#I don't think I can claim this concept for myself nor would I want to | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

bitter-sweet-coffee · 14 days

Note

What theory do you have regarding Babylon's loss of wings? I can understand if it's just how their species looks, but Rouge having wings while they don't seems strange to me. Sega even gave Honey the Cat white feathered angel wings, but not the actual bird species. 🫠

(I myself put slits on the back lol)

Okay Anon, this may seem like an easy answer question, but (un)fortunately, it is not! I have a lot to say on this, so much so that I whipped out my laptop and a word document to answer you, so let's delve into my personal lore for Babylonians, birds, and mobian-human relations: this isn't my official post for it, but until I have time to write a 900K word document on what the hell my canon is, THIS IS AS GOOD AS IT GETS!

CONTEXTUAL NOTE: I wouldn't classify this as a disclaimer, but I want to explain to the other people in these large tags what this post is. No, I am NOT claiming this is canon lore. No, it is not an AU. This is my personal canon-adjacent lore that has been carefully crafted with thoroughly intense regards to every piece of relevant source materials, going as far back as concept pieces from development. In order to make things work for MY canon, details have been changed and will sometimes contradict fragments of regular canon. Could I make everything cohesive and non-contradictory? Yes, and that's a different project of mine. This is my sandbox, you don't have to play in it (but it would be REALLY fun if you joined me :p) ONE LAST THING: I started writing this the second you sent it to me, then abandoned it until now where I did 90% of the writing. I am tired and slightly incoherent but I wanted it done, so sorry if it's rushed. You can send me more asks to clarify but I mean... i will probably make it worse lmao

THE CURSE OF BABYLON: OUR FALLEN ANGELS

HISTORY

1.1 Babylonians in Space

The Babylonians originate from the planet Babylon (lol duh), which is currently too far away from the major galaxies around Earth/Mobius to pinpoint an exact location, or who their neighbouring planets were. (Translation: one day I will design the star systems of the Sonic universe, but today is not that day!)

While most of the Babylonians reside on their home planet, exploration ships did go out in search of new technology, as these aliens pride themselves on their Treasure and Greatness. One of the common misconceptions about Babylonians is that 'treasure' translates to items of monetary value, but what they actually sought out was new technological advancements so they could pull from other developing planets and take what they've learned to improve their own inventions. This distorted sentiment is a tragic detail that spoils the reputation and ambition of the Babylonian descendants who have lost the true meaning of their heritage, but it's safe to say that some of them still think this way (cough, Wave and Tekno, cough).

Circling back to the point at hand though, I want to make it very clear that the Babylonians of Earth/Mobius are NOT the entire species, nor are they pure Babylonians. The real Babylon exists lightyears away, lost to the vastness of the universe, and Babylon Garden (Astral Babylon) was merely one ship that had been scouting various galaxies for new technology.

While it is not inherently relevant to the topic at hand, there was a brief moment in pre-crash Babylonian history where they were in alliance with the Black Arms. This took place before the war on Argentium with the Xorda, as the Babylonians tend to remain neutral during conflicts that do not concern them, but back on Babylon there are a separate class of Babylonian-Black Arms hybrids known to us as Corvids. The black pigment of these birds combined with their superior intelligence and durability was given to them through the power of chaos energy, something Babylonians do not possess in concentrated amounts when compared to other alien species, but was the result of crossbreeding with Black Arms. While there were some Corvids on Babylon Garden, the ship that crashed onto Earth/Mobius, many were made once more once the Babylonians had settled on the planet, welcoming a new, less potent version of this genetic branch. These Corvids are less powerful due to the weakened genetic purity of the Earth/Mobius-bound Babylonians, but they are still exceedingly brilliant, albeit near-extinct by present day.

1.2 Babylonians on Earth/Mobius

After travelling to the Nameless Zone and having a close call with the Berzerkers, Babylon Garden (the ship known as Astral Babylon) managed to emergency warp one last time to Earth/Mobius, the nearest dominant zone. Because of the damage caused by the Berzerkers, they disconnected the Ark of the Cosmos which had been used to manipulate gravity and warp them anywhere in space. This particular vessel was thus stranded on the planet, but their hopes of being found by other Babylonians who could bring them back home are the reason why Babylonians (and anyone in general) are inclined to make wishes on shooting stars. Making do with an 'inferior' planet, the Babylonians got somewhat of a negative reputation for their reclusiveness on their island, and superiority complexes when interacting with the planet's other inhabitants.

As the Babylonians split into different factions based on 3 major dogmas (which we will examine later) they developed a range of reputations. Because humans look down on mobians, the Babylonians which assimilated with other mobians were treated about as poorly as them. Contrastingly, Battle Kukus and the Battle Bird Armada are praised, respected, and in alliance with human society, especially the government. Their alienness has long been forgotten as Babylonian in origin, but their distinction from other mobians makes humans trust them more. If anything, the dominant public opinion is that "these ones aren't so bad, they can keep the inferior breeds of mobian in-line" which is fucked up to say the least. The Babylon Rogues are still regarded as Babylonian, and yet, hardly known, so they are as invisible and neutral as you can get. The modern reputations of these factions will be brought up again later from a current point of view, but it is safe to say that we have a full range of Babylonian reputation spanning from negative to positive.

1.3 Humans

Humans are racist, big shock! I won't dwell on it too much since this will eventually get its own post, but humans and Babylonians are biologically compatible, meaning there are plenty of humans who have Babylonian heritage. I don't mean like our REAL Babylonian descendants, which I feel like I should clarify. The non-fictional and historical city of Babylon (located in modern day Iraq) was named after the alien Babylon/Babylonians (in Sonic, obviously) because the biblical Tower of Babel depicted the tale of humans trying to reach heaven by building vertically: this sentiment being shared with the Babylonians who looked to the stars and longed to return home to Babylon. So, essentially, the history is reversed here!

Some humans worshipped the Babylonians, and there were a good number of them who had Babylonian-Human children. They turned out normal, arguably more normal than the ones who ended up with mobians, but the racism kinda discouraged this. There was a good deal of fetishization of these hybrids so they don't exist anymore, not to mention how the recessive nature of Babylonian traits discourages this practice. BASICALLY, a lot of humans have some percentage of Babylonian DNA, but it's barely detectable in the modern age… it DID happen though.

GENETICS

2.1 Babylonians

Even back on their home planet, the trait of having full sets of wings was recessive. You can see even by looking at murals of Babylonians provided in the games:

Wings? Where are the WINGS?!? I mean, there's this:

... but if we zoom out:

it is clear that while full sets of wings exist, few Babylonians had them, and the ones that did were ranked higher and even worshipped for their abilities, making them angelic to some extent.

So, considering that only a "small" (subjective) portion of Babylonians were on Babylon Garden when it crashed, it is safe to say that our starting numbers for the winged gene are… actually not as minimal as we might initially think. (But I just mentioned a hierarchy???)

More specifically, there are two types of wings we are going to examine: forearm wings, and back wings. The former are more common albeit still not universally inherited, and the latter were always persons of great status and power, as marked by their organic ways of flight. Since our Babylonians could not go back home or attain more fully-winged persons, this immediately impacted social hierarchies with even more emphasis being placed on genetic superiority.

I am going to simplify the genetics, but essentially, the rules are as follows:

Back-wings are an AUTOSOMAL RECESSIVE trait. This means that both parents must be carriers for there to even be a chance of inheritance. Here is a handy dandy visual I stole from google images because I am too lazy to draw you a punnett square:

Armed-wings are an AUTOSOMAL DOMINANT trait. Look at the chart above, any square with a dominant letter (R) inherits the trait. Essentially, unless both parents are recessive with no forearm-wings (rr and rr) a Babylonian will inherit the trait.

Carriers of the Back-wing trait have a 50% chance of having armed-wings. Don't ask how this works, assume it is magic if you don't know genetics that well (genetics are magic anyways LOL)

From this, it is quite evident how traditional (back) wings phased out of the genepool. While it is true that non-Babylonians can carry the back-wing gene (mobians who have wings), Babylonians by nature are almost always recessive! Birdness? Recessive. Tall, humanoid proportions? Recessive. So while mating with a winged-mobian increases the likelihood of having a set of proper wings, the offspring will almost always be the same species as the mobian parent. Thus, it is far more likely for a modern day Babylonian descendant to have armed-wings as opposed to back-wings, which require a very lucky combination of genetic makeup to present as a trait.

Forearm-wings are capable of gliding and sometimes flight, but are very limiting in terms of regular mobility since the arms would have to be somewhat underdeveloped to work as wings. It's also a bitch to try and hold things or wear shirts when your long feathers take up so much space, not to mention how you'll have to choose between flight and non-restrictive clothing. Weight is also a factor, as there is not enough power in arm-flapping to fly, unless one is very light. Furthermore, while a Babylonian child may fly with forearm-wings, they will probably grow out of it.

2.2 Evolution via Assimilation

The recessive nature of Babylonian genes also explains how they evolved to look more akin to mobians than humans. The modern day Babylon Rogues and much of the Battle Bird Armada pass as mobians, hence why Babylonian heritage is long forgotten and perhaps extinct according to most. However, the genes swing both ways: many non-birds (both mobian and human) are also some percentage of Babylonian, the traits are just recessive (making them carriers). There's a huge mutation that I'm about to cover, but it is safe to say that foxes are probably the utmost carriers of it!

2.3 Mutated Genes

There are two main mutations I want to talk about, so I will section them off. I'm sure people can think of more, and I do have a handful in the works, but the ones that are interesting and important to my lore are as follows:

a) Blue Eyes

Ever notice how essentially, across the comics and games, basically every single bird has blue eyes? Speedy and Soar are the only two who are given eye colours outside of blue (they have brownish-red eyes) with the rest having either no colour (black) or blue. When you take a look at who else has blue eyes, basically all the foxes do! Look deeper, and a lot of the characters with heightened intellect/wit or innovative skills have blue eyes. I'm not saying all innovative characters have blue eyes, that's racist, but all of the characters with blue eyes are either birds, smarties, or both. Some of this is character design prejudice, as I am a sucker for beautiful brown eyes mwah, but the pattern does exist.

Wait… what about Eggman? Maria? ELISE, WHOSE ROYAL CREST IS ALSO A BIRD? Need I remind everyone that the real life blue-eye mutation was traced back to a common ancestor? BLUE EYES ARE ALSO RECESSIVE, JUST LIKE ALL OTHER BABYLONIAN TRAITS! I SAID IT FOR A REASON, GUYS! I've constantly brought up how Babylonians are equally compatible with humans and mobians, and it is because this genetic mutation was the result of breeding with Babylonians. Blue eyes are an alien trait that for Earth/Mobius, was Babylonian in origin. It goes beyond blue eyes though, because these inventor-types with blue eyes also tend to be taller and leaner, making them somewhat comparable to the original mural depictions of the Babylonians.

Take it or leave it, I'm not claiming this was intentional or intended to be canon… but it is. To ME. When you combine real genetics with anthropomorphic furries, you're allowed to take some liberties and come up with fun ways to explain certain genetic traits. (I also failed to mention earlier that foxes exist in the Nameless Zone and were tied to the fall of Babylon, so it makes sense that Babylonians upon crashing to Earth/Mobius would seek familiarity in the mobian foxes already inhabiting the planet, thus tying the wit of kitsune to the innovation of Babylonians on a historic level.) Oh and before I move on, blue eyes are a recessive trait in almost every circumstance... the exception is to Babylonians, where it is a dominant trait. Brown eyes, if you are a bird, are recessive, hence why we only have 2 instances of brown eyes! Okay, there might be a few other background character birds I'm missing, but we either cannot see their eyes, or they're black (stylistic) or BLUE! Let me have this lol

b) Ovisanguitan Testalysis (OT)

Wow, that's a fancy name for "eggs no work" isn't it? This may come as a surprise, but Babylonians did not lay eggs, they are viviparous: need I repeat myself on how they're humanoid? Anyways, while Babylonians have viviparous births, mobian birds that are NOT Babylonian still exist. It might feel like I am pulling this out of nowhere, and perhaps it is a bit hypocritical for me to say "not all birds are going to be Babylonian!" after attributing an entire recessive trait to them two seconds ago, I firmly believe that birds exist outside of Babylon with no genetic ties. This is because… (inhales) BABYLONIANS ARE NOT BIRDS! THEY ARE BIRD-ESQUE, BUT THEY ARE HUMANOID BIRD-ESQUE CREATURES! Wanna know what else look like birds? BATS! DINOSAURS! DRAGONS! CERTAIN INSECTS!

Just because the Babylonians pride themselves on their birdness, it does not necessitate that birdness is exclusive to Babylonians. However, if modern day Babylonians are birds who have assimilated to be very mobian in composition, it would seem that they would be conceived and developed via eggs, not viviparously. As I established though, Babylonian traits are recessive, and therefore still possible (though not probable) given the right genetic composition.

Some modern day Babylonians then, have a reproductive disorder called Ovisanguitan Testalysis, known as OT. While egg-laying mobians develop about 1/3rd of their offspring inside their body before laying, with the latter part of development occurring independently inside the egg which hatches when completed, Babylonians initially gave birth at the end of term like humans do. Modern day Babylonians with OT will "lay" the same time regular egg-laying mobians do, aka after the first trimester, but because of their Babylonian genes, their body does not physically form a shell around the embryo before it is expelled. Without a shell, this is essentially a VERY premature birth that cannot be incubated or salvaged, and is more comparable to an abortion or miscarriage resembling a bloody clump of cells than a premature child.

There are very few instances where Babylonians with OT are able to prevent their bodies from expelling the embryo prematurely with enough calcium supplements and full-time hospitalization that prevents the premature rejection of the fetus, but because the Babylonians with this disorder are almost always Rogues (I'll probably explain that later) it is essentially just a very rare disorder which affects a small population that aren't even registered as legal citizens to any country. It is not IMPOSSIBLE to successfully have a child with OT, just highly unlikely, and they will probably be underdeveloped in some areas (the most likely defect being a lack of immune system… so the child will probably die from disease even if they make it to term).

Also, if someone with OT were to carry a child to term via medical intervention, the strain this puts on their body will most likely kill them, and if by some miracle they survive, they will be incapacitated as they will never fully recover from the nutrient drainage and overall stress this puts on the body. If this rant feels completely out of place in this response let me have it please, where else am I gonna mention it!?

DOGMAS

With regards to the Babylonians on Earth/Mobius, there are certain branches of absolute belief (dogmas) that they dispersed into, each one thinking they are superior over the other two. These might not seem directly related to your question, but it provides so much scope for how genes are relevant to the three dogmas. Also, with all these groups splitting off, the genetic odds of back-wings decreases significantly.

3.1 Assimilate

Most Babylonians assimilated with the mobians… okay, and the humans. There are humans who have Babylonian DNA even in modern times, but I think we all know who the more obvious choice was, considering the racism and all. These Babylonians found no reason to fight internally about their blood purity or distinct alien features because birds already exist in the universe outside of Babylon. Being more bird-like has nothing to do with surviving as a species, so the truth of the matter is that a lot of Babylonians couldn't care less and therefore didn't! Due to most Babylonians adopting this dogma, the physical, recessive traits disappeared almost immediately, with wings being first to go.

3.2 The Battle Birds

Initially, the only group that existed outside of assimilation were the Battle Kukus, or the Battle Bird Armada. They believed in Babylonian supremacy, and still exist to this day with the same dogma more or less. However, the way Kukus go about defining "Babylonian" is… based on their birdness, combined with regular eugenics, of course. Kukus pride themselves on strength and unity as a faction, with defected birds being snuffed out and eaten up until recent decades… that we know of. They probably still are cannibals lol.

Despite their disdain for other creatures of flight, non-birds with wings can produce viable children for the Kukus and are permitted to do so, as the Kukus only desire the FITTEST members, not the ones with the most Babylonian DNA. More on this in a second, let's circle back to the non-bird policy. I want to make it clear that this is not a good thing, because the Armada is only using winged-mobians for the increased likelihood of the recessive wings trait! They need to be the ones carrying by the way, so it gets prejudiced and sick from every angle: come on now, we can't just use winged mobians for breeding farms… doesn't stop them though! However, only birds can join the Armada, and because of how it is often one or the other (you either are a bird or have back-wings) most of these "outsourced" offspring are not Kukus.

Kukus pride themselves on their birdness, so forearm-wings are permitted for those of adequate status: you have to clip them back until you are given permission to fly. They despise the use of flight-based technology, as it makes flight accessible to non-birds, which as we know, pisses them the fuck off.

3.3 The Babylon Rogues

The Babylon Rogues were initially Kukus, hundreds of years ago that is. During the Salem Witch Trials, black-pigmented mobians were hunted to near-extinction, as witchcraft was associated with the Black Arms, and the Black Arms are the reason mobians possess the black-pigment genes. Thus, even if one was not outwardly alien, being black (hah) made mobians targets for burnings or ritualistic sacrifice by both humans AND other mobians. They were dubbed Familiars of witches, or demons from the heavens (aka Black Arms) and killed for no other reason. Remember the Corvids? HAH! Yeah, there's a reason most of them are gone, even though the Babylonian-Corvids were initially able to grow their numbers with the birds on Earth/Mobius. Praised universally for their intelligence and superiority among Babylonians, the fall of the Corvids was a hefty tragedy that struck the Kukus horribly. Despite this, most of them did not care and continued to pride themselves on their birdness.

The Rogues however, objected, and believed that the Kukus had lost sight of what was important to them as Babylonians. Cooperating with humans? Becoming bird supremacists? Establishing a militaristic, ascetic regime that limits their power to the planet they're stuck on, claiming to only rule the skies and all below it? NAH. The Rogues care more about returning to the stars, and innovating their technology. Kukus pride themselves on their physical birdness which allows them to fly, but the Rogues care more about using their intellect and innovative skills present in their technological advancements. Speedy (the Kuku) even notes in the comics that extreme gear is outdated, and most original Armada content has little to do with the boards themselves. The Rogues however, are defined by their technological feats, which is technically closer to what the original Babylonians valued.

This generational disdain for Earth/Mobius and its people has led to some… moral corruption amidst the Rogues. While Babylonians were originally travelling across galaxies with good (albeit still arrogant) intentions on their quest of technological advancement, the Rogues are more thrifty to say the least. When non-Babylonians succeed at innovation, the Rogues believe that they just got lucky and accidentally attained genius, and make it their mission to steal the good parts from others and "make better use of this technology" after thrifting it. Other times, Rogues claim that other moments of genius were stolen from Babylonian technology, and thus, by stealing back any advancements made on Earth/Mobius, they are "reclaiming the culture stolen from them" or whatever. This is far more condescending and malicious than the initial Babylonians, which the Kukus dismiss as hedonism.

They're not WRONG, dare I said both sides are partially correct? Even so, the Rogues rebelled from their Armada and continued on their quest to find the best treasures and technological advancements on Earth/Mobius, stealing them for personal usage to hopefully fuel their ambition to reach the stars and find Babylon once more.

Before we move on, I should probably relate this back to wings with a fun fact. The Babylon Rogues CAN grow forearm wings, it's not that rare of a trait as we established. However, in order to distance themselves from the Kukus and reject their birdness, they tattoo their forearms: this floods the feather follicles with ink, preventing wing growth. The Rogues literally and symbolically choose their hands (INNOVATION, TANGIBILITY, INVENTION: to reach towards the sky… and to steal with) over their wings that honestly don't even work well enough to be effective. If they want to fly, they will use technology as the Babylonians once did, hence their reliance on and pride in Extreme Gear.

The EX Grand Prix was originally a community-based initiative for Rogues to show off their advancements and push the limits of Extreme Gear Mechanics to see who was getting closer for finding a way home, but the thrill of sports deterred them and now there are too many board restrictions (cough and shitty air-tank-exclusive shells mass produced by non Babylonians such as MeteoTech) to make this actually useful. Oh, and there are not enough mechanics to sustain the educational value of the Prix, which sucks. Sorry Wave!

Finally, if it wasn't already clear, the Babylon Rogues value what percentage of Babylonian DNA you have over your physical traits. They aren't inbred, but there's a reason we only have 3 remaining Babylon Rogues…

AFTERMATH

This is more of a "small things I missed" section because if you managed to read this far, I doubt you want MORE incoherent rambling. I'm tired, you're tired, we all just wanted to know where the wings went. BUT, since we're already invested I'm going to perform a lightning-round and give some concise wrap-ups for some of the loose ends I created!

4.1 Legal Rights

Members of the Battle Bird Armada were given equal rights to humans ever since they were instated to the government on a worldwide level. Almost every country endorses the Kukus; they are government funded and given full control of the skies so long as they keep mobians "in check" and work in tandem with GUN. You might be wondering why I choose to make them part of the human government when they're supposed to be aligned with Eggman, to which I point out that Eggman is ALSO in kahoots with the human government. When Eggman took over during Forces, human cities were spared from destruction so long as they were being compliant.

It is heavily implied if not indirectly confirmed that Eggman makes all the weapons and machinery for GUN, and the reason he has an infinite amount of resources for all his projects is because he is given permission from the human governments to do whatever the fuck he wants. "Oh but why does Sonic have to defend the humans from Eggman?" It's all about how Eggman and GUN can help one another under the table. Money. The answer is money and political corruption. The Kukus and Eggman can be allies or enemies, no one gives a fuck, they're both protected by government funds anyways.

The Babylon Rogues, as they are not assimilated mobians OR Kukus, are thus not registered citizens. This is why they can commit crimes and remain immune to genuine repercussions including imprisonment, but it is also why we do not know how many of them still exist. Jet, Storm, and Wave are presumably the last 3, but we have no way of confirming this since it's not like they exist in any databases within mobian or human censuses, or services such as healthcare or residency. They have so much money that it does not even matter, but as free as they are, it kinda sucks that they are not protected by the law either.

4.2 Present Day Relations (Very Concise)

No one knows about the Rogues, so who cares!

Humans love the Kukus... usually. Don't look into the cannibalism.

The Rogues despise the Kukus and will never cooperate with them.

The Kukus despite the Rogues, but believe that some of them are of use to the Armada. Lazy, incompetent, and inferior Rogues are hunted for the kill, but someone like Wave who is very Babylonian (genetically), has a Corvid father (in my lore), and is a mechamechanical genius unheard of and unchallenged… they really want someone like her. After they lost Tekno there was a horrendous void to fill, so while they will patronize the Rogues, they think that some of them can be "fixed" for a greater purpose.

Mobians don't typically like either faction as both dogmas are too extreme (read as: rooted in eugenics)

4.3 Predator Hawk

This pertains to my lore specifically, so feel free to skip it. Ehem:

MY Predator Hawk had back-wings. Emphasis on HAD. Remember how the Battlelord threatened to clip his wings off in the comics? Well, due to a black market intervention, a certain someone used the Battlelord's anger towards Pred to convince him that the Battlelord demanded his wings be removed for failing his mission to recruit and/or kill the three remaining Babylon Rogues: a final mission given to him after he attacked Speedy as a last chance to redeem himself. In reality the Battlelord did NOT actually request this to happen and actually has no idea where Predator Hawk disappeared to, but it remains the case that his wings were twisted off of him with a wrench (I swear it wasn't Wave's) and sold on the black market. He still has the large gashes on his back that are semi hollow, as the base of the wing-bones were merely cut off, not fully extracted as that would rip his spine. Rather, the base bones lay flush inside the crevices of his back, and if he were to tense, the nubs of the bones pop out by about 7 inches. The skin healed around the bones so there's no blood, he just has permanently exposed bones.

Pred obviously can't fly anymore, but I felt like it would be really stupid if I were to come up with all this lore for Babylonian wings only to NOT have any avian characters who possess back-wings. So… I retconned Predator a little bit and made him a fucked up creature with trauma! I have a lot of other rants about Predator Hawk pertaining to my canon, but I honestly need to stop typing this, so if anyone wants more... it is on a requested basis.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I'm sure I had some final thoughts when I started this, and it was not meant to be NEARLY this long of a response. While I feel like I didn't directly answer your question, hopefully there's some catharsis dispersed in everything I rambled about here. In summary though, I do NOT give the Rogues wings because the Curse of Babylon (ehem, recessive back-wings) makes it nearly impossible for Babylonians of the modern day to have wings. If they did have wings, they would be from forearm feathers: lots of birds in the Armada have these. Due to dogmatic differences and a convoluted history of identity-based conflicts though, the Rogues tattoo away the possibility of hybrid arms in the pursuit for technologically-based flight. The exception is Predator Hawk, who HAD wings, but then had them removed against his will. He is still bitter about it.

Did anyone make it this far? If so, you're a fucking FREAK, and I encourage you to send me more asks, because I could ramble forever about Sonic lore. It does not have to be related to the Babylon Rogues, you can ask me anything, but do take into account that I am clearly a bit obsessive and might take some time to answer. But when I do… it will be a shitshow like this response was. You read to this point though, so clearly you're into it. ENABLE ME! Love ya <3

#bsc anons #bsc canon lore #sonic analysis #sonic the hedgehog #sonic riders #sonic riders zero gravity #sonic free riders #archie sonic #sonic the comic #the babylon rogues #babylon rogues #battle bird armada #jet the hawk #wave the swallow #storm the albatross #predator hawk #tekno the canary

19 notes · View notes

givemearmstopraywith · 9 months

Note

hey, absolutely no disrespect meant here, but i noticed in one post you referred to yourself as a jew, and in another said you were censoring g-d out of respect to your family's jewish heritage, which you are exploring. amongst all this, you are clearly a christian. are you jewish or not? if you are not personally jewish, i really don't think you should be referring to yourself as a jew in a post where you claim christian theology (jesus being g-d) is true.

instead of sending me asks like this, can you maybe google what it means to be jewish, or what it means to be a jew? there is a wikipedia page about this. that way i don't i have to repeatedly unpack my generational trauma on the internet for (literally) thousands of strangers? the search function on my blog is broken- fine, but i have talked about this a lot, repeatedly, in the time i've had this blog, and it is not something i feel comfortable divulging openly. nor should i have to- nor should i have to worry about my identity being policed by strangers. this ask is worded with a certain tone of well-meaning authority, which is fine, i understand, and i am not mad at you, nor do i think you are trying to come across as harsh. i appreciate that you took the time to send this because it shows well-meaning concern. but this tone of authority comes from somewhere. where is it coming from? if you do not already know how i can be a jew and talk about christian theology, then you don't have the authority to question my identity, because questioning that means you must have no prior knowledge of the history of the jews whatsoever, about religious versus ethnic identity, the history of forced conversions to which jews have been subject, the necessity for religious and cultural assimilation, and so on.

whether you intend this or not- and i don't think you do, insomuch as i think you are genuinely well-meaning and don't want to harm or offend me personally- the wording of your question demands, implicitly, that i need to unpack both my personal ethnic and religious history, as well as that of my family. i am either lying about being a jew or i am not qualified to talk about my own identity because i must be christian, or i am not qualified to talk about christianity because im a jew. both of those things, being jewish and christian, of which i am both and neither because i am an ethnic jew who has not been baptized but studies christianity theology, are fraught with generational trauma and a certain concept of privilege, in the sense that a non-jew would never be asked to justify their connection to judaism versus their connection to christianity, because non-jews are not subjected to the same level of biopolicing that jews historically have been. a non-jew can move in and out of the spaces of judaism and christianity at will. whether i practice judaism or i practice christianity, whether i get a rhinoplasty or change my name, whether i censor g-d or type out the name in full, i will always be a jew. someone who is not ethnically jewish can convert to judaism from christianity and leave christianity behind in full, but i cannot opt out of being a jew, nor can any jew. centuries of ethnic cleansing have cemented this as fact.

if jewish people- who practice judaism or who are non-practicing ethnic jews- want to criticize what i talk about they are welcome to, but i have yet to encounter any jews who do, on or offline.

to make it clear again: i don't have a problem with you specifically, but i've had this blog for nearly six years, i have been studying theology for four of those years, and every so often i get a bunch of messages like this that parrot the exact same questions i get asked by other christians in my theology program that very, very genuinely can be answered by googling "what is a jew?" rather than telling me how i should refer to myself. and i am kinda tired of it! i am kinda tired.

#most of the jews i know are non practicing and/or christian and i shouldnt need to explain the intricacies of my identity every single time #i think about formally converting to judaism #replies #like you just dont have these kind of conversations when you are not on the internet

26 notes · View notes

radix-outpost · 5 months

Text

I don't discuss it all that often, but I have a fondness for Mario; unlike stuff like Sonic or Megaman, though, I don't think I had any coherent AU ideas ("coherent" doing a lot of heavy lifting there). Time to fix that.

The basic conceit is "another adaptation the likes of which Nintendo would never sign off on today", influenced by SMB '93 (note Mario's, Luigi's, and Daisy's outfits) with some "The Great Mission to Rescue Princess Peach" thrown in (Haru's presence, the basis for the Toads).

Notes below:

Mario: the hero, as per usual. Worked as a freelance plumber alongside his brother Luigi in New Donk City until circumstances brought the two and Pauline to the Mushroom Kingdom. A jovial, compassionate guy who is also way too good at combat acrobatics for someone who claims that he was "just" a plumber.

Luigi: the lancer. As shaken as he is by this sudden turn of events, Luigi is doing his best to face everything head-on; unlike Mario, he prefers outmaneuvering his enemies over fighting them directly. Boyfriend of Pauline.

Peach: the runaway royal. Peach heads to the Metro Kingdom to try and get away from her wicked aunt, Queen Lena, only to dive right back into the Mushroom Kingdom to set things right. She attempts to pass herself off as a civilian to the Mario Bros., with limited success.

Prince Haru: the other runaway royal. After failing to reel in his mother Lena, Haru tracks down Peach and accidentally blows her cover. He's a skilled diplomat, but too fragile to provide anything out on the field except buffs. Takes a shine to Mario after the plumber rescues him from Bowser's forces.

Toadette: a Mushroomian and Peach's best buddy. She joins up with the heroes not long after they arrive in the Mushroom Kingdom, helping them to navigate the place after they (sans Haru) end up on Queen Lena's "wanted" list.

Daisy: the last descendant of the long-gone Sarasaland royal family. Daisy works as an archaeologist; her findings place her in Bowser's crosshairs, though he swiftly comes to regret sending minions after a woman who can punch Koopas into next week. Infatuated with Peach.

Pauline: a down-on-her-luck singer who was rooming with the Mario Bros. Just when it seemed like things couldn't get worse, this gorilla in a jaunty tie grabs her and legs it out of the Metro Kingdom--though not to kidnap her, as it turns out. Pauline is still a bit sore about that, though.

Yoshi: a member of the self-named species; this Yoshi may or may not be one of the Yoshis that the Mario Bros. faintly recall being surrounded by as very young children. He's on the runty side and thus too small for anyone but Toadette to ride, but he helps out where he can.

Other stuff:

As you might've noticed, I'm not going with the canon pairings here, because I like making things harder on myself doing things different. This AU concept has Mario/Haru, Peach/Daisy, and Luigi/Pauline.

Haru's design changed a lot between OVA and AU; my main concern was figuring out a colour palette that worked. The skirt was influenced by some art of CrystalCrowned. Story-wise, Haru's no longer the prince of the Flower Kingdom (especially not when Wonder introduced its own take), nor betrothed to Peach.

Peach's mother here was a nun, Sister Hildy; the King outlived her by about ten years before succumbing to illness. The Mushroom Kingdom's weird succession laws allowed Lena to take the throne before Peach or Haru.

Yes, that's Lena from SMB '93.

I like modern Yoshi well enough, but trying to figure out how their sphere-snouts work is an exercise best left to someone else. This Yoshi is based on older artwork.

#mario #nintendo #video games #fanart #radix art

11 notes · View notes

helladirections · 5 months

Note

What do u think of the phrase “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free”? Apparently it’s antisemitic and I wanted ur opinion

Short answer: Yes, mostly.

Long answer: below the cut. I need to preface with a few things:

My statement on the war is the same as it has always been. Dying is bad, I am concerned about people living in imminent danger (including people I know and people I don't). Also, I have always been for a two state solution, human rights, self determination, etc. for everybody.

There's a narrative about how it's not necessarily the responsibility of a person to explain what is / isn't offensive to their culture / identity, which is valid. But most of my Jewish community is very into educating others, and I'd rather you come to me than not at all.

There's an old saying, "2 Jews, 3 opinions." So don't take what I have to say as the end all be all. Also, while I've spent a lot of time intentionally educating myself on this issue (especially beyond what they just teach us growing up), I have never claimed to be an expert.

Resources you might be interested in at the bottom.

Like most things in Judaism and surrounding modern day Israel, this answer can be a bit complicated when going into the full context. So please bear with me. And remember that one of our main texts (Talmud) is a tiny section of Torah surrounded by a giant page of two ancient rabbis literally arguing with each other. Please don't be mad that the answer isn't super easy.

First, a bit of history.

Claims to the land: Both Jews and Palestinians have ancestral claims to the piece of land that we call modern Israel. There's really not a way to argue around that, nor should anyone. In ancient times, Jews / Israelites / Hebrews were not the only people to be living there. Sometimes they lived in peace with others, sometimes they were at war. (As was typical for the time period). Up until about the time of the 1948 UN resolution, there wasn't really a concept of "Palestinians" as a specifically Arab people. Palestine was just one of the names used for the land, in addition to Israel, Zion, and others.

Theology: Jews have religious texts claiming that Israel is our homeland given by Gd. Much (but not all) of the religious context actually comes directly from the story of Passover, a holiday which is starting on Monday night. Jews were slaves in Egypt, Pharoah was bad, 10 plagues, parting of the Red Sea, 40 years in the desert, Israel. Etc. Do I think that this should actually matter in a modern day political / civil conflict? No. But I think it's worth mentioning for context because some people think it is relevant.

Religious Spaces: Jews, Christians, and Muslims all have highly important landmarks around what is now Israel.

Jews in the land: Although the Jews were as a whole kicked out of Israel in the post Temple period (after the second Temple was destroyed, leaving only the Western Wall that we have now), a portion of Jews remained in the area. Additionally, there has been a pretty through line of belief that Jews would some day be back in that land. (Also Passover: at the end of the service we say "next year in Jerusalem!") Zionism - the belief that there should be a modern state of Israel, has always existed in some form, although sometimes not using that name.

Modern Political Agreements: There were some phases of individual Jewish communities going into the land and building what is now Tel Aviv, parts of Jerusalem, etc. Then there was the British Mandate. I forget the timeline, but there were multiple international offers to give Jews a piece of land was smaller than what Israel is now, or didn't even include Jewish holy sites, and from my knowledge, most of the Jewish leaders at those times were ready to accept anything they were offered.

Then after the Holocaust, there were millions of displaced Jews with nowhere to go. One of the primary reasons why the UN established the modern state of Israel was to address that problem - No one wanted to let them in, they didn't want to go anywhere random, and a general sense that there had to be a place that Jews could go to a be safe if something like the Holocaust were to happen again. That UN resolution was in 1948. There has been on and off war in the region since well before 1948, but the day after that resolution, all hell broke loose.

Gaza & Hamas: A lot of progress has been made since 1948. Israel has peace treaties with many Arab countries, Egypt being a prime example. Most relevant to this question and this moment in time is that in 2005, Israel left Gaza. The Israeli government displaced tons of Jewish & non Jewish Israelis to give that land to Palestinians. After leaving, Gaza was left to govern itself. The government that was chosen was Hamas. Hamas is not really a government and does not look after its people, its goal is not to govern, but to destroy Israel. And not only to destroy Israel because it is the political entity, but because it is the Jewish state specifically.

Now, the actual phrase

Meaning of From The River to The Sea: This phrase directly references from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. It calls to completely eliminate the existence of the modern, democratic, Jewish state of Israel, and replace it with a modern, most likely undemocratic and led by Hamas, state of Palestine.

Also: This catchy chant was created and continues to be pushed by people who are antisemitic and want to destroy not only modern Israel, but see all Jews as inherently evil.

However: It's a catchy chant. People want peace, human rights, and self determination, just as I said above. If all the people around you are claiming to want those same things, and this is the catchy chant that has become part of the brand, it makes sense to join in on it.

Plus: From the the river to the sea, no one should be oppressed, deprived of human rights, or living in imminent danger. Dying is bad.

So what does that all mean?

One of the major reasons why modern Israel exists is for the protection of the Jewish people. One of the (many) major reasons why Palestinians do not have a modern state is because Hamas and other Palestinian leadership have refused to negotiate with Israel and have only ever called for its complete and total destruction. Hamas has always called for destruction through violent means not just because Israel is currently there, but because Israel is Jewish.

So my "final answer": The chant was created by, is in line with, and supports movements which not only seek to eliminate the modern state of Israel, but do so through violent and destructive means specifically because it is Jewish. Therefore, in my opinion and that of most of the Jewish community, From The River To The Sea Palestine Will Be Free is an antisemitic slogan.

Furthermore, regardless of if the slogan is defined formally as antisemitic or not, it often accompanies people and actions which make Jews, including myself, feel unsafe.

That being said, there have always been Jewish voices calling for the elimination of Israel. After all, 2 Jews, 3 Opinions. And, many, if not most, people who repeat that phrase don't know the full history and don't intend to be antisemitic - the Pro Palestinian movement has done a wonderful job at branding around human rights.

Some more of my opinions, just for the record if I still managed to have your attention.

Just because you disagree with a government or the way a country was formed, does not mean the country does not have a right to exist. I disagree with the American government almost all the time, and the founding of this country relied on abusing BIPOC. But America is here, and so we deal with it and try to make the best of it.

I hate Netanyahu. I always have. My grandpa, who used to like him, now hates him as much as I do. We talked last night about how he is making it so difficult to be Jewish around the world right now.

My definition of the word Zionism: The belief that modern Israel has a right to exist as a democratic Jewish state.

My perfect version of that land: People stop killing each other, everyone has the right to self governance, universal human rights, everyone has safe access to their own holy sites. I think the most likely way to get there is through some sort of two state solution. I do not know what the lines look like.

Israel policy and politics used to be a hobby for me, something I cared about and found interesting. It was also an entry point into my political career. Then it was my job. Now it's not fun and I do try to avoid it because I get too emotional and I can't really do anything about it anyway. I said Netanyahu is making it hard to be Jewish anywhere in the world, because diaspora Jews are constantly being blamed for the actions of an independent country. It gets hard.

I have generally avoided talking about October 7th, and the ongoing war. That is because there are images from that day that I cannot unsee. My intrusive thoughts are those images. It's not healthy for me to be plagued by that constantly.

You may have read me write about this before, but I know a lot of people in Israel right now. My best friend and her son - my nephew, live just west of Jerusalem in a small Orthodox community, which means it sometimes takes days for me to get responses from her after a big event, especially if it overlaps with Shabbat or another holiday. I check in with her just a couple of days ago though, and she said she's doing well and she feels safe.

Resources you might be interested in:

ADL on From The River to The Sea AJC on From The River to The Sea AP on From The River to The Sea

History.com overview of Israel history MyJewishLearning overview of Israel history US State Department on the creation of Israel in 1948 Brittanica on history & conflict in Israel

Anyway, I hope this answers your question, I'm sorry it was so long, and I'm aware that I'm about to get some hateful comments. If you are going to send me a hateful anon, just know that I'm going to block you, then check my blocked list, and know who you are. I'm not going to sacrifice my mental health and stability over people who don't understand the full context of what they are talking about and choose to just attack with hate.

#beep #yo #this got long but i think it's all important #dying is bad #I hope this answered the question #i know im about to get hate. but im just gonna keep reblogging harry and living my best life

8 notes · View notes

insanefan · 18 days

Text

Writer Interview Tag

Thanks for the tag @hydropyro!

I will tag hmmm @gothic-ivory and... whomever else might feel inclined to join in!

Questions and answers below the cut <3

When did you start writing?

I used to write stories in primary school, I know. I believe about 5th grade was when it really started, with my stories about my dogs being superheroes. Grand adventures for these creatures who meant so much to me. Then, in 7th grade, we had a creative writing assignment in English - a gathering of witches! We had lots of prework for it, everyone had to write a 'postcard home', 'what does your character see in the crystal ball', 'what's in their suitcase' and so on and so forth, but then finally we were let loose.

Now, I'm writing this in English too, so one might think "ah well, pretty normal then". But I am not English, now am I xD No, at this point we'd had English lessons for about four years, I believe? The weakest in class wrote a story of about two pages. It was a good effort! But English was hard. I didn't understand it, but I could still appreciate the effort. Now me though... at ten pages my teacher went "you need to stop". I ended up with twelve. That sort of... sets a starting point, I think. That's when I went "ohh. oh I like this."

So I suppose what that means is; I started writing stories in English in 7th grade. 12 yrs old! Starting to be a while. And, uh, I've kept at it since. 90 % of the time in English. I started writing fanfiction also at 12, though a bit later in the year, and since I wanted to talk with people about it, I had to write in the 'shared' language, as it were.

My aunt, currently a journalist but previously an author, laments that I don't write in Norwegian. She claims there's a power in writing your own language. She may well be right. Maybe I'll get to it sometime.

Are there different themes or genres you enjoy reading than what you write?

Well, yes. I am a voracious reader. Always have been. I do mainly enjoy a variety of fantasy and folk genres, but I am also of mind that it's incredibly healthy to broaden your own horizons, so I often get books at the library that the librarians have recommended for one reason or another, even if I would not necessarily have chosen them myself. 8/10 times I enjoy them and learn something new. So I read a lot also in non-fantasy genres, though not a lot of sci-fi.

When it comes to my writing, it's 1) mainly fanfiction these days or 2) RP. The fanfiction I usually write in the universe it's set, though granted that's often one fantasy world or another, while the RP I tend to go looking for more fantasy-esque things. I'm also very much a 'fluff and angst' writer; tragedy and comfort, exploring one's own path to healing and the sharing of affection and warmth between characters is something I write a lot of. Should I branch out and try to tackle deeper themes, other ideas? Maybe. I might, if I get inspired at some point.

It might be it's easier if I try my hand at more original fiction. Food for thought.

Is there a writer you want to emulate or get compared to often?

Not really? There is always inspiration to be found in reading other things, and there's the concept that 'everything is copied from somewhere' and whatnot, but I really think it's more a case that everything you read, see, hear, experience and learn becomes part of this massive pool of knowledge you have. That you can pull from when you write. And sometimes that means you emulate a specific writing style. But I can't say it's something I am actively trying to, nor have I had my work compared with anything insofar as I'm aware.

Can you tell me a bit about your writing space?

My writing space is wherever I'm sitting comfortably with my laptop accessible. Or a notebook. I do have around 15 notebooks full from cover to cover with writing from my younger days, and they're hilarious to look through, not least because gods beyond have I improved since! But I write much, much faster with a computer.

I had a shitty laptop from I was around 12, but it was at upper secondary that I really started writing on the computer for real; we got our own laptops from school, and I spent... probably too much time writing stories instead of doing my actual schoolwork xD I still have all of those texts! Put them in my dropbox and have carried them around since. I believe I'm up to about 1500 separate documents for different stories now.

Of course, sometimes you can't bring your laptop, and that's when notebooks are good to have again. Or, in worst case, my phone. I do have a note app, I just sincerely dislike writing on the phone with its annoying autocorrection and whatnot.

Also tho, I did recently get a paper tablet (reMarkable) for work which feels like writing on paper and can turn handwritten text into computer text (to some degree; I have shit handwriting) and can regardless save the files so I have them in one place 👀 It's a very expensive notebook but so far I am loving it A Lot.

What's your most effective way to muster up a muse?

Lamenting about the lack of one? Honestly, I'm not quite sure. Sometimes I get inspiration out of nowhere, sometimes I struggle. Music can help, sometimes.

What is your reason for writing?

Otherwise I'd never get peace! There's always ideas swirling about in my head of various completion and loudness. If I don't write they take up too much space, not allowing me the space for other things, like, say, my work. I need the ideas out on paper or in a document to trap them there!

Honestly though, I also simply enjoy being able to describe events. Describe things that are happening to the characters, how they're reacting to them, what it does with them. I'm something of an introspective writer, I suppose, I'm very interested in the inner cognitive life of the characters I'm writing, and so it's almost always an exploration because these characters, much like people, are multi-faceted and don't necessarily react as expected.

Is there any specific comment or type of comment you find particularly motivating?

Hah! If people comment or interact with me regarding my writing, literally anything motivates me. Showing excitement for my excitement becomes excitement^2 you know? So really, even a comment as simple as "I like this character!" will cheer me and motivate me, though of course the moment you start commenting "I liked when character x did this" or "what are your plans for character y?" I will end up in high gear because then it's a conversation.

How do you want to be thought about by your readers?

Do they think about me? Odd thought. I'm always surprised when someone tells me they've thought about me if I'm not present. Which is also an odd thing, isn't it? The idea that you slip your friends' mind if you're not an active presence?

May or may not be a result of bullying in my youth, that one. Gotta work on it.

What do you feel is your greatest strength as a writer?

I suppose perhaps character development? I enjoy multi-faceted characters, so I often try to make mine as 'human' as possible, with all our faults and fantastic abilities. There's nothing I enjoy as much as putting a character in situations and having them realise things about themselves.

When you write, are you influenced by what others might enjoy reading, or do you write purely for yourself, or a mix of both?

All told it's probably a bit of a mix, but it leans to writing for myself. I've posted some things, both back in the days when fanfiction.net was it and on ao3, but as previously mentioned; 1500 documents. I've posted, what, 15 things on ao3? I write because I want to write and because I can't find what I want to read and thus need to write it myself. If someone else enjoys it too, it makes me happy! But it's no necessity.

How do you feel about your own writing?

I enjoy it! I will reread my own stories on a pretty frequent basis, honestly, because I've written them for me. When people also offer a lil compliment or comment that they like it too, it's incredibly nice, but in the end, yes, I do like my own writing.

Still things to learn, but I can learn them while enjoying it, instead of learning them because of feeling misery.

#writings #writer #interview game #tag game #insanefan #about me #ramblings #writer interview tag

4 notes · View notes

multigenderswag · 1 year

Note

saw the recent posts about lesbian men and like , to some extent i get how they got there-- if you define "lesbian" as "woman who is NOT attracted to men and IS attracted to women" and then you assume men and women are mutually exclusive because of your internalized phobias, and just kinda let non-binary people (assumed to all be neither men nor women) fall into a murky gray area.... you would go "wait but by claiming a man is a lesbian aren't you also implicitly claiming they're a woman and ~forcing me~ to be attracted to them?"

and it's like. it loops back around to the transmisogyny argument. because literally no one is forcing you to be attracted to or date these people. people have like, personal preferences sometimes. any individual person who is a lesbian and does not want to date men, like, that's fine. that's a personal thing. but it's not a lesbian thing. like.... i think the problem here is people imposing their personal preferences onto a community label just because they don't think they're allowed to..... have preferences in who they date??

like if i never found myself attracted to redheads i wouldn't try to claim that redheads weren't ~real [gender I'm attracted to]~. i would just go "yeah I'm [orientation] and also i never really find myself attracted to [x]". whether that's dicks or vaginas or a hair color or a neurotype (genuinely i don't think i could ever be attracted to a neurotypical. that's ok that's just how it is for me), like..... brains are weird. attraction is weird. you don't have to make it a Big Thing about everyone who is attracted to that gender. you don't have to make it about that gender.

like.... the actual definition of lesbian is so broad and so beautiful and so queer. and I'm sure there are plenty of lesbians that are not attracted to men (regardless of whether or not they are also women) and that's fine, like. there are definitely weirder attraction patterns than that. but it's really not that hard to go "yeah I'm a lesbian and also I've never found myself attracted to men" as if it's an actual personal preference. since it is.

anyway uh sorry to ramble in your inbox?? but yeah like, as someone who is a man + faux woman (like knockoff woman. soy-derived woman) uhh... yeah. lesbians are cool as shit and especially lesbians with male-aligned genders or transmasc/butch presentation. all the respect in the world from me

I'm not sure if I've publicly come out as a redhead on this blog, but I am a redhead, so I just found it extremely funny that you used redheads as your example of people you don't find attractive. Like damn, okay, just target me like that :/ (lighthearted)

Anyway, that aside, yeah! Even if I disagree with the anti male lesbian discourse, I can see how one would get from point A to point B. It's entirely understandable to have a knee-jerk reaction to "lesbians can be attracted to/be men," since a lot of lesbians- including me, way back in the day when I used to identify as a lesbian- really can't be attracted to men. And have had a lot of negative experiences trying to force themselves to be attracted to men, or having other people pressuring them to be attracted to men. So I can see where the discomfort comes from.

However- say it with me, kids- discomfort is not a moral judgement.

Yes, it can feel invalidating. No, that feeling does not give you the right to say "this identity that makes me uncomfortable is bad, end of story."

I think another problem, like you said, is that people conflate "SOME lesbians have a male gender, or SOME lesbians experience some attraction to men," with "ALL lesbians are obligated to date/sleep with men," when that's just not the case. An argument I've seen a lot is that men will use mspec lesbians as an excuse to pressure a non-mspec lesbian into dating them or sleeping with them. Which ignores a very important, very fundamental concept: NO MEANS NO.

If a man is hitting on a lesbian, and the lesbian says no, it doesn't actually matter whether that lesbian was attracted to men, or whether some lesbians can be attracted to men. All that matters is that that person said no. If the man in this scenario disregards that, it's not the fault of mspec lesbians; it's the fault of a man who didn't stop when he was told to stop.

In general, I think it's fairly easy to understand that "some members of x community do y" does not mean "all members of x community do y" or "most members of x community do y" or even "all members of x community should do y." Communities are diverse!

Take this example: "I'm Jewish, and I keep kosher. Some Jews don't keep kosher. Keeping kosher is an important part of my Jewish identity, but it's not part of their Jewish identity, and that's okay. That doesn't make them not Jewish, and that also doesn't mean I have to stop keeping kosher. Just because some Jews don't keep kosher, that doesn't give someone the right to insist I eat a bacon cheeseburger." This is a rational thing to say. I think most people would agree with what is being said here.

However. "I'm a lesbian, and I'm not attracted to men. Some lesbians are attracted to men. Lack of attraction to men is an important part of my lesbian identity, but it's not part of their lesbian identity, and that's okay. That doesn't make them not lesbian, and that also doesn't mean I have to be attracted to men. Just because some lesbians are attracted to men, that doesn't give someone the right to insist I sleep with a man." This follows the same logic, but is somehow a very controversial statement.

Because of the negative experiences so many lesbians have had due to not being attracted to men, it may be harder to reach the "and that's okay" point in the lesbian example than in the kosher example. I understand this. However, like you said, that doesn't mean they can enforce this for all lesbians.

And like you said, preferences are a thing that exist. Lesbians do not have to be attracted to every single other lesbian out there. Not being attracted to someone doesn't mean they're not a lesbian.

Lesbians are a diverse community, which is awesome. None of the ways to be a lesbian are wrong or bad just because they're different from each other.

#asks #male lesbian #multigender lesbian #lesbian

36 notes · View notes

sunflowergem · 1 month

Note

9 and 13 for the oc asks!!

9 Do you have a specific lyric or quote which you associate with your OC?

It took me 2 hours to remember this but I knew there was like an actual quote that I think of for her and I want to include it somewhere in the story! So it's actually when I think about a lot when I write like richer characters. I think because I'm not from a super affluent background and I'd like to think I would be a generous person if I became rich.

noblesse oblige

And I'm having a hell of a weird moment right now because I thought this was said sometime in the National Treasure movie and that's where I picked it up. But I'm looking into it to try and find the original quote and I'm not finding it at all! I don't have the DVD anymore nor a DVD player in my apartment so I can't like fully check, but I think I might have made this up in my brain somehow??? In my head Nicholas Cage says"noblesse oblige" and then goes on to explain what that concept means in like a more modern term in combination with some patriotism so the next part of it would be "It means if there's something something wrong, those who have the ability to take action have the responsibility to take action" But apparently only that second part is from the actual movie???

Apparently it's originally a A French concept and it still fits with her character because it is about nobles doing what they can to help those less fortunate but I am so confused how I ended up Mandela affecting myself to think this came from National Treasure at some point???

According to the Wikipedia article,

The Dictionnaire de l'Académie française defines it thus:

Whoever claims to be noble must conduct himself nobly.

(Figuratively) One must act in a fashion that conforms to one's position and privileges with which one has been born, bestowed and/or has earned.

I am also more confused how I messed this up because I'm reading more on the Wikipedia article and apparently it was used in something I definitely saw in my childhood that would have made a hell of an impact. But it's Mary Poppins, not National Treasure!

Also from the Wikipedia page:

In the song "The Life I Lead" from the 1964 Disney film Mary Poppins, the character Mr. Banks (played by David Tomlinson) uses the phrase: "I'm the lord of my castle! The sovereign! The liege! I treat my subjects, servants, children, wife, with a firm but gentle hand—noblesse oblige."

I don't think I ever fully internalized what he was saying at the end of that, but like I can hear this in his voice in my head! I have been on a ride with this question. Thank you for this experience 🤣

13 If you met your OC, would the two of you get along?

Considering she's pretty similar to me I think so? Although sometimes if people are too close to how you act then it kind of gets annoying. Also people pleasers meeting people-pleasers is kind of a recipe for hurt feelings over time because people start repressing shit. So maybe limited contact would be best. We could definitely work easily together I think like maybe favorite co-worker kind of status.

#tav sunflower #ask list #I rewrote the first question like three times. trying to figure out the answer

5 notes · View notes

clairelsonao3 · 1 year

Note

Happy STS! Following the beautifully lengthy Chapter 24 of GSNBTR, I have a related question. You're writing GSNBTR for an online audience and publishing it serially, paying special attention to where cliffhangers fall to build suspense between updates. When you are writing novels for print/ebook publication (either self or tradpub), how different or similar does that process look? Do you care whether your chapters are of relatively equal length? In a similar vein, do yo have a preference as a reader for short or long chapters?

Thanks for the ask, Kate! Happy STS!

For a long time, I hated the entire concept of chapters. The idea of cordoning off little sections of the story into specific chunks and then assigning numbers to them -- especially BEFORE they're even written -- seemed to me wholly unnatural and weird. There's no way I can possibly know how a chapter will look or specifically what it will contain until it's on the page in front of me, and ideally, until I know what exactly (not just the general events, but the actual WORDS) is in the chapter before it AND after it. Because of this, historically, I've written the entire work all the way through and then (if I choose to have chapters at all) divided it until at the very end. Incidentally, my YA thriller (which was intended for trad pub) lacks chapters entirely. There are definitely cliffhangers all over the place, but they end individual scenes, which are neither named nor numbered. I like the idea of leaving it more up to readers to stop and/or start restart reading whenever they feel like. Were I to write something else with a view toward trad pub, I might indeed go back to one of those approaches.

Obviously, posting on Ao3, I had to rethink this. It wasn't easy. As you know, I keep outlines partially in my head and partially on paper, but they are just "this happens, then this happens." They are NEVER written with any view toward chapters or really any other kind of subdivision. I would find myself wholly incapable of outlining like that. As you also know, I also write out of order pretty much always, which means often, getting ready to edit and post means quite literally "assembling" a chapter from bits and pieces scattered all over various documents. Consequently, I almost never know how long a chapter will be until I see how it looks when it's all "assembled" in front of me, with the scenes in the right order. And by "right order," I don't always mean chronological order, because I also jump around in time if I think it suits the story.

Would I prefer to have chapters of roughly equal length? Yes, because I'm just kind of OCD like that. Instead, I have chapters ranging from 2,500 to almost 9,000, with the average chapter length probably around 4,000-5,000. But my being happy with how the chapters are structured is much more important than length. I will cut out half a chapter or tack on thousands of words (again, generally simply transferred over from the next chapter because I write out of order) to make sure we end in the right place and make sure people come away intrigued and wanting to come back for more.

I can't believe I wrote that much about something (chapters) I claim to hate, but here you go!

#writeblr #sts #sts answer #storyteller saturday #writing #my writing

4 notes · View notes

mbti-notes · 2 years

Note

There's been a developing sentiment in the online type community that Fe isn't as valued in the western culture due to a preference for individuality, power and expediency, so there's an increasing unconscious motivation to use the function in a less healthy manner to get social results and feel seen/valued/respected. As a provider who has a lot of high Fe clients, I'm inclined to agree. What do you think?

1) I'm afraid that the claims you've raised don't really make sense to me. On one hand, you're saying western culture has a greater preference for individuality (which ends up devaluing Fe). On the other hand, you seem to be saying that western culture urges people to hide their individuality or put on a facade (in order to fit in and feel seen/valued/respected by society). Which is it? Is individuality valued or not?

2) I studied some cross-cultural psychology back in the day. While it was interesting, something that always bothered me was the tendency to throw around terms without clear definitions. You can't just take concepts/standards from one culture and then try to use them to understand another culture, as though it's easy to draw a straightforward equivalence. For example, if you're trying to measure the degree to which a society is "individualistic", you can't just take the western definition and conception of "individuality" and assume that it should look the same in other societies.

There is more awareness about the difficulty of finding the right definitions and metrics nowadays, but this puts into question the usefulness of older research. When ideas trickle down from academia into mainstream consciousness, the research is already quite dated. As soon as I hear someone start to make broad claims about western/eastern/x culture and they do not understand how their vantage point influences the definitions they use, I immediately get skeptical and brace myself for hearing a bunch of crude stereotypes.

3) I would argue that there is no society in existence that fully embraces individuality because it wasn't until recently that the concept was granted enough importance in the human imagination. Thus, most people don't have a deep enough understanding of individuality to develop the idea to its fullest potential. Even if the human species cared about individuality as soon as they started walking upright, throughout most of human history, they didn't have the time, resources, or options to be anything other than what they were born into. It is modern living that freed us up and gave us more options. We've come a long way, but there is still a long way to go.

4) While there are similarities to be found between people, nobody wears exactly the same psychological lenses as you. Each person interprets information in their own unique way. It is a fact that we are all individuals. And facts are neutral. A fact can SEEM "good" or "bad" to you, depending on your vantage point. But, change your vantage point and you easily see from the opposite point of view. Go beyond the concept of vantage point and you will see that individuality can be both good AND bad.

Individuality, in itself, as a concept, is neither good nor bad. Trying too hard to make the case that it's good/bad is largely an act of ego posturing. It's often about trying to feel better about the perspective you identify with and finding an excuse to ignore other perspectives. There are fairly common arguments you hear out there, but do you pick up on their underlying intention? For example, people claim to defend individuality as a virtue but what they really want is selfishness without consequences, or people malign individuality for the breakdown of society when the truth is that they are terrified of feeling excluded or left to fend for themselves. If you want to be good at analyzing arguments, you have to wonder what motivates people to want to make the argument in the first place.

5) Anyone who thinks Fe ignores individuality hasn't understood it. In the most basic terms, Fe is about social harmony. There can be no real social harmony as long as even one member of a social group is in a state of disharmony and/or feels excluded. Fairness to each and every individual member is part and parcel of Fe. A social group cannot hope to be at its best unless it knows how to bring out the best in all its individual members. What Fe does is grant you the ability to gauge and assess where the group is really at. Whether you know what to do with that information is your own personal matter. It's not the function's fault that people misuse it. There is usually a deeper (psychological) problem going on that needs to be addressed.

6) Don't conflate Fe with "fitting in". We all have to go through a stage in life where we learn the "rules" of how to get ahead in the society we find ourselves in, it's called adolescence. (This is partly determined by biology. We are not the only species to experience adolescence.) We also have to go through a stage in life where individuality emerges enough to prompt us to question our place in the world. (This usually happens in young adulthood, as human brain development reaches full maturation.) People get stuck in immaturity when they do not stop to question and reflect on the rules they have been told to follow. There are many biopsychosocial factors that can contribute to someone getting developmentally stuck. (See the section on Ego Development.)

To survive and continue on, every society places great pressure on its individual members to conform, in hopes that the majority will opt to keep the status quo alive and well, i.e., we all learn conformity before individuality. Some societies apply more pressure than others and some even use harsh tactics to force the appearance of conformity. None of this takes away from the fact that we are all individuals and it is a part of human development to grapple with our individuality.

Even when one's personality is supposedly highly valued by society, one can still feel deeply unfulfilled and question who one really is apart from all the outward appearances of "success". Even in the most tyrannical societies, you find individuals fighting for their right to freedom of expression. And what about people who make a fully conscious choice to conform to societal values because they genuinely believe it is their calling to help their society flourish - would you call them "individuals"? Trying to describe societies as being more/less "individualistic" or "collectivistic" is quite superficial if it only really refers to generalities/appearances and doesn't properly address more private manifestations of individuality. This goes back to the issue of whether you have defined your terms in a way that encompasses their true complexity.

IMO, the degree to which a particular culture prefers individuality isn't very important in the context of your clients, and it misses a larger point: We all have to make difficult choices regarding conformity, as part of our personal growth. Your personality type may have some minor influence on the time in your life at which individuality really starts to matter to you, but everyone must reckon with it eventually.

#individuality #conformity #society #development #growth #adolescence #fe #ask

10 notes · View notes

i-left-my-room-tidy · 2 years

Note

I'm also confused now mhmm

I mean... i'm still very indecisive about how I personally want to view the human mind, its consciousness, and realities... especially in regards to manifestation and reality shifting.

I must say i don't know that much about the writings of those people you mentioned. i'm currently reading neville goddard's books. English isn't my mother tongue. So, the archaic english parts REALLY confuse me sometimes but his way of interpreting the bible is really interesting.

Before getting into law of assumption and reality shifting, I was generally into spirituality and witchcraft. I even had a huge tumblr blog for tarot readings lol... yk through channeling my spirit guides and 'predicting' things so to say. Though, my way of viewing myself and the world I'm in changed a lot over the past view years.

But it's kinda like wanting to set puzzle pieces together but there are puzzles pieces from different pictures and some fit together (physically) that are not really meant to be together (image-wise) iykwim? And later on, you find out that some parts were wrongly put together so you have to revise it (your beliefs) and start again from zero... it's a difficult and really confusing journey imo.

And as i'm not really able to grasp the concept of this reality yet and what role my consciousness in all this plays, it's also really difficult to decide what role other people's souls and 'soulmates' play in this.

Oftentimes, I just want to simplify everything for me just because it all seems so overwhelmingly complicated. (Thats also why i wrote a very vague explanation in that soulmates ask - i tried to keep it simple.) Which reminds of what neville goddard keeps mentioning that humans always try to analyse everything even the simplest things and therefore always end up with complicated 'conclusions' which in turn makes them stray afar from the (very simple) quintessence. (idk if that made sense now lol)

I know this whole rant was probably completely useless to you, it just shows my confusion... sorry once again my mind is very scatterbrained and i don't know where im going with all those thoughts most of the time :')

Anyways, I still have plans to shift to a (what I like to call) 'spirit cafe dr' which is just a dr in a 'otherworldly' caféshop setting where I can talk with my spirit guides and other entities. And I plan to ask them about all this (and more)/to learn from them. I don't know when I will do it, probably not anytime soon because i'm busy with university but I definitely need answers lol

Btw have you already shifted to your jesus dr?

[thanks for this ask!]

and don't apologise for the rant! while i won't claim to understand everything that you've said, i do think you make a point with goddard's belief of analyses. i myself fall subject to that 😭😭

sometimes, we want to understand the world so much—and it's as if each change needs to be predicted, just so we fulfill our desire for knowing. i think that's where your experience with your worldview shifting and my habit of theorising fall under. as you've mentioned, the journey is a puzzle, and in some cases, the pieces never always fit together as expected. we both want to know what would be of us, and why; we want to know when, where, and how it would happen.

my best guess is that it's merely human nature at play. certainty isn't always guaranteed, as can be depicted by the presence of change itself. so, we try to make solutions for a problem that should have been left alone. I'm not saying it's inherently wrong, but the processes we take make it our lives harder than we need to. call it a lapse in judgement, if you will.

I'm not as versed with the concept of spirit guides nor do i always try to seek them out, but i do know they're very significant to everyone's journeys. that's mostly a matter of opinion, but don't let it stop you. i hope you get the answers that you seek!

and don't be shy about the rant! it's refreshing to see someone else's thoughts on the matter, actually. it usually takes me some time to respond, but i love long-winded discussions.

as for my jesus DR, not yet, because it's not that urgent for me as of the moment. I'm currently focused on my fame DR. but i do hope to shift (or mini-shift) to my jesus DR at least once this year, on or before christmas [just to celebrate it in time lmao].

#shifting #shifting realities #reality shifting #desired reality #shift #shifting shenanigans

2 notes · View notes

mdhwrites · 11 months

Text

Talking About Commissions

So this is not just about taking commissions. This is genuinely about writing commissions in general, why I price things as I do, etc. like that because I don't feel like writing commissions come up often in online spaces for... a lot of reasons that I'm not getting into. So to begin, what do I set my own commission rates at?

Actually, no, that's going to have to wait because with writing... How do you charge for it in general? With an art piece, you are asking for ONE thing. One piece of art. Well, with a writing commission, aren't you just asking for a short story or every chapter? Sure and you can charge that way but it presents a lot of potential problems. After all, if you claim 30 dollars for a one off story, what as a writer are you really signing up for? And what as a consumer are you?

First for the writers: I have one offs, that are one contiguous scene so wouldn't be split into chapters or the like, that go up to NINE. THOUSAND WORDS. I have chapters that have become the same length. That is one almost HALF of a complete novella written... for thirty dollars. For most writers, that is probably at least nine hours of work as well and that only counts the writing part of it. Not any revisions, thinking about it, planning etc. Even for me, who writes at about 2k words an hour and doesn't usually need the planning portion as heavily as most, that's still over four hours of work and I consider myself to write at a professional level so I don't want to undersell my capabilities, nor should you.

How about for the consumer though? This all sounds great for them after all? Well, what if the concept is really short? Just a sweet scene that ends up about only a thousand words. It's still well written, gets the point across and more fluff wouldn't really benefit the work. It is the best version you can get... But you spent thirty dollars on it. Non-negotiable. That might leave you a bit ticked as the buyer. Shouldn't the price be equivalent to the work needed?

That's why I charge more based on common freelance methods which is equivalent to how many words are written... Not that that's simple. After all, the story isn't written. I don't know how many words it will be. I can estimate because I know my style and what not but I can't guarantee it.

For me, partially due to my mental health, I do not charge up front and I request a budget effectively. A maximum amount that someone is willing to pay for the story. That way I know what to expect for the work but I also know what my limit is before I'm working on it pro bono, because I will not charge beyond that limit, no matter how many words I write. We established a budget, I will not ask for more. I imagine what a lot of authors would/may do is that they do this same sort of estimation and effectively ask for what they expect for the rock bottom amount of words the concept will take and charge that much as down payment. That might be the full price or they may ask for a budget like I do. That's up to the author.

So... What is my personal price?

10 USD / 1k words, rounded up at 700 words. Half price for original works.

So first: Why the rounding policy? It's effectively so that neither of us feels screwed over by the word count. After all, if I write 3124 words and charge $40 for it, you might be reasonably annoyed because you got shortchanged 8 dollars. If I were to write 3895 words with a budget of 50 dollars, I might be tempted to just find another hundred words to cram in, even if it makes a part awkward because I want to be paid for those extra 900 words. And I set the rounding policy like I do to favor the commissioner because, well, that's just kind of good business.

But couldn't I remove the rounding policy if I just charged 1 USD / 100 words? Yes. I could. I can't actually give you a real reason why I don't. I just like the larger, more even numbers I guess. It also makes it clear that any story should be expected to be 1k words. I don't want someone coming to me with 2 dollars and wanting a story because while I can technically do that, I'd honestly rather take something so short as just a request.

Why the 10 dollars as the rate? This is probably the part of my commission sheet I've warred with the most due to the reasons why you don't see writing commissions much. After all, with my writing speed and how I can generate a story in SECONDS, why not charge something like five dollars per 1k words? It'd be 10 dollars an hour then as a wage, upwards of 15 when I'm really in a flow state.

Well I live in the US and 15 dollars is what the minimum wage honestly SHOULD be here so at best, I am earning the minimum wage for my country on any given commission but that's only if we talk about specifically the time spent writing. Not the time spent doing revisions, thinking about it, etc. like that and that's without a potential editing pass since someone is paying for this rather than my own works which I don't usually do a self edit on. And remember: I am willing to PUBLISH my works. I consider them good enough to put out into the world and charge money for them. That further complicates how much I should or shouldn't shortchange myself on my prices, especially when I don't charge ahead of time and can ONLY deliver a finished product so if someone wants to commission me and bale, it's very easy to do so.

That part about me being willing to sell my works as books is also why I don't charge as much for original writing. I am not selling you the rights to commercialize the work I do for you. That complicates EXTREMELY and I probably just straight up wouldn't be willing to do proper, commercial commissions. However, if you do want me doing an original story, that means there's a lot of benefits for me (an excuse to market my original writing abilities, a short story I could publish in a collection eventually, etc. like that) and honestly the word count will probably be larger in fanfiction simply due to the necessities of original writing versus fanfiction (a whole other blog I could do).

It complicates things on all sides in a way that makes me commonly want to favor the commissioner over myself with the price of the work. Not that that has come up very often because I haven't done many original commissions and the last commissioned work I did was... six years ago? At least?

And that brings up the last question: Am I currently open for commissions? I... Am kind of in a limbo where if you want to talk to me about a potential commission, I will be willing to discuss it with you. However, due to my mental health problems and how bad they've been, right now I'm more likely to either turn it down or just allow it to be a request (I have made multiple short stories based on people just throwing me a prompt in my asks, not even asking for a story) because I don't want that extra pressure despite REALLY needing the money. Honestly, I'd rather you just bought my books. You get a lot more bang for your buck that way, even if it's less tailored to you.

So yeah, I hope you found this interesting and chew on it a bit if you're considering opening commissions yourself. See you next tale.

======+++++======

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

#writing #writing commissions

0 notes