#I just don't understand this specific reason

[arowitharrows]

people keep generally agreeing (?) with this post only to double down on the 'not doing anything' phrase and like, if you want to continue using this sentiment then sure, I'm not stopping you. But I personally won't stand behind it and my first assumption will be that people using it have not fully deconstructed and understood the mechanisms of queerphobia and/or do not understand asexuality and aromanticism.

In the past years, and especially with a focus on queer infighting and "discourse", it has become very clear to me how important it is to understand the reasons behind people's prejudice against certain minority groups. Everyone knows that queerphobia exists, but I find it helpful to ask myself, do I know why it exists? Do I know which fundamental beliefs drive people's hatred? Do I know how these beliefs differ between, e.g. the political far right, conservative christians, or my grandmother who grew up in the 40s? It is so important to consider these things, both in determining how to address the problem of queerphobia in the current context and to avoid pointless discourse about who does or doesn't face discrimination in our society.

So, in the context of this post, I need aspec people to understand that no matter how hard you cling to "we aren't even doing anything", it's not going to save you. Sure, people hate queer sex a lot, and maybe you aren't having queer sex. But it is vital to understand that, usually, their core belief isn't that no one should have sex ever, it's that people should have sex in a specific controlled context - e.g. married, heterosexual, sex for procreation, romantic sex - and they will not be happy with you if you don't comply. Choosing to never have sex is expressing bodily autonomy that they do not want you to have. And if you are clinging to this phrase because of a general feeling of "I'm just living my live, why would anyone hate me for existing?" then yeah, I get that, I really do. But don't forget that that's true for every single queer orientation out there.

Also on that note, I need people to not erase aromanticism from this discussion. If we are talking about aphobia then that includes aromantic people and it includes aromantic people who aren't asexual. It includes the way people react to aromantic people having sex without being romantically attracted to their partners. I feel like often times when people say they don't understand aphobia, and when they try to explain/justify this stance, it's only in the context of "not having sex" and aromanticism is somehow forgotten.

tbh I really dislike how aphobia tends to be discussed whenever there's some kind of incident that makes it visible to general society. The most common response seems to be some variation of "why would anyone hate asexual/aromantic people, they aren't even doing anything" and it just always sits wrong with me. It paints such a passive picture of our existence and feels like a comment influenced by the level of invisibility that aspec people have in society. Why would you be annoyed by someone who is practically invisible? Just go back to ignoring their existence, it's easy!

But despite the invisibility, aspec people are actually doing quite a lot of things that will piss off queerphobic, right-wing and religious people (and hell, even left-wing people). And the most obvious point is that we are actively not performing heterosexuality the way they want us to. People who's entire world view is "cis men and women should be in monogamous, heterosexual marriage and have (white) babies" are not going to lean back and say "oh but those asexuals and aromantics are fine". They will also hate our guts, and they will come up with all sorts of reasons, including insinuating we're all secretly into bestiality, or mentally ill, or not human, or attention seeking children. It's just plain old queerphobia, and like all queerphobia, there's no inherent logic to it which you can worm your way out of by "not doing anything".

And like, there's a lot more that aspec people do which people hate. Raising awareness about amatonormativity? People feel attacked, they hate it. Asexual people having sex? Or not having sex? People hate it! Aromantic people being in (seemingly) romantic relationships? People fucking hate it! Aromantic people having sex? Ohh people hate that!!

I guess the existence of aphobia can be confusing when you haven't spent much time thinking about asexuality and aromanticism, but in the end, these are identities that aren't heteronormative and they will be hit with the same or similar bigotry as any other queer identity. I just get tired of this response after seeing it recycled for 10 years without ever seeming to go any further.

[flvvffy]

. ۫ ꣑ৎ . ❝ 𝐏𝐄𝐑𝐅𝐄𝐂𝐓 𝐉𝐔𝐒𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐖𝐀𝐘 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐀𝐑𝐄... ❞

summary: suguru geto comforts chubby!reader, letting her know that she is loved and appreciated despite her insecurities

suguru adored you ever since the day he laid eyes on you. how could he not? you were breathtakingly beautiful, easy on the eyes and the your amazing personality was just another wonderful bonus.

suguru expressed his love for you in the ways he knew how. rushing to the store when you urgently needed something. offering his honest opinion when you asked. having an extra hair tie in case you needed one. he did everything he could to make you know that you are loved and appreciated.

you loved him too...deeply. he made you feel comfortable in your own skin than anyone else ever did. but sometimes...you felt that maybe changing yourself for him was for the better.

pretty girls with slim bodies were plastered everywhere you went. bill boards and social media more specifically. dressed in hot bikinis that you always hesitated to wear infront of suguru.

you were sure they never struggled to find the right bra that neither dug painfully into thier shoulders nor have cups too big. the right jeans that fit both their tummies and thick thighs, that actually allowed the possibility to breathe and not feel so self-conscious in public. shirts that looked stylish and trendy but comfortable.

you started to hate the way the seams dug into your skin, the way your reflection felt like a stranger's. you started to hate how you needed to plan your outfits like puzzles. never too tight, never too baggy. just enough to hide the parts you didn't like.

obsessively staring at yourself in the mirror. making a note of all the imperfections on your body. the stretch marks on your stomach, hips and swell of your breasts. the ways your thighs always touched. often thinking 'i know he loves me...i know that...but maybe he'd love me more if i wasn't... fat...'.

you wanted to let suguru know how you felt. but how? this wasn't a topic you were comfortable with. as much as you liked being around him, you couldn't help but feel too big, too noticable. especially when there were so many other girls out there, that were prettier, more skinnier and...perfect for him. your insecurities slapping you in the face whenever it crossed your mind

"I wanna start going to the gym...with you". you stated randomly as you were in his apartment, just casually, silently hoping that he wouldn't ask further questions. but you underestimated how much he pays attention to you.

"why the sudden interest?", his brow raised. shifting his attention for a short while from his phone to you

"i just wanted to try something new. you make it look so fun and easy", you reason but he still didn't seem to understand.

"it's not as fun as you think, pretty...you have to stay consistent"

"i can do that", he gave you a wary look and set his phone aside, attention fully on you.

"where is this coming from?", you shrunk back into the cushions, controlling your expression, hoping that he wouldn't catch up on your true intentions.

"just curious to know how it is...", he squinted his eyes at you and shook his head just a little. a sign that he wasn't, at all, convinced.

"you never want to try something new. you're the only person I know who despises change. you also told me that the gym seems like too much"

"people change", you shrugged.

"not you...you can tell me anything, you know that...". suguru's eyes showed concern. he placed his hand on yours the other tilted your chin to look at him. your throat felt dry. getting harder to swallow as he stared at you with such loving soft eyes.

"do you...", pause. "do you think i'm...beautiful?". silence follows. he looked deeper into your eyes, searching for sincerity in then. and you let him.

"you're the most beautiful girl in the world. of course i think you are", a small smile is plastered on his lips but you don't believe him...not yet...

"you don't have to lie to me...", his brows creased. his hand slid down to your shoulder and squeezed a bit.

"is it really so hard to believe. you are beautiful. has anyone made you feel like you're not?"

you shake your head, no. "i just feel like things would be better for me...for us if i was...skinnier"

"oh, baby...", he pulled you against his chest, his large hands cradled your head. you wanted to push him away. away from yourself...but you didn't...didn't have the heart to. so you wrapped your arms around his waist. your cheek pressed against his chest, the smell of his cologne invaded your nostrils, wrapping around you like a memory--sharp, warm...familiar

"there is nothing wrong with you, honey. everything about you is so elegant and astounding sometimes i think...that you're way out of my league.", you slapped his chest playfully and he kisses the top of your head.

"i go crazy whenever i see you. they way you carry yourself is just so...magical. i wanna nuzzle into you every time we cuddle. you're warm and you always make me feel so much better after such a long day. that beautiful smile of yours, your comfortable weight on top of me makes me wanna show you off to the entire world", he pulled back to look at you. your eyes a little watery.

he cupped your cheeks and placed a soft kiss on your forehead. "there is nothing that you need to fix for the world, but the world needs to fix itself for you". a tear slid down your cheek and he wiped it away with his thumb. you were smiling now, your cheeks heated and heart full from his words alone.

suguru leaned in, sealing his lips with yours in a passionate kiss. eyes closed. heart thumping loudly in your ears as your tongues danced together. hands roamed around the other's bodies until he pulled away. catching your breathes as he pressed his forehead to yours and whispered:

"you're beautiful in ways you can't always see...and don't you forget that"

. ۫ ꣑ৎ . 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓𝐒 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐄𝐑𝐕𝐄𝐃 © 𝐅𝐋𝐕𝐕𝐅𝐅𝐘

[glitter-stained]

Criticism of Winick's version of the Red Hood (as in, criticism of Jason's character and most often his morals) comes in three flavours imo:

#1: the "killing is always fundamentally inherently bad" crowd, which, at this point, can't really argue with that. If someone has the belief that actions are inherently good or evil and the intentions and weighing of consequences doesn't matter, then they're gonna hate the utilitarian, that does make sense, I fundamentally disagree with the ethics of it but I can respect the coherence.

#2: criticism of Jason's politics that is absolutely valid and was 100% put there on purpose by Winick as a parallel to Bruce to highlight those flaws in Bruce. "Jason's way doesn't work he became a drug lord and imposed a violent system! What? Who's Matches Malone?"/ "But Jason kills and wants to build a system based on violence! Meanwhile Batman just works with the police and tosses criminal in prison!"/ or, maybe my absolute favourite, which was "Jason is clearly a terrorist because he uses fear to try and influence people" which I don't think requires any commentary. Point is, Winick's Jason has very real flaws, and I don't like some of them in terms of meta because he's using jason as a blank slate to the discredit of jaybin, but those flaws are extremely intentional and veering at criticizing Bruce's character, very much here specifically to point out Bruce's flaws and failing, which makes it all the weirder to me how most of these Jason antis don't actually hate Bruce for any of it, they're on Bruce's side of the debate and using arguments against Jason that I'm convinced were designed specifically to shit-talk Bruce, so that's kinda baffling. Aka, I agree with that criticism and I understand if people hate Jason for it, but if people hate Jason for those specific reasons but don't hate Batman for them, I am squinting heavily.

#3: shit Jason literally didn't do. "He retraumatized Bruce and Mia! He called Mia diseased! He tried to kill teenagers Mia and Tim!" He... very much did not do that. Why are you making shit up. He did a whole bunch of fucked up things that are perfectly worthy of criticism (see point #2)! He's been chopping heads off and blowing up goons why are you up in arms with him fighting people his age he is literally a non-lethal age-appropriate villain for them meanwhile he launched a rocket into black mask's building he introduced himself by throwing a duffle bag of chopped heads on a table he's killed goons so low-ranked as car drivers (in uth specifically) he sent a decoy to be killed by Black Mask in his stead just to see Bruce's reaction (i've always wondered what that guy did to deserve that in Jason's books tbh) it's like he did so many actual gruesome things why do you guys feel the need to make shit up honestly.

So yeah. There's not necessarily a big conclusion to that just, stuff i've been seeing so far. Obviously you're totally allowed to hate Winick's Jason (he is not my favourite jason writer by any means). I just think it's interesting to ponder.

[whumpetywhumpwhump]

Maisie's guide to disguised AI

If you've been anywhere near AO3 recently, you've probably encountered AI writing at some point. As somebody who writes for, primarily, the ER fandom (and occasionally the Pitt, too), I've noticed a concerning trend over the last few days: AI-generated fanfiction clogging the tags.

Firstly, I'd like to say that if you ARE posting fics on AO3 that were AI-generated, and you're passing them off as your own, please stop. I know this is not likely to actually resonate with you if this IS you, but on the off-chance that you do see this- please use tags as intended and make it clear that you're using AI.

Secondly, before I go into some AI tells in detail, I want to preface this with a warning- just because you see one or two of these in a fic, there's no guarantee that it was AI-generated. Please approach the matter of flagging fics with care, because the last thing I want is to incite a witch hunt against innocent people just engaging in fandom.

However, when seen in tandem, these signs should act as a warning to think a little more deeply about what you're reading, and ask the question- was this human written?

1. Em-dashes

I'm getting this one out of the way quickly because it's something easily identifiable, but it should by no means discredit a fic on its own. Real people can use em-dashes, but ChatGPT uses them a LOT. Like, a distracting amount. And they're often used in conjunction with...

2. 'Not' qualifiers

ChatGPT doesn't do 'yes, and'. It seems to work off 'no, but' instead (sorry @pagingdoctorcarter , like an AI, I am stealing your phrase here. But I do have the decency to credit, I suppose!).

Take this sentence I've come up with right now:

Carter was so exhausted he was struggling to stand, legs trembling with the strain of keeping him upright.

AI might write something like this (using my own creative license here because I don't want to feed the beast):

Carter was exhausted— not the regular exhaustion that came with twelve hours on his feet. Something deeper. Heavier.

3. Repetitive phrases.

AI is not original, so it can't come up with anything original, of course. This means that it relies on basic phrases it uses over and over and over again e.g 'the kind of (blank) that (blank)'

4. The classic 'concrete noun' + 'abstract noun' combo

For reasons that I can't quite understand, AI adores this. Some humans include this combo in their work, too, but AI does it even more frequently. Some real phrases I've encountered so far include:

"a story about meatballs and betrayal"

"champagne and anxiety soaked into the upholstery"

5. Anachronisms and inaccuracies

This is especially present in a fandom like ER, where most of the time we're writing about the 90s, and this CAN be attributed to genuine human error... but if Carter is repeatedly 'swiping' on his phone screen to open a call, and everyone's always texting... could be AI.

In a similar vein, if someone is shouting 'code blue!' for things that AREN'T cardiac arrest, or mixing up names and even hallucinating random characters- think 'maybe AI'.

6. Short sentences, short paragraphs, short chapters.

AI doesn't have the ability to understand how paragraphs are structured for ease of reading and flow. So it likes short sentences. Snappy sentences.

And not just when the situation suits it. But always.

If there's a hell of a lot of paragraphs, it could be AI. AI doesn't like including many clauses. At all.

7. Generic similes and phrases that don't mean anything at all

This relates to the 'concrete noun + abstract noun combo' but, more generally, AI produces writing that veers away from specifics. It won't often describe places in too much detail, and when it comes to similes, it uses simple, overused ones OR spouts a series of words that are meaningless. If you see an abstract simile in a fic, take a second. Is it abstract because it's complex and has several layers, or is it utterly meaningless?

8. A crazy update schedule

This one is less reliable because it IS possible to bank chapters and then post a lot in one go, but if an author is posting many thousands of words in the span of a few days, consider this a small red flag- especially in conjunction with the other things mentioned. It could mean they're just pumping out AI-generated writing, and this allows them to move far quicker than any human.

9. Overly mushy dialogue

AI is a thief, but it's a happy-go-lucky thief. Characters speak like they stepped straight off Sesame Street at times, lacking any kind of emotional complexity.

10. Awful, awful jokes

AI cannot write jokes. It simply cannot. If you read a joke in a fic that feels Disney-Channel esque but also doesn't make sense at all? It very well could be AI.

For instance:

Nobody talks like this.

Also, note the 'concrete noun + abstract noun' combo again here! (This actually was an AI fic as confirmed by author before deletion, not naming them here): 'gauze and intuition'.

Conclusion

Be vigilant. Don't fall for AI crap and, if you disagree with the concept of AI work clogging AO3 tags, definitely don't leave kudos.

And if you're posting this stuff, yet again I ask you politely, please STOP.

Thank you.

[garuye]

Hiiii welcome to my cringe "jonadio are reborn as fairies in Pixie Hollow bookverse" au where I have an actual story I may or may not work up the energy to tell start to finish. The whole thing is kind of a disgustingly self-indulgent "they get a chance to do it right", while... still not being quite that easy. Sorry, Dio. It took a long time just to do the ref sheets because I was overthinking them so hard, but I had a lot of help from friends! If you're interested in deranged rambling, more under the cut!

Teehee irl size. Some extra context for what's relevant in this post specifically:

For those who don't know shit about disney fairies, fairies are born from a baby's first laugh. Neverland is a semi-sentient thing that travels and decides which laughs it wants and when. I'm taking it loose with what's canon and what isn't, because this isn't Peter Pan, fairies with talents is just a concept that for some reason I always love to come back to, and the books got a lot closer to what I loved about it than the movies did.

Whether it's handled well in the source material or not is another story, but an "incomplete fairy" is what they call one whose baby's first laugh was broken for some reason, and it's essentially an offensive term for fairies with any kind of disabilities. I use it because it resonates with my experience with developmental disability and want to be clear that there is not actually anything "incomplete" about either of them, it's just baseline prejudice (as I would very personally and emotionally like them to hear from Mother Dove). The Home Tree is a big friendly community, but it follows unspoken rules that can be harsh when broken. The way these two are treated for that is pretty close to how Prilla was in "Fairy Dust and the Quest for the Egg", except there's no grand, Neverland-saving feat they'll perform to earn everybody's special affections, they just have to do the best they can with what they're given. Jonathan will take more of the brunt of it, while Dio will mask over his instincts and blend in where he chooses.

Having two talents isn't just unheard of, it's not really possible, so fairies who can't accept what they don't understand will try to force Jonathan into a category that they do. As for why he does, it's because he practiced Hamon as a human— this ability bled over into his new life in a slightly more magical but not especially more functional way. More details I'd hope to explain more organically later. You can probably tell but I have uh. A tism. Thanks for coming to my TED talk!!

And yes, if any single soul noticed, I wrote Jojo's stupid book title in leaf lettering. Ridiculous thing that it is. "On Kyto the Dragon".

And the first post about them, for good measure!

(and a final, final note, I used the word "tampering" with the dust, but it's nothing like a Zarina situation, I actually really can't stand The Pirate Fairy)

[natequarter]

i really do think jasnah's childhood imprisonment was caused by ordinary mental health reasons, not supernatural or spren-related reasons. she seems to fear losing her sanity; her mind apparently once betrayed her, whatever that means; she was locked up by her loved ones in a dark room, which we know is a vorin treatment for mental illness; she mentions being tied down with restraints; dalinar and gavilar were aware of her "lunacy"; jasnah seems to doubt her own memories of it; it apparently lasted several months; and as of gavilar's assassination, she had not bonded ivory - she didn't even understand what she was doing when soulcasting - and, tellingly, ivory does not know about this incident.

it seems a strange thing for her whole family to forget about, but is it really? she doesn't seem to trust her mother, and we all know gavilar was a right bastard - if it was her loved ones who hurt her, it seems plausible it was specifically gavilar (and to a lesser extent navani) who chose to lock her away, which should have been a secret (and shameful at that) but unsurprisingly got out to dalinar somehow. and given that he asks how her lunacy is, that suggests that it definitely lasted several months from both jasnah and other characters' perspectives. almost everyone in her family has a very good excuse not to remember what happened - her father does remember, but he's the one who did it; dalinar was struggling with addiction and therefore might not remember the details well; elhokar would have been a very young child at this time, not old enough to remember; and adolin and renarin weren't born yet. and if the incident were kept secret, why would anyone tell them? the only character who doesn't seem to have any excuse not to remember the incident is navani - but then perhaps she was kept in the dark as to exactly what was happening. it's not implausible that a queen could go several months without seeing her daughter.

most tellingly of all, jasnah herself seems to somewhat doubt her own imprisonment - if no one else remembers it, are her memories really reliable? after all, her own mind betrayed her - somehow. yet she fears losing control, more specifically, losing her sanity - she even seems to understand the heralds' madness, in a way. and her distrust of navani coincides rather sharply with the point of her alleged lunacy...

no, i don't think there's anything supernatural about this at all. she just got some good old-fashioned trauma, which, like kaladin and shallan and so on, later allowed for a nahel bond. what little we know of vorin treatment for madness fits too well together to be coincidence.

[tiramiiswu]

⋆.ೃ࿔*:･ Invincible x Tharja!Reader

✦ masterlist || next ✦ imagine: mark with a dark mage reader inspired by tharja from fire emblem awakening, aka mark and the freak who follows him everywhere they possibly can and casts curses on people who inconvenience them ✦ pairings: mark grayson x tharja!reader ✦ warnings: slight yandere behavior, stalking, reader is a little freak sometimes ✦ a/n: the inevitable tharja!reader imagine i keep babbling about :3 i love my wife she's so silly 💞😊also sorry if this jumps around a lot i like, worked on this infrequently and mostly whenever a brain worm started wriggling i had to get it out of my system i dont really know when to stop

✦ you might be into him because he's attractive or maybe you're just fascinated by his strength or general trauma spiral, sometimes you just follow him like a little stalker because you find him so fascinating for some reason

✦ you like the way you are for sure, it's less so that you don't see anything wrong with your behavior (you're definitely aware enough to know what you're doing is odd) and more so like, this is kind of just how you are and you don’t really see a point in changing

✦ but if mark ever mentioned like her creepy stalker/dark mage behavior being weird or wishing you were like more normal you would both like, understand you needs to change your approach but also lack the social clues to do this in a way that isnt fucking insane

✦ like you don't really understand that he finds you weird, that your tendencies to stalk him and watch him when you think he isn't paying attention, you just think your approach is wrong and that you should try to be As Normal As Possible (in the most bizarre fashion)

✦ you're usually pretty gloomy and monotone so you try to sound and act generally cheerier and upbeat but also uh, you tend to say a lot of weird things

✦ like your phrasing is just kind of Off and Weirdly iterated, you sound old fashioned but in a like, medieval sense

✦ Like you start to greet him specifically with “how fare you” and “good morrow sir” and say “huzzah!” at the end of some of your sentences and none of it sounds right, like it’s just odd and archaic sounding and Extremely Unlike You

✦ At some point mark is even more weirded out by your attempts at being normal that he just, straight up asks you to go back to the way you were before he decided he can put up with your usual strange, gloomy self better than this friendlier side of you

✦ mark starts to notice when tharja!reader is stalking him, it’s never inherently malevolent or out to get him or his loved ones, you're just like, creepy in general

✦ he doesnt have to worry about you trying to hurt him despite your past as a goon of some bigger, more threatening villain

✦ you're reformed and relatively loyal to him and the guardians (at least up until the team splits, then it's pretty clear that you're only really following where he goes)

✦ you're mostly just a lurker

✦ you're fascinated with him in a way you can’t specifically explain, but you fully believe you were destined to meet and tends to speak to him like the two of you are star crossed lovers of some kind

✦ idk if you'd like, go as far as following him to his house that’s insane work even for you, but at places like the gda or the guardian's hq and even during some of his assignments at some point mark would just start to feel you staring at him from somewhere behind him or within the vicinity

✦ you really aren't being that slick with it tbh

✦ yes sometimes you're peering around corners and watching him without him knowing but sometimes someone can just, walk up to see what you're doing and it’s clear as day just watching mark do Literally Anything

✦ you always manage to appear when he’s in the middle of doing something, even if he’s with company

✦ whether it’s walking in to ask cecil a question during one of his training sessions or even just suddenly appearing during casual conversations he’s having with the guardians

✦ it becomes very evident to everyone that you're always going to be lurking somewhere nearby if mark is there

✦ at some point it might become like? comforting? (at least in a stockholm syndrome kind of way)

✦ you become more reliable in combat if you can manage to keep up with him somehow (you're mostly grounded and you don't have very great stamina tbh but you can manage on your own) you do well to watch his flank if you're not in immediate danger, glass cannon and all depending on your opponent’s resistance to magic

✦ but like idk tharja!reader’s head over heels in love with him and isnt opposed to lending an ear or a shoulder to cry on, you just aren’t exactly the first person you’d think to turn to for comfort

✦ i think he’s keeping you at an arm’s length because regardless you're fucking weird but like

✦ idk i want them to have their tharja/robin moment where after getting used to your antics and somewhat comfortable at the idea of you watching over him/taking care of him he feels you watching again and like

✦ reaches out and pulls around the corner you're hiding behind just like, “i mean, i guess an easier way for you to keep doing all this is to just keep you by my side forever or something”

✦ but for now instead of marrying you he'll just like, ask you out on a date

✦ and while you would accept this bc you were almost like? waiting for it, in very tharja fashion you would just be like, “hm, this is wrong, turn back around” and make him ask you again (you still said yes dw)

✦ you're not actually used to him like, looking at you directly

✦ he thinks it's kind of cute in a way that you get kind of shy when he's actually speaking to you face to face

✦ he notices you actually don’t like making eye contact with a lot of people in general, it’s rare to see you actually speak to someone while looking at them dead in the eyes you tend to look down or generally avert your gaze to focus on something else during conversations

✦ cecil probably couldve had you on a tighter leash if he started letting you monitor the graysons with him

✦ 10/10 if someone gave you the job you’d dedicate enough of your time away from studying dark magic and worshiping the fell god to stalk mark on a government paycheck

✦ that’s implying you even like cecil tbh

✦ you honestly couldnt care less what he actually wants to get out of it, you barely listen to him most of the time you're on parole anyway

✦ tbh you could develop a much better hex to keep tabs on mark and his family than whatever cecil’s system is, you just likes doing it yourself

✦ when mark isn’t there for you to shadow? you're holed up in some quiet dark room to practice your dark magic

✦ whether it be studying old texts of rituals and curses or just like, practicing a hex that can change the color of her curtains temporarily

✦ because you're not just practicing spells that are for combat, you're practicing minor hexes for simply just convenience’s sake, or

✦ like yeah you can cast a spell that has to inflict pain onto someone else to replenish your strength and stamina, sure you can sap the life force of another person to heal your wounds or trap someone in a pool of corrosive mire from a few yards away

✦ but what do you actually practice and study the most in you spare time?

✦ developing a new spell to relieve the aches and pains in you feet after you walk in heels, or a hex to help regulate your body temperature just enough to avoid shivering or feeling that prickling sensation from the room being just a bit too warm, sometimes it's just developing a quick charm to take your makeup off at the end of the night because you just couldn't be bothered to go through your whole routine that night

✦ you aren't always trying to cause harm

✦ well, okay except when you're trying to get out of having to see cecil because you Really Don’t Feel Like It and decide to put a curse on him so he gets sick or mildly injured so you can miss your meeting (this has caused him to add more time to whatever deal the two of you made in relation to not sending you to jail)

✦ like not enough to leave him severely harmed of course but like, leave him with a bad cold or maybe like a sprained ankle

✦ something that inconveniences him so he can reschedule and so you can just go back to your books or so you can watch mark in person

✦ this goes for quite a few of the guardians actually

✦ like i mentioned before you'd probably be a reformed villain, like not actually reformed like you had a change of heart and suddenly wanted to do good

✦ but because the villain you worked for was about to get apprehended or killed and you switched teams because you realized you were on the losing side and decided throwing your life away for some crazy mf who doesn't care about you wasn't worth it

✦ you're still not opposed to killing someone if you need to, mark didn’t approve of it though so you've been reeling in your more lethal spells (which was uh, most of them if you're being honest)

✦ it’s taken a bit but you're gradually starting to become more merciful and sparing your opponents from severe bodily harm in an attempt to gain mark’s approval

✦ you'd offer your help to anyone besides mark almost begrudgingly

✦ like you asked for this tbh

✦ you agreed to join the side of the good guys maybe even the gda with some deal with cecil or whatever sure, but you're not going out of your way to interact with your new "teammates"

✦ they always manage to find a way to butt into your business somehow, like you just cant escape them

✦ at some point it's like you're stuck being their therapist at times

✦ like there's something about you that makes people just kind of talk out loud about their problems around you or the universe just has the most impeccable comedic timing when it comes to you walking into a room when someone has a personal issue

✦ like you don't know how to make it any more clear how much you don't really care but like, for whatever reason you decide to offer your assistance (probably just to get them to stop talking)

✦ your methods would be fucking wild and unconventional as hell tho

✦ like oh, mark is still traumatized and conflicted over his feelings about his dad trying to conquer the earth? simple, you’ll just spend a couple of days working on like a whole ritual or concoct some elaborate spell or curse to place on him that will erase his memories of his dad entirely to get rid of the source of the problem like??

✦ it could definitely be a plausible solution (you had the courtesy of offering it to him and waiting for permission to use that spell and he definitely said no ofc) but who the fuck would think of that first???

✦ honestly you'd probably get along with robot decently well

✦ like who else would tharja!reader find kinship with than the fucking weirdo who literally stole his coworker's dna to seem more appealing to his crush? what a fucking freak (you definitely wondered if mark would like you more if you suddenly became ginger or something)

✦ tharja!reader likes to pretend that they're not interested in forming bonds and attachments with others except for mark, but he’s seen how you sit and observe people before offering a solution to their problems

✦ you don’t actively seek out friendship with anyone but he sees how much you try to just like, exist, to prove yourself as trustworthy to the other heroes who hold you at an arm’s length

✦ you tend to be othered due to your track record being a former villain, or because your personality isn’t the most approachable and how you're kind of off putting because your hobbies are strange and how your solutions to problems are extreme at times

✦ like he sees how you get defensive when you think they question your loyalty or judge your practices

✦ you have a tendency to get catty or make snide comments either at others or say something self deprecating about yourself to make a point

✦ you tend to shrug it off as just being honest or realistic, but it’s apparent that it’s starting to get under your skin how much you get treated like a time bomb

✦ he genuinely considers for a moment that you might’ve cursed him

✦ you didn’t btw however everyone definitely thinks you did based on the fact that mark is? actually looking for you now? like willingly?? what the fuck??

✦ like he just cannot stop thinking about you it’s genuinely driving him mad like at first it was because yeah you’re always near him or watching him ofc he’s going to think about you constantly you never leave him alone

✦ but now he’s like, up at night thinking of you sometimes, maybe hugging his pillow to his chest and kicking his feet a little

✦ at some point you aren’t even there and he passes by a shop that has like pretty notebooks or like a black cat or crow plushie in the window and he thinks about you or how you would probably like something like it and maybe he even buys it for himself

✦ if mark ever feels like tharja!reader is like, trustworthy or loyal enough to him (with some stipulations) he might introduce you to his family

✦ you would oddly be mostly disinterested in his family but like, hey, a win’s a win you gets to go to his house and lurk in his room, life is good

✦ depending on when you're invited over mark doesn’t have to worry much about you reporting back to cecil about oliver because you're like

✦ actively avoiding the kid

✦ you look at him like he’s a little creature

✦ like not specifically because he’s an alien or because his skin is purple, but because he’s a child

✦ you don't want any of his kiddy germs on you

✦ mark thinks it’s funny how much you stiffen up when oliver walks over to you

✦ like the way you shuffle further away from him when sitting on the couch and the little sounds of panic/defeat you make when inevitably little toddler oliver corners you and starts like patting your leg or trying to crawl or climb over you

✦ you look so miffed by oliver being curious it's so silly

✦ sometimes you make a minor illusion of like a butterfly or some small glowing image to lure him away so you can escape, or just so he won't hover around you when you're trying to converse with mark or debbie (the graysons finding your efforts to entertain oliver quite silly and endearing in an odd way)

✦ mark pretends not to see you working quietly on making an amulet that can help disguise oliver/change his appearance with a transmog to help debbie save money on whatever foundation or face paint she uses to hide his alien skin

✦ he thinks it’s cute that when oliver’s still pretty young you tend to talk to him like he’s an adult, seeing you holding your amulet up to him and with a rather serious frown explaining to the boy the importance of keeping the pendant unharmed and intact in order for the enchantment to work

✦ the sigh you let out when he inevitably ends up teething on the pendant before giving him the ever so slightly affectionate tug on his cheek is something mark thinks about quite often after that

✦ you don't particularly like being touched by people, but with mark? you're like a cat, you slink around and start to cling to his side or creep up behind him and just sort of like, press into his back and hold onto his waist or shoulders

✦ neither of you have really noticed yet but the two of you both sort of take turns like, watching the other sleep when you're together

✦ whether it be looming over him when he's napping or staring at his face when the two of you fall asleep side by side, you find the peaceful, helpless look on his face when he's vulnerable just oh so mesmerizing

✦ on the other hand whenever you actually managed to fall asleep first beside or on top of him (or sometimes when he finds you slumped over your books, a hex dancing along your fingers to your pen to scrawl across your notes while snoozing in your chair) mark can’t help but find the relaxed expression on your face so… enchanting

✦ it’s corny mark’s so fucking corny but genuinely it’s like you put a spell on him

✦ which tbh is highly probable, like sometimes you put a hex on him during combat to spike his adrenaline for a few seconds or block a pain receptor or two every now and then (maybe even crank up his libido or something idk whatever this little freak wants)

✦ but this time you definitely didn’t do that

✦ last minute addendum mostly unrelated to that last part but this now implies the existence of noire whose father is mark

✦ and that her like bipolar mood swings/personality switches are being influenced by fucking viltrumite genetic strength,,,,,, girl is gonna get a crit and shout “blood and thunder!” and rip a man in half omg

✦ i think they’ve created a monster and by they i ofc mean me this might get a pin put in it i will be scheming about father candidate mark now

[santajp]

Sorry if this is a bad addition, but saying "We all face the same stuff", and other variants of it, also feels like the same reasoning that is used to dismiss and say spaces made for and by those who are specifically oppressed aren't needed, that being another way people regurgitate bigotry without noticing it.

No two oppressions for groups are the exact same, but all are most certainly linked. Capitalism has its ties to sexism, fatphobia, racism, and many other manners of systems made to hurt people. Though that doesn't make them the same, nor does it mean people don't deserve spaces where they can speak about the oppressions they and their peers specifically face, especially when they overlap.

It isn't good to assume the worst of people. Though I'm not sure how this argument works unless you haven't made an effort to learn, beacuse then, of course you wouldn't know the nuances. Though you really don't have to dig deep to learn about the many systems hurting women.

And if you've lived for a long while and just never knew, well, that is apart of it! You have the privilege to just ingore the many issues women face! That, in and of itself, is weird, right?

I understand gripping with how deep the bigotry goes is hard. No doubt. Though, idk, this is just a weak argument that admits the guy hasn't actually looked into it even slightly I feel like.

i think if your response to "for every oppression a man faces a woman is facing that same stuff but with added intersectional misogyny" is "well we all face the same stuff" then idk if you actually asked anything of me in good faith tbh. "i don't see color" type of response

[codeword-art]

I don't want this to come off as judgemental or like I'm personally attacking anyone that thinks differently about this specific scene, but I'm not going to lie and say I won't be a bit dramatic/harsh in these statements either. Ultimately I can sort of understand why some may think this is funny or humorous given similar jokes and scenes in other media, but to me personally, I don't. When Henry rescues Hans at Maleshov, and they're discussing the secret passageway and how Hans refuses to take it because of his claustrophobia, I don't think its funny to then physically assault Hans and drag him unconscious through the passageway anyway. Is it easier as a game mechanic, sure. If people are having a hard time getting through this quest the other way, I can understand simply making this option to just move on.

However, to me, that option is not acceptable under any other circumstance when RPing a good or neutral Henry. It'd be one thing if this scene was played humorously, like so many questlines in KCD and KCD2 are, but its not. If Henry presses Hans about not going through the passageway, he damn near has a panic attack, it's actually awful to watch. Hans is dead ass serious about his phobia, says the idea makes him nauseous, and he'd rather take his chances at the front gate. He is damn near close to crying here, while trying to make Henry understand. He is not doing well.

I understand this is frustrating, I'm not saying I wasn't frustrated at first either, from both a players and Henry's POV, but phobias are irrational fears that cannot be controlled, especially in 15th century Bohemia where therapy wasn't even a science yet. Hans has a good reason to be scared, he already was uncomfortable in tight spaces, and his fear was exacerbated during the "Finger of God" quest, and he hasn't really had any time to process what happened. He was immediately kidnapped and thrown into a tiny room with Brabant, of all people.

So to have Hans express this fear, lightly or seriously if pressed further by Henry, and then to think I'd immediately turn around and betray his trust and bodily autonomy to just make my quest objective easier, it's just gross to me. Hans is allowed to make that decision, no matter how annoying it is in the moment.

Also Henry is already weirdly written out of character here anyway, in my opinion. The non-romance options are just weird.

If it was the only choice to make, or if the second option had worse negative outcomes that'd be one thing, but it's just a little more sneaking around a subjectively easy area with light patrol.

Now again, I understand this is just my opinion. I don't think people are monsters for taking this option towards a fictional video game character. I know people like to play evil Henry, or depending on the conversation you have with Hans, some players may not even realize how serious Hans in being here, and surface level it's an objectively easier choice to make. If you're just trying to get through the quest, doing a speedrun, mistakenly misinterpret the scene, or whatever that's fine. We all play differently, I just don't think the choice itself overall is a funny, "Ha-ha, jokes on you Hans."

Also, I think this should lock Henry out of his romance. If I relayed a fear to a dear friend or partner and they actively force me through that fear, especially by choking me out? Yeah, were done. Relationship is over. Hans is far better than I am in that circumstance.

[angelshizuka]

I don't speak French, so can't really comment on that specifically, but TA's using his language as a reason why he doesn't consider what Chloe's parents did to her as neglect, because apparently French's definition of neglect is only failing to provide your children's basic needs (TA lists off shelter and food as examples).

But... excuse me?! Making sure your children's emotional needs are met IS an important part in providing for them, so SHOULD fall under that definition. And the fact that so many adults don't understand why it's so important, aka why they don't see it as abuse, is exactly why so many suffer from it.

So, even when using the "but in French" excuse TA's bullshit reason still doesn't make any sense and he literally just admitted he's part of the problem why emotional abuse isn't taken seriously.

Also, people seriously need to learn the difference between the "is Chloe redeemable" and "was Chloe abused" debates, they aren't the same topic. Even a "worse than a literal terrorist evil Chloe" (sure TA) would still be an abuse victim from what we've literally seen on screen.

I just really need people to understand both good and bad people can be victims of abuse, so anyone's dislike of Chloe and how "evil" she is holds no value in this conversation.

[cpvnksabm]

you know, in general i am the #1 defender of ricky potts as disability rep (before the erasure rewrites) especially when it comes to his pre-cyclone backstory. but occasionally i do remember the details about ricky's parents, specifically, how stupid it is. i spend most of my time in this fandom internally screaming "stop haphazardly changing rickys backstory, youre erasing the parts that made him special to me" but this part is one of few things in the whole musical that i actually do want changed. because if you take it at face value it makes no sense at all.

direct quote from the script:

"when Richard lost his power of speech, the Potts family took a vow of silence; usually communicating in a series of strange gestures that only they understood. The only time they interacted with one another was when they read comics, or fed the cats… they had fourteen cats."

there is so much weird shit going on here.

first of all. vow of silence? i have never in my life heard of that being someone's response to having a nonspeaking child. i am not nonverbal myself but based on what ive heard from people who are, i understand that not being able to just talk out loud for ease of communication, it complicates every interaction... so why would ricky's parents, presumably non-disabled (the term "vow of silence" definitely implies a choice and not like, selective mutism or anything), do that voluntarily?

no seriously. why. the script makes no attempt to explain their reasoning behind this or how ricky feels about it. why did they do this. is it a symbolic gesture? an attempt to better understand what their son is going through? i can't see it helping ricky in any tangible way. in fact, not being able to have his parents stand up for him (especially as a disabled person who is chronically ignored, especially as a child) would probably make his life harder.

i'm going to guess that the reasoning behind this out-of-universe, the general concept the writers were trying to communicate, was something like "one of the problems with how society treats disabled people is that sometimes they get too much support, and people make really drastic life changes to give them help that they don't even need"...

...and on top of directly contradicting the rest of ricky's backstory ("the most appalling cruelty humanity can muster: complete indifference", anyone?), this is just not true! the idea that disabled people are given/offered "too much" help is a myth and a stereotype. the vast majority of disabled people in real life have less than what they need, and have to struggle to get by. every organisation that is supposed to help disabled people, at every level, is biased toward giving the bare minimum or less - not to giving people more than they need.

to my knowledge, the whole "my son cant speak so im taking a vow of silence" thing, this has just... never happened in real life. not only would it Not Even Help it's just... not an idea that occurs to most parents of nonspeaking children. because why would it? it's ridiculous! the potts family "vow of silence" is just a ridiculous overexaggeration of the concept of "parents of disabled children make sacrifices for their children", and i dont like it.

now, if you want you can handwave all this away with "yeah this would be insane and ultimately unhelpful, but the musical never says that it is helpful, so for all we know ricky doesnt like it and it isnt good and his parents are just insane for doing that". and if that was the case, it would kind of fit with a recurring theme in the musical of performative efforts to "help" ricky that actually just make him more miserable. although i would say that a literal vow of silence is waaaay too big of a life commitment for parents to realistically do performatively. but then again, ricky's parents are clearly already odd people, with the 14 cats and the "strange gestures", so maybe it's just their characterisation...

and that reminds me. why the hell are they communicating with "strange gestures that only they understand".

i think most of the fandom interprets this as referencing ASL. but based on the description that's not what ASL is. sign languages are languages, with their own complex grammar, vocabulary, etc. they are not "strange gestures". this is like if noel's lament ended with our Objective Omniscient Narrator Karnak saying "monique and the priest communicated with a series of strange sounds that only they understood" and then they just spoke regular ass french.

but of course the script never says they're using ASL, and to my knowledge no production has ever actually done ASL for the "gestures", that part is really just fanon.

if you interpret the "strange gestures that only they understood" wording more literally - there is such a thing as home sign! home sign is a communication system made of gestures, generally not considered a complete language, that develops in households where communicating in language (either spoken language or sign language) is not an option. primarily, this is something that happens to linguistically isolated deaf children. if a child cannot hear well enough to learn & communicate with spoken language, and their parents don't give them an opportunity to learn sign language, they develop their own communication methods.

even this isn't quite what's happening in the musical if you take it literally, though, because home sign is developed by the child, by the child who doesn't have access to language. ricky could be d/Deaf or hard of hearing, which would impact his ability to hear and thus learn spoken language, but there's nothing in the musical to really point to this and so i dont think its what the writers were going for. the phrasing of the "vow of silence" thing implies that it was ricky's parents' choice to develop their own communication method consisting of gestures, rather than just an existing language including the language they presumably all already knew and communicated with prior to the "vow of silence".

this truly just boggles the mind. how did this happen? was there a point where mr potts sat down with the family and said "okay, so when we all take a vow of silence, this gesture will be how we ask each other when the cats food bowl was last fulled"? i will give canon the benefit of the doubt on one thing - while it isnt specified in the script, based on how degenerative (neuromuscular) disorders work in real life, it's likely ricky losing his speech would have been a gradual process rather than an overnight thing, and therefore i suppose the parents could have had enough warning time to develop the basics of a signed conlang. but they could have also used that time to learn an existing sign language, which im sure would have been easier for everyone. or they could have used that time to say "considering english exists in forms that dont require talking out loud (AAC), it would probably be easier to learn that rather than a new language, and also why are we taking a vow of silence anyway, how does that help our kid".

of course we dont know exactly how this language of "strange gestures" came to be. because canon, rather than elaborating on any of this, simply dropped the out-of-context claim on our feet. but depending on exactly how it went down, if you take it seriously, i think it could range from "bizarre form of child abuse/neglect that would have a severe impact on rickys communication and social life for years to come" to "technically harmless but really weird and convoluted".

and while we're on the subject of potential neglect. may i remind you, the last part of the section on ricky's parents:

"The only time they interacted with one another was when they read comics, or fed the cats… they had fourteen cats."

This is, frankly, maddening. it seems to imply that ricky's family ignored him a lot due to his disability which, while depressing, is definitely consistent with the rest of his backstory - being ignored at school/in uranium in general, retreating into his own imagination to cope. and i've said time and time again that the ableism ricky faces, being constantly ignored and condescended to and having to literally die and have his disability be magicked away in the afterlife before anyone actually listens to him, this is the most realistic part of the whole musical.

with that being said uhhh. that ending line might be consistent with the rest of rickys backstory but its NOT consistent with everything else karnak said about rickys parents, as recently as thirty seconds ago! are you telling me these parents took a vow of silence in some sort of weird symbolic solidarity with their kid, went as far as creating their own gestural communication system (/signed conlang) to facilitate communicating through this vow of silence... and then barely interacted with the kid they had sacrificed so much for?

if i take karnak completely at his word here, the only explanation i can come up with is that ricky was the subject of some linguistic experiment that his parents came up with. and frankly im not convinced the experiment is scientifically or ethically sound.

okay, in all seriousness,

i know the potts family is not conducting an unethical linguistic experiment. or at least, i know that is not the intended subtext of the musical. it's possible to come up with contrived situations in which these bizarre decisions would be realistic in-universe, but we all know that ride the cyclone is a work of fiction. and when things are this contrived... the most reasonable explanation is simply "the writers never thought that hard about it".

and that's disappointing! this blatantly nonsensical detail stayed in the musical for years, and apparently nobody thought to be like "hey, does this make sense? should we fact-check this?". this part of rickys backstory stayed the same until his entire backstory was overhauled to remove his disability in 2022 and, tbh, i dont think that was actually that anyone realised this part didnt make sense and tried to fix it, more likely that it just happened to get thrown out while they were doing disability erasure.

everything about this short paragraph indicates the writers being unwilling to research. which is bad writing practice in general and particularly bad when you're writing about disabilities!

i find this particularly disappointing because, as ive said, most of ricky's backstory was very realistic in the old scripts, and surprisingly well done; this is one of the aspects of disability rep where they just, completely dropped the ball. unfortunately, that was years ago, and now rtc has so thoroughly gone off the deep end in terms of disability ""representation"" that it's hardly worth it to nitpick the worst details in the best versions of the script...

but, still, i wanted to share my thoughts on this. it's surprisingly under-discussed in the fandom. i see a lot of people attempting to explain how rtc's disability rep was always flawed, some better than others... and i thought it would be good to go through and actually nitpick what rtc did wrong in the first place so we can all try to do better.

anyway, to the half-dozen people still reading this. fic writers. if you are a stickler for Canon Compliance then please understand that the canon here is nuts. i'm not saying don't put it in your fics, personally i sometimes love to write fics that i call Canon Malicious Compliant, which is when you stubbornly refuse to acknowledge what the author probably meant to say and instead explore the fucked-up explanations of what the author literally did say. i would love to see some fics that explore how ricky would actually feel about the "vow of silence" thing, and how it would impact him & his relationship with his parents, rather than just having it as a background info that isn't acknowledged as the weird thing it clearly is.

alternatively, to the large section of the fandom that is willing to say "I recognize the canon has made a decision, but given that it's a stupid-ass decision, I've elected to ignore it" - can i suggest CODA!Ricky, as in Child Of Deaf Adults, as an alternative headcanon that stays close to the canon while actually making sense? this would explain why his parents use a sign language at home way better than the "their kid cant speak so naturally they took a vow of silence" nonsense. obviously, headcanon what you want, this is the one part of canon that is really so nonsensical you might as well ignore it and treat it as a blank space in which to write whatever hcs you want, i just wanted to suggest one possible (more reasonable) explanation

[salsa-and-light]

@spidersteelandsmile

Your story is beautiful. Than you for sharing, these sorts of things aren't talked about enough.

Knowing Queer people and Queer stories is the strongest antidote to prejudices like these.

I respect that you tried to approach this diplomatically.

I don't know if you were being brief to come off as non-hostile or if you genuinely aren't familiar with many of the tactics of homophobic Christians, but in my experience they do not have reasons for their beliefs.

Many have very rudimentary explanations which are either entirely untrue or fall apart upon examination. Examination that they can not or do not do themselves.

So I will admit that talking to them seriously can be taxing, even if they do have good intentions. It does not appear to me that that this person has good intentions.

I would be happy to explain more on the different ideas and sources surrounding this subject if you are curious, and you are more than welcome to read on. But in my opinion, I don't think you are going to get reasonable answers from someone like this.

>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>

@artist-issues

"But it’s kind of pointing out a flaw in your understanding of God’s Word to open your post with “give me verses” and then narrow it down to “but only the ones where Jesus is talking.”"

Christ specifically was operating in opposition to the religious norms of his day.

At various points both in his ministry and in the rest of the New Testament the Law and contemporary Jewish norms are specifically ended, removed or condemned.

Christian follow Christ, Christians focusing on Christ is the default.

We shouldn't be acting out the arrogant legalism of the pharisees who killed him, that's for sure.

"“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.“ John 1:1"

This is actually a good thing to mention.

As Gay Christian and historian of Christianity, Diarmaid MacCulloch put it:

"The Bible is not the word of God. Jesus is the word of God, it says so in the Bible."

So yes, Jesus the Christ seems to be the most important person to listen to in.. Christianity.

"“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness..."

No one said that scripture was useless.

What you're doing is talking around the fact that the founder of our faith didn't have anything to say about homosexuality.

If you want to argue that it doesn't matter, then fine, do that.

Arguing against points no one made makes you seem defensive, or paranoid.

..

Though you have stumbled upon something worth mentioning.

The scripture is trustworthy.

But why would you be⸮

You can have your opinion of course, it's just that your opinion isn't worth much.

In a way it's telling that when questioned you cite the inerrancy of God and scripture.

As if the authority of God.. makes your argument stronger.

Difficulty with separating your opinions from God's is usually a problem.

"Peter, in his letter, said Paul’s words were Scripture"

..No..

but also,

"His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction." - 2 Peter 3:16b

It's odd that you decided to breeze past the part where he says people distort scripture.

I'm not even disputing the legitimacy of Pauls readings, but if I were, why would I trust Peter more?

And even if I did trust Peter more.. he doesn't use the word "scripture" in Greek, he said "writings".

["γραφὰς-graphas" is the Greek word in quetion, being the source for the English root "graph" as in "photograph", "graphics" or "grapheme" a linguistic term for a fundamental unit of written language"]

Even the English word "scripture" just originally meant writings but through the isolated exposure to the word through the Catholic church the word gained religious connotations. Spanish, French and other romance languages have a doublet of the term but have to specify "escritura sagrada", "Saintes Écritures" or holy scriptures, because their terms are the equivalent of "writing(s)".

This is mostly a English phenomenon.

So no one was arguing that Paul was unimportant, but if they were.. then your argument would still be bad.

"And if you doubt that the Apostle Peter had the authority to say what was and was not the Word of God, then you’re doubting that anything you know Jesus to have said was ever actually what He said"

Again, no one is disputing the accounts of Peter.

But if they were this would, again, be a terrible argument.

There are four Gospels and Peter didn't write any of them.

If someone wanted to ignore Peter's account they could and still have the majority of the accounts of Christ's ministries.

..

i think you're misunderstanding the problem here.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Christ is the only source of information.

Christians are people who follow Christ, it' not that deep.

But if we are listening to Paul we should listen to him.

Here's what he said.

"One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?" - 1 Corinthians 1:12b-13

We are not saved by the Law or by Peter or Paul.

Appealing to them to supplant the ministry of Christ is contradictory to the ministry of Christ and that of Peter & Paul.

"a lot of the eyewitness accounts of what Jesus said come from the Apostle Peter."

I don't even know what this means.

Peter didn't write the Gospels, at most he Wrote 1st Peter and 2cd Peter.. and that's disputed too.

This isn't even the topic, I don't care and you're not the person to talk to about this anyways,

but these claims are just puzzling.

"If you’re going to say Scripture is your authority, you have to answer the question “why.”"

Interesting that you didn't give a why when you were making things up about how being straight was a fundamental part of the faith.

"The only reason to make Scripture the authority for your life and how you live it is if, indeed, it is the Word of God."

"The Bible is not the word of God. Jesus is the word of God, it says so in the Bible."

"And you have to believe all of it is the Word of God. All of it."

This is called a false dichotomy.

Another lie.

Not that anyone was saying that they didn't believe the Bible.

Which again,

"The Bible is not the word of God. Jesus is the word of God, it says so in the Bible."

"Now that we’ve established that it’s all-or-nothing"

You didn't establish anything.

You said something insane and blathered for a bit.

No one is even arguing that parts of the Bible are untrue, your arguments are just terrible

It's amazing that language teachers can't correct this sort of thing.

"you can’t just pick and choose which verses have authority and which don’t"

No you don't get to choose.

If you're listening to the whole Bible then you are actually commanded to ignore certain portions of it.

Which I know that you know, because I know you're not making animal sacrifices correctly.

"here are the ones where homosexuality is prohibited.[Leviticus 18:22 & Leviticus 20:13]"

This is so embarrassing for you.

..

I'm going to ignore the hypocrisy of quoting a code of law that you don't follow and I'll even ignore that I count five mistranslations in just two verses and I'll focus something worse.

You're being dishonest.

Let's make this very, very simple.

Is two lesbians raising a child together a form of homosexuality?

Yes.

Is two men having sex together a form of homosexuality?

Yes.

Now,

Is two lesbians raising a child together a form of two men having sex together⸮

No.

This is the equivalent of saying that clothes are banned because hats are banned. You're exaggerating the meaning to match your personal feelings, not the semantics of the actual text.

This verse, which is A) mistranslated and B) defunct, still does not prohibit homosexuality.

It doesn't prohibit gay marriage, it doesn't prohibit gay parents, it doesn't prohibit anything that a lesbian might do.

It doesn't even prohibit all forms of sex between men.

Even in a defunct, mistranslated text you still felt the need to lie.

Because nothing about your views is based on reason, or honesty. It's certainly not based on text.

It's based on your prejudice.

"This is God...telling the Israelites in His Law"

It's Levitical Law, the law of the Levitical priesthood. Priests from the tribe of Levi.

And among its lists of laws, [which you do not follow], are laws requiring the execution of rape victims and systematizing the ownership and sale of women; among other things.

So I'm actually grateful that you spent so much time building up Paul so you can't backtrack when Paul writes about the Law.

"But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." - Romans 7:6 "So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." Galatians 3:24-25 "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless" - Hebrews 7:18

But supposedly you got your conclusions from the text.

"It’s meant to reveal the standard that humanity falls short of, not condone falling short of that standard."

Sure the perfect version of humanity wears tassels.

Funny, Adam and Eve didn't wear anything.

"Jesus has not changed His mind about this. Homosexuality is an abomination. And ⬇️ [Romas 1:26-27]"

This is lazy.

I could tell you to just read the whole chapter; but who knows what you'd come up with.

If you had read the whole chapter.. you would know that this chapter is talking about a pagan sex cult.

And if you knew what you were talking about, then you would know that these men usually had sex with women.

Condemning a bunch of cultists is not a commentary on homosexuality even if the members were homosexuals, which they decidedly were not.

"⬆️ This was written in the New Covenant"

What would that even mean‽

Not everything in the New Testament, is a part of the new covenant.

You realize that the New Testament also includes the crucifixion and commands for slaves to obey their masters right?

"God hasn’t changed His mind. What He says is natural is natural...it’s not natural to be “consumed with passion” for the same sex as yourself."

You're talking about what's ""natural"" as if you aren't online. Be serious.

You want to know what else is unnatural⸮ Modern medicine, electricity, indoor plumbing, the written word.

If you had thought about this for more than a second you would have realized how stupid naturalism is as a moral standard

And if you had done that then you might have actually attempted to understand the meaning of the text.

The Greek term "φυσικὴν - physikēn" just means instinctual or inborn. It's a relative of the English word "physical".

It does not reference any such concept like an universal natural order.

It just means that these men were usually with women and not men.

This is the closest the Bible ever comes to describing orientation.

If Paul had intended to make broad sweeping commentary on homosexuality, a concept that would not exist for another eighteen centuries, then why would he be specifying that these men were acting out of character.

Probably because having sex for the worship of a pagan god is even more heinous when it's not even the sex you'd want to be having.

"Jesus talks about the correct view of marriage by quoting...[Matthew 19:4-5]"

Jesus does not say that this is the correct view of marriage, Jesus never even calls this a marriage, and neither does Genesis 2:24 which he is quoting.

You're compulsion to lie is troubling.

And because I actually know this topic fairly well I suspect that you're thinking that it must be about marriage because the verses mention wives.

But no

English translators added "wife", both the Hebrew and Greek terms of this quote(Genesis 2:24 & Matthew 19:5 respectively) just mean "woman"

And again, it's fortunate that you've spent so much time defending the validity of other scripture because if you want to argue that all scripture is equal.. then Jesus can't be claiming that the correct view of marriage is heterosexual monogamy.

Because the Bible frequently refers to polygamy and makes a distinction between marriage and other forms of relationship like concubinage.

So if you're claiming that no other sort of marriage can exist, then you're contradicting scripture.

"I know you said you don’t understand how what Jesus does say condemns homosexuality."

There’s nothing to understand, this is an imaginary problem.

Mentioning heterosexuality isn't condemning Queer people.

Queer people manage talk about heterosexuality all the time without being homophobes.

"Jesus was talking to people who were trying to trap Him by asking about the right way to handle divorce—a matter of marriage. And Jesus answered by explaining what the correct view of marriage is"

Assumption.

"We fall so hard that even what we desire is twisted and broken, and even our ability to know what brokenness is"

Clearly yours is.

"And that’s why it’s so good that you asked me to give you verses. Because when we can’t trust whether or not we know what’s good or bad, right or wrong"

You're a fool if you think feelings stop at the page.

Your feelings influence you.

You are not impartial, objective or even terribly knowledgeable.

Your interpretation is less reliable than the conscience of someone who actually knows something about the Queer experience.

"The Bible. God’s Word."

"The Bible is not the word of God. Jesus is the word of God, it says so in the Bible."

"You can’t base what God wants for you, what’s right and wrong, on your feelings"

That's what you're doing hon'

You arguments don't make sense and your behavior is more in line with an emotional outburst.

"Life experience is meant to be informed by what God says in His Word"

I'd love to see where you got that idea from.

All human communication is formed on the basis of past experiences.

Anything you could interpret must be transmitted through the lens of past experiences.

Which is why bias is an inherent part of the human condition.

"Because your analyzer, your mind, your heart, are broken,"

Oh look gaslighting.

Isn't it rich that you remember the basic reality of bias and fallibility only when they're using them to explain why you should be the authority.

"What I am telling you is that your interpretation of that experience, that it’s somehow “from God,” that He set it up that way and that’s how you know He approves of your homosexuality—that is what’s incorrect"

Cool story, but you can't prove it.

"Your interpretation of what you’ve lived through as “from God” is incorrect, and it is very dangerous."

Real quick, how many people died from being gay and happy⸮

It's "dangerous" because you can't disprove it. And you know that no one will buy the misery you're hawking without censoring any alternative.

"There are plenty of verses about that."

Oh yes there are plenty of verses about being wrong about scripture.

But history seems to indicates that that doesn't stop people frome being wrong.

One of us must be wrong don’t you think, but do those verses tell us who⸮

"This is against saying that “God placed a burden on me to do this or that” because you run the risk of perverting His words."

I guess you're also abstaining from the "burden of proof" too.

"Again, this verse proves[Jeremiah 23:25-27] you can think you’re hearing from God, or something is coming from God, and be wrong."

And you're exemplifying that problem beautifully.

"But you don’t have to read very far into the Bible to notice that God is a specific, existing Person with His own set of characteristics, wants, loves, and dislikes, and you can’t change them or decide what they really any more than I could change or decide what your characteristics,"

Says the homophobe using non-binary pronouns to blaspheme a God of Love.

This is a non-point.

No one is trying to change God here but you.

You're the one making the claim that God's grace is undone by homosexuality.

That's heresy.

"The only way to know is to line what you’re thinking about His will up next to Scripture. See if it matches."

Oh girl, don't you know better.

If your only standard for your base ethics is whether scripture "agrees with you" then it's no wonder you're so nasty.

For one you don't know much about the Bible, so basing your morality on your hazy recollections is.. not exactly ideal.

But let's suppose that you actually knew something.

You want to know who reads the Bible and comes away thinking they have God's approval⸮

Everyone who wants it

I'm sorry but even I and the other Queer people you so despise regularly come to the conclusion that the Bible supports us.

Your own pseudo-logic condemns you.

Queer people don’t usually go around bragging about it because anyone can get scripture’s approval: me, you, nazis, slavers, imperialists.

And lest you be confused, this is not because everyone else is lying to themselves and you are the one true Christian who reads the Bible honestly.

It’s because bias is inherent to the human condition and we can be wrong no matter how good or bad our intentions are.

"And if you’re living as if He does not think homosexuality is an abomination,"

Abomination is one of those mistranslations from the laws that you don't follow that I mentioned;

by the way.

"One more verse, because it’s the one where Hope is found.[1 Corinthians 6:9-11] See? Do you see?"

Another instance where some more research would have saved us both some time.

Please refer to the documentary about this

1946: The Mistranslation That Shifted Culture

Or if you can't find that documentary, you can look at this recorded presentation made by one of the presenters.

Both 1 Corinthians 6:9 & 1 Timothy 1:10 are mistranslations totally unsupported by historical analysis and even modern English semantics.

You don’t have to watch these videos, but if you want to claim to be informed with any honesty it would behoove you to actually be informed.

"Don’t be deceived - you can be wrong about this."

But not you is that right.

- negative self awareness -

"It is defined as normal by the Bible TO be deceived"

Yeah,

Which explains why Christians have proclaimed evil prejudices like racial hierarchy and imperialism for centuries.

Can you think of anything similar⸮

"You can be deceived—into believing that any of the sins he lists are somehow NOT sins"

And you were deceived into thinking that Love was immoral based on mistranslation.

"It’s in the verse. It’s plain. Nothing twisted or hard to see or understand about that."

You wouldn't be saying that unless you already knew that the translation is contentious.

If you had spent time trying to understand the situation instead of covering your own ass, then you might have been able to learn something.

"Homosexuality is a sin. But it’s not a super-sin. It’s not special"

Lie. You don't believe that.

And I know you don't believe that because you didn't write angry pouts about other sins.

You also didn't claim that the arrogant or the hypocritical stop being Christians.

Presumably because you aren't so stupid.

But you're not smart enough to not get caught in an obvious lie.

"Such were some of you - Christians have been homosexuals."

And Christians continue to be homosexuals.

Gay conversion is not possible through any ethical means, nor is it possible through unethical means, and we know this because we've tried all of them.

Advocating torture because you can't handle reality is evil.

"But it’s past-tense. It was who they were. It is NOT anymore."

Being gay has never been who anyone is.

And you would know that if you saw Queer people as your equals instead of as evil bogey man made to torment you.

"Homosexuals" is a mistranslation. And your wild conspiracism is embarrasing.

"The name of Christ? “Christian.” An identifier that is incompatible with the name “homosexual.”"

Prove it.

You have no credibility, your knowledge is inaccurate, you honesty is wanting and you're a minority opinion even among the bigoted.

This isn't an argumment, it's begging.

"You aren’t a homosexual. If you’ve been washed, sanctified, by the Spirit of God"

And we're still not heterosexual or straight.

Which is it. Is God's power limited⸮ Or are you⸮

There is a wrong answer.

"Please don’t jump right into responding to this reblog by saying things to me like “I pray that one day God opens your eyes to a world of love, not hate,”"

Oh.

So you do have an understanding of how impersonal platitudes are annoying.

So you weren't ignorant, you were a hypocrite.

"as if anything I’ve said is hateful"

- negative self awareness -

I don't know what needs to be done for you to have an attitude adjustment, but I teach rich pre-teens and they're not this bratty.

"or anything apart from what God says is love can be love. He is love."

Lower my expectations and keep digging.

You're somehow deluded into believing that Love can be evil.

I follow a God of Love, you’re doing something else.

Look at 1 Corinthians 13

You know.. Love is patient, Love is kind..

Ring any bells⸮

Why don't you read that chapter and let me know when you find a gender requirement.

"He says it is is better than the lies the world has convinced you is “love.”"

Oh so your evil.

Queer people are in fact capable of Love.

How you think you're not full of hatred is beyond me. Though I suppose you could be lying.

"Read what is typed in this post and weigh it and consider it, as if it’s the first time you’ve heard it."

So without all of your homophobic biases.

Funny, without assuming that homosexuality immoral and that Queer people are incapable of Love the Bible doesn't seem so prejudiced after all.

Way to tell on yourself.

Get real.

People aren't going to magically acquire your biases even if they could somehow get rid of their own.

You are not some blank slate interpreting without motive, you are dripping in bias, with a large helping of self-importance to boot.

"And THEN make the decision"

I did.

I got three degrees worth of knowledge and read a pile of books on the subject.

You can't even be bothered to read your own posts so you don't get caught in a lie.

Maybe you got off on being able to dominate the other boys and girls in Sunday school, I don’t know, but this behavior is terrible.

I once believed the way you do. Then I got better.

You could too. But you choose to wallow instead.

"Or are you going to stop trusting your deceitful heart and what the whole world says, and trust in God alone?"

You can't even Trust that God made a Love you don't experience.

Don’t bother talking about trust when you’ve shown that you don’t value it.

"If you’re a Christian, you chose to die to your old self and be Christ’s. Be what He tells you to be."

Which is a Queer fuck.

And if you don't like it, kick rocks.

"One is a traveling nurse who was engaged to another woman, the other is a 15 year-old girl who was dating another girl. They gave their lives to Christ in this past year and are happy, even though it’s hard, following Him."

80% of supposed "ex-gays" are openly Queer again within five years.

And that's according to the manipulated data of "conversion therapists."

But if you're hanging around we might be able to cut that time in half.

Wishing them a speedy recovery.

"“Let God be true though every one were a liar…”"

Well we already know which one you are.

I will say it again:

The LGBTQ+ person who asks Christians to "welcome and accept them without telling them they should change" is openly demanding that the Christians change. From being Christians, to being non-Christians.

Because Christ died to save you from who you used to be. When you become a Christian, you're choosing to change from who you were to who He tells you to be. That is Christianity. To tell Christians to stop talking and behaving like that is what they believe is to not only reject Christianity yourself, but demand that they reject it, too.

Do not listen to any influencer, pop culture icon, or person who says to you that Christians do not love LGBTQ+ people, because they say LGBTQ+ people should change who they are.

Christians change who they are. More accurately, they let Christ change who they are. That’s how they became Christians. Truth goes hand in hand with love—it is not avoiding it. Because love is not anti-rejection. Love rejects plenty of things! Love rejects hatred, self-focus, and lies. So of course Christians who believe in a God that says, “let Me change you into who you’re meant to be” can tell you that you need to change—and that is loving. They love you, and they’re not okay with leaving you the way you are. Because Christ didn’t leave them, the Christians, the way they were.

Don't listen to anyone, "Christian" or otherwise, who tells you different.

[charafansmile]

what do you think of Berdly deltarune?

I like him! I think he's an interesting little guy, and I enjoy the role he fulfils in the story. He's a redditor and he sucks alot but by God is it funny to watch him be a redditor and suck alot.

There's specific parts of him as a character that I think deserve to be discussed (primarily how the character is fundamentally one with sexist beliefs) ..but alot of berdly negative I think goes too far in on the him being sexist angle (he is, but let's be real he's 15 and capable of learning. If we were supposed to think he's sexualizing noelle or susie he'd be written more overtly like burgerpants is). My own stance is that he's a play on the 'white knight' sort of 'nice guy' with the subversion that he's not actually interested in noelle romantically. But does still think he 'deserves' her. Not quite an incel but playing with those tropes.

He is weird and pushy ABOUT romance and I think that angle of the character provides an interesting dynamic with suselle (being that noelle has to learn how to stand up for herself) and the player and kris ourself since we can go directly against what kris wants by saying yes to him. He's basically the annoying team member you can't get rid of that is 'harmless' enough to not really be a threat so much as he is a device for other characters development. (Sidenote, I don't like calling his actions harmless and I'd really rather people not defend him being pushy with romance as him being autistic and not understanding social cues, he's inept sure but that sort of behavior does need to get called out and I hope there's some scene in the festival where he apologises or something.)

Of course me seeing him as more of a plot device atm doesn't mean I don't think he's a character in his own right, I enjoy the inferiority complex he's got going on and his friendship with noelle is very sweet to me. The lightnerds.. they talk vidya games togetehr... As weird as he can be he's just one of those people who you just can't spend alot of time around without wanting to strangle them. Like queen said. Nothing REALLY wrong with him, he's just annoying.

I also think there is a potential for something deeper with his character, and him being avoided because of his behavior does have potential for angst.. but I don't care for reading into it that deeply or blaming his isolation on outside factors that don't recognize the fact that berdly: is a jerk. He's an ass, he's rude, he's self-important and condescending...all of those are the reasons for people avoiding him. It's his own fault. He's that kid in high school who insults your handwriting and keeps talking to you when you're trying to ignore him. You may have a few casual conversations with him and be able to have fun on occasion courtesy of being in a small town without more options, but he still acts like he's better than you for no real reason. It's his biggest character flaw outside of the romance thing and probably my favorite thing about him. Love characters that keep fucking things up for themselves. I think the scene in chapter 4 of the library where he starts spluttering when he realizes susie doesn't want to hang out with him if he's being a jerk will be something that comes up again, if his arc continues. Ideally it'll be something like this

He keeps being pushy with noelle + susie + kris -> they ditch him -> He realizes they dont actually like him that way-> he eventually apologizes -> they hang for a bit -> he reverts to being kind of a jerk again -> they threaten to ditch him -> he realizes his error a second time and then apologizes again -> character arc fulfilled.

Not that he'd be completely fixed, he seems the sort to need multiple lessons, but I think being friends with susie would be good for him? She wouldn't put up with him like noelle does or ignore him like kris does, she'd call him out and stand on it in a way that I think would help develop him...the issue is he needs to get over his crush on her and a few(alot) more beats of self reflection before he's able to be #normal about it. Susie needs more friends too but well.. as good of a friend as she'd be for berdly being a better person I'm not so sure he'd be a very good friend to her without a lot more development. His interactions with her post realizing he can be stupid were funny but I need him to stop flirting yesterday. Idk this parts more an aside. They COULD be gamer buddies...but im unsure of it.

[quirkwizard]

Burn Out

Enji Todoroki's story is the most controversial part of MHA. I don't think that there is much debate for that. In spite of being introduced as a man who both abused and neglected his family for his petty desires, the story goes on to try and explore him more as a person. Needless to say, this had very contentious reactions from the fan base. Though the loudest part of it seems to decry this choice. That trying to get us to understand and even forgive a confirmed abuser is rather questionable. Once again, I disagree with this.

I think a lot of the issues with Enji come down to a fundamental misunderstanding of him as a character, specifically what the story says and shows, and what his arc is about. For starters, there are a lot more beats and character work that goes into it. It puts in a lot of work and new context to who Enji is as a person. At least, who he was before all of this. It's not a retcon. It's a recontextualization. It's an expansion from Shoto's and the reader's limited perspective on who Enji is. And at no point does it expect you to see Endeavor in a favorable light. That includes anyone outside the family. Any praise given to him isn't about him as a person. The most that he is given is that "Hey, he's trying to better himself and that is admirable." Because, yeah, you can be a good pro hero and not be a good person.

Then there is the actual work done with Enji's family. It treats him as the core problem with everything that happens, including the actions of Dabi. That line about everyone being to blame is more about everything that lead to Dabi than everyone being equally blamed. Though the most important part of this is that none of them welcome Endeavor back. No one is forgiving Enji for what he did. The most anyone talks about forgiveness, such as Shoto during the dinner scene, is in the context of self-fulfillment. Not forgiving him for Enji's sake, but their own, so they can move on with their lives. None of his family members are running back into his arms and calling him dad. Which I do think would be a massive botching for this plot line, but that isn't the case.

And the reason I bring up the lack of forgiveness is because Enji's story is not a redemption arc. It's not even about redemption. It's about atonement. Redemption is about trying to seek and earn forgiveness. Atonement is about trying to make up for what you did in the past. Enji does change and he works hard to see that change through. Sometimes, it does improve things and shows that he has changed, like trying to remove himself from his family so they can meet on his terms. Yet none of what Enji does fixes anything. It still doesn't absolve Enji or bring him meaningfully closer to the people he hurt. Even Enji himself says that he doesn't want to be redeemed. He doesn't see any kind of future for himself with his family.

And part of that atonement is how much he is punished. Which I've seen fans get upset about. That wasn't punished or condemned by the rest of the cast. Because Japan was in the middle of an apocalypse and there were way more pressing concerns. Yet Enji gets punished in other ways. Enji gets his dream on a technicality, fails to live up to the standard set up by his rival, has his legacy tarnished by all the terrible things he's done, nearly gets murdered by the son that hates him, and gets mangled by several different people throughout the war. In the end, all he's remembered as a great pro hero, but not a good person. It's an empty prize for what is an ultimately wasted life. And he ended up where he would always be: alone. He just did what good he could do before he got there.

Enji's story is a man who is trying to repair the damage he's done. His will burned everyone around him and left him nothing but ashes. A man who wants to do right by the family he destroyed. Who realized what he had done far too late and now needs to suffer with that. He knows that. Yet no matter what, he is going to try to make himself a better person. That is his Endeavor. And I wish people would at least try and understand that about him. I can understand not liking Enji as a character for whatever reason. I just ask that people to at least try and see what the story is saying and doing with him. Rather than just act like he's the same character he was back in the Sports Festival. Some bad man who is there to be evil, lacking any real depth to his character beyond that perspective. 

[charmedreincarnation]

Hey charm can you tell me why people are actually struggling to enter void through lucid dreaming ..is there any specific reason for that like why they are entering in fake voids instead of real void ..People have entered through lucid dreaming in past but now I don't understand why we are struggling ..what's your take on that :) btw thankyou so much for your efforts :)

I struggled with that too. Remember….dreams are just your subconscious mind awake. So whatever you believe, even on a subconscious level, is still affecting you inside the dream. You’re going to have to find the root of it.

I went through the same thing in the beginning either the dream characters wouldn’t listen, or they’d try to take me to the void and it wouldn’t work. Or sometimes it would work, but I’d have this lingering doubt in the back of my mind like, “This isn’t real,” and nothing would happen.

What helped me was summoning a god-like figure, an angel, or even just asking my higher self what to do. You can literally create a guide in the dream and ask them how to move forward. The thing is, I don’t know what your specific fear or limiting belief is that’s holding you back but your subconscious does.

I actually recommend talking to ChatGPT to figure out the core belief or fear that might be blocking you. Then, once you have that, come up with a plan to placebo it in the dream like a personal ritual, a tool, or a symbol that makes your mind accept the shift :))

There are so many different ways to use lucid dreams, which is why it’s worth learning how to master them. Once you get the hang of it, you can experiment with different techniques. some people shift by dying in the dream and waking up in the void, others meditate, create portals, clip through the floor, or use dream characters to guide them.

If you can manifest the ability to lucid dream, then the next step is focusing on your dream concept and self-concept the belief that once you’re lucid, you always shift or enter the void. That belief becomes your baseline. Remember, you’re still manifesting but this time from inside your own subconscious mind.

[evilweiiwei]

⧣₊˚﹒✦₊ ⧣₊˚ 𓂃★ ⸝⸝ ⧣₊˚﹒✦₊ ⧣₊˚

/) /)

(｡•ㅅ•｡)〝₎₎ Sukuna ramble!✦₊ ˊ˗

. .╭∪─∪────────── ✦ ⁺.

honestly i've seen a looottt more people mischaracterize sukuna lately and i don't like it </3 and really, this is just how i understand sukuna as a character

agree to disagree mls ૮꒰ ˶• ༝ •˶꒱ა ♡

while, ya he's obvi a bad person... that's a given.. but people watering him down to simply an egotistical, homocidal maniac gets repetitive.

to describe him as purely a 'hateful villain' would defeat the purpose of his upbringing- if he was merely hateful, he'd be purely driven to hate people and sorcerers alike, or even one specific person.. which he doesn't. he doesn't necessarily care for anyone enough to to hate them- and deems them purely on how they can entertain him. for instance, he immediately killed nanako and mimiko for just BEGGING sukuna to let suguru rest in peace. to him, that was pathetic, and nothing more than a 'one and done' thought. they bargained with him with absolutely nothing, and he finds no meaning in wasting time on weakness. though, with jogo, one of the people (since he was awakened) to land a hit on him, he showed pure respect- as sukuna can hold him to a standard, a standard of him being worthy of his time and understanding. sukuna simply cares for the energy and time he must waste on a person, if they can not live up to that standard there's no reason to entertain their ideals. to sukuna, if you can not be of that worth, or even live up to the standards of sorcerers and curses, what point would it make if you were to try and become significant? you're not strong, not talented, hold no power.. what difference would it make? he can not fathom the way yuji can understand yet not rationalize with the ways of curses. and upon never really having another person willing enough to challenge his ideals, it's clear as to why he hates yuji so much- yuji is persistent in trying to do the right thing and argue about sukunas (yes, it is) borderline nihilism-esk understanding of the way of life.

then again, it's not that surprising to understand why he turned out that way.

he was quite literally kicked to the curb for being ugly, like, his mama had him like this

sukuna wasn't even given a chance to BECOME a decent person, only because he was deemed ugly and a curse. and due to that, he grew with the mentality of not needing anyone or any form of relationship because he had himself always. and in the manga, he's never really opposed to feelings and love, rather he just finds no use in them.

but with uraume, i really think it was simply because uraume had ended up in the same boat as him, just different circumstances (he also needed someone to cook ngl)

and upon giving uraume the chance he never had in his life, i find it gives more depth and humility to him as a person. he's not hateful, just simply in tune with what he deems as important to him and a person's character.

i dunno just my silly little thoughts on my silly little blog

thank yeww! buh bye! ۶ৎ