#but you do have to acknowledge what kind of driven unhinged person could do even half of what he did

[thursdays-adult]

You know, throwing this out there completely randomly, we really don't talk enough about Zhao from Avatar. Like his story is absolutely wild. Man was trained by Jeong Jeong, freaking found Wan Shi Tong's library, found out about the solar eclipse from the library, burned a section of the library down, escaped from that alive, captured the avatar, successfully breached the walls of the Northern Water Tribe which had never been done, and killed the freaking moon spirit. Like he is a bastard and regularly loses to teenagers, but you can't deny it's quite the resume.

[rawliverandcigarettes]

Hi ! How do you envision Aria in Halfway Home ? I do believe you have mentioned she would be involved.

Hello, and thank you for the kind ask, it is absolutely helpful ;_;

So Aria. Aria's a complicated beast. I have a lot of thoughts about her. I kind of always enjoyed her potential more than her execution, as I've been known to have a soft spot for, what I call, Girlbosses Fucking Up. As in: women driven by scary, unhinged ambition that ends up destroying everything including themselves, and Aria could have fitted that description pretty well, or at least its first part (if there had been a proper attempt at character examination and development past her getting suddenly horny for Shepard and fawning over how much cooler and Dangerous than her they actually are or something idk).

So first, about my thoughts on Aria T'loak in canon:

I think Aria embodies a lot of Mass Effect's guilty-pleasure relationship to edge, and I completely believe she's been written first and foremost to be 1) cool, and 2) a sexual fantasy. The problem with that posture is that... basically any serious attempt at unpacking her politics risk ruining her pseudo-dominatrix vibes. So as a result, we get the most unquestioned, unashamed libertarian figure of the games, blaring that she's justified in her power position because she's the strongest, that because she's the strongest she's justified in commiting any kind of violence to hoard what she considers to be hers, and the fact she's basically an absolute despot is seen as something to be admired and even envied (no red tapes, no Council, nobody to answer to but herself and her whims).

To be noted: she's criticized in the vaguest way possible in the Omega DLC, but it has way more to do with the interpersonal, Nyreen and then a dominance struggle with Shepard, than with any of her concrete politics (and the dominance struggle is very... it's very much about "conquering" her and shoving yet another power fantasy down Shepard's throat --either by taming her fire or sharing it, and being called The Most Special Of All And I Never Met Anyone Like You Wooow You're Making Me So Hot And Bothered, and I'd argue it's still more about stroking the player's, hm, ego than about Aria herself). The "nooo don't kill civilians because surely there are any trace of civilians that aren't slavers, gang members or mercenaries left after like, two coups and a half" has nothing to say about the value of the life of said "civilians" despite their darkness, nothing to say about Aria's right to wage life and death over them. Even Nyreen's criticisms of Aria are... very un-Omegan. They still wager on Omega civilians being poor, unprepared babies, and to me it just doesn't ring true or meaningful in the slightest. But I made no effort ever hiding how much I don't vibe with this DLC, and its refusal to engage with Omega's themes to preserve Aria's sex appeal is one of the biggest culprits to me.

I also whinge about Aria in my critic of Mass Effect: Retribution, where I discover that she is actually quite dumb, and solves her problems with temper tantrums and half-assed decisions the narrative desesperatly tries to justify instead of being the savvy figure Mass Effect 2 tries to sell us (also her daughter is treated like a sexpot who immediately dies an awful, voyeuristic death and I doooon't love that choice, even if it's, once again, very telling on the kind of character Aria's supposed to be).

So now, I will stop whingeing about canon and talk about how I tried to reinterpret Aria T'loak in Halfway Home.

So Aria in HH is... kind of an awful, complicated person. I completely leaned in that Girlboss Fucking Up direction because nobody can stop me to explore some of the absurd tragedy behind her struggle for power. She is libertarian to a fault, at once believing in the importance of daring to bite what you can off a seemingly unchangeable and incredibly cruel social system, while failing to acknowledge that she's a central actor of said system, maintaining its alchemy with an iron fist with little concern for those who have to pay the price. While not nearly as conservative as them (socially, economically she's almost worse), I took inspiration from figures like Ayn Rand and Margaret Thatcher to flesh her out, especially in the way she turns against her own kind to keep her head out of the water (I mean at once asaris and sex workers, as I kept her backstory infiltrating Omega's ecosystem as an Afterlife dancer first). But by having this background, to garner respect, she has to be ruthless and consistently brilliant so she doesn't slip, because if she does... Well the fall will be rather brutal. She's acutely aware of the necessity of maintaining her prestige and her innaccessibility, while keeping herself desirable (as a potential ally and as an asari), because everyone wants to either kill her, be her or have her, and this is at once the basis of her power and an incredibly lonely and vulnerable position to have to voluntarily maintain yourself in.

Aria in Halfway Home does fucked up shit, or willingly allows or facilitates fucked up shit to maintain herself afloat (especially in her power plays with the Council, batarians and Cerberus). But she's been doing this dangerous dance for centuries, and she's starting to feel alienated from herself, from anticipating and catering to all sides at once. She also tends to keep opportunities open and let people live if they can be useful (à la Patriarch) rather than kill them, even if she cultivates her vicious reputation to prevent coups against her --basically keeping escape routes open as much as she can. As far as attitude goes, she follows more of her sarcastic/jaded side that is sometimes apparent in canon, and it's becoming clear how tired she is, how every single one of her desires have melted into what she needs to do to stay in power. She's the Pirate Queen, and in more ways than one the world is at her feet, yet everything she does is calculated to keep herself alive, at all time. And she can't stop now, because she's addicted to Omega and what it did to her, and if she stops she will be torn apart by everyone pretending to be on her side. In a way she's a prisonner of her own power, while also maintaining everyone else in the cell with her by force and pretending that... there is no alternative, if you can forgive my wording.

So yeah. Sarcastic, tired, brilliant, cynical. That's my Aria. She's the absolute worst, and yet she's a little tragic too. But by the end of the story, Shlee doesn't care about that part at all and will not shut the fuck up about how she should be deposed and is, in fact, the absolute worst, which, yeah, great thing to scream around Shlee, very smart.

[mylivejournalsucks]

how i quit drinking

hiii. k, so i talked about quitting drinking in my AMA's and got a lot of questions/curious vibes so i thought i would expand a bit.

i had a pretty "normal" relationship with drinking until a few years ago when i started drinking more at home. it became very common to split a bottle of wine, which would invariably sometimes turn into a bottle of wine solo every night. it was slow and insidious, which makes sense because alcohol is progressive. it's very common to drink more, little by little, and then before you know it, you're in what feels like quicksand and can't dig yourself out.  eventually i became accustomed to going through life with a mid-grade hangover. my work and relationships didn't suffer which, in a way, made it harder for me to acknowledge there was even a problem. alcoholism, to me, was synonymous with burning your life to the ground but here I was! still an ultra productive Virgo getting shit done so I'm fine, right?

we don't have the language or nuance to describe what constitutes as a drinking problem.  it's very binary: you either have an issue or you don't. but i would argue that a lot of people exist in the grey; they don't like their relationship with alcohol so they try to scale back. maybe it works for awhile but eventually they find themselves right back where they started. that was very much my pattern. i'd go through booze heavy periods, chill out so i could gain an illusion of control, and then start back all over again. it was exhausting. i was constantly disappointed in myself. why couldn't i go back to the way i used to drink? i survived a painkiller addiction, getting hit by a car....but somehow, i can't restrict myself to two drinks?! rude.

quitting drinking altogether seemed psycho. i mean, our culture worships at the altar of booze. WE ARE OBSESSED. it's sewn into the fabric of our society. we can't imagine parties or vacations without it. pasta without a glass of red? babe, no. alcohol is the only drug where you get judged for NOT doing it. it's unhinged!! (this is probs because it forces people to look at their own relationship with alcohol, which can be LOL levels of terrifying.)

then the pandemi hit and all my probs with alcohol were suddenly in HD. I was drinking more and more, not even getting drunk because my tolerance was so high. every day i'd make a promise not to drink and then 5pm would roll around and the thought of not unwinding with a glass of something legit terrified me so i would. it was so depressing and also so boring!!! every day had the same flat blank quality to it. it felt like i was stuck in the world's least compelling groundhog's day.

six months earlier, i bought a book recommended by edith zimmerman at the cut called how to quit drinking by allen carr. i didn't read it at first—i wasn't ready— so i just put it on my bookshelf and waited for it to be like, "PICK ME UP, BITCH!"

my "rock bottom" was unremarkable. i had dinner, drank a bottle of wine, felt barely buzzed. i went to bed and was jolted awake at 3am with a hangover. this wasn't uncommon. it'd happen a few times a week and every time i'd wake up and be like, "okay, this needs to stop. tomorrow is the day i make real changes." then i would fall asleep, wake up, and forget all the honest feelings i had felt earlier.

but this time was different. i went on my phone and read more articles from edith zimmerman about her sobriety. i came across an interview she did with annie grace who wrote a book called This Naked Mind. curious, i read the first few pages. her opener was literally her talking about how, when she was drinking, she'd jolt awake in the middle of the night hungover and be honest with herself about the state of her drinking. then she would fall asleep, Men In Black memory erase that honesty, and wake up repeating the same cycle. L-OL. DRAG ME, BABY!

it was witchy reading someone articulate my exact reality. it was also confirmation that i did have a problem. it might not be a problem that was causing me to lose my job or put my life in danger but it was a problem. i woke up the next day, committed to not pushing those thoughts out of my head like i usually did, and read allen carr's book and annie grace's book. i haven't drank since.

in essence, both their books dismantle our collective belief that alcohol is amazing, that it is a necessary part of our life, and to be without it would be a chore and less fun. these books are basically like, "actually, babe, alcohol is a scam and here's why." they articulate alcohol's effect on the body and the brain (spoiler: it's not good, hon....) but they don't do it in a scare tactics kind of way. it's very matter-of-fact and driven by science. IDK, it just fucking clicked for me. granted, the book wasn't some magic trick. i had to get to the point where i was ready to change. edith zimmerman said something like, "i no longer believed in alcohol and what it purported to do for me so it was time to take out that belief system and replace it with something new."

the key for me was seeing alcohol for what it is; literally poison. when i did dry january, there would always be a moment when out to dinner, i'd want a glass of wine but then i would use my willpower and white knuckle my way through it. the craving would pass and i'd be so grateful i abstained but there was still this feeling of "awwww,..wine...that would've been nice." now i'm like "ew, get that away from me." i'm truly nauseated by the smell of alcohol now.

everyone's journey to sobriety is different. a lot of my friends got sober working a program and doing AA, which is amazing. this is just what worked for me. i was hesitant to share this shit because it's not a traditional path and i haven't been sober for a large amount of time. but fuck it. if one person reads this and is moved towards sobriety, it's worth it.

[king-paimon]

HNK Chapter 86 thoughts: Complicated characters being complicated (Thoughts on Diamond)

I’ve been so anxious about this chapter after the last one. I’m happy to say that it isn’t as heart wrenching as I thought it would be, which was great, but it’s clear now we are approaching end-game and there will no doubt be some sadness coming soon.  

The art in this chapter was gorgeous! I want that two page spread as a poster! Phos looks awesomely horrifying and Ms. Ichikawa never fails to make me laugh at the most weirdest of times. Seriously, the whole buildup with Alex for it to end up with him passing out was hilarious! It was also nice to see most of the gems in the same chapter, and while I’m still sad we’re going to have some major losses, I’m really looking forward to what’ll happen next.

But I want to give my thoughts on the true star of this chapter: Diamond.

This is another really long post so be warned. I again apologize for the messy writing; it is still not my strongest trait, but I’ll do my best to put my thoughts into words and I will make any necessary edits if I need to. These are my thoughts and if you want to share yours, I’m all for it. Please no attacks, though. Everyone has their own opinion when it comes to the characters and while we may not agree, these opinions will be respected. Thank you and please enjoy my probably poorly written analysis!

Diamond... is such an interesting, complicated character. Like with Phos, it’s fascinating how they ended up this way. 

After chapter 84, I was curious to see how Dia was going to react to Bort and it turned out better than I thought. After years of not properly dealing with this toxic relationship between Dia and Bort, of course it would end up with an emotional driven fight. But what has me most interested is how it’s Dia who’s going feral while Bort is being calm. It’s like their personalities flipped, but after looking back, it makes sense.

Diamond is tightly bound to their inferiority complex and their so-called rivalry with Bort.  I betcha that if Bort was the same as he was at the beginning of this story, I’m sure Diamond wouldn’t be flipping out like they did in the chapter. I’m sure that was exactly what they were expecting to see, but that’s not what they got: not only had Bort changed physically, but he had changed mentally. He’s no longer the battle hunger fighter Dia knew; he’d rather care for the jellyfish and not fight at all. Bort has changed through and through. And maybe I’m seeing this all wrong, but I think this is one of the facts that made Dia livid. 

In Dia’s insecure mind, they believe they must be equal to or better than Bort. They must prove to themselves that they are a true diamond by beating the stronger, battle loving Bort at his own game, so they can be truly free of fear and feeling inferior. Dia now finally has the chance to do this… but that Bort isn’t there anymore.  And because of that, Dia feels cheated and angry. Also, I think it’s funny that Dia claims that Bort got to live freely because of them, though really, it’s Phos to thank but of course neither gem will acknowledge that. (Continuing to show how much the gems care about Phos, I see *sarcasm*)

It’s interesting though: Diamond was the one who left and got a new life, but didn’t truly mature or change, while Bort was the one who stayed behind but had changed and matured (sort of.) You’d think it would’ve been the other way around but the fact that this is what happened just makes the characters more interesting to analyze.  Speaking of which...

Diamond and the blame game

I can understand Dia’s inferiority complex and how it’s tied to their obsession with Bort. I can definitely sympathize with them and understand why they made their decisions. But at the same time, I recognize that these feeling are not Bort’s fault but rather Dia’s. This ‘rivalry’ of Dia’s is entirely one sided and the negative thoughts Dia has about themselves are all self-imposed. For this reason, my sympathy for Dia can only go so far.

If Bort was the type to over-gloat and constantly and intentionally belittling Dia and putting these terrible thoughts in Dia’s head, then I would definitely be more sympathetic towards Dia and would hate Bort... But as far as I can remember, Bort never said anything like this to Dia (yeah, he said very mean stuff to Phos but that’s entirely another thing.) 

While he had scolded Dia harshly for doing anything risky, like that time after he saved Dia and Phos all the way back in the first chapters (Chapter 3 specifically,) I pretty sure Bort never went out of his way to intentionally make Dia feel inferior, especially for some sort of personal gain.  As far as I see, Bort’s only crimes against Dia was being overly protective, overly strict, and simply existing.  I’m not saying that Bort is completely guiltless, because Bort is guilty of a lot of things and does deserve some form of punishment.  But intentionally making Dia feel sorry for themselves isn’t one of them. That is all Dia; Dia is the one who put themselves in this negative head-space and chose to run away than properly deal with them. They shouldn’t keep blaming Bort for their self-inflicted misery, but they chose to. 

Should Bort have treated Dia differently/better? Oh yeah, most definitely. Bort, throughout most of the story, had a problem when it came to how he treated the other gems, especially Dia and Phos, and could have done things differently. But regardless, I still understand why he acted the way that he did, partially due to my own experiences in life, and I can’t hate him for it. And despite what I said before, the same goes for Dia; I may not agree with how they’re handling things, but I can understand why it came to this. But in the end, the truth is this: Diamond’s inferiority complex  

What’ll happen next?

I keep on telling myself to not make predictions for this series because Ms. Ichikawa is great at throwing curve balls, but I can’t help but think of the possible scenarios of what’ll happen next between Diamond and Bortz.

The first one is that they end with a draw. Both end up beaten to the point of exhaustion and maybe they both realize the errors of their ways without further destruction to one another. As nice as this scenario sounds, I don’t think it’ll happen, at least not this way. Maybe they both end up destroying each other without a proper resolution… I wouldn’t put it passed Ms. Ichikawa, honestly. So, this scenario, if it were to happen, can either end satisfyingly or unsatisfyingly.

The second possibility is that Dia wins. I find this more likely to happen because Dia has the advantage of the moon people and Bort having a messed-up arm. Anyways, I picture that Dia would win over Bort, finally ‘proving’ to themselves that they are better than Bort and is a ‘true diamond’ afterall... they finally ‘won’...to only realize they aren’t happy. They still felt empty. Wouldn’t that be both satisfying and unsatisfying? This whole build with Dia and Bort, after years of self-inflicted feelings of worthlessness, for Dia to win…to only realize that it was pointless. I kind of hope that we get a scenario like this because it’ll force Dia to acknowledge that Bort, as much as they may hate/love him, isn’t the one who’s holding them back. They’re in charge of their own happiness and blaming Bort for their misery was nonsensical and dumb. 

The third possibility is that Bort would win but I definitely don’t think Ms. Ichikawa will have this happen. Regardless of how I’d feel, I think its safe to say that Bort is most likely not going to survive this fight. If he did, then it would honestly be quite pointless for both his and Dia’s character development. Who knows, though? Maybe something like this will happen but with more twists? Anything can happen with this series… 

Either way, I don’t think Bort or Dia are going to get out of this fight unscathed. It’ll end up with both becoming completely broken physically and/ or mentally. (And to a degree, they both kinda deserve it. A lot. For various reasons.)

Final thoughts:

I’m glad to see I’m not alone when it comes to this character. Dia is anything but perfect or even morally good. Their character is more than the cute, soft, nice girly archetype; they have layers with many negative traits, including pettiness and selfishness, and these traits are shared by many of the other characters in this series. I know I say this a lot, but I can’t think of many characters in this series that are truly good or bad, black or white; everyone are various shades of gray and I think that makes for a fascinating story. And while Dia isn’t one of my favorite characters in this series, seeing them shed become unhinged after everything that happened is really fascinating and I can’t wait to see what’ll happen next.

Sigh, these dang gems…if only they knew how to communicate with each other! So many conflicts would’ve been resolved! But nope: they’d rather ignore the problem and let it fester or they let their emotions take over and go straight to violence without properly trying to resolve anything. Man, I love all of these characters, but they can give me such a headache…

And though a happy ending for all is out of reach, I still have hope that all of them.  The moon and earth gems, the Admirabilis, the moon people (minus Aechmea) and most of all, Phos, deserve happiness. How will this happen? I don’t know… we’ll see.

[cryptidandwren]

OUR FETISHES ARE NO BASIS FOR A SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT

In this essay we will discuss the media and social environment under which a dangerously unhinged President personally responsible for a quarter million of his people dying can come within ten million votes of winning the popular vote. You are seeing this because you follow my wife’s porn blog, so I'll skip over the part about minority rule’s role in American politics. There is nothing cute to be made of a Senate majority that represents 20 million fewer people systematically eroding reproductive rights, discriminatory protections, and twisting the federal judiciary into a visage of an extreme few. No, you are seeing this because of porn, so let's use porn to understand what is happening in The United States. Personally, I am very interested in dangerously unstable people with complete disregard for their actions’ effects on themselves and others. While it's personally undisputed that crazy is hot, this sexual preference was never going to factor into my dating decisions, because unfortunately I am within the subset of “others”. In this discussion we are also going to be talking about those on the right side of the political aisle, because what we are talking about is not symmetrical fresh-never-frozen-bug-fucking-insanity. The Republican Party started experimenting with putting its dick in crazy beginning with the Southern Strategy, and now its been balls deep in crazy for three decades. Part of the “go balls deep and nut in the worst angels of our being” strategy pioneered by Nixon and allies like the Koch brothers was to create a verdant media environment where you could choose your own adventure on talk radio or Fox News. Choice is where this all goes from “go balls deep and nut in the worst angels of our being” to “tied to a chair in a shady warehouse by the docks wearing nothing but a latex horse mask and being sucked off by one lady, one man, and an oddly enthusiastic aquarium fish.” In broad strokes people are selecting news that makes them feel good in the same way that they are selecting porn that makes them feel good, and people will become better able at determining what exactly they want over time.

Let’s start off by defining what makes something pornographic. For this there can only be one source of authority to begin our inquiry: The United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court defined obscenity as: “1) A thing must be prurient in nature; 2) a thing must be completely devoid of scientific, political, educational, or social value; and 3) a thing must violate the local community standards.” Miller v. California 413 U.S. 15 (1973).  The Miller test is the threshold standard for obscenity. Obscenity is a classification under First Amendment law, and not all porn will pass through the Miller test threshold. At the same time Miller is the culmination of a large body of litigation over the question of how pornography, its almost always pornography, should be classified for First Amendment protections purposes. It is important to understand that this is a local standard. Which is to say that the Government’s ability to regulate pornographic or otherwise obscene speech is conditional upon local community standards. While two people fucking on the subway may be a charming part of the morning commute in NYC, or nutting to Lucky, the mascot for the Celtics, may be essential to Boston culture, both acts may be obscene in Des Moines Iowa. When discussing the internet, which we must do in this inquiry, local standards are thrown out. Additionally, Miller is a threshold standard for a certain kind of porn. For these reasons, Miller cannot be said to be controlling on what makes something pornographic. 

Fortunately The Supreme Court’s long history of litigation on the legal question of what makes pornography allows us to draw on persuasive evidence. Justice Stewart in his concurring opinion stated that he knows it [obscenity/porn] when he sees it. Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 187 (1964). This rule cures the defect created by a local standard as found in Miller. Additionally, it provides a more sex positive framework with which to approach the issue, as it better acknowledges the full breadth of human sexual expression. Still, it is too subjective to provide a tenable framework, as when everything can be porn then nothing may also be porn. A synthesis of the two rules is therefore appropriate.  

The definition of porn requires a global standard, room to embrace the full breadth of human sexual expression, and some objective elements. Drawing on both Jacovellis and Miller porn is: 1) a thing known when seen; 2) a thing completely devoid of scientific, political, educational, or social value; and 3) a thing which violates community standards. Let us now apply this new test to two fact patterns. First, HOT MILF OCTAGON DILDO WARRIOR 3 THE RESUBMITINING is a hypothetical film about mothers, although proof of their identity as such is lacking, fighting with dildos to submit or resubmit other mothers in a octagon with elaborate combat etiquette around naked dildo fights. Starting at the top, let us stipulate that this would be known to be porn when seen. Second, only the most strained and lonely freshman year Lit students could glean some scientific, political, educational, or social value out of what has been presented. Perhaps something to the effect of: “it represents the way in which an overly sexualized capitalist society pits actors against each other in abstracted combat which inevitably comes at the expense of the family unit, and the brunt of this abstract combat falls on women and or female caregivers”. Finally, this would violate community standards. Transgressiveness is hot, and you are not supposed to fight, much less with ten (10) pound dildo flails. Alternatively, there is the Venus de Milo. They would show this on PBS. It's not porn. That's not to say you can't nut to it, but any such nutting would be brought to you by viewers like you. This synthesized rule provides a practical framework to view porn broadly.  

Now that we have a definition to apply to the pornographic, let us turn our gaze towards the fetish driven hellscape that is American politics. Our politics have become run by civic pornographic tropes. These tropes exigent before the advent of social media found a newly fertile ground on Twitter and Facebook. In the same way that interest in DADDY BIGFOOT FUCKS ME IN THE ASS AND THEN TAKES ME TO CHILI’S existed before the internet, interest in a secretive government leaker trying to save children and provide life extending technology conspiracies existed before the internet. The internet simply reduces the transactional cost of finding what you are really into.   

Sex sells, but faces problems of scalability. Facebook, twitter, and all the rest sell ads. The more you are on them the more ads they can sell. Porn sells like, well, porn, but Pornhub hasn’t managed to destabilize entire governments and escalate ethnic tensions into a genocide. The problem that Pornhub has is scalability. We are closer to chimps than bonobos, so sex can only sell so far. This presented Facebook with a problem.  How do you scale up a platform designed to rank your co-workers on fuckability into something that can Grima Wormtounge everyone’s grandmother? Use algorithms to push people towards more and more specifically targeted salacious content and rely on a healthy community of amateur content creators so that there is always something available to engage anyone’s most niche interests. That the business model of Pornhub and Facebook are nearly indistinguishable are no mistake. 

To scale up one not only has to understand what porn is, but what the draw of porn is. Porn’s fundamental draw is not the sex, but the fantasy. It is fantasy without the distant mirror, or at least without an intentional one. Porn, unlike sex, creates a reality of your own choosing unconstrained by real worldly limitations and curated to facilitate the chosen fantasy. PRISON LESBIANS 4 NO ESCAPE; BUTTSTUFF FOR BAD GIRLS doesn’t have to be a dingy place standing as a monolith to a horrifying system housing those broken under the crushing wheels of a morally indefensible society of indifference, like a real prison. Instead it can be a well-lit, adequately shot, sanitized play place for beautiful people to fuck like they are in a smutty disneyworld after Disney ripped the still beating heart out of the play Chicago. Through its alchemy porn is able to transmute the real world into smutty gold. Any impurities which may have stood in the way of the fantasy drawn out and rendered golden.  

It is this same alchemy that we find at work in the so-called “new media”. GOD KING TRUMP TO KILL CHINESE DRAGON AND FREE AMERICAN WORKERS FROM THOUSAND YEARS OF DARKNESS is no more concerned with the realities of the election than PRISON LESBIANS 4 NO ESCAPE; BUTTSTUFF FOR BAD GIRLS is concerned with The United States criminal justice system. Applying our standard to GOD KING TRUMP TO KILL CHINESE DRAGON AND FREE AMERICAN WORKERS FROM THOUSAND YEARS OF DARKNESS its pornographic nature must be:1) a thing known when seen; 2) a thing completely devoid of scientific, political, educational, or social value; and 3) a thing which violates community standards. Starting with the first element, this exists because someone is into it. It is, like most porn, ridiculous with the benefit of post nut clarity. Secondly, no real value can be drawn from it. Perhaps a vague sense that the American working class has not been served by the last forty years of neoliberalism’s relentless pace which makes scabs out of entire nations, but surely nothing can be gleaned worth thinking about. Finally, Trump by his nature and actions is transgressive and violates nearly every social norm he's ever met. He even paid off several social norms to ensure their silence. This is porn under the Miller-Jacovellis synthesis rule.  

“Well that is only one example,” a scarecrow I just created to take down might say. Well scarecrow I've inserted in a petulant power fantasy, we will discuss yet another political pornographic genre.

 Let's look at one of the most persistent fetishes in American politics. The fetish that The United States is a meritocracy. First prong is satisfied, because this is a fantasy that exists because it feels good. In a meritocracy one would see social mobility both upwards and downwards. As a person of great quality is born to a low class they would naturally rise. Conversely as a person of low quality is born to a high class they would naturally fall. This is simply not the case. You will die in the same class or a little below as your parents. Men make more on average than women for the same work. Finally, reports of racism's demise after Obama’s election were greatly exaggerated. Much as the realities of American prisons have to be thrown out to allow for the fantasy within PRISON LESBIANS 4 NO ESCAPE; BUTTSTUFF FOR BAD GIRLS or the class and gender implications must be kept at arm's length for HOT MILF OCTAGON DILDO WARRIOR 3 THE RESUBMITINING, the realities of America’s class, gender, and race relations must be transmuted away for the alchemy of porn to take place on the American meritocracy. Element two is met, because this fantasy has no more value than those contained within DADDY BIGFOOT FUCKS ME IN THE ASS AND THEN TAKES ME TO CHILI’S. Any attempt to stratify and rank fantasies based on intellectual merit is more likely to tell us about the author of the list than to accurately rank the intellectual merits with any validity, so all fantasies must then stand on equal footing sexually or not. Finally, we must analyze the transgressiveness of a meritocracy to satisfy the third element. On one hand, this is a omnibus fetish like tits or ass in sexual pornography. However, a kind of transgressive nature does appear to materialize when POC or women succeed. Were Captain America to be cast as a black man it would surely be met with cries of, “that's not right, Cap is White, Libs ruin comic books”. When female characters fail to be thinly veiled fetish items or possess body fat necessary to make it through a day without getting dizzy are cast, one can expect cries of, “WOMEN CAN’T BE.” In this way it is transgressive for those who are not supposed to win based on their immutable characteristics rather than their talents to win under this meritocracy. It is therefore plausible to find meritocracy in The United States as a genre of civic pornography.

It is at this point that we must view those on the right side of the political aisle not as misguided by misinformation with infantilizing gaze and endless forgiveness, but as fetish enthusiasts who open conversations with what grocery store’s ginger makes the best buttplugs. People gravitate towards the news that makes them feel good, in the same way that they gravitate towards porn that makes them feel good. These are active choices to view and active choices to talk about their fetishes. It's fine if people want to read TRUMP ELECTED GOD KING OF AMERICA; TO LIFT US TO MOON BASE WITH MASSIVE COCK or PRESIDENT TRUMP LOCKS BABIES IN CAGES TO HARVEST LIB TEARS; TOO WINNING TOO HARD  in the privacy of their own bedroom. Much like sexually explicit pornography, the line is drawn when you start acting on or discussing the weird stuff in the real world without consent. 

Fundamentally, when Nixon first suggested to the Republican electorate that they had the freedom to go balls deep in the worst angels of our being, we saw a sort of sexual liberation take place. It started with veiled dogwhistles. Just the “tasteful” little “welfare queen” brand racism used to be enough, but it wasn't really what they wanted. I mean sure, BALL GAG BALLET SWAN TAINT LAKE has some things you like, but maybe GIMP SUIT’S A NUUTCRACKER; CHRISTMAS CUMS ONCE A YEAR is gonna really scratch that itch. 

We need to stop asking Republicans to change for us. This is their authentic selves, and it's awful. Accepting someone for who they are doesn't always mean forgiving them for the things they jerk off to in the supermarket in a bizarre attempt to undermine your nation's democratic institutions.    

[halekingsourwolf]

Hmm..., the whole full shift thing ist such a mess. While it kind of makes sense that the hard (and therefore greatly acknowledged part) of the full shift is the turning back, I don't really like the idea of there being no more than letting go of your humanity tho achieve this. I doubt the tale of werewolves not being able to change back would keep the real psychos from trying. Would be a great risk for newly turned wolves, as well, right? Though canonically speaking the only thing that 1/3

seems still true for all of the full shifters seems to be that they were all born wolves. By the way: Do we consider Peter in S1 as fully shifted? On the wolsbane part: In SPN they have this thing with mirrors showing the real face of a monster. What if the wolfsbane is exactly that for werewolves? If you think about it the wolfsbane's a contratdiction in itself. It makes them loose control but at the same time makes them weak. We've heard the whole the shape you take reflects who you are thing and wolfsbane brings it out. So maybe that even is an old werewolf ritual to bury the fallen (Laure, here) in their truest form. For Derek in S4 his true form might've been influenced by Kate's kidnapping and the trauma that caused. And due to the long exposure that might've stayed with him for a while. 3/3

It’s fair enough that you don’t like the theory. To be fair, though, I don’t think there’s anything particularly easy about completely letting go of your humanity, and even though power hungry or wild werewolves might be perfectly willing to try it, that doesn’t mean they’d succeed.

I mean, can you even imagine that? Completely letting go of your sense of self, everything that you are and everything you’re connected to, dropping it over a ledge and trusting you’ll be able to find it and latch onto it again later? True, for wolves it wouldn’t be letting go of everything since the wolves are part of themselves, but that would be like... I can’t even think of a good parallel for humans, but it would be sort of like willingly abandoning all your inhibitions and everything you care about, knowing that you won’t be able to control yourself and that you might not be able to get it back afterward. Abandoning humanity, slipping into the full shift, would take either absolute trust in yourself or absolute, self-destructive terror. Faith that you could find yourself again afterward or complete lack of caring if you do.

For a power-hungry Alpha trying to full shift, if their motivations were too selfish or materialistically driven (I’ll be rich and powerful afterward, I’ll show those other Alphas I’m the best, blahblah etc) I don’t think they’d have any chance of achieving it. Because those motivations, in themselves, would in most cases be tethers to their humanity. Tiny anchors of ambition and expectation that would stop them from completely letting go.

And even if they could achieve the full shift –– if their motivations were lined up enough with a wolf’s, perhaps, or if they were just unhinged and wild enough to let go of all possible consequences –– there would be even less chance that they’d succeed in the reverse, shifting back. That would take a whole other level of control and self-confidence that few of the most posturing, powerful wolves would be able to achieve.

As for new betas, this is the same issue. Heightened emotional state and general lack of practice can make them lose control pulling their wolf closer to the surface, but that’s a far cry from completely letting go of your humanity. Teen Wolf makes a big deal about your anchor being one thing that holds you to humanity, but in all honesty people have way more than one anchor. There might be one that works best, that immediately calms and steadies you, but people are tied to so much more than one person or idea. And to full shift you need to be willing to let all of those things go (see Derek giving up his need for control, giving up Stiles by telling him to go, generally giving up his ties and expectations as he accepts his inevitable death, giving up his need for revenge, which is shown when he lets Kate walk a few minutes later) or need to be somehow secure enough that you will still be able to hold onto them through the shift.

In the case of Peter’s daughter, all of those tiny anchors, those ties to humanity, would have been completely shattered by the accident. Her mom and sister dead, her father the last thing she’d want to face again with the guilt and horror of what she’d done; every significant anchor shattered in an instant and pushing her into the full shift. She probably didn’t want to be herself anymore in that instant, not after what she’d perceived she’d done. But once she was shifted, she didn’t have the control and the strength and the completeness of self to bring her back.

For other betas –– we’ve never seen any of the others go through that kind of similar trauma. They’ve lost people they’ve cared about, but they’ve never lost everyone they cared about. Scott lost Allison, and lost his anchor with Allison, but he still had his mother, Stiles, and Kira as lesser anchors, and I don’t think he ever lost his will to live or exist or be himself. And for newly turned wolves, this is the same thing. They might not have latched onto a strong enough anchor yet to keep them completely in control, but they certainly still have enough to keep them from completely losing control. And when they don’t, as shown with Peter’s daughter, they do full shift.

As for Peter... that’s a tough question. I think part of the issue here comes from Jeff’s shifting canon –– at the start, it was perceived that the full shift was an Alpha ability, and that Peter’s was twisted by... well, the fact that he, himself was twisted (tying into the s2 trope of “the shape you take reflects who you are”). This is later contradicted by both Peter’s daughter and Derek’s evolution, but I absolutely believe this was the intention at the start and for the first several seasons. Therefore, the out of canon conclusion would be that Peter doesn’t fit into this explanation because the canon was just different then, but I hate that answer and want to try to come up with something that makes sense.

We know Peter’s Alpha shift wasn’t a beta shift, but it wasn’t quite a normal full shift either, because it didn’t look like a real wolf. If it was a full shift, but just warped by his warped persona (the shape you take reflects...) then it would still have to abide by the rules for other full shifts –– that Peter was able to let go of his humanity to the wolf, but still had the control necessary to change back. And.... honestly, yeah, I can see him doing that. Peter of season one had nothing really left to lose –– and was actively willing to kill any ties or “anchors” he had left to achieve his ends (Laura, Jennifer the nurse). Your mileage may vary on his sanity level or intentions, but he was both wild and controlled in turns, incredibly clever and manipulative, and narcissistic to an extreme, and while that alone wouldn’t let you achieve a full shift, if you factor in his single-minded need for revenge at the expense of anything else (probably even himself)... yeah, I can see that as a negative example of someone who could achieve full shift. When someone has nothing left they care about and nothing left to lose, they can achieve a lot.

This is really long already, so I’m not going to get too much into the wolfbane on this one, but I don’t think losing control and being weak is necessarily a contradiction. It takes extreme strength to keep control, especially in emotional circumstances, and wolfsbane lowering your ability to focus and hold onto your humanity could easily trigger at least a beta shift.