#Justified answers for not having website

[franavu]

Being a Dutch Jew, here is some information about the violence in Amsterdam that is either common knowledge in the Netherlands, or is from some sources in Dutch that might not be commonly available for an international audience.

First of all about hooliganism, Amsterdam's football club Ajax is known as a 'joodenclub', a 'jewclub', because Amsterdam used to have a large jewish minority, many of whom were supporters of the club, and because several Dutch Jews were members of the team at one point. Ajax supporters take pride in this name. Because of this, there is a good relationship between Ajax and Macabbi, and the match was considered at low risk for football related violence and supporters of both teams mixed freely on the train back to the city center. In fact, only a pro-palestine protest was moved away from the stadium, because the police had recieved information that 'harde kern' Ajax hooligans were planning to stop that demonstration.

On that note, I have seen mixed information on what the Macabbi supporters were singing, but regardless, because Ajax is known as a jewclub, a common chant among the fans of opposing Dutch teams is "Hamas, hamas, alle joden aan het gas," or "Hamas, hamas, all the jews to the gas." Yes, a chant heard at pro-palestine protest is originally from Dutch football. Authorities have been cracking down on it in recent years, but a cursory google found people being arrested over it as recently as may 2023. Somehow, jews have never attacked random supporters of opposing teams at matches where this was chanted. Any Dutch person trying to justify things would be well aware of this.

About media coverage, I get my news about Amsterdam from Het Parool, a left-of-center, Amsterdam-based newspaper, that grew out of a WWII resistance paper. This is the current (about 16:30 Dutch time) front page of the newspaper website. In it the violence is described as an 'antisemitische klopjacht' an antisemitic manhunt. Most articles about it are paywalled, but firefox screenreader mode can bypass it.

Finally, I recognised a lot of the terminology in intenational news coverage from yesterday's press conference by Mayor Halsema (the woman in the picture above), which was also shown live by the dutch public bradcaster. In it an AP reporter asks in Dutch about Macabbi provocations, and they partially quote the police chief's answer, but not Mayor Halsma who came in right after, and said that the violence was in no way justifiable. I'm linking the full YouTube video of the press conference below. It is mostly in Dutch, and I have no idea about the quality of the autotranslation, but at about the 30 min. mark an Al Jazeera reporter asks a similar question in English, and the Mayor's answer in English is very clear.

[creekfiend]

I wanted to make a bonsai kitten recovery post that outlines some of the stuff that I've been doing. Because I don't think that you need to ✨see a therapist✨ to start dealing with a lot of this stuff and I get really frustrated when that is the answer that everyone is constantly giving. Firstly a disclaimer, because I know what website I am on: this is a guide for things that have worked for me! I am not everyone and if there are things on here that do not work for you or even that you think are stupid, that is fine, but please do not make it my problem. If you are reading it and you're like "that sounds like it would actually be detrimental to my specific mental health because of my specific issues" then please disregard it. Use your critical thinking skills and do what you think is right for you!

My second disclaimer is that I didn't make any of this up myself; most of these are collected from various places either in therapeutic guide books or various websites about emotional regulation etc. Some of it is stuff that I have extrapolated from those places based on experience with what works for me or does not work for me. A lot of the way that I treat myself when I need to get my body and brain into a place where I can think about stuff productively is actually directly from gentle parenting guides, because frankly cptsd recovery stuff is very often like parenting a toddler. And the toddler is you. ALL THAT SAID,

The first skill that I had to get good at, that many of the other skills depend on, is to learn how to understand when I am Reacting to something. If I am Reacting it is extremely likely that that's going to only escalate the situation and make it much worse. I HAVE to be able to tell if I am Reacting emotionally to something in a way that is coming from a place of fear and panic. This is important because it involves not being prescriptive about your emotions. You could be Reacting to something that you do not logically feel is at all justified in making you feel that way and that doesn't matter! You can't be doing math equations to try to come to the answer of how you SHOULD be feeling; you have to be observing your mind and body to see how you factually ARE feeling and then respond to THAT. This can be really hard to learn how to do especially if you were abused as a child. (If you cannot think of yourself as someone who is abused as a child perhaps it would help to think of yourself as someone who simply was not taught various emotional regulation skills for mysterious reasons that have nothing to do with your parents' inadequacies.) I need to be able to glance inward and see what the physiological reaction that I'm having is and identify whether or not I feel like this is the biggest emergency in the world that needs to be addressed right now immediately! That is a sure sign that Mr Fight and Mr Flight are in the building and it is bad to make declarative statements or important decisions when that is the case. So, I have to work on dismissing them first. That is literally the first step to any of this. One of my friends calls this "fire mittens," which is to say, if you are wearing mittens that are on fire and you try to touch stuff, the stuff will also become on fire. You have to put the fire out first before you can touch other things.

Once I have determined that I am indeed Reacting and in a physiological state of fear, I have a document in my notes app that is a "what to do when you are in fight or flight mode" guide and it has several helpful things that I will try to outline here.

Firstly, the really important thing for me for trying to get back into an emotional state where I'm capable of making decisions and being thoughtful is to feel safe and comfortable. So I actually have some stuff in my document that is straight up just like "go in the blankie nest. put on this specific music album. light this specific scented candle." etc. You might want to have a specific food or drink that is comforting to you or some other sort of stim toy that helps you regulate. If there's any calming medication or supplements for anxiety that you take as needed, now is also the time to do that. Physical sensory grounding is really important for this. This is probably especially true if, like me, you are neurodivergent, but I think it is also true for everyone because we are animals! And you can't just think about it, you have to actually do it. Which sounds obvious but is the thing that has often tripped me up in the past. Once you start getting into the habit of actually physically doing this it DOES become easier though.

One of my rules is that if I want to respond to something but I am in fight or flight mode, I don't get to respond to it for at least 24 hours. I'm only allowed to respond once I've gotten myself out of fear mode. If it is some kind of comment on Facebook that has set me off, often this means that 24 hours later I realize that I actually don't want to get into it to begin with, which is great. If it's something that is pretty serious and interpersonal with a friend, sometimes that means I have to communicate to them that I'm going to take a while to process it and then get back to them. IMPORTANT: You CANNOT do this passive aggressively or else it undermines the whole thing. You can't phrase it in a way that will make your friends think that you are guilt tripping them for "making" you feel a way. It is VERY tempting to do this when you are in the first stages of trying to form this habit and you simply need to resist the urge because it will render this step worthless. I know. It sucks.

If I am feeling fearful and insecure about friends or loved ones, I also usually try to spend some time thinking about the people that I love and care about. Because often this stuff manifest for me as insecurity that the people that I care about do not care about me, or that they think that I'm being annoying, or that they are secretly thinking mean things about me. It's obviously not good for me to constantly be imagining that the people in my life who I care about are actually avatars of my own insecurity who are here to tell me that I'm secretly fundamentally unlovable! But crucially also it's ALSO not fair to those people to imagine them as that. They are not that guy, they are their own complex human beings with their own lives and experiences and interiority. So sometimes I do thought exercises where I will imagine my friends or loved ones doing things in their everyday lives and I will think about them as people and I will think about the things that they like to do and the things that they say and the places that they go, and I will try to imagine them fondly in those circumstances. This helps to remind me that they are just people and that the scary puppet wearing their faces is not real. To this end I sometimes will have a document of screenshots of things that they have said to me that I can use to reality check myself. I personally find reality checks to be essential for a lot of this. Things can feel true when they are not true at all. Things can feel wrong when they are actually true. The point of most of these exercises is to gently remind myself that those feelings are normal for me to be having, but that I do not need to let them dictate my responses.

It is crucial throughout all of this that you are nice to yourself. You can't talk to yourself in a mean way while you're doing this, or you will not get to a point where you are feeling safe enough to react from a place of not-fear. You can't make yourself feel ashamed or defensive for your emotional reactions. This is the particular area where I find gentle parenting protocols helpful. You HAVE to be patient with yourself.

Ok that's all for now bc I ran out of steam but I will try to think of more to add on another day maybe. Godspeed everyone

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Hi, I’m the one who sent in the thing about Vil’s new card that you answered a bit earlier. I do actually like the card but I’ve seen people saying it’s like they dressed Vil in a trash bag. I understand that people are disappointed that he’s not dressed in robes like that meme or the colors aren’t purple(which I’m more iffy about because of Deuce is mainly featured in dark blue clothes dispit the fact he’s dorm color is red.) Apologies if this sounds rude I’m just confused why people are hating on it. Especially the hat because like you said earlier it helps the hair( something like that at least) Also sorry for the long ask.

[Referencing this post!; referencing this meme too.]

Hey, so 💦 I know this ask is about Vil and his new birthday card, but I’m going to speak much more generally in my response because this doesn’t pertain to only Vil. And just so we’re clear: this isn’t a dig at you at all, Anon. This is referring to fandom in general!

Recently I’ve noticed that people worry/care way too much about what other people think. We may not consciously believe that we put a lot of stock in others’ opinions, but it shows in our behaviors. For example, very few people outright say, “Does X approve of this?” but tons of people will say, “I don’t understand why you think this way” (implying that we are concerned about opinions that deviate from our own). But the thing is, this is faulty thinking because you are realistically NEVER going to have a thought or an idea that satisfies everyone. Trying to do so is a fruitless pursuit and will only leave you frustrated.

It’s fine to be confused if someone doesn’t think the same way as you, but we also have to accept that others will hold different opinions than us. They don’t necessarily need a grand reason for feeling the way that they do. Liking or disliking something doesn’t have to be justified or explained. Understanding something (in this case, the practicality of Vil’s silk cap/bonnet) does not always mean someone will like it or compliment it. Those are entirely separate things. (For example, I have written a number of analyses on Vil, but that does not mean I personally like him as a character.)

At the end of the day, the discourse is not that deep. It really, really isn’t. This is two parties disagreeing on how they perceive the look of an outfit. That’s all. Are some people being louder and ruder about it than is necessary? Maybe. Should you let this bother you and influence your own enjoyment of the content? No. You can still like Vil’s pajamas, because whatever other people say about it should have zero baring on your opinion.

The fact of the matter is that social media is a lot meaner than it used to be. Websites benefit when users stay online for longer. That’s why their algorithms tend to promote posts that 1) are relevant to your interests but, more importantly, 2) will get you emotional enough to engage. This leads to the cultivation of insular communities where the snappiest, most extreme takes thrive and users feel like they need to match this energy in order to “survive” on those platforms. That’s why we see a lot of “hating”, criticism, and general negativity on socials now. Everyone wants to be the one saying a witty clapback, and that’s what social media is geared toward now, especially Twitter and Tiktok.

There’s no point in letting it get to us; it wouldn’t be productive. All it will do is make you confused or upset. We have to grow thick skin and turn the other cheek when we see whatever we deem as “hate”. Don’t worry about what other people are doing, just focus on yourself and how you choose to engage with the content.

[godbirdart]

Hey there. Ive been admiring your work a long time and I was hoping I could get some advice from a more experienced artist.

How do you go about deciding which commission submissions will proceed forward? If you decide to decline a request how do you go about it? I recently started accepting commissions and get nervous when certain requests are too vague, too difficult or the requester isn't fully answering my questions and I dont know how to go about justifying a decline. Is it okay to decline a commission submission?

aAA thank you for enjoying my work!!

i could talk for Days about commissions and how I handle my own work, but I'm going to try to keep this short and simple for ease of reading:

i use a Google Form in combination with a number generator for my commission openings

reasons why i use a Google Form and number generator: - to avoid favoritism / client bias - to push my comfort zone with a variety of projects - to ensure i'm not taking on more work that i can handle

The Google form will automatically assign a number to each form, making it easy for me to pull up a website and ask it to generate a number between [insert number] and [insert number]. That said, I will still manually go through each form. Occasionally I'll pick up a project if I notice someone's reapplied a couple times who wasn't selected during previous openings, or if a project especially appeals to me, or isn't something i'd usually draw!

declining a commission / project:

yes, it is always okay to decline a project! you are not obligated to accept every submission that comes into your inbox / form / etc. there are many valid reasons to decline a project, from a conflict with your Terms of Service, to making sure you don't take on more work than you can reasonably handle.

if the project doesn't inspire you or spark that creative passion, it may result in frustration, exhaustion, and you might wind up handing the client a subpar art piece that you're not at all proud of. it's much more honorable to be upfront about it than to subject yourself to such grief as you waste your time and energy and your client's time and money.

ways to decline: it's always important to be polite. depending on your reasoning, you could say "Thank you for considering me for this project, but, ...." - "... This is not a project I'd be comfortable taking on." "... This project conflicts with my Terms of Service and I cannot accept it." "... I cannot accept it at this time." "... but I would not be able to fulfill your request to the detail / complexity you are expecting for this piece."

there's no shame in saying "i would not be a good fit for this project". i've had clients ask me for hyper-realistic work, which is quite far from my art style. while i could do it, i'd rather not put both myself and the client through months of frustration and waiting for a project i am not completely confident in executing.

if a client is being too vague, not answering questions:

it happens! not every client will communicate thoroughly. some clients will over-communicate, and for others there may be a language barrier so their difficultness may be entirely unintended.

you can't do the job if you don't know what you're supposed to be doing. never be afraid to ask your client for clarification on their request. phases you can use would be: - "I do not have enough information to begin work on this, could you clarify these details: [insert questions about details you need elaboration about]" - "I cannot proceed without knowing more about [insert thing], can you tell me more about [thing you need clarification on]". if your client being deliberately obtuse and refusing to supply the necessary information, you can be more firm with them such as: - "I will not proceed any further with this project if I do not receive [insert details]."

on clients being too difficult:

"difficult" is a bit subjective here. what may be considered difficult for one artist may be a walk in the park for another. this said, i'm going to use some very generic common examples here.

too many irrelevant notes, or randomly forwarding details / requests instead of condensing their ideas into one message:

"Thank you for these additional notes, however: ..." - "... please only supply notes that are directly related to the project at hand." [such as notes on the expression, environment, pose, etc - things that you need to know for the artwork you are working on] - "... please condense them into one message instead of sending multiple messages. I want to stay organized / do not want to lose track of your notes."

frequent requests for updates, or changes to the WIP / final art:

note: you should always be communicative and receptive to a client's request for updates, but here i am referring specifically to excessive requests such as numerous requests sent multiple times a day. additionally, what is considered "excessive" will vary depending on an artist's average turnaround time. "Thank you for reaching out, ..." - "... but I do not yet have an update for you at this time. I will reach out when I have an update ready for you, thank you for your patience." - "... but these requests are too frequent. Please allow more time to pass between requests for updates." You could also ask your client if they have concerns about the turnaround time, if they need the work by a specific date for a birthday / event, etc. It is important to consider that some clients may have been scammed by an artist in the past and their insistence on updates could be a result from that. if a client keeps requesting edits on the concept / sketch or final piece, you're within your right to say enough is enough. this will also vary depending on the artist's individual work process. if the changes are getting excessive, you could say: - "As we've undergone numerous edits to this, I will permit one final request for editing after which I will -" [move on to the next stage, cease work on this project, issue a partial refund, start asking fees for edits, etc; insert next step of your preference]

ignoring work hours / terms of service / communication channels

as an artist, you should set a firm boundary of what is a working day and what is not. you are not in a profession that is "on-call" 24/7. you can save some headache by having your schedule posted on your website / social media or wherever your queue is publicly posted. anywhere that is readily accessible for a client to easy find. - something you could say is: "My work days are [insert days], I answer work-related messages, work on art, and send out updates [if applicable] on those days. Thank you for your patience." if you prefer to have your work messages confined to one social media account or email, it's okay to enforce that! but be sure to have it posted in easily noticeable spots like pinned posts. - something to say here would be: "If you need to reach me, please do so via [insert platform / email etc]. I will not respond to [comments / DMs on other social media, etc]." terms of service, same as above, should be in an easy-to-find location and should be easy to read. if a client's prompt or action conflicts with your ToS, you could address it with: "As mentioned in my Terms of Service, [address thing that conflicts with your T&C."

language barriers

sometimes you may have a client with a language barrier. we live in a vast world, after all! be patient with them, and depending on their fluency, do your best to simplify your questions for them. if you know your client is using an online translator, try and avoid using jargon. we've come a long way with online translators, but they're not going to spit out the right translation if you ask "are they supposed to be super shredded and beefy" and the translator tells your client "should they be shredded meat".

dropping a client

this is an absolute most extreme last resort, but i bring this up since we're on the topic of difficult clients and this particular stage isn't spoken about often. no artist wants to up and drop a client, but sometimes it's better for all parties involved instead of dragging out a bad experience. dropping a client could result from a variety of factors, including: the artist is retiring from art, something has come up in the artist's life and they are unable to continue, a client has become abusive, or an agreement cannot be made on a project or the project has caused a conflict of interest between the artist and the client. if you must drop a client, you could say: - "I apologize, but for [insert reason] I cannot continue with this project. I will be [refunding / partially refunding] this project." If it's for medical reasons, you can say "due to a medical complication, I am unable to continue" - and leave it at that. Your client does not need elaboration on your private medical information. The same goes for private family matter or other personal issue. artists shouldn't let guilt eat at them if they are physically incapable of completing a project due to personal reasons. things happen, life happens. the vast majority of your clients will be understanding and appreciate that you reached out to them to address the situation instead of leaving them in limbo. If you have to drop a client because they're being genuinely abusive and hostile and not respecting you, your time, or your work, you can say the same thing as above. There's zero need to retaliate or be hostile back. The situation will likely make you feel awful, sure, but firmly staying professional is the best thing you can do. When issuing a refund, always specify when the client should expect their refund to arrive. "A refund has been issued and will be processed through [insert payment method] shortly." or "A refund will be issued on [insert date]."

This wound up long anyway despite my effort to shorten it, but ah well.

If you'd like more elaboration on something, don't hesitate to ask! Some sections did get pruned down in my futile effort to keep it short, so things might've ended up a bit vague or convoluted [my apologies].

[drchucktingle]

Good day Dr. Tingle. I haven't read your stories, but I've known about you from afar in this website for a while. Your recent post about separating Ideas and Message is very similar to how I teach a class. I wanted to ask you, if you could share some of your Messages, in whichever structure/length/complexity you think about them before writing, to have some real world examples to show in class.

Personally I tend to simplify and shorten my messages as much as possible, like "everyone deserves forgiveness" for example, so that I can permeate it throughout the story, and so that anyone experiencing the story can come to a similarish conclusion.

I'm curious as to how your Messages look like inside your head, during the creative process. Not the refined versions used for marketing and sales and stuff.

Thank you!

sure buckaroo.

high concept idea of the book STRAIGHT was this: zombie apocalypse story but the rage only effects straight cis people (there is also a second high concept idea in there which is: what if zombie plague only happened one day a year? how would culture handle this politically and otherwise?)

so i had this idea that i thought was good, but before i can write it i think 'well what do i want to SAY about this? what am i FEELING?'

and i realized that i was a little torn about how to write this story because of the one day a year thing. when is it okay to fight back? can you hurt a zombie if it turns back into a person the next day? is that right or wrong? and WHEN is it right or wrong? what situations?

then i realized that with the metaphor of this story what i was really asking was something bigger: why is it up to the victims (in this case queer buckaroos) to be forced to make these decisions? marginalized groups have TWO kinds of violations done to them, the first is the obvious act of violation, but the second is that they are forced to use their time and mental space and emotional tolerance to learn how to HANDLE the first violation in an 'acceptable way'

so THAT became my message. if you want to know how i feel about these questions you can read STRAIGHT and find out.

CAMP DAMASCUS high concept idea was (SPOILERS IF YOU HAVE NOT READ CAMP DAMASCUS STOP READING HERE) what if the church really DID decide the ends justify the means and instead of stopping demonic possession they were inflicting demonic possession to counter sinful acts.

but that is not the message of the book. that is just the idea. if i just had that idea i would not write it, but as things evolved i realized WHAT i wanted to say with this story

in this situation WHO is the force of 'evil'? would it be the demons? would it be the possessed? or would it be the SYSTEM AND MENTALITY that was creating this situation in the first place? so the book sets out the answer this question and express the conclusion that ive made for myself

i also noticed that many churches who are anti gay have a sort of infantilizing trot with how they handle their young buckaroos. this idea that gay feelings will just go away if they are ignored and that they can almost keep young queer buckaroos from ever aging into fully realized adults. obviously i think this is WRONG and so fighting back against this mentality became part of the message as well, and that informed most of the metaphor and symbolism in the book.

it is important to keep in mind that sometimes the message can change. as the book trots along i am LEARNING myself, working out these thoughts on the page and coming to a conclusion of my own. this is actually VERY true of BURY YOUR GAYS, which is probably most autobiographical thing i have written. i will save talking about that MESSAGE and HIGH CONCEPT for after book is out though

EDIT FOR CLARITY OF MY WAY:

when i say i write MESSAGE FIRST that does not mean i think of the message first in TIME (although that does happen sometimes) it means the message is the most important thing over plot or characters or anything like that (although those are important too). it means that i write with message as my north star, which is rare, but it is how i make art

[doberbutts]

Hello, I have a Dog Question.

I grew up with dogs who were rescue mutts but now that I'm an adult I'm looking at getting a dog from a breeder. All my research says "make sure the breeder is reputable" but I don't know at all how to assess a breeder's reputation. I don't even know how much is normal to pay for a dog, and when I look it up, all the websites seem AI generated. Do you have any advice on where to get more information about that kind of thing? Are there any registries that are really trustworthy, or is it better to try to find word-of-mouth networks on who has a good reputation?

If you don't have any advice, no worries, thanks for reading my question anyways.

It can really depend on what type of dog you are looking for! There isn't necessarily one right answer.

Personally I don't care about reputation (reputable) more than I care about the breeder's personal code of ethics (ethical) being relatively close to my own.

Breeding dogs should be health tested. Not just a DNA test but whatever they may be at risk for due to their size or breed or genetic mixup. These results should be made available to you as a potential buyer, and the breeder should be weeding out or making informed choices for dogs with less than steller results. You need to know what is something that just needs to be bred to a dog with better results, vs what shouldn't be bred at all. This, as said, can vary depending on what exact dogs you're looking at.

The breeder should be asking you for more than just money. Talking to you and making sure that you are the right home for their puppy, and letting you also talk to them and make sure you actually want to buy from them. Do they say things about the dogs that don't sit right with you? Are you okay with the way they keep their dogs? Are they well fed, vaccinated, and have their needs met and cared for? Can you see proof of that? People will just say whatever, but seeing is believing.

What's the average price? Different breeds cost different amounts of money. Dobermans are very expensive! Other breeds cost less. Some cost more! If they're mixing breeds, why and what are they looking to create? Does it seem successful or are they just producing a bunch of dogs just to produce a bunch of dogs? Does the high price seem justified? Dobes are expensive because the health testing is very expensive, but less health tested breeds are cheaper. Is the breeder actually doing that expensive health testing or are they charging high without justifying cost?

Registries are not proof of ethics. Being registered with a registry just means that the dog has a traceable pedigree. So we know who the parents are, great. It doesn't determine anything else about the dog though. There is no registry that I would say exclusively has ethically produced dogs. However if a dog is of a breed that can be registered and yet isn't, that is a red flag.

@molosseraptor is a good friend of mine that runs a dog breed matching service and she also knows how to help people find a breeder that works well for them. I would trust just about any recommendation I got from her! She might be able to help you narrow down the list.

[wromwood]

You know, while I enjoyed the new Doctor Who episode "Lux," there are couple of plot-related things that continue to niggle at me, one of which is this:

Was the Mr. Ring-a-Ding cartoon real in-universe, or did god-related shenanigans create it?

I feel like the answer is supposed to be the former - yes, it exists in some unaltered form in the Doctor Who universe - but there are a lot of reasons that make me doubt this nonetheless.

First, here are the reasons that Mr. Ring-a-Ding could have already been real:

The film reel already existed in the movie theater, and we watched as the moonlight entered its projection for (apparently) the first time.

At the end of the episode, the young man who works at the diner says (paraphrasing) "Is that Mr. Ring-a-Ding?" in a confused tone upon seeing Lux expand in the sunlight. This implies that he knows Mr. Ring-a-Ding as a cartoon character and has seen him before. Why would Lux create a cartoon character for people to safely watch and enjoy before he was able to corrupt the character?

An official Doctor Who website from the BBC states this: "The star of 1935 cartoon ‘Mr Ring-a-Ding Goes to Town’, Mr Ring-a-Ding is an all-singing, all-dancing entertainer – until the light of his film’s projection is hit by an unusual bout of moonlight."

This seems pretty straightforward. Until you remember...

There's no other evidence of Mr. Ring-a-Ding's existence. No other shorts, no merchandise, nothing except for what we see in the episode. Mr. Ring-a-Ding COULD have been invented just for Lux's purposes, and it wouldn't affect the rest of the world of Doctor Who at all.

Neither Belinda nor the Doctor know who Mr. Ring-a-Ding is. The Doctor asks, "Who are you?" and fixates on the fact that Mr. Ring-a-Ding is a living cartoon character in general. Belinda is even more obviously clueless, asking, "What are you a cartoon of?" and even questioning little things like his pig-nose design and blue color. I could understand Belinda not knowing this specific character, as sadly, not all 21st-century people know many 1930's-era rubber hose cartoon characters (however, it's curious that she recognizes him so little that she can't even fathom his appearance, negating the possibility of her having seen images of Mr. Ring-a-Ding in passing). But the Doctor's relative silence is more interesting. He's been around Earth for longer, and he's not typically portrayed as totally out-of-the-loop on media (and the few times that the Doctor hasn't known about certain media, it's usually for a humorous bit and was therefore justified). I expected the Doctor to say that he'd seen some of Mr. Ring-a-Ding's cartoons before, or that Mr. Ring-a-Ding was from such-and-such animation studio, or otherwise establish more world-building for Mr. Ring-a-Ding as a part of Earth media. The absence of this world-building is rather blatant.

Mr. Ring-a-Ding's existence is a little too closely tied to Lux and his purposes. His catchphrase ("Don't make me laugh!") feels purposefully made just for the arpeggio laugh reveal. Lux also embodies Mr. Ring-a-Ding so closely that he cares about continuing his little song number, even as the Doctor and Belinda run off. If this was just a random existing cartoon character, would Lux have done the same? If he'd possessed Popeye, would Lux have sung the whole "Popeye, the Sailor Man" song? Or is Mr. Ring-a-Ding more personal to Lux? Of course, the Doylist explanation for this is that Russell T. Davies just wanted to write a clever reveal and a silly joke. But if there's any Watsonian explanation, it may be that Lux himself created the Mr. Ring-a-Ding cartoon, either doing this in advance or creating a past for the cartoon instantaneously.

It wouldn't be too far-fetched for Lux to do something like create a cartoon out of thin air. Lux is a god, after all. He was able to create the meta trap with the three fake Doctor Who fans, and he could read the Doctor's past accurately enough to create reference-laden merch and episode titles. Lux also created a fake Rock Hudson movie just for a "Harbinger" reveal (although it's debatable whether this movie also exists in-universe). This is in line with what the gods of the Pantheon can, and will, do. Last season, the Maestro created an entire human son for their own "H. Arbinger" reveal, one who was able to sign up for music lessons with few questions asked, only for him to be dismissed once his purpose was served. While Lux is apparently confined to the movie theater, his power, to some extents, knows nearly no bounds.

Soooo yeah, those are my thoughts! Let me know if this occurred to you too, or if you agree/disagree.

[transfemme-shelterdog]

Deeply curious as to how you fell into MRA stuff and also how you found your way out of it. Totally fine if you don't want to answer though, I get not wanting to put past stuff like that on the internet. I'm more curious from a "it's really impressive that you un/learned some stuff and grew as a person" kind of standpoint.

Well, it's a long story. Sorry for the late reply, I wanted to actually sit down and type out a good response and finally got time for it now:

I grew up in a strong religious Christian family. Typical Christian views and values were instilled in me from a young age. I was also raised in an environment where my parents told me that if I ever came out as gay or trans, I'd be disowned.

Flashforward to high school, and I started getting involved in far-right views, thanks to being raised as a homophobic, transphobic asshole. As when the rest of society was more accepting of queer people, I was pushed towards the far-right which was the only group that reflected the values of my family.

Between elementary and high school, I had been raped and molested several times by girls, and this lead to me not only hating women for raping me, but also growing fearful of them.

From here, I slowly migrated more towards the MGTOW/MRA type websites and forums. This wasn't curbed by my parents as they only saw the more "palatable" views that I feel like a lot of more reasonable people share (anti-infant circumcision, fathers getting more rights during custody, etc), and they never saw my woman hating views that were a mix of envy, hate, fear, and other emotions.

The MRA/Incel/MGTOW crowds fed off of this, further providing "evidence" as to why my hatred of women for being raped was justified. I hated women. Partially because women in my life who got close to me always ended up raping me, partially because I wanted to be them, and was jealous of that, and partially because MRAs/MGTOW types and incels gave me evidence that backed up my hatred of women for what they did and what they were.

One day in my last year of college, I woke up and I was just fucking miserable. Turns out, constantly being steeped in MGTOW/MRA/Incel/far-right views is hard on your mind. I was miserable for years, but I just had enough. I sought out a therapist, and worked through my trauma, and then worked through my anti-women views. I purposely sought out a female therapist so that I would have to purposely be exposed to a woman, and have her views on the issue. I figured that was more effective than a male therapist.

I only got out because I had hit rock bottom, realized I was just miserable when everyone else was happy, and sought help. I attended weekly sessions for years, and finally worked through my hatred of women, which was rooted in several things.

It was hard, but I got through it. I'm not proud of the person I was back then, but it did end up coming in handy when I attended University, and had already existing connections to far-right groups and individuals, along with knowing the ins and outs of their language. So in the long run, it was at least helpful for my University education. But still, it was a shameful era of my life, but I've grown as a woman, and that's what matters.

[zenkindoflove]

I've been thinking about this question a lot, and I like your thoughtful answers to fandom, so I'm gonna shoot my shot so feel free to delete this.

Do you think there's space for unity and/or peace in the ACOTAR fandom (everyone goes their own ways and just does their own thing in their sub-communities)?

I have thoughts, but I'm curious about what you're going to say!

Oh boy. This is a doozy to answer. I’m going to put my thoughts under a cut because it’s mostly going to be me rambling about how I think fandom has changed in the last ten years and also some thoughts I have about the ACOTAR fandom specifically and what I’ve observed in the last year and a half I’ve been active here.

My tldr answer is: No. I do not think there is anyway we will ever just get along and find peace.

I’ve been reflecting for a while on why that is, and I have some overall theories. The first is something I think that is true about fandoms in general these days and is completely outside of our control.

I think social media has created more toxicity in fandom, and the biggest driving factor is that social media forces us to socialize with each other by valuing individualism. In the days before all these big social media sites, in order to engage with fandom (or the internet in general) you had to seek out communal spaces on your own based around a specific interest. You were always a guest/visitor in these spaces, and there were norms set in place for how to interact and engage with people. Now, the big websites that we all interact with each other on (tumblr included) requires us to create profile pages that we curate to represent who we are. We see our blogs as the “content” we create - both as a personal diary and a way to express our individuality and “authentic selves” that we share. Now, there is some value to that, but I think what it does is it makes us exist on these different platforms with a “me” first mindset. This is MY blog and I’ll say and express whatever I WANT.

But the reality is that there are communal spaces that exist on these platforms too. Such as the tagging system on tumblr. Tags are designed to be followed and ways to project your thoughts and share them with a community. And yet we still must do that from our home territory – our blogs. The posts co-exist in both spaces. And try as we might to enforce best practices and rules of how to use these spaces, people still are aggressively ego-centric in how they want to engage because they see their profile as their territory.

I don’t think that there is any way to request people to not act that way. Of course we want to curate and have freedom of expression in our own spaces. And we try to encourage ways for people to not see things they aren’t going to like (blocking, filtering tags, etc). But ultimately, to form community on these sites, we have to essentially follow people instead of only interacting with them in these communal spaces – which opens us up to basically witnessing every thought they have.

I think that is wherein lies the problem. We see things we don’t want to see, opinions or takes that irritate us, from people we otherwise enjoy. And this is fandom. We feel strongly about the subject matter no matter how you slice it. Otherwise we wouldn’t be here. I just don’t think we were meant to know all of this about each other. No matter what, you’re going to see something that pisses you off, and then cue the antics where people try to feel righteous or justify their irritation by stirring up shit. And on and on it goes.

I say this as someone who very much as participated in and perpetuated this cycle. I include myself in the offenders because after all – I am ultimately a stubborn, passionate human who wants to gossip and fight if I see something unjust. I am not immune, and I have observed this exact mindset in how I see my own behaviors.

Now – for the ACOTAR fandom specifically – I think we are basically this problem on steroids. I think partly it’s because of the nature of the fanbase. For so many people in this fandom – this is their FIRST fandom. While that is a beautiful thing, it also means a lot of people come into this space not understanding the norms of fandoms in general that have tried to address avoiding toxicity in the past. I also think that, frankly, a lot of people coming here from the bookish space are bringing in very weird ideas about censorship and shipping beliefs that essentially makes us have the same exact conversation over and over again – all because they still need to go through fandom university to unlearn a lot of the bullshit other places on the internet have ingrained in them.

I also think that the nature of this series – serial romances with a large cast of characters – it makes our fandom more fragmented then I have seen in other fandoms. We don’t just have one or two big shipper groups – we have multiples and they all have distinct flavors and personalities of how they interact with other groups and each other. This goes beyond just the toxicity of the ship war. A lot of toxicity exists within shipping groups or between shippers/stans for characters you would otherwise think wouldn’t have an issue with each other, and I think that is in large part because there are several competing interests and a lot of value placed on popularity. We see followers and post stats as currency (as is true for how social media works in general), and we use that in how we judge each other and whose voices matter.

I guess to not be totally doom and gloom, I do think there are ways to mitigate the toxicity. And that is finding a smaller group of like-minded people and forming a group chat or discord server with them. It won’t stop it completely. I think the most important element of this is finding people who you share the same interests - not just the same frustrations. You’ll still gossip and blow off steam and talk about what the new drama and bullshit that is going on in either your side or another side of the fandom. That's normal. But having time to really talk about the things you like and be positive is much more fruitful than only relating to each other because of what you all dislike. Search for people who are also looking to get the same out of fandom as you are, such as earnest connections rather than “reach” or “engagement”. Make friends because you share interests and how you think about the characters you love instead of who you think will make you more popular.

TBF, I have never been in a fandom that has known true peace, but I do think there is something unique with the ACOTAR fandom and how it really insists on playing all the top hits of worse fandom behavior on a loop. For me – I think taking a step back recently from how I’m participating in this fandom and the role I have within it has changed where I’m putting my energy. I do not see myself being here for a long time, but I do want to have a good time. I've been in enough fandoms to know my "Best by" date, and while I'm here, I'm trying my best to make the most of it.

[queermccoy]

Is it too late to say I wish you would write a louliver omegaverse fic 😂😂 I'm thinking specifically his reaction to the lou photo shoot but if it strikes your fancy anything will do

never too late for a louliver prompt 😝 (lain bless you)

i am fully making up some omegaverse language, bear with me

----

Oliver was an omeginist, okay? He was. An omega's body was their own, no one could tell them what to do with it. It wasn't his business. He wasn't that kind of alpha. He was totally and 100% an omeginist, which was why he felt justified in saying, "I can't believe you let them take these with your tits out."

It wasn't secondary-sexist because he was an omeginist. Obviously.

He was on the phone with Lou, airpods in, thumbing through the pictures from his Felix photoshoot, fighting with the website to see them all. They weren't artful and as he went, Oliver noted all of the ways he would have done it himself.

Lou said something, but Oliver wasn't listening. He settled back on his couch, dogs on either side of him, head tipped back. The hood from his sweatshirt slipped up his forehead, but he didn't fix it. He idly scratched behind an ear with one hand, tapping to zoom in on the particular photo that was making his stomach squirm unpleasantly with the other; Lou in a cardigan with his torso on display, tits the center of attention.

"It's just that," Oliver continued, "you're so weird about your omega status. And then you let them take pictures of your naked breasts."

Oliver listened to the answering dead air before Lou asked incredulously, "Are you actually jealous right now?"

Unfortunately, Oliver had spent enough time with Lou to hear the smug grin behind it. Well, fuck that. He wasn't jealous. He didn't even like that man. And he hated this photographer. On his phone, Lou was glancing over his shoulder like a slutty omega waiting for their mate to return from sea. Absolute faff.

And he'd just brushed aside Oliver's concerns about his internalized secondary-sexism, which he should be taking more seriously. No one could tell from the pictures alone that Lou was an omega but Oliver knew. Oliver also knew that Lou was fucked in the head about it.

He definitely wasn't jealous. At all.

"Obviously not." Oliver zoomed in again on the picture, using fingers from both hands to enlarge the curve of Lou's closest-to-the-camera tit. Oliver felt the phantom firmness of it on his tongue. He sucked on his teeth to get rid of it.

He didn't let Lou respond. He said, "Come over," and then hung up the phone.

Lou was there 45 minutes later. He was wearing a cardigan.

----

no longer taking i wish you would writes

[acti-veg]

long-time vegetarian & climate activist here. i’m so baffled at the bad faith arguments being thrown about regarding this absurd vegan leather thing. this has got to be one of the most widely-accepted misinformation campaigns on this website right now, i feel like i’m going crazy every time i see another goddamn “checkmate vegans” post with zero sources

When you’re presented with the fact that your behaviour does not align with your values, you have three options.

1) Change your values to align with your behaviour.

2) Change your behaviour to align with your values.

3) Pretend that your existing behaviour does align with your values.

Most people choose the third option, because it is easier and does not involve introspection or the admission of wrongdoing. They will then respond with aggression towards anyone who chooses the second option, since it reflects poorly on their own choice. If we’re saying that buying this wildly unsustainable and inhumane product is wrong, we’re saying that they’re wrong. More fundamentally, we’re also calling into question their identify as “environmentalist,” which they just cannot tolerate.

It is nothing to do with leather, just as it was nothing to do with quinoa, or soy, or agave. People (especially on the left) find veganism threatening and our arguments deeply uncomfortable, because they know that their values align with boycotting animal agriculture.

None of what they are professing are beliefs they’ve arrived at through logic or reason. Nobody decides to buy a leather jacket based on the environmental harm of plasfo. They buy the jacket because it looks good, because it is a signifier of status, and because they were already going to buy it. Then they find reasons to justify it later, and aggressively attack anyone who calls that into question.

The entire reason we see these posts cycle so widely and so frequently is because false or shaky beliefs need to be repeatedly reinforced by the group in order to stick. This is why there is never a source, it is isn’t about collectively finding the ‘right’ answer, it is about collectively reinforcing the behaviour of the group through this bizarre and frankly deeply pathetic exercise of self-soothing and mutual ego-boosting.

[terfism-unmasked]

ever since i was in middle school ive had radical feminist beliefs, it has helped me make sense of the way women are treated in the world, turning agaist feminist women who just want the best for their sisters doesnt make you a hero, presenting people who have bad opinions/bad ways of wording themselves as speaking for all radfems doesnt make you a hero

if you were just agaist terfs it would be whatever but in half of your posts you openly mock RADICAL FEMINISM itself, why? why do you hate women wanting to take radical action to chance patriarchy from its roots? you are indistinguishable from people making those "feminism cringe compilations" from the 2015s

i would like an answer to why you hate radical feminism because its really important to me and it makes me genuinely sad to see it get hatred by the people who are supposed to support it..

respectfully, this isn't a debate blog and i don't owe you explanations for anything, so i will keep it short. this blog is run by a trans person that believes many do genuinely radfems have good intentions but subscribed to an ideology that relies on exclusion to survive and, while sometimes on accident, allows white supremacy and eugenics to grow and fester. i particularly dislike the gender critical branch of radical feminism, which is what the absurd majority of people mean when they say radfem on this website, and in this blog i compile moments in which transphobes in general (usually gender critical radfems or terfs though not exclusively them) say or do something that ends up exposing the extreme bigotry in their belief system, because i was tired of the claim that radfems aren't driven by hate. even if you believe that said hate is justified (or was at some point), you cannot deny that radical feminists are more often than not motivated by hate alone. it sounds great in theory - fighting patriarchy with all you have. but in practice? fighting patriarchy is the last thing in most radfem's to-do list, and it only leads to the sorts of things you see on this blog.

if this makes you sad or isn't what you want to see, you're allowed to leave at any time. you don't have to stay.

lastly, if it's only a small portion of people behaving this way and they shouldn't speak for the community, then why is this blog, created not too long ago, already so full of examples?

[olderthannetfic]

https://olderthannetfic.tumblr.com/post/761000318381293568/i-recently-saw-this-kinda-fascinating-interaction#notes

The post wasn't about calling her Gweilo, the post was if he was the ass for being an ass towards his wife for how she eats Chinese food when out with his family. He didn't call her that to her face. He referred to her as "Gweilo" in terms of her eating habits in the post aka behind her back. His bitching was that she didn't want to eat Chinese food at Chinese restaurants the way his Chinese family demands of her; that his family elders get to decide what everyone eats, and she has to eat a bit of everything to not be rude, and she has to share. Despite her, in his own words, explicitly mentioning she doesn't like sharing and she doesn't like any of the food they choose.

In the post he said smth like having confronted her about her eating habits, not sharing and adding condiments to her own food, and in the post he referred to "She eats like a Gweilo" to show how annoyed he was at her.

The point was people asking if he even liked his wife, and why he'd marry a white woman if he was so offended by her not following strict Asian family traditions the way he'd expect of an traditionally Asian raised person.

"maybe we’re missing the context that she’s a devil in the sack and this is them flirting serious answer, i agree with the comment that SHE gets to decide what she’s offended by and what she’s okay with her husband calling her but also I think it’s practically impossible to judge the “slur"ness of words from another culture in a language you don’t speak so i’m eyeroll at anon here, who i statistically assume is a monolingual american barring other evidence" I ain't as ignorant as you, you literally built a completely different case entirely with and got mad at me for that. Statistically guys like you just love assuming everyone is a dumb American, even the Euros, the Asians, the Africans and the fucking penguins on this website. I'm a multilingual non-American. And even if not, don't be a bitch to random americans, there are enough "monolingual americans" who're of a non-american ethnicity and just never had the privilege of being taught the (literal) language of their parents. (Or the places where English is literally the official language despite not being England or America) Americans aren't dumb, no more or less than any one else. If some dude wants a traditional little Asian housewife, and starts insulting his (white) wife her behind her back online because she isn't what he wanted, then he that still doesn't justify slurs) (Yes this annoyed me, because why the fuck do people always feel so smug shitting on random people online.)

--

[capitalism-and-analytics]

I don't believe anyone has the right to discriminate against anyone for reasons of identity. Because if they didn’t do anything objectively then your problem with them is subjective and therefore should only be your problem.

You don’t have to like them or respect them or the way they live. But if you provide goods or service to everyone not only the people you approve of. Because either that's the standard you set for everyone. And not only justifying the emotional weakness of every shop owner (which is something I thought only liberals were supposed to do.) But then that gives people the right to further retreat into their own personal bubbles and to not have their viewpoints challenged by everyday life.

That and when this becomes the standard for everyone 1 day you'll be kicked out of some place for something they don't like about you, and you'll be like "that's not fair I did nothing wrong." Which means that you're telling people to express themselves less and to be less of how they are. Which is the thought process totalitarianism is based on.

And if we don't go through with tlhe implications of this and only do this to gay people then they'll ask "well what did we do wrong? Why are we less legitimate than everyone else?" And we answer with: "well it’s how they feel." "Then all they gotta respond with is "well we don't guard anyone else is feelings that much so seems dumb to me." And there's no logical counter to that.

So at worst it's tyrannical and at best it's hypocrtically. Remember freedom of people always comes before freedom of business because if not than the businesses will oppress us. And oppression of any kind is awful.

Well there's quite a few things to address here and to avoid a terribly long post, I am going to try to keep it focused and on-topic of the original post.

I am assuming this post is in response and in context of the court decision (correct me if I am mistaken), but the decision was limited to expressive services and protecting individuals' rights of expression that in conducting business they have a right to reject providing expressive services that conflict with their own beliefs. This is very different than summarizing it as "only people you approve of" as it should be better described as "only forms of expressions you approve of". I understand the concern that people have that this could be a slippery slope situation that could turn into discrimination of certain groups of people solely based on a protected form of identity, but that is an inherent risk regardless as unfortunately, bigotry cannot be legislated away.

that gives people the right to further retreat into their own personal bubbles and to not have their viewpoints challenged by everyday life

Absolutely not as this "right" has already existed by consumers. The difference is that the right has been extended to businesses too. For example, forcing Muslims to shop at a Christian wedding store will not challenge their viewpoints, it will merely oppress them. Similarly, forcing a Christian wedding store to design services specifically for a Nikah will have the same effect.

In contrast, if you give them both the right to willingly participate, then you will find the Christian wedding store may choose to be more open to other religious practices in order to generate more business or the Muslims may consider purchasing some items/services from the Christian wedding store than to go without.

Remember freedom of people always comes before freedom of business because if not than the businesses will oppress us

I am not sure what you mean here because businesses are people. They are just a legal term to describe the entity providing a good or service. Are you referring to corporations being separate legal entities than their stockholders?

In the context of the court decision, we are referring to a self-employed website designer being protected by the first amendment, i.e. freedom of expression. Are you arguing that the Constitution or more specifically the First Amendment should not cover those involved in a business-related activity? I don't wish to strawman or misrepresent your argument.

[redd956]

Hey, hope you’re doing well. Do you have any advice for coming up with names? Towns/cities, locations, creatures, characters, thingamabobs, all those things?

Hope I’m not being too vague, but if I am, specifically creatures and/or characters. How do you think of a name that’s meaningful or suits them? Just find a name, say it aloud and see if you like it? I know name generators exist (like fantasy name generator. They’re great and have a lot) but sometimes nothing really fits the vibe or appearance or lore or a sort of deeper meaning (yeah, names don’t always have to be like that, but I like being detailed and overthink with these things lol sorry), hopefully that makes sense.

Plus, in some places/mythologies/cultures, names have a lot of meaning and power, like people referring to powerful corrupt people as “he who should be be named” or with the whole Fae-stealing-names thing. Some names evoke different feelings from respect and fear to disgust and mocking, and some names are for mocking purposes that sometimes “replace” a things name in big cases.

What about the roots of a name? Assuming that you haven’t world built an entire dang language with suffix’s and grammar and all that, how would roots play into it (probably self answered)? Also with names being the core of someone’s being, so I guess my overthinking is actually somewhat justified?

Sorry for the wall of text and questions, again, I overthink and analyze answering questions like this in their entirety and try to include EVERYTHING, but this MAIN QUESTION is just how do you go about creating meaningful names for characters and creatures? All of the other words are mainly my brain musings and the whole “take fricking everything into account” so you can ignore them or use them for more thought provocation if you want. Feel free to take as much time as you need and answer in as much or as little detail as you want

Hope you’re having a great day/night and are taking care of yourself and staying hydrated and all that jazz :]

-idk (@idkanonymystuff. Tagging myself in case I forget I asked and won’t accidentally send it again)

Of course! Although I am personally quite bad at naming things, my own poor characters included XD

But anything to help prevent someone to become like me. This is going to be a long one.

Worldbuilding: Naming Conventions

Names As Descriptions

People

Historically and overall, generally cultures have used names as descriptions, whether about appearance, workforce, or even past achievements. We see this especially in English Surnames, Native American Names, and Abrahamic Names

Grace, Philip, Baker, Miller, Smith, Chris, Abigail, Johnson; all have descriptive origins, whether in their historical name variants or other.

Abigail was once Aviḡayil from Hebrew, which roots of av mean father, and gil mean joy, meaning the name meant "my Father is Joy"

It's also common for cultures to have family occupational surnames. The Millers own a windmill, Smiths had a blacksmith, Coopers made barrels.

Names don't have to have such strong meaning though. Many people are happy giving their children names they just like the sound of, or mean something to them in personal ways, like a grandmother, a country/continent, or even favorite song artist.

(Hopefully they're not like my friend's mom. I'm so sorry Airyc)

There's currently a trend in Japan to give people ridiculously cute names, although it is viewed similarly as "tradedeigh" names in the United States. (Sorry any Kayleighs)

We also see naming cultures like China's, which I will go on more about later.

If you want to look further into the etymology of names I suggest the website Behind the Name, it not only has a good name randomizer but also an amazing name dictionary with some explanation of history and origins.

Animals

As for animals the names get far much more whimsical. I honestly just suggest looking through the names of birds in your local region.

We see descriptive names like American Goldfinch, a bright yellow bird found in the United States. Sometimes they're named after their discoverers or famous people, especially scientific names. Or the sound they make, like a finch.

Names can also be straightforward; Fried Egg Jellyfish, Bullet Ant, Blobfish, Mountain Chicken

Or random like the Nonsense Rat

Names As Achievements/Fluid

Some cultures use names as achievements or role-examples, most infamously many Native America tribes, such as the Lakota. Eventually you earn a new name based off of something you've done or are.

As for the Lakota, a naming ceremony takes place where people present receive their new name, entering them into the family of the Lakota.

Some cultures have a multiple names system, more complex then the middle name system we see in English style names. You can work with a naming culture where people go by different names at work, then they do at home.

The Inuit often name their children by passing on the name of a spirit, which is selected by an elder after they receive a sign that a spirit is ready, this is because they believe a person never really dies and instead a spirit embodies a child.

In fact traditions of the parents not naming the children is another common thing seen, in worldbuilding too, such as names being chosen by an important member of society or even provided through magic.

In Brazil we see the Pirahã people, which go through many names throughout their lives, often to combat and avoid dark spirits.

Names don't always have to be a one and done, even in Western culture we see the action of changing your first name to match for gender affirming reasons, or even abandonment of an abusive family.

Family

We often see the tradition of the family name, often times the surname in the west, and the first name in some eastern countries like China. Think [First Name] [Family Name] versus [Family Name] [Secondary Name]

Having a family shows the importance to so many various cultures that is family, or knowing where you've came from. We also have traditions like taking on the surname of a lover (traditional the man's surname in a heterosexual pairing).

In several Hispanic cultures they have two surnames, their father's first surname, and their mother's first surname. So their names look like [First Name] [Father Surname]-[Mom Surname]. This is written similarly to conjoined surnames when people simply combined surnames instead of replacing one when marrying.

Maybe we're working with a culture that doesn't honor family at all, do they have secondary names? Do they only need one name? A sole named culture would put a lot of emphasis into the inner workings of having one name... and that's because names hold power.

Power of Names

I'm sure you've heard the historical rumor that we have middle names to protect us from fairies and demons. That is because there is a sort of natural power to names, and in various cultures many superstitions that come with them.

The more prevalent the supernatural, or religious beliefs, the more superstitious people are going to be about names.

As for the origin of middles names it's still mostly unknown. Many cultures have reinvented the middle name for various reasons, including the superstitious belief that if a fairy or demon got a hold of your entire name, first to last, they could own you. The middle name was introduced as a name only people the closest to you would know, and when you gave out your first and last name you would still be safe.

Other origins include requirements that your child had a saint's name in traditional Christian societies. While when middle names first appeared in medieval England, it was actually illegal for the common people to have them, as middle names were reserved for the wealthy, important, or royal.

In China and many other East Asian nations they believe that the name holds luck. Directly translated many Chinese names becomes things like Wealth, Strength, Wisdom, and Success. There's many other superstitions, including not naming your children's after someone alive in your family or after someone who met a tragic end.

This is why sometimes Chinese people using English names will meticulously choose their name, to find something of equal value.

In a world with magic I wouldn't be surprised if the magic that someone posses plays a role in their name too. In my own worldbuilding, nations like Mondie, Charagon, and Tannica which use mostly western naming basis will see surnames based off of magic. Some characters deviate from this within their own nations for religious or subcultural regions, such as the people from the Lichtfuer Kingdom, or Fayen-Charagonian Immigrants.

Nicknames & Callsigns

Speaking in terms of militaristic characters we bring in nicknames and callsigns.

Rarely ever are callsigns from cool or badass actions. Their origins are usually very embarrassing or insulting, no in-between. Often times the badass titles that we think of are from war heroes, who are the few out of thousands of soldiers, and usually dubbed onto them after their efforts are known historically or from their enemies.

People like the White Death, the Red Baron (Rote Kampfflieger), or Lady Death were also still people. Their nicknames did lead to people idolizing or exaggerating their actions, often times becoming so focused on their war stories that the outside about them is left untouched. Although they have these nicknames, they are all still indicative of their role in war or times as unwilling propagandist.

Callsign stories are a great place to look for how silly and strange their origins can actually be. There's entire forums dedicated to it. My own grandparents even had callsigns, Doc and Hillbilly.

Doc was my granddad's callsign, because he was a medic. My papa had the callsign hillbilly while in training because his rural Indiana accent was mostly unheard of at the time, and reminded people of hillbillies. That was just the 60s though. Nowadays people will have callsigns like "Firehose" meaning that they pissed themselves once really really bad.

Thankfully I never went into the military, because I already had the high school nickname "Shortcake" for being very very short.

Dangerous/Infamous Animals

When it comes to infamous people we see similar naming conventions as dangerous animals, think of an unkillable dragon or a mutant wolf that has gone rogue.

In the early 1900s there was a tiger called the Man-Eater that had gone rogue due to physical and emotional trauma from poaching, leaving the tiger to prefer hunting humans instead of its usual.

There are many cases of animals like this having names in such a way, from monster catfishes to a crocodile named Gustave.

Final Thoughts

There's even more that goes on behind names, than I would feel comfortable with covering in one post. Maybe in the future I will do another, touching on other aspects.

Honestly when naming my own characters I don't think too hard, but that's just me. I know some people take naming characters very seriously.

A lot of my worldbuilding does have its own naming conventions, but I often find myself trying to cheat anyway.

[dross-the-fish]

So you’ve answered what the motley crew would think of their media adaptations, but what would they think of their fandoms?

Erik, Adam, and Edward (vampires and werewolves?) all have their fair share of people either ignoring the atrocities they committed to say they did nothing wrong and would never do anything wrong, justifying them to say they never did nothing wrong, or paying attention to them and going “he did everything wrong, but he looked so sexy doing it and I think we should let him off the hook anyway.”

I dunno much about the other peoples fandoms since the only one I’m really in is Jekyll and Hyde, but Adam fans tend to treat him like his name is Adam even though it was never made canon.

Edward’s fans tend to be very. Uh. Very tumblr flavored folks. You know, “the type of thing I would fuck and the sorts of violence I would condone is far more extreme than what a normal person would consider.” “This is the ANONYMOUS website, I left my dignity at the door where I left my face.” *does aggression on you by being sweet, and shows affection with rabid violence,* that kinda thing.

most of what I see of the Sherlock Books fandom is just him being shipped with Watson, which I don’t touch because I can’t bring myself to care about a relationship nearly as much once you tell me it’s romantic. I actually don’t know whether you ship them, do you ship them?

I'll be honest I don't know what they'd think of their fandoms. Half the time I don't know what to think of their fandoms since I only happen to see small segments of them myself. I don't really actively talk to other people in the fandom except for my handfuls of discord friends or the folks that come onto my blog to ask me questions. Adam and Erik might be pleasantly surprised to find so much sympathy and outright desire for them. Edward would enjoy the attention. I don't know much about the Sherlock fandom at all but I do think of Holmes and Watson as being queer-platonic much like myself and my own partner.