#i really don't have a coherent stance on that i think they're useful in some ways + trying to eliminate an entire religion is not great | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tanadrin · 1 year

Note

( My position on Longevity research) I believe animal based research in this field is entirely unjustified, like with communicable diseases , “ no one dies of an infection or childbirth ( especially children) ” is a coherent theoretically achievable goal, with positive downstream effects ( lower fertility rates, fewer future meat-eaters, ) , but people can’t achieve immortality, A human life will always be a minute point of the universe, Immortality is a white whales gigantic maw, How many lives will you sacrifice trying to satiate its endless stomach. How much commodification and torture of your fellow beasts until your satisfied?

"can we engineer solutions to the individual biological effects of natural aging" is an empirical question that has nothing to do with philosophical-aesthetic considerations like "what is the relative measure of a human life in the grand sweep of the universe." i think one reason a lot of transhumanists get really annoyed by these conversations is that they think they're having a conversation about where incremential improvements in medical technology are leading, and how nice it would be to make diseases like cancer and dementia a thing of the past, and to stave off things like age-related cognitive decline or sensory impairment, and then the person they're talking to will suddenly go off on a tangent on, like, the sources of essential meaning for human existence.

and it's disingenuous as hell! or it feels that way--because ultimately what you have to confront is that sooner or later, if you take an out-and-out anti-immortality position (contingent on the answer to the empirical question of "can we indefinitely stave off most of the effects of aging" being "yes") that grandma has to die pissing and shitting herself and not knowing what year it is or who her grandkids are because A Human Life is a Minute Point in the Universe, and nobody actually thinks that's a reasonable proposition.

like, we've made real gains in cancer treatment in the last few decades; cancer is an age-related illness; should we stop researching cancer treatments because A Human Life is a Minute Point in the Universe? dementia is virtually exclusively a disease of age; should we stop researching treatments for dementia because A Human Life is a Minute Point in the Universe? at a certain point you have to own up to your principles and say which lines of medical research you oppose because A Human Life is a Minute Point in the Universe, and it's more important that we all be incredibly aware of that at all times than your kids getting to have meaningful memories and connections with your parents or w/e.

Like jesus, what even is that last bit of nonsense? Barrings some really unexpected turn of events in the biomedical sciences, it seems likely to me that one day--not soon, mind you, but one day--human lifespans might start regularly surpassing the hard ~100 year limit that they have right now, even if we don't aim at "immortality" as such as a goal. Medical science is good, it's getting better, and lots of smart people are highly interested in questions like "how can we improve people's lives and reduce their suffering?" So when do you say "no more"? When do you start going around to old folks' homes and executing people whom you personally deem have lived too long?

It just seems like a really weird ethical stance that nobody who argues for has really thought through. And when all you can do is spin airy-fairy philosophical reasons to justify that stance, when you are inventing reasons that a thing is bad, like imagining some kind of abstract machine into which monkeys are dumped in one end and additional average life expectancy years come out the other, I can't help but think you don't actually have a coherent idea about why the things you oppose are bad.

The ethics of the use of live animals in medical research is a totally valid conversation to have, but it's a different conversation. Its answer does not impinges on the empirical question of whether functional immortality will ever be possible, or desirable. If you want to have that conversation, go ahead, but please let's not have it in my ask box.

251 notes · View notes

the-judicial-assistants-notebook · 1 year

Note

*KICKS THE DOOR DOWN* WWWAIT FREYA I HAVE MIXED FEELINGS ON FANDOMS VIEW OF THIS SHIP I NEED TO KNOW UR OPINION. HOMUMIKU???

WKSHJSHJDBJHAHAHAH HIIIII, GRACE!!!! ❤️💕💞💝💗💖💘💓💕💞💖💞💘

Homumiko (HUGE spoilers for DGS after the bingo sheet):

I have been waiting to get into this ship properly, because I have THOUGHTS and I need to be forced to get them out coherently.

Let's get into the basic ship itself. Honestly? No comment. I think hmmk cheats a bit by relying on the literal decades people have spent shipping Holmes and Watson together, and I doubt that they would be half as popular without this history; but, as someone who has never had strong feelings about HolmesWatson either way, I don't have that bias! Even if we're just going off of DGS and looking at how they complement and trust each other, and are obviously more comfortable around one another than most other people, I don't really have a strong opinion on them. I do think they're close, but whether that bond is platonic, romantic, sexual or some mix of the two is just not something I particularly care about. You know who I do care about, though?

Susato-san.

OKAY, SIT DOWN, EVERYONE BECAUSE THE SHIP BINGO PART OF THIS IS OVER, AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE PARTS OF HMMK I DO CARE ABOUT AND WHY THAT ACTUALLY HAS VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THEM AND EVERYTHING TO DO WITH HER.

Let's get this out of the way first. Based on my very modern sensibilities, I take a rather harsh stance on Mikotoba's parenting.

Do I think he loves his daughter? Sure. But which parts of his daughter? Because it's very easy to love a child who is always obedient, elegant and the literal embodiment of idealised Japanese womanhood without knowing or truly even looking at her. I think Susato made it easy for him to love her, because she believed she had to earn it. Her father left when she was born, consumed by grief over her mother's death -- her mother, whom she killed. I know the game tries to justify this by saying it was Jigoku who dragged him away (and I do think him leaving was good for him, because I doubt he would have been a good father even if he'd stayed due to his grief), but the point is that he still left. For six years. And when he returned, he didn't even return because of her (whether she knew that from the moment she met him or not is debatable, but I think, at least on a subconscious level, she knew. And, of course, it's also debatable whether he could have returned sooner because of his commitment as a transfer student, but the Mikotobas are a powerful family, and, if Soseki could return before his period of learning was fully up, I think he would have been able to pull strings to return home if he wanted to).

This falls under speculation, so I understand not agreeing with it, but I don't think Mikotoba ever properly spoke to Susato when she was a child, especially not about what he did in England. I believe that a part of the reason why Susato started reading the Sherlock Holmes stories to begin with was because they featured a doctor in London, like her father had been, and she wanted to feel closer to him through those stories. And it probably worked! Her father probably did start engaging with her more after after she picked them up, because it was an easy way to connect with her. That's why I believe she was so insistent on the existence of John H. Watson, as a doctor, when she met Iris and learnt the truth.

There's this distance between Susato and her father which glimpse in moments in the game, like how he remarks on her lack of composure in court (suggesting that he isn't used to seeing her yamato nadeshiko mask slip), how he less requests her trust and more orders or expects it forthright, and how he seems reluctant to face the parts of her that inconvenience him (like how he asks her to play the koto when he isn't home and how, when faced by her real anger, he looks to Holmes to explain the situation rather than actually attempt to himself).

HOWEVER, in the setting of the game (Meiji-era Japan), I will concede that Mikotoba is a fantastic father. He may not have been very present in her life growing up, but men largely weren't expected to be. Their jobs were to provide for their children, not nurture them. And Mikotoba went well beyond his duty in that regard. Add to that the fact that he had her properly educated, ensured she knew how to defend herself, and allowed her to pursue her studies overseas at a level that was on par with any man, and you can see that he's really quite a great father; which is why I don't think he sees his absence as a flaw or even notices he was absent. Susato, though, does.

Now, Susato is obviously a product of her time, too, so I believe she'd be insulted if anyone was to suggest that her father or childhood was lacking in some way. That being said, I do believe she is aware of the distance between them in a way he is not. I think her affection for him is founded on a sense of duty and filial piety rather than pure love (although, obviously, she does love him), and, as she grew older, she stopped vying for his affection; hence why she's obsessed with the Great Detective more so than anyone else when we meet her. I also think that this distance contributed to her becoming so attached to Kazuma, in spite of the fact that he kept her at arm's length, too; he may not have allowed her very close, but he was always there, and he saw her for who she truly was. When she leaves at the end of the first game, Susato is not so much anxious that her father is ill as she is shaken -- she seems more upset that she's leaving her Baker Street family rather than that her actual father might be dying, and I think that's because she knows how to live without him. This distance between them, I believe, becomes all the more apparent to her when she goes to London and sees the deep bond held between Iris and Holmes.

And, speaking of, you know who else I think is aware of the distance between them and the part he played in creating that distance? The Great Detective himself, Mr. Sherlock Holmes.

See, I think Holmes has always known about Susato. I'm quite sure that, from the moment they met, he knew that Mikotoba was running away from something and that he had left an infant daughter back home. He just didn't care.

We don't know what Holmes was like when he was younger, but I believe he was a lot closer to how he appears in a lot of modern adaptations and how Watson describes him in some of the Sherlock Holmes stories: the 'cold, calculating computer' character. I don't think it's a stretch to think that Holmes viewed marriage and children as mere distractions and interferences to the mind; and Mikotoba was, presumably, his first real friend. He wasn't going to let something pesky like a baby back home detract from his friend's obviously sterling character and brain! After all, it's a lot easier to ignore this nebulous, abstract entity when you simply consider its existence, and thus its abandonment, unimportant. It's a lot easier when you don't know what it's like to be a father yourself. It's a lot easier when you don't know her.

Here's the thing: I believe Holmes's image of and relation to Mikotoba began changing from the time he started raising Iris. Suddenly, that inconsequential baby seemed to bear quite a bit of consequence, actually. But it was still all right to keep dismissing her, because maybe Mikotoba's baby wasn't special the way Iris was. Maybe she was a brat or an idiot, and really not worth much time at all! Maybe she could've lived without him and been perfectly fine, regardless...? As time went on, I believe the excuses he made for Mikotoba's decision all those years ago became increasingly flimsy, but he was still able to hold onto them because The Daughter was still an indistinct figure in his mind. She wasn't quite real.

That is, until he met her.

In the game, Holmes tends to keep a certain width between himself and Susato. He very rarely initiates conversation with her the way he does Ryuunosuke, and from a Doylist (ha) perspective, this is obviously because Ryuunosuke is... the main character. Looking at it from a narrative perspective, though, I think he was afraid of hurting more than he already has and must.

Holmes is a very resolute man. He sticks by his decisions regardless of what anyone else thinks, so I don't think he ever regretted what he did. However, I do think he felt guilty. Certainly, he didn't quite take her father away from her, but he did play a role in keeping him from her for so long. I think there was a part of him that consciously guided Mikotoba away from thinking about Japan while they lived together, because, well... he didn't want him to leave.

There's an interesting layer to the separation that Holmes creates with Susato, because, beyond the distance he maintains between her and himself, he also keeps her identity separate from her father's. Contrary to how he refers to Ryuunosuke by his last name, Holmes only ever calls Susato "Miss Susato" or "my dear (madame)", and never "Miss Mikotoba". I view this is his way of, perhaps subconsciously, dividing from that little girl he once decided did not matter. And it's interesting because, to an extent, he tries to do with her and Kazuma, too.

In the SS Burya case, despite meeting Susato first and seeing how affected she is by Kazuma's "death", Holmes largely ignores her in favour of focusing on Ryuunosuke and his bond with Kazuma. He calls Kazuma Ryuunosuke's "dear companion" and pretty much only interacts with Susato when he has little other choice... until he sees her cry.

See, I believe that when Holmes found out Susato was going to England and was about to be wrapped up in the whole messy affair, he was fully committed to Not Giving a Damn about Her. Sure, he would let her and Kazuma live with him, but by no means was he going to allow himself to grow attached to her because, again, he values his relationship and history with Mikotoba too much for it to get complicated in this way. Susato's relative composure throughout the case helps him hold on to this resolution; however, when he catches that final conversation between her and Ryuunosuke in the cabin, he is finally forced to see and acknowledge the amount of pain she is truly in. It forces him to at last face the fact that he can't avoid or fake aloofness around her any longer, because she is not some nebulous, distant entity he can continue to ignore. She is an actual girl with a fiercely strong spirit, a brilliant mind and real, human emotions. A girl whom he's hurt twice-over now and must continue hurting until all his lies finally come to light.

When he makes that decision to enter the cabin and console her the only way he knows how, he throws away any hope he had of feeling anything but apathy towards her. In truth, he probably didn't have much hope of that to begin with, because at his core, Sherlock Holmes is a good man, and he cares.

He cares for her, too, even though he may have no right to. How could he not, when she loves him so openly, trusts him so readily, saves his life? How could he not, when she comes to him in the middle of the night with a secret she can't tell anyone else because his judgement is the only one she wholly trusts and believes in? How could he not, when she refuses to accept he lied despite the living, breathing evidence he did until he admits it himself? How could he not, when after everything he has done, she still looks at him the way she always has and says that she's proud that her father is the assistant of "the Great Detective"?

How could anyone not? How could Mikotoba not... love her the second he laid eyes on her?

And of course this doesn't shatter his love for Mikotoba -- he has no right to these feelings in the first place: no matter how indignant or guilty he may feel, it doesn't change the fact that he has been lying to and manipulating her the entire time they've known one another. He can't even bring himself to tell her that he's been lying; he has to go through Ryuunosuke instead, because, even after all this time, he still can't face the woman whom he's done nothing but cause pain for from the moment she was born. When he can't even give her that ounce of respect, who is he to judge Mikotoba?

So he doesn't. Till the end of the game, he keeps Susato at a distance and pretends that everything between him and Mikotoba is as it was from the start. But, inside, I think he knows it isn't. Because I think Holmes can see that Mikotoba doesn't feel half as guilty about what they've done as he does, and that he doesn't view the fact that he left Susato 16 years ago as a real problem. And while he doesn't judge Mikotoba for that, I don't think he can look past it anymore. That final investigation and dance of deduction, to me, is less an assurance that they are still the same partners they were before, and more a final farewell to their old, uncomplicated bond -- the one that did exist before they grew to love other people and understand what love truly meant to both of them.

Going back to the ship itself, I think shipping them pre-DGS works perfectly well. They both had a huge impact on each other's life and changed one another for the better; Holmes by drawing Mikotoba out from his grief, and Mikotoba by pulling Holmes from his life of solitude and loneliness. They needed each other, but it is also because of these reasons that I think there was an issue of codependency between them, hence the semi-horrible for each other box I gave them. With Mikotoba, it's clear cut. Holmes helped him run away from his very real issues at home and allowed him to live like he was a bachelor with zero familial obligations again. With Holmes, it gets a bit more foggy, but I believe that Mikotoba basically allowed him to live believing he was the only person Holmes would ever truly connect with and properly befriend. Holmes is obviously his own person and whatnot, but I do think there was a bit of unhealthy attachment there on his end if not both.

During DGS and post-DGS is where their ship gets more complicated for me, because, while Susato is still very much there at the beginning of their relationship, her role in their lives and what they did to her becomes impossible to ignore once she and Holmes actually meet. I don't believe that they can just pick up from where they left off because there is now (imo) a fundamental disagreement in how they view their actions and how it affected her. So, even if they do go back to being lovers or whatever afterwards, I feel that there should be this chasm or weight between them that they simply don't talk about or acknowledge in any way. Because I don't think they'd discuss it. Holmes because it isn't his place, Mikotoba because he sees it as a non-issue (maybe he doesnt even notice this distance), and both because sweeping unpleasantness under the rug is so ingrained into their cultures.

My main issue with the way this ship is often portrayed post-DGS (why they got a 50-50 on the I would erase them from existence box) is that it ignores what happened with Susato. The few times I've seen the concern that she might have an issue with their relationship even brought up in hmmk works is always because they're gay. Which, like!! Fair!!! It's the 1800s, I get it, but!!!! You're ignoring the actual, very big issue for why she might be hurt and that's because DGS ends with her finding out that three of the men she's closest to have been lying and using her for their own means her entire life!!!!!!!! And she just has to take it!!!!!!!

Which brings me to the second most popular interpretation of this ship which doesn't just put Iris and Susato in a box somewhere unseen, and that's the one where all four of them are a peaceful happy family with 0 issues! And this one bothers me because it seems like it's taking what Susato said at the end of the reveal as what she 100% sincerely meant down to her core, rather than something she had to say because (1) it is her duty to honour her father no matter what, and (2) because Iris was there. When she learns the entire truth, I don't think Susato knows what she truly thinks or feels about any of it; but she sees Iris, and she sees this little girl who was abandoned through her circumstances as a baby, named after her mother, and forced to grow up much sooner than she should have been, and she sees a girl who is more her sister than anyone else. So she does what she always has and tucks away her own emotions so she might tend to someone else's. She has been the perfect daughter her whole life; she can be the perfect sister.

Even if you don't subscribe to the, admittedly, harsh view of Mikotoba's parenting that I do, I don't see how you can get away from the fact that they still lied to her for a significant portion of time. Especially from Holmes, whom she trusted and believed in more than anyone else! In the face of his shoddy deductions, she still held onto her unwavering belief that he was a genius and a good man, and then it comes out that he's just been lying to her from the first day he met her. I just can't extract the ship from their treatment of Susato, so when I say that I would erase the ship from existence, it's mainly about these two bits. As with Asoryuu, the primary reason why I don't ship them personally is because I can't do that to her.

And, obviously, it's just shipping and fun and games, and everyone should feel free to ship whoever in whatever way they want bUT IN A SPECIAL WORLD MADE PERFECTLY FOR ME. iris would be perfectly oblivious, and susato would have tossed both holmes and mikotoba into the thames and left them to figure it out. In a world that must still vaguely make sense with the canon of the game, though, then Holmes would have given Mikotoba the boot and taken the kids; because he may be a coward, but at least I can see that he knows he fucked up, and he allows Susato to set the terms of their relationship, just like he does Iris.

Anyway, I'm so sorry for how long, convoluted and only tangentially-related to the ask this is, but thank you so much for it, Grace!!!! I don't think I quite got down what I meant precisely, but it's the closest to coherency I've ever gotten so. Thank you 💖💕💗💓💕💘💕

#this one's getting TAGGED bc i spent TIME on it & bc ive been trying to articulate my thoughts on holmes & susato for ages #homumiko #susato mikotoba #dgs sherlock holmes #yujin mikotoba #dai gyakuten saiban #the great ace attorney #dgs #tgaa #honestly i feel like i still didnt quite say what i wanted to but this is the best ive got so far. i like the way their relationships are #handled and depicted in canon but the fanon ones just never sat right with me #i feel like i came across as very harsh to yuujin here wjsjdgak i think he's a good man and he did his best!! grief gets the best of us #sometimes. but i cant get over how he seems to show 0 compunction for leaving susato behind as a baby and openly saying without a hint of #'oh i was also ready to be with my daughter finally' that he was FORCED out of london. like???? ALSO the way he says he wants ryuu to go #back with him & leaves susato out to dry??? i know he says it's respecting her freedom and whatnot but doesnt that seem a LITTLE neglectful #in a way? like it can very easily be read as 'oh i dont need you with me' or 'i cant be bothered to worry about you right now' especially #when he's already abandoned her once like. !!!!! and even if you dont view it that way doesnt it seem a bit dismissive of her role in those #cases? susato was crucial to all the cases ryuunosuke won (and he would attest to that) but yuujin makes it seem like it was all ryuu and #just disregards how important susato was there and i. i dont like that.#some might say that i am unfairly biased towards holmes and that's fair. i kind of am wjsdh but the reason why i dont bash on his parenting #as much is because he never pushes iris to love or respect him as her father. he very much leaves that up to her so when iris asserts at #the end that holmes IS her father you know that there is a real sense of love between them. that's why that scene is so important and #that's what validates their father-daughter relationship #ofc u could still argue im biased bc he did leave a 10 y/o to go on a cruise for who knows how long so. yea. valid WKASGAKSH #anyway. thank you SO much and im so sorry i completely went off the rails there. i hope anyone who read everything got... something from it #💕💘💓💖💖💘💖💕❤️💝💞💗💘💞💞💕💓💞💕💖💖💖💖💖💕#sorrry again grace 😔 i hope i came a little close to giving you what you wanted #mikotoba susato #mikotoba yuujin #dgs spoilers

68 notes · View notes

audreycritter · 10 months

Note

Hi! Do you think there’s any room for Calkins-style story-based learning/encouraging a love for reading in the classroom, or should curriculums be purely focused on the evidence-based phonics instruction?

I'm gonna be honest, I really don't like Lucy Calkins. Her denial of the actual evidence supporting phonics-based reading programs has been incredibly detrimental to educational programs because her influence was so vast. It's only recently that she's recanted that stance or folded some phonics into her recommendations.

The truth is, with a few exceptions for precocious kids who have a natural bent for story-telling and reading, most kids aren't ready to be creative in this specific way when they're also learning to read. Many, many kids love to tell stories or make up stories or scenarios-- very few of them have any kind of recognizable story structure when they're in the 4-8 year old range. Putting that down on paper in a way that supports reading skills is ... way too much for most kids.

I'm on mobile and trying to collect/organize my thoughts, so I'll go through them with numbers to try to coherently cover the things I want to touch on. Keep in mind that I'm not a trained expert-- I'm just a life-long learner who has taught kids to read and worked with learning disabilities and neurodivergent kids, as well as NT kids.

1. Story is one of the first and earliest "academic" concepts it's beneficial to expose kids to. Kids benefit from being read to when they're very small and that benefit continues when they grow. Kids should be read to at their age level, above their age level, and for their interests. You foster a love for story by engaging with stories and the kid together. Even people who are never strong or comfortable readers can enjoy and love stories.

2. The mechanics of reading (phonics primarily, whole word for some kids depending on LDs) have very little to do with story when a kid is first reading. Pairing them often leads, in my experience, to frustration. Learning to read doesn't have to be BORING, but expecting story to "unlock" reading for a kid still working on sounds is...a bit out of order? Some kids "get" reading at some point, something CLICKS, and they find things they love to read. But for most kids, trying to retain "story" from one page to the next while they ALSO do the work of decoding sounds is a LOT.

3. Kids are SO creative, but being creative and having coherent creative output are two different things. Writing things down and reading and telling a story are all using different functions/pathways in the brain and it takes time to link those things. They need to be strong skills to work together. Asking a beginning reader to make up a new sentence about something and write it down is like telling an adult to sit and write the great american novel-- it's daunting. It's why so many kids who CAN verbally tell stories cry over homework that asks them to "describe" something. Kids in the 5-9 age set should almost always be given the option of dictating creative material to someone who can write it down for them, and even then, they need help. Their creativity at that age is a state of play, not usually a structured output. It's sort of like asking them to "demonstrate" creative playground play. A few kids will love to show off, many of them will act confused or self-conscious or freeze up.

4. I think love of story and love of reading are linked. I think they support each other. But driving reading education by using guess words and context and sight words to "unlock" story, or expecting a child's natural love of story to be part of some creative output that supports reading, are things that fail most kids. Early academic education is laying the foundation for all of these skills that should eventually work together. Reading is a skill. Writing, conceptually, is a skill. Physically writing with a pencil is a skill. Being able to tell back a story is a skill. They're all things that should be working alongside each other, but they use different parts of the brain and you can't help a kid make progress on one skill with an entirely different skill they aren't comfortable with yet.

Kids should be surrounded by story. They should get structured, specific sound education for reading. They should get to be creative. But you also have to know what their brains are doing and where they're growing to support that-- you can't ask them to work with tools they don't have yet. Teaching a kid to read and teaching them to love stories are two different things at that stage, and it leads to frustrated, struggling readers to treat them as the same thing.

#asks

19 notes · View notes

titleknown · 11 months

Text

...I will say, I've been reading over the blogs and reblogs of @vacuouslyfalse and @tanadrin talking about how leftist movements tend to use more-radical-than-thou rhetoric in a way that leads to do-nothing-ism and becoming a sideshow with no way to recruit/create coalitions/put policy into action, and also leading to a tendency to be distressingly non-specific/naiive in terms of actual plans, and...

...Well A) It helped me realize how much a lot of the way those sorts of posters they're talking about trigger my anxiety is me filling in the blanks with the way I've been treated with contempt/neglect and B) I generally do feel the way they feel about the way that radicalism often leads to a feeling of nothing getting done and "Don't Forget, You're Here Forever" and "For Their Lives To Get Better, Yours Will Have To Get Worse," at least on an emotional, gut level

But C) think that while I agree that it's A Problem, I think they ignore why it is movements; and in particular a lot of the most marginalized groups in those movements; lean on that sort of isolating viewpoint.

Like, to give an example there's a specific paper talking about it far more coherently than "Decolonization Is Not A Metaphor" that I'll link in the notes, but reason they give for not wanting to do politics of reconciliation/coalition rather than constant antagonism/provoking discomfort is that; in their view; that means assimilation into the settler state, and with it elimination.

Now, I think vacuouslyfalse makes a decent point when they say they don't really have the numbers or power to pull off that sort of oppositional "No compromise until the US state is abolished" stance, and "constant agonism with no possibility of reconciliation" as a means of engagement like they propose has some... bad implications with regards to workability, from what even my smoothbrain can tell, but it's interesting that that fear of the prospect of elimination-through-assimilation is what leads to that perspective, and no appeal to practicality I see ever addresses that.

Which leads to my point that I think a lot of the reason that marginalized leftists adopt that sort of radical anti-collaboration/anti-systemic-engagement rhetoric really kinda is the Hedgehog's Dilemma, in that at its core, it's about the fear of being thrown under the bus by the movement by virtue of being crowded out or shoved into a paradigm fundamentally hostile to your goals.

And it's not like that fear is entirely abstract either, from what I can see it comes heavily from experience, experiences that themselves often get buried when we wonkishly focus on the unviability of their tactics/stances!

One of the most persistent anti-industrial-civilization people on here's a Gullah-Gechee person who saw their home constantly under threat by "development," and I wouldn't say that it's too far to think their radicalism comes from the fear that, under other forms of socialism, their home too would be under that same chopping block for "progress"

Or, to quote a friend's experences (with permission):

i was one of the lead organizers on a (failed) global environmental strike years ago and the reason we failed was letting liberals, well, be liberals about a strike. i have lost all hope and respect for these people and think energy would be best spent elsewhere for the most part yeah ultimately [the desire for apoliticality] was the big one [that derailed us]. i was fighting tooth and nail constantly for our stances to have even the tiniest amount of bite, and it was pushback everytime. i had to seriously argue in favor of the IWW's rules of no bosses, no cops, no landlords! for a STRIKE it was a split amongst lead organizers between people like me who were explicitly leftist and liberals. and there was a refusal to acknowledge liberals dont know how to strike and appealing to them isnt going to work like i said.. i spent way more time trying to wrangle the discord or argue with people than actually organizing im definitely glad i did it; i learned a lot about organizing and it strongly reaffirmed in me that "dont try to make your radical action group appeal to liberals" is the end-all be-all rule for organizing and just drama. always drama. a big deal was that until i became an international organizer, of the like.. 9? that there were? One Person was not white. for a global movement! i pushed hard for talk about things like environmental racism and such and got a ton of pushback for it as well it was just such a hugely broad political spectrum, and since nobody wanted to pull it in any one direction on that front.. it just sputtered out the dutch group was one we consistently had major problems w because a handful of the rly active folks there couldnt stop saying weirdly racist stuff including a beloved message i still have screenshot somewhere of "i didnt see a black person until a year ago" from somebody who was like, 25 Which like im sure was true but the context was us going "can you stop being racist please"

Said friend said "read Settlers" to me in a different discussion, so I think that probably sums up how that experience shaped him.

The point I'm trying to get at is, if we're to chide the ways radicalism and the language thereof can become isolationist/anti-solution-ist, the burden of proof is on us to demonstrate to those marginalized people how being more diplomatic/wonkish isn't going to get them screwed.

Like, as much as I hate the do-nothing malaise and more-radical-than-thou infighting I keep seeing, I feel like these discussions on how that derails leftism are going to go nowhere if they ignore the reasons why people adopt these behaviors and why it seems to be the most vulnerable/hurt that do so!

It can't just be on them to be more friendly to neglected tactics, it has to be on us to show we'll have their back against the ways they've been screwed in the name of easy pseudo-victories and ignoring tough questions!

As for how to do that... TBH I think that's its own dialectic, but one a lone person isn't equipped to do, feel free to chat about it in the replies!

#leftism #rambling #shut up titleknown

14 notes · View notes

onewomancitadel · 1 year

Text

With the stipulation that had it been an ask I would've been a lot nicer (because asks are by and large not personal; because I have messages turned off and hate them), regarding the whole 'I don't think Knightfall will be canon' thing private message from another Knightfall shipper - what I don't like about it, that I can't really comment on it in a meaningful way in a conversation because then there's the juggling hurt feelings - is that like, what justification have you offered with that? Why are you telling me? Why do you think I give a shit? I barely knew this person beyond the times he had been entitled and annoying and I don't care. The rest of the fandom thinks the same thing too, if they've ever even bothered to consider the ship. But what reasoning?

My personal stance is that the impediment to Knightfall's potential canonicity is contingent upon the story being thoughtful and answering the thematic question in a coherent (and so far, foreshadowed) way. That is something that is hard to dispute (the null hypothesis is boring, and it's the easy, lazy position for your average drive-by commentator - but to make a positive case for it, now that's fun) but similarly I don't think the remote concern here is anything morally-loaded e.g. Cinder being too evil. You actually need a grasp on the way redemption is conceived of in the story. The fanon would tell you it's impossible because arbitrary lines between villains they're okay with and villains they're not okay with have been drawn in the sand because of Cinder's perceived likability. That's it.

Seriously. Cinder's contentious as a character because of likability. The moral stuff doesn't come into it. I don't genuinely believe that most of anti fandom and villain fandom is in any way related to the perceived evilness of a character, it all comes down to personality and charisma, which is why it's a load of shit. It's also why those selfsame people will 'stan' (what a bullshit concept) morally reprehensible characters and/or characters outright condemned by the narrative because they fucking like them (or because they are protagonists). Obviously that likability is in some way connected to narrative acts e.g. she killed Pyrrha who is flawless and cute and dreamgirl (puke, not even her canon characterisation and relatedly it's part of her fatal flaw) which means Cinder is evilbigbadforever, but Cinder's other genuinely evil narrative acts are like uhhhhhh I guess they're kind of bad. Anybody who wants to play moral arithmetic with her is being disingenuous. I am the first person who will play moral arithmetic in terms of the 'too far' line, and Pyrrha is not the 'too far' line.

I think what I want to make clear about my blog is that Jaune/Cinder is only interesting because of the canon potential and the established canon. I abhor canon-as-sandbox and I don't find it cute. I don't find baseless uninteresting stereotypes interesting. I am not interested in grumpy/sunshine. I am not interested in guy-gets-girl. I am not interested in shitty fanon. I am not interested in d/ominatrix/whiny bottom. I am not interested in fucking any of that and it's not a compliment to me for someone to ~like~ my blog despite canon. It is actually an insult and I'd rather just be left alone.

I don't seek other people out because I understand I don't fit into traditional fandom paradigms. That is not to sound self-important; I have managed to find a middleground of being able to be tangential to fandom whilst not being in fandom which means I can still engage in my hobby without annoying other people.

I guess people are probably wondering why I hate private messages. I don't want to make conversation outside of asks/replies. I don't want to juggle hurt feelings when I'd rather use my blog for actual discourse/response. Asks have a clearly defined start and end that don't give me hives and when published publically they also document my response in a way that you can't turn around and say I didn't say something or I said something in a different way or whathaveyou. I also started using Tumblr in 2012 when I was too young for this website (yes. that long) and private messages were properly implemented in around 2016 and so to me they are weird and modern and I don't like them and find them hostile. I had messages turned off but apparently if someone has messaged you before you can still message them. There are exceptions here for people I know/whom I've talked to before in case anybody is wondering and I did send a PM to someone to check on him but you know what I'm talking about with actual fandom discourse.

I'm trying to parse my feelings on the matter because the whole thing is interesting to me but also really annoying. On the other hand, when it comes to people considering things canon or not canon (in this case it felt patronising), my yardstick tends to be 'whatever Reddit et al. thinks, not that', so...

#shitstirring

4 notes · View notes

inoppositionflorien · 11 months

Text

I know I've been promising to articulate my opinions on anarchism pretty much since I joined Tumblr, but seeing as that's not happening today, I'm instead going to complain about complaining.

In particular the "ha the US is unique in its evilitude and it ought to stop being a thing, remember that time it did xyz" brand of complaint. Notably, this particular brand of weird political stance is almost exclusively seen in Canadian, Western European, and Australian leftists.

It is not particularly commonly held among US leftists. (This is not to say there are none who hold that opinion, there definitely are some, if just by osmosis of opinion, merely that they are far less commonly seen than ones originating from other countries, often ones with very similar colonial legacies.)

As that parenthetical says, every country that tried to be a world power and many that never made it have remarkably similar skeletons in their closet. Further, the individuals in question often make no effort to understand the US political system. This ties back to the myth of the All-powerful executive branch, the President being in charge of everything. They usually buy this wholesale, which, as said in some previous post I made is certainly an appealing idea, but a broadly wrong one. They also make no effort to follow the news beyond the headline, or occasionally the first article.

This often leads to "The US is axiomatically bad and thus any force that opposes it (even nominally) is axiomatically good." It doesn't always go there, but more often than I think anyone should be comfortable with, it does. That way lies support of authoritarians and occasionally actual fascists simply because they oppose the US out of a xenophobic nationalism, or, if they're a LatAm populist, used the specter of past US intervention (which was broadly a disaster, and pointlessly installed many authoritarians who did nothing helpful, for the record) to claim that any problems they're having came from the apparently all-powerful and illusive CIA, and not from poor management choices that necessarily come from incoherent populist policy platforms which are either ill-defined to the point that anything can be claimed as part of the policy, or a mess of contradictory ideas that don't actually work because the smart ones almost invariably rely on the perpetual existence of a macroeconomic money sink in a naturally unstable global economy or a misunderstanding of the problems raw extraction countries face in the international market, and then when they are technically workable, they trip over the really bad unworkable ideas (see what happened to Venezuela's healthcare system when they attempted to run two parallel ones at once to preserve jobs while also trying to fix inefficiencies in the old system. Essentially, it became more inefficient and more expensive to run, which dumped an enormous amount of money into an economy with few actual money sinks because taxes had been cut and the money sink that high oil prices provide to a petrostate disappeared when oil prices crashed. It would have been more effective to either fix the first system or completely restructure it if that seemed too hard)

The point is, I don't actually think it's a coincidence how in many of these cases, it's the authoritarians and populists with no coherent policy platform being praised or at least grudgingly accepted. Notably, those are both strongman positions, and strongmanism is broadly popular, pretty much wherever you go politically speaking. (Interestingly, you can find it even in many branches of anarchism!) It's also often a messianic belief system, a "someone, one person who leads, they will do it right, defeat a great evil, and then everything will be good forever" sort of thing.

The reason the US in particular is targeted, I think, is less because of its particular legacy, (After all, remember, nearly every country that didn't get colonized on heavily and several that did all have similar legacies if you're willing to look, though not necessarily to as great a recent extent simply because they haven't been major powers for a while, or haven't made it there yet) but simply because it's visible. It is THE power in the world. It is not a hegemon, nor has it ever been, but it is very capable in its own right and has been economically dominant for nearly 150 years. Incidentally, this, (and some racism) is why the US right is obsessed with China, a country that's apparently the second largest power. It's visible. In practice, there's actually plenty of evidence China has been struggling with the problems authoritarianism brings, and has been overreporting its economic strength for years, and it will probably be overtaken by India soon economically, but this is irrelevant to their position. China is visible, so China is the target. Much the same, the US is visible, certainly culturally (it has a culture so dominant that many people don't even realize they're in it. This is not a unique issue to the US, most non-minority groups in a given country don't realize they're in a distinct culture. Part of this is the "white as default" thing, but this is also much more broadly true than that particular phrase implies) so the US is the target for people who aren't in it.

It is in fact, closely related to the all-powerful executive I brought up earlier. It is very, very easy and fun to ascribe all or many problems to one position or one country or one people. It is also very easy when you're doing that to start to believe in strongmanism, because whether they know it or not, strongmen (who are almost invariably isolationist nationalists) will win international acclaim for pretending to be an underdog against the biggest power they think they can get away with taking issue with, and for many places, that's the US.

And strongmanism and more general authoritarianism, as I'm sure everyone knows by now, don't actually work very well at achieving their intended ends (not to mention the ends they intend are often bad to start with)

There could be the criticism of this made that the US school systems do not teach of everything bad the US has done, and this is why the US left broadly disagrees in the way brought up in the start... Except oops that's true of pretty much every country's education system. They very rarely go into much detail about all the various terrors their country wreaked until college level, and occasionally not even then. Further, the US left is broadly just as aware about all the past atrocity as international ones. Often more so, in fact, because people tend to know more about their own country than others. There is, in truth, no one target that must be hit to fix everything, whether it be a country as in this particular complaint, or something else, and the pervasive belief in that is a major issue across nearly all political groups that goes largely unaddressed.

This actually leads into another whole long post that I'll probably make some day about how systems of government, economic systems, and baseline happiness interact to create a whole situation where the events of the Great Disappointment of 1844 but for anticapitalism is going to happen in slow motion if capitalism ever stops being the dominant economic system, but I'll save that for another post. And maybe someday I'll actually talk about my feelings on Anarchism.

#the florien gets political #complaining about particular brands of complaint

2 notes · View notes

withinsnow · 2 years

Text

"Is Wei Wuxian a morally grey character?"

As always, seeing the discussions floating around have inspired me to gather my own thoughts on the topic. They're still loose, kinda here kinda there, but they at least have some semblance of coherency now. Maybe.

To answer this question I'll have to go on some tangents to sort out my thoughts on what "grey morality" means to me. I don't believe "grey morality" refers to one specific phenomenon, and that it's more of an umbrella term instead. Moral complexity is not the same as moral ambiguity, but they both fall under "grey morality". Even those terms have different interpretations; some may say moral ambiguity is the same as moral nihilism, though others (including me) will disagree on that. How we understand "grey morality" will be influenced by how we perceive morality in general.

Another important thing to remember when we discuss this, is that "morality" isn't really a tangible law of nature. As our society change and we along it, so does our perception of what is morally right and what is not. This, like most unmeasurable values we've constructed for ourselves, is inherently biased. If we are to examine what morality means to us, we also need to take into account the biases we consciously or subconsciously apply. The absence of an indisputable answer doesn't mean trying to define morality is meaningless (again, ambiguity =/= nihilism). Then again, this is a discussion that can't be neatly summed up in a paragraph or two, so we'll move on.

So how about Wei Wuxian and grey morality? I swear I'll get to it eventually, but first: As I see it, a character can only be as morally grey as the work itself. Imagine we have a hypothetical character whose "grey morality" is defined by the presence of good/bad traits. A very simplified example would be an antagonist who runs a violent and morally abhorrent crime syndicate, but also builds housing for homeless people in their free time or something. The thing is, if the story runs with a very surface portrayal of morality shoved into a strictly good/bad binary, then it's still not very complex at all. It's only slightly to the left of the black/white stories of d*isney fairy tales, merely acknowledging that people usually aren't one or the other. Its stance on morality itself is still fairly shallow, and in this case I'd hesitate to call the character "morally grey", since their "morality" is about as grey as a checkerboard.

So how does mdzs present morality? Is it grey? My answer to this question is: "well, both yes and no." While the story has moments of ambiguous and complex morality, it's fairly straightforward for the most part. I don't think Mxtx is trying to make some hard statement on it, and me saying this doesn't mean I think the story has no set ideas on what's morally right or wrong, or that there are no overarching themes exploring it. What I mean is that I find the novel less focused on exploring morality at a societal and/or philosophical level, instead portraying different characters grappling with their own sense of right and wrong in more or less ambiguous situations. It's not about the question, it's about the individual person's answer and how they land on it. I've previously reflected on it here.

Another thing to note is how a situation's ambiguous morality isn't necessarily due to an absence of clear answers. Information, or the lack of it in this case, is a pretty central theme in the story. When Wei Wuxian answers Lan Xichen's question of whether his father did the right thing with a "I don't know", it reads more to me as him not being in possession of the information he needs to make a conclusive judgement. Lack of information to judge a past action as right or wrong is one thing, lack of information on what different outcomes your potential actions can have is another. In the case of Lan Wangji and his decision not to force Wei Wuxian to come to Gusu, he made his decision based on what he thought was right in a situation where he didn't know what consequences either option would have. The only frame of reference he had was his mother's fate (and there's a possibility here for exploring how Lan Wangji was able to navigate the situation with information his father did not have when he made his choice. We learn from our ancestors' mistakes after all). My point is that the right/wrong in a situation doesn't have to be ambiguous, but we may see it that way due to our own shortcomings.

So finally, the question that started this whole thing:

"Is Wei Wuxian a morally grey character?"

My answer to this is: "well, not really." At his core, Wei Wuxian has a good sense of right and wrong, moral and immoral. His decisions are not affected by a twisted sense of morality, and he does not turn to immoral methods if the situation allows him to avoid it. He weighs his options and choose what he believes is the best path given the circumstances, which may be more or less morally grey. His core values of forgiveness, kindness and empathy, how he doesn't nurse his grudges or get caught up in vengeance, resentment and hatred, that is to me what defines a good person. I've written about it here and here.

However, even if I don't think the core of his character is one of grey morality, that does not mean I think Wei Wuxian always did the right thing, was morally good in every situation or always acted with (morally) good intentions. Even if he at times acted on motivations that were not morally righteous; like torturing Wen Chao for revenge, attacking the group of cultivators speaking ill of him and the Wens before the Nightless City massacre (and I do think this scene is not intended to portray righteous vengeance, as his action directly contrast his decision to save all the cultivators at the second siege), this doesn't mean he's morally grey, it simply means he's human. Such slips of judgement doesnt define a person. What does are the lessons they take from it, how they grow and how they change. In other words: "good people can do bad things, and bad people can do good things."

I think we have a tendency to confuse a morally grey character with a round character. A round character is complex and flawed; more human if you will. This doesn't equal moral greyness for the reasons given above, though "grey morality" may be one flaw that rounds the character. For this reason I believe Wei Wuxian is a round character, but not a morally grey one.

TLDR: I don't think Wei Wuxian is a morally grey character, but this doesn't mean I believe he's always done the right thing or never made mistakes and/or poor judgements. I see him as a round character with his own mistakes and flaws. The story itself is fairly straight-forward, though it has more than one moment of moral complexity and/or ambiguity. This in turn affects how the characters navigate the questions of right and wrong within the story.

As always I warmly welcome different responses on this topic. Do you agree? If not, feel free to tell me why!

#short answer: no I don't think he is #mdzs #mo dao zu shi #snow's ponder corner

27 notes · View notes

gotyouanyway · 2 years

Note

13 in general seems to have such warped morals compared to some other doctors like she lets a dude blow himself up where she wasn’t willing to in the Timeless Children and way back in Aracnids in the UK the american business guy is like “i’m going to shoot the big monster spiders” so she’s like “no these are living creatures and they deserve to be treated with dignity and respect; i’m going to lock them in a room and starve them to death instead” queen of having no morals

ok i put this off because i wanted to fully catch up and then go back and recontextualize a bit and this got really long and maybe not that coherent but YEAH here we go ----

i totally agree, her morals are very shaky and i think i actually like it! at first i didn't like it because i had gotten so used to the doctor being obsessed with morality, sometimes to the point of overcompensation (mostly 10 lol). and with the thesis of 12's final season being "without hope, without witness, without reward" etc. and goodness being the thing he died for, it felt kind of like a betrayal for 13 to equivocate on her morals so heavily

i mean, i personally love when the doctor isn't perfect and it made for some really interesting character moments like letting that old guy do the dirty work AND die for her in the timeless children. but i wasn't sure about it as a writing choice because it seemed weird after all of that. but then i started rewatching season 1 and like.. there she is though! it was obvious when it was 9, fresh out of the time war, still thinking like a soldier and not as ashamed of it yet as he would be. definitely not as interested in hiding it (or hiding from it). 9 let multiple people die for him without too much protest or guilt, he did his best and he felt for them but he didn't obsess over every loss or take all the burden on himself the way he would later on. he was going to gladly take the slitheen woman home to be executed, he had to be physically stopped from killing the last living dalek on sight LOL. a soldier, and nothing like the goodness-obsessed person we see later. and THAT is the morality i see in 13.

so that could definitely be a lapse in character continuity and i (petty) don't really want to praise chibnall for anything. but to give the benefit of the doubt for the sake of having a good time here: the things that 9 and 13 have in common are that they've both just experienced recent, devastating, violent loss of [checks notes] literally everyone they knew and cared about, and they didn't want to regenerate and keep living at all (or likely didn't want to). basically if we're talking about patterns of behaviour here, i think in both 9 and 13 we're seeing the doctor at low points, and specifically low points where they're doubting their morality and their identity as the Doctor. they're both literally born out of experiences where their morality failed them (12's goodness failed to save anyone he cared about - in fact, it specifically got bill and missy killed) or it failed period (the war doctor was not Good in the doctor's usual sense). so i like to think, again mostly for the sake of enjoying the show lol, that consciously or subconsciously 13 is going through something similar to what she went through after the time war - extreme distress and an identity/morality crisis, leading to her making some very questionable choices :)

the fun thing about 13 though imo is that this time she's trying to hide it from herself and from others a lotttt more. she's gone right back to being bouncy and fun to hide the distress (like 10/11) but she's also very clearly hiding it from herself and equivocating TO HERSELF. 9 took this stance of basically "war is hell, people die, i'm not god". now though, after spending a few hundred years reforming that mindset until he basically became a saint and martyr, 13 feels much more guilty about making questionable choices and she has to lie to herself about it. y'know, "maybe i let that old man get the blood on his hands and die so i could escape this situation, but at least i didn't stoop to the master's level".. ma'am you're fooling no one <3

anyway sorry this got so long i've been thinking about it for like 2 weeks love u xoxo

#asks #anonymous #WHEW SORRY this is so long #p #dw

14 notes · View notes

brakingpoint · 3 years

Text

tagged by @allgaslynobrakes to do this lil tag game! (actually it's a big tag game so i'm putting it under a cut)

1. Why did you choose your url? wanted to start an f1 blog, was absolutely spiralling over drive to survive season 2 episode 10 aka the 35 minutes of television that cured all my mental illnesses. gaslypodium felt like a fitting encapsulation of my brand

2. Any side blogs? this is a sideblog! my main is @lonelyroommp3 and i also have a woefully undercurated ~aesthetic~ blog (there is no coherent aesthetic to it it's just nice pictures) @messiaens

3. How long have you been on tumblr? i've been on this blog since january but my main dates from november 2012 and prior to that i lurked a lot starting in like, 2011 when all my irls got into tumblr but i thought my parents wouldn't let me make an account lol. basically i have long term tumblr poisoning

4. Do you have a queue tag? nope i think i've only even used the queue function once... u get my posts when they hit my silly little brain my beloveds<3

5. Why did you start your blog on the first place? main blog was because i wanted to make friends with my favourite les mis blogs that i'd been sending anons to for several months ahahahaha... i made this blog because i was getting super into f1 but i knew that i was gonna be liveblogging a ton so doing it all on main would be absolutely infuriating to people on main who followed me for like, musical theatre or whatever so i thought i should bite the bullet and actually make a sideblog. this is the first time i've actually had a fandom specific sideblog btw!! normally i am just a multifandom mess

6. Why did you choose your icon/pfp? pierre looks pretty in it <3

7. Why did you choose your header ? i didn't have a good header for AGES and then dts season 3 dropped and that shot of pierre with the confetti on the monza podium just HIT me and i was like ah... i can make a blog theme out of this

8. What’s your post with the most notes ? i have no clue on this blog but on main i have a couple of 100k+ note posts knocking about. i think THE most popular was a post i made in like 2013 about people changing the pronouns on song covers i think that one made it to like 300k for some reason

9. How many mutuals do you have ? no idea! tbh i don't put a huge amount of stock in mutual follows anyway esp because i am very very bad at remembering to check my follower list and follow people back. so if i've never followed you back it's nothing personal and we can still be besties!!

10. How many followers do you have ? about 280 on here, just over 4000 on main 🥴

11. How many people do you follow ? about 650ish? a lot of them are inactive blogs from 2013 though lol

12. Have you ever made a shit post? everything i make is a shitpost don't worry

13. How often do you use tumblr a day? too much omg. i basically quit using every other social media (i lurk on insta but never post anymore) late last year so this is Thee hub for all my horrible little thoughts and posts

14. Did you ever have a fight/argument with another blog? not on this blog bc honestly i try to keep my f1 posting relatively drama free but omg i have had some legendary beefs on main

15. How do you feel about the “you need to reblog” posts ? used to be really anxious about the bad luck type ones but now i'm getting a lot better at ignoring them guilt free. if it's one of those "i see you scrolling past this >:( your stance on social issues is solely determined by whether or not you reblog MY post >:(" type deals then honey i am already 5 miles down my dash away from it<3

16. Do you like tag games ? i love them!! i'm always really bad at tagging people though because i'm always like omg nooo we're not besties enough to tag yet they're gonna think i'm weeeeeird

17. Do you like ask games ? in theory but i always forget to keep answering them halfway through esp if they're ones where my reply takes any kind of effort sorry :((

18. Which of your mutuals do you think is mutual famous? i have no idea what this means i think i am out of touch with the youth

19. Do you have a mutual crush? does it count if im mutuals with my girlfriend

20. Tags ? no pressure tags & sorry if you've already done it!! @schwarzevulkan @limp-wrist-max @maxricciardo

2 notes · View notes

hinacu-arts · 1 year

Text

I posted 753 times in 2022

That's 689 more posts than 2021!

225 posts created (30%)

528 posts reblogged (70%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@help-i-need-a-cool-username

@hinacu-arts

@millylotus

@void-inked-pen

@freakadr0id

I tagged 713 of my posts in 2022

Only 5% of my posts had no tags

#hinacu tmnt - 166 posts

#rottmnt - 114 posts

#hinacu au - 106 posts

#hinacu sonic - 98 posts

#rwby - 86 posts

#hinacu rwby - 80 posts

#tffm fic - 78 posts

#hinacu xover - 67 posts

#tmnt 2012 - 61 posts

#bbc the fic - 54 posts

Longest Tag: 140 characters

#when i walk and i really wanna put a sash in but would i ever actually wear it? no i'll leave it out for now maybe i'll add some jewelry and

My Top Posts in 2022:

Some sonic drawings i wanna do after i figure out how to draw them

Tails sitting on Tom's shoulders. They are wearing matching sunglasses

Sonic puffing up all spiky

Maddie and Knuckles doing yoga together

Knuckles demolishing a carnival strength game

Redraw these scenes:

See the full post

390 notes - Posted April 17, 2022

One again on the cusp of finally attempting a fic, and once again its crack taken seriously

You know all those fics where 2012!Mikey shows up in Riseverse and the brothers instantly adopt him and he doesnt want to go home? Yeah its that but from the 2012 gangs perspective, as they fight the Rise cast in stages (they win, they "get Mikey back"). Leo and Donnie are always Extra™️ so its set up like a videogame, and the boss battle is Splinter Rat Jitsu. Theres a fog machine so all 2012 can see of Casey Jr. is the glowing eyes in his mask. April introduces herself by coming up behind 12!Raph and hitting him so hard he flies. Donnie's "stage" is Albertoland and he's clearly unhinged the entire time. Raph doesnt really wanna fight so its essentially him just pushing 2012 back with little effort. Leo and Mikey Dr. Delicate Touch are a duo. Cassandra comes out of the shadows with both her masks on and gives 2012 a run for their money. At the end 2012 run through the last door, expecting to see 12!Mikey tied up, but he's just chilling with Draxum on the couch eating chips and salsa

EDIT: i did it Ao3 and FFnet

470 notes - Posted September 21, 2022

another possible crossover scene that has absolutely nothing to do with anything (but i laughed so im sharing)

rise! Leo: Your Casey and Donnie don't like each other? Oh this is really funny.

2012! Leo: what... do you mean?

rise! Leo, snickering: well you see, in my world Donnie and Casey are kinda married...

2012! Everyone: WHAT?!

rise! Leo: yeah, so first off we're in Florida-

2012! Raph: why were you in Florida?!

rise! Leo: and we got our tails handed to us pretty bad. Raph busted his hand up, April fractured a couple ribs, Donnie had a concussion, Cassie messed up her knee, yadda yadda. So, we're on some heavy duty painkillers, and Mikey-

rise! Leo: actually I think i have the wedding on video actually. *pulls out phone*

rise! Leo: ahhh no it must be on Mikey's phone. This video was the same night though!

Video!Leo: so, tell me Don-Don, how would you rate your whole Florida experience?

Video!Donnie, who clearly is not 100% coherent: two outta ten. Do not reccomend.

Video!Leo: but you still give it a two?

Video!Donnie: the humidity and heat are pretty nice but that's the only good thing about this state.

rise! Leo: i'll just fast forward to the relevant part.

Video!Mikey: Donnie! You're the smart one-

Video!Donnie, off screen: right you are!

Video!Mikey: PLEASE tell Casey that people who go through Vegas' drive through wedding chapels are real and actual marriages!

Video!Donnie: of course Vegas weddings are real!

Video!Mikey: aha!

Video!Donnie: its every other drive thru wedding chapel who's marriages are a sham.

Video!Casey, to Mikey: aha!

Video!April: im pretty sure they're also legal-

Video!Donnie: no they arent!

Video!Casey: You heard Mikey, Purple's the smart one, so he must be right! Which makes me right!

Video!Raph: but your stance was on Vegas weddings-

Video!Leo, behind the camera: if you two are so sure about this why don't you go test it out? Theres a drive through chapel 45 minutes awayyyy

Video!Casey: no thats too far. You couldn't pay me to sit in a van with all five of you for that long.

Video!Leo: what if I paid you both $50?

Video!Donnie: done! CASSANDRA! What is your middle name I need to propose properly

See the full post

572 notes - Posted September 19, 2022

Every time i play around with a 2012 x 2018 crossover set in 2018 verse i get secondhand self conscious and dial back the affection between 2018's extended cast. But you know what? No. Let 2012 and every other verse get uncomfortable with being in a environment filled with so much undisputed love

2018 boys cuddle on the couch. One of the boys will plop their head in 18!April's lap. Casey Jr. will slide up under 18!Leo's arm and doze off while leaning into his chest. Draxum comes over for lunch every Saturday and 18!Mikey excitedly calls him "Dad" while bouncing around him the first hour he's there. 18!Splinter kisses his sons goodnight if he sees them on his way to bed, including alternate universe counterpart sons. The Hamatos are huggers and every time 18!April or Sunita or Cassandra drop by, and on the rare occasion Sr. Hueso or Big Mama deliver something, they get a big hello hug. Cassandra greets Casey Jr. with hugs and dramatic cheek kisses and Casey Jr. has the biggest smile on his face the whole time. 18!Raph's just constantly beaming affection. 18!Leo will drape himself off everyone and everything. "I love you"s are said in almost every goodbye. No one is ashamed to admit they crawl into each others' beds at night after bad dreams or scary movies, often just telling a 2012 thats looking for them to jusy come to that room that morning because theyre comfy and dont want to move. 18!April regularly wears 18!Donnie's sweatshirts and trades off with him throughout the day (she likes baggy sweatshirts, Donnie likes warm sweatshirts), even after 12!Donnie and the teasing his brothers not-so-quietly do makes it a little uncomfortable, because this is something small that makes the other happy and a couple stares is hardly a price. 18!Mikey actively does gestures of affection (ex. making someone's favorite meal, making a painting, playing with April's hair, etc). 18!Donnie will walk away from a project if someone expressly states they wanna spend time with him (videogames are a whole different story). Sitting on top of each other because the booths at Run of the Mill cant hold 12+ people (Leo's sideways in Donnie's lap with his arms around his neck, Mikey is sitting on top of the booth with April sitting in front of him between his legs and his plate balanced on her head, Cassandra is propped up on Raph's shell and Casey Jr. is on his knee, Sunita has one leg on the seat and the other in April's lap) while 2012 try to pretend they arent uncomfortable with being squished together in a row. Todd shows up being Todd and 2018 actively and enthusiastically join in his sappy friendship things. The boys using their ten thousand dad nicknames for 18!Splinter. 18!Mikey running around to get goodnight hugs and kisses

702 notes - Posted September 17, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

Drew this meme for a tmnt 2012 x rottmnt crossover and now i wanna draw more

See the full post

1,593 notes - Posted September 12, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →

#tumblr2022 #year in review #my 2022 tumblr year in review #your tumblr year in review #hinacu

11 notes · View notes