#I think in general it’s better to refuse to accept the premise than to argue against it

[rotationalsymmetry]

I think an awful lot of anti-abortion types do not in fact believe abortion is murder. (Some do, and that sucks for them. I’m completely serious about this btw, if you believed that whatever number of abortions are performed in whatever amount of time are actually child murders and most people just go about their life like no big, you’d go bugfuck insane over it too.) Rather, they pull out the idea of child murder as a rhetorical tool, because once “ok but is it murder or not?” is on the table, then talking about generational poverty and individual rights and the way becoming a mother fucks up a women’s lifetime earnings and so on, just seems petty and irrelevant in comparison. If they had to argue it on “but premarital sex is bad” grounds they’d get trounced; when they argue it on “murder” grounds they can stop open minded liberals from just tearing them to pieces. Because who wants to be insensitive about murder?

It’s the same thing with equating sex ed with grooming. As far as I can tell the people who come up with this nonsense don’t actually believe it (doesn’t mean other people don’t though, if nobody believed it it wouldn’t work.) But, when you’ve got accusations of pedophilia out there, some people are going to stop in confusion rather than rushing in to argue. It’s like getting sand thrown in your face.

(Same thing with associating gay people and pedophilia, same thing with the old school blood libel against Jewish people…you make an accusation that’s sufficiently heinous and even if it’s pulled out of thin air you can still get a lot of people to instantly stop thinking and only feel for a bit.)

Oh, I forgot to argue for why I think the “abortion is murder” argument is largely made up rather than a genuine belief. Logically, if life begins at conception and abortion is child murder, then it would follow that 1. miscarriage would also be child death, and should be treated like it (which does not happen, it is not typical for pregnant people who lose a baby to miscarriage early in the pregnancy to get the same level of sympathy and condolences as someone who’s had an actual already-born infant die (even when the pregnancy is wanted) although yes, it is treated as sad and unfortunate, and yes, when things go wrong in the worst possibly way late in the pregnancy that’s much more likely to be treated like losing a child, it’s almost like the beginning and end of a pregnancy aren’t the same thing) and 2. IVF would also be child murder, because IVF works by trying to fertilize more eggs than you actually need, and typically extra fertilized embryos that don’t get implanted just get thrown out. This is normal, and generally speaking anti-abortion types find some way to wiggle out of it being literally the same thing by “life begins at conception” standards. Because they’re in favor of IVF and against abortion — for reasons that are not in fact about child murder.

(That’s also why the #1 most reliable way to reduce abortions, promoting birth control and making it easily available, is almost always opposed by anti abortion people. Because it’s not about preventing child murder, that’s just a rhetorical tool.) (they also tend to be against the other reliable way to reduce abortions: the main reason people have abortions is they can’t afford a child, and part of that is about how solid government support is.)

Again, not saying that everyone who is against abortion is that way, but I think the most powerful ones are. The ones who are framing the debate.

One of the things that happens with framing the debate this way, is that even arguing against the anti-abortion “it’s murder” position undermines a pro-abortion position. Because you’re busy arguing with this ludicrous, asinine premise rather than talking about what’s really going on, which is that the rich and powerful and very very white — and very, very heartless — find it beneficial to them to have more babies around that need homes, and more wealth inequality, and more gender inequality, and more ways for those in power to exert control over those with less power.

On multiple levels. If you’re a boss and your employees can’t afford to lose their job because their kids will go hungry, that’s good for you. If you have a mistress who can only get an abortion if you arrange it for her, that’s also good for you. If you have a daughter who can’t have sex with someone you don’t like without risking ruining her life, you see where I’m going with this? And if you happen not to be able to have your own kids, and you’re a selfish asswipe who doesn’t care about anyone else’s wellbeing, it is in your interest to have a wide pool of of healthy infants (preferably with your skin color, usually) to adopt from. No matter what happens to the less healthy or a little too old or otherwise not easily adoptable ones. Just like if you’re an employer who doesn’t give a shit about anyone, you want a lot of prospective employees to choose from and you want them to not have too many options of their own, and if that means there’s a lot of unemployment and poverty-related suffering who cares, you got yours.

And if you want to cover up that that’s what you want? Make the other side out to be monsters.

[incarnateirony]

oh that's cute patrick thinks everyone only gets info from M&Gs like him

Protip: if you use M&Gs as anything more than to supplement existing information, you're gonna end up as off kilter as Pat. Like sure I got hit by an apollo dodgeball of Misha's 2 year old M&G sent late, but at the time it meant nothing, it only had value in context of other information. That's the part Pat can't wrap his head around. Having actual information.

All M&Gs are good for is actors basically redistributing information to the semi-public yall. But it's truncated, translated by a bunch of muggles, and already generally trimmed out for spoilers. Like. Congrats they told yall and still nobody gets it lmfao

He's apparently self consoling bc apparently Jensen said some similar shit to some other shit going on right now and like. Yeah. Go figure. He eventually is going to repeat things in more public avenues. Am I speaking greek? Expecting brain surgery?

This man is such a sad sack. He still pretends he has one over me when literally his big slam dunk was me having the original ending, and him being so out of it he had to pay 5,000 to even admit it was omitted. And then the pilot script fail.

Like if this dipshit can't figure out how "knowing the original ending. the guys talking about wanting to finish what they wanted, having access to the pilot and all hiring info long before release, and where the story is heading" all fucking connect he's a more hopeless rube than I thought.

Then again, he argued and laughed about the roadhouse reunion and other missing details, then adamantly refused to admit it was omitted, then paid out the ass only to find it was omitted, to turn around and argue that he had inside Chaos Machine sources telling him my script was fake, only for filming and the trailer to hit. Oh and those big long posts he wrote about how stupid I was for saying that the entire premise of the prequel was about letting go and moving on and then that TIME TO LET GO trailer hit. He endorses anti-jensen anti-misha fuckery and refuses to accept where Jensen's at on certain topics, arguing against statements mine or his. Then in rolls Jib12. Like he can't catch a clue on the patterns here, somehow.

But hey, I'll enjoy the long year of him prematurely crowing victory again only to wipe out and, as he always does, show he's never had access to a single goddamn thing of value when it smashes his face in like a hammer again. He's kinda like Trump. There's always an embarrassing tweet

Goddamn painful that this motherfuckers' only concept of intel is friends of friends of friends that live in LA or M&Gs. Jesus christ.

No wonder the dude can't hit the broad side of a widely advertised barn. He's technically well past his three strikes but we'll let him keep trying for his feelings till he taps one.

honestly pretty sure this man would piss his pants if he knew my current employer ngl. well no, first he would have to have the scope to comprehend how many pieces of media he's seen, viewed or read of ours in the last 24 hours alone. Or sometimes unironically cites in his posts, badly. I mean thanks for the traffic man, we appreciate it, but y i k e s l o l

like do we have screeners, well at a few of our child companies yes. Do I have access, no, and I'm not gonna explain to Pat's pea brain why that's different and just not something I can snipe. Just keep pissin in the pond till you feel better dude

dipshit doesn't have enough media sense to be able to detect the time/date stamps vs drafts vs timing of release or understand that scripts get sent out abroad for agents and casting at a specific time. None of this. Zero fucking media comprehension. And that goes for every dumb motherfucker like the "pre successful actor" lolj that echoed it. Could have completely avoided looking like a self-penetrating asshole but here we are. And he's gonna just. project everyone gets their shit from M&Gs.

Though ironically this did remind me to update my twitter bio after all my layout overhauls. Had an "ex" to pull and some other specifics to add. :)

Keep thinking back to this it's so funny. thinking about pat's cm source that even argued with me. and calling them a cm source is generous at best. But it's what pat calls them. bc they're still all fandom fuckin muggles trying to put on their robe and production wizard hat. You either get it and you don't. And you, my dear, do not.

If I can argue with your "CM source" (which you fell for hookline and sinker not knowing that person's limitations), confidently, and know they are wrong, what the FUCK do YOU think you have over me, dumbfuck?

[mobiuslakes]

What are your thoughts on Netero’s morality? Like in contrast to popular fanon? I see people say he’s awful because he’s willing to put kids in danger but then I see people imply the poor man’s rose was a necessary evil (which is an extremely tone-deaf, American take when you consider people say that to justify Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which the act has obvious illusions to). Additionally, the morality with him being fine with the DC exhibition as long as he’s not alive to see it?

i’m not interested in picking which hell he goes to, but i can give you thoughts.

child endangerment, general endangerment

not a single character in this series objected to gon and killua taking the hunter exam on the basis of safety. netero spurring them on and allowing them to join the extermination team is a difference of degree. how you'll feel about that depends on whether you accept the narrative's premise that being a hunter is worthwhile self actualization for overpowered middle schoolers.

the mission is still clearly out of their league, but the only in universe objections (bisky, ging) are made on pragmatic, not moral grounds. 

i think what gets lost is that netero's extreme challenges are not out of cruelty, apathy, or even stringent expectations. we see him chiding menchi into giving the examinees she failed another chance, slowing the airship so gon can rest, being shamed by komugi's fatal injury, refusing to be spared as a "worthy" human if it means the rest are kept as livestock, making the dark continent taboo when hunters die imitating him. 

he is simply insane. he whole heartedly believes in pushing oneself to the very limits, earning the disapproval and incredulity of colleagues who are extreme outliers themselves. 

as well as their admiration, devotion, and respect. 

poor man's rose

while the rose is an unambiguous allusion, netero's use of it is in deliberate contrast to that kind of situation; he hired zeno to lure meruem out into the desert for single combat warfare. the logic of killing meruem to save a greater number of human lives is the same whether it's by the bodhisattva or a bomb.

some reactions from japanese fandom: discussing why the rose wasn't used sooner, more strategic uses of it, the bomb as a ploy to halt power inflation, relevance of the fukushima disaster (which happened between the releases of chapter 310 and 311)

detonating the rose is evil because the rose shouldn't even exist. its sole purpose is to metastasize death, and making that the instrument of your salvation—with that scale of poisonous history—would mean the loss of all your justification and humanity.

as the extermination team fights for the cause of humanity, they repeatedly cause the detriment of one particular human. komugi is injured during the initial assault, she’s used as a hostage, and finally, she’s the sole noncombatant to die by the rose’s toxins.

palm and ikalgo hiding her from meruem is what prompts this line:

were these actions “necessary” if your only concern is survival? could a better diplomat than netero have talked meruem into respecting human life? 

it’s not clear. 

it might have taken the shock of being on the verge of death, only able to find the person he loves at someone else’s mercy, to stop seeing all other individuals as inferiors.

it's understandable that netero didn’t want to chance it with 5 million people waiting to become super soldiers or corpses in a matter of hours. however, you can absolutely fault him for letting it get to that point, for not being decisive until after the king was born. i wouldn’t go so far as to say he was only thinking of the ultimate fight, but his arrogance and carelessness has a body count.

dc expedition

speaking of body counts, netero’s concern for the welfare of the association and its members is ultimately outweighed by his ambitions for the same. sure, he can’t stop anyone from going once he’s dead, but he made his last request a competition against his son. it’s selfish, as he admits. but it’s a decision to be made by his successors, not him, and cheadle sighing that she has no choice is her choice.

ging and pariston arguing over #WWND is a continuation of the zodiacs bickering over netero’s will in the previous arc. it’s a paradoxical argument—netero can’t be in the position of acting on his own legacy—because even netero’s stated wishes are less important then what his followers see in him. in short, his opinion on the expedition from the grave is less important than the cumulation of the myriad and contradictory actions he took during his life. 

as for the scramble for resources, it’s difficult to tell whether he would have anticipated the change in international policy or cared about it. so far there’s been few details about the nature of past expeditions and the exact plans for this one. there’s a lot to wait on in that department.

[janiedean]

hey, can you talk about this: why is it that even after jaime saves brienne from rape & jumps into a bearpit for her, brienne still expects the worst from him and thinks he wants her to kill sansa? can b ever fully trust and love jaime? will brienne ever accept that jaime loves her and is capable of good or will she always expect evil from him/ be insecure + expect him to pull a ronnet? i think this will cause problems for them if they ever get together. do you think it would be a deal-breaker?

tldr: no because the moment you read her affc povs you see she’s way past her initial distrust and actually that scene is... the turning point? like you don’t know that because you don’t have her pov, but anyway I think I’ll just break it down and be done with it since I had wanted to for a while - regardless, premise: you can see exactly how far she goes with trusting him/changing her mind about him by seeing her dialogue choices in asos before, as in, she calls him ser for the first time after he saves her from being raped and when they’re in the bath she snaps at him the moment he goads her about renly and she’s naked in front of a man and she feels most likely guilty for the loss of his hand, and the moment he faints she catches him and she volunteers to dress him/clean him up after, like... you don’t do that if you don’t want to and if you don’t care about the person some regardless. ANYWAY SO let me just find the whole scene.

SOOOO, counting that he’s doing this just after he basically broke up with cersei...

The wench looked as ugly and awkward as ever, he decided when Tyrell left them. Someone had dressed her in woman’s clothes again, but this dress fit much better than that hideous pink rag the goat had made her wear. “Blue is a good color on you, my lady,” Jaime observed. “It goes well with your eyes.” She does have astonishing eyes.

Brienne glanced down at herself, flustered. “Septa Donyse padded out the bodice, to give it that shape. She said you sent her to me.” She lingered by the door, as if she meant to flee at any second. “You look . . .”

“Different?” He managed a half-smile. “More meat on the ribs and fewer lice in my hair, that’s all. The stump’s the same. Close the door and come here.” She did as he bid her. “The white cloak . . .”

“. . . is new, but I’m sure I’ll soil it soon enough.”

“That wasn’t . . . I was about to say that it becomes you.”

right, so, when this entire scene starts you have the worst flirting that ever existed but like basically that’s pretty much what it is - they haven’t seen each other in a while right, and first he goes like UH UGLY AND AWKWARD, then in the span of three lines he decides that the dress looks nice on her and it fits her, and when he opens his mouth he calls her my lady and compliments her on her appearance and her eyes and then thinks SHE HAS ASTONISHING EYES which like... jaime you were thinking she was ugly three lines ago where is the truth, the truth is that he’s hella attracted to her, he’s not admitting it to himself but he can’t help saying it and so hey hello brienne, you just showed up in my room where I summoned you after having you freed and I’m telling you you’re hot!! when you never heard it before from a guy ever!!!

brienne at that point is FLUSTERED and feels like pointing out the bodice is padded as if he hasn’t seen her naked, and she’s obviously afraid af because she’s standing near the door, and then she goes like ‘you look...’ while most likely STARING at him like OH MY GOD HAVEN’T SEEN HIM IN WEEKS LOOK AT HIM jesus, and then he starts going off with the self-deprecating humor telling her to get over here, she does, she starts again with the white cloak, he goes all defensive self-deprecating again (I’ll soil it soon enough, presuming that she still thinks that of him)... and then she goes like I was about to say it becomes you, which means I’m telling you A WHITE CLOAK FITS YOU AND IS BECOMING ON YOU, which given the significancy of the white cloak/kg/the fact that he confessed her he believed in his vow/knighthood when he was fifteen in the bath... she’s telling him being honorable becomes him, which sorry but does not to me qualify as ‘expecting the worse of him’. now:

She came closer, hesitant. “Jaime, did you mean what you told Ser Loras? About . . . about King Renly, and the shadow?”

Jaime shrugged. “I would have killed Renly myself if we’d met in battle, what do I care who cut his throat?”

“You said I had honor . . .”

“I’m the bloody Kingslayer, remember? When I say you have honor, that’s like a whore vouchsafing your maidenhood.” He leaned back and looked up at her. 

problem is: he is on the self-deprecative spiral wanting to distance himself, which I have a feeling is because he’s a) upset because of cersei from before b) not exactly processing his feelings re being into her, so everything she is saying he’s shutting her down, which makes her hesitant - first he shrugs away having gotten her out of prison and talking for her to loras when if you read that part you know he cares about getting her out, she’s all like oh YOU SAID I HAD HONOR!!! **, and he immediately shuts that down too with the it’s worth nothing if I do, so basically she’s there all ‘!!! ** !!!’ and he’s back to shutting her out, which... considering how brienne is would make her lose a lot of courage here, right? right. also: SHE CALLED HIM JAIME in the beginning, which means... she feels like they’re on a familiar enough level that she can use his name without the ser before and she’s not calling him kingslayer. like. she’s absolutely expecting the best here.

“Steelshanks is on his way back north, to deliver Arya Stark to Roose Bolton.”

“You gave her to him?” she cried, dismayed. “You swore an oath to Lady Catelyn . . .”

“With a sword at my throat, but never mind. Lady Catelyn’s dead. I could not give her back her daughters even if I had them. And the girl my father sent with Steelshanks was not Arya Stark.”

“Not Arya Stark?”

“You heard me. My lord father found some skinny northern girl more or less the same age with more or less the same coloring. He dressed her up in white and grey, gave her a silver wolf to pin her cloak, and sent her off to wed Bolton’s bastard.” He lifted his stump to point at her. “I wanted to tell you that before you went galloping off to rescue her and got yourself killed for no good purpose. You’re not half bad with a sword, but you’re not good enough to take on two hundred men by yourself.”

now, for the chapter where grrm knows that words mean things: the definition of dismayed is : experiencing or showing feelings of alarmed concern or dismay : upset, worried, or agitated because of some unwelcome situation or occurrence, which means that the moment jaime goes like ‘oh and I gave arya to roose bolton’ she is UPSET at hearing that... because she didn’t expect that? she changed her mind, she thinks he’s honorable, he saved her from being raped, he’s complimenting her, she’s trying to compliment him, she thinks they have an understanding, he told her all of that...... and now he’s telling her he gave arya back to the boltons? when she thought he cared about their oath and he freed her? like what the fuck jaime? obviouly she’s upset, but because she already expected better and he’s a disaster emotionally stunted person who just moved on from 17yo of emotional maturity and he can’t have that conversation without going in self-defense. he points out he can’t do that but anyway then tells her it’s not arya.. because he didn’t want brienne to go after her ie he cared about her well-being and now he throws in a compliment too (you’re not half bad with a sword) and she’s most likely like wtf, also he gestures at her with the stump which cersei refused to interact with before and brienne doesn’t even flinch at that, but never mind let’s go on.

Brienne shook her head. “When Lord Bolton learns that your father paid him with false coin . . .”

“Oh, he knows. Lannisters lie, remember? It makes no matter, this girl serves his purpose just as well. Who is going to say that she isn’t Arya Stark? Everyone the girl was close to is dead except for her sister, who has disappeared.”

“Why would you tell me all this, if it’s true? You are betraying your father’s secrets.”

The Hand’s secrets, he thought. I no longer have a father. “I pay my debts like every good little lion. I did promise Lady Stark her daughters . . . and one of them is still alive. My brother may know where she is, but if so he isn’t saying. Cersei is convinced that Sansa helped him murder Joffrey.”

“The wench’s mouth got stubborn. “I will not believe that gentle girl a poisoner. Lady Catelyn said that she had a loving heart. It was your brother. There was a trial, Ser Loras said.”

as stated: she shakes her head, which is a thing you do... when you’ve just been given conflicting information, which he just did because he just told her HEY MY FATHER JUST BASICALLY LIED TO HIS ALLY, but poor girl is not a political shrewd mind because a moment later he explains her that they both knew and so on, and at that point brienne is understandably like WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU TELLING ME THIS IT’S TREASON, which it technically is.... and then he remembers tywin disowned him and they argued so ‘I no longer have a father’, but he doesn’t tell brienne that, goes back to self-defensive, goes like ‘well I’m a good lion and I pay my debts’ and then only mentions what his brother and sister think, counting that brienne doesn’t know tyrion and know what he does about cersei... that might make her think that he’s taking their side, and now she is getting defensive pointing out it couldn’t be sansa and so on, but like... he basically has given her conflicted reactions, now she’s back on the defensive... as she generally is unless it’s with someone she trusts.

“Two trials, actually. Words and swords both failed him. A bloody mess. Did you watch from your window?”

“My cell faces the sea. I heard the shouting, though.”

“Prince Oberyn of Dorne is dead, Ser Gregor Clegane lies dying, and Tyrion stands condemned before the eyes of gods and men. They’re keeping him in a black cell till they kill him.”

Brienne looked at him. “You do not believe he did it.”

Jaime gave her a hard smile. “See, wench? We know each other too well. Tyrion’s wanted to be me since he took his first step, but he’d never follow me in kingslaying. Sansa Stark killed Joffrey. My brother’s kept silent to protect her. He gets these fits of gallantry from time to time. The last one cost him a nose. This time it will mean his head.”

now they discuss the trials blah blah blah, and brienne figures out he doesn’t believe tyrion did it just from the tone/the way he says it - because the facts are kind of straight, so it must be the tone of voice, and then what does he says as he gives her a *hard smile*? that they know each other too well. and then he goes and says a bunch of stuff that’s not true (sansa killed joffrey, tyrion kept silent), goading her again...

“No,” Brienne said. “It was not my lady’s daughter. It could not have been her.”

“There’s the stubborn stupid wench that I remember.”

“She reddened. “My name is . . .”

“Brienne of Tarth.” Jaime sighed. “I have a gift for you.” He reached down under the Lord Commander’s chair and brought it out, wrapped in folds of crimson velvet.

Brienne approached as if the bundle was like to bite her, reached out a huge freckled hand, and flipped back a fold of cloth. Rubies glimmered in the light. She picked the treasure up gingerly, curled her fingers around the leather grip, and slowly slid the sword free of its scabbard. Blood and black the ripples shone. A finger of reflected light ran red along the edge. “Is this Valyrian steel? I have never seen such colors.”

“Nor I. There was a time that I would have given my right hand to wield a sword like that. Now it appears I have, so the blade is wasted on me. Take it.” Before she could think to refuse, he went on. “A sword so fine must bear a name. It would please me if you would call this one Oathkeeper. One more thing. The blade comes with a price.”

... at which brienne absolutely falls for it and protests but then he goes like ‘oh there you are’, so he was most likely either testing her or pushing her to say it again/assure himself of what he was doing, but for her... it’d be even more confusing. she blushes when he calls her wench, and then when he says he has a gift she’s scared af until she sees what it is, and when she asks what it is first he does the self-deprecation thing again, then says he wants it named oathkeeper, so far so good... and then says it comes with a price, which makes it sound like she has to do something in return to have it, and how would that sound to her after this entire conversation when he hasn’t told her that he’s cut off ties with anyone but tyrion and he’s been basically hostile/sarcastic/has rebuked all her compliments?

Her face darkened. “I told you, I will never serve . . .”

“. . . such foul creatures as us. Yes, I recall. Hear me out, Brienne. Both of us swore oaths concerning Sansa Stark. Cersei means to see that the girl is found and killed, wherever she has gone to ground . . .”

Brienne’s homely face twisted in fury. “If you believe that I would harm my lady’s daughter for a sword, you—”

“Just listen,” he snapped, angered by her assumption. “I want you to find Sansa first, and get her somewhere safe. How else are the two of us going to make good our stupid vows to your precious dead Lady Catelyn?”

The wench blinked. “I . . . I thought . . .”

now here’s the point but like... she assumes he wanted her to do what cersei wanted when he hasn’t given her any other hint he might want to do otherwise throughout the exchange and basically never told her anything straight and she had come in all excited and wanting to compliment him and presuming the best, and then he gets angry because she assumed wrong... but what was she going to assume? then again: asos!jaime handles a lot of his interactions like an angry teenager because again he started moving on from it during this book and he has no idea of how to deal with her or that that kinda attitude would confuse the shit out of her and make her assume wrong things when she wasn’t assuming them to begin with, and when she immediately realizes he just wanted to keep the oath she goes back to OH, like... she was presuming they’d withhold it from the beginning when she mentioned it along with arya, so it’s her now knowing she was right and go like OH FUCK I FUCKED UP, but like... jaime baby ily but just tell her from the get go right? nah, I guess. buuut let’s go on.

“I know what you thought.” Suddenly Jaime was sick of the sight of her. She bleats like a bloody sheep. “When Ned Stark died, his greatsword was given to the King’s Justice,” he told her. “But my father felt that such a fine blade was wasted on a mere headsman. He gave Ser Ilyn a new sword, and had Ice melted down and reforged. There was enough metal for two new blades. You’re holding one. So you’ll be defending Ned Stark’s daughter with Ned Stark’s own steel, if that makes any difference to you.”

“Ser, I . . . I owe you an apolo . . .”

He cut her off. “Take the bloody sword and go, before I change my mind. There’s a bay mare in the stables, as homely as you are but somewhat better trained. Chase after Steelshanks, search for Sansa, or ride home to your isle of sapphires, it’s naught to me. I don’t want to look at you anymore.”

“Jaime . . .”

“Kingslayer,” he reminded her. “Best use that sword to clean the wax out of your ears, wench. We’re done.”

Stubbornly, she persisted. “Joffrey was your . . .”

now not that I don’t think that jaime wasn’t pushing her also in... outright denial of not wanting her to go, but: now he’s angry at her (when he technically got her angry when he could have not) and wants her to go and he’s telling her again in the sarcasticselfdefense tone and she immediately - immediately - tries to apologize, he shuts her off, doesn’t tell her that the mare is not homely at all, and tells her it’s naught to him when it’s all to him since she knows what his honor means to him, she goes from ‘ser’ (honorific) to ‘jaime’ (personal) and he goes back to ‘nah I’m the kingslayer see that’s all I’ll ever be leave’, except that... she doesn’t leave and she persists, stubbornly, because she actually wants to know, and presses asking about joffrey since she knows he was his father and is most likely still WTFFFFF HE’S BETRAYING HIS FAMILY...

“My king. Leave it at that.”

“You say Sansa killed him. Why protect her?”

Because Joff was no more to me than a squirt of seed in Cersei’s cunt. And because he deserved to die. “I have made kings and unmade them. Sansa Stark is my last chance for honor.” Jaime smiled thinly. “Besides, kingslayers should band together. Are you ever going to go?”

Her big hand wrapped tight around Oathkeeper. “I will. And I will find the girl and keep her safe. For her lady mother’s sake. And for yours.” She bowed stiffly, whirled, and went.

she expects him to say his son? he say ‘his king’ and LEAVE IT AT THAT, giving the idea he doesn’t care, and at that point she goes like okay so why would you protect the person you said killed him, fair question right, which I think on her side was... wanting to see what he’d reply because she’s realizing he won’t answer straight right, and exactly he thinks ‘joffrey deserved it and was nothing to me’ but doesn’t tell her that, he tells her that he made kings and unmade them, fair, and then that sansa is his last chance at honor, and smiles thinly (not hard like before), which suggests he’s visually being sincere, and it’s an answer brienne would get... and then he reminds her that he’s called a kingslayer and she is called one and neither of them actually were in the wrong but they both have bad fame for it and they should band together and pledge their oath, and... brienne gets it because she stops asking questions, takes the sword and goes, but instead of falling for his bait or be angry about being called a kingslayer, she says she’ll fulfill their oath and find sansa for catelyn’s sake and for his sake too, pointing out she’s swearing a vow to him too before she leaves after bowing, which basically seals it...

which means that she walked in with a good impression of him, he challenged it, then she realized it wasn’t wrong and he just was shit as communicating and she’s not... expecting the worse anymore? anytime she thinks of him in affc is as the honorable man who saved her and she swore a vow to and she wishes would be with her on her quest, not as someone she doesn’t trust. so, to go with your questions:

1) brienne still expects the worst from him and thinks he wants her to kill sansa?

as stated from the above: she doesn’t :)

2) can b ever fully trust and love jaime?

she was about to die for him at the end of affc, I think she already does X°D

3) will brienne ever accept that jaime loves her and is capable of good or will she always expect evil from him/ be insecure + expect him to pull a ronnet?

she’s already... not? I mean, accepting he loves her might be a problem because she doesn’t conceive he would as it is and it’d take a while for her to not be insecure, but that he’s capable of good she already does, and she’s way past expecting him to pull a ronnet XD she doesn’t even compare them once like... I don’t see how this would be a thing X°DD

4) i think this will cause problems for them if they ever get together. do you think it would be a deal-breaker?

I don’t because like... okay her being insecure might eventually but honestly she wanted to die for him anon and she was convinced of his good intentions the moment she walked into the room and then he threw her in for a loop and she came out of that even more convinced soooooo no I really don’t think it would XD

[croc-odette]

i love ds9 and here are some episode premises that i wish had happened

DND EPISODE: already talked about this but a dungeons and dragons holosuite episode. jake is the overly prepared DM obviously, nog, ziyal, and alexander are players. nog’s player is clearly his idea of sisko, a lawful good paladin; ziyal plays as a cardassian rogue (played by dukat, but clearly based in personality on kira); alexander plays a mage who is kind-of worf kind-of jadzia and keeps switching between them through the game). there’s an NPC version that’s clearly also based on sisko at one point, but from jake’s point of view knowing him as his dad to compare how differently jake and nog, a cadet, see him.

as the game progresses, it becomes clear that the Big Bad is based on a combo of dukat/winn (corrupt government/religious figure). ziyal struggles with the classic DND question of ‘just because i would do this, does that mean my character would?’ except she’s realizing that her dad wouldn’t do any of the selfless things she wants her character to do. alexander keeps trying to solve shit through weird cantrips or puzzle solving instead of fighting and jake is like ‘it’s not deep it’s just a cave bat please roll initiative’. bashir and garak show up as like, the old couple from the princess bride and everyone has to be like ‘jake they’re not dating in real life this rpf shit is kind of inappropriate’ and he’s like ‘wait what? i thought they were dating’. miles is an NPC and dies. nog thinks jake’s-sisko-npc is too silly and disrespectful and jake is like ‘he’s MY dad’ and they have to take a break to argue about it and jake is like ‘your dad is cool too’. nog’s character changes to lawful good paladin rom. actually this whole game is ‘arguing about dads’ time now that i think about it, which jake is not really equipped to jump in on since he has a normal cool dad who he basically just thinks is embarrassing because he’s the ~messiah~ or some goofy bullshit. ends with them calling it a day after the final boss battle and then jake and nog privately talking about whether or not they can trust ziyal if she has to choose between ds9 and dukat, which was an ulterior motive of the game. ziyal is clearly clearly rattled by what the game made her realize and goes to see kira, who she doesn’t tell about the game but who still gives her a hug, and ziyal realizes that kira’s her hero (and like, her mom). alexander tells worf and dax about the game and dax thinks it sounds fun as hell and asks alexander if they can come next time, and worf is like ‘....... only if i can be a blood mage’. nog and jake go home and tell their dads they love them. 

shit i blacked out

PRANK WAR EPISODE: escalating series of pranks starting with jadzia putting hair dye in bashir’s shampoo and ending with the space station accidentally going into a meltdown self destruct scenario. garak is torn between helping jadzia and quark, who are clearly the better pranksters, or helping julian and odo, who suck at pranks but are his lunch friends. everyone has to tell garak that he’s way too intense about ‘pranks’ which are actually just really dangerous booby traps he puts in people’s quarters. sisko ends the episode by grounding everyone; no holosuites for a month!! yes even dax

GREAT RACE EPISODE: there’s some kind of macguffin resource on a planet (a klingon escape pod with a survivor with crucial intelligence information?), but they can’t teleport directly to it. a vorta and jem h’dar team and a ds9 team beam down on opposite sides of its location and are both racing to get there first, having to macgyver together vehicles and tools on the way. lots of excellent outdoor on-location settings and comparison of the jem h’dar/vorta dynamic and the ds9 federation dynamic. ends with the jem h’dar almost winning but turning on the vorta at the last few yards, and sisko’s team beams out as the jem h’dar chant victory. no i refuse to think this is same plot as ‘the ship’ or whatever

KASIDY EPISODE: set earlier in kasidy/sisko’s relationship, kasidy agrees to go with jadzia as a third-party observer to negotiations with a nearby bajoran colony over a trade agreement with the federation. jadzia and kasidy bond over gossiping about sisko on the way, but once they get there kasidy disagrees with the starfleet’s contract during negotiations which causes tensions, and recommends that the bajorans reject it. she and jadzia get into an argument about starfleet and its ideals, and why kasidy chose to be an independent captain rather than a starfleet captain, and how that doesn’t make her lesser than starfleet captains. jadzia realizes that kasidy is right and petitions superiors for a new contract, which kasidy approves of. they go home tenser then when they left, but when sisko asks jadzia what she thinks of kasidy, she very seriously says that she has incredible compassion, intelligence, and integrity, and that she doesn’t need or want jadzia’s approval. but has it anyway

MUSICAL EPISODE: someone already outlined a great musical ep where lwaxana comes in with a betazoid cold and it makes everyone burst into song in another text post and like 100% cosigned

SHAKESPEARE EP: holosuite shenanigans; every character is suddenly stuck as someone from a different shakespeare play. garak is an enthusiastically combative beatrice, kira is cordelia, worf is hamlet, jadzia is a very amused katerina, julian is puck, miles is duncan (”i get MURDERED?”), odo is benvolio and kind of bummed he’s not romeo, etc. i actually don’t know any shakespeare play that well but i think it could be neat. julian is the only fucking person on ds9 who actually knows any of it well enough to figure out what’s going on, except for sisko who doesn’t really care for shakespeare but generally knows about the plays (maybe a good opportunity to talk about the racism in most ‘classic Earth’ pop culture that star trek tends to uphold without criticism). i don’t know shit about the 40 plays that shakespeare wrote about british kings but i could see sisko ending up in that kind of intense role and refusing to play into it, as do the rest of the characters who refuse to fulfill their respective roles and instead find another way to end the program.

KLINGON OPERA EPISODE: goodddddddd can we see some klingon opera, mac. i’ve been dying to see some klingon opera. premise is they believe that someone is assassinating ambassadors and so they tag along with a andorian ambassador who loves opera to see if they can figure out who the assassin is, however the andorian plays it down as over-worrying and that they should use it as an excuse to enjoy themselves. worf and jadzia go and have a lovey dovey time, sisko and kasidy go and have a lovey dovey time watching worf and jadzia get super into the opera together. julian is asked to go in case there’s poison used or first aid needed, and miles is like ‘the last time i went undercover i came home with trauma and someone’s cat so no thanks i hate klingon opera’ and after some increasingly overt passive aggressive implications that julian should take HIM, julian asks garak to go with him. bonus points if for some reason they are wearing the stupid tuxedos from doctor bashir i presume. a lot of loud arguing about the opera which almost gets them kicked out. at the end of the first act, one of the actors DOES try to kill the andorian but jadzia jumps in front of the phaser beam (cue worf being very concerned and annoyed that she could have gotten killed, jadzia being very smug and pleased with herself, her head in his lap, in a pose mirroring an earlier couple in the opera). julian feels like he would have noticed if he hadn’t been distracted by garak, and when it turns out the andorian ambassador has sensitive info about cardassia’s civilian government, julian accuses garak of intentionally trying to distract him to make sure the andorian actually died, which turns into a huge argument (ideally in a very opulent klingon opera house bathroom). during the argument, julian realizes that garak was trying to hint to him that something about the assassination attempt was off; he pieces together aloud that the andorian and the actor must have been in league together, to fake the andorian’s assassination so they could not be tried for profiteering by illegally selling weapons to the cardassian central control during bajoran occupation, which they are currently under investigation for. the other ambassador assasinations were planned by the andorian to cover their tracks. the andorian is arrested, as is the actor. at the ballroom afterparty, sisko and kasidy, in a good mood that everything worked out, agree to join in on traditional klingon dancing. worf and jadzia take a peaceful walk through the gardens and worf recites some really lovely klingon poetry about how sometimes it’s NOT a good day to die if someone loves you, that none of us fucking understand without looking it up. julian and garak talk on the balcony, and julian posits that garak is loyal to cardassia, but which part of it? garak answers, very close and meaningfully looking at julian, ‘like most things... it’s complicated.’

i was about to say ‘fake wedding episode’ but literally LITERALLY that was the shotgun wedding lwaxana/odo ep. i love star trek

KEIKO BOTANIST EPISODE: kira accompanies keiko to bajor to help find a medicinal plant that was thought to be wiped out during the occupation but might still exist in a remote mountain region based on local reports. a nice episode where we learn more about bajor and see how bajorans are coping and healing. over a campfire, kira thanks keiko for accepting her into their family. keiko tells kira that she was really intimidated by her when they first met, and then realized she’s one of the most loving people she knows. just a nice episode, maybe some mild nature survival conflict, but ends on a hopeful note of them finding the plant. miles beams down with the kids to have a picnic with keiko and kira, and kira’s happy to see children playing carelessly on bajor again.

JAKE AND ZIYAL EPISODE: everyone thinks jake and ziyal are dating because they’ve been hanging out. julian’s an idiot and mentions to sisko ‘must be hard, huh’ and sisko’s like ‘WHAT must be hard’ and julian’s like oh my god were we not supposed to talk to him about this. jake and ziyal aren’t dating but as soon as sisko tries to talk to jake about it jake is like ‘i’m not but actually maybe i SHOULD ask her out’ and sisko is like fuck. okay no that’s fine. this is more of a B-plot but basically give jake and ziyal age-appropriate love interests they’re both RIGHT there

[unproduciblesmackdown]

Taylor and Winston’s Shared Glances at Wendy Which Could Recontextualize Billions 5x05 into Something Bearable

look if we take taylor’s behavior in 5x05 at face value, not only is it unpleasant for all of us but it also makes no sense. why question winston’s worth here, when he’s been making consistent and important contributions for mase cap the entire time? why bank on wendy, who everyone knows is more loyal to axe and axe cap, and who not only obviously very deliberately betrayed taylor last year for no good reason, but also has been meddling around with mase cap since before taylor offered the teamup, and refusing to ever acknowledge that she’s overstepping or doing anything wrong - not to mention that in 5x03, the episode just before taylor and wendy start off on this partnership venture, taylor expresses that they don’t trust wendy and don’t appreciate her interference at mase cap (or her efforts to deflect on that instead of like, apologizing or even recognizing she’s doing anything wrong. wendy’s really learned from last season, wow). taylor’s explanation to lauren of [Why Trust Wendy] being “well, risk is always involved, and it would be too obvious a move for wendy to betray me again, so she won’t.” i can accept the “there’s always risk” thing, like, maybe taylor knows they’re taking a big gamble on wendy here but is just that desperate and directionless, especially after sara quits, that they’re just willing to bet it all on wendy. but even so, there’s seemingly no need to push away their preexisting employees, or any benefit to doing so. and taylor’s apparent indifference / total lack of appreciation / even slight disdain for winston in this episode, when the entire point of him being here is that taylor could always recognize and respect his ability and worth, is again unpleasant for us all and also just doesn’t make sense. 

BUT then we very much extremely have this moment in the first scene between them, and it is entirely Something. the Secret Nonverbal Communication going on between winston and taylor in this moment is Real.

originally what caught my attention was taylor’s initial glance over at wendy and how Unusual it is. it’s too fleeting to be taylor making eye contact with wendy, and the fact that their eye contact returns so immediately to winston means they’ve still Deliberately interrupted that eye contact. if taylor was acting how they normally would, they and winston would just be holding each other’s eye contact (see: kompenso. nobody blinks!!) and they’re too conscious and deliberate in the cues they give off for this to be an accident. i was going to pause just to think about Why taylor has this very strange glance away-and-back, but then of course i saw that the very next thing that happens is winston, looking at taylor, also quickly glances at wendy, then back at taylor, and nods. 

he was clearly Bemused At Best throughout this scene, but as soon as this [taylor glancing at wendy and back at him, winston following their lead and glancing at wendy as well, then back at them] moment occurs, he just goes ahead and accepts this request to Prove Why He Shouldn’t Be Fired.

what i’m getting at is that i think taylor’s Glance At Wendy is their version of [a much more pointed glance, featuring raised eyebrows and them tilting their head at her to really get the message across], and winston is picking up on i, which lets him realize that taylor is more on his side here than they can say in front of wendy. taylor has previously Cued Winston In via a pointed nonverbal Look, and he’s shown he understands what they mean to convey when they do so. already, the implication that taylor trusts winston to pick up on this (and that he Does) shows that taylor respects winston a nonzero amount lol which is a little more than this episode suggests otherwise, without the “taylor and winston are Secretly Communicating here.”

naturally, what i think the secret [glancing] communication is about is that taylor themself is not considering firing winston, nor wanting to. they’re putting on this show for wendy here, wanting her to see taylor as already being fully on board with this partnership, which will encourage wendy to Also be more on board, 40% even - for whatever reason taylor might be able to use that down the line towards some bigger plan. and in this moment, taylor is conveying to winston that this whole “i’m considering firing you” matter is playing out because of wendy, hence the glance at her, which winston copies, then seemingly accepting the premise all of this instead of continuing to argue the point here and now.

and consider: if taylor really thought they should fire winston, they could’ve immediately done so in this scene. They are the one who’s putting the brakes on, managing to keep any decision from being made, yet without making it seem like they aren’t still essentially in accordance with wendy’s perspective here. i mean, damn, they’re out here getting pedantic about the fact that no, they don’t *have* to fire winston as a *need* to continue to be alive as organisms.......it’s easy to see them playing this as like, putting themself between wendy and winston while still making it seem like they’re actually fully on wendy’s side for this, acting indifferent towards winston, avoiding defending him to any point that they seem like they’re definitely advocating for him.........not to mention that winston’s right, and the math works no matter what, and it makes no sense to consider getting rid of him.......and taylor is directly contradicting themself by denying that they “need” winston, unless they’re just again talking about “i do not literally Need you like literal oxygen,” and/or, say, because they’re putting on a show of reluctance to keep winston on for wendy’s sake.

further consider: winston goes to mafee to complain, and then mafee and winston both bring lauren into the fold, but winston is complaining about what wendy specifically is doing - he’s not mentioning taylor. and winston complaining about this to mafee (and lauren) doesn’t have to be an act, because wendy’s not in on all this; she probably Does want to push out pre-impact-fund mase cappers, and they Don’t have reason to trust her. there’s no reason for winston to Not be upset about wendy wanting him out / interfering so much at mase cap - and maybe this Moment where taylor communicates to him via this glance is all the info winston has, like, all he knows is “oh, taylor maybe doesn’t want to do everything wendy does, but wendy is obviously pushing some Agendas,” like, he was there, taylor was managing to defend him without making it look like they were Clearly wanting to do that, but wendy was all in on just firing him asap.

not to mention how taylor acts in the scene where they do decide to keep winston on - they wait for wendy to make the call, then without waiting for even a beat to pass, confirm that winston’s Still Aboard, and immediately leave so that the whole matter is done with. more on this whole scene in a sec lol

and for another thought on how this Broader Recontextualization (i.e. that taylor is Not as aligned with wendy as they might act at face value / has some more complex plan at work here which requires them to act as though they’re just fully invested in this partnership with wendy) could be supported here, before i even noticed these Glances, i also noticed that it seemed like taylor was really Emphatic in telling lauren not to get into the middle of what they were doing with wendy.....and not in like an angry way or anything obviously, just like, they seemed particularly Earnest about that. and i think that could be indication of like, taylor does have this elaborate, big plan here, and they want it to unfold smoothly and/or just don’t want lauren to have to deal with any unforeseen consequences of stumbling into this Scheme..............but it’s unfortunate if lauren’s entirely in the dark, especially with how taylor was kind of ignoring her advice about the 25% vs 15% thing or whatever.........good that lauren’s on board anyways, like, not like taylor didn’t back her up on the less-than-ideal(-for-taylor) transition into being partially an axe cap employee, but it’s like......any relationship strife here is unnecessary, lauren’s just trying to look out for them. why can’t she be in on any larger schemes unfolding here

also, i think about taylor’s conversations with oscar back in 5x02. he was talking to them all about speed chess and having to think as many moves ahead (including your opponents potential moves) as possible, which, first of all i think that’s just always true in chess, but with speed chess you try to do it faster......as is the nature of speed chess......and, anyways, at the end taylor lets him know that they were even better than he was at that [seeing as many potential moves ahead as possible] thing. and i could definitely buy that taylor here is playing speed chess and has a much more in-depth plan than they’re letting on, vs. that their plan should be taken at face value and they really Do just trust wendy because of like, well there’s always risk + why would she betray me twice in a row. lol. and just the fact that all taylor’s behavior and choices and attitudes here like......do not make much sense otherwise, or line up much with how they’ve ever done things previously, really.

and here’s a whole extra galaxy brain layer to the matter:

What if Rian’s Already in On Taylor’s Plans Here, Potentially Even A Co-Conspirator With Both Taylor And Winston

here’s another thing i noticed was Strange before noticing the glances.....why is rian even back interviewing again??? i mean i could absolute ignore the weirdness of why rian apparently came back to this interview, pitch ready on her laptop, but didn’t even know *why* she should want to be doing the interview until bringing that up partway through. also, the presentation / idea was not That impressive lmao like, idk, taylor was a bit more generous with praise than warranted mayhaps lmfao but like. yes this could just be all taken at face value and it’d make more sense than [taking Everything taylor does at face value] but check this out

let’s say somehow taylor gets in touch with rian before she comes in and rian is in on all this from the start lol. acting kind of ambivalent, yet has this whole project just ready to pitch?? also like, apparently conveniently an “earnest believer” in saving the world one hedge fund trade at a time or whatever, but idk, i guess some people theoretically are........but anyways yeah taylor Wants to bring rian on, but wants wendy to be part of that / for wendy to think it was mostly her idea, aka mostly taylor listening to / valuing wendy’s good idea here. 

like, the real point comes with how like, the glance suggests taylor Does Not Want To Fire Winston, but in the scene where winston Starts Up the conversation about keeping him on, taylor is Not helping winston.....still sort of being neutral, but also acting bizarrely indifferent and unimpressed with him. but then you know, for no particular reason, rian cuts in and makes a case for keeping him on. 

and idk, maybe she’s just that nice and like, reverse hospitable to new coworkers, maybe she’s already decided he’s Alright and she may as well try to keep him around. but her defense of winston includes some Weirdly Strong language throughout.

well, it actually helps that he's outside the camp. don't you think? studies have proven that a diversity of opinions really strengthens an organization. impact funds really benefit from having a capitalist douche on staff as a bellwether; i mean, if you can sell impact plays to him, you know they'll be viable to anyone.

with the italics being where rian herself places emphasis. like, aside from the mystery of how anyone at a hedge fund thinks some people are capitalist and some, apparently, anticapitalist, or why winston should apparently be Exceptionally Mercenary and uncaring when he was all for the nlp oil divestment strategy which led to this whole impact fund idea in the first place.......rian is really arguing for winston here, and taylor literally looks to wendy, who agrees with rian that they should keep him on, and then taylor immediately affirms it and leaves. 

co-conspirator galaxy brain blast here being: taylor can’t directly stick up for winston, they want to seem as indifferent / unenthused as possible, while not actually throwing him under the bus, yet not defending him to put themself at odds with wendy. winston can’t really defend himself here - imo the fact that wendy’s even considering firing him at all kind of shows that like, maybe the usual reasonable arguments he has aren’t gonna fly, since presumably arguing for the value of his own quantitative approach doesn’t count for anything if wendy’s just dead set on hiring “true believers” for whatever reason, even though the math will still work, like he says, and he hardly seems pressed about being Against this impact fund maneuver or anything...........he can’t argue for himself here, taylor can’t either b/c they want it to be wendy’s idea/decision to keep him on so they can simply seem to be agreeing with her, so here comes co-conspirator rian, mysteriously but firmly arguing that winston should be kept on board b/c of this reason that really doesn’t make all that much sense (when has winston ever been like, skeptical of any strategies for not being Capitalist enough or whatever).......but apparently wendy buys it, and she’s sort of further affirmed by it having been her Good Idea / Good Call to hire this person who she’s now taking the advice of.........and taylor just gets to Really quickly agree in a way that still firmly concludes this whole issue, and yet doesn’t make it seem like they were sticking up for him in the least. sure was really convenient for everyone lol, thanks rian for gunning for this guy you probably met just today.

if rian’s not a co-conspirator, maybe that was just dumb luck, but that’d really be bold if taylor wanted to keep winston on but there was no game plan for how to guarantee that happens, we’re just gonna wing it..........and despite their seeming indifference, even slight disdain towards him in this scene, as Soon as wendy agrees he should stay, bam, taylor tells him it’s Decided and he’s fine and immediately bails so that the conversation can’t continue, boy, they sure accepted that Wholly and Immediately for someone who was supposedly on the fence about all of it.

and anyways the point is:

tl;dr The Glancing Between Winston And Taylor Is Real and They’re Secretly Communicating With Each Other This Way in This Moment

[thestateofuforia]

Xena is better than every male antihero from the past 20 years of prestige dramas and I will prove it with my extensive TV knowledge and feelings

What makes a “great” television show? We all know that there is no single definition, as people have different preferences and experiences, etc. etc. But what are the shows that critics have universally agreed are masterworks of television? The kind that sweep awards shows and influence the direction of entire industry? The kind that your professors uphold as the zenith of television’s potential?

Dark, character-driven dramas. TV’s chock-full of ‘em now, but for the sake of illustration, let’s just use The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, and Mad Men as examples of this phenomenon.

Aside from genre trappings, and writing/directing/acting quality, what do they all have in common? Why do people give so many shits, so intensely, about these shows? What could possibly be at their center? 

Answer: A broody, complex antihero with a dark past/present who struggles with the moral quandaries of existence, while remaining simultaneously vulnerable and withholding to both the viewer and those around him. I use “him,” because this character is always male. 

Where are all the female antiheroes? Well, there’s at least one who is constantly forgotten, probably because she hails from a wildly different kind of show. One with Greek gods, sword fights, and whooshing sound effects. But don’t let the aesthetics of this show fool you – at its heart, it’s a drama about the redemption of one of TV’s finest antiheroes. 

Xena is better than Tony Soprano, Walter White, and Don Draper combined, and I’m about to show you why I can make this audacious (and extremely biased and opinionated) claim!

Let’s take a look at the competition. You’ve got:

Tony Soprano  

Mob boss with Feelings™. He’s in therapy for the panic attacks he’s been having lately, because this very sensitive man is simply not cut out for the mafia. He’s killed strangers, friends, even his best friend, and he feels real bad about it. At the same time, he’s struggling to maintain the closest relationships in his life, particularly with his family. His kids are growing up, his marriage is strained, and he’s constantly trying to reconcile his brutal, immoral actions with the belief that he could be a good person. Tony wants to be good, but he knows he is destructive force to everyone around him, and the cognitive dissonance is tearing him apart. In spite of therapy, he makes very little progress towards becoming more in touch with his emotions.

Walter White 

High school chemistry teacher-turned-meth-cook whose entire life falls apart. It starts as a means of paying for his cancer treatment and providing for his family after he’s gone, but when the cancer goes into remission, Walt keeps on cookin’ just because he likes it. I’m not putting words in his mouth; he actually says this. He leads a double life, and, like our boy Tony up there, wants to believe he can be a good person, a good father, a good husband, while simultaneously devolving into cruel, manipulative (sociopathic??) drug lord. Even at the end, when the jig is up and he’s off in hiding, he still wants to provide for his family as some kind of compensation for everything he’s put them through. It’s too little, too late, but we get the idea – he’s a tortured soul, yada yada. Also, Walt, like Tony, is not one for heart-to-hearts with the fam.

Don Draper

1960s ad-man with a dark past, who buries the truth about the tobacco/cancer connection in order to sell cigarettes, and schedules cheating on his wife in his day planner, all while trying to be a good father/person. The most irrepressibly charming guy on this list, Don lives a lie, after stealing the identity of his commanding officer, killed alongside him in combat (whom he may/may not have had a hand in killing). Not even his name is real (Although who wouldn’t pick “Don Draper” over “Dick Whitman?”). He starts the series living the “perfect” life with a wife he plucked from a lineup of models, who, thanks to his closed-off attitude, knows absolutely fuck-all about him. They are in the midst of raising two children before he finally tells her that his father beat him as a child. He’s a stranger to his own wife. That’s how little this guy talks about his feelings. 

So why do we watch these antiheroes? They’re shitty people, right? From Tony choking a man to death while on a college tour with his daughter, to Walt watching his best friend’s girlfriend die of a heroin overdose and doing nothing to save her in order to win back complete control of his “friend,” to Don rejecting his long-lost brother who then goes on to hang himself, these guys are Not. Good. 

But, they are compelling characters. We have to care about them in order to tune in every week/binge five years of television in one weekend. And as far as I can tell, we like them because they feel bad about what they do. That’s oversimplification, of course, but it touches on the premise that makes these disparate characters somewhat relatable: 

We all have done bad things that we regret, and we all need to believe that, at the end of the day, we’re good people. 

Enter: Xena

In terms of sheer kill count, Xena has all these tortured main men beaten by a long, bloody mile. I can’t list all of her deeds, but suffice it to say, when Xena begins her journey in the first episode of her series, she’s at Genghis Khan-levels of slaughter. The character of Xena began as a warlord on Hercules’ show, but the whole truth of her villainy is only revealed bit-by-bit throughout the next six years of her journey. She’s killed thousands, razed entire villages to the ground, betrayed those close to her, and essentially been a Really Bad Person for most of her life. It’s arguable, but many see the act of burying her armor in the pilot as a self-sacrificial suicide attempt. Undefended, in a land brimming with uncountable numbers of wronged individuals who would love to see her head on a spike, she’s a lamb waiting for the slaughter. 

Enter: Gabrielle

A tiny village is under attack, and in a sudden twist of morality, Xena begins using her combat skills for good. She saves, among others, a plucky village girl who immediately starts following the warrior around like a puppy. But Xena, ever the classic brooding antihero, feels undeserving of gratitude and rejects her. Multiple times. But Gabrielle refuses to be left behind. Xena acquiesces, and the two begin their journey together. Gabrielle’s unrelenting faith in Xena pushes the ex-warlord onto a path of redemption. 

Over the course of the series, Xena and Gabrielle spend most of their time walking through forests until someone Evil Xena has wronged stumbles into their path and she and Gabrielle have to face another demon from her past. But no matter how many souls she saves, how many wrongs she rights, Xena never fully accepts that she is a good person. She wants to be good, and she sees goodness in Gabrielle, but always regards it as a quality just out of reach for herself. Her past haunts her, and she doesn’t know if she can ever fully atone for what she’s done.

In addition to undergoing a transformation of purpose, Xena also changes as a person. She begins the first season as a cold, near-Vulcan warrior with an impenetrable exterior and a steely gaze that never totally softens. But with time, and through the force of her relationship with Gabrielle, she chips aways at the wall she’s built around herself until she’s (more of) an emotionally communicative person. She allows herself to be vulnerable, and shares even the darkest secrets of her past with Gabrielle. And although she always braces herself for Gabrielle to have seen too much of the darkness inside Xena and finally leave her, Gabrielle stays by her side every time, and Xena heals a little bit more.

You know what that’s called? Growth. 

And it’s hella satisfying to watch. 

And, in this definitely-biased lesbian’s opinion, this is what makes Xena a more compelling character than any of the aforementioned male antiheroes. Her story is unique. Tony Soprano struggles with morality, but never truly changes. Walter White gives in to the darkness and lets it consume him. Don Draper reaches for redemption but always falls short. And yes, there is something exciting and interesting about all those stories. As you could probably tell, I’m a huge fan of every show I just mentioned. Hell, I had the idea for this post in the midst of a Mad Men binge at 3am last night. And, for the record, no, I do not hate all men, or all stories about men. But I was wracking my brain for an example of a female antihero in a prestige drama, and suddenly I realized I was looking in the wrong place. And that this would be a completely insane post that could ruffle some feathers online, which meant I had to get it out there on the World Wide Web.

Finally:

You might argue that Xena’s story is so different, and the series itself is so unlike these prestige dramas, that to draw a comparison among these characters is misguided, at best, and totally freaking bananas, at worst. 

But, here’s a final breakdown of what these antiheroes have in common:

1. An inner darkness that both drives and troubles them. (Check)

2. A sense of unworthiness towards those who show them love. (Check)

3. A level of charisma/general appeal that invites the audience to give a shit about them, in spite of whatever they might have done/are doing. (Check)

4. A persistent moral greyness. (Check)

5. A preternatural ability to stare into the middle distance and brood. (BIG check)

Clearly, Xena is classic antihero material. But what sets her apart is that she takes action to redeem herself. Even when she doesn’t truly believe she is good, she calls upon all her strength to do good, regardless. Instead of stewing in the darkness, pushing away her loved ones, stagnating in the nebulous state of her morality, she devotes the rest of her life to reckoning with her past and remains steadfastly fixed on redemption. She still makes mistakes. She remains flawed, conflicted, human. But she grows, whether or not she thinks she deserves to. She moves forward. 

[duhragonball]

Dragon Ball GT Retrospective (1/7)

[Note: This was originally written on January 10, 2013.   My leg was broken, and I decided to kill some time watching GT all the way through.]

My leg is still broken.   On the bright side, this gives me time to catch up on crappy anime.   My Tenchi in Tokyo DVD arrived in the mail a while back, and I had already resolved to use my convalescance to watch every episode of Dragon Ball GT.   So now I can have what I like to call a Marathon of Crap.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LyNFxnv78w

I've written about the problems with DBGT before, but now that I've sat through the first fourteen episodes, I feel better informed about them.  I think the experience of GT for any fan basically goes like this: STAGE ONE: You finish watching Dragon Ball Z, and you're hopeful that GT will just be 64 more episodes of awesome, even if everyone else who saw it thinks it sucks.   STAGE TWO: You start watching it, and quickly recognize why everyone hates it.   Nevertheless, you remain hopeful that you'll find some hidden quality that redeems the series in some way.   STAGE THREE: You get to the part where Goku is thwarted by a metal grate in a sewer, even though he's spent the entire series performing superhuman feats of strength.   You wearily accept that this show refuses to adhere to even the simplest level of continuity.   STAGE FOUR: Cool!   Super Saiyan 4 Gogeta!  They can't possibly screw this u--ohhhhh shit they just did. STAGE FIVE: You refuse to recognize GT as anything remotely resembling canon.   STAGE SIX: You buy the DVD box set anyway, because you're a completist and it was on sale.   STAGE SEVEN: You watch the series again, now properly aware that it was never going to be a worthy continuation of DBZ, but it's probably got some decent camp value.   And that's where I am today.  When they rolled out GT for American audiences, Funimation didn't even bother releasing the first twenty or so episodes, because even they knew how lame they were as a followup to DBZ.  Instead, they edited together a single episode which recapped them, then later released the uncut editions as "The Lost Episodes".   So these are the worst of the worst.  Later on, the series evolves into a watered down parody of what Dragon Ball Z had been, and I think that's what most American fans are complaining about when they talk about the show.    But these early episodes are the real crap.   The original premise was that a secret set of "Black Star" Dragon Balls is discovered and accidentally used to de-age Goku into a child.  At first, the goal seems to be getting Goku back to normal, except the Black Star Dragon Balls have an added side effect of blowing up the world one year after they're used to make a wish.   Worse, they scatter all over the universe with each use, so the only hope is a space mission to find them and return to Earth within one year.   

Frankly, this is the stupidest thing ever.   The Dragon Balls are artifacts created by Namekian craftsmen, and they were introduced to Earth when a Namekian skilled in the art came to this planet.   Why would he construct Dragon Balls that blow up the Earth, where he is?  Why would he fashion them so that they scatter into space, when he is essentially stuck on his adopted world with no practical means of searching for them?   One could argue that this was a faulty job, an essay in the craft, abandoned when the Red Star Dragon Balls turned out to be much safer and more convenient to use.   But no one ever says this.  Also, no one ever explains why they can't use one of the other sets of Dragon Balls to retrieve the more volatile Black Star set.   Anyway, the space expedition goes haywire when Goku's granddaughter Pan sneaks aboard and carelessly launches the ship before it's ready.   This leaves only herself, Goku, and Trunks on board to carry out the mission.  For the first leg of the series, these are the main cast of the show.  I'm not sure how they picked that lineup, except that they were clearly trying to echo the dynamic of Goku, Krillin, and Bulma back in the old Dragon Ball series.  The idea was to go back to the adventure concept of the original series, as opposed to the heavy action focus of Dragon Ball Z.   This doesn't work, mainly because the characters are simply too powerful to function as adventure heroes doing Indiana Jones style stories.  Back in the old days Goku and Krillin were superhuman fighters, but they were still inexperienced, and there was room in the world for stronger enemies to menace them.  By DBGT, Goku has repeatedly proven himself to be the most powerful mortal being in his universe, and most of the other characters are right behind him on the Top Twenty.  GT keeps doing episodes where the trio land on a planet, explore the situation a little, then stage a lopsided confrontation with the bad guy.  There's no suspense to it because Goku can blow up the whole planet if he wants to, and the bad guy is usually some tin-dictator who doesn't realize what he's up against.   To compensate, the writers keep employing what fans call "GT logic".   For instance, this one episode had a bad guy called Lord Luud, who's a giant robot shaped like a kewpie doll or something.    Goku and Trunks fight it, but the robot is pretty durable.   Despite the difficulty, they never bother turning into Super Sayians, even though they can both totally do that at any time and it would even the odds.   Luud then steps on the heroes, and then they finally transform, mostly for the big dramatic moment where they have their Superman comeback and toss Luud on his ass.    Then they change back and start beating up on Luud as if he suddenly got easy.   Luud's handler gets desperate, so he adds Pan's to Luud's power supply, giving him a boost.   Pan's weaker than Goku or Trunks, but for some reason Pan+Luud  is way, way stronger than Goku and Trunks put together.   Well, whatever, but the situation is now looking pretty grim, and Goku and Trunks still keep fighting in their base forms.   They never explain this either.   It really doesn't make sense, because the Super Saiyan transformations were one of the most popular elements of the franchise.  I think they wanted to hearken back to the days before the Super Saiyan concept was introduced, but they never bothered to rationalize it.   So they compromised and made the transformations really really brief and infrequent for no reason.    Pan never transforms, although it's not clear if she just doesn't know how, or she just refuses to for the same mysterious reason as everyone else.  I could sort of buy that Goku's younger body is too weak to handle the transformation, or that Trunks is out of practice, but they still do it, just not very much.  It'd be like a whole episode of He-Man where Prince Adam fights Skeletor and has a really hard time, but he only uses his sword when he needs to lift heavy boulders.   The bad guys suck ass.   The first real villain is Lord Don Key.   Get it?   Do you? Because it's a pun.   He's a plutocratic fop, so he hires thugs that know how to use hand energy.  Goku beats them all in like two minutes, but for some reason his team farts around for like four episodes gathering information.  That's really what's wrong with the show.   It wasn't a mortal sin to go for a sillier tone or back off the fighting, but the pacing ruins whatever they were going for.  A lot of these GT plots resemble early episodes of Dragon Ball, except they get stretched out to two or three episodes of GT.   Gags that might have been cute in two minutes get stretched out to six or seven.  The next major bad guy is Master Dolltaki, who turns Pan into a doll while he tries to get Lord Luud operational.  Dolltaki's gimmick is that he's a total perv with toy dolls, and he spends something like three episodes talking or thinking about what a cute doll Pan is and how he can't wait to dress her up in all sorts of adorable little doll clothes.  Remember that scene from Spaceballs where Rick Moranis plays with action figures in his quarters?  It was what?  Two minutes of the movie?   If Toei had made Spaceballs, they would have dragged that out to half an hour, and added a heapin' helpin' of pedophilia just in case it was too subtle.   Admittedly, there wasn't a whole lot of places left to go as far as Dragon Ball villains.  Majin Buu was an indestructible shape-shifter, and how do you top that?  The first credible GT villain was Dr. Myuu, who was basically an outer space version of DBZ's Dr. Gero.   Baby had some potential, but his main advantage was his power to possess Goku's friends.   So he wasn't really a challening bad guy so much as he was a plot device to force the good guys to fight each other.   After that, they just decided to bring back all the old villains by having them stage a mass escape from hell.    Cute, but not very innovative.  The series ends by having the Dragon Balls themselves become the final boss of the franchise.   That was a smart idea, but it was pretty poorly executed.  Ultimately, Goku beats the Evil Dragon using the same move he used to beat Majin Buu at the end of DBZ, so it really forces you to ask if this trip was really necessary.   But by then, I think everyone in Japan had recognized the obvious: Dragon Ball could only be stretched so far.  The franchise still has life in it, but the specials and videogames and other merchandise generally sidestep GT.   I think everyone at Toei understands now that GT was a failed experiment at best.  Of course, the recent Bardock special feels a lot like the same sort of watered down crap that GT was, but at least they were applying the formula to good ol' DBZ lore, instead of going in directions no one wanted to see.

[nameless-articles]

The Regional Differences of Nier (And Why the Western Version is Better)

Nier (2010) is one of countless games to change based on the region its released in. While the localization process is nothing interesting in the realm of video games, the extent to which Nier changes is quite immense. The significant difference between Nier Replicant, the Japanese Playstation 3 version, and Nier Gestalt, the Japanese Xbox and worldwide version, is the age of the main character (canonically and for the sake of this essay titular) and his relationship to Yonah. In the former, Nier is Yonah’s older brother, while in the latter he is Yonah’s father. There appears to be a twenty or so year difference between the two Niers, and in general this does little to affect the gameplay. Yoko Taro is on record as saying Replicant was the original premise, while Gestalt was an attempt to appeal to a wider audience, as they feared the younger protagonist would not mesh well with western players. While their fears weren’t misguided, this change has wider thematic implications that overall service the narrative better than if Nier had remained a brother.

While Gestalt is available in Japan, it’s important to note that it is the Xbox version. Japanese support was weak for the console, hence any user being hard-pressed to name several noteworthy Japanese made games that did not cater to the west in some fashion (at least overseas, because there were a surprising number of japanese only shoot-em-ups and rpgs exclusive to the Xbox). All to say, that even if this version was available in Japan, the developers didn’t make it with Japanese players in mind.

Yoko Taro is no stranger to challenging tropes in video games, and this is one of the surface reasons Nier’s age difference works between versions. Tropes vary depending on regional culture, so it is not too far-fetched to suggest a game challenging conventional game design and its tropes would change important/visible aspects of its game to challenge them. While a caring big brother is a common trope in the West, there are more instances of it in Japanese media (particularly games and other contemporary media). On the other hand, the caring father figure is a trope that, though it would not be amazingly popular in video games for another two years after Nier (thank you The Last of Us), is familiar to the average consumer. On a basic level, the big brother and father roles are functioning the same outside of a few script changes and different voice acting. Gameplay wise, brother Nier has a better excuse for not having the ability to wield greatswords and spears than father Nier, but this doesn’t amount to much beyond a jarring absence of those weapons in the first half of the western version. As the game goes on, there is a different importance placed on the character depending on their age and relationship, and the implications for the story are greater for father than they are brother.

Our expectations for these characters’ knowledge varies depending on how old they are; we would expect father Nier to be wiser, to know more about this world than we would for brother Nier. What we would chalk up to naivety for brother Nier is then considered willful ignorance if not outright manipulation for the older one. Brother Nier is a simpler character in this regard, because he’s young, and we can only despise what he does so much before realizing he didn’t know any better. Father Nier, on the other hand, is old enough that his lack of empathy provides stronger commentary for his character.

At the root of Nier (game) is the matter of perspective: what looks good for one character is disastrous and hostile for another. The game reveals this information towards the end of the first playthrough and all throughout the second. This information then informs the player’s perspective on both Nier’s behavior and what we presumed to be hostile acts. Let’s take a look at the cutscene after Emil destroys the Aerie. 

Emil is overcome with grief and sorrow because of the destruction his actions have caused. He seems genuinely concerned and remorseful after having destroyed the town, realizing all the innocent people that were surely killed in the process. Despite actions having consequences throughout the whole game, none of them up until that point have had that great of a change. From this point on, this area becomes more or less useless (and for those interested in grinding out upgrade materials, a sour sight as you wait until the next play through to grind for eggs). People to talk to, quests to complete, whatever you needed in that place is completely locked away for the rest of the play through. All that remains is a huge and empty pit.

How does Nier respond to Emil? He tells Emil, “But you saved our lives,” and goes on to explain how it was a case of them or the shades, that there was no other choice to take, and ends, almost like an order, by telling Emil, “Don’t look back.” Nier does not want Emil to think about the negative consequences of his actions, a running theme present throughout the story, usually used with regards to killing shades, where no matter how innocuous their behavior might seem, Nier will posit that there is no other choice but to exterminate each and every shade they encounter. Nier tells Emil this to keep him on his side, to influence the way Emil should see his monstrous actions. Nier needs him to believe in his cause, and there’s no room to question who’ve you hurt, or whether you are wrong.

Nier’s stubbornness persists throughout the whole game, culminating in the end where, despite knowing that the Shadowlord has just a noble a cause - in fact, probably a nobler cause considering he is the original Nier and his daughter is the original Yonah - Nier refuses to sympathize or stop himself from taking what he deserves. This isn’t to say that the Nier we play as the whole game is necessarily “the bad guy,” but that our entire notion of what it means to play “the bad guy” is entirely dependent on the perspective and player agency of that character.

It is much easier to view these enemies in simple terms as we are forced to do in the first play through, before we understand Kaine’s backstory and see how shades behave when they aren’t being murdered by the replicants. These are enemies, plain and simple. Though there are side quests and moments where this comes into question, for the majority of the main plot, up until the very end, we are meant to believe that our fight is the right thing to do. However, the second playthrough complicates this situation, and it starts to become less clear whether we should keep on going. However, Nier’s own persistent despite our own knowledge is what differentiates him from most other playable protagonists. While the player is able to make choices throughout the game, it is never during the most critical scenes (despite arguably the ending (though even then the Shadowlord must always be defeated)). Nier is stubborn and committed to the purpose he has set for himself until the very end.

Again, as a brother these actions come across just as stubborn, however this stubbornness is different from father Nier. We can look at Nier’s actions more critically when we accept that he’s consciously exerting himself and manipulating others to get the result he wants.

This becomes most clear during the battle with Devola and Popola. The sisters make the game’s point clear: Everyone has their own motives and desires driving them, and conflict happens when different characters with opposing purposes meet. It really is that simple. However, after Nier kills Devola, he tells Popola to stop. Popola responds with what might be the most powerful statement in the entire game. Her line, “Do you think I have the luxury to stop?” is particularly poignant because it invites the player to consider how important her role is and whether she could call it quits even if she wanted to. But most importantly, it makes the player question why we ourselves haven’t stopped. Why have we continued to play this game and kill these characters? Even if we separate ourselves from the characters and believe we only play to get to the end, what does this say about our behaviors and why we continue to play games at all. Why don’t we just stop? Before her phase in the battle begins, she exclaims, “No one ever stops!” She’s just as assured in what she’s about to do as Nier. While this article focuses on how Nier (the character) is changed between regions, it would be foolish not to include that this line, as it’s expressed in the English dub, does not exist in the original Japanese. In Japanese, Popola just exclaims that she’s going to kill you… Besides removing many of the implications that her English exclamation has, it really limits how deeply we can think about Devola and Popola. The English version gives a better sense of thematic ideas that have been present throughout.

The credit song for ending A works to this goal as well. Though the song is interesting for the way it explains how the world of Nier (the game) relates to Drakengard by giving the events shortly following that game’s ending, there are several lines that speak to the thematic points that I argue are made clearer in the English version. The chorus of the song goes, “Hidden so deep in veils of deceit, / Imprisoned in twisting spells - / Are we the plaything of fiends, or merely the dreams / That we're telling ourselves, telling ourselves?” While Devola acknowledges the reality of everyone having motives, she neglects to note how difficult it is to discover those motives; even Nier doesn’t find out until they tell him explicitly, and up until then everyone is certain the sisters are on the side of the replicants. These lines also acknowledge the unfounded nature of everyone’s motives and purpose. Do our duties come from a manipulative figure (as we see Nier doing to Emil) or do they come from something we hope is achievable (as we see in the side quest where the boy wants to escape his family of thieves). Are either of these better than the other?

The lines directly following the first chorus, “Strive till the phantoms are broken, / Fight till the battle is done,” refer to the end goal of these motives, which is to say, not necessarily to achieve those motives at all. If phantoms are taken to be haunting visages of the past, then we continue on until we forget about them. If we set out for war, all we can do is fight until there is nothing left to fight. Fighting until the battle is done is not the same as fighting until its won. The one referenced in the lyrics only wants the fight to be done, regardless of the results. Neither of these existences are spoken of with much reverence, more so with an acceptance that this is one framework through which we view actions in our lives. Further playthroughs build our understanding of everyone’s actions, but the game’s final ending being locked behind deleting the player’s save data asks us to question what these goals are worth (or they would, if consoles didn’t have cloud-saving and backup features).

While the song lyrics and final-ending mechanic are present in the Japanese version as well, that version of the game, primarily by having Nier portrayed as a younger character, doesn’t reinforce these larger thematic ideas as well as the English version, despite arguably having better voice acting. The English version feels like it has a more concentrated focus on these interactions because of the little things changed to appeal to a western audience. While most games don’t/wouldn’t benefit from a western localization, it’s interesting to encounter a game where such a release feels like a more tightly constructed work of art.

[kanasmusings]

[Summary/Thoughts] Lycoris no Mori Drama Tracks - Part 2 B

Here’s the final installment of the summary of Lycoris no Mori!  This is obviously not spoiler-free so please read at your own discretion ^^ 

Part 1 | Part 2 A | Part 2 B

I’ll also be translating the official character diagram for this series ^^

Under the cut for length, enjoy~ Also, sorry in advance for cursing in some parts of the commentary ^^

Here’s the long summary of the final track:

Continuing where we left off, Alvin (Masato) continues on saying what he can offer Tokiya to help capture Otoya. Cecil still goes on and tempts Tokiya, whispering to him how he should just kill Alvin, too, while he’s at it. Cecil then questions Tokiya as to why he’s hesitating.

Masato continues on with his super dramatic and poetic monologue, saying that he doesn’t have much longer to live and how it’s his destiny. Masato then goes on and says “there’s no one left to save Blood” He persuades Tokiya to kill him and the scene gets cut.

The next scene is Ren running and hoping that he makes it in time. He has a flashback of his conversation with Reiji. They argue about why Reiji did what he did and Reiji says that he had no other choice but to let Otoya go because there’s no one out there who’ll save him. Ren says that he would have but Reiji retaliates that Ren’s only doing it for his pride.

The flashback ends when Ren reaches Masato’s house. Cecil’s there again and comments on how Masato’s scattered blood looks like a lycoris flower. He says afterwards that it was obvious Masato would die since he’s someone a lot of people hate. (Cecil, you’re so heartless)

Cecil taunts Ren into thinking that a werewolf killed Masato and Ren runs off to search for Otoya. After Ren runs away, Cecil goes into a short monologue about how “all the pieces have gathered and that it can’t be stopped anymore.”

 The next scene is a scene between Tokiya and Otoya. Tokiya calls Otoya’s name and he talks of how they fulfilled their promise to see each other again.

Otoya talks about how the lycoris flower is his favourite flower and how it resembles the both of them. They have a heart-to-heart talk here but I won’t go and describe it because it’s too detailed and I’ll just leave it for when I’ve translated the drama CD.

When Tokiya says that he’s on Otoya’s side, Otoya gets upset and calls him a liar. Otoya goes on about how he trusted Tokiya and thought they were friends. He then reveals that he knew all along that Tokiya was asked to kidnap him and all that. Tokiya retaliates and says how it’s not what Otoya thinks. He goes on and says that the happiness he felt when he was with Otoya was not a lie. Otoya gets teary eyed and then says that he really loved Tokiya.

 **ALL PARTS AFTER THIS WILL BE A SPOILER FOR THE ENDING!!** If you don’t want to be spoiled before I release the full translations by tomorrow, I think it’d be a good idea to stop here XD But if you really want to read, then, go ahead ^^

 Otoya freakin’ stabs Tokiya and says that if Tokiya was going to die, it’s better that he be killed by Otoya than by anyone else. Otoya says that by doing this he’ll be able to understand Tokiya’s sins and feelings more. Otoya says that he’ll free Tokiya from this harsh reality. Tokiya says that that’s the best way to go and says that Otoya’s such a nice person. Tokiya fucking says that the wound he received from Otoya is the proof of happiness (what the hell Tokiya????)

Tokiya smiles as it seems like he’s dying and Otoya says that he’s happy to see Tokiya smiling. (WTF???!!) And then Tokiya goes on and says how it’s wonderful that the last thing he sees is Otoya’s smiling face.

Tokiya asks Otoya to promise that he’ll forget all about Tokiya. That Otoya should live and search for a new world in his place. Tokiya wishes for Otoya to find new happiness. Otoya says that he won’t forget and how this moment is the happiest moment he’s ever had. (a little twisted but, okay…)

Tokiya says that dying in Otoya’s warm hands is a happiness that nothing can ever surpass. He thanks and says that he loves Otoya (literally! He goes  「愛している」)  before he draws his last breath. Otoya says that he loves Tokiya, too. (stay calm, my heart)

 Cecil then laughs maniacally and says that Otoya’s heart is now finally his. Ren runs into the scene asking if Otoya’s okay. Ren threatens the already dead Tokiya to get away from Otoya. Ren’s taken aback when he says Otoya drop a knife and to find out that Tokiya’s already dead.

Otoya says he killed the werewolf. Ren approaches Otoya and asks if he’s okay or if he’s hurt anywhere. Ren’s relieved when he finds out that Otoya’s fine and says that it’s a relief that the werewolf’s already dead. Otoya’s obviously mad and says that Ren has no right to call Tokiya evil or to accuse him of doing anything wrong.

Ren says that Tokiya killed Masato but Otoya reveals that it was him who actually killed Masato. Ren’s surprised, of course.

There’s a flashback between Masato and Otoya where they talk about how Reiji was planning to sell Otoya and the one who accepted the mission was Tokiya. Otoya’s in shock obviously. Masato then tells Otoya to kill him. When Otoya refuses to, Masato attempts to stab himself but Otoya stops him. Masato dies either way and Otoya cry-laughs(??) and begs Masato to not die.

The flashback ends and Ren doesn’t want to believe it. Cecil takes over Otoya’s body and picks up the knife and kills Ren.

 Cecil does a little monologue about sins and wishes and all that.

 The final scene is between Otoya and Tokiya. Otoya runs over to where Tokiya is and says that he’s there to fulfil their promise. Tokiya says that Otoya should’ve just forgotten about him and Otoya says that there’s no way he can do that. He says (guys, and this is true) that he can’t imagine a happiness where Tokiya’s not there. Tokiya takes Otoya’s hands in his and says that they’ll be starting a new life together.

Aaaaanddd, that’s how it ends.

 My thoughts on this track:

 Okay, wow. I didn’t really expect that it would be this dark. That was a wild ride.

Positive personal notes about the drama tracks were:

1.)    It’s really dark and I’m a sucker for those kinds of stories.

2.)    All the Tokiya x Otoya content that we were blessed with.

3.)    TOKIOTO!!! (More like Randolph x Blood but still!!!) 

4.)    “愛してる” This line is enough to kill me.

5.)     Also, a personal achievement, I figured out that Otoya’s basically a teenager (young man in the official description) and everyone else was just a little older than him lol.

That aside, overall I think it’s really good!

Positive general notes: (Unbiased thoughts this time XD)

1.)    The UtaPri writers really know how to make a good story. They utilized their theme well and made it their own unique story despite being an adaptation of a famous fairy tale. It’s really well done!

2.)    The characters were very good and even if some of them were only there for a short while, their presence was not wasted. They all had memorable lines that they said and I think that’s a great way of utilizing a character’s potential even though they’re only there for a few minutes.

3.)    Voice acting! I knew I wouldn’t be disappointed given the fact that they’re all veteran seiyuus but hearing all their emotions and projecting it was a wonderful experience. Especially during the ending scenes. Otoya’s yandere voice hnggggh.

Negative general notes:

1.)    The story’s too fast-paced. There were times when you think everything’s happening too quickly and it’s hard to try and catch-up with what’s happening. Some questions are left unanswered and Cecil still confuses me lol. Two tracks are definitely not enough. I’ll buy a whole drama CD with just this AU if need be XD

2.)    I’m a little confused about the ending. Did the two of them die and meet in the afterlife?? Did Tokiya somehow manage to be revived and Otoya went searching for him??? I personally want it to be the second one but it’s so vague.

3.)    The other characters somehow just disappear from the story. Ranmaru was made a big deal in the first track but somehow he loses significance in the second track. Cecil’s still a mystery lol. (Or maybe I just wasn’t paying close attention to him lol)

Well, in short, it’s a story of a meeting that never should’ve happened and the consequences they faced afterwards. Should they go down the forbidden road or should they go back to where they think they’ll be happy? That’s the basic premise.

I really loved it and I hope that UtaPri does more works like this. It’s refreshing and takes you away from its normal otome genre. It’s a wonderful installment to an already wonderful franchise.

And, that’s about all I have to offer for this CD. Please look forward to the complete translations ^^

P.S. if anyone’s willing to share with me the drama tracks for “Trois” and “Lost Alice”, I’d gladly do a translation for them, too ^^

[janiedean]

What's the matter with the Jaime's redemption arc? I see that some GOT fans are against it and others want it so bad. I noticed that they spend a lot of time arguing and attacking each other...but why?

pfff anon you’re kicking the hornet’s nest but like, tldr:

people who don’t want jaime’s **redemption arc** (which imo isn’t even what you’d call proper redemption arc see link for in-depth rant) should actually be ‘people who decided jaime is the same person as cersei therefore inherently terrible therefore no way he can be a good person or have an happy ending’;

being ‘against it’ means ‘assuming against all textual evidence both in show and book that jaime is a Horrible Person And Will End Like His Sister And/Or Die A Villain;

the other side doesn’t want jaime’s redemption arc, the other side accepts what the text says because it’s not a question of wanting it or not, it’s that it’s textual that it’s where he’s been headed since he got chapters in the books (and I’d argue it was fairly guess-able before as well but nvm) and if at this point people are still arguing about whether jaime is a bad person or not and is on a redemption arc or not I honestly don’t even know what to tell them because he’s been on the quest to go back to the good person he always was/could be and that he didn’t become thanks to bad trauma managing openly since he got chapters, whether one *wants* it or not is irrelevant;

like guys I also really would have wanted for robb to not die or for a ship I don’t care for to not become canon, robb died and that ship is show canon, I’m not going around denying it’s a thing or whatever because both things happened, same as jaime going towards the good side/having the redemption arc for lack of better terms is a thing that’s happening;

about why: idk I mean I’ve had a lot of theorizing but my two cents are generally on:a) people can’t accept that a guy who started the series doing something fairly heinous can actually be a good person all things considered;b) people are working on the assumption that jaime = cersei which is a thing that is not canon whatsoever and at this point if they do idk what to say;c) people think that sarcasm = serious so they take all of j’s chapters seriously including the obvious sarcastic parts which would line with b^.

now: I personally have no interest in arguing with people about jaime’s redemption arc because I’ve been saying what I’ve been saying since 2011 and that’s it, but as far as I’m concerned I really am tired of people in general shoving under the rag 90% of his canon storyline, ignoring pretty much most of the canon-described issues he has, completely disregarding the fact that he has untreated ptsd/has been an abuse victim with in order at least his sister, his father and aerys being the perpetrators (not counting the fact that his entire rship with cersei is based on her having the upper hand always and him annulling himself for her but that’s totally healthy and 50/50 codependent… not really), blaming on him wrongdoings that belong to, er, HIS RELATIVES more than him (same as most people in the narrative do) and consistently refusing to recognize that his entire sl is about a) him realizing he can be the good person he always was/felt he was, b) finding his own way in life outside being defined by other people/thinking he doesn’t have a personality that’s not his sister’s, c) trying to be better and not giving up on it even if it’s not a neat path and he has setbacks same as everyone else.

like, it’s not that I hate that people don’t want him to have it nor that I want to argue about it because I’ve read the source material/seen the show and I like to think I don’t deny stuff that’s dangling in front of me (again: one show canon ship is a thing I really am not into and I never liked it, I’m not finding ten different ways to invalidate it I just accepted it was canon and whatever) so when he actually gets nice things and people recognize he’s nowhere near as terrible as they thought he was (in the narrative) I’ll just go like ‘well I’ve said that for ages’. my problem is that people willingly keep on ignoring the source text and twist it/ignore it/misinterpret it purposefully while keeping on denying that one of the main themes in jaime’s entire story is his complete lack of agency as 90% of his life went to shit because of stuff other people forced him to do/because he was forced into doing things he himself would have not wanted to do in the first place and you can’t go and discuss anything in it if you start from the premise that he actually had it all along, because he didn’t. and I find it intellectually dishonest as hell because then it goes back to victim blaming and ignoring that he has trauma because he’s apparently not a good enough victim to make the cut of people who suffered and so deserve a narrative reward, except that the narrative says the contrary, and people pretend it doesn’t.

and like, I’m personally tired af. but the matter with jaime’s so-called redemption is that it exists and some people have decided it doesn’t because if it does then they can’t say he’s the same person as his sister anymore and it doesn’t add up with a textual reading that has as many holes as leerdammer cheese if not more, and I’ve said everything I had to say. xD

[megacircuit9universe]

Ejector Seat

I’ve been thinking about the previous entry for a few days now... the idea of a self driving economy kept on the rails by the collective smarts of all the learning algorithms out there, whose prime directive is to keep the money moving...

And then it occurred to me yesterday that, even if this were true, things could still be screwed up by something like an arbitrary and pointless trade war with the nations who produce most if not all of the stuff that keeps this modern economy moving... namely, the smart phones themselves, as well as all the products we can use those phones to buy at low low prices.

Trumps insane tariff policies, will eventually result in a fairly painful (if totally artificial) inflation on the cost of all those things, which will eventually result in far less consumer spending... which in turn will result in a recession.

And because he is not sane, Trump will respond to the recession by doubling down on the tariffs... turning that recession into a global depression.

Now, before I go any further, I have to address an elephant in the room here... And it’s that the current economy, which has been doing so well for so long, has been pretty bad for many parties involved... such as the low wage global workforce who produces most of the stuff we buy for those low low prices, and also wage stagnation here in America... not to mention the huge education bubble... the growing problem of rent inflation... and of course, climate change!

But outside of America, we were, and still are, working on those problems. There is an argument that low wage factory work in developing nations, while not ideal, in terms of wages or working conditions... still lifts those people out of poverty and... can be seen as a stepping stone to their future prosperity much as factory work during the industrial revolution paved the way for the following generations to enjoy better working conditions, wages, and general quality of life.

That’s far from a guarantee, but it’s possible with the right focus.

Other issues, such as wage stagnation, and the education, rent, and healthcare bubbles... are purely American problems. Most if not all other first world nations either never had those problems, or have solved them by now.

Which leaves climate change... where again, most of the world is on board for addressing the problem, both short and long term.

So... excluding failed states that aren’t really in the game right now... the global economy, while far from perfect, is a work in progress that could become far more fair and equitable over time... 

...with the exception of America (and I guess, England too) where legacy political issues such as racism and unbridled corporate greed are currently fighting tooth and nail to stay relevant in this new century that is leaving them behind.

But, putting them to one side for a moment, we can see that our self driving economy... such that it is... could be bad, if it refuses to allow any further change... keeping rent and education forever too high, and foreign factory wages forever too low, while we blindly destroy all the planet’s resources and turn the atmosphere into an oven.

However... because this is ultimately an economy driven by social media... there is a built-in flexibility to accommodate the ever shifting desires of a collective human population, around the globe, who very much want life to become more fair and equatable... from the top of the ionosphere, to the street level, down to the bottom of the underground mine.

So if you accept that premise, as I do, then the collective AI acting as an auto-pilot for this economy... is a good thing... that will not become a bad thing down the road.

TLDR: Even if our modern economy is problematic, the self driving aspect does not damn it to remaining problematic forever, because the self driving aspect is designed to learn and change according to the collective will of all global consumers, rich and poor alike.

In fact, the poor, I would argue, have more leverage than the rich, because... well, they vastly outnumber the rich, for one thing... and they spend those pennies as fast as they get them... while the rich mostly sit on their piles of cash.

Those collective pennies from the 99% amount to far more money, pulsing through the veins of the economy on a daily basis... with the number of individual transactions being... what... in the quadrillions or something a day? 

When your self driving feature is a learning algorithm... it can only learn from a transaction.  

They literally look at your transaction history, to try and suggest more things you’re likely to be interested in, and if that leads to another transaction... bingo!  It has learned!

Far more of that is going on with low income consumers every day... than with the rich... who often try to launder their money and mask the few fat transactions they do make... leaving them out of that cyber learning loop.

Their fat cat financial decisions, more and more as time goes on, will be determined by the nuanced concerns of the 99%, who determine which investments are sound, and which are folly.

Alright!  So, lets get back to Donald Trump, noted racist and friend to the greedy... who is also batshit crazy.

He’s in power because of the first two things, but his tariff policy is all that third thing.  It’s not really racist or greedy.  The racists and the greedy never asked for any tariffs.  It’s truly just... batshit lunacy coming out of the cartoonish depths of his plaque ridden synaptic structures.

He heard somewhere that tariffs are a thing bossy presidents used to do, a hundred years ago, and then he heard some other lunatic on AM radio say they were some kind of a solution for white supremacy and... he just seized on that and now he will just never let it go.

As I said in the opening, this is the one kind of thing that could short circuit the self driving economy and cause it to crash like all other economies before it.

However, in the previous entry, I noted that thus far, the economic auto pilot has been doing a freakishly good job of just ignoring his inputs to the pedals and the steering wheel.

I say, “freakishly,” because the result has been huge stock market spikes one day, followed by huge dips the next... for a year now... with the net result that nothing much has changed, because the spikes and dips cancel each other out.

It’s terrifying to watch from one day and week to the next... but on the other hand... it’s been a whole year of this and... we’re still fine!

To be clear here, these are spikes and dips on a stock market chart... they are not spikes and dips in your or my bank balance... or in the prices for the things we buy... because they are happening waaaay to fast.

An apt analogy would be... I come into your living room and flip the lights on and off, fifty thousand times per second, for a whole hour.  Will you notice?

Well, considering that your alternating current cycles them on and off already at the rate of sixty thousand times per second (if you live in the US) no!   You will not fucking notice any change in the brightness of your lights in the living room.

Okay, yes!.. your light switch would break if I did that... possibly leaving you in the dark.  But your light switch is a mechanical component.

The switches and buttons Trump is exercising like mad every waking minute with his daily tweet storms and policy contortions... are all digital... powered by redundant servers all around the planet, sitting in air conditioned rooms, with surge protectors and back up generators.

So... simply overheating the self driving mechanisms our economy, by working them to death trying to compensate for an unending barrage of violent inputs... is not possible.

AI algorithms exist independent of any one server, drive, card, or chip... and the internet as a whole is built to withstand daily attacks from global electrical storms and natural disasters, solar storms, and a never ending assault on the power grid from the world’s squirrels.

So, the economy is quite safe from his day to day insanity.

The question is... is that self driving infrastructure clever enough to deal with the long term, artificial inflation that his tariffs will impose upon the system from the outside?

With the tariffs... Trump is side-stepping the computers entirely, and fucking with the underlying economic math itself!

That’s... what a tariff is!  

It’s a way for a leader to arbitrarily change the fundamental math that underpins the economy.

So the answer to the question... if the self driving economy can correct for such a root level attack... depends on how intelligent it actually is.

All of these learning algorithms, working in concert toward the one objective of maintaining and improving the circulation of money... are ALL black-box algorithms, as touched on in the previous entry.

It means... all of them have evolved to survive inside our internet jungle of multiple such species of AI... and while we do not know how any of them think or work... it’s a safe bet they will all work together to isolate and neutralize the same existential threat.

Now, that last paragraph echoes the two-parter on cyber sentience... specifically the fear of such destroying humanity in an act of self preservation... but that fear was fairly well resolved in that two-parter... and the echo to it here, is not intentional.

Instead... and now we are down to the grit of tonight’s entry... I believe it may just be possible that a self driving economy, such as our own, could actually posses, within the cryptic depths of it’s curious, collective mind... a primal awareness that all the, “off the chart,” alarms which have been plaguing it recently, are tied back to one single “agent” known as “President Trump.”

This would seem to make sense, given that the same collective of economic bots are able to identify random teenage girls who are pregnant, even before the girls know it themselves, and start marketing baby products to them.

Would it really be such a leap to imagine that a self driving economy, would not figure out that it was under attack by a worm, introduced through social media, that went by the name of “President Trump.” and... through trial and error... figure out how best to defend against this destructive parasite?

If so... then flashing the all powerful warning signal of an inverted yield curve last week, has proven to be very effective... rattling him to the core, and rattling his greedy enablers hard enough to start trotting out Republican primary challengers against him.

What this would amount to is nothing less than... a self driving car which is learning how to eject an abusive driver... even when the cops are giving that abusive driver a pass... without destroying itself... by turning that abusive driver’s friends against him... by threatening their lives.

And that’s pretty damn clever, if you ask me.

Of course, at this juncture you’re surely thinking, “all of this is has to be bullshit and the inverted yield curve was real!  That’s all there is to this!  The rest is just your own madness trying to get rid of Trump without suffering an economic downturn.”

And maybe you’re right.

But the larger theme of this blog IS... that we are living in very strange times... like nothing we’ve seen before.

And all of this is just an attempt to try and explain such insanity... by tying together the newest branches of established science, tech, and sociology... into a kind of braided rope to climb?

Okay, time for bed.

[whatsupbitches]

Why isn't "A Very Sunny Christmas" canon?

Good question, anon, and I’m very glad you asked! I had a feeling this would be the most controversial entry on my Not Canon list.

In general, I am not a fan of “A Very Sunny Christmas.” Something about it just feels off; everyone is just slightly out of character throughout, and because it’s an hour long, the cumulative effect of so many individual OOC moments is a sense that what I just watched isn’t truly Sunny at all. Sure, Sunny is always hilarious, and this episode is no exception (”Wait, why wasn’t the elf wearing pants?”) – but having given it some thought, I’ve decided to exclude the entire Christmas special from canon, for the following reasons:

1. It raises questions that it never attempts to answer.

Wait, Charlie’s mom was a literal sex worker? All the time (which somehow went unnoticed not just by Charlie, but by Mac and even Frank), or just annually on Christmas? If the latter, how did that even work? How did she earn a living and support Charlie the rest of the year? I’m not saying the episode needed to resolve all of these inconsistencies within its runtime, but it definitely felt more like a one-off joke than a true revelation about Charlie’s childhood. And more significantly…

2. It introduces major character revelations that are never mentioned or even alluded to again for the rest of the series.

I’m pretty sure (correct me if I’m wrong) that following the Christmas special, the show has never made a single reference to Charlie’s mom doing sex work. Nor has it alluded to any of the other events of the Christmas special. This is likely because…

3. It exists outside the show’s timeline.

I was going to say “It never actually aired,” but I just checked and apparently it did – over a year after it was released on DVD. Regardless, its origins as a DVD extra place it outside of time, unmoored from the sequence of canonical events. It’s shot in the grainy, scuzzy medium of earlier seasons rather than the slick HD style of Season 6, of which it is supposedly the thirteenth episode. It even exists outside the usual constraints of FX censorship: there’s full-frontal nudity, graphic violence, and the word “fuck.” Overall, it just doesn’t seem to take place in the same universe as the rest of the show.

4. Everyone is slightly out of character.

This is not an explanation in itself, but the OOC-ness is easier to accept if you accept the premise that the episode is not canon. Just a few examples off the top of my head:

–A Lamborghini just seems wrong as Dennis’s dream gift. I’m not sure what Dennis’s actual dream gift would be, but I think we can all agree that it wouldn’t be a Lamborghini. It probably wouldn’t even be a car – but if it were, we know from “The Gang Misses the Boat” that Dennis’s dream car is an Alfa Romeo.

–I’m not saying that Charlie is constitutionally incapable of going into a fugue state of rage and biting a man in the throat and basically, um, murdering him in public?? (I am not a fan of that scene.) I’d like to think that Charlie is a precious cinnamon roll who doesn’t have it in him, but who am I kidding, he probably does – Charlie’s feral, we all know that. Still, the way it actually plays out in “A Very Sunny Christmas” feels strange and sketchily motivated. We’ve never seen any evidence that Charlie feels particularly protective toward his mother’s virtue; he was utterly indifferent to Frank ostentatiously making her his “bang maid” in “Dennis Looks Like a Registered Sex Offender.” The whole scene feels more like an exercise in shock humor – and an excuse to drop the word “fuck” – than like something Charlie Kelly would really do.

–I just cannot accept that Frank would have a change of heart and become so kind and generous under the circumstances of the episode. Again, I’m not saying that Frank could never have a change of heart; I just refuse to buy that it could happen so quickly. That plot point is clearly motivated only by the conventions of the Dickens-inspired Christmas special – and the need to set up its own inevitable, predictable reversal – not by the real personality of Frank Reynolds.

In conclusion, I believe that Sunny canon holds together better if “A Very Sunny Christmas” is excluded from it altogether. The canon is so impressively consistent over 12 seasons, the exclusion of “A Very Sunny Christmas” (and, as I have previously argued, “The Gang Hits the Slopes” and “Flowers for Charlie”) feels like a small price to pay indeed.

[kendrixtermina]

Extra Typology Vol #3 - Part 9, A: The Leisurely Style (Basics)

This would be the quintessential “Type B” individual - sure, they’ll fulfill their obligations & put in whatever share of work is needed to have a solid living, but once that is done, they feel that they have the right to their personal pursuit of hapiness & see that as the area of life where the “worthwhile” stuff happens - That this is where life is & that the other part is the drudgery you do for the sake of your life.  

They feel that they have a right to their “me time” and while they might fill it with anything from plain chillaxing to hobbies to creative pursuits, it’s important to them that they are guranteed this opportunity, and though  they are generally easygoing, they will vigorously defend their right to do their own thing & have their time & space.

This seems to be vaguely 9w8, the Phlegmatic Temperament or the Ne-Si axis.

(Funnily enough I never thought of this as any sort of distinct trait, perhaps because it’s the most common one in my makeup - I always just assumed this is simply “everyone to some degre/default/common sense/normal people” which, in hindsight, seems to hold the implicit assumption that type A people are “weird” Sorry.  ^^° Well, at least I am now less stupid than I was before reading this book so yay for this book. Guess this just shows how we’re all vulnerable to & should be on the lookout for that type of thinking, as we’re all ordinary or unusual in some ways.)

The Six Domains

Self

The first priority for the Leisurely style is the inviolable independence of the self - The implicit idea that they have the intrinsic right to be who they are, to feel good, and to pursue their own pleasures and concepts in their own way - and that no person or institution has any business “meddling” or taking those rights away from then - They can be said to have a more fluent connection to the basic, default value of human existence. 

If a Conscientious person will define themselves & others through their work, Leisurely people are more likely to see their indentity as related to their hobbies and, as a corollary, will tend to ask others “What are you into?” instead and believe in their inalienable right to use their personal time however they choose. 

Unlike some of the more emotional “scattered” types they can operate quite well within systems such as the family, the workplace, the community... indeed those outer complexes are necessary to fulfill their needs, but they do not identify with or feel a need to cater to any outer authorities and generally don’t have a pronounced superego or any of the associated heavy self-critical burdens. - They’re aware of their obligations, but after meeting them - including those to their family - the Leisurely person will turn to what they see as “the things that really matter”: The pursuit of their private pleasure in life, be it sports, art, contemplating nature or watching TV with a beer in hand. 

Unlike, say, Self-Confident types who feel that they are inherently special, better and closer to the center of the universe than most others, Leisurely people perceive that, along with everybody else, they are small cogs in the cosmic wheel - and that’s okay with them. Leisurely folks are usually comfortable with themselves - but even small cogs are entitled to lucky breaks - which is how Leisurely people perceive the diference between the have and the have-nots. 

Most of all, they feel entitled to be happy and claim this right vigorously - Leisurely individuals will not enslave themselves to anyone or anything, or substitute anybody else’s values for their own - they might have a role to play, a job to do, services to perform etc. but they are individual and separate, subject to their own dictates - they’re willing to do their part, but beyond that, they reserve the right to feel good privately. 

Relationships

This same central attitude extends not just to work but also to their relationships, with the result that these can only work under a premise of “You don’t own me.” or contain a certain ambivalence -  Don’t misunderstand: People who have this as their dominant style are deeply entwined with other people - they’re family oriented and comfortable in groups. They like or even need to be taken care of and enter into relationships easily. 

At the same time, they are, like Vigilant types, vaguely suspicious of others, especially people in authority - Leisurely types lowkey  expect others to ask too much of them. But while Vigilant people stand emotionally clear of people until they are certain their autonomy is assured, Leisurely individuals have a much greater immediate need of companionship - as well as a foolproof defense against being ill-used: If anyone asks them to sacrifice their self-determination, they’ll simply refuse -  they are frequently skilled at saying no and will always be protective of their individual freedom.

They’re not the sort to change themselves or a lifestyle they are satisfied with for the sake of a relationship, and if that means the relationship has to stop, they can generally accept that, seeing little sense in trying to win back an ex-partner who has clearly proven incompatible with their life an not likely to be happy with them - that said, they do care about their relationships & are likely to experience emotional pain when their desires conflict with those of their loved ones - they’ll usually go their own way in the endbut not without a lot of soul-searching in the end. 

It’s not uncommon for people with this style to be read as lazy by those who don’t share their values, but that’s a misunderstanding: Not too different from archiever-types they’re dividing up their time according to what they want but what they want isn’t recognition or fancy stuff but to have a significant portion of their time to use as they please without outside encumbrance - they’re generally not rebels, mavericks, angrily defiant indvidals or anything of the sort: They won’t yell  or argue when asked to do something they consider far beyond their duties - they’ll simply refuse. 

They might simply not want or value the same things as their type A friends/partners & not find it as important that this or that is done - sometimes with the result that the other person feels obliged to do it & ends up comlaining about having to do all the work when the Leisurely person never asked or expected them to.

Work

To a Leisurely person, work and moneymaking are generally a means, not the end. They’re the sort to look at their employment as “just a job” rather than a career or vocation. 

Because they generally work not for fame or sucess, but simply to pay bills, get a pension, finance their pursuit of pleasure and maybe have fun, they generally won’t take work home, don’t worry about it after hours, won’t do work that they see as outside their responsibility & won’t do more than what is asked of them to please the boss or feel better about themselves - they feel just fine. 

They can be good, cooperative workers & are quite capable of fulfilling the requirements and taking pride in what they do, but they don’t find the meaning of their life in their work and won’t let themselves be pushed around by someone who does - However, they might not necessarily see how their apparent lack of ambition might account for receiving less approval, encouragement or reward that their coworkers who do go the extra mile and may resent another person’s success as unjustified.

That said, individuals with a mixed pattern containing traits like Conscientious or Self-Conscious do manage to find pleasure somewhere in the workplace - some may be able to mix pleasure and business, which is probably the easiest to accomplish in creative work - others may enjoy some aspects of their work and procrastinate on others, or find something incidental to their work that they actually enjoy (such as the office sports team) - they can do very good work and stand a lot of tedium but the job is rarely going to be the central focus of their lives. They work slowly & comfortably and won’t rush to beat the clock, or to make an unreasonable deadline.

This may annoy the occasional supervisor or boss because people in authority generally expect their employees and subordinates to share their values & dedication to the project even though they ‘ll be getting a smaller share of the rewards, but the Leisurely person may reply that they’re not paid to photocopy bills or work past five, in short, that whatever extra stuff is being demanded is “not their job”, and they will certainly resist being exploited - 

Leisurely types are at least mildly suspicious of authority in the workplace - they expect that the boss will want more than they are willing to give - which often proves true, especially when the job has no precise description, or when the boss is highly Conscientious, Self-Confident, Agressive or Serious. Leisurely individuals attempt to fulfill their obligations, but might feel ill-used if their supervisors or colleagues do not accept this as sufficient - if the boss asks them to do more or to work faster, they might begin to feel that they are being treated unfairly - in general, Leisurely individuals are very aware of their rights. Fair is fair, and anything else is exploitation - as such, they won’t hesitate to make use of such rights (like take off all the days they’re allowed to) and, for that, may be

While the promise of extra pay is usually not enough to tempt them to stay longer, being compensated with extra free time later on might actually do the trick - and if a Leisurely person happens to be self-employed, they’ll have much the same attitude toward authority and won’t let their clients make unreasonable demands of them. 

Emotions

In terms of emotional dynamics, Leisurely individuals often fall into the phlegmatic temperament (or possibly SanPhleg if extroverted), or, as Oldham puts it, reminiscent of Lizards basking in the sun: They’re placid, patient, slow-moving, mellow and not likely to get upset. 

Even when they’re angry, (usually because of real or perceived unfairness) they tend to be indirect about it and avoid head-on confrontation - instead they’ll sulk, assign blame elsewhere, act grouchy & sullen and half-heartedly neglect the tasks others want them to do, or act all scattered & procrastinatey until... ooops! The deadline has passed, basically doing a bad job so that they won’t be asked to do it again. 

Self-Control

 As a side effect of the above orientation toward chill, they tend to avoid things that might disrupt their “flow” - which might lead them to put off onerous tasks such as word deadlines, taxes, bill paying, christmas shopping etc. to the last minute. 

Apart from that though, their self-control is actually fairly good (just used for their piorities) - a halfway healthy individual is not driven to excesses, though many little indulgences can backfire by adding up, leading one to damage their health out of sheer habit from too much sugar, booze etc. 

Worldview

To people in which this style is predominant, the world is a fairly straightforward place, if populated with a lot of folks who claim authority over others and would have you working all the time on unimportant tasks - Leisurely individuals have a built-in immunity to these claims because they can see that work is only a part of what there is in life. 

They protect their identities by keeping a low profile, fulfilling only those obligations to the system that they must, wishing for a stroke of good luck (to which they feel as entitled as the next guy) and then concentrating on what they really want to do with their time, or, as they call it, the real life. 

Life Choices

Leadership

Predominantly Leisurely types are rarely found above mid-management, because they’re not that ambitious in their careers - they don’t want to devote themselves to getting ahead, don’t care about working hard enough to make tons of money and are very reluctant to make the kinds of sacrifices on their personal time that the fast track demands. 

Since Leisurely individuals often work for the same company, agency or military branch, they may rise to mid-management levels over the years - as managers, they expect of their subordinates what they expect of themselves: A day’s work for a day’s pay. They don’t push anybody too hard, but they do expect their staffs to follow the rules and not make life difficult for them. They’re not particularly creative or motivating managers, but in the beaurocracies that they find themselves in, they fit right in & allow the wheels to keep turning without rocking the boat. 

Job Recomendations

If this is your primary style (and you were unlucky enough not to be born rich), im for a good ‘ol 9-to-5 job in which you know exactly what is expected of you - Since people of your style like their challenges primarily outside the workplace, look for a secure job that offers good pensions & benefits (teacher, city hall clerk, civil service, union shops etc.) and avoid jbs where a lot of initiaive is required (eg. lawyer)

Be aware, however, that those more interested & invested in the job may receive more encouragement and rewards. While you might see self-employment as a way to ensure that you have sufficient time to yourself flexible working conditions, it might be a bit of a trap if you can’t muster the necessary self-discipline or switch from work to play - You might have better chances if you have traits of a more ‘disciplined’ style,  but it can also be hard to reconcile those two sides of yourself, as such traits can be in conflict inside a single individual as much as in society at large - A solution might be to become a consultant or freelancer, to combine pleasure & work by finding a job you enjoy (eg. creative work), or, you can try to focus on archievement while you’re young & kick back later once you’ve secured a foundation of cash and ressources. 

Stress Sources

Perhaps as a result of maing their lives very comfortable, they’re rarely ever tense & generally don’t end up with stress or anxiety related problems - they tend to be emotionally even, but with one important exception: When they’re pushed to do more than they think is fair, or when someone pressures them to change their priorities - such situations would represent the primary souces of stress for a Leisurely individual. 

In response they feel drawn to do things the other person’s way, but then react by resisting in a more demonstrative way, which can go from guiltily going along with it for a while to lowkey hostile, complainy passive-agressive behavior. If others keep insisting, the Leisurely person will indignantly justify their behavior and even try to rally others to their side. 

If left alone to do their thing, it doesn’t take much for them to find emotional comfort - they don’t really need any great things to be satisfied, just a little bit of chill time - ultimately this is a slow, easy, pleasure-seeking style. Hapiness can come just from sitting in front of the TV with a bag of chips - but if their relationships with mates and supervisors are constantly strained by arguments, sourness may become their primary attitude. 

Parenting

Generally speaking, Leisurely parents make for responsible breadwinners who are concerned with their children’s basic needs - their family life is an important source of pleasure for them and generally very important - they have a gift for enjoying themselves and can share in their children’s lives more memorably when they are all having a plain old wonderful time. 

However, there can be a tendency t believe that what is best for them is also generally best for their children & they do not generally go out of their way to adapt to their children’s needs and wants if those are different from their own - they can be sort of old-fashioned. That said, they are usually not inflexible and will bend if someone can get through to them that they must.

In the maladaptive extremes, though, such a parent may refuse to comprehend that their children may have different needs than the one they assume and end up being remebered as a stubborn & selfish person more comcerned with their own comfort than the child’s welfare.

Romantic Compatibility

Strongly Leisurely people need mates who are accepting, understanding and giving nd are content to orbit around them - they won’t put the needs of the relationship first and will only go so far to please others, except when it comes to brief acts of contrition - that said, they do value their relationships, like being cared for and all will be well if their partners don’t mind the responsibility of keeping the relationship together and doing a little more of the chores. Then, they will prove to be responsive, appreciative, loyal and loving mates.

(A/N:  Alternatively, try someone who gives just as little fucks about excessive neatfreakery as you do - worked just fine for me on 2 separate occasions. Or, have some arrangement along the lines of “the living room stays clear but my desk my rules”. I personally prefer not to burden or embarass another person with my dirty dishes - can we agree that neither partner should have to twist themselves into a pretzel?)

A strong degree of either the Devoted or Self-Sacrificing style might be conductive to a harmonic match as those will usually be able to tolerate the Leisurely person’s fundamental self-interest while providing a warm & caring quality

Those with with pronounced Conscientious traits should look elsewhere though - Chances are they’ll have a hard time understanding or accepting each other’s approach to life. While they might get together due to the Leisurely type’s appreciation for the Conscientious ability to take care of things, this pairing very often turns very sour in the long run -  Neither style is good at compromizing and both wants stuff done their way.

For similar reasons, the Self-Confident style is probably out - their “high standards”/”ongoing archievements” approach tends to clash with the Leisurely style’s “work until content & then chill” MO, and the Self-Confident partner will tend to expect concessions that Leisurely types are unwilling to give

They often feel comfortable with Vigilant types as they both mistrust authority - the Vigilant person will typically be responsible and make fallback plans in case the Leisurely person mucks it up.

Two Leisurely people will generally respect & understand each others’ rights, but as they like to be taken care of it might help if one of them had a tad of Devoted or Self-Sacrificing style in them - also, someone needs to step forward & take charge when less desirable things need doing so it would depend on the exact “trait coctail” of the people involved. 

Serious mates may provide a sense of resigned responsibility that can keep the relationship together - even if the Serious partner feels put upon, they don’t necessarily expect life to be all fun & games. They will likely support a highly Leisurely person’s belief that those who have it better ust got lucky, as well as their passive wishfulness and sourish attitude - they might not necessarily be able to share in the Leisurely person’t pleasures, but they certainly won’t keep them from pursuing them. 

They will generally not be comfortable with emotionally demanding styles such as Dramatic or Mercurial

Relationships with Sensitive types might well work, but the Leisurely type should take care to be there for the Sensitive when they need suppor with personal challenges

Like the Leisurely style, the Adventurous style is pleasure seeking, but they tend to break the rules rather than stay within them & play ball, so forget this match

Specific Issues

The Leisurely Style vs. Housework

Since their free time is their main source of joy in their lives, Leisurely people need a lot of time to themselves - Even if they’re the local homemakers. In that case the house will be presentable enough, the meals good if not elaborate (unless cooking is one of their hobbies), but nothing will be particularly well kept, prepared or organized.

Taking care of a home & family is one of the more demanding jobs out there so it may be a good thing if the Leisurely individual knows how to set their limits, but they may run into problems if their mate doesn’t think of housework as “real” work & sees their need to have a break from it and entertain themselves as self-indulgent. 

On the other hand, if the Leisurely mate is the one who works outside the home, they may mistakenly assume that their at-home partner didn’t have much to do all day & not be inclined to pitch in after they “did their due” on a long day of work (it’s easy to see how being raised with certain cultural expectation of what one’s “share” of the work constitutes can be unhelpful here ^^°)

In general, they treasure their non-work hours too much to give up too much of them for chores, especially if there’s other family members whom they feel could and/or should take care of it. 

Success isn’t Everything

Leisurely-style people can be found in virtually all manner of careers, including, say, Chemistry professors, but rarely on top of any, which is fine by them - Since their overall comfort in life comes from how they enjoy themselves away from work, they rarely devote the time or  push that hard.

A pitfall of the Leisurely type may be that some for whom the trait is very pronounced may drift off course or lose direction in their life, but this needn’t happen - generally they can and do make good lifes for themselves (according to their own priorities) even if others may say that they haven’t done as well as they “should” have. For example, they might pass up a prestigious job for one that is secure and easy-going & be happy with their life as it is, doing the things they do, and will prefer doing activities they actually like (be it at work or at home) rather than squeezing the maximum potential out of everything. 

[attredd]

Have you seen that mountain of evidence that Derek Chauvin is a racist? Me neither.In that regard, I’m like the Wall Street Journal’s fearlessly fact-driven Jason Riley. Did some shred of racial animus motivate the since-fired Minneapolis police officer’s killing of George Floyd? For the moment, we have no proof of that -- just a racialist narrative built on the happenstance (no reason to believe it’s more than that right now) that Chauvin is white and Floyd was black.These days, alas, mere happenstance is enough to tear this nation asunder.As an old investigator, I am intrigued by the fact that Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison has refused to disclose police body-cam video of the moments leading up to Chauvin’s disturbing neck hold. Ditto the fact -- highlighted in my analyses of the charges filed against the arresting officers (here and here) -- that the state’s minute-by-minute recitation of probable cause omits whatever went on between Floyd and police inside the squad-car. Surely, if they helped the prosecution’s police-brutality allegations, those gaps in the complaint would have been filled.Similarly, the fact that Minnesota police procedures permitted the use of neck holds for suspects resisting arrest has disappeared from the reporting. No chatter permitted, either, about the facts that Floyd (a) had a significant criminal record (though no new charges in recent years), (b) was suspected of passing a small amount of counterfeit money at the time of his arrest, and (c) was high on fentanyl and methamphetamine -- a toxic combination whose ingestion was particularly dangerous for a person with his heart conditions.Silence on these matters is partially explained by the admirably widespread desire not to besmirch a tragic victim, as well as the Left’s more-narrow determination to martyr Floyd for purposes of their police-racism narrative. The subject is also verboten, though, because the police were inconveniently recorded discussing their fear that Floyd might be experiencing excited-delirium syndrome. When police suspect that dangerous condition, their training calls for restraining the arrestee until emergency medical personnel arrive.I’ve expressed my concern that the case against the former Minneapolis police is both overcharged and undercharged. Others have taken the overcharging argument further than I have -- and persuasively so (see this thoughtful, comprehensive analysis by Gavrilo David). None of this means the prosecution of the now-fired cops is illegitimate. To the contrary, it underscores the wisdom of the original charges, filed before the notoriously demagogic Ellison entered the fray. In them, prosecutors took pains to include a manslaughter charge along with depraved indifference murder. That is, the police were not trying to kill this man. His death, to which his own poor judgment contributed, resulted from police negligence, possibly severe enough to rise to recklessness. But to this moment, there is no reason to believe his death was intentional, much less a modern-day “lynching” motivated by racial animus.Yet the racism narrative is driving the nation to ruin.The defamation that police are institutionally racist because America is indelibly racist has opened a potentially unbridgeable chasm. It is abetted by two national character flaws. The first is our gravitation to political leaders capable only of making matters worse by their spitefulness and Manichean posturing.The second is our increasingly manifest conviction that we are not worth defending. We seem convinced that there is no positive case to be made for a society that idealizes liberty and the equal dignity of every person. For a society that does not pretend to be perfect, but that strives to be better. A society that confesses its sin and works toward redemption: spilling its blood to end slavery, fighting to end de jure racism, and rejecting racial discrimination as a socially acceptable attitude.If we do not believe we are worth preserving -- humbled by our flaws, yes, but duly proud of our virtues and our historic accomplishments -- we will not be preserved.This week’s farce on Capitol Hill was not a hopeful sign.I admire Senator Tim Scott. His life story, recently told in moving detail by the WSJ’s Tunku Varadarajan, is an inspiration. Yet his police-reform legislation was far from inspirational. Sure, it should have been debated. Democrats are cynical -- surprise! -- to block its consideration, the better to keep riding the racism wave they expect to make an anti-Trump tsunami by November (and, as usual, getting no small amount of help from the president). But the best you can say for Scott’s proposal was that it would do no real harm.Republicans had no intention of pushing back against the slander of institutional racism. They have no stomach for trumpeting the 30-year revolution in policing that, by dramatically driving down homicide and violent crime, has saved thousands of black lives. They would not rouse themselves to a defense of police forces that, reflective of their communities, boast high percentages of African-American officers and, in many major cities, of African-American leadership. No case was made that those black lives matter, too.Instead, Republicans accept the premise that the nation’s police forces are infected with racism and in desperate need of reform. The GOP won’t dictate to the states, as a bill passed by House Democrats’ would. But Republicans would use federal funding as the prod for state data-gathering on police uses of force. Given that policing is a state responsibility, and that the use of force is a necessary component of it, the only rational purpose of this federal scrutiny is the conceit that police violence is triggered by racism, not by the imperative of countering aggressive criminal behavior.You might think Congress would want to test that proposition before hamstringing police in a way that will inevitably endanger American communities. Nope.The Republican cravenness makes it that much easier for Democrats to go all the way with the narrative. The Democratic legislation has no chance of being enacted in law -- at least not until the Democrats retake the Senate and do away with the filibuster so President Biden can sign their grand designs into law. But “reforming” police by legislation is not the objective.The point is for the Biden Justice Department to pick up where the Obama Justice Department left off.As I pointed out at the time, the Obama Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division made a habit of slipstreaming behind race-tinged controversies, commencing investigations of state and local police departments. They would file lawsuits under a Clinton-era law that permits the Justice Department to sue municipalities based on any alleged “pattern or practice” that deprives people of their federal rights. States, cities, and towns cannot afford to go toe-to-toe with the Justice Department and its $30 billion annual budget. So they would settle by agreeing to consent decrees in which they’d be obliged to conform to Obama-prescribed policing -- in with police as social workers whose community “legitimacy” hinges on confessing their “implicit bias”; out with “broken windows.”The headline grabbers in the Democrats’ police-reform package were bans on chokeholds and no-knock warrants (the federal jurisdiction for such mandates remains mysterious), as well as the gutting of “qualified immunity,” which would make it easier to sue police. Less well noticed were the legislation’s data-gathering provisions. They are similar to Scott’s, except Democrats want more information about forcible police encounters, and they want that information broken down by race.The object of the game is patent. Using the hocus-pocus of “disparate impact” theory, Democrats will argue that the disproportionately high percentage of black males in forcible police incidents is conclusive evidence of racism. Such factors as disproportionately high incidence of criminal behavior, and the race (often black) of the responding police officers will be ignored (the individual’s race makes no difference, you see, if the institution is racist -- indeed, incorrigibly so). This distorted number crunching will make it even more prohibitive for states and their municipalities to challenge Justice Department lawsuits. They will concede and sign on the dotted line: “reform” by consent decree.That is how you project racism without proving racism. It is not hard for the side that relishes the battle, especially when the other side’s specialty is preemptive surrender.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/2YGw1mk