down, he'd probably pity them depending on how tolerable they are to be around.

He'd grow to be more sentimental over time, much to his disgust. The last thing he wants is to be "emotionally vulnerable" in a killing game. All over watching the misfortune of the dead.

He'd probably be scared to become one of them if they're suffering that much too... Which may lead him to becoming extra vigilant and only going outside of his room in company of any living person he still trusts, or a ghost like Eva or Wolfgang (due to their deal in Entry#3).

Eva Tsunaka

Eva... there was something I realized when she was executed. Everyone simply stood around watching as she struggled to cling to one of the podiums. Before she was even executed, no one openly acknowledged her side of things or stood up for her much.

Technically, the others proved her right. That even in death, she'd be treated poorly. Even though she did kill someone who meant well to the others, Eva was still proven right.

If she heard Diana's speech, I don't think she'll really appreciate it either.

So, to new ghosts, she'd avoid them and never speak to them. She'd simply watch their despair from a distance, mentally picking them apart, just like they did to her before she was executed. She'd feel immense pride in the fact that she was right about a lot of things.

Though, I think a part of her would also crack over time. Death is something way more than 'karma'. Death is permanent, it's irreversible. After being satisfied with the plight of someone you despise as they grieve and suffer... what else is there to revel in? Their very death? Is that really something to feel happy about?

Death will hurt everyone either way, even if she doesn't want to admit it. Even if she only watches from a distance, the death of the other Ultimates will eventually hurt her as well, regardless of how they treated her.

Wolfgang Akire

As for Wolfgang, seeing the Ultimates die and turn into ghosts would hurt him, which he would be quite open about. He'd be very much nicer to any victims than to any culprits (he may put that knife arm to good use if he's extra 'disappointed'). But he will make exceptions if, for example, a culprit killed on accident and was remorseful.

He'd try to 'help', only to realize there's so little that he could do. The more that die, the more he realizes just how much he was wrong about- which is pretty much the opposite of Eva's situation.

Even though he may try to have hope in their situation, even if he tries to make the ghosts a little less shaken over their passing, it doesn't change anything. I think that sort of thing would discourage him, and perhaps he'd withdraw from interacting with the other ghosts later on into the game.

If ever, he'd still hold up well in conversation with other ghosts, but there's not a lot to talk about when you want to dance around the fact you and the person you're speaking to are both dead. He'd definitely try to avoid the topic.

Maybe he'll stick with speaking to Damon and haunting the living as usual... It really depends on who dies later on in the game.

To summarize, Damon would begrudgingly acknowledge them, but lose his temper more often than not, Eva wouldn't interact with any of the ghosts at all unless absolutely necessary, and Wolfgang would try to help ghosts grapple with their death, but that wouldn't help them much.

Again, I'm sorry for the long post, but I just felt like going in-depth about how these guys feel about any future deaths, and your question was a good opportunity to talk about it^^ I also apologize in advance if there's any spelling errors.

Thank you for your ask!