#didn't you know it's a requirement for all arbiters

[binah-beloved]

Binah teaching you how to dance. the Floor of Philosophy has the perfect ambiance, with stars twinkling against the ceiling, and when no one else is around she'll pull you to your feet, silently guiding you through the steps with a subtle smile on her face

[homucifer-ryotan]

(TW: Mentions of CSA (child sexual abuse)

All of these bad "protect minors" internet bills (KOSA or as I like to call it "Kill Online Speech Act", Bill S-210, Bill SB976, the EU bill for Chat Control, etc) frustrate me like crazy, but the reason why KOSA annoys me the most, beside the fact it requires government ID upload worldwide to use the web, not just in North America, (something these American pro KOSA politicians like to forget) when people outside of the USA did not consent to it, but also because it is very hypocritical to push Kill Online Speech Act to law this year to "protect kids" when the USA has child marriages still legal in so many states!

Excuse me Marsha Blackburn, Richard Blumenthal, Chuck Schumer, and Rob Wittman, do you (especially Schumer and Blumenthal since these 2 has been pushing for KOSA the most) not realize how weird it looks to push for KOSA in America to "protect kids" when these "marriages" are still around? Getting a 16 year married to someone 4+ years older than them is way worse than most things on the internet. At least they can they can close or turn off their smartphone/computer. Getting out of a "marriage" like that would be super difficult.

—

Since an Committee mark up (not an actual vote yet) for KOSA is happening this Wednesday (September 18th) please, if you're an American, email or call them calmly (unlike me in this post doing a vent) to vote NO on KOSA and patiently explain why this bill should not happen. Tell them how bad it would look for America if KOSA becomes a thing to "protect kids" when the end of legal child marriages didn't happen and wasn't a priority before any internet bill. Please tell that other danger to kids offline that should be focused before KOSA or any other internet bill. (How can you protect anyone under 18 from the "dangerous internet" and then have them spend less time online when things outside the internet isn't safe either?)

Also if you are American parent, please, please call and tell them you are against KOSA, don't let the title of "Kids Online Safety Act" fool you. It won't do anything to help your kids.

If you aren't an American parent, but you know any, please tell them why KOSA is bad for kids and everyone else so they can also call against it.

Everything you need is below:

(Credit to @super-firepaw119 for contact information below. Also this post is important to see and this google doc has who need to call and what you can use to say)

Thank you very much.

[marzipanandminutiae]

Friend Marzi, why do we have an inclination to believe that all historical clothing was very heavy? Fabrics varied in lightness and for the very heat of summer for example an all-silk or all-muslin ensemble could be made very light and breathable if necessary, even foregoing implements like boning, etc. Like, there are ways to not be dragging your skirts around.

Working people and people with active hobbies were already wearing fewer layers anyway, so we shouldn't expect them to be encumbered. Why do we anyway?

Friend Tumblr User Chasingtheskyline! Hello!

(This answer will focus primarily on conventionally feminine clothing, since that's my area of expertise. Just to disclaim.)

I think it's because of the layering, really. And the idea that, as you touched on, Only Rich People Wore All That (not so much- the basic makeup of chemise/combinations, maybe drawers post-1820s, corset/stays, at least one petticoat, skirt, bodice for women was pretty consistent across most of the social ladder during the 18th and 19th centuries at least) so of COURSE it's heavy and impractical. And as we all know, rich people didn't have lives or do things! They just lounged around being rich and not moving! </s>

We're used to one layer of our mostly-polyester clothing being extremely warming in summer because. It's polyester. Breathability is not something people think about much nowadays, since we're so used to just exposing as much skin as possible to cool down. Ergo, the idea that it's layers of lightweight fabric doesn't really occur to people, I think.

Another element, I think, may be that some of these people have carried reproduction historical garments but never worn them. Or weighed them in a heap on a scale- yes, really -and never taken into account the weight distribution when they're on a body. I've owned garments that were a bear to carry, but perfectly comfortable to wear.

Also, you know. We've long had a vested interest in making our own garments seem like The Best Most Advanced Garments. You can find articles from as early as the 1920s decrying Victorian "trailing skirts and trailing hair" as unhygienic and uncomfortable Never mind that the ADULTS saying this would have known full well that shorter skirts were commonplace for situations where Excessive Dirt would be present and grown women wore their hair up. (Also, you know. Unless you're licking your hem, your skirts cannot get you sick.)

Either you're getting only the experiences of women who hated what they wore before- which would somehow be the same fashion writers who once declared that the gowns of 1915 were the best, or 1910, or 1905 -or they had a vested interest in selling something to the public: in this case, the hottest, newest clothes (and hairstyles that required more regular trips to the hairdresser than long hair pinned up). Of course you get those writers calling earlier clothing heavy- they're trying to get people to buy rayon flapper dresses!

Now, does that mean that nobody in history found their clothing heavy? Of course not. One of Amelia Bloomer's key complaints about the fashions of the 1840s and early 50s was the many layers of petticoats women often wore to create the fashionable skirt shape- and while I'm often loath to take dress reformers as sole arbiters of women's opinion, the invention of the cage crinoline/hoop skirt was widely hailed as a marvel for enabling big skirts with much less weight.

But you're so right that this perception is extremely exaggerated nowadays. I do my best to fight it- had this conversation with a colleague today, as I was wearing a long-sleeved blouse of cotton voile and a long cotton skirt to work in 80-degree (F) weather -but. Well. It DOES get frustrating at times.

[burst-of-iridescent]

How come people complain more about Aang not teaching Kya or Bumi about Air Culture than they do about how Katara didn’t teach Tenzin or Bumi about Water Culture?

I’m not denying that it was wrong for Aang to do that and Kya’s + Bumi’s feelings were valid. But Both Katara and Aang did the same crime. Katara wasn’t forced to do/not do anything, She made her own decisions. Plus The practice of only focusing on one culture had continued years after Aang died.

well, for starters: katara didn't take kya on solo vacations while leaving her other children at home with her husband. katara didn't forget to mention that she has non-waterbending children to the rest of the southern water tribe. bumi didn't feel the need to apologize to katara for not being a waterbender. tenzin and bumi didn't hold resentment towards katara well into their fifties.

i think that's a pretty clear indication of why people might complain more about aang's canonical treatment of his non-airbending children than katara's supposed neglect of her non-waterbending kids.

besides, how can we assume that katara didn't teach tenzin or bumi about water tribe culture? maybe she did. maybe she tried, at the very least. but that's the real issue: we don't know. we aren't told. and that's why it's impossible to say that katara and aang committed the same crime, because there is a stark disparity in how much information we are given regarding their respective relationships with their kids: we know something about aang's dynamic with his kids, flawed and dysfunctional as it may be, but we know next to nothing at all (at least within lok) about the intricacies of katara's relationship with her children. they visit, she loves them, they love her... and that's it. that's pretty much all we get.

and that comes back to the heart of the problem with the kat.aang relationship: katara always comes secondary to a.ang. katara exists in the legend of korra as the arbiter of aang's legacy, not her own. tenzin and bumi display no connection to their water tribe heritage not because katara doesn't care, but because the narrative doesn't. exploring the mixed heritage of the kat.aang kids with equal attention paid to both their parents' cultures would require an active investment in katara's character, and that's not something the story of lok is interested in. she's a NPC, an exposition machine, a plot device, nostalgia bait... but certainly not a character with agency and autonomy of her own. the kat.aang kids' swt ancestry is made irrelevant within lok largely because katara herself is.

but if you're looking for a watsonian explanation for why katara might not have taught tenzin and bumi about her - and their - heritage, all you have to do is look at a.ang's own treatment of water tribe culture within atla to find a far more disturbing answer. though likely unintended, there are some very troubling implications there, and the characterization of the kat.aang family within lok only worsens them.

[thegodthief]

You may have answered this before but are you a God who IS a thief, you steal FROM gods, or you steal gods? Collecting deities like Pokemon

The moniker was bestowed as an acute derogatory term by a Tumblrite who was hella annoyed that I included deities in my "dream" posts to whom I have no apparent cultural connection. That the deity that was the last straw for this person happens to be a god of thieves made the entire affair extra humorous. To the point that said god of thieves asked me to take on that moniker as a request (read: offering) to him AND to extra annoy the Tumblrite who thought they were the sole arbiter of the discussion because who the fuck is this person speaking on behalf of a god who already made their boundaries known to me?

The moniker stuck. HARD. Those who knew me when I was more gregarious online and thus more open with my "travels" loved to pick on me about it, because I was (and still am) actively avoiding being attached (read: leashed) to any divinity, be it by oath or otherwise. So the idea of me stealing gods like a rogue Pokemon trainer was just the height of hilarity.

I didn't get to save the picture, but someone made a quick drawing to commemorate the mental aneurysm that my embrace of the moniker created. There is a drawing of [someone that's supposed to be me], in a stolen convertible, license plate "FELETES1", driving off laughing. There are taped boxes in the backseat labeled "STOLEN GODS". And Hermes is peeking out from the unlatched trunk facing the viewer with his finger over his mouth to shush the viewer.

I think of that picture every time someone gets silly about religious boundaries. Are there closed religious practices that I have no right to demand insider info on? Absolutely. There are practices that do require the right bloodline to enter, and I will be out in the street because that's not my right. There are practices that require a certain initiation rite to properly enter into and receive benefit of, and for those practices, no amount of self-initiation is going to be satisfactory because the lineage is required for a reason. There are practices that require access to certain places, certain things, certain rituals for the practitioner to have certain blessings and obeisances for. I will never meet those requirements so I have no right to speak of what I know as if I was someone who has.

But, there are certain religious practices that were forced onto other peoples, if not by the might of swords, then by the might of the markets. There are certain religious practices have remade themselves to adjust to the modern world, that may have been closed at one time, but opened themselves to become accessible to all. There are certain religious practices that are documented as never giving a flying fuck about the practitioners as long as the practitioners behaved themselves, and you can't close a barn door when the barn was never built in the first place.

And then there's people like me: Culturally cut off from ancestral lineages. Culturally cut off from the predominate religion of the area because [insert bullshit reasons here]. Culturally and religiously isolated and trying to find a way through this hot mess, and if Other People's Gods™ look over and hand me a travel bag with a skin of water, who the hell am I to turn that down?

So, to answer your question, I am a person that steals gods, but only if the god wanted to be "stolen" in the first place. Please disregard the snickering sounds from the box I'm preaching from.

[bloodgulchblog]

In light of what others have asked about the Banished, do you ever feel like the narrative writers (not all, but by-and-large) haven’t been interested in telling stories about morally complex aliens—writing them as people, in other words?

After years spent waiting for the post-war setting, for me the Kilo Five trilogy’s messaging signaled that 343 weren’t interested in telling that kind of story, especially after more years of alien terrorists who really want to kill humans again constantly being centered (while seemingly ignoring that the Great Schism was A Thing) and with the Swords of Sanghelios being deemphasized to the point where only a paragraph in the 2022 Encyclopedia’s “Splinter Factions” section was dedicated to them while the Banished got three dozen.

With some of the new story shards and Halo: Outcasts I feel like things are starting to turn around, but I do worry that they’ll shift back.

I don't know anything about anything for real but I think what's going on is this:

First and foremost, before it is anything else, Halo is an investment Microsoft is trying to make money on. The way it does this is primarily by selling purchases in a live services video game where you compete at running around shooting other players and (only recently) sometimes computers. They do make money on merch and things like books and such, but it's not remotely as much as they make on shootman video game.

They have a huge incentive to continue telling stories where running around shooting is the main action. Ergo, the stories Halo's writers tell need to create excuses to have this action and to make that part seem fun and enticing.

(The fact that Halo's pvp has never really had anything to do with events occurring in the lore doesn't really matter, once they have the campaign story excuse game for the multiplayer. "It's a training exercise for Spartan-IVs" was a very late addition, and oldschool Halo didn't bother framing it at all because nobody cared. Frankly, I think most people who play Halo PVP still don't really care.)

So, Halo's not interested in post-war and anything that amounts to recovery because it doesn't do a lot to contribute to Halo's core goal of making shootgame money that keeps convincing Microsoft that the people who make Halo should get the paychecks they need to afford to live indoors and eat food.

I do think there are people working on Halo who are interested in and curious about these ideas, and I really do think the Arbiter and the Swords of Sanghelios and the Sangheili in general are house favorites. (Why else would they be finding excuses to continue bringing the Sangheili into the games even if they can only fit them in as part of the Banished now, when the Sangheili are the species the Jiralhanae probably hate the most?)

Honestly, Halo isn't good at deep or complex characters of any species most of the time and when things are good it's because someone managed to give them some extra love somewhere. Halo has never needed a watertight, emotionally intelligent narrative. It just sometimes skates close on things like the Arbiter, and even though the Arbiter's arc is easily the strongest part of Halo 2's story the gamers hated it and that's why it was so curtailed in Halo 3.

They gotta make shootman games, and sell the shootman games, and that requires an acceptable enemy. For a while they were pivoting toward having Forerunner enemies, but now those are associated with an unpopular time in Halo (especially Halo 5). And Halo is at an age where it feels like every new thing about it is "trying to return to the roots" so... shooting familiar-looking aliens that people have nostalgia for.

Frankly, this is the biggest reason why I'm sighing and waiting for them to bring back the Flood again even though I'm really just not looking forward to that. It feels inevitable.

[druidposting]

Not to get sociopolitical in the cr maintag, but I think a lot of people arent understanding something VERY critical to the "gods good or bad" argument, so I'm gonna try and lay out these points as best I can.

(This ended up being very long, but if you enjoy analyzing CR through a sociological lens, it's all under the cut.)

To start, you have to understand that the Exandrian gods are immortal beings with immense power and influence compared to the mortals of the material plane. Yes, obviously gods have died/sustained wounds in the past, but comparing the power required to do any of those things to a god is like comparing the wattage of the Sun to that of a lightbulb. Its just incomparable.

In spite of this, however, I keep seeing posts about how its fucked up to kill someone just because they didn't give you what you wanted. For starters, the gods aren't just "someone" - as I said before, they're unfathomably powerful and immortal beings, and while they no longer have the ability to walk the earth and shape it to their whims, they absolutely have the ability to influence the ideas and ethics of the mortals that do walk the earth in very material ways (see the Angle of Irons cult, Tevan Klask the champion of Asmodeus we just met, and Pelor vs the Valley Coalition for examples). To put it in maybe more understandable terms, you can make a decent allegory between the gods and real-world political pundits, in the sense that while a president cant literally shape the world how they want, they have an overwhelmingly disproportionate ability to influence and shape how the people they rule over think and feel, and what should and shouldn't be morally permissible in their society. In a vacuum, the fundamental role of politicians in current neoliberal societies is to try and ensure their ideas and ethics are the dominant ones, so that the people they rule over can do the shaping of the world for them. This is why I find it much more permissible, and often necessary, even, to pass judgement over and rise up against (and wish death upon (in minecraft)) political pundits whos morals don't align with mine - their ideas have material influence on society, in ways that normal individuals don't, and I happen to agree with Marx when he said "the ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas".

So all that said, I totally see why some Exandrian mortals would be very very upset with some of the gods for various reasons! And I fully support their desires and rights to protest and fight back against any proponents and arbiters of bad ideas and prescriptions.

HOWEVER. This does NOT mean I am pro destroying the Exandrian pantheon. I think that based on everything we know so far (especially with the new info from the latest episode), that would be a net bad for Exandrian mortals.

To understand why I feel this way even in spite of my above arguments, I think it will be helpful to outline what I think are the worst of the likely outcomes if Predathos is released;

A power vacuum opens with the gods eradicated, and Ludinus (or some other dictator, but likely Ludinus as I think this is his actual goal) promptly fills the position of god emperor of Exandria, With no external forces to restrict their actions, and free reign over how they choose to rule the people. The consequences of this are even less freedom for Exandrian mortals than they had under the oversight of the gods, which is in my opinion, very bad.

The swaths of demon armies who have been chomping at the bit for literal millennia to find any minute perceived weakness in the divinely appointed (whether by Prime or Betrayer god) defenders of the Material Plane from the Abyssal armies, are finally able to overcome these defenses and wage devastating war and eradicate all life on Exandria. This is something we're already starting to see happen in the Grey Valley in the current arc, and I have to say, this also seems like it would be really bad for mortals.

Predathos doesn't stop after eating the gods, and in the end, devours all of Exandria. That would probably also be pretty bad.

Even if none of those things ended up happening, the overwhelming threat level of any of those outcomes, and the fair likelihood of any of them happening, far outweighs the potential benefits Ludinus proposes. I'll liken it again to real-world politics in the US, because I think some useful parallels can be made here; Think of the Exandrian gods as the Democrats, and Predathos as the Republicans. No one likes the Democrats. They're cowardly, their polices are luke-warm at best and detrimental to human happiness at worst, they continue to bolster capitalism even though their constituents hate it, all of their politicians are way too old, and god damn do they ever come off as condescending. But compared to the Republicans? They are the bastion of freedom. The Democrats are far from perfect. The Exandrian gods are far from perfect. But when your other option for who gets to govern you and your society is a fascist, you must do anything to preserve the freedoms you currently have, even if they're limited. Under the Exandrian Gods, the limited freedoms mortals have are infinitely more favorable to the zero freedom they would have under a dictatorship or as a dead person. With the Exandrian Gods, individuals have the chance to rise up against oppressions they face from their disciples, and to make more and more gains over time that solidify and bolster their freedoms. This is just objectively not an option under any of the above scenarios if Predathos is unleashed. If you're facing down the existential threat of fascism in a neoliberal establishment, you do not toss the current establishment aside in favor of a better one - you buy time by bolstering the current establishment, and when the threat is lower, then you can look at revolutionary action and work towards better forms of governance again. I believe that similarly, Exandrians will have the best opportunity for the greatest freedom in the future if they're able to stave off Predathos and Ludinus.

Now with all this context, I can talk about something that Ludinus either fails to understand - or deliberately doesn't care about and misconstrues for the sake of enacting his end goal - that is key to this debate, that being the difference between positive and negative freedoms.

Very briefly, negative freedoms are characterized as freedom from external constraints on any actions they may wish to take. For example, freedom of speech allows an individual the freedom to speak whatever they wish without the imposition of government. Positive freedoms are characterized by the freedom to do something, the ability to enact your future goals and desires. Positive and negative freedoms are often at odds with each other. A good real-world example of this would be murder. I think everyone would agree with saying murder being a punishable crime is a good thing - but is it not an imposition on an individual's freedom to legislate against them acting on their free will, if murder was what they wanted to do? Technically, its a removal of their negative freedom to act without constraint, but outlawing murder is itself a positive freedom, as it allows people the ability to live without fear of death (and obviously grants positive freedom to the hypothetical victim in that they now have the freedom to live instead of having died to the murderer).

With Ludinus, the freedom he talks about, freedom from the meddling and imposition of the gods on the free will of mortals, is a negative freedom. But if the potential consequences of releasing Predathos could be as dire as the complete destruction of all mortals on Exandria, or the subjugation of all mortals to the dictatorship of whoever fills the resulting power vacuum, then I feel pretty safe in saying that Exandrians deserve the positive freedom to continue living without the fear of certain death or subjugation under a post-Predathos world, even if there's the possibility that the current gods continue to meddle with ideas as they have. A dead Exandrian can't rise up and resist the will of the gods and their disciples, after all.

[penultimate-step]

I see there's discourse going around again about if it's ok to control what kids read. I'll start off by saying that I am quite firmly in the camp of "no" and that I strongly believe that kids of any age should be able to make their own choices as far as what they read/watch/play. That said, I don't fully agree with the posts I've been seeing who argue for the same results as me. I've seen some posts going something along the line of "kids can't be harmed by anything they read, don't worry about it." which seems false to me? I do get the urge to not give a single inch to your political opponents but this seems patently false to me. of course some things are going to get kids hurt. I just think the route of maximum agency for kids is the route that minimizes harm to kids.

To me, the issue with controlling kids media intake is. well its in the name isn't it. its control. over an already vulnerable group. but more to the point, these arguments tend to speak as if censorship is a completely neutral event that spawns from the ether. It is not! To control means somebody must be the controller. What is chosen to be limited and what is chosen to be allowed are choices that in the end must be made by somebody. The extreme end of this is well documented: abusive parents, teachers, groups, any figures of authority really, if given power over a child's information diet will stop them from learning what they need, keeping the youth reliant on them. They make themselves the sole arbiter of information. Just look at basically every book banning.

But even a less extreme and well intentioned censorship is still bad. To take away the agency and ability of children to choose is to do them harm. I have to say, as someone who read many adult books as a child, and was also forbidden to read many things by my parents, most of what I read didn't do me any harm. But being treated as if none of my opinions, even about my own mind, had any value, and thinking that I had to conform to certain ways of thinking to gain approval, that stuck with me.

Also. Does nobody else on this site remember being a teenager. Be honest with yourself: when you were 13, did you really feel like your parents, teachers, school administrators, knew you well? Better than you knew yourself? Or did you feel, perhaps, as almost every child does, that they didn't understand you at all? Let us grant that I believe that books can harm kids merely by reading them. In that case, the person best equipped to make the choice on what might harm them, what they can read and what needs to be avoided, is the child themselves! As I said above, to control a child requires a controller - and that third party will almost certainly have a worse understanding of the child's limits than they do themselves, and be more likely, not less, to make incorrect, harm causing judgements.

The correct response to "some books can cause harm to children" is not "harm the child yourself by removing their agency." It is, perhaps, an argument against forcing them to read something they say they are not prepared for. If a child says they know they are prepared to read something, outside very extreme extenuating circumstances, I have no reason not to believe them over any adult authority figure in their life. Children deserve to have full autonomy over themselves.

[sleepydross]

Hey ho I wanna have a quick convo uh... *spins the wheel* queer eighteen to twenty-one year olds, sit down a sec, yeah? Let's talk.

Being in queer spaces, younger folk, new adults even, can find themselves thrust into positions of power - moderation, administration, etc. This post is for the folks in those positions and a quick lesson in 'You are not the arbiter of justice.'

You're a new adult. Perhaps you've lived a whole childhood, as most do, perhaps you've lived hard and rough, and damn near died, the way I did. It doesn't matter, because you're now in charge of a queer community, or you created one.

You do not know the moral arc of the universe. I didn't, when I was eighteen. I certainly didn't know or understand how tainted and 'liberal' my views were, rather than 'leftist.' For a number of years I even conflated leftism and liberalism out of ignorance.

But here's the rub - the places I wound up in power, I tried to keep my ideas out. I set rules, or had rules set, and enforced those rules, not the 'spirit' of them unless it was required, and I don't recall using my power as a mod to shut up someone I disagreed with unless they were... breaking rules, harassing others.

You don't ban people, or punish people, for not agreeing with you within the rules in place.

If you're the kind of eighteen to twenty-one year old queer moderator I'm talking to, I want you to process that last paragraph. It's about you, and you need to shut your fucking mouth a moment, and have some humility.

If you want to create real, lasting community, you need to be prepared to be *Wrong.* Being a moderator doesn't make you right, nor should you feel powerful, because moderation is SERVICE. You're there to enforce rules the larger community thinks are valid.

If you want to create a community that will fill up exclusively with people who agree with you on everything, my god, that will both collapse quickly and be the angstiest place on earth.

I'm not saying 'people you disagree with' here too loosely either. If you throw out nazis, that's not what I'm talking about. I am talking about other queer people who simply, to use a salient example, don't care that some rich people died in a shitty submarine.

You're young - and maybe you're privileged. Queer people can have privilege too, you know. But you need to understand that simping for the rich, and acting like a holier-than-thou ultra-pious person cause you got mad at another queer for going 'lol poorly made subs sink, richies knew that, served em right,' I need you to know that you're not.

You're just being a twat. You're not moral, or in some way good / better, because you made the super fun decision to *checks notes* uhhhhhhhhhhh get mad at other queer people and defend the rich and the cost, expense and danger of trying to save those rich people after they fucked up their stupid sub.

All of this is to say, eighteen to twenty-one year olds... please understand that the world isn't nice. Rich people aren't your friends. You're not doing something good by championing the humanity they don't have. You're just acting like a jackass, and making SURE your community will fail.

If that's how you wanna do, sucking boot and killing potential friendships so you can feel morally superior for loving rich people so much, hell, it's for the best youll never hold anything together.

But you could. You just gotta learn that being a mod, being an admin, doesn't make you RIGHT BY DEFAULT. Quit being arrogant cusses sometimes, it ain't a good look. Seek harmony, don't sow discord.

If you read all this, idk, I hope it made sense and got something across for you cause it's sure been something bothering me in multiple places for a while.

[akiiyamashun]

“I never thought I’d say this, but it’s good to see you again.“

Star Trek: the Next Generation starters . accepting

Akiyama closed the door to the audience chamber with more determination than required for that gesture; his expression was not one that indicated a peaceful state of mind either, and his entire body language denounced the frustration and irritation coursing through the veins.

It was strange - in many ways, that simple movement of turning the doorknob and placing himself on the other side of that threshold illustrated beautifully his new life. His left hand unconsciously moved to the top of his uniform, undoing a couple more of buttons and leaving some room for his skin to breathe, like the man had been on the verge of suffocating despite all the oxygen around.

Akiyama Shun, Federation commander and 1st officer aboard the Tojo, had just formally cut all relations to his family. Once a proud and dedicated member of the organization and yet another prodigy of his family line, the discussions held within the chamber behind his back had finally put an end to that path. Not that he had been unwilling to stray from that course already - working alongside Daigo and his crew had taught Akiyama much.

But now, after having cleared his captain's name before the selected panel of judges and inhaling the air outside, it was hard not to replay the conversation with his father; the way he addressed a single child with so much contempt and no regard for his life or well-being and pondered only about his slightly unkempt appearance (one button out of place, longer hair now they didn't make port so often to see barbers) as if Akiyama Shun was not a human with feelings, but some sort of trophy to be paraded before his colleagues.

The fact that he was there to defend Dojima Daigo, a Federation-wide pariah, did not help; particularly where there was no way to punish the captain without blatantly disregarding the current regulations in place, which was something Akiyama knew from the beginning. His smug grin and the tone of each 'your honor' delivered to the judges had indicated as much, but there was so much the local arbiters could do in face of sarcasm.

Akiyama finally propelled himself forward - one step after the other, until the movements became automatic and he turned a corner, finding Daigo coming from the opposite way. The captain smiled softly at his first officer, fully aware of the reason for his presence within the building - the two no longer were at odds with one another, but their banter (now playful) remained in their private meetings.

"I never thought I’d say this, but it’s good to see you again," Daigo chuckled, but upon seeing the rather troubled expression on his commander's eyes and the unconvincing grin that followed, the captain placed a hand over Akiyama's shoulder. "Shun - are you alright? Is it the hearing? I hope you know I understand the consequences of my actions and that there is no pressure for you to-"

"Daigo," the younger male said, then laughed a bit while pressuring the other to not jump to the worst conclusions so fast, "Dojima, listen to me. You're fine, you're cleared from the charges - I'm pretty convincing when I need to be and you were not technically wrong. Relax," the first officer explained, and although Daigo's expression indicated some sort of relief, he was still visibly concerned.

Particularly when Akiyama's free hand moved to his jacket and all the buttons came undone - the piece hung open, showing the fitting shirt that was worn underneath and a look that most people exhibited only at bars, holodecks or during off-time, never at the Federation headquarters. Chuckling at the captain's raised eyebrow, the commander placed one of his hands over his superior's shoulder, mimicking Daigo's action from earlier.

"I just joined the exclusive club for kids with asshole dads, that's all. I was kind of hoping you had some pointers - maybe over a beer? There used to be a good place a couple of blocks down the street where all cadets went but I never did because I was always studying my ass off. I probably missed out on a lot of fun back then, so if you're willing to indulge your first officer..."

Daigo didn't say anything right then - his lips were pressed into a thin line and he examined Akiyama with a clinical look, but soon enough there was undeniable warmth and understanding flooding from the captain's dark irises. Nodding, he merely tapped the other man's shoulder twice and offered him a youthful grin, taking the lead and undoing a couple of the buttons of his own uniform - work could wait.

Friends were important, too - they both learned it the hard way.

"Remind me when we're back in orbit - I'll give your membership card of our little association," Daigo joked in relation to Akiyama's comment from earlier, "Our support group for kids with less than optimal parents meets every week, over poker. At the rate our ranks are growing, someday the Federation will send some therapist our way."

[game-boy-pocket]

Why is Ganon so bad after wind waker

He wasn't really "bad" in Twilight Princess, at least in my opinion. He just wasn't as good as in Wind Waker. And Ganondorf was VERY good in Wind Waker, it's kind of hard to measure up to a version of Ganondorf that's older, suffered defeat, is slightly more human and speaks of his people and his homeland and why he even wanted the Triforce to begin with, driven slightly mad near the end when he comes so close to getting what he wants only to have it snatched away at the last minute on a technicality. But TP Ganondorf was still cool as hell any time he got screen time.

The main problem most people have with him is that they were just too excited for a new villain and felt like he came out of nowhere at the very end, even though the game clearly foreshadows him once you finish Arbiters Grounds. Him ending up as the final boss is not my problem with him.

My problem is just the way his introduction was handled at all.

When Twilight Princess came out, nobody seemed to know when it took place. Nobody suspected it was in the timeline in which young Link went back in time, warned the King of Hyrule about Ganondorf ( despite him not listening to his own daughter about it ) and prevented the events of Ocarina of Time from ever happening at all. Anybody who tells you they suspected this is bullshitting. This just was not a discussion at all until Nintendo confirmed the split timeline thing long after TP had already been out. People were still thinking the ocean in Wind Waker had somehow been drained and we were back to old Hyrule.

So here I was trying to figure out why Ganondorf got out of the stone at the bottom of the sea, and why he didn't say anything at all about Link, a boy dressed just like the Hero of Time and the Hero of Winds who defeated him before, he only ever directly spoke to Midna... I understand the events now thanks to supplemental material, which, I really don't like it when supplemental material is required to fully understand the details like that.... but I still feel like a Ganondorf who is less experienced could be handled better... also "lol the Gods just gave him the Triforce of Power for Funsies" is something I never fully understood. If Ganondorf never got to break into the Sacred Realm to touch the triforce to begin with, then why was it split up among the three triforce holders? It makes no sense to me.

Anyway, I don't mind him in Twilight Princess, I just wish it was easier to understand and he didn't just suddenly get god like powers because the Gods were just feeling a little silly that day. I also wish he could have spoken a little bit more on his experience in the Twilight Realm and maybe made his connections with Zant a little more clear ( wtf was up with that neck crack thing at the end of the game? )

No, my main problem is with everything that came after. They treat him less like a man who has a lust for power and is driven by having suffered a shitty life in the desert while being jealous of the thriving Hyrulians and their lush greenery... and more like a monster who's just evil for funzies and only wants to kill and destroy. All of this feels like a result of that unceremonious backstory they tacked on with Skyward Sword... "Lulz, he's the reincarnation of an evil god so he's always going to be a powerful warlord who hates Hyrule no matter what his circumstances are"

I'll grant you this. We have only had exactly one Ganondorf appearance in a mainline Zelda game since TP. He was a half baked monster that didn't speak and only wanted to destroy shit. I was very worried that this is just the new direction for his character in a post-skyward-sword-retconned world. Destructive demon man who only does what he does because destiny said so or something.

Tears of the Kingdom could change things, now that it's possible that Calamity Ganon is not really the same being as Ganondorf. But again, his dialogue being all "kill em all, burn it all down, no survivors!" does not fill me with confidence that he's going to be interesting in this game.

[weaverreaver42]

"Hidden Devils and False Idols" short story (maybe spoilers?)

I've been thinking about the fluff of the Arbiters, the canon of warframe, and how they relate to my Operator OC. Made a short story out of it.

Sengoki had been on the ship for long enough to notice: The Warframe had tells. Even when 'Zeawr' was not actively..... inside the warframe, they still had an obvious connection. He also had been long enough to know when the warframe flexed, that meant anger. It wasn't a common occurence, this was the first site of rage he had seen outside of when the operator's Kubrow got shot by a grineer while they were invading the ship. That kind of anger you take note of without needing a second experience. It was a terrifying moment, between the flexing.... and the hunching and subtle convulsion: Like a kavat trying to throw something up but also wanting to be subtle about it. The energy glowed like a galaxy, and in an instant the process was over, the light was gone, and the warframe slumped as if tired.

and yet looked not nearly as tired as Zeawr's eyes were.

The conversation had started off civil, if terse, when Galsh had mentioned the technology in the railjack had been orokin era. She seemed ecstatic, stating simply: "I would love to talk with an orokin, despite their crimes, it's a shame they're technology is almost totally gone. Imagine what we could have learned from them had all of what they created be as well preserved as the Tenno."

From there the tenno quickly cited some of the atrocities of orokin technology, such as the continuity they used to preserve themselves by destroying the minds of a new host body. A sickening process that left no room for doubt the orokin were better off dead. The argument had immediately gone from the value of orokin knowledge to if the orokin had produced anything that didn't result in needless death. Sengoki should have kept his mouth shut.

"What about the Tenno? You all have saved so many lives, you aren't soldiers like all of the other creations of the Orokin."

That had been the moment when Oberon, The warframe Zeawr was inhabiting as he typically did, displayed its user's displeasure and brought them all face to face.

The tenno looked so tired. How often the Tenno stopped engaging in missions was a hot debate amongst their allies, but however many they did they always found time to get fresh faced again when interacting with their respective crews. Zeawr did not take such measures. His hair was dishevled and his eyes focused on nothing as if looking through Sengoki.

"I know what the Arbiters of Hexis say about us, that we are more than warriors and bringers of death. I appreciate the words, they drive me to be better...... and they are technically right"

Despite the seeming agreement Sengoki felt a lump in his throat, Remembering Zeawr's previous comment about everything the Orokin doing coming with a caveat. He felt the agreement would have one such exception as well. He was right.

"We were not soldiers, we were weapons. We were found, molded into tools to kill, and then prepared to be thrown aside once our use had come and gone. You said that we were meant for more than just violence, but violence is all that we were ever meant to be for. Every good deed I do, every life I save is nothing more than me trying to deny that fact. Because everytime I cut down another grineer I wonder to myself If I ever stopped being that weapon. Because that was all the Orokin every intended for us to be, and every implication otherwise is simply untrue."

And with that...... silence. Zeawr, quickly disapeared back into his warframe and walked off, most likely to another mission that didn't require their services. The other crewmates quickly made themselves usefull somewhere that hadn't been recently made uncomfortable by recent events.

And Sengoki? Sengoki had alot to think about.