#Out-of-the-box immutability

[techdirectarchive]

How to update Object First OOTBI Cluster

Object First OOTBI (Out-of-the-box immutability) is an easy to use backup storage solution designed specifically for Veeam customers and it offers ransome-proof solution by providing immutable storage and above all, it is built on Zero Trust and data security principles. In this article, I will show you the steps on how to update Object First OOTBI Cluster. Please see How to integrate ObjectFirst…

[dexaroth]

so funny to end growing up as the character guy with no social awareness or storytelling skills. yes this is my guy, he has no backstory because he represents a vague collection of traits i cant put into words and he also never changes and was just born like this. sorry

[apollos-boyfriend]

i trust we’re all mature enough now so can i just the say philza ace race incident? genuinely one of the funniest fucking things to ever come out of mcc. it’s up there it’s the mcc7 battle box incident. so many grown adults decided to ignore the actual track signals because of their immutable trust in philza minecraft and i think that’s beautiful

[malcolmschmitz]

The Insider and Outsider Detectives

So there's a lot of discourse about detectives floating around, ever since 2020 shifted a lot of people's Views on the police. Everyone likes a good mystery story, but no one seems to know what to make of a detective protagonist- especially if they're a cop. And everyone who cares about this kind of thing likes to argue over whether detective stories hold up the existing order or subvert it. Are they inherently copaganda? Are they subversive commentary on the uselessness of the police?

I think they can be both. And I think there's a framework we can use to look at individual detectives, and their stories, that illuminates the space between "a show like LAPD straight-up exists to make the cops look good" and "Boy Detective is a gender to me, actually".

So. You can sort most detectives in fiction into two boxes, based on their role in society: the Insider Detective and the Outsider Detective.

The Insider Detective is a part of the society they're investigating in, and has access to at least some of the levers of power in that society. They can throw money at their problems, or call in reinforcements, and if they contact the authorities, those authorities will take them seriously. Even the people they're investigating usually treat them with respect. They're a nice normal person in a nice normal world, thank you very much; they're not particularly eccentric. You could describe them as "sensible". And crime is a threat to that normal world. It's an intrusion that they have to fight off. An Insider Detective solving a crime is restoring the way things ought to be.

Some clear-cut examples of Insider Detectives are the Hardy Boys (and their father Fenton), Soichiro "Light's Dad" Yagami, or Father Brown. Many police procedural detectives are Insider Detectives, though not all.

The Outsider Detective, in contrast, is not a part of the society they're investigating in. They're often a marginalized person- they're neurodivergent, or elderly, or foreign, or a woman in a historical setting, or a child. They don't have access to any of the levers of power in their world- the authorities may not believe them (and might harass them), the people they're investigating think they're a joke (and can often wave them off), and they're unlikely to have access to things like "a forensics lab". The Outsider Detective is not respectable, and not welcome here- and yet they persist and solve the crime anyway. A lot of the time, when an Outsider Detective solves a crime, it's less "restoring the world to its rightful state" and more "exposing the rot in the normal world, and forcing it to change."

Some clear-cut examples of Outsider Detectives are Dirk Gently, Philip Marlowe, Sammy Keyes, or Mello from Death Note.

Now, here's the catch: these aren't immutable categories, and they are almost never clear-cut. The same detective can be an Insider Detective in one setting and an Outsider Detective in another. A good writer will know this, and will balance the two to say something about power and society.

Tumblr's second-favourite detective Benoit Blanc is a great example of this. Theoretically, Mr. Blanc should be an Insider Detective- he's a world-famous detective, he collaborates with the police, he's odd but respectable. But because of the circumstances he's in- investigating the ultra-rich, who live in their own horrid little bubbles- he comes off as the Outsider Detective, exposing the rot and helping everyone get what they deserve. And that's deliberate. There is no world where a nice, slightly eccentric, mildly fruity, fairly privileged guy like Benoit Blanc should be an outsider. But the turbo-rich live in such an insular world, full of so much contempt for anyone who isn't Them, that even Benoit Blanc gets left out in the cold. It's a scathing political statement, if you think about it.

But even a writer who isn't trying to Say Something About The World will still often veer between making their detective an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective, because you can tell different kinds of stories within those frameworks. Jessica Fletcher from Murder She Wrote is a really good example of this-- she's a respectable older lady, whose runaway success as a mystery novelist gives her access to some social cachet. Key word: some.

Within her hometown of Cabot Cove, Fletcher is an Insider Detective. She's good friends with the local sheriff, she's incredibly familiar with the town's social dynamics, she can call in a favour from basically anyone... but she's still a little old lady. The second she leaves town, she might run into someone who likes her books... but she's just as likely to run into a police officer who thinks she's crazy or a perp who thinks she's an easy target. She has the incredibly tenuous social power that belongs to a little old lady that everyone likes- and when that's gone, she's incredibly vulnerable.

This is also why a lot of Sherlock Holmes adaptations tend to be so... divisive. Holmes is all things to all people, and depending on which stories you choose to focus on, you can get a very different detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes collaborates with the police, on the stories with that very special kind of Victorian racism, or the stories where Holmes is fighting Moriarty, you've got an Insider Detective. If you focus on the stories where Holmes is consulting for a Nice Young Lady, on the stories where Holmes' neurodivergence is most prominent, or on his addictions, you've got an Outsider Detective.

Finally, a lot of buddy detective stories have an Insider Detective and an Outsider Detective sharing the spotlight. Think Scully and Mulder, or Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde. This lets the writer play with both pieces of the thematic puzzle at the same time, without sacrificing the consistency of their detective's character.

Back to my original point: if you like detective fiction, you probably like one kind of story better than the other. I know I personally really prefer Outsider Detective Stories to Insider Detective Stories- and while I can enjoy a good Insider Detective (I'd argue that Brother Cadfael, my beloved, is one most of the time), I seek out detectives who don't quite fit into the world they live in more often than not.

And if that's the vibe you're looking for... you're not going to run into a lot of police stories. It's absolutely possible to make a story where a cop (or, even better, an FBI agent) is an Outsider Detective-- Nick Angel from Hot Fuzz was originally going to be one of my 'clear-cut examples' until I remembered that he is, in fact, legally a cop! But a cop who's an Outsider Detective is going to be spending a lot of time butting heads with local law enforcement, to the point where he doesn't particularly feel like one. He's probably going to get fired at some point, and even if his badge gets reinstated, he's going to struggle with his place in the world. And a lot of Outsider Detective stories where the detective is a cop or an FBI agent are intensely political, and not in a conservative way- they have Things To Say about small towns, clannishness, and the injustice that can happen when a Pillar Of The Community does something wrong and everyone looks the other way. (Think Twin Peaks or The Wicker Man.)

Does this mean Insider Detective Stories are Bad Copaganda and Outsider Detective Stories are Good Revolutionary Stories? No. If you take one thing away from this post, please make it that these categories are morally neutral. There are Outsider Detective stories about cops who are Outsiders because they really, really want an excuse to shoot people. There are Insider Detective stories about little old people who are trying to keep misapplied justice from hurting the kids in their community. Neither of these types of stories are good or bad on their own. They're different kinds of storytelling framework and they serve different purposes.

But, if you find yourself really gravitating to certain kinds of mysteries and really put off by other kinds, and you're trying to express why, this might be a framework that's useful for you. If your gender is Boy Detective, but you absolutely loathe cop stories? This might be why.

(PS: @anim-ttrpgs was posting about their game Eureka again, and that got me to make this post- thank them if you're happy to finally see it. Eureka is designed as an Outsider Detective simulator, and so the rules actively forbid you from playing as a cop- they're trying to make it so that you have limited resources and have to rely on your own competence. It's a fantastic looking game and I can't recommend it enough.)

(PPS: I'm probably going to come back to this once I finish Psycho-Pass with my partner, because they said I'd probably have Thoughts.)

(PPPS: Encyclopedia Brown is an Insider Detective, and that's why no one likes him. This is my most controversial detective take.)

[phantomrose96]

(Only at the early episodes of season 2, no spoilers) but I have a vision and it is one where Jinwoo surrounds himself with a party of high-rank but fucking-useless hunters who he treats as absolute Pillow Princesses while using them as cover for himself.

Like it's established that your rank is a natural and immutable feature of yourself, but that says nothing for your mental state or physical health, right? Like they call out that Joohee is a B-rank technically, but she only does low-level raids because her nerves are fried.

So like. There's GOTTA be a wealth of A-rank--MAYBE even some S-rank--people who are absolute basket cases, or couch potatoes, or do nooooootttt fucking care.

Jinwoo should just assemble them, be like "you get a 7% cut for showing up", enter the gate, park them there with like a whole campsite of care items from his hammer-space bullshit, while he just goes to take care of the dungeon himself.

Like the whole raid team walks out and the Hunters Guild is like, "Ah, once again this up-and-coming A-rank-stacked team has defeated a dungeon, with their token E-rank mascot still not dead. How nice of them."

Meanwhile, anyone paying close attention on the news is watching while a camera crew interviews some A-rank stay-at-home mom who clearly does NOT know how to hold that knife she's holding, describing a dungeon boss who is almost definitely King Kong.

While E-rank Jinwoo just like, renders in the background

And the next interview is with the S-rank NEET who has not left his room in 12 years except, right now, to go kill this dungeon boss I guess. Which he also cannot describe.

While E-rank Jinwoo continues to. like. render.

And the online boards are like "wasn't that the E-rank who was one of the sole survivors of that catastrophe dungeon incident?" "You're totally right but also I was thinking of a DIFFERENT catastrophe dungeon. Did that happen twice?" "What do you mean it happened 3 times?"

One of these interviews Jinwoo is in the background doing perfect shadow-boxing using some knife that is resonating an aura so potent it's mucking up the camera equipment, while the A-rank on camera describes the plot of Godzilla.

[showeredinstardust]

I am not a big Tumblr poster. Ok? I'm an observer in all aspects. A lurker, if you will. I don't reblog stuff. I barely even like things. I only follow people sometimes.

But recently I've been scrolling through the 'transandrophobia' tag a lot more than I used to. recently I've seen posts that send me into a train of thought that's like. "People really think like this?" And it's more tiring than I realize sometimes. So I'm putting my thoughts into this post.

I've recently watched masculine trans people and queer people of all kinds getting the short end of the stick. I watch people put others down based on their masculinity, and I think- if this is such a big issue when done to femininity, why in the world would you think it's acceptable to flip it around? Feminism has never been about saying that women are better. It's never been about hating men. It's been about uplifting women so that they'll be seen as equals, and breaking both men and women out of patriarchal mindsets. It's about uniting over the fact that no group of people is better than another.

Trans men and enbies and mascs do not have whatever perceived systemic privilege you think they do. Trans people in general will only ever have conditional privilege in specific situations, if that. Society only praises performative masculinity- the kind that fits into their neat little boxes of 'should' and 'shouldn't'. Masculine queer people have never fit into those stupid little boxes. Trans men. Mascs. Butches.

I'm tired of this. Tired of the 'femininity good masculinity bad' talk. You're not children. Grow up and learn some nuance. Trans men are whiny and annoying to you because they've never had the privilege of being anything other than invisible. Constantly erased and brushed off so when they start getting angry you see it as an attack because you haven't cared to see them before. You haven't cared to see them when they were scared. You haven't cared to see them when they were just begging to be seen. You haven't cared to see them as anything other than traitors or thieves or anything because until it's not about you anymore, you don't give a fuck. You only look at them when you're personally slighted by whatever they have to say.

What does it cost to have empathy for other's lived experiences? Nothing. When a group of people is telling you what they've consistently and repeatedly been through, you listen to them. You don't shut them down because of an immutable trait. You don't shut them down because you've never seen it happen. You don't shut them down because they're not your idea of someone who's oppressed. That's not how this works. People are angry for a REASON. Masculine queer people have every right to be angry. we've been pushed aside and had statistics ignored and been told that other people's oppression is more important than ours simply for what? the sin of masculinity?

Now, above all, trans people should be united. Instead of fussing over whatever sort of strawmen and caricatures you have in your head, we should just be listening to each other. we should be able to listen to other's lives and traumas and pains without throwing a fit over words or theories. Having words to describe oppression is important. Being able to label your pain is important. But none of that matters more than what's happening to people in their real lives. the people who are dying. The people who are being raped and silenced and shunned out of public spaces and even their own homes. No words will ever matter more than the people who are actively hurting due to your refusal to even look in their direction.

if you want to talk about this, be my guest. Ask me questions. Tell me I'm wrong. Whatever. I just have a need for this to be known above all else. I don't care what people on the internet think of what I have to say. This site is a fuckin cesspool. so's every other corner of the internet.

Thanks for reading.

[theerurishipper]

Superbat Week Day 3: Alien Biology

For @superbatweek2024

“I’ve been meaning to ask, how exactly is it that you fly?”

Clark looks at Bruce, eyebrow raised quizzically. “What do you mean?”

“Well,” Bruce starts, gesturing at Clark’s form as the man in question happily eats Chocos out of the box, “how exactly does it work? J’onn, for instance, levitates with the help of his telekinetic abilities. It would be useful to understand how it works for you.”

Clark then gives him a huge grin, eyes twinkling with either amusement or the option Bruce hates most: mischief. “It’s because I actually have invisible wings!”

“Clark.”

“No, it’s true,” Clark insists, eyes wide. “Kryptonian biology is very different from most species, you know.”

“Clark.”

“Fine, fine,” Clark huffs. “It’s no fun trying to pull the wool over your eyes, you know? You could throw me a bone every now and then.”

“Of course,” Bruce admits. “But where’s the fun in that?”

Clark throws his Chocos at him, grinning.

--

“Hey, Spooky!”

Bruce turns begrudgingly at the grating sound of Hal Jordan’s voice. He supresses the part of him that is curious. After all, Hal usually— and thankfully— avoids him for the most part. It gives Bruce a lot more peace in his day, but also has the unintended and unwelcome side effect of making him interested whenever the man swallows his pride to approach him.

“Did you know about this? Did you know and just decide to keep this from everyone?”

“I don’t know what you mean.”

Hal rolls his eyes. “I’m talking about Supes, man.” He looks around the empty corridor, and leans in closer to Bruce, voice dropping to a whisper.

“Did you know that he has invisible wings?”

It must be an effect of all the idiocy in the air around him, but it’s almost like Bruce can feel his thoughts coming to a screeching halt in his head.

“I… he what?”

The first thing that occurs to him when his brain begins to function again is that Clark is probably way prouder of this idea than he has any right to be. And apparently, for good reason, because Hal seems completely taken in.

Bruce hates being wrong. Especially about this.

“Yeah! He sorta mentioned it in passing… but damn, you think you know a guy, huh?”

Bruce says nothing. He simply watches Hal stand before him, rubbing his head in consternation. And in his fugue state, Bruce makes one of the most questionable decisions of his life.

“I knew.”

“What?” Hal shrieks. “You knew? And didn’t mention this to anyone?”

“It wasn’t my secret to tell.”

Hal frowns. “I guess…” Then he sighs, running a hand through his hair, frustration visible on his face. “I guess you’d know that, huh? And I can safely say that it’s the truth, cause you’re allergic to pranks and fun.”

“Goodbye, Jordan.”

--

By the end of the day, the whole Watchtower knows of Superman’s magical invisible wings. Bruce can hear the poorly hushed conversations flooding through the entire satellite.

“Batman said he had them, so it must be true!”

“Yeah, he hates fun, he’d never go along with it if it was a prank!”

If only they knew.

--

“—And now people keep asking if they can feel them!” Clark huffs, head resting on Bruce’s lap.

“Mm.”

“It was funny at first, and it still is… but now, I think it’s falling apart.”

Bruce pats his forehead. “All pranks come to an end. It’s an immutable fact of life.”

“It’s just too good to be over so soon!”

Bruce wisely keeps his thoughts about the quality of Clark’s pranks to himself. Instead, he looks up from his laptop to observe the silent pout on his face, and makes a few calculated decisions. Then he picks up one of Alfred’s cookies and tosses it at Clark’s face.

“What’s this for?” asks Clark, confusedly.

“I’m throwing this at you, in lieu of a bone.”

--

Bruce has faced many dangers throughout his career as a superhero. Dangerous criminals, the best martial artists in the world, magic users, and even literal demons. But this might be the hardest thing he’s ever done.

“You want me to make Clark a pair of…” Zatanna trails off, and looks back down at the piece of paper he’d handed her. “…invisible attachable magic wings?”

“Yes.”

Zatanna looks up at him, looking absolutely miserable.

“What did you do this time?”

Bruce bristles and glares. “Nothing.”

“If you’re in the doghouse, it’s best you fix whatever you’ve done on your own—”

“It’s not an apology present. I’m helping him with a project.” Zatanna looks mildly curious for a split second, and realization dawns on her face.

“So his invisible wings aren’t real?” she whispers, looking stricken.

Self-control. Bruce is a master of self-control. He will not raise his palm to slap it against his forehead. He will not give into that ever-present urge.

“Of course not.”

“Damn,” she murmurs, looking away as though revaluating her entire existence. Luckily for her, so is Bruce.

But she bounces back fairly quickly, which is only a credit to her character. “All right, I’m down.”

“Thank you.”

--

“You know,” Zatanna insists as she rolls up her sleeves theatrically, wand already held in her hand, “I’ve never seen you go the extra mile for a prank before. You really love him, don’t you?”

“…Just do the spell.”

--

Clark’s wings are a big hit. The Hawks are especially thrilled. Bruce loses just a little more faith in everyone’s competency per second.

But seeing Clark’s excited face as he beats his invisible wings and bamboozles everybody within arm’s reach makes it all worth it. Not that he would ever admit as much to the man himself.

But unfortunately (or fortunately, if Alfred is to be believed), Clark knows him too well for all that.

“How hard was it to ask Zatanna to make these for me?” When Bruce doesn’t reply, Clark just grins, his arms coming to wrap around Bruce from the back. “I bet it was hard. I know how much you hate asking for favours.”

“They aren’t permanent, so enjoy them while they last.”

“Sure, sure.” Clark stops speaking, and the Batcave is left in its natural state of silence.

“Thank you, Bruce.”

Bruce doesn’t turn to look at him. “It’s just a pair of wings. Zatanna made them in five seconds.”

“That’s not what I mean. I just—” Clark leans in closer, pressing himself against Bruce’s back, and Bruce can feel his warmth flooding through him.

“This was the silliest thing ever, but you went along with it anyway.”

“Clark.” Bruce turns himself around in Clark’s arms, and lays a hand on his face. “It’s not silly. If you found it amusing, who am I to get in your way?”

“I was so sure you found it… what’s the word you used? Juvenile?”

Bruce gives him one of his lesser, weaker glares. “And now you’ve decided that I’m an expert in comedy? After all the time I’ve spent projecting the opposite?” Clark just laughs, quietly, subdued in a way that leaves Bruce feeling profoundly uneasy.

“I guess…”

Bruce pats his head, ruffling through his hair. “Since when have you cared so much about what I think?”

Clark just looks at him, and then sighs, dropping his head down onto Bruce’s shoulder. “I always care about what you think,” he mutters. “Your opinion means the world to me.”

Bruce’s first thought is to tell Clark that his faith is misplaced. That Bruce isn’t as worthy of admiration or respect as Clark seems to think. That Clark is giving him far too much credit.

But there’s something in the way Clark says those words, quiet and heavy, that renders him speechless, unable to say anything; something that leaves him wishing that it could be true. And so, he just stands there, in Clark’s embrace, trying to convey all the things he can’t say.

It’s Clark who breaks the silence, obviously. “You know… if I told you I had invisible wings right now, that wouldn’t be a lie…”

“I suppose so.”

“I guess I am different from you today. Biologically. Even on the outside.”

“I can’t argue with that.”

 “So…” Clark lifts his head up to look at him, expression positively sultry. “There’s a lot of fun we could have with these. Don’t you think so?”

Bruce just looks into his eyes, and raises a hand to run his finger along the soft surface of Zatanna’s magical wings. He drags his hand back, and rests both his arms around Clark’s neck.

“Let it never be said that I don’t know how to have a good time.”

Clark laughs, and kisses him.

--

“You know,” Clark says, conversationally, idly messing with Bruce’s hair. “I might not have actually had magic wings, but you know what I do have?”

“A penchant for silly pranks?”

Bruce looks up to find Clark waggling his eyebrows, mayhem already gathering in his eyes. “Well, yes,” Clark says, “but I was thinking more along the lines of horns that can detect lies. What do you think?”

Bruce just sighs, and buries his face in Clark’s shoulder. “I can’t lie to your horns. That’s a terrible idea.”

“So…”

“Fine. Let’s do it.”

---

Read on AO3

[thefadecodex]

Much of what we know about spirits comes from the Chantry—specifically the Southern Chantry—since that’s where most of the Dragon Age series takes place, at least until DATV. The Chantry’s view on spirits is pretty rigid, dividing them into neat little boxes: benevolent, demonic, or benign.

But DAI cracked that perspective wide open. Through Solas, we gained a deeper understanding of spirits as individuals, not just archetypes. Then, in the Jaws of Hakkon DLC, the Avvar gave us a whole new lens, showing us a culture where spirits are integrated into daily life in ways the Chantry would probably find unsettling.

And then came DATV, which took us to Northern Thedas—a region with its own unique spiritual traditions. Here, spirits aren’t just categorized differently; the entire relationship between mortals and spirits feels like it operates on a completely different foundation. As a result, our understanding of spirits is more nuanced, moving us away from simple labels and closer to seeing spirits as complex beings in their own right.

Beyond Good and Evil: Solas's Spirit Classifications

Solas suggests spirits are better classified as "aggressive" or "non-aggressive" rather than "malevolent" or "benevolent," as mortal influence plays a key role in shaping their behavior.

Aggression as Purpose: Rethinking Spirit Behavior

The creator of The Fade Codex proposes a theory—(possibly) canon, but based on observed patterns—that spirits are far more complex than the established categories suggest. Traditionally, spirits are understood in two primary ways:

Spirits embodying their original purpose (“Spirits”): Entities like spirits of Wisdom, Compassion, or Justice.

Spirits twisted or corrupted into demons (“Demons/Maligned Spirits”): Entities such as Pride demons, Rage demons, or Desire demons, formed when a spirit’s purpose is distorted through corruption or mortal influence (e.g., Wisdom -> Pride, Compassion -> Despair)

However, there may be a *"third category":

"Aggressive" spirits embodying their true purpose: These spirits remain true to their nature, but their purpose itself might manifest in ways that appear hostile or confrontational.

Note: The Fade Codex is using the term "aggressive" very loosely here.

Example:

A corrupted spirit may twist into a manifestation of Fear.

But there are also Spirits of Fear—entities whose "aggression" aligns with their natural role, not corruption.

This distinction suggests a more nuanced understanding of spirits, where aggression isn't inherently a sign of corruption but can be an expression of a spirit's authentic purpose.

A contributor (@restarose) pointed out that in DAO, during the Mage Origins, you meet a Spirit of Valor that demands a duel in order to provide you with one of the weapons it created and the way that Valor speaks is confrontational, which the creator of The Fade Codex does agree with. 

However, the third category is looking at spirits who would be viewed historically as a maligned spirit/demon, but is not actually a maligned spirit/demon.

(The third category itself, would really just be part of "spirit" category, but again, historically, spirits have been viewed as either benevolent ("spirits") or malevolent ("demons" and there is an association with aggressive = demon.)

From Purpose to Perversion: The Fall of a Spirit

Spirits are deeply tied to the concepts they embody, but their nature isn't immutable. They can be twisted, corrupted, or otherwise diverted from their original purpose through various means, often shaped by external influences or internal struggles. Below are some possible pathways by which this transformation occurs, which was expanded upon from the original source:

1. Reflecting or Mirroring Mortal Corruption and Distortions

Spirits are impressionable and can absorb or mirror the values of those they interact with, even when those values are warped or self-serving.

A spirit with pure intent can become twisted when exposed to mortals whose emotions or goals are corrupt.

Example: Justice, once an embodiment of fairness and moral clarity, was twisted into Vengeance after being bound to Anders, whose anger and obsession overwhelmed Justice's original purpose.

This shows how mortal influence can fundamentally alter a spirit’s identity, reshaping them in ways they might not have chosen on their own.

2. Oversimplifying or Misapplying Their Virtue

Spirits are deeply tied to their purpose, but their understanding of how to fulfill that purpose can become rigid or overly literal, leading to unintended consequences.

Their attempts to enact their virtue might become extreme or harmful.

Example: Cole, a spirit of Compassion, killed suffering mages in the Circle to end their pain. While his intent was compassionate, his actions were ultimately tragic and misguided.

This highlights the fragility of a spirit's interpretation of its purpose, especially when faced with complex moral dilemmas

3. Madness Through External Forces

Spirits are vulnerable to external manipulation and environmental trauma, especially when forced into the physical world under unnatural circumstances.

Being pulled through the Veil prematurely or against their will can shatter a spirit’s sense of self, twisting them into something they were never meant to be.

Example: Spirits forcibly manifested into Thedas through rifts or blood magic rituals often emerge distorted, aggressive, and barely recognizable from their original purpose.

This underscores the violent toll that unnatural manifestation (being forcibly pulled through the Veil against their will) can have on a spirit's stability and clarity of purpose.

4. Denial of Purpose Through Enslavement or Manipulation

Spirits are bound to their purpose, and when forcibly prevented from fulfilling it—especially through blood magic or other forms of binding—their nature begins to unravel.

Forced obedience or commands that violate their core intent can warp them into something unrecognizable.

Example: A Spirit of Wisdom, when bound by blood magic and ordered to kill, was corrupted into a Pride Demon.

This reveals how violating a spirit’s agency and core purpose can lead to irreversible corruption.

*Note: According to The Fade Codex's knowledge, there is no explicit mention of a "third category" of spirit classification of "'aggressive' spirits embodying their true purpose."

The closest thing we do come to seeing this in any of the games or books, is during in DATV when we see Solas using Spirits of Chaos, Disorder, and Disruption as part of his rebellion.

Because of this example, The Fade Codex is more inclined to believe that there is a third category that breaks further away from the chantry's dichotomy of classification; however, there may be people who disagree with The Fade Codex on this matter and believe this is more of a head canon rather than a fan theory directly based on lore, which is understandable.

Another example might be involving the Candlehops in DATV, where The Fade Codex suspects these might be Spirits of Mischief (however, this is never explicitly stated and we there is also limited information regarding the Candlehops). It does appear that the Candlehops are actually friendly and are trustworthy "expect the one that got in the way" described in the codex entry 'The Candlehop Maker.'

[insertcannibalismmetaphorhere]

Theres something to be said about how the beta kids’ upbringings are addressed… yet again, homestuck finds a way to make itself larger on the inside; to put details which in any other piece of m edia would be explained in detail- or at least be considered of importance to the story-in a kind of. Schroedinger’s box.(John is afforded the most leeway with this, at least so far as I’ve noticed it.)

Jade managed to survive a virtually impossible situation, from the time her grandfather died and onward. Especially considering her narcolepsy? Its an outright miracle she made it through. But we as the audience aren’t really supposed to believe that jade simply put to use her survival skills and worked hard to survive. She didn’t fall asleep in inconvenient places and narrowly escape. The time between her childhood and the beginning of the comic neither happened nor didn’t happen.

When we see Dave in his house full of smuppets with his fridge filled with swords, and we hear him explain that bro does not feed him (and presumably never has) it contradicts with a (under normal circumstances) immutable fact of the world: that people need to eat. We know that dave has made it this far because of…? something. But it’s not exactly expected of the audience to fill in what exactly Dave’s been doing. He doesn’t have a neighbor who’s happy to feed him. He doesn’t make the most of school lunch. Functionally, (and excluding bro) not a single other person lives in the whole of Texas! And even if they did, Dave- who FELL FROM THE SKY ON A METEOR- does not legally exist in the capacity which is required to be enrolled in a public school. Simply, dave neither ate nor didn’t eat.

The character who i think is affected most relevantly by these non-facts is Rose. (Although really, all of the strider-lalondes are much more affected by their actual pre-canon lives than any of the other kids.)

For someone whose schooling and social life pre-canon literally do not exist, Rose acts exactly how you’d expect a lonely teenage academic from a small town to act.

Parishville, NY (technically where the lalonde residence is, if we take homestuck way more seriously than im sure was intended) currently has a population of just over 2,000 people. If you’re from a small town (or even if you’ve seen an episode of any 2010s teen drama about “small town life”) you know exactly how suffocating that can be.

Without straying too far from topic, there are innumerable ways in which capitalism has failed america. The “American dream” relies on an idea of upwards mobility that is simply nonexistent for those raised in small towns- those raised without money and without resource. Nonetheless, theres an idea that seems to thoroughly permeate any small community: you have to get out.

You have to get out because you have to become something better than this. You have to get out because you can’t risk becoming your parents. You have to get out because if you don’t, you haven’t done anything with your life. You’ll work at the liquor store or the gas station or whatever adjacent dead-end job until you’re too old to work or you die- whichever comes first.

On my first read-through of homestuck, one of the panels which stood out to me most was 4989, in which Rose explains to Dave that yes, a dream self can be drunk. Specifically, she says “There wasn’t very much to do. But there was a house full of liquor.”

While Rose didn’t *actually* excel in academics- and while she wasn’t *actually* ostracized from her peers for her grim outlook and intellect- we see shadows of the effects throughout her character for the entire run of the comic (And hsbc if you’ve had the displeasure.) Rose is afforded much more significant consequence to her upbringing than most other homestuck characters- especially the female ones.

I don’t really have a conclusion here, just something i’ve been chewing on..

[techdirectarchive]

Object First OOTBI Appliance Quick Setup

[your-bigender-big-brother]

My Sex is Nonbinary Too (an essay)

My sex is of a nonbinary quality. This shouldn't be a very radical statement, but sex is as heavily binarized as gender is and there are certain expectations society has about sex. Your sex has to be either male or female, and whatever happens outside of that rule is treated as an anomaly. You're expected to fall into one of these two categories and in order to move away from the very strict box you were placed in, you'd have to undergo a physical change in order to fit the opposite category. At birth, you're female, and you'll stay that way until you make the difficult decision to get surgery. Now you're male. You’re assigned male at birth and are assumed to be of the male sex. That is, of course, unless you get that surgery to change it all. It's so very linear and conventional, and quite frankly misses so many nuances to the human experience.

My gender is who I am and is intrinsically tied to most other aspects of my identity. I'm a transgender man, I'm a nonbinary man, I'm an autistic man, I'm a man of many talents. No matter how my identity shifts and expands, the same gender is always present. Gender is inevitably relevant no matter which part of me I'm talking about because it gets tangled up in all the other pieces of me, and I don't see why that can't be true for the physical parts of me. My body is a part of my identity experience because it is a part of me.

Of course, I consider this a man's body no matter how I was supposedly born or what I choose to do with it. I call my body a man's body out of a need to take control over an event - an assigned gender at birth - that I did not consent to and that doesn't fully describe my relationship with gender accurately. As for sex, this is a highly intimate part of me that has been medicalized and binarized against my will just as much as the rest of my body, but bodies aren't meant to be policed in this way. Bodies are not meant to be at the mercy of medical biases.

My gender is not a medical anomaly nor anything that derives from physical limitations. I’m not a man because of what my body does, but because of how I view my role in society and how I subvert what society expects of me. For others, they may be a man (or another gender) because they want to fill a specific role in society rather than subvert it. Either way, this is what makes a gender and not what doctors assign to us based on perceived physiology. Likewise, my sex should not be placed under the scrutiny of doctors just so they can call it what they want based on their personal biases and my sex should not be relevant to what is expected of me in society. The sex binary is a construct that I've happily broken away from just as much as the gender binary.

Sex has always been a concept that was forced on me: It determines “what's in your pants” (according to cisgender and transgender people alike) and there are two categories that trans people have to fall into. People have this viewpoint that gender and sex are separate, but somehow they bastardized that concept into the idea that your sex is immutable but your gender is not. I've been told by both trans and cis people, both allies and bigots, that I will always be female because that's what my sex is called. In order to change that, I would need extensive surgery and hormone replacement therapy, according to them. Even so, we are often assumed to always be the sex we were assigned no matter what we do.

I don't subscribe to the sex binary in any way. While my gender has some overlap with the gender binary, my sex is a different thing altogether. I refuse to give my sex a binarist label and even reject sex-related terminology that is typically expected in the trans community: I don't talk about my AGAB, I refuse to call myself “FtM” or “MtF”, and I don't call my sex male or female. No matter what my physiology is, I consider my sex to be of a nonbinary quality, existing outside of the sex binary and being unable to be contained within the typical allotted binary boxes we're often expected to fit into. As someone who is transmaverine - maverine being a quality outside of pre-existing governance - I exist outside the governance of bodily convention.

When I began to really be aware of all the intricacies of my identity and all the pieces that make my gender what it is, I looked into how binarism limits my self-identification. As I grew to understand myself more and more over time, I began to shed all the baggage that comes with conformity and convention. Eventually I landed on the topic of sex. Whether we want it to or not, sex plays a huge role in gender exploration, and it's often expected that we either have a sex that matches our gender or that we subvert sex linearly (that is, we move along a straight path from assigned sex to a new sex.) None of this was ever appealing to me as a concept and so, instead of playing a part in this performance, I decided to reject it altogether.

Some folks are of the male sex, some are female, some consider themselves to be in-between, and some are null of sex. Many of these concepts are physical in nature and have a defined blueprint, which is what society expects from all people. But I don't feel like any of these terms accurately capture how I view my sex and I don't believe that changing my physiology is the only way to gain access to a nonbinary sex. If my gender can be man without having to change myself on a physical level, then my sex can be nonbinary in quite the same way. Nobody should have to undergo costly and stressful surgeries just to be seen as who they truly are.

There's a particular term that was always thrown my way whenever I brought up the idea of having a nonbinary sex. That term is altersex. It's a word for those who wish to change their sex to something unconventional or who view their sex in a way that does not fit societal standards. For a while I had assumed that the desire to physically transition was a prerequisite for altersex people to use the term, that there had to be some kind of physical change planned in order to fit the label, but apparently the definition was expanded early on to include those who simply viewed their sex in a nonconforming way. Still, this term goes out of its way to separate itself from gender labels, but I prefer to use a label to describe my sex that is typically used to describe gender. I don't see my sex as something incompatible with my nonbinary gender and I don’t believe my gender and my sex should use entirely separate and distinct descriptors. I call my sex nonbinary and I think that it would benefit a lot of trans and nonbinary people if they tried to do the same. Try to say “I am a man and this is a man's body, therefore my sex is male,” or “I am nonbinary and this is a nonbinary body, therefore my sex is nonbinary.” This can work for any kind of gender, really.

Of course, there are dozens of labels out there that can describe sex in nonconforming ways - neumel (neutral sex), aporale (aporine sex), oumel (outherine sex), enbinmel (nonbinary sex) - and a number of them may come pretty close to describing exactly the way I view my sex. Enbinmel is right there as a word for having a nonbinary sex, so why don’t I choose this one? To me, it’s empowering to use a term that is typically used to describe gender to describe sex instead. It’s a way for me to queer sex with the same aggressive nonconformity with which I queer gender, to say “fuck you” to all convention and label myself on my own terms, even if it makes no sense to most people.

That’s really the struggle right now: Trying to help make sense of nonbinary sex for people who view sex as a physiological two-part model, because I can see myself having to explain that my nonbinary sex doesn’t have a specific “look” and that it’s just what I call my sex. I call myself bigender, which in turn also doesn’t “look” like anything. I call myself a man, neutrois, transmaverine, and none of these things have a “look.” But people tend to hold on to the material and seem to prefer some kind of visual evidence of gender. Masculine is masculine and feminine is feminine. To some, nonbinarity should have some kind of visual signifier so that they can wrap their heads around the concept. The problem is that gender is not that simple and while sex may be assigned based on specific observed traits, it’s not that simple either.

To those folks, I say: Gender is a construct that is entirely mental and traditionally, there may be some kind of perceived aesthetic that matches or subverts specific genders, but it’s otherwise more flexible than traditionalists tend to view it. Sex is something assigned based on biases and can pave the way for how we are raised and what is expected of us in society. We can call our sexes whatever we want and we can choose to break away from our assignment if it means living a more authentic life. Sex, gender, and many other aspects of our identities are very personal and it really shouldn’t concern others how we choose to navigate these concepts. It often feels like all of society is an oppressive force of conformity with few options for exploration. Many of us choose to look at all the options forced upon us and simply say “no thank you!” or “not applicable!”

I never talked much about my physical transition goals in videos or blog posts and the older I get, the less inclined I am to do so. I don't need a specific transition plan in mind just to convince others to view my labels as valid and I'm sure as hell not shelling out money for a surgery that can “perfectly” encompass all the many facets of my gender. Few nonbinary people even have access to nonbinary options for surgery because of the heavily binarized medical field and the expectation for sex to be of two distinct physiological categories. This is why being able to call our genders and our sexes what we want, both equally, is far more beneficial to our individual journeys of self-exploration. We are valid because we are self-identified.

[felixfanblog]

How do the Bright Lights see reality?

Analysis ahead: I thought too hard about alternate reality show and about each of the bright lights’ relationships with reality. (Thanks to the folks on the OSC plurals server who chatted about this with me! Wanted to write these points on my blog as well.)

Test Tube, being a scientist, is a very practical and grounded thinker. She sees reality as it is objectively first and foremost and thinks about it very logically. She has a mostly direct, objective view & relationship with reality. However, ironically, her confidence in her own reasoning skills can lead her to reject reality when it doesn’t line up with her theories. She will always accept the truth when presented with immutable evidence, though! That’s one of her best qualities. She is stubborn but she is not unreasonable.

Lightbulb of course masks very heavily, and tries to twist reality to be as positive and bright as she can make it. It’s only natural that she would be attracted to the idea of escaping reality and creating a better one as she does in ARS. She relies on escapism, to the point that it can occasionally lead to harm and neglect to herself or others. She’s sometimes so distracted that she doesn’t even notice that problems are there. But at the same time, her out-of-the-box thinking and creativity really serves her in the long run as her spontaneity is actually very useful for problem solving! She operates by her own rules and that’s okay. Her open-minded-ness also leads her to having better and more understanding relationships than other contestants do. She is not judgmental!

Paintbrush is also on the more logical side, and has a hard time accepting other people’s perception of reality when it doesn’t align with what they know (or believe) to be true. As seen with their short temper, they have a very low tolerance for other’s distortions of reality and emotional biases. If you’re being unreasonable, you can count on Paintbrush to call you out on it when others might not! In addition, something that I think has further implications is how Paintbrush was basically completely out of the loop and uninvolved with the timeline shenanigans in ARS. I think that, intentionally or unintentionally, can represent their groundedness. For better or for worse, they are often unable to access the fantasies (in this case a literal other timeline) that others use to cope. Even more additionally, their relationship to gender shows how they are often the most in tune with realities that are denied by others. And, others often don’t listen to them, or paintbrush believes that they won’t. And towards the end of ARS, Paintbrush comes to appreciate how Lightbulb, in all her nonsense, can actually use her creativity to bridge gaps and be more understanding than others.

Finally, Fan (me!): Sees reality from a detached view, initially copes by thinking of it in the same way as fiction. Loves analyzing reality but has a shaky sense of how he fits into it.

Altogether, I think these are all really great reasons for why the Bright Lights were the perfect cast to be featured in Alternate Reality Show. Also, I noticed a lot of these details provide insight into why they reacted the way they did after the twist, but that’s a whole other essay.

[bestworstcase]

Something I've been chewing on that I do wonder if you have any thoughts on. What is the intended characterization/symbolism of Yang's semblance. Jaune is a healer/support. Ren learned to control his emotions and then grew empathetic. Qrow has his bad luck which is probably a defense mechanism with consequences from the bandits that raised him and Raven. Taiyang's description of Yang's semblance is the closest to an analysis the audience has gotten and that is - "basically a Temper Tantrum". Very interestingly the narrative has so far let that description stand uncontested. And I believe you were the one that did the analysis that Yang's problem was overly depending upon her semblance as a finisher. Also fun to consider how one of the ways that Yang has her parallel with Cinder is with the fire association... which for Yang is just actually her preferred ammunition and the go to imagery for her songs that I can recall off the top of my head except for temper metaphors.

that was me yeah

a core theme of yang’s character is that she’s made of contradictions and cannot be easily defined or fit into a single box. this is true of every character in rwby—there’s always more than meets the eye, complexity beneath the surface—but yang as a character is subject to other characters’ struggle to parse who she is. tai sees a temper tantrum, ruby sees invulnerability, blake has been on an emotional journey spanning six volumes of just learning to see and love yang’s whole, complete self. yang is raven’s daughter, after all—but she’s also summer’s daughter so much that the resemblance screams itself out of the screen.

so. her semblance.

in the story, it’s been described three different times by three different characters:

ruby: “every hit makes her stronger, and she uses that to fight back. that’s what makes her special”

tai: “basically a temper tantrum, great in a bind, but it won’t always save you”

blake: “his semblance is like yours, he absorbs energy through his sword, stores it up and sends it back when he’s ready” (+ yang feeling it’s “cheap” that he “gets to dish out damage without feeling it”)

<- three bears.

in goldilocks terms, yang’s semblance is “too strong” (ruby sees her as invulnerable), “too weak” (tai sees the power it grants her as essentially hollow, false) and “just right” (yang is neither invulnerable nor fragile and her semblance is just a part of her). i also think that what yang says of adam’s semblance is more revealing of her own self-perception than necessarily being meant as an objective critique of adam—it’s not “cheap” to parry/riposte and in fact yang’s growth as a combatant post-beacon looks like learning to fight more defensively and evasively, less reliant on soaking up damage/power for explosive finishers.

insofar as there’s a meaningful difference between adam needing to block hits vs yang not it’s that yang’s semblance gives her a bit of a cushion—she can still riposte even if she misses the parry—and in all honesty i think probably comes down to their kit. yang is a hand-to-hand fighter. she’s blocking hits with her forearms and, gauntlets or not, she’s going to feel that. the specific damage-absorption mechanics of their semblances cater to their fighting styles.

but, yang feels that it’s “cheap” for adam to absorb energy through his sword rather than his own body, because yang takes a certain pride in being able to get back up after being knocked down. her idea that she must take damage before she can deal it back twice as hard is probably not a real, immutable characteristic of her semblance but something that developed in response to how yang herself copes with trauma—it’s a way of, i think, regaining a sense of control and security by telling herself that it’s okay if bad things happen because it will just make her stronger in the end.

the narrative challenges this way of thinking post-beacon—losing her arm and being left behind did not make yang stronger, receiving support from trusted adults like oobleck and port and reuniting with her friends/family is what made her stronger. learning to accept help and treat herself with more compassion is making her stronger. exploring who she is apart from ruby is making her stronger. this is the direction she’s growing in emotionally—that being hurt doesn’t make her strong, healing makes her strong—and her use of her semblance is shifting in tandem with that (still pops it as a finisher quite often but it is pretty rare since v6 that yang uses it to gain the upper hand in fights she’s at risk of losing, bc these days she’s more focused on evasion/outmaneuvering opponents to create openings for her semblance to end the fight)

and then it’s connected to yang’s anger (and fear, as when she gets between neo and ruby) because both the feelings and the semblance are in essence a self-protective response—yang gets angry when she or someone she cares about is hurt and uses that anger to protect herself and/or the person she loves. her semblance is about taking painful things that happen to her and transmuting that into the power to defend herself. same thing.

i don’t actually think that her semblance is hooked into her anger in the, like, mechanical sense (we’ve definitely seen her pop the semblance in context where she’s having a GREAT time, for one)—the correlation arises from yang’s anger being motivated by protectiveness and a desire to not be hurt, which is also what manifests in her semblance.

i would argue that “basically a temper tantrum” is meant to be read in context with ruby’s “that’s what makes her special” and then both those extremes are brought to a resolution by blake’s neutral description of what burn is, mechanically; in that sense i don’t think that tai’s analysis has been left uncontested except insofar as yang didn’t argue with him—but conversely, tai more or less tells her to think of her semblance as a risky weapon of last resort and yang went “k” and started using her semblance more, so i think it’s less that yang takes his advice at face value than it is yang recognizing that tai raises a generally good point [being creative and flexible is valuable] and thinking okay, i can probably get more out of my semblance if i try new things.

her position is that burn is normal (“how is me using my semblance different from someone else using theirs?”), and the way she takes this advice on board reflects that—if someone else relied on their semblance for just one specific tactic and nothing else, what advice would they be getting from their instructors? push yourself further, test the limits of what you think you can do, get out of your comfort zone. that’s what winter tells weiss when she’s struggling! that’s how RNJR are taught in v5! tai views burn as fundamentally different from other semblances, and his advice really comes down to “don’t rely on it, you don’t need it.” but yang disregards that part of what he tells her entirely. she quietly sorts through what tai tells her and only keeps what she thinks will actually help her improve—which is, in itself, of a piece with her semblance. she takes the ‘hit’—the harsh and rather unfair criticism—and then filters/converts it into something more constructive.

(there is also some interesting subtext here with the protective/self-protective drive behind both yang’s anger and her semblance and tai’s perception that the semblance is a “temper tantrum”—which aside from framing burn itself as abnormal also casts yang’s anger as irrational, childish, out-of-control. given the dynamic of yang’s childhood situation, the parentification and leaving yang and ruby alone at home for extended periods of time and over-identification of yang with raven plus favoritism toward ruby… and factoring in tai referring to yang’s anxiety and post-traumatic depression as “moping” well. across the board he seems either unwilling or unable to seriously/genuinely engage with yang’s feelings so how much of his perception that yang has “temper tantrums” follows from outbursts she had when overwhelmed as a child or young teen that tai didn’t take seriously or chose to ignore rather than deal with the root cause of neglect/trauma?)

[ursynes]

Gaster is a cat confirmed (kinda)

Ok, so I'll go ahead and come out as a massive Gaster stannie. (My beloved. He barely exists in-universe, but he is so real to me. Pets him on his bald head)

Anyway, there's a small passage in the Valentine's newsletter that caught my eye:

Putting aside interchangeable faces - this is a reference to Alice in Wonderland. Specifically to how Alice plays with verbiage. The notion that words, indeed, mean anything is constantly toyed with (and discarded) in the book.

We're now given this image of Gaster as someone for whom reality is so warped, that words (and perhaps the objects they signify as well) lose concrete shape. It ties in neatly with his use of a font where every letter is a symbol upon itself. The guy sure has a strained relationship with language. (Relatable.)

Of course, this isn't the only Alice reference we have:

So the "friend" is an obvious nod to the Cheshire Cat. This character is known for vanishing, leaving behind only its grin, and being cryptic. Vanishing and cryptic? Sounds familiar.

We have known for a while that the "cat" element exists in DR:

The other elemental pairs - Thunder/Light, Dark/Star - have a throughline of meaning that ties them together. They are things that co-occur with one another. Where there's thunder, there must have been light(ning). Stars can only be seen in the dark. So what's the deal with Puppet/Cat?...

Let's assume "cat" stands for Cheshire Cat-like qualities. Ephemeral, inscrutable, with a tinge of eerie omniscience. Why is it paired with "puppet"? A puppet is something that is, well, puppeteered. It is something immutably material, with no agency of its own. Quite the opposite of "ephemeral and omniscient"!.. Except when you realize that in DR, transcending what you know of reality will inevitably lead to the conclusion that you are...

One is intrinsically tied to another!

The characters in DR who seem to have the most forbidden knowledge have a relation to puppets and/or cats:

(Assuming that Jevil has some jack-in-the-box in him.)

These folks also have ties to Gaster and his juicy knowledge. It is not too far-fetched to assume Gaster himself has Puppet/Cat vibes. In fact, I think that he is the Cheshire Cat of Deltarune. Perhaps he doesn't mind his condition as much as we think!

TL;DR when Gaster is revealed as a catboy, the fandom will implode. Consider this your warning.

[the-indigo-symphony]

We recently saw a post about exomemories that interested us, but to avoid detracting from the point of that post, we're making this one ourselves.

The community often focuses on vivid exomemories, ones you can easily understand and tell others about, but it's alright if yours aren't like that. We ourselves often experience memories – whether exo- or from this life/world – as more general knowledge than, like, flashbacks or whatever. We know things without knowing how we know them. Sometimes we get flashes of "Yes, this feels right." or "This reminds me of something I can't put my finger on." We miss things that are hard to put into words, or instinctually assume the presence of something that we only realize in hindsight doesn't exist here. All these kinds of exomemories are just as important as the times we remember something big and vivid.

And of course, memories can be hazy or unclear; you don't need to scramble for details to prove to yourself your exomemories are real. This-life memories aren't perfectly clear and immutable forever and always; why would exomemories somehow be exempt from the regular ol' flaws of memory recall? You don't need every last detail to have "real" exomemories. If it matters to you, and feels real to you, then that's all that matters in the end.

Big, vivid, and clear exomemories are fun to talk about a lot of the time, but they're not the only kind of exomemory out there. Don't hurt yourself trying to force yourself to only have those kinds of exomemories, or suppressing everything that doesn't fall into that box. Exomemories are, at the end of the day, just memories like any other – and as this community should know well, memory can be complicated as hell.

[thewarfox]

DEI is racist.

I wrote this as a comment to a youtube video, but I am relatively certain that it will get shadowbanned. I'm pretty happy with the thoughts I wrote down, so I decided to bring them over here: The reason DEI has a negative inclination is the same reason that Affirmative Action has a negative inclination. Even if the person being hired is qualified, you cannot be certain they got the position because of their merits, or because of their 'diverse' qualities. Let's say that, hypothetically, you have two equally qualified candidates that have to be decided between. One has to be picked. The only difference between them is that one is a white man, and one is a black woman. Same age, same education, same records, everything else is equal. When you have a culture of DEI, you immediately run into a problem. If you DON'T hire the black woman, you risk being called a racist and a sexist. If you do hire her, you risk being accused of picking her for her immutable characteristics instead of for her qualifications. On the side of the hypothetical black woman, if you get picked for the job, you can't be completely certain that you were picked for your qualifications, or if you were picked for your God-given characteristics. On the side of the hypothetical white man, if you get picked for the job, you can't be completely certain that you were picked for your qualifications, or if you were picked because your employer is a racist or sexist. There are obviously other possibilities, but we're trying to narrow the thought experiment for simplicity. By utilizing DEI, you are putting discrimination on the table. You are stating that you have an agenda to shape your workplace based on categories that have nothing to do with qualifications. You are subjecting people hired under it to be insecure about the circumstances of their employment, and their true role in the organization. Are they there to do a job, or are they there to check off a box? Have they really earned the position, or are they being used to signal to outside observers? And finally, like any system humanity creates, people take advantage of it. Does it happen very often? Hopefully not. But it certainly does happen, however rarely. And the fear that the people you're hiring might be a grifter of some kind does poison the well. A rotten apple can spoil the bunch. It can breed distrust of potential selectees based off of the actions of a few bad actors. It opens the door for behaviors and worries and conflicts that don't need to exist. There are places where DEI has no place, and everything works fine. Take basketball for instance. You don't see anyone saying that a certain percentage of asian or white players need to be on every team to reflect the population. Any team that does such a thing will likely be at a competitive disadvantage to the teams that don't do it. They are composing the teams of the best players, and they happen to mostly be black, and no one has a problem with this. DEI didn't have to be implemented to get black people onto the teams, their own skill, ability, and effectiveness got them there. If they failed to get onto the teams because the rules forced them to hire other people for the team, how many black basketballers would not be able to get on the team when they otherwise would? In fact, one could say that DEI-like thinking kept black players out of basketball in the early days, and only when teams started taking risks by hiring them, and they started winning games more as a result, the inherent competitiveness of sport demanded that other teams had to hire black players as well if they didn't want to be left behind. It was only by abolishing a policy of composing a team by race that the sport was allowed to take its modern, superior shape. DEI is not a recipe for competitiveness. It is inherently anticapitalistic. It promotes unhealthy discrimination. It opens the door for ugly and unhealthy criticism. It calls into question the capabilities of people, and whether they are qualified for their positions.