#Thank you for coming to my TEDTalk

[calculust-prime]

My opinions on Umemiya Hajime must be viewed as a triplicate. Please consider the following:

Umemiya, hair back and jacket on: A threat. The strongest. The leader. Not looking for smoke, but ready to scrap. Don't make him repeat himself.

Ume-nii, hair back and no coat: Oldest brother. Plant dad. Always tells you when you did a good job. Will protect you. Sends you plant pictures. Vegetable enthusiast.

Hajime, hair down and no coat: The bestest most gentlest boy to ever exist. He's just a lad. Pacifist. Love, not war. Don't touch him. Must protect his smile. Too good for this world. He's so excitable. Just look at him. 😭

Thank you for your time.

[tokenducks]

My hottest take is gender bend/ fem Charles should be named Charlotte and not Charlie. Charles doesn’t go by Charlie so why would Charlotte.

[tuktukpodfics]

The Problem With "Dao Swords": My love-hate relationship with pleonastic translations

An essay that no one asked for.

A lot of fanfics call Zuko’s broadswords “dao swords.” As a Chinese to English translator, this phrase makes me pause every time. Here is my humble opinion on “dao swords” and other pleonastic translations:

What the heck is a pleonastic translation?

I’m so glad you asked! “Pleonasm” is a fancy term for a redundant phrase, like “black darkness” or “burning fire.”

A pleonastic translation is a phrase that puts the source language and the translation back-to-back. A common example is “chai tea” which literally means “tea tea.”

“Dao swords” is a pleonastic translation. “Dao” 刀 is the Chinese blanket term for blade. The phrase basically means “sword swords.” Sounds pretty silly, right?

Pleonastic translations are bad?

I think it depends on your audience, the text purpose, and how special the word is.

In advertising, pleonastic translations can help increase a product’s searchability. Ex: “Longjing Dragonwell tea” would appear in a Google search for either “longjing” or “dragonwell.”

Tourist destinations often use pleonastic translations to help foreigners navigate. Ex: “Nanzhan South Station” on a map helps foreigners know what the place is, but also gives them the Chinese pronunciation so that they can communicate with their taxi driver.

In literature, a pleonastic translation is a succinct way to introduce a culturally significant term without a footnote or distracting tangent. A lot of translators will sneak in a pleonastic translation the first time the word appears in a text, and then use the untranslated term alone every time after. Ex: "He slouched on the kang bed-stove. His grandmother sighed and took a seat on the kang too.”

Is "dao" a culturally significant word?

No.

Dao is a super mundane word used to describe any kind of single-edged blade, from butter knives to ice skates. It feels weird to keep such a normal word untranslated. Using the Chinese word emphasizes its foreignness. They’re not just swords, they’re special, Chinese swords. 

Yes, words take on different meanings as they pass from culture to culture. That’s how language works. But English is also a unique case. Because of imperialism. I think English speakers have an obligation to avoid exotifying every-day words.

Also, English is a global language. Chinese speakers are reading your translation, and…I dunno...“sword swords” feels off putting. Disruptive.

But I want to acknowledge the real-life culture behind the swords

Giving credit to the cultures that you're borrowing from is an A+ idea.

...I don't know how to do this in a fantasy setting.

Zuko’s swords and fighting style is based on oxtail sabers (牛尾刀）and Shaolin dual broadswords (少林双刀). @atlaculture has a very cool post on oxtail sabers. But calling his swords "oxtail sabers" doesn't work because cows don't exist in atla. Shaolin is a type of martial arts that originates from Shaolin temple in Henan, China (Shaolin itself literally means “young forest”). But you can’t call them “Shaolin broadswords," since Shaolin does not exist in the Fire Nation.

It’s quite a pickle.

Maybe just use a footnote?

So what should I call Zuko’s swords?

I don’t know.

I think you can just call them broadswords. That’s what the TV show calls them.

Dao by itself could work too if you need to differentiate Zuko's dao from Sokka's jian (double-edged blade). Readers can probably figure out what dao means from context.

If it’s not clear from context what dao means? *sigh* ..."Dao swords" it is, I guess.

To end on a happier note, here is a video of Chang Zhizhao busting some sweet moves.

[desos-records]

the moments in the Lockwood and Co show that really break my heart are the ones where Lockwood’s armor cracks. god bless the actor, his expressions are so subtle but convey so much.

you see it a little when he’s asking Lucy if she’ll take the job (if she’ll stay), then a little with Kipps (telling Lucy not to stay), a bit when his charming words, a weapon as real as his rapier, fail completely on Barnes

but the first real break happens when Lucy’s possessed because he’s completely unprepared for this and it has nothing to do with the ghost and everything to do with how she’s touching his face and how she’s looking at him (like she loves him, like she means it when she says that). and worse, how she’s asking him not to hurt her (he’s afraid he will one day)

then again when Barnes tells Lockwood to fire Lucy (that he won’t be able to let her stay), probably because there’s no one to see his face. his mask shoots right back up as soon as he turns around. 

and again when Lucy threatens to quit

“we need you [I need you].” 

“why?” 

“because [it’s too soon to tell you this] because you’re [someone I already can’t stand the thought of losing] you’re Lucy Carlyle [and you make everything better]”

you see it a little after they blow up the well, but it looks more like a strange sort of relief than a break (Lucy and George are safe) and all he needs is a little grounding (holding Lucy’s hand). the real one happens when Fairfax calls his bluff and points a gun at him, not because of the gun, not really, but because his words can’t protect him (but Lucy can)

when he apologizes to Lucy for yelling at her (hiding how rattled he was by George’s comment about his feelings for her), his armor doesn’t break so much as he sets it down on purpose this time. he can’t stand the thought of hurting her and if he has to come out from behind his mask to make amends (if that’s what it takes for her to stay), he will

there are cracks all over his armor when Winkman threatens him (because his words mean nothing here), but it shatters when he threatens Lucy. he’s begging this man to kill him for the chance that Lucy lives. and oh, when Winkman says he’ll kill Lockwood first so he won’t have to watch her die (his words don’t just fail to protect him, they fail to protect her)

and you can see that part of him wants to set it down when Lucy asks him why he was so so quick to die for her, but he just managed to pull it back together and the wound is too raw. he understands that she’s angry with him (and he cannot stand that), but I’m not sure he understands why. because it doesn’t occur to him that she cares about him too (that she cannot stand the thought of losing him). all he can process right then is that Lucy’s alive and she’s angry with him, but at least she’s safe now

from the beginning he’s constantly trying to make sure she’s safe, but he’s more and more obvious about it. it isn’t George saying Lockwood’s in charge, not her, that gets him moving (he could barely sit still as it is), it’s the reminder that she’s in danger and he’s not there to make sure she’s safe. he was fully prepared to break down that basement door if it meant rescuing her. he grounds her the best way he knows how (the way his hand runs down her forearm before he holds her hand) and tells her

“we’ve got you now [I’m here].”

“you’re safe now, okay? you’re with us. [I’ll make sure you’re safe].”

there’s still more hairline fractures when he sees Lucy with Kipps, when he sees her with Fittes. which is why he gives her the necklace. the thought of her maybe choosing someone else sends him running to tell her how important she is to him (as clumsy as it is) and ask her to stay. it’s not as outright as before because it’s not just them, it’s everything he’s threatened by

“I can’t compete with this [with someone else for your favor]”

the worst of it, of course, is around the auction. before it starts, the DEPRAC agent sees right through him, giving Lockwood a painful reminder of his age (which he tries to act above) with one hand

and when he and Lucy are fighting, he pushes her away, would’ve charged in there alone, but she stays (it’s much too real now). she calls him out and his armor fails him, but he still can’t seem to process her point. he thinks just being around him (much less getting close to him) will hurt her. failing to understand that losing him would hurt her (and it is far too late to turn back)

and then after, when the DEPRAC agent dies and Lockwood is so quick to blame himself, it isn’t just a break. he loses all of it. his center is on full display, his fear and his bleeding heart. he can barely stand.

he still reaches out to Lucy to ground himself (because when he can’t protect himself, she does) and she’s so forceful with her feelings for him. she’s not gently touching his face, but holding his head and jarring him back to present (which is the real way Lucy loves). he can’t hold onto her properly or even look at her, but she’s the one who gives him back his armor. she presses their foreheads together and he takes a breath and he starts to build it back up

it’s ramshackle and unsteady, but it’s back by the time they step out of the car. it’s still nothing against Lucy. and he realizes here, as she’s walking away from him, what she’s been trying to tell him

so by the time he quietly steals into the kitchen, he’s left it behind again, because he’s learning that he doesn’t need it with Lucy (it’s hardly protection if it’s hurting her). this is his center too, the part full of love, and it’s no mistake that it happens in the kitchen, the center of their house. and he’s more honest than he’s ever been

“don’t give up on me.”

“the bottom of the thames used to be a far more appealing place to be.”

“and really no one would have cared.”

“but now... [now there’s you and you care and I won’t hurt something you care about].”

and of course it does come back during the final fight (it is a survival instinct after all) and when he’s collapsing, in pain, afraid (old habits don’t go away overnight). but Lucy and George push back before he goes too far

“this isn’t how you die.”

“how do you know?”

“we won’t let you.”

“never.”

he’s in a place where he can start healing (now that the wound’s been cleaned out), which is why he opens the door. because, yes, his armor is useful, but he doesn’t need it with George and Lucy

[keepingeahalive]

Why Rapple Wouldn’t Work as a Couple

First off, let’s get this out of the way: Raven and Apple are not related. Well…more like distantly related, but to the point where any relation is almost nil. Raven is not destined to marry Apple’s father because Apple’s dad and Raven’s dad (The Good King) are two separate characters. Raven is only destined to be jealous of Apple and poison her. That is all.

Okay, on with the real debate.

I'm probably gonna get a lot of hate for this, but I can't see Apple and Raven as a couple. While both of their arcs were about coming to accept each other, they weren't equal in their relationship. Raven made it clear to Apple many times that she felt disrespected, and Apple ignored that and pushed her own agenda on her. It may have come from a place of caring, but Apple didn't get Raven at all. I can see them working through their issues down the line, but their love story (if you can call it that) is better as platonic.

Bulldozing and Passive Aggression

From the first episode, we can see that Apple immediately took control for both of them. She went behind Raven's back to room with her and decorated Raven's side of the room without her permission, all because Raven is an important part of "her" story.

Not their story. "Her" story.

Her friendship with Raven in the first three chapters was surface-level at best. She assumes what Raven wants instead of actually getting to know her, like when she decides to take "Home Evil-nomics" to get back at Raven for taking Princessology. But Raven's favorite class isn't Home Evil-nomics. It's Muse-ic.

We can see Raven trying to be patient with Apple because Raven is a good person. She doesn't want a repeat of what happened between Snow White and the Evil Queen. In fact, we see her other friends hide their concerns from Apple because they don't want to upset her.

When Ashlynn finally comes out about her relationship with Hunter, she's immediately met with Apple's dismay. Apple tells her several times that she's making the wrong decision, and it gets to Ashlynn so much that she chooses her friendship with Apple over her relationship with Hunter because she doesn't want everyone to be upset. Although Ashlynn decides to do what makes her happy, Apple still tells her outright that she's making the wrong choice.

Briar starts to feel the weight of her destiny sink in and, instead of being met with compassion and understanding, Apple tells Briar "we all have our part to play." While Briar rightfully calls her out for how privileged she is, it takes her three chapters and two more specials to admit to Apple that she was too scared to tell anyone that she didn't want to follow her destiny.

They both go behind Raven's back to poison a birthday cake she made for Apple just so she would stop crying about it.

Apple is the next Queen of Ever After, and she wants to take an active role in serving her people. But she thinks she knows what's best for everyone. If they don't do what she says, then there's something wrong and she has to fix them. Everyone enabled this behavior, except for Raven. This domination is what causes her and Raven's tension at the start of the series.

2. Apple's Fears

Apple is a selfish character. But that selfishness is born of fear.

She believes going against her destiny means dying and being forgotten.

I believe she does care about her friends, in the same vein a God-fearing church-goer cares about the people in her community. She believes there is only one true way of staying safe: following your destiny. If you don't, something bad happens. And she has to remind you of that. She thinks she's helping people when she's really being insensitive and condescending. And this comes down the hardest on Raven.

Raven is the equivalent of someone who's become disillusioned with their faith. She's unhappy with the system she's been put in and she wants something better. That doesn't mean she's not afraid of what might happen if she does. She's terrified she might doom everyone at first. But taking a risk on Legacy Day and showing everyone they can live without following a predetermined path made her and others more hopeful that they could live better lives.

But Apple can't be convinced with one act of rebellion. She doubles down on her beliefs and blames Raven for ruining her Happily Ever After. She's so afraid of her future being uncertain that she would rather follow a status quo where someone she claims to care for is locked away for the rest of her life. You could argue that she doesn't understand that's what would happen, but she never bothered to understand Raven's perspective. Raven takes Apple's perspective in Thronecoming and considers the consequences of her actions. Raven cares about her friends too, so much that she's willing to put her happiness aside to keep them safe. Apple never once did that for her, or for any of her other friends.

This stems from Apple being promised the best destiny out of anyone. She'd go on to live a very prestigious life as Queen. But she's too naive to realize what that would mean for everyone else: Raven would be locked up for the rest of her life, Ashlynn would die to continue her legacy, and Briar would marry some random dude several decades younger than her and never see Apple or anyone she knew ever again. I understand that no one wants to lose the stability they've had their entire life. But she doesn't seem to understand how good she has it.

3. Apple and Raven's Growth

Way Too Wonderland and Dragon Games gave us a lot in terms of character development. Apple and Raven have gotten to know each other better at this point. Even though they have their differences, they do care about each other.

Say what you will about Way Too Wonderland, but I do believe Apple has come to know Raven and is genuinely shocked and heartbroken when Raven finally signed the Storybook of Legends. She's come to care about who Raven really is, she knows Raven would never want to hurt anyone, and she realizes that destinies can be dangerous. I understand her main reasoning was that anyone could easily take someone else's destiny if they had the chance. But seeing what signing the book did to Raven frightened her. Destroying the book with Raven cemented a level of trust and understanding that Raven was longing for.

Which is what makes Dragon Games so heartbreaking.

Apple is a privileged little princess who was promised the best destiny one could expect. I don't think anyone would be all that happy about letting that go. It goes back to what she fears the most. She doesn't know what to do without her destiny. And with her mother only feeding into these insecurities, it allows Apple's doubts to resurface and for someone to take advantage of that.

Apple could have prevented releasing the Evil Queen. But she was too deep in her own cowardice to think clearly. Desperation will make people do anything, especially if promised a happy ending for you and everyone you love (maybe subconsciously hoping Raven would be her True Love). That doesn't excuse her freeing a war criminal who happens to be her best friend's estranged mother, thereby breaking her trust all over again. Raven had just started seeing Apple as someone she could depend on. That's gone now, and Raven had a right to be angry with Apple's selfishness and cowardice.

"But Apple realized her mistake and Raven forgave her in the end!" That's true, but that doesn't mean things are okay between them. Apple is still Raven's friend, and it's in Raven's character to forgive her. But I don't see her forgetting this experience any time soon. That trust would have to be built up all over again and, if you ask me, this ruled out any chance of them getting together romantically. I think Raven would need some time away from Apple to figure things out. Apple could use that time to figure herself out too, especially after figuring out it was Darling who woke her.

If that trust was able to be built back up again, hopefully they would have grown as people and learned to be better friends. But you can't expect this level of trust to be regained for a partnership.

4. A One-Sided Romance

If Rapple were to be anything romantic, it would only come from Apple.

Apple was always obsessed with Raven. I do believe she wanted Raven to fulfill their destinies so they would both be safe, but was too selfish to consider how that would look from Raven's end. She never showed any interest in Daring and, while she enjoyed the admiration she got from other boys, never expressed interest in anyone else.

Except Raven.

So, yes. I do believe Apple was in love with Raven. But I can't see Raven returning those feelings. Apple always disregarded what she wanted, ignored her when she argued against her destiny, and continually tried to turn Raven into something she wasn't. Even after her much-needed character development in Way to Wonderland and Dragon Games, these two still don't have a good foundation of trust between them. If we had gotten more of the show, we might have seen some healing. And, in my opinion, that would include Apple learning to let go of Raven and focusing on her own growth as a person.

And maybe someone else...

In all seriousness, Apple and Raven have a complicated relationship that I don't see working romantically. I know they have the most development together, and it would be an interesting take on the enemies-to-lover trope. But with how often Apple betrayed Raven's trust and how grounded and self-aware Raven is, I can't see them getting together.

I can see Raven being Apple's first crush, but the closest these two can get is sisters.

Because, you know, Raven has a boyfriend. It's Dexter. Say what you want about him, but they have a healthier relationship than Raven and Apple could ever have, romantic or not.

[autistic-daydreamer]

Sophie Foster would be a child of Athena, I just feel it in my bones, but if we're going for plot she would be a child of Zeus

Fitz, Biana, and Alvar would be children of Nike (I was looking it up and saw just now that Nike was close with both Zeus and Athena and I swear it is a coincidence) (also they have the same mortal parent)

Dex is a child of Hephaestus duh, as would Marella (do you see the vision?)

Keefe would be a child of Aphrodite (got that charmspeak already)

Lihn and Tam were harder to think of bc they have powers relating to different gods but then I realized they could have the same mortal parent and different godly parents so they are children of Hades and Poseidon (Sophie 🤝🏼 Tam🤝🏼 Lihn being forbidden children)

Stina would be a child of Apollo.. maybe. I had a hard time deciding her and I might change my mind later but that's what I think rn

I don't know a lot about Rayni but maybe Hecate??

Also Jensi is unclaimed or child of Hermes

[nwarrior777]

okay internet, i know that you not ready for this but

it's strange being all omgyes #slay yay totaly okay for like, all kinks, but going #omg wtf cringe scull emoji about fat kink

like we as society know how kinks works (importance of consents, special rules for practices like using special candles for wax play, etc), we know how really infinite can human fantasy go and so on and so on but why is it still taboo to be openly horny about things like big tasty meal with your lover

can we be finally chill about it

p.s. i have post which gives good arguments on this topic but i couldn't find it by search, only in my blog archive, so here is the link.

The problem with fat kink is not in it existing, but in not-exsisting of range of image of fatness in media

[graedari]

This was supposed to be me just making a reference for Corvo's scars... I am not immune to Corvo/Jess propaganda <3

[are-we-really-doing-this]

I initially put these two photos next to each other like 'oh boyfriends always gotta go through the same hair evolutions' and then I noticed the lock and chain around Punk's neck and thought for a minute.

They've had the same taste in jewelry too, at some point or another.

[theaonlax]

"Akaashiii, the sunrise is beautiful isn't it?"

"Yes, it is."

[leonardoeatscarrots]

Pathologic but the panacea is this

[calculust-prime]

Look out into the distance with me and picture this...

Imagine the softest boy that ever was soft

...is trying to fucking kill you

Thank you for your time.

[canichangemyblogname]

Look. Because some of you need this spelled out for you.

Men are not oppressed for being men. That includes trans men.

Imagine this scenario:

A young boy skins his knee. He begins crying. His father tells him to suck it up because “crying’s for girls; boys don’t cry.” Later, they’re playing t-ball. Same father tells his son that he throws “like a girl” and no son of his is going to be a “sissy.”

Is that boy being oppressed for being a boy?

Spoiler: no.

Has he just faced misogynistic oppression?

Spoiler: no.

Has he faced the negative consequence of a patriarchal ideology predicated upon the idea that women and men are fundamentally different with different “natural spheres” of behavior and norms? Yes. Has he faced the negative consequences of a patriarchal ideology that holds preconceived notions about women and believes them the “lesser sex” due to a myriad of factors like “being emotional” and “being weak?” Yes. Are his father’s words a reflection of his own misogynistic beliefs about women? Yes. He lives under a patriarchy, his entire worldview is constructed through misogyny. Is that boy being oppressed by an system that upholds male dominance and the domination of women? No. Is he facing misogynistic oppression? No.

Imagine a new scenario:

A TERF tells a trans man that he’s just a hysterical little girl who needs to be protected from predators trying to brainwash him into “trans ideology.” The TERF laments his “mutilation” of his “god-given” body and fertility, imploring him to become a mother and fulfill his “natural duty.”

Are the TERF’s words a reflection of her own reactive, reductive, and misogynistic ideas about women and girls? Yes. The TERF’s worldview under the patriarchy is also constructed through misogyny. Her ideas about everything— from race to queerness to women— is influenced by misogyny. Is the man being oppressed for being a woman? No. Is he being oppressed for being a man? Also no. He’s being oppressed for being trans. Has he faced a negative consequence resulting from a worldview that believes that men/males and women/females must be fundamentally separate and different and keep to their “natural” spheres? Yes. Is he being oppressed for being a woman? No. Is he being oppressed for being a man? Definitely not.

Do trans men face unique oppression because of the intersection of their queerness and their man-ness? Yes. Does that mean they’re oppressed for being men? Fucking no. Everyone has their own unique experience of privilege and oppression. Intersectionality is the study of how oppressions and privileges intersect at the socio-political level. It refers to the interconnectedness of social categories.

Trans men are not oppressed for being men; they simply face a transphobia different from that of trans women on account of how the privilege of being a man interacts with a trans man’s transness. They also aren’t oppressed for “being women.” When a trans man faces barriers to things like proper cervical care, it is for reasons different from why women face barriers in similar care. A practice or idea can be rooted in a misogynistic worldview under a fundamentally misogynistic system and society, but that doesn’t mean men face misogynistic oppression. It especially does not mean that men face oppression for being men under the patriarchy.

Transness and man-ness will also be affected by things like class, race, place of origin, immigration status, and even whether the man is gay (in the sense he likes men). Man-ness is complicated by various marginalizations. Man-ness (“being a real man”) under the patriarchy is defined very narrowly, designed in a way so that most people lose. Straightness is a feature of being a “real man” under the patriarchy, but we wouldn’t claim gay men are treated “like women” or being oppressed for “being men” when the definition of man-ness is weaponized against them.

This is not that hard to grasp.

Men are not oppressed for being men. That goes for ALL men. Misandry is not real. It has no political or societal consequences. The same goes for transmisandry.

[armoralor]

transphobes are not welcome here. r*dfems and T*RFs can get fucked. Star Wars is home to many trans characters and fans. nothing can be done to change it.

[diviedrawn]

I just wanted an excuse to draw him again

[watcheraurora]

Tango, Etho, and Doc should build a stage and auditorium and give a presentation on redstone. Call it a TEDtalk