#and ultimately that's all that matters

[yharnamesque]

17 long years you've been by my side. All those times you stole my chair and slapped my face to get under the blankets at night. My one reason for staying during the days I didn't have anything else. My best friend and my favourite little pest

Goodnight Cookie, sleep tight

[yudol-skorbi]

i was listening to Metal Guru by T Rex and its kinda happened

[truly-sincerely]

Obsessively reading everything in game by and about Gortash and the dude is

On a philosophical trajectory that ends in immortality thru technology / the machine

Doesn't have an original bone in his body, but he can backwards engineer anything

Halfway to being a decent scientist but doesn't have the education and is deeply impatient

Overconfident in the veracity of his own results and conclusions

Accurately predicted that the brain would metamorphose and become more difficult to control and then did nothing about it

Outsources his propaganda / arts and humanities

Charming, but he got there in a Pavlovian way (learned from trial and error and probably doesn't consciously know how he does it)

Vindictive af (learned / reinforced)

Darwinian (in the worst way)

Sociopathic, obviously, but extremely Rationalist about it

Never asks questions he doesn't know the answer to and probably thinks this makes him sound more authoritative

Completely incompetent as a strategist (but doesn't know it)

Not nearly as narcissistic / full of himself as he pretends to be

Thinks what he wants is praise but it's never enough because it's not actually what he wants (he wants to be wanted)

Bane makes him feel wanted (conditionally)

Durge made him feel wanted (unconditionally)

Understands intellectually that Durge got ambushed, but he feels abandoned

See also: thematic parallels between Gortash and

Silouv Yali (the Adamantine Forge & the construct Grym)

Oliver (in the shadow-cursed lands)

Astarion and Gale, obviously

[fighting-naturalist]

[critter-wizard]

ep 43 had me tearing up in a fucking shopping centre ‼️‼️

b+w alt version that I truly couldn't decide if I liked it more . Also I included a lot of thoughts in the tags but they're somewhat incoherent<3

[supreme-leader-stoat]

Response to your reblog before I peace out.

The argument of the immorality of abortion is built on the assumption that life inherently has value. Lives do not have any inherent value, because they are the result of millions of years of naturally occurring processes. These natural processes do not have any inherent moral value; attempting to assign one would involve invoking some sort of "god" that exists beyond the material, observable, provable world we live in, rather than some logical, clear, and distinct notion such as the one attempted to be shown. For these reasons, abortion is morally neutral.

On that note, the morality and legality of abortion are thereby a human notion, with a logically valid -though not logically sound- argument in either direction. The argument presented says that "no human life should be purposefully ended by another human being. Because that's murder." In short, they believe that murder is necessarily and inherently immoral. That's all it is though, a belief: There is no wholly logical ground to stand on with regards to murder being universally bad in all scenarios, because of its' moral neutrality as I proved above. In other words, the morality and legality of aborting a fetus is wholly subjective.

"Do you actually have an issue with my argument that a fetus is a human being with the right to life, and ending their life is murder[?]"

Yes I do. A fetus is not survivable beyond the confines of the womb for quite some time; in fact, not until right before the fetus is due to become a baby and be born, that ever-reliable 8 month mark after insemination. As such, considering the fetus is unable to survive without constant connection to the pregnant person, it stands to reason that this is an extension of their body at this point, rather than a separate entity. If one intended to claim it still was at the stages before a fetus can survive independently, then consider this implication: Parasites rely on being attached to living beings in order to survive. This includes humans. Therefore, following the earlier claim that "a fetus is a human being with the right to life, and ending their life is murder," a parasite attached to a human is also a human being with the right to life, and ending their life is murder. Therefore, it is more reasonable to claim that for most of the pregnancy cycle, a fetus is not a separate entity from the pregnant person, and by extension, "ending its' life" is not murder.

"Babies are people, too, and have the same right to life as an adult."

This is true! Because babies are not fetuses.

Just thought you would want to read this, because anti-choice rhetoric can be very harmful in shutting down the agency of pregnant people and their ability to dictate their own lives. Knowing the direction that restrictions of this kind have gone in the past, those restrictions will not stop after the illegalization of abortion. Please consider who this harms and who this helps before spreading closed-minded rhetoric of that kind.

Either morality (God-given or otherwise, because there are many secular arguments against abortion) exists or it doesn't. There is a line in the sand or there is not. If you truly intend to argue that lives have no inherent value beyond what we assign them, then not only are the two of us operating in completely irreconcilable ethical frameworks, but yours collapses under its own weight; harm, agency, all these things mattering hinges on the idea that humans and (to a lesser extent) other forms of life have inherent worth, inherent dignity, that causing the former and undermining the latter are wrong in and of themselves.

If there is no objective standard on which to hang our arguments, then everything becomes subjective; all that matters is what we value on a social and individual level. And if that's the case, why would I ever bother to value the opinions of you, a stranger on the internet, over my own? It would be unfair and wrong of me not to consider other positions, to try to see things from another person's point of view, but why should I care about fairness or rightness?

Equating an embryo or fetus to a parasite is fallacious and incorrect. Ignoring that by the scientific definition parasites have to be a different species from the host, and that a pregnancy is a two-way street that also provides benefits for the mother, embryos and fetuses are simply living out the natural development cycle that literally every other human being on the planet has gone through. The biological principles at play in parasitism and human reproduction are fundamentally different.

I could keep going. I could match your arguments with my own about how anti-life rhetoric is a slippery slope to eugenics, about how I could just as easily twist your arguments around to make social parasites out of the elderly and disabled; but in this case it's pointless, because I can't even get you to sit down and agree upon simple principles like "human lives have value" and "murder is bad" or even "there is such a thing as objective morality."

[brucie-baby]

“hope” is the thing with feathers - emily dickinson

batman/superman: world's finest #6 // red hood and the outlaws: rebirth // batman v3 #135 // robin v4 #126 // shadow war #3 // nightwing v4 annual 2 // batman v3 #148 // batman v3 #125 // batman v1 #633 // batman incorporated v2 #8 // detective comics #1000

[bloggingboutburgers]

this past week my qpp of almost two years broke up with me. and i know for you, you said you wouldn't necessarily feel heartbroken if your qpr came to an end, but for me, it felt more heartbreaking than some of my past romantic breakups. this whole thing made me wonder if maybe im not queerplatonic or aro enough to be in a qpr, or if id ever want to be in a qpr again. but seeing you post about your qpr gives me hope that queerplatonic love is something that i can experience fully. so thank you for always sharing your story, because that's what's helping me heal right now <3

Aah, to be perfectly honest, as much as I sorta "downplay" it compared to what it must feel for people who experience romantic attraction... I've had a time where I almost felt like I couldn't go on with my QPP as well and the sheer thought of it was really hard to bear too, so my words here aren't necessarily being very fair to the reality of things.

It was during the travel ban of March 2020 to November 2021 where citizens of my country and others weren't allowed to enter the US unless we spent 15 days in a country that wasn't banned. It made it much harder than usual to visit my partner and as it was nearing 2 years with nobody aware it was going on anymore and US people more concerned about whether they'd be able to have turkey for Thanksgiving, my hope was running really thin. So for a few days in mid-October, as I was at rock bottom, I was starting to write in passing to my partner about how maybe going on wasn't worth it because the separation was too hard on us, it wasn't showing signs of stopping, and the whole thing maybe wasn't worth the pain if they could live their life happily and not have to worry about me who couldn't visit.

And then we videocalled at some point, and when they tearfully told me that even if it did end then and there, they wanted me to keep the promise ring they'd recently given me, I suddenly felt a quiet rage in me going like "No. Fuck this. Look at them. I love them. And I love this too much to allow some cruel governmental decision to end it. If it ever ends, it'll be because WE want it to end. Not because of shit like this."

...I'm making it sound super dramatic but yeah long story short this is also a big reason why we're planning to get married. So that when the US government decides to put a ban on countries including mine again, they can't stop us from vibing together this time.

I guess... I still don't wanna 100% assume we'll be together forever because I don't wanna trap them in a situation they may no longer feel happy in. We're doing great now, but I still have it in the back of my mind that maybe someday they'll get sick of me (they say they never will and that'd be dope if they never did, but never say never and all), or we'll both just want other things, and if it ends like that, then... Yeah, that'd be alright. Much more alright than the way it almost ended.

(...Oh, and for the record, if a friendship of mine ended abruptly, or if my brothers stopped being on good terms with me, I'm pretty sure I'd be just as heartbroken, to be fair. And it'd feel like my reality was collapsing a little. I guess anything ending, any human connection ending, has that effect to a degree, if it's important enough, after all.)

Though describing things like that does make it a bit harder to define what makes it "queerplatonic" as opposed to "romantic", I still... Just have that feeling in my gut that it isn't romance, y'know? It's kinda... A mix between being close friends and being an old married couple without ever having gone through the grandiose passion-honeymoon phase. Maybe that phase IS what defines romance per se. I don't know. Maybe someday I'll find more answers, but it's kinda hard to find answers when you have no idea how romance works to begin with I guess 🙈

In any case... Sorry if I caused any confusion or if I made you question your validity. The thing is pretty simple to be honest: if you feel you're aro, you're veeeeeery likely to BE aro. Because nobody can make that call but you and nobody can name the relationships you have but you. And if amongst everything you even FOUND the words "aro" or "queerplatonic" in a world where those identities and types of relationships are so aggressively hidden or erased, then it's gotta stand for something.

...I guess at the very least THIS I can be certain of TwT Sorry I'm a bit messy about all of this myself, I'm still also going on about it trying to figure it out day by day, but I owed it to you and everyone to be honest. These things are hard to define and I hope to keep finding better and better words to do so someday. TwT

[lewiscarrolatemybrain]

I love how basically every crew we see has a dynamic where the chaotic dumbass captain (for varying definitions of chaotic and dumbass) is tempered by a more sensible and careful first mate (for varying definitions and sensible and careful)

Like, obviously different people and different crews have different needs, but still — the first mate is generally the calmer and more reasonable of the two

And Then There’s Luffy And Zoro

[atopvisenyashill]

that arianne chapter reconvinced me of that theory that the rest of dorne Does Not Fuck With House Dayne Anymore, like, to the rest of Westeros Arthur is a shining example of chivalry and knightly ideals, but Dorne is like “Lewyn had to be blackmailed into fighting for Rhaegar, where the fuck were you when Elia and the babies were slaughtered you useless binch?!” i just think even the other characters do not take gerold dayne even a little serious, they all are aware he’s skilled but it feels like they’re laughing at him behind his back and he knows it.

[kacievvbbbb]

Garp and Compliance

I do think Garp is a very complicated man with very complicated motivations and actions. He is the definition of lawful chaotic. And I do genuinely believe that he joined the marines cause he wanted to do good in the world and that was how he saw how. But I also believe he is a great example of how the willful compliance of the few "good" help maintain the power of a bad system and how that is a part of the problem. does it matter if there are a few good men if the entire system is bad?

But I also do believe that he wanted his kids to drink the marine cool aid like him to keep them safe, Ace particularly. Like I do genuinely believe that.

Like listen they have the "D" just by being alive they are a threat to the world government and it will always want them dead and those they love dead by association. Hell even Sengoku tells Garp that he would have been executed long ago for the crimes of his family if he wasnt so valuable as the Hero of the Marines, anf it's played off like a joke but given everything we know about the marines and the world government it was very much a real threat.

But they haven't because Garp is valuable, he doesn't follow order, his family are all some of the most dangerous criminals in the world and he acts entirely too much like a pirate himself never mind that he and his lineage bare the ultimate sin of having a "D" in their name. But he gets to live, he is safe because he is valuable. And so by that logic if those kids get into the marines, if they complied and become strong, indispensable, invaluable. Then maybe that will keep them safe, maybe it will keep even Ace safe, a boy who committed the gravest only crime against the marines by being born the son of a man the government killed 22 years ago.

And if they are safe then maybe Garp doesn't have to confront the tyranny he swore to protect.

[txttletale]

what does it mean when people say stuff like individual morality or action is incompatible with class analysis or class struggle?

alright so like one of the key ideas about class analysis is the idea that classes (as a whole) have economic interests that affect all their members but don't extrapolate out to an individual analysis.

for example, let's say that you can't find a job, and somebody offers to pay you below the table for below minimum wage. it's in your individual interest to do this--it beats having no job! but as a member of the working class, once this practice becomes normalized, suddenly the standards of pay for everyone are lower because people know that they can just pay less than minimum wage under the table. competition between workers for jobs drives wages down for everyone, leaving them all in a worse situation overall even if each individual choice to scab, to accept lower pay, to resist unionization, etc, leaves the person who makes it better off. cf. karl marx on what happens when wages and working conditions deteriorate:

The labourer seeks to maintain the total of his wages for a given time by performing more labour, either by working a great number of hours, or by accomplishing more in the same number of hours. Thus, urged on by want, he himself multiplies the disastrous effects of division of labour. The result is: the more he works, the less wages he receives. And for this simple reason: the more he works, the more he competes against his fellow workmen, the more he compels them to compete against him, and to offer themselves on the same wretched conditions as he does; so that, in the last analysis, he competes against himself as a member of the working class.

— Karl Marx, Wage Labour & Capital

similarly, any individual member of the working class is completely dispensable and replaceable by capital. if one person refuses to work unless they're paid a higher wage, they'll be fired and replaced with somebody who doesn't. the individual worker has no economic leverage whatsoever. but the working class has incredible economic leverage! and so does the intermediate stage between the working class and the individual--organized segments of the working class (e.g. trade unions) have economic leverage. if one person strikes, the capitalist can fire them. if 40,000 people strike, your industry is going to shut down.

so the reason why class analysis is compatible with individual action is that your incentives measurably change when you start organizing--it's in the interests of the individual to compete, but in the interests of the class to cooperate. and obviously you cannot just expect everyone to spontaneously coordinate! you, the individual, are disposable to capital! if you, personally, refuse to take the under-the-table offer, either on moral grounds or because you recognize your class interest, your neighbour's going to take it--unless you and her get together and agree that neither of you will take it. that's the only way that the guy making the offer is going to have to give in and offer the job for a living wage.

and this is what organization is--trade unions (although they have severe limitations!), communist parties, and other worker's organizations allow the working class to pursue their collective interest--which can only be pursued by collective action, because engaging in the strategies of collective action as an individual, without the cooperation of your peers, is high risk for no reward.

[vaguely-concerned]

Thinking about the symbolic weight of smoking in the TLT universe that comes to the fore in The Unwanted Guest -- the way it moves through from person to person: Pyrrha smoked, and Augustine wanted to impress her in all her stone cold fox MILF James Bond glory (and tbf who wouldn't) so he started too. and even though as far as he knows she's been gone for a myriad and is never coming back, he keeps the habit. Ianthe sees something in the hollowed-out Faberge eggshell of Augustine that resonates with her, all that gilded eloquent emptiness and disdain through the ages, so she picked it up from him to try to emulate it. She picked it up so hard that Palamedes -- the exact spiritual antithesis of the 'smoking! on a space station! what a powermove' ennui Ianthe so admired -- spontaneously unnerded enough to even known how to, simply from a sort of contact contamination of the soul.

G1deon and Augustine sharing a jittery smoke after their near-Harrow experience during soup night, and it's the closest thing to any real sense of brotherhood that remains between them. Pyrrha going ten thousand years dying both literally and for a smoke (and then Camilla sold her fucking cigarettes (for a third of what they were worth, probably Pyrrha's own good, and also more importantly grocery money). what an entirely haunted time to be alive etc.). Augustine and Mercy trading a cigarette back and forth in the middle of their collusion over the love and murder of god.

An act of small and measured self-destruction in the name of something a little bit like connection when you're stuck somewhere in yourself where love itself dares not or cannot tread (ritualized, transmissible)..........

[rattkachuk]

Hello! Hope you are having a good day.

So I have a question for you, just ignore when you don't feel like answering.

I came to Mattdrai via the enemies/rivals to lovers tag and then got sucked into hockey. I really like the fanon take on Leon, fav character, fanon Matthew was fine but way too woobified and infantilized in so many fics. So my surprise when I started to watch games, interviews etc. Public Matthew is so confident, so loving, awesome family to back him up, especially Brady, hot as hell, sexy way of playing hockey, amazing public persona. Loved and respected by his team, beyond hockey.

Then Leon. His only trait seems to be that he's pissy which I can appreciate but it seems that he's just a downright mean, arrogant guy with a superiority complex (see that interview when he puts Silovs down.) I don't find him stoic at all but he's just seems boring and bland and yeah, pissy. It doesn't seem like he has fun or likes his team a lot or is liked by them (Connor aside and his skills aside.) His friendship with Connor seems the only endearing or likeable thing. He even looks good in a bland way and his hockey is while it's so skillful it's not hot and also I wonder why his dirty plays aren't called out more often.

So what do I miss? Where does great fanon Leon come from? Why is he written mostly so superior to Matthew and where comes the "his team likes Leon so much but Matthew is an outcast in his own team come from?) It's so far from what I gather from old and new interviews or games and I have watched a lot, also German interviews. I really would like to like Leon, shipping them had been more fun when I didn't find his public self so jarring. What do I not see what everyone else seems to get?

Sorry for the long ask! Have a great day and thank you

first off thank you for such a thought out ask! i don't get to dive into things like this a lot outside of writing fic and it got my brain gears going.

to get right into the bulk of this ask: i get what you are saying about leon. that can be the way he comes off for sure, and look everything i'm gonna say? i'm talking out of my ass here. i don't claim to know anything about him as a person besides what's publicly presented, and i don't have much right to theorize about why he is the way that he is, but i'd be lying if i said i didn't think about it. how would i write rpf otherwise, right 💀

i think he cares a lot. and i think sometimes he gets so wrapped up in things, how things should be, how he should be performing, etc, and when it doesn't go a certain way he gets frustrated and snarky (eg, pissy comments and such). but i don't see that being bad necessarily, especially when it's seems to come from such a team oriented state of mind. which, i dont think he dislikes his team at all? i think if anything, he has a sort of blind faith in his team, and that's the only context i could see a 'superiority complex' making sense in. and yah maybe a little misplaced at times, but ultimately i think it comes from believing so fully in his team and not seeing that come to fruition. he really does not seem to care about his individual performance much at all, so how self obsessed can he be? when i think about leon i just see someone that is ultimately very passionate and committed to the game he plays. i'm also curious to know where you get the vibe that his team doesn't like him? simply because i never got that impression from any of the other oilers, they all seem like they're obsessed with him.

beyond hockey, i see a caring, sweet, kindhearted individual. anytime i see a picture or vid of him interacting with bowie, or even the things his girlfriend posts about him, the comments he leaves for people on ig, and yah of course in the way he talks/acts around connor, i see fragments of someone soooo different than the little two minute post game interviews (which, can we judge any hockey player on those? i think they all hate them dfkjgsd). it's not always something i actively go digging for or have examples of the top of my head, but i do see it, and it definitely goes into creating the version of leon that i have in my mind.

hey, and, he's a silly guy!!! please, i know the reputation is pissy and humourless, ESPECIALLY in fic, but that man is so funny. so many random offhanded comments that make me pause and then laugh. a different sense of humour but it's so there. i love the sandcastle vid from the asg last year and feel like it's a good example of that, all sunburnt and happy. also hey, big man in tune with his fear of the ocean? love that. that little vid of him dancing on the ice earlier this season, those halloween photos where he's dressed as a monkey, every time he talks to a kid. hell, seeing him in warmups and watching the way he takes time to interact fans?? loveee watching warmups but i'd never had a player actually acknowledge my existence before leon!

also i really enjoy his personality on the ice, i like the rat behaviour and the sassy comments that he makes to other players/refs, i like the bitch moves, and i like his hockey too. i think his game is dependable and like you said skillful, and while maybe not the most creative, the sureness and the technical aspect it is hot to me. so my thoughts on everything are probably skewed in that regard.

anyways this was just a whole lot of rambling about why i find him interesting, endearing even, but i understand the perception you have. i don't like some players that other people love, just cause i cant see what they see. and honestly that's sometimes just the way it is! if you don't like leon, maybe u just don't like him and thats fine.

disclaimer that i have only been on hockeyblr for a couple years, and really didn't spare many thoughts for leon til the beginning of the 22/23 season. truthfully i'm hardly the person to ask about leon imo, but of course i have thoughts anyways! if someone else with more knowledge reads my bit of rambling here, please feel free to chime in and add your voice to this!

and side note, ofc, i have to touch on this bc who would i be if i'm not one to talk about matthew; in the way of m.tkachuk, i think that in the early days of mattdrai it was maybe a fair take away during his time with the flames (minus the woobifying). even though he was loved so much here and had some fucking times, and i think the team was mostly good to him (player wise if not regarding management, that is), i see such a stark difference now that he's on the panthers. he seems much happier and more confident, and obviously he's clicking with the cats on another level, and i do see a shift in how he's been portrayed in fics since tbh.

[perenians]

i like to think that tara is so fiercely territorial when it comes to gale out of a sense of protectiveness. oh, she knows gale is a more than formidable wizard—she'd even go so far as to say that he's one of the best—but she knows what he's like in love. his actions are of utter, nearly thoughtless devotion. dangerous.

once he starts falling, he falls willingly with open arms. he gives all of himself to the person he loves—and that is what scares tara. his heart, given so freely, must be loved in return and taken care of. but how can tara trust gale's lover to do so, when tara does not know them at all? she's seen the damage that careless hands have done to her little love, and she doesn't want that to happen again. but gale's heart is his to give, it is not hers to protect, and i think that hurts her more than anything.

[abandoned-quiche]

i am in the very small minority that thinks noelle wasn't actually killing darkners in the weird route. snowgrave is specifically labelled as "fatal" while iceshock is not.

they don't work like human beings, where your cells start dying if you're encased in ice. they're COMPUTER PROGRAMS; computer programs freeze. get it?

it still sucks that you did all that. everyone gets frozen and then left behind in the cyber world. but berdly was the only one you KILLED.