#also i think the most important fact to remember is: NONE OF THIS IS REAL OH MY GOD HES JUST A CHARACTER WHY ARE YOU

[prismatoxic]

okay, shipping brainrot from my last post aside, i'm still thinking about the shapeshifter arc. the other sites i use don't have inline posting or do but it's clunky, so i guess i'm theorizing here. some of this may seem obvious; bear with me, i'm not trying to be patronizing, just working through things. this will probably be long.

(edit: i've since learned there's canon explanations for all of this. regrettably i don't like them. enjoy my ideas of what would be better maybe? but keep in mind i wrote this before i knew it had been explained anywhere else.)

(edit again: i've done a 180 and come fully around on the canon explanations! i have a lot of thoughts about them but this isn't the post for that. anyway i'm disabling reblogs, sorry. you can still look at this if you want)

laios reveals what he knows of shapeshifters, and that they function on memory:

no one ever really suggests in chapters 39 or 40 who thought of which fake except in the case of which ones laios must have thought of, but i want to posit who i think each one came from, and what it means narratively if i'm right. so, mostly a thought experiment/character study that i could be wrong about or that was never meant to be clearly defined in the first place. but maybe fun to think about? (i'm sure other people have done this before too, but i think it'll be fun to write up.)

from the outset, i think it's worth mentioning that chilchuck knows all three laios fakes are, in fact, fakes. two chilchucks say this, but the one on the right is the real one. senshi and marcille immediately corroborate this, though we can't tell which of them it is except that it's not any of the really obvious fakes.

what i think this suggests is that, brought to the surface, the warped perceptions of the rest of the party that chilchuck, senshi, and marcille have can be easily discerned when compared with the real thing. each of these laioses is from one of them, but they immediately figure out none of them are right with the real laios right there in the room. this is important.

as for who's who...

i think it's fair to assume that giant laios is from chilchuck. laios is the tallest member of their party, at six feet; while chilchuck sees marcille and senshi as their correct heights, laios is a giant to him, and his bulky armor doesn't help. that's why, even if this is his perception, it's glaringly obvious that it's wrong as soon as it's made physical. it's the only big one, and easily falls into the camp of "doesn't seem to know much about monsters" that the others also do.

stupid laios is, i think, from marcille. because the giant one is so likely chilchuck's and i don't think senshi sees laios as someone who stupidly wants to eat everything (even if senshi's opinion of him isn't stellar right now, "i have to eat it" wouldn't be paired with being an idiot to senshi), it tracks that marcille would be the one to remember him this way. to someone who doesn't appreciate their monster eating and otherwise thinks he's an idiot just as much as the others do, dumbly muttering about eating things seems like a reasonable portrayal of laios.

feminine laios, then, is from senshi. i think his physical perception of the other party members is the most off-base; this is likely because he's known them for the least amount of time, and his idea of what they look like is based more on their races than anything else. i think the resemblance to falin might not be intentional--someone suggested to me the other day that the dwarf perception of tall-men is probably more feminine in contrast to how Macho dwarfs are. i think that makes sense (if it ever comes up canonically, i haven't seen it yet). laios and falin do just... look like gender-swapped versions of each other, also. so if senshi sees laios as a feminine person, well... that just winds up looking like falin.

so this leaves us with only the real laios. confronted with their perceptions of him, his friends can immediately tell all three are incorrect.

moving on, we eliminate the three most obvious fakes from the rest of the party, starting with marcille:

if we take into account what i just said about senshi, i think this is his. racial stereotypes about elves being what they are, him not knowing the party as well as the other members do... she stands out, and that's why.

now this is where things start to get interesting.

the next two fakes to be eliminated aren't so blatantly incorrect that they can be struck right out at a glance, but it's not hard to notice the flaws when you look closer, and chilchucks A and B are the ones to point it out. chilchuck is naturally observant; most of his fakes seem to emulate this. (the one who addresses the fakes is A, the real one, but B is proving himself able to pick up on the things A notices. this is important.)

notably, chilchuck and senshi assume these must be laios's versions of them.

we can assume this is correct, if we want to. we can take the framing of this as being an intentional reflection of the truth.

or... or... we can look a little deeper. we can wonder if, perhaps, this isn't a reflection of laios, but a reflection of his friends and what they think of him. laios may not immediately notice the problems, but i don't think it's because he doesn't remember these details. i don't think laios sees much of anything in vague terms; he's observant in his own right, but in ways he doesn't really recognize, nor does anyone else. i think he was so focused on their faces and mannerisms that he didn't notice the bigger picture, glossing over something because so many other factors are at play.

senshi and chilchuck think laios doesn't take notice of things, but the vast majority of the shapeshifter arc is about them and marcille not trusting laios's judgement as it is, given how things went recently. is it possible there's more to their assumptions here than what the text explicitly says? i think so!

so then who do these two belong to? marcille, i think.

if we assume dumb laios is hers, then we can also assume her perceptions of the others are kind of broad and vague. she doesn't think poorly of them, necessarily (at least not in as obvious a way as she does with laios, who, i'll remind you, she's currently upset with), but she doesn't commit unimportant details to memory, like chilchuck's neck band or the damage to senshi's helmet.

we've got three more "obvious" fakes to get through, and laios offers another lore tidbit on how the shapeshifters work:

anyway, the first of the next round is marcille again, setting the stage for how these three next fakes are eliminated.

marcille changes her hairstyle all the time, so this isn't a surprise. the last one pictured here winds up being our next fake, as indicated by her grimoire:

so the fake marcille in this section is the one with the most visibly different hair texture (who even draws attention to this), and the spellbook that's woefully incompetent. i think she's from chilchuck.

he's observant, as i said before; even if he didn't commit her hair to memory, he did remember the stuff she's said about how important hair is to magic. maybe that's why the texture is so striking. more importantly, chilchuck isn't wary of magic quite the way senshi is, but he also doesn't understand it. the general tone of the low-quality grimoire also just... sounds like the way he'd frame something like that. (plus, the "how to turn back time" bit is a thing he specifically called her on when she suggested it a few chapters ago.)

so the next fake chilchuck and senshi are revealed via their tools:

i think the chubby-cheeked chilchuck with the simple lockpicks is from senshi, and i think the ordinary-looking senshi with the simple cookware is from chilchuck. the former speaks for itself--senshi sees chilchuck as a child, and knows absolutely nothing about picking locks. as for the fake senshi, chilchuck has a decent mental image of him but knows nothing about cookware.

so now we're down to the final three fakes, and there's only one person left who they could be from: laios. nobody thinks this, not even laios himself, but i want to explore the concept because i think it has extreme merit. the three remaining fakes have some key similarities between them, namely in that they're all close enough interpretations that making a distinction is difficult. they look a tiny bit different, but both the real people and their fakes make plausible cases for why they're the actual person. i want to talk about why i think laios is the one who made that so, and what that means about him.

chapter 39 ends with all his companions--real and fake--doubting his skills. seeing a pattern?

chapter 40 opens with laios determined to regain his friends' trust in him...

...while his friends (and their fakes) talk about how he's liable to like the fakes more, because they're monsters.

this is a needlessly cruel interpretation of laios, but after how things went post-falin-rescue, it's not a surprise. they see him as reckless and single-minded, more interested in the things he's weird about than in the people around him.

laios is really bad at talking about what he's thinking--not because he's hiding it, but because it doesn't occur to him that it's important. meeting the lunatic magician in the paintings is a prime example of this, but he does it a lot. they likely have no idea why he told toshiro about falin and the black magic; to them, laios was being flippant with sensitive information, not worrying about their safety. to laios? he was trying to get help. he trusted toshiro, and his perception of their friendship made him think the information would help them gain an ally who cared about falin as much as they do. he wasn't trying to put falin or marcille in danger--far from it, in fact. but he didn't tell his friends about his thought process. he didn't think it was important to share.

(he's autistic but we all know this. moving on)

so, we have laios's plan: the pairs cook together, while he watches for behavioral differences to discern who's who. it doesn't occur to him, or anyone else, that the people he's watching for mistakes are his own perceptions of his friends. and now we get into the meat of why i wanted to write this post.

assuming i'm correct... let's talk about laios's view of his friends, and how he challenges those perceptions.

starting with my favorite, chilchuck:

chilchuck A, of course, is in fact the real one. this is a pretty significant character moment for him too, in my opinion; we know he has difficulty expressing his emotions, and that a lot of his conflicts so far have stemmed from that. the fact that "chilchuck B asked for help with a menial task" is a gotcha moment to him is... telling. not only because it's so obvious to him, but because it's not obvious to any of his companions. he thinks they know this about him, but he's never openly expressed anything to make them think this is an issue he'd have, in addition to having sought help in the past.

his "convictions and pride and all that" seems to them like someone trying to convince them of something, not someone reminding them of facts he assumes they know.

anyway, back to laios. if we accept that chilchuck B is made from his memories, this suggests several things. first of all, chilchuck B is, despite his softer eyes and willingness to ask for help, still a fairly accurate portrayal of chilchuck. he's easily annoyed and he's observant, two traits chilchuck is known for. i think the reason chilchuck B has the kinder eyes and the more gentle disposition is because to laios, those things are indicative of someone being a good person, and he very much thinks chilchuck is a good person.

we know laios isn't especially good at reading people in general. thus, his idea of who his friends are is skewed in broad strokes, but not in the ways they think. he knows who chilchuck is, but he also associates chilchuck with his own ideas of what makes someone "good", which results in a chilchuck who's less rough around the edges. confronted with this--the real chilchuck asking him if he can tell--laios compares the two and thinks, reasonably speaking, the nicer one who trusts him has to be the friend he respects so much.

senshi and marcille also want to accept this chilchuck, likely for similar reasons. they also respect and care for him; they've seen him go through a lot. laios's ideal of him is just that, ideal. in a roundabout way, it's only their deep fondness for who chilchuck really is that makes them want to see him this way.

next up, we have marcille.

the fake, marcille A, is a radical departure from what makes chilchuck B a fake. laios notes that the real marcille is exactly the same as she always is. the reason, then, that marcille A confuses him--and the others--is that after everything they've been through, their perception of her has changed radically.

if we look back to senshi and chilchuck's marcilles, it's readily apparent when they're eliminated that both interpretations hinge on the knowledge that she performs black magic. senshi's tries to use it to prove herself; chilchuck's has a grimoire loudly proclaiming it's what she does. contrast this to marcille A: she doesn't mention black magic at all, and her grimoire looks strikingly similar to the real one.

that's because laios doesn't think her performing black magic changes anything about who she is. her doing so proved her to be just as dedicated to falin as he himself is, and the knowledge that her goals involve it doesn't faze him. (additionally, marcille has been teaching him magic, and falin had tried in the past. though his image of a grimoire is flawed to someone experienced, to anyone else it looks fine.) thus, marcille A isn't a flagrant black magic wielder; she's someone who's been fundamentally changed by what they--and falin--went through.

let's go back to chapter 27:

chilchuck and senshi are appalled, and will continue to be. while they ultimately don't prevent marcille from doing this, and care enough about both her and laios (and in chilchuck's case, falin as well) to be in tentative support, this changes their view of her in a negative way. she's dangerous now, in a way she wasn't before, but she's still marcille--goofy and a little reckless. thus, their views of her, and the illusions that result.

laios's opinion of her changes for the better.

she is, all at once, both competent and loyally dedicated. she will stop at nothing to help falin. whatever goofiness she exhibited before now is gone, replaced by the cold demeanor of someone who is doing something extremely dangerous for reasons that are inherently selfish, but ultimately too important to reject.

thus, we return to marcille A: cold, sharp, dedicated. not reckless or goofy, but methodical and haunted. she may have returned to "normal" since they left the castle town, but laios's opinion of her, and understanding of her love for falin, has been forever changed.

so faced with the real marcille--still silly, still whining, still frequently annoyed with him--he's confused, because that's deeply familiar, but it doesn't line up with what he knows about her now.

the truth, of course, is nuanced--these things are true about marcille, but only under duress; it's similar to how laios becomes a competent leader when the going gets tough. she has this within her, but it's not her default state of being. still, the shapeshifter picks up on the strongest memories laios has of her, this new interpretation of someone he thought he knew.

now then--onto senshi, the punchline of this particular joke about the differences between the copies. i still think it says a lot.

i think this one speaks for itself, though i find chilchuck's agreement interesting. senshi is the newest member of the team; little is known about him. laios happily notes that senshi "always looks cool" while chilchuck says he looks normal (and chilchuck B insults the real one). laios sees senshi this way because he thinks senshi is cool as hell, and this manifests in an idealized version of a face he's not as familiar with as he is with chilchuck and marcille.

this is clearly comedy, but it also speaks to the same desire to see the best in the rest of the party. marcille is the only one who notices likely because her opinion of senshi isn't so romanticized. chilchuck's senshi, of note, wasn't a perfect replica: we don't see much of him after the obvious fakes are hauled off, but he's a little squashed (he's the top one):

which indicates that chilchuck's visual memory of senshi is already flawed. if we compare this to giant laios and the marcille with the unique hair texture, it tells us chilchuck's attention to detail is more specific than the others'; he can remember the hole in the helmet, the importance of hair, but he doesn't quite see the bigger picture. giant laios is also surprisingly... rugged? which i imagine has to do with chilchuck's perception of him as a tall-man. (or maybe how he clearly has trouble seeing laios's face half the time, lmao...)

anyway. laios thinks senshi is super cool and chilchuck has an imperfect idea of what senshi look like as it is. (i wonder if chilchuck is some degree of faceblind? not enough to not recognize someone at all, but can't pinpoint specifics.)

and so, we arrive at the moment of truth.

so let's go over what i'm theorizing here... all the remaining fakes are illusions based on how laios sees his friends. the illusions manage to make mistakes that reveal the truth to him, but i think the reason for that harkens back to what laios said earlier... the illusions are being updated over time.

laios isn't considering any of the things that give the fakes away until this moment. if it had taken a little longer to resolve things, maybe they'd have started course-correcting, but they aren't given the chance. laios makes sure they aren't--he acts very quickly. even as he presents the three pairs with his findings, he's aware that everything will fall apart as soon as he does... and he's banking on that. while the shapeshifter illusions defend themselves from being killed, he gets right to the heart of the matter in the only way he knows how: confronting the actual monster involved.

when all's said and done, laios reveals how he figured it out:

potentially of note, all of these details happened before the red dragon fight. chilchuck fighting a mimic and revealing his history with them, senshi gushing about the dungeon's ecosystem, and marcille being attacked by the undine weren't super recent memories. when laios brought them forth in his mind, he had a delay before the shapeshifter updated its illusions.

well... except with marcille. marcille A actually didn't show her hand so easily; it was the real marcille's carelessness that proved her identity.

but what this suggests is that, when confronted with the realities of marcille versus his idealized version of her, laios had to make a choice: did it make more sense for her to have been radically changed by the revival and subsequent loss of falin, or was the presence of a marcille he knew so well proof of an illusion? she was the one who was the most different, and as such, the contrast was the same one that eliminated all three laioses at the start: with the real thing in the room, the fake became apparent.

so, to reach a conclusion: one again, laios has proven he's not as scatterbrained as his companions think, but this time he did so on a more personal level than usual. to them, he reveals that he knows their quirks enough to define them by such when they're otherwise faced with convincing copies. to us, the readers, if we accept what i've suggested here... he's revealed a lot more. he respects, admires, and idolizes his friends, all out of fondness: he wants to see them in an ideal way, whatever that means for each of them as individuals.

anyway thanks for coming to my TED talk

[katerinaaqu]

Why didn't Odysseus's crew stage a mutiny against him in the Odyssey? (An analysis based on Homer's Odyssey)

It has been a while since the last time I did some Odyssey Analysis and here is an interesting question that goes on in this. A very valid question actually.

During the arduous trip in the Odyssey, the Cephallinians suffered greater loss than anything they suffered at the 10 year war at Troy. They lost almost all ships and all men were dying. They were reduced to a ship of a crew with less than 40 people and they didn't seem to get much hope. So of course one could ask; what was holding them back and didn't fight back against Odysseus apart from the indirect mutiny they did when he turned his eyes away from him to pray? Why their only mutiny was to disobey his orders and slay the cattle of Helios Hyperion? Surely more than 30 men could do plenty of damage to one man right? Why didn't they? And why is it important for the story?

So while thinking about it I came down with some possible explanations as to why that happened;

Odysseus was beloved to the gods

Regardless of their terrible situations, Odysseus probably still had the fame of someone beloved to the gods. He used to be directly communicating with Athena and was under her protection. Despite the fact that he was cursed by a god, there could be some sort of a thought running to their minds; what if we harm him and the gods strike us for it? What if there will be consequences for directly wishing harm to one who was blessed to be appreciated by gods? It could possibly be a risk that they didn't want to take. And it makes sense given how much Odysseus interracted even with minor gods during the trip (for example Aeolus or Circe). Quite frankly they might as well have wished that at some point Odysseus would appeal to yet another god for help.

Odysseus was beloved to his subjects

If you look at my other analysis here You can remember how beloved leader Odysseus was even to subjects such as slaves who in theory would have no real reason to be loyal to him. Odysseus seemed always to be a just and beloved leader and his men on the ship were not an exception. Regardless of whether they had lost faith hin him in his capability to bring him home or if they doubted his judgement, they couldn't get past the emotional connection; Odysseus had protected them during the war to the point of suffering the least possible losses, during the trip he was going to extreme measures to protect them (even the cruel misadventure in which Odysseus cut the rope from his ship to save the last ship from the Laestrygonians might as well have spoken volumes to the men that were saved). It would be hard for them to completely ignore that even in the face of mistrust. Somehow it would also be them thinking that they "owe him" till that part.

Odysseus was hiding stuff from them that could be important

Ironically the very source of their mistrust was protecting Odysseus. Odysseus didn't share with them the nature of the sack of Aeolus even if he seemed pretty clear that they couldn't touch it (and that led to their first tragedies). Later he hid the information that they would have to go through the Sirens till the very last moment where he warned them about it. Later he hid completely the information that they would go through Skylla and Charybdis. His men could think "How many more things did this man know on their way home and hid it from them?" if they captured or killed him in a mutiny how were they sure there weren't more dangers ahead that Odysseus was hiding from them and could either be informed the last moment or not at all? What guarantee did they have that Odysseus didn't know even MORE about their course? They had none. So ironically the very reason they began to mistrust him in the first place became the reason Odysseus was safe from their rage.

No one wanted to take responsibility at time of crisis!

Last and definitely not least comes for me the most important reason of all at least story-wise that shows how excellent writer Homer is into writing human nature. His men didn't stage a mutiny because no matter how displeased they were with his decisions, literally NO ONE wants to have the same responsibility to take decisions in time of crisis! Honestly, how many times do common folk feel themselves find a scapegoat usually to the face of their leaders when things go south? (and for good reason that is given that they are the ones with the responsibility to take decisions). When something goes wrong we blame the leader, the government or someone that has come forth and not only takes the decisions but also is responsible for the blame as well.

During their arduous trip Odysseus took some of the most painful decisions they could imagine in order to save what he could; he advised them to leave the Cicones and they didn't which led to their first tragedy; he tried to correct his mistake by appeasing the god Aeolus, he took the decision to sacrifice his ships in order to save the one he could knowing full well that they would never be able to fight against the Laestrygonians. He knew the 11 ships were lost cause so he acted fast cutting the ropes of his own ship and sailing away, making sure to save what he could even if that meant to the terrible loss. He traveled to the underworld even though he was alive, he chose Skylla over Charybdis knowing that the sacrifice would be too great but still not as great as to lose them all.

Regardless of their emotions at that moment; they put themselves in his shoes and realize that none of them would take the burden of leadership and take those decisions for them. Odysseus with his nerves of steel managed to save them so far even if they had so many losses and undoubtedly they realized that in his shoes they would never be able to act so efficiently and so fast. And knowing their own reactions against him; blaming him for the losses, they realize that none of them would have the guts to take not only the painful decisions but also the blame and hate that follows them. Odysseus was lifting on his shoulder as much hate and anger as very few others; not only his previous experiences at war and his actions but now his decisions of the trip. I have no doubt that even in their anger the men admired how he could carry it all.

Conlcusions:

Homer is a master of words and plot. I have no doubt that if he thought it served the plot he would have mentioned his men staging a full on mutiny against Odysseus or in one way I am almost certain he thought of the possibility being quite doable given as I said above that Odysseys was one man and the others were over 30. However knowing how great he is in protraying human emotions to his writing I think his choice of plot was deliberate.

Not only was Odysseus someone that could erupt not only controversy but also superstition given his close relationship with gods before, his leadership was always admirable regardless of the results (knowing his prudent nature and how plenty of his orders that were disobeyed ended up in a tragedy and let's face it Odysseus was also a brilliant fighter. I doubt anyone would easily take the first step to fight him one on one either!) and above all he was one of the best when it came on taking some really difficult decisions, carrying on his back not only the personal guilt he felt while taking them but also the anger of others and their retalliation. And in an amazingly human writing Homer speaks on times of crisis. When people do not wish to take responsibility at times of Crisis because they know full well that their decisions rarely ever would be painless!

Therefore they couldn't retalliate against him; they didn't want the responsibility of leadership or the blame for the losses. They didn't want to stand against authority directly either. So they took the indirect mutiny decision; when authority is not present they disobey or they break their will when the force of authority.

Could we perhaps one more time appeal to the usual theory of "unreliable storyteller" and speak on how Odysseus doesn't want to mention a mutiny in his story to Phaeakes because he doesn't want to appear as weak leader in their eyes?

We could but in my opinion this doesn't seem likely. Odysseus is already humiliated; shipwrecked and a beggar in their house. He mentioned how it was ellegedly his fault that the whole domino of reactions began when he mentions how he was yelling to Polyphemus being blasphemus that not even Poseidon could put him back together if he had killed him (which let's face it is too much given that gods had no probelm resurrecting some dead before). He had already mentioned his men not listening to him and disobedience was already a heavy thing. He didn't hide most of the unpleasant experiences during the trip so why miss the opportunity of shifting the blame to his men, saying that they stage a mutiny against him thus himself being unable to react instead of stating that he fell asleep during the prayer? To show that his men fear him so they do not dare to face him? Perhaps but it seems unlikely given the whole story in which Odysseus doesn't hide his bad sides from them.

What do you guys think? Let me know to your comments and reblogs below! ^_^

[remember-digimon]

Let's talk about Tai!

First of all, Tai does in fact show signs of terminal Shonen Protagonist, however with the depth of his character we can assume it is in remission. Good for him.

Tai is reckless and often rushes into things without thinking. To him, there is the goal and there are things in the way of his goal, so naturally he just has to bulldoze the obstacles and he's good. This is probably how he ended up as the leader of the group, aside from him being shown as a sort-of-main-character; while other characters are important, Tai is the driving force. He is action.

(Remember that time he tried to beat up a Bakemon?? This kid has zero chill when he's on a mission I swear)

If Izzy were in charge, they would get sidetracked by the details. If Matt were in charge, they'd likely never get very far because he has to consider the feelings of the entire group. If Sora were in charge, she would be too concerned with protecting everyone.

While Tai is basically the rocket fuel of their group, this also leads him to charging forward when other parts of the metaphorical machine aren't ready. This is why the dynamic of the whole group works so well; Tai may be hyperfocused on the end game but the others make up for the skills he lacks.

In addition to being the driving force, Tai is really good at delegating. He gives the task of figuring out the gate in Myotismon's castle to Izzy, who is objectively the best one for the job. During Our War Game, he's giving orders like a general during the fight, showing his aptitude for strategy.

Other leaders in Digimon seem to be given that title simply because they're the ones wearing the goggles, but in my opinion none of them really live up to the standard set by Tai. He may not have a deep understanding of Digimon and their world, but he has Izzy for that. He might sometimes lose himself in the end goal and forget to be empathetic to his friends, but he has Matt for that. He might be bullheaded and stubborn, but he has Mimi to be blunt and tell him what he needs to hear.

His real weakness lies in Kari; when she passes out in the desert, Tai basically falls to pieces and Izzy has to take over. When Izzy accidentally broadcasts their location, Tai flies off the handle, unprovoked, in a way that's pretty out of character for him any other time. He's haunted by the incident where Kari collapsed at the playground when they were younger, and he blames himself completely for what happened.

It's interesting to compare Tai and Matt as older brothers. Tai is very loving to Kari, and very protective, likely (at least in part) because of what happened at the playground. Matt is just as overprotective of TK, maybe even more, since he's basically rooted his entire purpose in protecting TK. Tai values Kari as a member of the team, but is still highly aware of the danger she's in. This is similar to how Matt views TK, being glad to be spending this much time with him but losing himself a little in worrying about him.

Unlike Matt, though, Tai is never really given the chance to fully confront his fear of something happening to Kari. He finds aspirin for her, but Machinedramon attacks and separates them. She's recovered by then anyway, but that's beside the point. It would've been nice to see him come to terms with his feeling of failure to protect her at all costs, but there were huge monsters to fight so I see why they skipped it.

Overall, Tai is a wonderful protag. He's courageous and instills his teammates with the energy to keep moving forward, he always has his eye on the prize, and he knows when to step aside and let someone else handle a problem he might not be well equipped for. Other shonen protags, like Ash from Pokemon for instance, can solve their problems by believing in their friends and that's it. Tai solves problems through strategy, delegating, and most of all, teamwork.

[ohsalome]

love seeing people (westerners) WHO HAVE NEVER EVEN MADE A SINGLE PEEP ABOUT UKRAINE AID, EVER, reblog russian lgbt aid funds after the recent news.

i'm very anti whataboutism but holy hell. when it comes to a certain country we all agree that liberation comes before improvement of lgbt issues. *i* agree with that, at least. but then the same people would rather pay to save lgbt people from a country that's actively besieging another country, it's just... beyond words how hypocritical it is.

I have so many things to say, none of them being nice.

Ukrainian army is, so far, the only force that is presenting challenge to "putin's regime". Wouldn't it make sense for people who "want to protect russian lgbt+s" to support us then? We are conctantly being degraded for "not allying with good russians" who are supposed to be our "natural allies" because they are "anti-putin".... Funny how it doesn't work the other way around, doesn't it? And yes, I have personal experience with russian lgbt+ and feminist circles (prior to the full-scale invasion), and I remember clearly how they explicitly ignored all pleas from ukrainians to speak up on our behalf. And how can one forget the famous "women have no nationality"...

This is, from my memory, the third time russia has "banned lgbt+s", and I believe I have a good reason for being sceptical about the real consequences of russian laws which, as we all know, are worth a little more than toilet paper. It is common knowledge which people of russian elite are gay, and I sincerely doubt their life will change in any way with this new law. As a matter of fact, most of them are a part of russian propaganda machine, like the infamous Anton Krasovsky. Also, what is the point then of this law, if it functionally duplicates all the previous ones already existing and brings nothing new to the table? I will not repeat the conspiracies about "diverting attention from Ukraine", because you've probably already heard of them. My own conspiracy is that its goal is to further the international reputation of russians as innocent victims of the regime, all while ukrainians are being actively slandered and forced into fake opposition with palestinians. One example relevant to the discussion I've seen recently is a post of a russian "war refugee" who has fled from russia either when the war started, or during one of the mobilisation waves. She was complaining about how much she dislikes living in the West and how she plans to return to russia, fully knowing that it is an authoritarian hellscape, and she will have to collaborate with it, because "it is more comfortable there"... This is what I think about russian "victims of the regime" - this is all masquerade for them, which they are ready and happy to take off once they are tired of play-pretending being part of the civilized world and want to return to their comform zone swamp.

Just like pussy riot monetizing Bucha imagery for their fame and profit, russian lgbt+s jumped on the oppostunity to appropriate the suffering of ukrainian war victims to earn more $$$$$. And I blame western media which has for day one has put us on the same scale, equating ukrainian civillians to russian ones, even though only one side has to live under constant bombardment, only one side had to seek refuge due to the threat of occupation, only one side is being actively genocided... But russians are having meanie mean words said about them on the internet, and this is just as bad - nay, mayhaps even worse! Remember how during the first months of full-scale invasion westerners were claiming that russians will starve to death due to sanctions, and I was preaching to the choir trying to explain that we are literally dying due to west feeding the russian war machine that is exterminating us? Well, almost two years have passed, no russian have famished because Chanel has left the market, they are successfuly importing all the missiles components through Kazakhstan, and Ukraine cannot even count all the losses we've had because how much of our territory remains under the occupation. But westerners have already congratulated themselves about how they've "immediately gifted ukraine all the weapons they need once the war started" (hahaha!) and moved on to playing with their new palestinian toy, all while for some reason pitting us against each other (and stealing footage from Syria and Ukraine to misrepresent them as Palestine)

Oh and don't get me started on western "political activists" who go out of their way to mention every single conflict happening on planted earth, excluding Ukraine. I will never forget that.

[very bitter and pessimistic conclusion censored]

[aoimeru14]

I'm usually more calm about this sport, but today's race makes me want to sort of rant (and hear what y'all think)...

Serious question, do you genuinely think that McLaren actually has a strategy? (Any kind of strategy) (Please comment on it, I'm genuinely curious to hear your thoughts)

No, because now I'm starting to think that they just play Jenga during the briefing and then tell the drivers "Do what you want, you are your own man now. But remember, Papaya Rules" and then proceed to play Galaga at the pitwall during the race.

I'm saying this because even if McLaren objectively has the best car/drivers combo on the grid, it seems like they still don't have a plan on how to use it and what they want to achieve with it. (Like, today they achieved results just because the drivers aren't tractor drivers) (and no, it's not the same as Ferrari. They have clear goals, just poor strategies, from time to time, for achieving them)

You think they learned after Hungary, but no.

You think they came to a resolution after everyone, especially their direct competitors, told them about WDC, but no.

Today none of the pit calls made sense (most of them were just plain data feeding/asking for feedback) and this leaves me wondering:

"why I still cannot figure out what they want to do with this 2024 season in terms of strategy/goals?"

(Also, they clearly don't have a clue on how to start p1-p2).

Italy Sky sports commentators seem to think just like me because they kept asking the same question to everyone on the grid.

Am I really the only one who saw today as an easy p1-p2? Like, everyone was so confused/slow during the race and the drivers were clearly left by their own devices...

In the realm (of dreams) in which a strategy/goal actually existed, then the pitwall should have done more, in my opinion. They should have given more clear instructions to both drivers, especially before the actual race...

Yes, i'm also (but not only) talking about that risky, premature and overly aggressive pass in lap 1 at the chicane.

NO, it is not Oscar's fault, he just wanted to prove that he is a good driver. We know sweetie. You still have a lot to learn and today it showed. The fault is on the ones who instructed him, a rookie, that he COULD do it so aggressively and early in the race, risking both of the cars like that. (Thank you Lando for braking and saving it)

No, really, If that's what they are cooking for winning WCC then, oh boy. We are screwed.

Let's remember the clownery of: "Yes, we don't have a first driver, that's toxic behaviour. We let them race each other".

Yes, I agree.

You have a really good lineup so, why not? BUT there must be limits, for god's sake... There must be a strategy behind it. Look at what could have happened to BOTH cars... IN LAP 1.

That 1v1, so early in the race, didn't make sense strategy wise (and, in fact, just helped to open a position for Ferrari to slide in. Very "Ministry of Defense of the Papaya Kingdom" behaviour from everyone involved).

It was clear that today Piastri was feeling it, even more than Norris. He could have had all of the laps in the world to challenge Lando AFTER they secured a P1-P2 by distancing themselves from the Ferraris...

Also, why on earth do they still ask the drivers "Are we still on plan A or B?"... Guys, it's your job, YOU HAVE ALL THE DATA IN FRONT OF YOUR NOSE... YOU are the one who should know if your drivers are in a position in which they can safely do two pits or just focus on one and manage the tyres (yes, I'm positive that that was the full extent of the two impossible-to-decipher master plans... Call them MI5).

To quote Max Verstappen: "Can people in the background please be awake? it's important."

Speaking of the data... I unfortunately also think that the real reason behind why they had to rely so much on the drivers for feedback was also because they didn't harvest enough data for the medium (and so, acquiring solid data concerning the race pace) during free practice. From what I saw they preferred the soft all friday, obviously for a perfect pole at quali, and sacrificed all Saturday morning for petty strategy (sandbagging, really? In this economy?!).

Speaking of "In this economy"... (Yes I'm still not done ranting, I just recharged my battery for the last nail in the coffin, like Lando taught me last GP)

Ok, today was bad but what makes me more upset is the fact that McLaren's lack of ideas (and today's podium positions) slightly undermined both of the drivers chances to p1-p3 in WDC. (Yes, both. I would really like to see Piastri getting P3 in WDC in his second F1 season. Very demure, very polite cat.)

For those wondering, no, I'm really happy that McLaren is achieving all these points this year, it's been a while for the Papaya house and they really worked so hard to achieve this and more.

But this car/driver combo has not only proved to be suited for being on upper side of the grid, it's real winning material. So real that the beasts (us and, why not, the drivers) are getting hungry for victories. Let's just keep this mentality and translate it to a solid plan, because we don't know how long will it last. Maybe next year would be 2022/2023 all over again. Let's win everything while we can.

ALSO this lack of plans, Championship wise, is also starting to build up on drivers. We can see it on Oscar's tendency to be impulsive at times and Lando's struggles with believing in himself and performing accordingly. Does he really have to start ignoring the pit wall and go full multi21 for the WDC? Does Oscar have to do the same to win and prove that he can do better than whatever Hungary was? No.

The fact that none of the other McLaren strategists/team principal seem to acknowledge the harm that this lack of long term plans/goals is doing to everyone is what is making everything worse. And no, saying that Lando could do a Vettel Is not how you solve the problem. Same goes for "Oscar Is ready to help, if asked". Same goes for guilt-trapping Lando and calling him childish when he does not comply.

No, no one has to sacrifice something. No, one IS sacrificing something. Why is it always about blaming the other driver? Stop with this narrative. It's pure and simple gaslighting, the reality is that you have a rocketship and zero plan on how to use it at the fullest.

All for what? favouring constructor? That's really the only plan you have? Guys, do you know that if you do strategies that help the drivers (also WDC wise) you mathematically also get points for the WCC, right? That's how it works...

And yes, i really think that p1-p3 in WDC was (and maybe is, I don't know... Don't feel like I want to do the calculations right now) doable with the right strategy (and Verstappen constantly on a one-wheeled tractor, let's be realistic).

Both Norris and Piastri deserved a P1-p2 today, and both of them deserve to be adequately followed for the WDC (even if they cannot achieve P1. P2 and P3 is still LOVELY). Wouldn't it be more gratifying for them and their careers than just a podium?? That would be a real PAPAYA RULES in my opinion. (Of course drivers like to win, so probably they are ok with anything if that means holding trophies, but still... THINK BIG WHEN YOU CAN)

That said, even if I'm a McLaren fan (maybe I should correct it as "McLaren's drivers and engineers fan" now, we'll see), I'm still really happy that Leclerc won (sorry, i'm italian. Today, and just today, I'm also a tifosa too, forza Ferrari!).

Just a little pissed to see that we still don't have a plan other than a stupid propagandistic slogan... (Yes, I decided to risk my life on this site doing this ranting BECAUSE of that stupid slogan).

Sorry for the yapping/ranting, I hope I didn't offend anyone. Love y'all, and don't take anything too seriously, it's just a sport.

As anyone, I just want to see the team I'm rooting for improve, especially now that we have a NASA rocket in the house.

Also, McLaren fans, pls don't fight each other, let's be less toxic than our favourite team. The drivers didn't do anything wrong today and, even if it is difficult to admit it, they are just two twenty-something years old acting like their age living their dream/passion.

That said, I'm really curious to read your thoughts/opinions on today's race and ideas for possible future strategies. I see it often on Reddit and never on Tumblr, let's show that we too can get technical!

See you (?) for the next GP... Hoping McLaren does come to their senses.

[controversial-blorbo-bracket]

Controversial Character Tournament Round 2: Alois Trancy from Black Butler vs Eichi Tenshouin from Ensemble Stars

(remember that these characters are fictional and your fellow tumblr users are real. i will block you if you harass others in the notes, please consider sending your unhinged harassment to my inbox instead)

Propaganda under the cut, may contain spoilers:

Alois Trancy:

LOVE:

- "everyone wants this guy dead. he is the villain of his narrative for the simple hubris of wanting to live and be loved after surviving traumatic events one after another for his whole childhood, and in the end the narrative kills him for it. being an anime-only character, many fans dislike his character as well, seeing him as unnecessary or controversial/contradictory to the well-established lore of the main storyline. he's gotten rejected from other poll tournaments, even, for his backstory containing a Lot of controversial and dark material (so yeah heads up for that). i personally care very deeply about his character, because someone i am very close with in my real life relates a lot to him, and has experienced similar traumatic events. in the end, he just wants to be loved, but he is bound to the hatred of his fellow characters, of the writers and his universe itself, of the fans of his series, of... everyone but a select few people clinging to him. which is to say, he is broadly hated, but i think the balance of the few that truly and deeply want to break him out of that fate and love him with the fervor of a thousand suns.... i think that makes him a great candidate for this competition."

Eichi Tenshouin:

LOVE:

- "Eichi is so silly… he started an entire war for his crush… then “killed” said crush in public (it was a metaphorical killing). He’s responsible for ruining the lives/mental health of SEVERAL if not dozen of people. He doesn’t know about the concept of “love.” In all honestly, I just see him as a very naive person with too much money to spend (he’s extremely rich if I didn’t mention it). People either love him or hate him, though I feel like the fandom has been coming around to him lately, especially in the past few years, so he may not win the poll, but the discourse around him has left such a strong impression on me that I HAD to submit him. Personally, I love him he’s one of my favorite characters; I have a plushie of him :)"

- "Okay first of all I don't love or hate him I'm actually pretty neutral about him BUT I will defend him til the day I die because people who hate him hate him for like. the wrong reasons. Okay he started an idol war like he was 16 and wanted to change the idol system at Yumenosaki and none of the teachers did anything to like. actually turn these kids into idols and Eichi took things into his own hands. This guy is a rich chronically ill nepo baby and gay as hell which is incredibly important to the whole narrative and I still stand by the fact that like. if the adults at the school had done their job this wouldn't have happened and Eichi has shown a lot of growth and self reflection in the time since then (even though he is......essentially creating an idol factory to mass produce popular idols. anyway) and he regrets a lot of his actions during the war but also. objectively at least for one of the characters, if someone didnt do something about what was going on in that unit it would have ended incredibly badly (Shu Itsuki and Ex-Valkyrie which is another long story I am not going to get into but you can read Marionette if you want to know more about it and even as a Shu Producer I think it was necessary for his own character arc and development, as well as Nazuna and Mika's arcs. Anyway this isn't about them this is about Eichi) he's very complicated and I think people who hate him just because of the war are missing whole pieces of his character, yknow? He was just a kid with ideals and a lot of money and drive to create change and nobody was around to guide him in the right direction. I still don't understand how the teachers at this school have jobs if they just allowed four kids to get metaphorically executed on stage though."

- "i love him very much he’s kind of a bitch though so like i think he’s divisive enough to win it"

- ""how controversial can this idol gacha game boy possibly be" I have seen people unironically censor his name it's so funny. his haters are so. they hate any complex morally grey character and none of them can be normal about it. the amount of people I've seen making jokes about his terminal illness and how they can't wait until he dies is something else, and I've seen soooo many people unironically call him irredeemable and evil and that enstars would be better if he wasn't in it (as if eichi isn't the single most important character in enstars' plot like. literally most of the cast would never have met and bonded if it wasn't for him) and etc etc. his fans are also kind of rabid and hardcore but I respect that. he gives me brainworms too. I think the controversy might maaaaybe be largely only the western side of the fanbase...? bc his merch is still some of the most expensive in the entire series lol. an expensive boy few can afford... literally the character of all time. please appreciate him in this cat hoodie: https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/ensemble-stars/images/5/5d/Eichi_Tenshouin_Namja_Town.png/revision/latest?cb=20200109223739"

- "He is my special little guy my blorbo my funny little war criminal however he very much did commit a lot of crimes and people rightfully do not like him for it. However. To me, personally, he is my poor sick little meow meow. He is so fucked up and I love him for it. Men who were born all alone in a wet cardboard box am I right ?"

[supercalime]

all those interviews are fun even with hardcore stans speculation but god i wish they kinda stopped.

like, stop having stans interviewing actors in the first place, what do you mean they talk about couch theory? are we even serious right now? it’s obvious people are going to create even weirder hc after all these interviews.

I understand the interviewers (to a degree) bringing up b*ddie and baiting Oliver and Ryan to “leak” information or address how they are defenders of the ship, as it obviously makes dramatic headlines, which causes engagement, which advertises the show and by extent the website/reporter that did the interview.

Just a bit off topic but it has to be said: most of the interviews are borderline unprofessional. Not just with the aspect of bringing up b*ddie when the recent storyline has nothing to do with eddie but also relying their questions on stereotypes about the queer community (someone unironically asked Oliver who’s buck’s favorite pop diva now that he’s queer. Like wtf).

Anyway, going back to the mess haha. I’m not surprised the stans are acting this way (I’m very new to this fandom but not to fandoms and their discourses). I’m sometimes very invested in media and there are times I do extrapolate and need to touch grass. Sometimes I feel like people who are this invested in a fictional relationship that’s not even canon just need to find a different outlet for intense feelings, and not rely on things that are out of their control.

Of course fan reaction can influence a story being told, however fans have to also know how to approach it while being respectful. In all honesty, if I were writing a show and I finally went with a storyline I wasn’t allowed to write before because the network previously denied, and that was how the fans of a ship reacted, I would be pissed. I think I would not have b*ddie be a thing out of spite.

The bi!buck/bucktommy storyline is a huge step forward for a tv show in this scale. In fact, I can’t remember other procedurals that have as many queer main characters as 911/911 lone star. It’s been said, but a story about this very masculine man that has been known as a womanizer figuring out he’s bisexual well into his thirties and in the seventh season of a very popular show that is not part of a specific niche is important and should be celebrated on its own, regardless of ships or whatever the fans have to say about the partner choice.

But let’s be real for a second as I end my little essay here. If you know a single thing about writing, you know you can’t just throw a love story without buildup and as hard as it is to accept, the interactions between buck and eddie seemed to have always been ambiguous on purpose, and buck being maybe into guys was more played off as a joke. I know the fans want the ship to happen, but if they want this love story to happen, they gotta be patient. Just commenting “we don’t like this. We want buddie!” on an ig post about tevan won’t make the story suddenly turn into that direction.

What I’m saying won’t change anyone’s mind but whoever reads until the end, I want yall to know that unfortunately every fandom is like this and we gotta try our best to stay out of the discourse cause in all seriousness: none of this matters. It’s a show and arguing about it, bothering the actors, commenting annoying things on ig won’t change anything.

[letters-to-lgbt-kids]

My dear lgbt+ kids, 

At some point in my life, I probably saw two strangers doing something together and just assumed that they are in a romantic relationship - even though they were platonic friends.

Most likely it was a situation like “Ohh, there is the waiter with my food! Finally!... never mind, it’s for the couple over there”. Just some random moment where I made an automatic judgment about their relationship status without even consciously thinking about it.

I do not remember it happening but how would I? Unless I randomly overheard them loudly discussing the fact that they are not dating, there's no way my mistake would become apparent. I'd just finish my meal and leave the restaurant none the wiser.

Another reason I wouldn't remember it is that the world didn’t crash and burn. I did not singlehandedly erase the concept of friendship. They were not forcibly married right there in the restaurant by the sheer power of my thoughts. They left the restaurant as friends, just like they entered it. And me? Well, the wrong assumption didn't magically turn me into some weird pervert who pushes the heads of random strangers together and yells "Now kiss for my enjoyment!". I also left the restaurant just like I entered it: ignorant about their personal relationship - something that ultimately has no bearing on anyone's actual life whatsoever.

Yeah, I am being dramatic and silly here. Nobody would actually expect any of that to happen, would they? But some people do freak out about queer fans making an assumption about fictional characters and their relationships.

I keep seeing panicky comments about it - two characters of the same sex can't be friends anymore without some people on the internet shipping them! They are erasing the concept of friendship! This will lead to kids missing out on important platonic connections with the same gender and ultimately leave them unable to connect to anyone at all unless it's sexually!

Oftentimes this is simply a way to justify homophobia. Saying you are worried about the kids causes less backlash than "Eww, gays are yucky".

But sometimes it comes from inside the house, from people who are actually queer themselves - this can be internalized homophobia but it may also be an overestimation of the impact of queer internet fandom. Many of us spend a lot of time there because it's a (fairly) safe space for us... but it's important to remember that tumblr doesn't properly represent the real world in many aspects. Gay shipping is essentially a (comparatively small) group of people re-telling stories as a hobby. This can be very meaningful for the people in the group - but it won't influence the entire world. Fandom will never erase the concept of friendship. It's really not widespread or powerful enough for that.

Panicking about that is unnecessary - just like freaking out about me potentially assigning the wrong relationship status to the people at the table next to me would be.

With all my love,

Your Tumblr Dad

[fandom-hoarder]

Grabbing these tags by @deanwinchesterpregnant from this post to expand.

Because yes, this is a very important part! Sam says it, too!

And while there ARE Sam haters that will say "Sam doesn't know how much Dean sacrificed!" and mean it as a JUDGEMENT and omg wooby!Dean; there are also people like me, who started writing s1 Sam POVs to understand him better, and suddenly connected him to my little brother like, 'OH. Sam doesn't KNOW. How COULD he know??😭' and it's not a judgment of his character or his love for Dean! And he's not stupid! They're both just kids who have yet to work through their own shit enough to realize they don't know EVERYTHING about each other, despite their shared history. It's part of why Sam says in In My Time of Dying that they were "just starting to be brothers again."

Obviously it's a necessary part of s1 to give us, the viewer, expositional glimpses into Sam and Dean's inner workings. But the way they each react to certain new revelations about each other are still canon even if there are Doylist reasons.

It's canon that Sam didn't know Dean carried him out of the fire. It's canon that Dean has felt responsible for Sam almost being eaten by a shtriga since he was 9/10 years old, and it's canon that Sam never even knew that happened. It's canon that the memory of Mary was so coveted by Dean and John that Sam has virtually no connection to her; no stories and no echoes of her in the way they live other than the infamous Winchester Surprise.

It's canon that Sam doesn't really have any happy holiday memories, and Dean does. It's canon that their perspective on the same shared holidays is completely different. It's canon that Dean stole Christmas decorations and presents for Sam and apparently none for himself. And it's canon that Sam realized Dean did that for him and gave him his only present. And it's canon that remembering that made grown-up Sam want to give Dean Christmas even though it meant admitting something hurtful to himself. (John not showing up for Christmas/Dean's last Christmas)

If you put yourself in Sam's shoes--- a kid left alone for most of his formative years; unable to put down roots and make friends; whose best friend, the only one who could even try to understand him, is his good little soldier brother--- it's easier to understand why Sam felt lonely and became a much more introspective person. Because he was literally stuck with just his thoughts and anxieties and the TV for days at a time. When you think about how sick he must've been about it, every time Dean and John would leave. Waiting for that next phone call. Biting his fingernails when the call was late. Wanting to be invited to prove yourself, but also because if you're THERE at least you KNOW what happens.

But then, too, if you can put yourself in Dean's place: it's not necessarily something a kid or young adult can fully appreciate--- especially a somewhat emotionally immature young adult--- that their little sibling is a completely autonomous person with their own inner life. They don't just pause when you leave their sight. Dean throws himself into the hunt, and isn't thinking about how much Sam is worrying about them. He's thinking, "Sam is safe, so I can focus on backing Dad up."

It sounds selfish, but it's simply a fact of the maturing brain that it takes some time to comprehend someone else's existence outside of you as a real thing and not just a vague concept.

So, to touch on another aspect that gets discoursed:

There ARE a lot of things about Dean's parentification that Sam doesn't know at first, but he has always known about it to SOME degree. He had his own perspective on it, and for sure I wouldn't say that Sam thought of Dean as his parent. Dean has definitely always been his older and somewhat overbearing big brother. But who do you think Sam took his problems to? Who threatens to rip his bully's lungs out in After School Special? Who remembers what fucking play Sam did in drama?

And a short related aside--- thinking about how Sam was surprised about the things of his John had in storage. His surprise that John kept an eye on him at Stanford. And relating these things that changed Sam's understanding of his father, to the way his understanding of Dean shifted with each revelation of what Dean had done for him. And despite everything Sam ALREADY knew, his adult brain and life experiences gave him new perspective on things.

This maybe is a little rambley, but oh well. What was I saying...

Oh yeah. So sometimes people get upset about Dean being given like. More praise than he deserves or something, by having those "you practically raised me" lines and things. As if it's a retcon. But it's really not.

It's Sam growing up, and his brain constantly taking in new information and reshaping his understanding. It's Sam seeing how much Dean blames himself for things that weren't his fault, and wanting Dean to see the good he's done. It's Sam being able to see Dean's heart underneath his codependent or selfish decisions, and reaching out. It's Sam trying to remind Dean he can lean on Sam, too.

I've gone off on a tangent and made myself tear up lol. I don't remember where I wanted to end up anymore. Somewhere in the ether there's another rant about how Dean has a harder time allowing himself the introspection on his perception of Sam, and how this leads to Sam having to do a lot of the leading on the emotional maturity of their relationship, and how hard this is when the person you're leading still sees you as their kid, in whatever capacity.

But ultimately, of COURSE Sam does as much for Dean. Of course Sam has agency in this and isn't Dean's baby that had a pampered childhood vs Dean's horrible one. Sam and Dean acknowledging the actual circumstances of their childhood dynamic doesn't have to be a Samgirls vs Deangirls fucking situation lol.

[dorkynerd23]

I found this over on Twitter, apparently Michael Kovach (The Voice Of N)(Murder Drones) was on stream the other day recently and said that Uzi is clearly NOT A MINOR and Is an adult.

Honestly, The fact that the voice actors have to be dragged into these shipping wars and arguments from some fans in this fandom just annoys and frustrates me honestly. Can some of you antis and toxic shippers just stop fighting and doing this, the VA's shouldn't have to be dragged into these shipping wars some of you bring yourselves in, honestly some of these fans just make the fandom look worse and toxic..I know that's all fandoms and none are perfect and MD isn't the worst fandom I've seen and been in (it's mostly toxic over on Twitter, though) but my goodness, some of these toxic fans, especially the envy shippers (not saying all are bad and Nuzi shippers can be toxic too, I'm just talking about the majority of them) are just insane and take shipping wayyy too far!! Also, I've stated this before and I wanna say it here as well, shipping isn't everything and it's especially not worth getting into arguments, bullying + harassing people for, shipping isn't that important and people should stop making it a big deal. Now, there's no harm in it (just as long as it isn't problematic and such) as I participate in shipping myself! But, sometimes it goes way too far and gets extreme to the point it makes a fandom look horrible and toxic as hell and makes most fans look bad even though that's not the case, but all fandoms have bad apples sadly.

Let me clarify and say that, neither Envy or Nuzi are canon and and none of us are sure which one the show will be leaning towards and who'll be together at the end. Sure, the show is 100% leaning towards Nuzi as of now in canon, but anything can go afterall and we'll all just have to wait and see what happens. Also, we all have to remember, this is Liam's show, not ours and it's his choice for what he decides and wants to do with the characters and who should end up with who. These are HIS characters and his story and he can do whatever he wants, we can't change the canon and in the end only Liam can choose what he wants to do and what he thinks works for the story of MD.

So again, please stop saying that Nuzi is problematic and p*oship because IT'S NOT. There's nothing troubling and uncomfortable about the pairing, it's harmless just like all the other pairings for the show. Hell, N literally said that Uzi, him and V WERE KIDS!! They're around the same age!

Some of you toxic shippers really need to stop doing this, stop turning stuff around + saying certain headcanons to fit your favorite ship and putting others down to fullfill your egos. It's fine to not like a ship, but if you're going to the point of attacking and harassing other fans because they don't like your favorite pairing, then that's an issue and is totally uncalled for. Just let people like what they want and if you don't like any ship in the show and just don't like shipping in general then just scroll away and just don't interact with those people, simple as that!

And one more thing I've gotta add real quick, I know it's not everyone, but the amount of shipping wars and fighting I've seen go on in the MD community from fans is just saddening and ridiculous, and it just seems that some of these fans are only coming for the show for the shipping and romance of the show, even though that's not even part of the series, MD isn't even about romance. It seems that some of these fans don't actually care about the show and what's going on, they just care about the shipping aspects and that's just unfair to me. Murder Drones have so much more to offer, so much more to give, there's so much more to appreciate and focus on in the show than just ships.

Shipping shouldn't even be something you go into for a show, you should watch and go into a show for more than just that, that shouldn't be the only thing to look forward to. Shows like Murder Drones have so much more to them and so much more to offer and be loved, enjoyed and appreciated for! ♥️

[dovesandmagpies]

Thoughts rereading the Lord of the Rings for the first time in 10 years, (in no particular order and with no claim to literary expertise beyond reading a lot of books)

When I was younger I would always skip the old forest, Tom Bombadil and the barrow wites, because I didn't think they were necessary to the story, it still makes sense if they're not there and the barrow wites (is that how you spell it?) creeped me out.

Listening to it now, yes they're not essential, but they make the world feel more real. There are evil things that don't have anything to do with Sauron, old man willow is never explained, he's just there, hating people, with no giant evil plan for world domination or anything.

Tom Bombadil makes much sense when you think that the world of middle earth was sung into being, a guy who sings all the time is (a little) less strange in that context.

And the barrow wites are still the creepyist things in the whole story but I appreciate the creepyness more as an adult.

Merry is still my favourite character, I always feel sad when I remember how reduced his character was in the movies

I find the songs more interesting, I only read the Silmarilion once, and that was over 10 years ago (I am currently rereading it, I am not even half way through though) But the fact that it exists, that the history that is referenced or hinted at in the Lord of the rings is actually there all written down some where so you can read it if you want to know more, it is what makes the Lord of the rings one of my favourite books.

It also makes it a very sad story, yes they win, the villain is destroyed, but the time of the elves is finished, all that history that happens in the Silmarillion has come to an end. There is a deep feeling that something important has been lost and no matter what happens it can't be the same as it was.

The kingdoms of Gondor and Anor remind me very much of the Roman empire in the middle ages, (I feel like I may be pointing out the obvious here, but I never noticed this before) All the lands used to be part of one great kingdom/empire, the kingdom broke in to two halves one of the which fell and the other survived but was not as great as it had been. There are ruins and old buildings all over the place that no one at the time of the story could build. Even though Arnor has been gone for hundreds of years people still refer to it as something to be admired. Most people speak the same or similar languages because of it. Numenor conccered most of middle earth and made it this huge kingdom, which then collapsed and split apart in smaller kingdoms none quite as great as the original. There are probably parallels to other things but this is what stood out to me.

I understand why they didn't put the scouring of the Shire in the movie, but I think it is an important part of story. It shows how evil isn't all huge and far away, sometimes it's small, pathetic, sneaky and done or helped by people you know, and that is much scarier.

I forgot about how many side characters they didn't include in the movie, particularly in the Return of the King.

When Gandalf and Pippin get to Gondor is the point I really remembered that Tolkien lived through WWI and 2, there are little things before that (the dead marshes for instance), but in Gondor they're sending all the women and children to the countryside so they won't be caught in the fighting. There's rationing of the food, all the lights must be dimmed or put out so the flying creatures can't see anything. It's something only someone who lived after WWI would write because before that it just wouldn't enter your head that war could be like that.

Going back to the Silmarillion for a moment, theoretically, if the sons of Feanor had broken their oath, would they have turned into ghosts like the ones in the Paths of the Dead? Or are they ghosts because Isildur cursed them?

I occasionally see people criticising Tolkien for making Eowen marry Faramir and give up war, this is generally portrayed as Tolkien being sexist for letting a female character fight and then immediately taking it away and marrying her off to some random guy.

I disagree with this perspective and I don't understand how you could think that after reading Eowen's part of the story.

By the time Eowen faced the Witch King she had no hope, she thought the only thing she had to live for was the hope of a glorious death in battle, she wanted to die. When she survived what she needed was hope that there was more to life than death in battle, that's why her marrying Faramir is a happy ending for her. He is able to help Eowen see that there is more to live for than she believed and she is able to hope for the future instead of wishing to die from despair.

Is it canon that Feanor made the Palatri or was that just an educated guess on Gandalf's part?

Is that giant "as big as an elm tree and walking" the hobbits talk about in the pub in one of the first chapters an entwife? I always assumed it was but I've never seen anyone else mention it.

Is Goldberry a maia? If not what is she?

Gollum is a lot funnier than I remember, he's just such a drama queen. He can't eat lembas? "oh poor Smegol, he must starve! "

The orcs come across as a lot smarter and more like real people than I remember, yes they're evil but they're just doing their jobs, trying to get promoted and not lose their heads. Also they have wages. I don't know why but this was one of the biggest surprises in the whole book, how "civilised" the orcs were. They, and Mordor in general, are really an industrial power fighting a medieval one. Which shouldn't be a surprise considering what Tolkien clearly thought about industry, but I was caught off guard by it.

That's all the thoughts I have, for now at any rate, hopefully it wasn't too confusing.

[nuctoria]

Luigi can redeem almost any villain... maybe?

He may be Mario's counterpart, but in the eyes of the bad guys he is much more than that.

I agree with that but doing so can get him into real trouble because it can easily lead to a trap, Luigi has the patience and kindness to help redeem but some villains also have the same patience, the manipulation skills and the actually clever and detailed plan to take down Luigi. This is even more dangerous if the villain is actively but secretly after Luigi alone instead of trying to use him to get to Mario, Peach or someone else.

This also depends on the type of villain. If it's a villain who's been broken down, never really had affection or positive reinforcement and so on, Luigi's genuine kindness can shock them into a pause and slowly rub off on them to the point they actually get redeemed and open up to him so he can help them heal. And it's small. normal kindness from Luigi, nothing else. He follows their boundaries, working with them to take care of them, remember the little details that they thought wouldn't be important at all yet let them start to see that Luigi actually cares and shocks them even more when he reveals that this is what's normal. They don't focus so much more on evil schemes and hatred or other negative emotions, they get used to this quiet, comfortable and peaceful life. They don't want to risk loosing it all by going back to their ways. Mission Complete.

Then we have the villains that aren't broken and are naturally assholes, worse if they actually did get affection in the past yet still chose to be evil due to genuinely liking it better. Those are the most dangerous, because those have the least amount of morals and not that many weaknesses. In fact, they can be the type that do the most damage, both physically, mentally and emotionally. Luigi becomes the perfect target for that. He is very much vulnerable in their eyes and will attract them due to this. You may think showing his resilience and actually strength and many other surprises he has will make them think twice but no, it makes things worse. They get excited and want to increase their attacks on him just to see how much more he can take, how much torture he can endure before he breaks.

If he tried to rehabilitate those villains then he'll need to be surrounded by his friends more, as it will force the villain to be even more careful and crafty to not get caught by people who actually don't trust them and their mission is to protect Luigi. However, because they are familiar with positive interactions, they can use those skills to seem none-threatening and get closer to Luigi then to his friends to calm them down and not be so wary. The plan can go in different ways after that. It can be a surprise kidnap, a more elaborate plan of isolation and manipulation so Luigi starts to depend on them, magic being used if needed to make their influence on him more solid. Another important factor that must be done, reveal nothing solid about themselves, nothing that can give his friends or even him hints of where they are from, who they really are or what they have done. They can't lie either as it will be dangerous to get caught lying, instead they reshape the truth or don't make it as clear, using false shame and guilt to cover for it and not be asked for more details, which will work immediately with Luigi due to his kind heart and relating to not wanting to be pressured into revealing the darker part of ones self.

Is it possible to redeem these villains though? Yes, but very rarely and it's often too dangerous to try.

You know what, I think I now know how to make my villain OC i talked about. I just need to decide what to base them on still.

[himluv]

DA Review Series - The Stolen Throne by David Gaider

Since I finished my original fiction novel at the end of February, I've started replaying the Dragon Age games and the long process of re-reading all the Media Tie-Ins. I thought, since I'm doing all of this, I might as well share my thoughts along the way.

I'm following this list that I made last year, if you'd like to follow along :). Now, onto the review!

Title: The Stolen Throne Author: David Gaider Publication Year: 2009 In-World Year: ~8:96 Blessed to ~9:00 Dragon (there are discrepancies) Verdict: Skip. There isn't any real lore value here, and it's mostly just teen angst wrapped in sexism.

The Stolen Throne is a prequel to Dragon Age: Origins, which introduces us to teenaged Maric Theirin just after his mother has been assassinated. The book follows Maric and his friends over the course of about four years as they lead a rebellion to free Ferelden from Orlesian occupation. We also meet young Loghain MacTir and Rowan Guerrin – both important figures to the Ferelden we experience in DA:O.

Unfortunately, I don't have much good to say about this book. I first read it in 2011, and remember really liking it then. I was 21, and while a voracious reader, I was not a reader of much Fantasy at the time. I've grown a lot since then, and this book does not age well.

I tried to re-read it in 2020 and couldn't finish it. I tried again in 2023 and, again, abandoned it. But this year, while playing DA:O I was able to slog through it and FINALLY finish it.

So, why was it such a slog?

The writing is, uh, bad. Just, on a basic prose level, this feels like a rough draft. Adjectives and adverbs run rampant over this book. Descriptions are winding and don't always make sense. The amount of times I rolled my eyes while reading this book, y'all. It was a lot.

But, if the story had been good enough, I could have overlooked the bumbling execution. The problem is, the story isn't all that compelling. Yes, I expected the overthrowing of Thedas's most influential political force to be an exciting read. Instead, this book isn't so much about the politics of Thedas and the tolls of war, but about... love triangles? Quadrangles?

Without getting lost in the details, basically Maric is betrothed to Rowan, but Loghain loves Rowan. And Maric is in love with Katriel (which is a whole 'nother problematic can of worms) and cheats on Rowan. And Rowan... is upset about this, but I don't really know why because she doesn't love Maric. And she sleeps with Loghain, but also.... I don't think she loves him either? IDK, man. None of it made sense.

And that is the crux of this book. So little of the characters' motivations made sense. And so much of the book hinged on those supposed motivations and feelings. But they didn't make sense – at least, not to me.

Sadly, there wasn't much lore to be gained from this book, either. we learn a little about Maric and his mother Moira. A little about Loghain, but even what I did learn didn't make me more sympathetic to him. He's still a dick. In fact, the only characters I did like were Rowan and Katriel, both of whom are dead by the end of the book. Neither of whom had any real power over their own lives. In fact! When Katriel attempted to flex what little power she did have, Maric KILLED her. And he supposedly loved her??? No. Uh-huh. And Loghain basically goaded him into it, so they both suck.

The one good thing from this is I think it does make the Orelsian hate in DA:O more believable. When the Warden comes on the scene, it's only been ~30 years since Maric and Loghain ousted Orlais. People are still living and working who fought in these battles, who lived under occupation. So, that's some good context. Don't think we needed over 400 pages of misogyny to get it, though.

David Gaider wrote two more Dragon Age novels, so wish me luck. I think I'm going to need it...

[delphinidin4]

I’ve seen some people getting really angry at The Boys for excluding Mina because “they think she’s frail.” I think this is a mischaracterization of their motives. Here’s how Van Helsing explains his reasoning:

“It is not good that she run a risk so great. We men are determined—nay, are we not pledged?—to destroy this monster; but it is no part for a woman. Even if she be not harmed, her heart may fail her in so much and so many horrors; and hereafter she may suffer—both in waking, from her nerves, and in sleep, from her dreams. And, besides, she is young woman and not so long married; there may be other things to think of some time, if not now.”

Van Helsing isn’t saying she’s too weak. He’s saying he’s afraid to risk her. It’s classic Victorian chivalry: annoying and sexist, yes, but not (in this case) based on thinking she’s too WEAK. 

This is a really dangerous thing they’re going to do. It’s dangerous for all of them, not just for Mina, and he’s afraid of her getting hurt. It was considered extremely dishonorable for a man to put a woman in danger. Even in 20th century murder mysteries (Sayers, Marsh) you see male detectives being upset when their evidence points to a female murderer because they don’t want to be the reason even that a GUILTY woman hangs for her crime! Remember how important masculine honor is to men in this period: When Van Helsing asks Arthur to trust him blindly, Arthur actually mentions his honor before even his religion! (”if it be anything in which my honour as a gentleman or my faith as a Christian is concerned, I cannot make such a promise.”)

It’s not just physical danger they’re afraid of exposing her to, but psychological danger. None of them was at all surprised that Jonathan had mental health problems after his run-in with Dracula (and honestly, knowing something about PTSD myself, while it’s true that realizing it was all real could have helped him a LOT, it would likely NOT have produced this entire recuperation we’re seeing in this story). A lot of people have pointed out that the getting upset and hysterical thing happens to men just as much (if not more) than women in this story, so I think it’s even doubtful that they’re worried that Mina will be MORE affected because she’s a woman: they’re just acknowledging that even if she doesn’t get hurt physically, she could be hurt psychologically, which would also make them feel awful.

Added to this at the end is a mention of the fact that Mina may be pregnant: if putting a woman in danger is dishonorable, putting a pregnant woman in danger is unthinkable. (Remember that even today, most of us go out of our way to protect pregnant women in a way that we do with few other populations.) And if she’s not pregnant now, she’s still likely to have children later, and Victorians believed that mental stress in the mother could have real physical effects on children. (This... actually is true, just not in the way the Victorians thought it worked!) So they would be endangering, not only Mina, but her potential unborn children. (Remember that this is also a period that does not have widespread access to contraceptives, so everybody would be assuming that Mina probably IS going to have kids at some point, because she’s married and IS having unprotected sex.)

So basically, it’s not that they think Mina is weak or frail. It’s that they feel it is their duty according to social customs to not allow a woman to be harmed physically or psychologically, or to allow her potential unborn children to be harmed. It’s not that women are in a special box marked “Weak and frail”, it’s that women are in a special box marked “PROTECT AT ALL COSTS”.

Is this kind of chivalry now recognized as a hindrance to women’s freedom and ability to participate in society as equals to men? Yep. But it’s not QUITE the same thing as “They think she’s weak!”

Also, iirc, the fact that they’ve excluded her is going to come back to bite them on the asses anyway, so it’s possible Stoker is actually going to use this to Make a Point about not excluding women from things.

[linane-art]

Public Service Announcement

Yes, I'm back! Missed me? :D

I don't know where to start, really. My last year of travels was both an incredible, life-changing, empowering, unforgettable experience, and the hardest, most challenging thing I have ever done (and probably will ever do) in my life.

In the space of a year I have visited 11 countries: New Zealand, Fiji, Australia, New Caledonia, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Poland and Greece. Everywhere I went, I have always tried not to be a tourist, but live like a local, stay with the local people and have as many experiences as I could possibly grab a hold of.

I close my eyes and I can re-trace the exact route from Cashmere to the city centre of Christchurch, or I can still taste the Kava drink, or I remember exactly where to put my feet on the ascent to Yunomine Onsen via the Kumano Kodo Pilgrim Trail, or I can tell what Sumatran elephant skin feels like under my fingers, or which of the rice fields around Ubud offer best views without too many tourists.

I got to do everything I ever wanted, fulfilled every dream I ever had and then some, met some amazing people that will stay with me for the rest of my life, and frequently did 8 absolutely impossible things before breakfast. I travelled on local busses, bought my veggies from local bazars, had local supermarket loyalty cards, dealt with visas, made friends with people who didn't speak a word of English... It kinda made me fearless and unstoppable. I've also struggled with depression, seriously questioned my life's choices, missed home insanely, been to paradise and hated it at times, doubted myself, and had a real reality check on what's important to me. And I regret none of it.

How do you pick up the pieces of your life after something like that?

The good news is that my love for this fandom has never left or diminished, and in fact it often provided to be a source of great comfort to me. I wrote stories in my head during my walks, I re-read some excellent old fics, I took Fili and Kili with me to some seriously remote places.

But I think the fandom has changed during my absence. And I have changed too. So as I sit down and re-think how I wanna indulge in my love of FiKi, here's what I've got:

I am seriously attached to three of my Verses (and have been focussing on them for a while), which I'd love to continue with: Silence, Isca and Postcards. There will be more posted, when I'm ready with it. Watch this space. Subscribe, maybe?

I have been writing mainly for myself for a number of years now and I can and I will continue to do so. But it's alwas a delight when someone else comes on a journey with you, so I'll continue posting publically.

GF is my Happy Place and I have missed it hugely, especailly as it hadn't continued to function as I hoped it would during my absence. I want to come back to tending that garden, as it's important to me. And I might take part in some events again, if the gods smile at me again, which will mean any and all verses will be considered.

I can't imagine in what possible universe I would have the time for drawing again. Having said that, I am sitting on some unpublished and unfinished artwork, some of it in collabs, and I know I can be stubborn enough to force their completion. Something to think about.

What else? I guess that's it. How have everyone been? What's new? WHO's new? Did I miss anything important? Come and say hi - I'm always happy to chatter.

[lavenderspence]

Also let’s talk about how Colleen Hoover is really problematic in general and this movie, let alone the book, shouldn’t exist in the first place-

Honestly, yes, let's talk about this too!

Warnings for DV & child loss

I'll be honest, I've read some of her books and have a lot of them in my physical tbr too. (They're very easy to read...like you require a single braincell and that should say it all. The tbr thing I have no excuse for...). You all are allowed to shame me for this, I shame myself too.

Moving on though

Someone literally pointed out on tiktok how NONE of her books actually have any content or trigger warnings. Which, honestly, extremely problematic I'd say. I think as an author it's partially, if not fully, her responsibility to let her readers make a decision for themselves whether her books are something they can handle reading, given some of the extremes she "explores" within her writing.

And that's especially true when most of those are branded as "romance" and are promoted by fans and readers as "romance" books where I'd say some are more of "a romance that explores heavy topics sometimes in a bad way". I think the romantization of certain aspects of her books are quite honestly harmful to any people who've gone through trauma and have had to relieve trauma later on. Obviously i cannot speak on DV or child loss (it ends with us / ugly love) but I can just give my point of view.

I think as a whole had this fully been done under Justin Baldoni's view, where he was the one holding on the reins from start to finish, and during the premieres, the press tour and marketing, we would have had something completely different that I believe might have made much more sense.

I've been deep into "the ends with us" movie drama for a few days now, and you can CLEARLY tell that Justin's idea and desire to make this into a movie has everything to do with wanting to bring attention to what living within a home filled with DV is like, and how even when you struggle and cannot find a way, you and what you experience is important and shouldn't be happening, and it's not your fault (I do hope I explained this relatively well).

I cannot even being to explain how many people on tiktok I've seen be "wait, so this isn't a romcom?" And I'm like....what the hell.

This takeover that Blake Lively has done over the movie and the final cut and the marketing and the press is so disgusting and the fact that CoHo is all fine with this speaks VOLUMES about the truth behind her writing that and making this movie - a money grab.

I don't want to put down her mom's experience in any way, but I think there's a very thin line between making something for someone else, sticking to being real about it, and then later on turning it into whatever this is.

I remember being so uncomfortable reading "it ends with us" because even then (and that's Jan of 2021) it was marketed as a romance...A ROMANCE? Like....?-?

Anyway, at the end, I think this whole thing is a mess and CoHo has long ago had people openly be negative towards her but I think this might also be the fall of Blake Lively because...girly this isn't...it's not the place nor the time. Like do you really need to promote your haircare line right now? Right now?

Well maybe not the fall, but a lot of people are aware and becoming aware that this is problematic, and her husband is also being problematic and to be honest, the only none problematic individual is this whole scenario is Justin Baldoni.

(Okay this once again had more focus on the movie, I'm sorry)