#but what about the fact that man made objects being and inherent part of the reality to where

[hybbat]

You know a world where your ability to carry something is determined by quantity rather than size or weight is very easy to accept in a video game, because of mechanical convenience, but would probably be so strange in a story in any other medium, and I think a few more books and shows could stand to get a little funkier with the fundamentals of their reality like that.

[artiststarme]

A Grudge Be Held

Based on an enabling comment from @estrellami-1. Hope you guys like it and please leave me your opinions in the comments!

~*~*~*~

There are a few well known facts in the universe; the earth revolves around the sun, George Michael is gay, Tim Curry has sexy legs, and Eddie Munson holds grudges.

It wasn’t because he was a bad person or because he thought people were inherently bad, he’d just been through too much to waste his time on people that had already wronged him. He didn’t give more than one chance and if they fucked that up, well, they didn’t deserve another one.

He was usually lenient on what constituted a grudge to be held. Unless someone did something directly to him or someone he cared about, it didn’t really bother him and they certainly didn’t make his list. His parents were on there (because why wouldn’t they be?), Mrs. O’Donnell was on there because he was positive at least one of his failed senior years was due to her having a bone to pick with him, and Principal Higgins was on there too because fuck that guy.

Tommy Hagan was on the list because of a rumor started that made life hard for Eddie for awhile (it was true but needless to share), Jason Carver was on there now for starting a mob trying to kill him, and Billy Hargrove earned a spot for being an asshole to anything that moved.

A person that many people were surprised wasn’t on the list was Steve Harrington. The DnD party was shocked when they heard King Steve wasn’t an object of resentment in Eddie. But he’d never done anything out of malice to Eddie specifically. Where others saw confidence and pride, Eddie looked at a lonely and broken teen that was willing to do anything to fit in. He couldn’t hate him for that. And the time where Steve stood up for Eddie against Billy Hargrove at a drug deal gone wrong forever cemented him as a good guy in Eddie’s eyes.

After his experience with the Upside Down, psychic murders, and overall shitshow that was his Spring Break, Eddie and Steve got closer. Steve coerced everyone of authority to clear Eddie’s name with help from Robin, Nancy, and the passed Chief Hopper that apparently wasn’t actually dead. He housed Eddie and Wayne until they could find a new trailer that they could afford. Then he spent every waking moment making sure Eddie was alright and included as part of the group. In laymen’s terms, Steve saved his life.

So in true Eddie fashion, he made the internal dramatic decision that he would hold grudges on Steve’s behalf. He would be a guard dog of sorts, protecting and defending the love of his life his friend. What he didn’t consider was how difficult the task would be.

Through a new lens, Eddie saw that everyone walked all over Steve. The cashiers at the grocery store blatantly charged him extra, the customers at Family Video talked over him nearly every sentence in response to questions they asked, and teens on the street laughed at the scars in their view. Worse of all though, the Party didn’t respect him. Dustin and Mike told him several times a day how stupid he was, Nancy looked at him in pity and shut down all of his opinions, Lucas talked about not having sports in common with anyone right in front of him, and Robin kept blowing off their plans to hang with Vickie.

Through it all, Steve appeared fine. He smiled and nodded in all the right places but as soon as he thought the eyes moved on, his smile would slip to reveal something sadder. And so Eddie’s vengeance began.

He “accidentally” knocked over sales racks near the registers in the grocery store when they charged an extra $2 for milk. He keyed the cars of the teenagers that laughed at the evidence of Steve’s pain. When he saw Officer Callahan yacking at Steve for speeding, he picked up a dozen eggs and pelted the man’s house in revenge.

Dealing with the kids in the Party was trickier. His glares and barbed comebacks were clear enough for Nancy and Robin to change their ways. The kids though just weren’t observant enough to pick up on the clues Eddie tried to drop. One session of a campaign though, the perfect opportunity presented itself.

“I didn’t know there were dragons in the game. If you losers had told me there were dragons, I might’ve considered playing ages ago!” Steve exclaimed from his seat on the couch, intrigued eyes meeting Eddie’s.

Eddie smirked at him. “Oh yeah, Big Boy. You should know by now that I’m full of surprises.”

Steve blushed a little bit but as he went to respond, Mike interrupted. “Steve, you’re not even playing. You shouldn’t even be here much less interrupting the game!”

Steve’s flush turned pale and he shrunk into himself. “Sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt. I can just uh, I can go. I’ll see you guys later.”

As he moved to get up though, Eddie stood and towered over the table.

“Wait Steve, you’re gonna want to see this part.” He glowered at Mike and rasped his voice to transition back to DM’ing. “A comet flies from the dragon’s cavern and lands on Sir Madeon. Roll for damage.”

“What the hell! No, you can’t do that!” Mike stammered with a dropped jaw.

“I just did, pipsqueak. Roll for damage or die trying.”

“14,” Mike muttered. He glared at Eddie then Steve before pouting in his seat.

“The comet is too large to escape from. Sir Madeon tries to run but he’s not fast enough to avoid the flying stone. It lands on his back in a fiery crumble. The intense heat eats through his flesh, bones, and organs at once leaving only his head and limbs intact, scattered amongst the rest of the Party. He dies a horrendous death and his friends are left alone with only the smell of charred remains to remember him by.” Eddie ends his tirade with a quirked eyebrow. That’ll show these little assholes what happens when they mess with him. A quick glance at Steve shows him excitement and surprise, he absolutely was not expecting that.

“What the fuck. This is supposed to be PG,” Dustin stares at Eddie in horror. “You really just killed a character in the middle of a campaign for Steve?”

“Roll stealth and damage.” Eddie tells him deadpan.

“God-fucking-dammit! Eddie, no, please…”

“Roll or face the consequences!”

“3 stealth, Nat-20 damage,” Dustin whispered with his face in his hands. The other kids watch Eddie in a mixture of confusion and aghastment. But Steve is beaming, teeth shining from ear to ear.

“The dragon hears your cries of grief and turns its burly head towards you. Its glimmering eyes reach the you and the rest of the Party and you see its scaled lips open in a human like smile. With a speed you could never have anticipated, it slithers toward you before standing on muscled hind legs and flapping its leathery wings. Its lips curl around a blue flame. The last thing you feel is a flash of ice before you see no more.

Your friends see you disappear into a pile of ash, the heat of the flame too powerful to escape. The dragon whips its tail towards the party while they stare at where you used to stand. Will the Wise can’t even list his magical staff before the weight of the tail crushes him to the ground in a pile of shattered bones and bloody sinnew.

Luther is impaled by one of the dragon’s back spikes and killed immediately. The light in his eyes fades and all he sees is a figure with a crown waving at him in the distance. Prince Stephen and his pet dragon prosper in the face of their trespassing adversaries once again but the only witnesses to the horror are erased from the Earth.”

The boys stare at him in shock while he arranges his papers and stands. “The end. Steve and I are going to the movies. You bitchasses aren’t invited and if you’re even a little bit nasty to Steve again, I’ll pulverize you in real life just like I killed you in the campaign. Think on that.”

With that, Eddie grabs the hand of a stunned Steve and drags him from the Wheeler’s basement. After that debacle, he’s sure that the kids have gotten their point. And now he’s got a movie to see with his main man.

(The kids absolutely get his point and moving forward are a lot nicer to Steve. And a little scared of how Eddie’s mind works.

Eddie holds a grudge against the kids for months and will still reference their comments when he sees fit for the rest of their lives or at least the rest of his.

And Steve? He starts dating his DM in shining armor a mere two hours later.)

My Permanent Tag List: @doubleb11 @nburkhardt @zerokrox-blog @newtstabber @i-less-than-three-you @carlyv @pyrohonk @sherlock15 @conversesweetheart @estrellami-1 @suddenlyinlove @yikes-a-bee @swimmingbirdrunningrock @perseus-notjackson @anaibis @merricatty @maya-custodios-dionach @grtwdsmwhr @manda-panda-monium @lumoschildextra @goodolefashionedloverboi @mentallyundone @awkwardgravity1 @devondespresso @gregre369 @mysticcrownshipper @disasterlia @lillys-weird-world @messrs-weasley @orangesunsets12 @awkotaco24 @pukner @strangerthingfanfic @dangdirtydemons @bookworm0690 @hannahhook7744 @dreamlandforever @marsbars97 @precursorandthedragon @romanticdestruction @5ammi90 @death-thee-nervousqueer @panicatthediaz @justforthedead89 @futuristicnachostranger @breadboi66 @fandommaniac123

[whitedemon-ladydeath]

I feel like Rhys would be more interesting for me if SJM made up her mind on what kind of character he is supposed to be. If he's the "ideal man" then why write him performing textbook acts of abuse. the "ideal man" who is the pinnacle of Healthy Relationship Material cannot really mesh well with grey morality

part of being a morally grey character is,, the fucked up morality that "normal" characters would be like "dude wtf" which you can see with characters like Kaz Brekker and to an extent Damon Salvatore. Their grey morality is tied to their actual personhood and their actual sense of morality. they're not haunted by their actions. it is *within their morality* in their own ideals of what they consider right and wrong

Rhys' "grey morality" is tied to that of his "mask" and then he gets so tortured by how he just has to hurt all these people for the "greater good" my good dude that's not morally grey. a morally grey character is going to see it as worth it and not blink an eye bec it was what needed to be done- see Kaz literally ripping out that dudes eye and not blinking about it while everyone else was like what the fuck

Rhys is written closer to a character similar to Stefan who is just so tortured and the narrative and the people around him (and by extension many of his Stans™️) will go out of their way to completely forgive all the problematic shit he did bec he "has a pure heart" or "hes an addict tho" or whatever and it's easier to excuse when he's standing next to Damon, who is outwardly fucked up and problematic in such an obvious way (Rhys next to Tamlin or even Nesta)

she Wants him to be a morally grey bad boy but he's not *written* like one. he's not allowed to be problematic the way morally grey characters are problematic. Morally Grey characters are inherently toxic and problematic and often to the point where they can be/are abusive

but also, it's the fact that he just,,, doesn't have any real character growth outside of MAF. he becomes stagnant. his characterization doesn't really change. he keeps lying to Feyre. His actions don't really change bec the narrative doesn't challenge him to bec he's "the ideal man"

Hell Rhys taunting Tamlin in TAR was interesting and entertaining for me to read but when we get that in later books from his POV with Tamlin literally just beaten down and having had given up there is nothing to gleam from that. it's beating a dead horse, it's kicking someone while they're down. it's not taunting, it's not entertaining where someone can snap back, it's just demeaning and cruel at that point like fuck just leave him alone and maybe stop trespassing

I'd probably view Nesta and Rhys' beef differently if he didn't abuse political and magical power over her- if the narrative itself didn't immediately side with Rhys as objectively in the right despite lying and abusing his power over her. and maybe to an extent I'd forgive it if we had more scenes with them where they, more or less, buried the hatchet and let their relationship actually develop and build nuance

he gets boring. no one pushed back against him in a way that actually challenges the plot or Rhys, outside of Maybe Nesta when she told Feyre about the pregnancy but even then that went out of its way to vilify Nesta and not Rhysand for putting the gag order in place in the first place

like maybe if SJM committed to a Side with Rhys or actually got the plot to challenge him and give him actual growth I'd be more interested in his character. Right now he's just boring. and he's a dick. and not in the way I find very entertaining in characters

[lunar-years]

I could possibly have stomached James being back and forgiven apparently, if it wasn't for the casually dropped in statutory rape, what on earth?? The writers were probably trucking along with their "everyone deserves forgiveness" train, meanwhile anyone with a jot of common sense had air raid sirens screaming "DO NOT LET THAT MAN NEAR JAMIE". I'd have been angry with the forgiveness side anyway (we see no signs that James is trying to be a better person or even that hes not going to try and beat the shit out of his son again, for all we know thats a court mandated rehab), but I could have sort of understood it. Adding in that fun little fact made James go from terrible horrific abuser to just completely unforgiveable.

honestly i completely agree with you. I know this is a very divisive arc and there were people who genuinely loved where they took it because it resonated with them in some way, especially for some people who have been through similar experiences and appreciated the recognition that someone like James could successfully change. I really try to accept and understand fans who have that opinion and I want to be very clear that I both recognize addiction is a disease and think there is nothing inherently wrong with wanting to or actually forgiving your abuser. Each situation is different! People suffering from addiction can absolutely recover! Individuals need to do what is right for them in their real actual lives, etc.

That said, the parts I loathe about the Jamie & James arc, from my own personal opinion, are:

any sort of relationship Jamie and James may have moving forward post-canon is inherently a complex one, but the writers did not address the conclusion of the arc complexly. At all. Instead it was "oh everything conveniently worked out and here they are happy and together" wrapped up in a 10 second flash-forward which is just...no.

there is absolutely no evidence that James' violence stems directly from his addiction. there is nothing to say a sober James isn't every bit as abusive as a drunken James. There is no indication that Jamie isn't putting himself back into a situation that is downright unsafe, or that he isn't at risk of coming into harm and being deeply hurt all over again. there is nothing to say James hasn't tried rehab before, and relapsed.

James never apologizes or owns up to his actions onscreen.

Jamie's decision to forgive his dad comes at a time when he's in a very vulnerable place mentally, having just come off a canonical depressive episode. He consults no one about forgiving his father apart from Ted, who is quite literally the worst person on the show he could have consulted (no offense, Ted, it's just that the man is incapable of being objective when it comes to Jamie and the father&son of it all). The decision isn't being made in a healthy state of mind and Jamie hasn't rallied a support group around him before taking the leap. From what we see on screen, he seemingly doesn't tell anyone that he's going to visit his dad in rehab.

there's a way that all of this can make sense. I can make sense of why Ted, with his own heaping helping of daddy issues, would give Jamie the advice he does. I can see why Jamie (again, in a vulnerable place) would take it! why he decides the right thing to do is to reach out to his dad! I can see him going to visit. I can imagine that visit going well or going poorly, can see James' stint in rehab being mandated, or also him checking himself it. But at the end of the day, those scenarios are all imagined! none of that nuanced context is provided on the show. Rather, the presentation and messaging are hasty and in my person opinion, flat-out dangerous. They lead the casual viewer to read Ted's advice as good (it categorically isn't), and Jamie as Doing the Right and Responsible Thing, when it's a hell of a lot more complicated that that.

it is also weird and complicated to have Jamie take Ted's advice over his mum's, who in the same episode, mind you, told him James was never ever going to change. again, we can jump through hoops to make sense of it, but we shouldn't have to.

there's absolutely a pattern of abuse being weirdly minimized on ted lasso/victims forgiving their abusers and i think that's gross. you can't claim to be a comedy show that dares to tackle real, tough issues in one breath and then expect us to laugh off abuse (Jane/Beard) in the next. Sometimes it's like they change what kind of show they want to be scene by scene, lol.

as you point out, in my opinion it is completely batshit on the writer's part to have introduced "btw Jamie's dad, who we've previously established beats him and verbally abuses him, ALSO proxy raped him when he was 14!" in the same season in which you plan to have Jamie forgive said father (with next to no buildup or context) just a few episodes later. Like, yes, let's add even deeper layers to Jamie's tragic backstory before we wash it away in feel-good reunion tosh! just, ew. what on earth were they thinking.

So all in all, I think the arc could have been successful if the writers had known where they were going with it from the beginning of the season and given it the kind of care that sort of storyline demands. However they didn't do that, and the end message is incredibly harmful as a result.

[aesolerin]

Did you ever hear about that digital presentation/lecture one of the Red Hook fellas gave on how they put together the game visually and inspirationally? (Fun Fact: Jester turned out the way he did because Bourassa hates the DnD Bard stereotype, lol) I'm mentioning this in particular because he went over Leper as an example in terms of symbolism incorporated into his design

(which, side tangent to that: Leper's blocky and metallic aesthetic was inspired by Iron Man! the more you know, lol)

This was put out onto YouTube before Red Hook made it fully clear DD2 was gonna be a thing, which made it all the more notable when people later realized that one of the pictures used on that slide was of Leper's DD2 character design. So, everything he was talking about here was likely with Leper's canon DD2 backstory in mind. This is important because:

One of the points Bourassa mentioned was the fact that Leper has a "broken sword for a broken man".

That by itself is already brutally sad, but rest assured! It gets worse if you think about it long enough. After all, do you remember when that happened in his backstory? If not, lemme stop being coy for a moment to help you in drawing some conclusions:

The Leper's sword broke in killing off his advisors.

It wasn't the diagnosis that got to him. Neither was it leaving his kingdom behind. It was in breaking the oath he made to himself that he would protect everyone in his kingdom. Because, treacherous or not, his advisors were still part of his kingdom. It was only a small handful of people, sure. And yes, it's true that they couldn't be trusted to take actions in good faith once he was gone. And it likely was the right thing to do, at the end of the day.

But justifications don't erase the stark truth that he murdered his own subjects in cold blood.

And THAT shattered him (and his sword) more than a simple diagnosis or self-exile ever could.

Because, the thing is: someone can believe that their actions were objectively the best possible option and justifiable, while considering those same actions subjectively horrifying and unforgivable. After all, murder is still murder no matter the motivation, and some folks deeply take that to heart.

~~~~~~

Of course, this is only true if I remembered that presentation correctly, as I haven't tried to look it up to verify it, lol. You got any thoughts on it, yourself? Assuming you hadn't already realized that on some level, of course - for all I know, you could have drawn this conclusion a long time ago and never brought it up because you thought it was obvious! xD

Or, on the other side of it, there's no reason you should feel the need to change how you characterize our fave Leper buddy, y'know? Though, imo, it's not particularly contradictory to how we normally characterize him. This is just another angle you could look at him from if you wanted to in your writing, shippy or otherwise!

(Though speaking of shipping: this creates another interesting level to think about Leper's dynamic with Jester, no?)

(Maybe Jester needs to get his king to forgive himself by comparing their past actions. If Baldwin finds nothing wrong with what Sarmenti did, which was spurred on by a much more selfish - if entirely sympathetic - motivation, why should Baldwin go about putting his own actions on a pedestal of guilt? Unless he's implying that he's supposed to be morally better than Jester, which I'm p sure both of them would hate to draw as a conclusion.)

(Or maybe Leper sees it as another way they can understand each other that others may not grasp. That while they may be stained by their past actions, it doesn't make the two of them inherently unlovable or deserving of suffering. It's a burden they can help each other bear due to their own personal experience with it.)

(Or maybe Jester is tired of all this masturbatory self-flagellating fuckery and would much rather he and Leper get down to something a bit more literal in its sexual nature. Wouldn't put it past the Silly fella)

thank you much for providing that link to the video! which i will in turn provide in full, because it is a very fun and thought-provoking talk overall, not just the Leper stuff!!

(and, as someone who's played lots of bards, ☹ [but i will point out i've never played one of those horny bards at least])

i do very much agree that retaliating and killing his traitorous advisors was a huge turning point for Leper, and a source of at least some degree of internal conflict for him.

was it a moment of freedom and liberation, finally justified in doing something about those poison-tongued sycophants?

was it a moment of horror and regret, killing treasonous-but-still-subjects of his?

was it a moment of resignation and cold calculation, defending himself against attackers seeking to kill him?

was it a moment of inevitability and hollowness, knowing something of this magnitude was bound to happen after his diagnosis?

some bits of all four? fluctuating day-by-day, nightmare-by-nightmare?

as Bourassa said, a broken sword for a broken man. no matter the literal golden facade he puts up, Leper is still a broken man looking for something as he battles the horrors of the Hamlet/the world. at least this is an unexpected connection he shares with Jester, right?

i will admit it's not something i've commented much on in my fics, as Jester's trauma is just so much more, but i certainly have thoughts!

way back in my first DD fic, Dreams, Jester notes that royal blood on their hands is something they share, and Leper smiles as he says “Hence the beauty I see in your bloody finale. Such cruelty and abuse should be responded to in kind."

in Bow, something about the assassination attempt seems to have severely fucked up the Veiled Emperor's sense of trust.

believe me friend, when it is finally revealed, i am going to have so much fun 😊

these are some wonderful(ly painful) thoughts you've shared, and again thank you for putting this talk on my radar!!

[call-me-strega]

Analysis/Call-Out of the Spider Society

The whole situation with everyone chasing Miles is astounding to me because most of these guys didn't even question why Miguel was telling them this. It also stuck out to me that the Spiders that learned about canon events seemed okay with finding out that some deaths were supposed to happen which lead me to think about it more critically.

No one can tell me that the vast majority of Spiders don't have a guilt complex a mile high. They also tend to feel like they are outcasts or some other form of isolation from family and friends due their secret identities. They all have gone through thoughts of "it's my fault bc I didn't use my power/I failed/I'm Spider-(wo)man, etc"' and "I can't tell anyone about being Spider-(wo)man bc they wouldn't understand/it would endanger them/it would endanger me". All the Spiders want the same things Miles did in the movie: To be able to talk to someone who gets it. Who understands the guilt, the powers, and the struggle of a double life. The only difference is that these guys are able to get it and Miguel was the one to give it to them.

Their loyalty to Miguel mostly comes from the precieved solution he offers. Not only does he have the power to give them access to a multiversal base, to people who understand, but he also has an explanation that plays into a Spider's guilt complex: "Your Uncle Ben/Aunt May/Parents/Best Friend/Captain/etc were always meant to die. That's part of what made you Spider-(wo)man. There was nothing you could have done about it because it is something that needed to happen for the good of the multiverse and you are better for it." Which essentially boils down to "It's not your fault" something a large majority of these Spiders need to hear. Additionally, it's basically canon that every Spider is a huge nerd so the fact that there is some sort of scientific force outside their control that causes this may come as a comfort to some of them.

Then we also have to examine what Miguel has them doing in the Spider Society. His mission is to maintain the balance and stability of the multiverse, something that sounds like a mission any Spider can get behind when it's on paper. Then they also have to witness what happens when anomalies pop up in the wrong universes. Not only do the cause mass destruction and mayhem but the universe who are unable to get them under control fall into ruin. This helps build the mentality that all anomalies alre inherently bad and that Miguel's mission is objectively correct through experience and observation.

Moreover, I highly doubt that most of these Spiders even know who Miles is much less what the big deal about him is. They've probably been left out of the loop in regards to how Miguel is approaching him and the realities of his situation. They don't know because it's not their job to worry about these things. The Spider Society to them is a place where they can interact with peers and protect more people. They even acknowledge that their are certain deaths they can't prevent because of the laws of multiversal balance. They aren't doing a good thing by chasing down Miles but the don't really know any better.

Which brings me to the why. As I said before most of the Spiders don't know Miles' situation so here's what they do know. Miguel gave them a place to belong. Miguel has a noble cause and wants to help people and maintain stability of the multiverse. The anomalies they've been dealing with endanger the multiverse ergo, anomalies are bad. Miguel says this guy is an anomaly and danger to the multiverse and he wants us to stop him. Miguel hasn't given us a reason to to trust him so far. Furthermore, there is an underlying fear of "I don't want to lose the place/people who understand" that comes from a precieved threat to the multiverse that comes into play here. If you take in these facts it seems only logical that the Spiders would chase down Miles on Miguel's orders. And as for the Spiders who are in the loop, they've already decided to side with Miguel because they think he's right.

Now I've reached the call-out portion of the rant. It upsets me that none of the Spiders stop to think critically and examine what they are doing. This anomaly is another Spiderman, one that has no ill intent and is just a kid who looks terrified by what's going on. Nobody thought there was something fishy here? And why are they chasing him blindly too? It is incredibly easy of Miles to trick and lead them away from the base. None of them could stop for one minute to think of a better plan? Send one person to talk him down or maybe set a trap? Or even just try to understand where the guy is coming from and not chase him down.

Also the part of the portion where they just accept that some people can't be saved is off to me. Even if you can't save everyone doesn't mean you stop trying. That's the essence of what Spider-man, and honestly super heroes in general, stand for. To try and save everyone, no matter the odds, no matter how hopeless it seems. Even if some Spiders took comfort in the idea that it had to happen and it wasn't their fault doesn't mean they should lie down and let it happen. Miles' question is right "If you knew this before Uncle Ben died would you not try to save him still?" A supposedly destined fate isn't an excuse to stop fighting back and trying to save everyone. That's just it: why do you let the fear of consequences let you submit to fate when it is the essence of your character to fight and protect against the odds?

Yes it's valid that you have some fears but since when have you let them hold you back from helping people. Helping people is a call that the Spiders literally can't ignore so why would they let it happen. There is no way that every Spider-person should have just accepted it. They shouldn't have blindly taken part in a manhunt for a kid who didn't accept that he shouldn't try to save certain people. Nor should they have failed to think critically on better ways to approach the situation.

I sincerely hope that their will be more internal conflict in the Spider Society in the next movie. I want there to be people who are more critical of Miguel and those who are willing to fight back. There has to be a number of Spiders who get where Miles is coming from and are willing to support him. Here's to hoping this is elaborated on in the next movie.

[absolutebl]

Takara, Amagi, Communication Used to Subvert Seme/Uke plus some stuff about Ask v Guess cultures 

Takara might just have jumped to the top of my list of BL’s best communicators (post in progress).  

Still, I can’t wait, I haffa talk about this sequence now, okay? It’s from Episode 2 of Takara-kun and Amagi-kun (GaGa & Viki). 

Look it’s so important, what was said in these two scenes (capped above) - whether the translation is strictly accurate or not. 

First of all, how Takara expresses his frustration in the expectation that he be able to understand what Amagi is thinking (and wants) but ALSO that he expresses that having to ask about Amagi’s erratic behavior makes him feel unmanly.

ARGH. SO good.

Here’s why: 

I’ve talked about this before with the issues behind seme/uke dynamics and that one of those things inherent to that dynamic is that the seme is expected to read the uke’s mind and understand what he wants. He has to do this so he can make the decision for the uke (especailly with regards to sex) so the uke is not made impure by desire (because the uke is associated with pure virginal innocence). 

This results in the idea that a manly man just “knows what his baby” desires. (And it being romantic to glorify this aspect.) 

Also it is unmanly for the seme to have to talk about feelings, his own confusion (is a feeling) but also his uke’s over emotional reactions to situations = more feelings (gasp). 

This is a huge issue with romance in general - in fiction AND in real life. That women, primarily, expect men, primarily, to understand what they want (in bed or out of it) WITHOUT talking about it.

Honestly if you want to do a thing, or have it done to you, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT FIRST.

This fatal flaw in het and seme/uke dynamics, is what leads to some serious issues like romanticizing dub-con (he "just knows” that she “wants it” so he doesn’t have to have consent) which discolors BL and Kdramas, (see frustrations with Mame’s currently airing Love in the Air). Not to mention so many narratives driven by willful miscommunication.

The fact that it’s Japan in a high school BL that’s tackling this issue head on shouldn’t be surprising - but that they did it so openly and so early on in a series we’re led to believe is going to be all about willful miscommunication?

Brilliant.

Takara is defined by his unwillingness to act initially because he is afraid of the depth of his own feelings, acting on them (and what he really desires) but also talking about them and expressing them to the object of his desire. 

It’s kind of magical that he is such a communicator, but that was because he almost lost Amagi through misunderstanding already and his fear of losing his boy is greater than his fear of expressing his feelings and asking about Amagi’s. 

ALSO! 

Conflating manliness with being diminished by having to ask/talk about feelings is touching on the difference between an ask culture and a guess culture. (Most, but not all, western cultures are ask cultures and most, but not all, Asian cultures are guess cultures.) 

The intrinsic social differences between ask/guess also contributes to wide scale misinterpretations of narrative from western audiences especially around familial and friendship involvement and intimacy in each others lives. There’s an essay in there somewhere but I don’t have time or inclination. Still I rec reading up on the difference when you have time, it’s truly fascinating.) 

Finally, since this series is using voice over to peek into BOTH character’s heads we are being shown constantly that “guess” is not going to work. Takara does not understand Amagi (that’s part of why he likes him, I think) so we know he MUST get up the courage (and go against his seme nature to) ask. Also Amagi doesn't understand Takara, so he’s going to have to LEARN to ask. Hopefully that’s his character arc. 

This is exactly the opposite of Love in the Air where we only get VO from the uke’s perspective, and it’s being used as an excuse to exacerbate the damaging idea that a good seme knows what his uke wants, and takes without asking, because that’s just “so hot.” 

(source) 

[mermaidsirennikita]

What did you mean by twilight being “era specific” in your tags on the reblog about upcoming reboots?

I think that when Twilight came out, the book especially (which built a ground fanbase for the movie to launch from) there was less pseudointellectual web analysis, PLUS there was less care for the genuine problems with the series. In some ways, Twilight Discourse helped propel some early era "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!" puritanical bullshit.

things people weren't clocking super heavily when Twilight came out that I think are legitimate issues:

--Stephenie Meyer is a devout Mormon, and as such her politics seep into the books; the conservativism surrounding sex despite the inherent titillation of "when will they fucking fuck"; the anti-choice messaging; the racism, which lemme tell you, has some Very Specific Implications when it comes from a Mormon author. (Now I.... clocked her as soon as I saw the name "Stephenie", and had it confirmed as soon as I read she was named that for her dad, for reasons I won't get into. But a lot of people didn't.)

--Going back to the racism... It's real bad, and the movies made it worse by casting a white guy the most important indigenous role. Everyone else was played by Native actors. Not Jacob Black, the third most crucial character in the entire series. The fact that they baldly got away with that in 2008? Says a lot. Like, they weren't even trying to pass him off, they just went "well, he can tan". In fact, I think Taylor Lautner SAID he'd work up a tan for the second movie. I mean, he was already pretty tan, the just sprayed him down further. Problem solved, right?

--Nessie is dumb as hell in general, but it's also like... so anti-choice. Like. Bella is literally dying lmao. But not only is it presented as Right and Understandable that she'd want to die to birth this demonic child--the crucial thing about this is that EDWARD, MY MAN, is presented as the bad guy for really, really wanting her to abort. He is being completely logical and a loving partner here. He rightly points out that they have no fucking idea what this kid is, and also, most importantly, he loves Bella and puts her first and wants her to LIVE. Can I just say--unintentionally, the romantic hero everyone was losing their shit over in 2005-2012? Being super about his wife having a life-saving abortion? Kind of iconic. Edward is a pro-choice ally, lmao. (He even tells Jacob like "FINE WHATEVER IF SHE WANTS A BABY THAT BAD YOU CAN FUCK HER IDGAF" in what is. Objectively. A hilarious scene. I've seen Edward antis try to paint this as like, him trying to control her bodily autonomy--dude, Edward could have physically forced Bella to get an abortion. He does not, he simply wants this woman to LIVE.)

But then, as soon as the demon baby is born, he's all in love with her because he realizes she was a Soul Baby this entire time. Lol. No. In a post-Dobbs world, I don't know how you do this, and I think that if you have to entirely redo a crucial part of the series, why. bother. making it.

Never mind Jacob falling in love with a baby.

There are other problems, obviously, but you also have the SAVE THE GIRLS FROM THEIR HORNY DESIRES crowd, who thinks the entire series should be thrown in the trash because Edward is a) abusive because he doesn't want Bella to go be a frosty delight and die or b) abusive because he does want Bella to be a frosty delight and die c) abusive because he doesn't put out (a truly wild take lmao, he's sexually manipulating belly by dangling his cherry in front of her, and she somehow has zero alternatives, certainly not the other guy vying for her hand) d) abusive because he like, tries to buy her a new car and give her nice things...? e) abusive because he doesn't love the idea of his girlfriend hanging out with another guy who tries to kiss her and shit f) abusive because he DOES want her to hang out with that guy and wants her t have werepuppies to distract from the loss of their demon babies.

There is a lot of discourse around Bella, Edward, and Jacob that I find very stupid. I cannot imagine it's going to be any better in a post-Twitter post-X world.

I also think that, frankly? The youth want different things. If they want vampires, they want the Gothic melodrama (and more racially conscious updates) of a show like Interview with the Vampire. If they want teen content, they want teen content that incorporates people who aren't universally cishet and white (Quileutes aside, and as we have discussed... bad).

UNFORTUNATELY, the teens are also less horny, apparently, than they were when I was a teen. Which I think is the result of puritanical stuff/the conservative appropriation and perversion of theoretically solid progressive concepts.... among other things... and we need to make it so that teens feel comfortable with exploring things in an emotionally and physically healthy way. BUT. That's going to take time, and I don't think that the thing that really helped Twilight surmount the discourse, which is that--we Twihards were largely very horny about it--is going to work right now.

Also; if you are not a puriteen, I don't really think Twilight's particular brand of "oh my god, he might just touch my lips while I wear my khaki skirt" horniness is going to work for you, either. Like I said, it was a specific time. The kids who were really anti-sex were less the liberals who are worried about fictional characters' consent being violated when we watched movies... It was Silver Ring Thing kids, who lemme tell you, as someone who did not partake but knew several... Those kids.... wanted to throw down. Really bad.

And so Twilight appealed to that mindset that was like, pervasive in 2008--you don't abstain because you don't or shouldn't want it, you abstain because it's this thing that you will be able to have as soon as it is Right to have it. Like the Jonas Brothers! They did that, right? They really committed to the purity rings, riiiiiiiiiight?

The knowledge that you're waiting for this thing that you have a semi-specific timestamp on (your wedding night) and it's going to be sooo worth the wait (it will not, at least not for a while lol) was this deeply titillating thing for much of the target audience, because that's what Twilight was almost literally evoking. Edward wouldn't have sex with Bella until their wedding night, but he TEASED her. The entire series was arguably abut this leadup to the sex. And boy, was it disappointing! But until it happened, I think the series really captured that breathless anticipation. And I just don't think people are currently very interested in that.

They might as well have been soaking

Also. Bella's dad is a cop.

[ringtownrangerlark]

[@walkingbugencyclopedia]

Hi there my name is Bugsy we talked Once about Cereal and I’m a Gym Leader in Johto and I’d like to politely disagree with you about the League and Pokeballs.

As you can probably guess from the everything about me I’m an expert in Bug-Types. I’m a specialist in both battling with them and research of them (though not yet qualified for the Professor title, something I want to be in the future). I discovered the move Fury Cutter, which, while not as impressive as a lot of things a lot of other people have done, is pretty rare for someone who was (at the time) 12 years old.

I’ve been involved in my region’s Pokemon League… pretty much since. And I might go so far as to say that these people are the best thing that’s ever happened to me. (Better than most of the people I’d been friends with before that point, at least.) We’re flawed. So’s everything else ever created in the history of everything. Humans aren’t, can’t be, perfect. You and others make some fair points. (Technically the Johtonian Pokemon School is entirely independent of the League and I’d call Unova an exception along with Paldea, but that’s tangential.)

The League aside, Silph and Devon are FAR from the only people making Pokeballs. While the modern mass-produced Pokeball is mostly made by corporations, they’ve been almost an art form for CENTURIES. Not that something being older makes it better by the very principle of it, but people have been hand-making Pokeballs using apricorns and ingenuity long before the styler was a twinkle in its inventor’s eyes. I live a few doors down from a man who’s been making traditional Pokeballs since long before I was even born. The Pokeball, in itself, is not new, not in the same way the styler appears to have been popularized within the lifetime of some still-active Rangers. Also Kalos has its own entirely independent Pokeball factory but that’s a minor factual error on your part at worst.

On a related point, the only Pokeball that can be bought for, quote, “pocket change” without any league badges (which, I may note, are given out at the Gym Leader’s discretion, even disregarding the battle outcome; so that Trainers who are abusive towards Pokemon or similarly not deserving of a Badge don’t get it) are the standard ones (and the Premier Ball, but that’s just standard with a fancy coat of paint). The standard Pokeball is not designed to capture Pokemon efficiently. The other Pokeballs that can be obtained with no League Badges are often a) situational and/or b) sold by private individuals who have the right to refuse to sell their Pokeballs to those that may misuse them.

Claiming that being older makes the Pokeball objectively better would be an appeal to tradition, though, so that’s not really reason enough. What is, in my opinion, reason enough, is the actual value of the more concrete and compact capture that a Pokeball provides. It allows for the entire existence of Pokemon Training as a sport, and the modern idea of living in harmony with Pokemon. Now, while training Pokemon without Pokeballs is possible, it’s a whole lot less practical for everyone involved, up to and including the Pokemon. Pokeballs don’t inherently take away a Pokemon’s free will any more than a styler. After the moment of capture itself, a Pokemon in a Pokeball isn’t “trapped” in any meaningful sense of the word. While it’s registered to you, and many Pokemon often do become more docile (due to the fact that they’re often intelligent enough to know that human means food and safety), others don’t, and those Pokemon are just as aggressive as before they’re caught. The Pokeball, while it can be released and recalled on the command of the Trainer, also allows the Pokemon to do the same things, and while the Trainer can try and counteract those actions, sometimes it’s a losing battle. If that Pokemon doesn’t want to be captured I can assure you that one way or another, it won’t be. (The only exception being the Master Ball but that’s controversial at best and even now only given out to the most trusted of Trainers and authorities.) Pokeballs are also relatively easy to break, which, while it may sound like a negative, is actually a very positive thing all considered. A broken Pokeball deregisters the Pokemon that had been contained within it. This is great because breaking a Pokeball is an easy way to get a Pokemon deregistered if it has been registered to someone that it shouldn’t be. As has been mentioned, Pokeballs are inherently single use, which means that while not all-encompassing, budget is a strong limiting factor.

I’d also like to mention that jamming technology for Pokeballs exists and its lack of widespread use by the authorities is an issue on their part, not on the Pokeballs themselves. Perhaps the adoption of such technology could solve some of the issues you have with Pokeballs in their modern state.

Finally, I’d like to emphasize that no malice is intended in this argument. You, sir, have the correct views on cereal, and that makes you pretty damn cool in my book.

Signed,

Bugsy, Azalea Town Gym Leader

Hello!

I really appreciate this thorough and thoughtful reply. I will be the first to admit that I'm not immune to bias. I come from a region where pokeballs are relatively new and rare, and there is no league, so I have an outsider's perspective on these things, and don't really "get" some aspects of league and trainer culture. I'll try to address your points one by one:

First of all, congratulations! I certainly wasn't doing anything close to that impressive at age 12. And from what I've seen, your bug expertise is top-notch.

I'm really glad the League has been such a positive experience for you. It was never my intention to imply the league itself was evil. I suspect your feelings are similar to mine about the rangers- I started volunteering as a teenager and rangers haven't just been my coworkers, they are family members and good friends. The Union still has it's flaws and inefficiencies, and is far from perfect.

I did not know much about the history of pokeballs! I am also very glad to hear that gym badges are not handed out by battle victory alone. That was a concern for possible abuse. To your point about standard pokeballs not being designed to capture efficiently- I feel like that would just encourage a person to buy and use more pokeballs, rather than addressing the root issues of care, goodness-of-fit, and motivation.

I also feel the need to clarify that I never believed a pokemon caught via ball was trapped, or that registering a pokemon was inherently harmful. And as I have said elsewhere, I am not actually against pokemon capture, training, or battling (or other uses of registered pokemon, such as construction). These practices have existed for centuries and have been often to the betterment of pokemon and humans alike.

I think the primary flaw in my argument was that I focused on pokeballs vs. stylers, when a lot of my concerns boil down really to what I am going to call "trainer culture" for lack of a better word. By this I mean things like:

Trainers not being expected to learn ecology or pokemon biology

Battling being seen as the be-all-end-all of handling situations, even outside of the league and sports battles. For example, the notion that criminal organizations can be managed by vigilantes or citizens fighting with their own pokemon.

Catching a pokemon being seen as synonymous to knowing/learning about/understanding it

Being a battle champion being seen as the peak or 'mastery' of Pokemon

"Gotta catch em all" mentality

Valuing a pokemon's moves and utility in battle as the most important features

Thinking all pokemon must battle, or that evolution (via battle) is necessary for all pokemon

Assuming everyone battles, knows about battling, or follows battling as a sport

Assuming someone who doesn't battle regularly doesn't know about pokemon

I'm not saying all trainers believe these things. But I have encountered these beliefs as basic, unquestioned assumptions in many trainers. And it isn't even typically malicious- just a widespread cultural norm. And you must also remember that I'm coming at this from my position as a ranger. Which means in my day-to-day job I am constantly dealing with things like:

People randomly releasing pokemon they no longer want, often in inappropriate environments or after too much training for wild release (e.g. just dumping an anorith in the ocean).

Mass trafficking of pokemon.

Trainers using wild pokemon as battle practice (rather than gyms or fellow trainers) which can result in widespread damage (e.g. a trainer training their charmander by battling dozens of oddish, who would not normally encounter charmander, and to a degree greater than normal loss through predation. Or someone bringing an elektrike to knock-out multiple magikarp in a region where there are no water electric types, and ocean pokemon are not adapted to that kind of encounter.)

Trainers doing dangerous or disruptive things in the name of catching or battling (e.g. putting honey on trees which fed wild pokemon, in a region without honey trees or wild aipom).

I agree that pokeballs have their benefits for safe capture of pokemon intended to be kept/trained rather than wild. A capture styler is tailored for rangers and wouldn't meet the needs of most others. But I would like more people to recognize

The way modern pokeballs make certains kinds of harm very easy to perpetuate and very hard to stop and

Maybe question a bit more the effects their typical assumptions, behaviors or practices with pokemon, and whether some of these things are actually necessary.

A lot of my job would be much safer and easier if people weren't encouraged to catch and battle as much as possible, while being under-encouraged to actually learn about pokemon and the environment. I hope that has made my position more clear.

With warm regards,

Lark, Ranger (Ringtown, currently Paldea Crater Base)

[xplrvibes]

So. I did watch the Zak Bagans Museum episode a few days ago, and I've been slowly writing this...essay about it ever since.

Anyway, I put my thoughts and review/reaction, whatever you want to call it, under a cut. Before we get to that, however:

Disclaimer: everything below the cut is my opinion, and opinions are not law. The definition of opinion is: "a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge." Please keep that in mind as you proceed.

I want to cover a few areas that were of particular interest to me:

Zak Bagans

The Psychology of Fear

The Investigation/Evidence

So, I’ll start with bullet #1: everyone’s favorite paranormal curmudgeon, Zak Bagans.

First of all, I have to state the obvious here: love him, hate him, don’t believe a word coming out of his lying ass mouth- Zak is still the most recognizable name in the paranormal entertainment industry, and that name carries some weight.  The fact that snc were able to get this man, who has been notoriously prickly about giving his platform to other people in the industry in the past (especially youtubers), to not only allow them to film, but to allow them to record a phone conversation with them, is huge.  This is a massive, massive deal for them, if they want to move forward and become more mainstream.

And, controversial opinion incoming here: there is nothing wrong with wanting to be more mainstream. Wanting to reach a much broader audience is not a sign of being an inherently bad person.

So, this collab was a big deal.  Him talking to them on the phone, him agreeing to allow them to record them on the phone, him being nice to them, him hyping them up on socials- all a really big deal and an awesome feat for them.The fact that he readily agreed to allow them to do things that only his team has ever done (and the fact that Colby is the first person to ever lay on the Hof Bed) is a really cool thing for them, and I’m stoked that they got the opportunity.

Think about this: Colby (and Kat) was the first person to ever lay on that bed since it came to the Museum.  Zak could decide to have a storyboard made and hung on the wall in the Museum someday, noting that.  Like- come on. 

That’s cool.

So, moving on to my second talking point: The Psychology of Fear.

Something that really, really interested me in some weird way about this video, was that it really showcased how fear can play a large part in the vibes of a person, place, or thing.  

SNC had talked about egregores before (aka: certain non-physical entity that arises from the collective thoughts of a distinct group of people), and I think Zak’s Museum is a class A example of this.  This place, and the artifacts held within it, are so deeply tied to these terrifying urban legends- stories of cursed objects and demons and demonic possession, etc- that people go into this place already scared, and the vibe in the building itself only intensifies as you go through it.  The more your fear is manifesting, the more you are manifesting these curses and hauntings. 

Take Peggy the Doll, for example.  SNC spent an exorbitant amount of time hyping up this doll’s scary, cursed eyeball power.  The really drove the point home that if you look into this doll’s eyes, you will become cursed.  Then they showed the doll’s eyes on camera.

Many, many youtube comments were from people who looked at the doll’s eyes, and claimed to immediately get headaches, feel sick, feel chest pains- all things that SNC had said would happen if you look in this doll’s eyes. And it’s fascinating to me, because you really don’t know if this doll is truly that cursed that she can just fuck with people’s physical health through a computer screen, or if people just manifested the symptoms they were told about because of their fear. 

Either way, its interesting. 

To be completely honest with you, I do think that was a lot of what was going on in this video- they were all kind of trapped in a fear tornado, and all of their fears mixed with the fear that is manifested and left behind by the frequent guests day in and day out, just amplified their fear to the nth degree. Fear is a powerful output of energy, and energy doesn't ever really dissipate, so it's probably baked into the walls of that place, by this point.

Think about it. Are the objects cursed, or are people and their fears cursing the objects?

Anyway, some people may have been annoyed by the fact that snc + Stas were becoming physically affected by their fear in this video, but I personally just really found the whole thing interesting from a psychological standpoint.

+1 point to both S and C for brining up at certain points that they could just be manifesting things because of their fear.

(Take a shot for everytime I said the word "fear" during that last section, lol)

So, onto the investigation/evidence:

I honestly don't have much to say here, because honestly- not a lot happened. And you know what? That's ok. I don't need some crazy, life changing shit to happen every single time. To me, this episode was more about the history of some of these items, the psychology of fear and what it can do and how it can manifest, and their interpersonal relationships with one another.

Highlights of the episode:

Sam: "The Freemasons are next door! Those guys do Satanic Rituals!" All of us who were trash talking their research abilities the other day: *furiously jotting that one down as future evidence*

Colby's on pitch as shit, "Fuck no, babay!" Should be a tiktok sound.

Colby: "Zak Bagans Museum just gave birth to me."

I looked at Peggy the doll, and now every shitty thing that happens throughout the course of my mundane days, I blame on that doll. It's kind of fun.

Sam losing at Rock Paper Scissors and then immediately choosing to go out and try to scam one of the girls into looking into that doll's eyes by playing Nose Goes with them was a Moment. Colby immediately narcing on him was also a Moment.

Which do you think is dirtier: the Hof Bed, or the Colby Brock LA Mattress?

First of all: Colby getting into a "come hither" pose on the bed and then Sam basically implying that Colby has a lot of experience with dead prostitutes was hilarious.

Second of all, props to Kat for getting into the Hof Bed with Colby and actually being calm about it. +1 for her.

What is Sam's obsession with thinking everyone is lying to him? They're like, "Oh, you're neck is scratched," and his first words are, "You're lying to me." Dude needs to work on some trust building exercises.

The Clown thing went on for too long. -1

All I kept thinking when snc left their hair at the Dybbuk was, "How long before a fan goes there, steals their hair, and uses it to cast a love spell on them or something equally as ridiculous?"

Sam really is the guy who dies first in every horror movie, huh?

The Devil's Chair might honestly be the first time I ever saw Sam truly get scared. He always seems so excited when scary things happen, but not that time.

Colby taking Stas' cross necklace was hilarious to me. This man really was just like, "Can I have that thing you have been wearing and clinging onto as protection for myself?" And then just never ever gave it back.

Colby is a real one. He did not have to go sit in that chair- and he was clearly buying into the fear of it, and was horribly affected by it- but he did it, because he didn't want Sam to do it alone.

Also: interesting that Amanda commented that when Colby sat in the chair, all of the energy in the room hyperfocued on him. They speculated it was because of the cross. I'm speculating it's because he looked like a serious Star Wars villain in that chair with the leather jacket and the red lighting.

SNC immediately calling it a day in the basement when they thought their friends were being affected by the investigation was sweet. They really are genuine, in that way.

Overall, I do think this was a solid start to a season 2, and I'm going to go ahead and give them a 8/10.

[weird-tea]

I'm a sucker for the 'Merlin gets handcuffed with cold iron and therefore can't access his magic' trope in fanfics, and decided to do a little research as to where that idea came from as I'm pretty sure it's not actually canon in the show unless I'm forgetting something.

Iron, particularly "cold iron" has been said in European folklore going way back to repel, contain, or even harm ghosts, fairies, witches, and other malevolent supernatural creatures. This developed into traditions that still exist today like putting a horse shoe above your front door and surrounding a cemetery with an iron fence to keep the spirits in.

This I already kinda knew, but what exactly is "cold iron"? What makes it different from normal iron?

Well, from what I can tell "Cold Iron" isn't actually a different kind of iron, the coldness is a reference to what the iron is used for. For example, you could refer to a weapon of cold steel, with the steel just being normal steel, it's the fact that it has been forged into a weapon that makes it cold. Like, think of the expression 'killing someone in cold blood'. It's what the material is made into, what the designed purpose of the object is, that makes it cold. So Merlin should have no problem touching the iron pots and pans in camelot's kitchen, but an iron knife will cause him some problems.

Also, the reasoning behind Iron of all things being repellant to magical things seems to come from the idea of Smiths being magical, that the act of taking bits of rock and turning them into any kind of shaped metal is inherently magical, almost akin to alchemy. And if you're going with the idea that the magic of characters like Merlin is inherently linked to the earth and nature, then something like iron that has been taken by a person and worked and worked until it confirmed to the shape they wanted could be a very different kind of magic, human magic, not part of nature necessarily. So, it would make sense if magical creatures highly confected to magic would be repelled or even hurt by something so man made. Wrought iron is stronger the more it's worked, the more the human changes it.

So basically, it makes sense iron in a fantasy/historical setting (what we would now call wrought iron) would be a problem for magical beings, but also cold iron is apparently just about the intention when making it so that's really neat.

[ps1demodisk]

I'm going to bed now but in case any more asks come through this is like... my general thoughts after my mind cleared from how funny the ask was. This is everything I would've responded had I not been having a giggle fit, essentially. There's also a more general statement that's tangentially related at the very end.

You are allowed to think I'm a bad person and still think other people who I thought were bad are also bad. You do not have to drastically change your opinions on everyone you once spoke mad shit about just because I agreed with you. In the same vein, I can be shitty and not be the worst person to ever exist who only talks to others in an attempt manipulate them. I am actually capable of human emotion and I carry the ability to care for others, crazy I know. That's part of why the dying alone comment had no effect, because quite frankly I know I'm not going to die alone, especially not because of some internet drama I had as a 20 year old where people lost the ability to use critical thinking skills. I know what I am, and I know how I think, even if I can't fully grasp my emotions and thought processes. I saw everything, it was funny the way everyone jumped to Satan level, but it also made me think.

"You only reached out because you knew your control was slipping" did you ever stop to consider I might've just actually felt bad? No, you didn't, because from the very start I stopped being viewed as a person. It was obvious in the way people spoke, you spoke about me as if I were just an object, and at that point of course you wouldn't consider the fact I felt normal people feelings, I was almost fictional. You made me out to be cartoonishly evil, and I'm sorry I can't live up to the image you built up in your heads but unfortunately I'm just a 20 year old man who's emotionally immature and unstable, I just don't think before I speak, consequences are a future thing and I don't think about the future because the future scares me. There was never anything more to it. I spoke shit cause other people spoke shit, and I never stopped to think about how any of it would look out of context. I am not a mastermind evil manipulator, that's giving me too much credit.

I still don't think anyone there is inherently an awful person for anything they said (maybe 2 people who are bad people for actions tho), I can understand it when I take a step back and look at it all from an outside perspective. That doesn't make any of what you said better, especially not the genuine wishes I'd die, or the more vague wishes I died before I met you, but it doesn't change the fact things I said were bad either. Even if they were only bad out of context, or they were "normal" in context but still hurtful. Context matters but the words out of context also matters, even if it's not as much. Shit does hurt, even if it feels justified, even if you think you're justified in saying it. You all suck, and I also suck. Maybe I suck more than some of you, maybe I suck less than others. I don't actually care to know anymore.

I still do not think I'm a bad person, I still do not think you are justified in any of what you are doing, saying, or have done or said thus far, but I also don't think you're bad people either. I am just going to file everything I read under "hurt people hurt people" and stop trying to find any reason or justification beyond that.

As I was finishing this up I remembered the person who interacts with minors on nsfw, I do truly believe that is incredibly weird to do and you need to stop trying to deflect from it with "but Kalista is weird he said his favourite tf2 merc was whichever could bring him my head first!" which you for some reason are deciding to call a murder threat. What I said was weird, yes, but that doesn't mean interacting with minors on your public nsfw account is normal and ok to do, please think critically about that. Also do you truly genuinely believe I am going to get a plane from the united kingdom and come to your house and kill you, do you really genuinely believe that is something I want to do? Be honest. Be real with me. Do you really think I could kill you? If you do that's almost flattering.

Are we done? Cool. I don't actually care if we are, I am.

- -

I also think in general the dehumanisation of people you deem bad is not a good thing, because it means you stop thinking about the fact they're just like you and at any point if you made or make one wrong decision you could have ended up like them. It's good to recognise people you deem bad as people because it reminds you to question your thought processes, it means you'll notice if you start having a worrying thought pattern or attitude and you won't let it spiral. People don't turn shit in a day, it's often years of conditioning and ignoring/reinforcing shitty beliefs that leads them there. Seeing their inherent humanity doesn't mean justifying or agreeing with what they do, it means recognising anyone is capable of it and that includes you, and you need to watch yourself to keep yourself on a good path. Good people aren't naturally good, it's a choice.

[trixiedjinn]

A couple paragraphs I realized I had to toss in this "essay" I'm working on about the nature of porn/erotica, gender, and sexuality's relationships to one another.

Sexuality for women is hard because not only in non sexual spaces are we expected to be objects to be acted on rather than subjects. Think about main ways it's considered "normal" for women to share our interest in sex, when we're allowed to do so at all.

"I'm so tight, (instead of, I can squeeze)"

"I've got a phat ass/being a phat ass, reduces us to a given body part (the insistence on behaving as though it's a natural property, instead of something developed over time via the gym/diet & the distance we're forced to put between the reality of having a dumpy via fat vs muscle + the fact that to get it in the gym you have to consciously be trying to carve a fatter ass through very targeted exercises for the sake of attention[status for women under patriarchy is tied to perceived sexual desireability in tandem with a paradoxical unawareness of it/childishness/"innocence"/cuteness)

This is compounded by the moralization of sex, pleasure, and the roles men and women must play in order to have it in a socially acceptable way.

Men™ are aggressive beasts with urges that must be satiated, and can lose control if sufficiently provoked.

Women™ are innocent, childlike, and beautifully tempting flowers that must be protected at all costs lest they be defiled by the sexuality of the beast™

As it goes. The second wave of feminism; indeed the only parts that seem to have survived till today somehow; claims that the solution to this dilemma is for women™ to band together and "rise up" in some growing tide of opposition with the evils of men™, as if we're not the same species of creature as them. Rather, this broken perspective borne of misunderstood and badly applied feminist concepts only reinforces the structures of (patriarchy/gender) and the moralization of sex.

For the sapphic community this has been more complex, but prior to the AIDS crisis there was at least a solution; via the butch & femme kink/"neo" genders. A subculture that reimagined the Man™ and Woman™ genders, but through both the combined understanding of mutual consent & play rather than coercion, and were trans-positive (for the time).

Most butches then were what we would call trans men today. Or rather, would have called binary trans men in the late 2010s. Though confusion sown by current radfems, or terfs more specifically, have made using proper language to discuss the topic difficult through the association between men/"people with traits defined as masculine" with a vague religious assumption of inherent danger.

Some of this association has been accidental and a result of misunderstanding, though just as much has been a result of conscious bad actors trying to disrupt discussion and scapegoat trans people as being responsible for current economic trends and an imagined social decay/corruption.

Saying all this to say; even beyond anxiety about potential homophobic responses, it's no wonder "useless sapphic/lesbian" is a familiar phrase. If overt expressions of sexual desire with active language is rare or unheard of for even straight women™, and queer women™'s romance/sexuality is suppressed; all forms of active expressions of sexuality because solely masculine™ behavior.

And "masculinity"/"acting like a man™" is bad, thanks to misunderstandings of and a refusal to evolve past 2nd wave feminism for a lot of online spaces.

🌺

[seasideretreat]

Man oh man

The things we do are strange and weird. Nothing really matters. However, the constant support of good people for okay judgements are fine and we see this happen in the last analysis. Everything is constantly in motion and we can't help but regard the infinite with a sense of wonder and marvel. The weird things are strange and nothing can help us recover the wonder of creation. What is known is not known and what is weird is not weird. We make sense of things by creating new categories of peace and harmony in the constant sense of being alive, but there ain't nothing really alive in the last analysis, so everything we know is weird and pointless: I make sense of this by regarding the truth about nature with a bit of philosophical irony, to recover the things we do and make sense of it that way; be reasonable. But in the last analysis the crazy things are weird, and nothing can be made apparent through sheer action. Actionable decisions are useful and something might be done, but there ain't nothing to be done, the world is all emptiness and vaguery and the things we do are objectionable and weird. This is the constant endeavor, the power of sheer necessity, we know that this is the case, but we cannot create a new power out of nothing, so everything is forgotten and we create a fake identity to live out crazy lives in the back of some crazy complex of identity; and of being alive. The nothing of being alive is crazy and obscure, but there is something that might be discovered this way, if we just do good things - but there ain't nothing good about being yourself, and you have to be realistic about the little things that make sense every time and which use only the finest flour to ascertain the validity of the truth. I don't know. Normal things are weird when they are sustained through crazy effort. The effort of real action is crazy when things are crazy. But everything is crazy when something is made real, and the reality of ordinary things is weird because something is known to us, even though we are invisible and ignorant of the details in the tiniest necessity of ordinary life, and we try to make sense of the things that happen, but we don't know what it means: we are just creative people destinguishing themselves through crazy necessity, but there ain't no reality that makes any sense to sheer reality - we are nobodies that inhere in the inhabitation of normal necessities and villages on the outskirts of the world that make us realize the little things, but that don't matter in the entirety of the universe. Everything is crazy, everything is weird and nothing is known, we are all crazy buffoons that do nothing right and that keep on trying to ascertain the truth about the validity of normal things that are forgotten by the hamstrung thugs of the past world, that do nothing and that allow evil to enter the world this way - in fact, we are all crazy buffoons and the craziest objection we make to progress is that it is progress. That's the hard part. But in the ordinary progress of weird things something might be known in the last analysis that makes us know the validity of the ordinary world, that nevertheless can't help but make ordinary life function in the vast way that allows us to create happy events that happen everywhere and the go nowhere: the craziest things keep happening and there ain't nothing useful about it in the last analysis; however, we try to keep at it and create new things all the time.

[grad505-macytaylor]

Feedback in Week 12

Peer Feedback: (Maia)

Really well-written. Good that you are continuously putting the question in context and explaining why you are answering it. Good signposting and linking.

Throughout the whole essay I would link back to the advertising part of the question and totally insert examples of it. The whole essay is well-written and easy to read, I think just explain some stuff in more depth, but I totally get what this is about

Tutor feedback: (Becky) -paraphrased & answered/ unpacked-

You have set the scene really well and now it’s time to get into the nitty gritty of it Make sure to include design and advertising aspects.

Things you could potentially include?

Citroen/ Eiffel tower advertisement

Any print/ advertising aspects during this time?

eg. Leonetto Cappiello, A.M. Cassandre, Jules Cheret, Jean Carlu

Luxury goods- find art deco style ads for luxury goods

Art deco/ fashion advertising

What art deco is in terms of visual language?

“The characteristic features of Art Deco reflect admiration for the modernity of the machine and for the inherent design qualities of machine-made objects—e.g., relative simplicity, planarity, symmetry, and unvaried repetition of elements. Art Deco objects often showcase simple, clean shapes, usually with a “streamlined” look; ornament that is geometric or stylized from representational forms such as florals, animals, and sunrays; and use of man-made substances, including plastics, vita-glass, and reinforced concrete, often combined with such natural materials as jade, silver, ivory, and chrome.”

Art Deco | Definition, Characteristics, History, Artists, Architecture, & Facts | Britannica. (2022). In Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/art/Art-Deco

Metro stations in art deco style?

The architect of the station was Alexey Dushkin. At the beginning of his career, he was fond of constructivism, and then came to the art Deco. This style was well suited to the goals set by the government: it had an "understandable" beauty, while being modern and technological, reflecting the industrial orientation of the country.

Mayakovskaya, A. (2019). Moscow Metro As A Work Of Art: Mayakovskaya Station. Spb.hse.ru. https://spb.hse.ru/soc/illuminated/news/321452417.html

‌

Fashion houses such Hermes

Hermès is a French luxury design house established in 1837. It specializes in leather goods, lifestyle accessories, home furnishings, perfumery, jewelry, watches and ready-to-wear. Its logo, since the 1950s, is of a Duke carriage with horse. Nadège Vanhee-Cybulski is the current creative director.

Wikipedia Contributors. (2022, May 6). Hermès. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herm%C3%A8s

‌

[all-about-the-tea-parties]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t the whole point of the show that Sang-woo isn’t ultimately the bad guy? He’s just a desperate man placed into a situation that, sure, he got in himself, but also was trying to copy the ways of the upper class - trying to beat the game by cheating.

Objectively he is a bad person. But also objectively he ISNT the villain. And both Gi-hun and Sang-woo realise they aren’t each other’s enemies at the end. The game was made to bring out the worst in ppl, actively working against cooperation tactics and group work, because the ppl who MADE the game have some ridiculous moral complex about humanity being inherently evil (thereby justifying and excusing the way they take advantage of the poor in these games).

My dad pointed out something I think is incredibly important and something that game itself capitalises on - that final bet between Gi-hun and Il-nam had them create a circumstance that depended on human kindness, on the simple act of ONE person doing the right thing to help a man in trouble; the thing is, both Gi-hun and Il-nam were also potential aids to this man���s plight, and neither did anything. Il-nam refuses to look at the hypocrisy in his own actions by rejecting the inherent truth: he, as part of the upper class, is in a unique position to help those with less them him. Gi-hun however is trapped, not by hypocrisy, not by a refusal for accountability, but by spectator syndrome. The bet demands only one person do right, and there’s a implication that Gi-hun helping would count as interference - but it doesn’t matter, because both people making the bet are also people who have the potential to simply not make a bet in the first place. The Squid Game alleviates the VIPs guilt (If they have any) and pushes the players into thinking that they also have no true power over their own surroundings. They are punished, time and time again, for trusting in *each other* and made to believe that working together is dangerous when it’s actually the best way to win. They feel powerless and unable to contribute; made spectators to their own suffering.

Gi-hun could have helped that man in the streets but did not because he fell once again into the trap. Nobody helping that man would not have reflected on humanity at all, only on the people who did not help. Had Gi-hun ignored the bet altogether and saved that man himself, he would have shown Il-nam the truth to his own lie: all it takes is one person holding themselves accountable to their own conscience, and that in itself is evidence of humanity. (As well as the fact that, in a way, Il-nam has rigged the bet by placing the responsibility into the hands of strangers, despite being aware a man could genuinely die). Il-nam tricked Gi-hun into entertaining the bullshit of billionaires, and while I didn’t like that he disappointed his daughter again, he did what he didn’t do for that man on the street, and recognised the responsibility in his own hands as someone with an iota of power.

How does this all pertain to Sang-woo? Well, all Sang-woo had left was a knife. And that knife was like the berries in the Hunger Games. That knife was an apology and a rebellion. You don’t get to kill me, you don’t get to steal from me this last thing that I have. You don’t get to decide this, I do. And I die for my friends. He untrapped himself, no longer a spectator to suffering, no longer washing himself of the responsibility. Sang-woo’s death was tragic too.