#it's just all the nuance is implied

[dxxtruction]

"Louis acting like a pimp to Armand" And what is a pimp exactly? Quickly. And, oh so sexual trauma survivors can't engage in kink now without it being all about that? Pet names? They can't be submissive anymore? Consensually? Sexually healthy? Be serious. I'd hardly say there's much power difference between them during all this anyway, except that Louis is freer than Armand and it's been putting a strain on their relationship. Louis wants more from Armand, and less of this 'being his past' for them both, and so helping Armand with this could fix that. It's healthy to want to help your partners get out of a rough patch?

I mean, the whole exchange was very clearly set up as a "I want to help you" after such a great moment of vulnerability Louis feels just how much Armand is desperate for it. Louis called Armand so they could work out a plan together.

And the bit with the umbrella was Louis' way of asking 'are you willing to listen to me?' and Armand said yes by unfolding it. Louis goes on and explains, Armand is allowed to argue against it, but Louis makes his point. And then he gives Armand a way to make his own choice in it too. Armand's already decided 'I want you, more than anything else in the world', but Louis still asks after if he's sure of his choice, and with a name, Arun, that is the one of his fullest agency, running the point home. Honoring the situation Armand calls Louis Maitre - as a way of being like 'I'll do as you've said then'. To make this work he's going to have to give Louis some of the control, yes. But it's the first time such a role is ever established, and it was his choice to do it. So so what if they do it in a very suggestive way? They can't like doing that? I think it's them having fun.

I struggle to find how Louis is being overly domineering here when really he's giving and offering Armand the most agency he's ever had. Same with finding it manipulative. The manipulation was more earlier in the episode I think, when he was stringing him along, giving mixed signals. He's no longer toying with him like that. Louis might be pushing Armand, leading him on to make a decision, but he doesn't mean bad by it.

But back to this pimp thing. I find it frankly offensive that this is where people are going with this. I get it, but to run with it being the case is, on many levels, wrong.

Louis told us episode 1 this was the only sustainable line of work to support his family and keep their standing, at the time. It was never his choice to be doing this either but his blackness allowed no other options. He did what he did so his family could stay in that house and maintain all their same comforts. It gave him privileges most black men didn't have at the time that he wanted to maintain and even have more of. Anyway, it doesn't and had never defined him the way 'being good at running things' had. And in that case he just likes having that kind of control where he can get it, which makes sense.

The world is what placed that kind of role onto him of what he was allowed to be able to run, not himself. And on that he actually treated the sex workers he employed well and respected them enough to give them more opportunity.** He recognizes they don't have much in the way of options either.

Louis employed sex workers, yes, but he didn't subject them to abuse, (like how Armand was)*. He didn't oversee things in a way that would go against their consent (see; episode 1 again)**. Sometimes a job is just a job. And Sex work is work.

Armand's particular past with sexual abuses may strike a particular cord with Louis, given all that, but the very last thing either is thinking is that Louis' pimping Armand out here. This is merely their decision as companions, and had nothing to do with adding another line in a laundry list of selling Armands body out to people at the command of someone else. Armand rescinds some of his control to Louis' wishes, because he wants him, and he trusts him, that's all.

If you aren't allowing Armand that choice, and are doubtful it's fully his, you're putting him right back in the box of being defined by his abuses. Putting him back into that space where he isn't given any agency over what he does. (Which is exactly opposite of what the intent of this scene is for)*.

*: (edit) added for clarity.

**: (strike through) numerous people are saying I'm misremembering these points so disregard it. (Thought he was siding with Bricks, it was the other way around). (Technically one aspect of those opportunities were for getting around the law). I don't have a perfect memory, it happens. Let's not get mad about it. Doesn't change much of the point which is that Louis, now, Louis then, was always considering more about the running things and for stated purposes. So I guess I'd say he may only have respected the SWers enough sometimes for what allowed him to do that, and there are moments he certainly expressed remorse over the fact, but he has a great deal higher respect for Armand that is genuine. It's incomparable. Please read my added notes in the tags, it should address most other concerns.

[foundfamilywhump]

see like the thing with 'carewhumpers' as a concept to me is it just like... i know this is prrrrobably not really how it's meant but something skeeves me out about the idea that kindness or caretaking mixed in with hurting someone can somehow meaningfully complicate or dilute the harm done to the point of making that character no longer a 'whumper' whereas someone doing the same 'bad' things but not ever being gentle or caring for them would just be a straight-out whumper. when like... that's how 90% of irl abuse dynamics work? so i just... don't really get the point, i guess. like to me it implies something about the 'care' provided somehow mitigating or combating the harm done that. i just do not personally appreciate or enjoy.

[erabu-san]

First of all, I would like to thank you so much for all your support and your kind message !! Thank you so much for being patient with me too !! (you will see, I thanks a lot in this post lol)

Haha tbh I believe that ignoring and move on is a great way too! Yeees when I read this anon ask, I was wondering if they are living somewhere where pale person are oppressed and they are personally in this case and it affects them so badly that they have so much hate in them or they are just being hateful toward poc w/o any explication ? It was a bit uncomfortable And what is appealing with Genshin Impact (for me) is the fact that they use real culture to create their game ; even in the last survey, they ask if we like Natlan's authenticity (weird they only ask abt environment and music, i think they know they have issue with character design bahaha). I learn a lot about persian, algerian, but also chinese and even about french culture ! It is because people recognize themself that they start talking about it. I know there is a lot of controversial topic in Natlan, but because of this, I learn a lot on Hawai'i 's culture too. So yes, even if it is fiction, representation *is* important. And it is because they take inspiration of their culture that there is people who want a better representation, and in my opinion, this is something to not ignore !

About taking well what anon said, thank you so much ! If i can be honest tho, I didn't take it very well neither, or just I don't know how do I really felt at the moment I am an adult but I still hard time to distinguish what is morally okay or not, what is bad and good ? So if someone doesn't tell me they are explicitly a bad person with bad intention, I won't get it haha (ofc I grew up and now I identify my value and morals, but I still questionning if my morals are objectively great or not- yeaaah i was called weird for that, I am aware) Since forever I always try to understand other so I can communicate properly (at least I try), and that's why I am always interested on how does people think, why do they react in this specific way etc etc. Pro, I am patient and can take even the most violent take "well" (all depends. I am still a human) Con, I give free speech to those who have a "bad" take </3 and I apologize for that aaaa

KFSDLFSD I wish to express my angryness sometime but I just don't know if it is really adequate What if I interpret their text in wrong way as they initially try to say ? I wasn't feel offended by what they said, I was just uncomfortable because their opinion is something I consider hateful. and what if i was wrong??? But reading you all's opinion just affirm that's they were indeed rude ! I should stop overthink, life would be easier Maybe next time I have a doubt I will ask my friends's opinion before answering ksdkfsf

Oh my god thank you !!! If i can be honest, I draw Kinich this way because when I draw him w a darker skin for the first time, I thought "Oh !!! he looks so cool !!!!" and seeing a lot of positive comment abt my Kinich just makes me happy so I keep him like this ! And thank you for sharing with me informations !<<333 This is not overstepping at all ! And it is a reciprocate feeling anon ! It might be a bit weird but "angry" is such a complex feeling for me. I feel it but I don't really know how to express it in the most healthy way and it is super frustrating. So... seeing people getting mad at something I also disagree on makes me feel better !! And for this, thank you all !

I SNORT SO HAAAARD Damn Macron you again..........!! I didn't put all ask here but I read them all !! Thank you for sharing with me your opinion and reaction, it is truly interesting (and way more relaxing that the hater anon kskskss) !! and again, your support is truly meaningful for me. You all have sincere gratitude Hope y'all have a great day !! Stay hydrated too <3

[peridot-tears]

During the main quests, this appears p often. It literally means "Jin's Journey":

But the kanji for "Jin" -- 仁 -- also means "benevolence," emphasizing a respect for humanity. So 仁之道, while it means "Jin's Journey," can also be read as "the path/way of benevolence."

He isn't following the bushido, or 武士道，the way of the warrior/samurai, but rather 仁之道, the way of benevolence, a path that diverts sharply from the "honor" that samurai follow.

[eclaire-went-bam]

i'm annoyed at how much the left values empathy specifically. you can do good things without having empathy, empathy is not an inherently good quality, and lacking it isn't inherently bad. i hate seeing lefties dunk on someone for "having no empathy," which may or may not be true, but considering how many people preach empathy as an inherent trait of the left & "goodness" is irksome. just dunk on someone for the bad actions they have done, it's not hard.

i know it's a good look to be empathetic, but it really does feel like the end-all-be-all here.

i can still have good politics and want better for people & the world without necessary having empathy for these things. i can still be passionate about certain issues just from a factual standpoint, i can still listen to people affected by them, without necessarily feeling empathy for those most affected by them.

it's just like that one tumblr posts where a user pointed out "yes, even free healthcare to annoying ppl like those who went blind at the nft convention" ;;

i doubt many people are empathetic towards them, but we still acknowledge they should benefit. generally speaking we're trying to benefit even those opposed to us with stuff like free housing & healthcare. those are our politics & beliefs, and they don't suddenly "turn off" when you seee someone you don't like. or, they shouldn't. i can hate someone & still believe they deserve the same rights as me. i could not care if someone died, & yet still believe they should at least be able to keep themselves alive with a minimum wage job

frankly, to suddenly change your beliefs on some specific cases bcs you don't like them specifically is fickle, just like how the left is all restorative justice, until it comes to a specific person or crime that is too far, then it's "maybe we should give the state the right to execute people !"

so it does baffle me why so many people here value empathy like it's an inherent trait in the left, or that those opposed to the left are incapable of empathy & therefore evil & demonic.

empathy can ignite action in most people who have the ability to experience it. but that doesn't mean only those people are or do good, and the language the left uses is real isolating for that.

[inamagicalhallucination]

my toxic trait is i get really annoyed when ppl make atsushi and akutagawa's relationship about dazai

[noodle-shenaniganery]

can we stop trying to bully people into advocacy, please?

can we stop making people feel personally responsible for issues they only just heard of and may not even understand?

can we stop yelling and berating people who aren’t putting all of their (probably limited) energy into researching something that has almost nothing to do with them and which may stress them out?

can we stop pressuring people who are already struggling to survive to limit their options on how they can live, what they can eat?

please?

please

can we stop

[claire-starsword]

Authentic Story of the Shining Force - Saint Fencer Max - Chapter 4

Translation notes:

This is the last boob joke. We're free at last.

Here's the retranslation of every scene with the Spring of Recollection in the game. Overall, her speech here is fairly close to what she says in Waral in-game, with a few details from her final appearance sprinkled in, like her care for Cain. It does misses a few nuances though, like the Legacy being more than just Dark Dragon.

I don't think I've ever seen art of the Spring, but notably, she gets a portrait in the GBA version, and it looks a lot like the manga design, with the slightly wavy hair and especially the blank eyes.

Obviously, the manga rushes through the plot since it's short, thus a lot of places are skipped. I didn't even feel like pointing them out before. However I will point out Waral not being here this time, because Waral happens to not be in the beta map either, and it has very contradicting lore between the ASCII guide and the World Book, meaning it might have not been well developed. Besides, Chapter 5 is very weirdly structured. You get two ship battles that are basically the same, you get to Waral by accident, you advance the plot by going to Ring Reef for no reason and everyone telling you it's off-limits while letting you waltz in anyway, and hardly anything happens in the shrine besides you hearing about the Manual, which is not even a big deal because you get to Rudo by accident later (two ship accidents!! why repeat this plot point!!) and would go to Dragonia anyway to help Bleu. Basically, I obviously can't prove it, but it wouldn't surprise me if the ocean shrine was initially thought off as only a plot scene, and the battles/town added much later for gameplay reasons.

Perhaps worth mentioning, the GBA version also makes a point to mention that Max got lost in the shrine alone, and everyone was worried about him, which does remind me a lot of the ship scene here.

uh oh. i hit image limit for the first time and i don't wanna remove either of these pics. more notes on a reblog later.

[shalom-iamcominghome]

hiii, im a conservative convert who wears tzitzit! it's definitely not the community norm, and you'll probably get some ppl reacting weirdly or telling you you're getting "too frum" (or maybe that's just my shul...), but that's their problem — what matters is whether you find it meaningful, and how it enhances your connection to Hashem. it's always a positive thing to take on a new mitzvah. personally i have found it to be deeply meaningful. and if you're worried about people's reactions, you can always wear them tucked in! i will add that if you're wearing out, it's my opinion that you should not do things publicly that violate halacha such as eating at a non kosher restaurant, but i also recognize that im very stringent in general for myself so of course, you should speak to your rabbi and use your judgement in making those decisions. all this to say — honestly yes, you will probably be the odd one out at a conservative shul if youre wearing tzitzit, but as long as it's something you find joy and meaning in, then it won't matter!

sorry this was a very rambly paragraph lol, but i really do encourage anyone who feels intrigued by this mitzvah to start wearing tzitzit without worrying too much about what people think. i think it's a beautiful way to remind yourself every day of your dedication to Hashem and to Torah <3

Absolutely! I don't really see anything jewish as being "too frum" to observe - because frum people are amazing people and because the things we call frum are just... part of judaism? I've found so much meaning in the things I have been able to do, and I've found... it's not just as simple as "I do this because I'm told to," these mitzvot are meaningful because of how grounded I've felt doing them, how they remind me I'm part of a bigger world that's not just "me," that I represent part of the human condition and I should act like it. I think a lot of people almost... oversimplify these mitzvot to the point where they can't understand why it's meaningful - which isn't really a bad thing, because I get it! We don't find the same meaning in the same things! But I just love celebrating all of these mitzvot because I think they're deep and personal and bigger than just "do this arbitrary thing lol"

[emotivehardcore]

The thing about those posts that are like “cis people can go on masculinizing/feminizing hrt” or “cis people can get trans surgeries” is that imo if you’re doing things that change your sex you kind of are trans. Even if you identify with the gender you were assigned, you are transing your sex and that’s a trans experience. Like you may not be transgender but you are transsexual which is still trans. I just don’t think it really makes sense to classify someone as cis when they have materially changed their sex, even if they identify as the gender they were assigned

[gammija]

i love s4, and im enjoying listening to it with the magaday, but i forgot it would also lead to the worst thing: seeing people interpret media differently than me on the internet OTL

[measureyourlifeincake]

Malevolent E9 (not specifically about that ep but yknow. i havent listened past it so if anything i say is contradicted by anything in later eps, that's why): Been thinking about how Malevolent's story is so defined by the constraints of its creation and the problem-solving used to get around that (I mean, I suppose the same can be said to some degree for nearly any piece of art, but it really jumps out for me here).

The first and most obvious example is Arthur's blindness, with John "acting as his eyes" by describing their surroundings for him (and the audience)—it's (to me at least) clearly contrived as a way to get around the "This Gun In My Right Hand Is Loaded" problem, but it also is kind of the main conceit of the plot, and immediately defines John and Arthur's relationship—Arthur has to rely upon John from the jump, even though he has no real proof of his intentions or trustworthiness. "I have your eyes," John says, a threat as much as it is a fact. All John has to do to harm Arthur is stop talking and watch him blunder around without his help (which he does do eventually, but the threat hanging over his head is, at least initially, enough to convince Arthur to cooperate with him). It's an interesting tool for the audience to understand what is going on at any given point of the story, but also, it has real actual consequences in the story that reverberate through the narrative.

(putting the rest under the cut bc this got Long)

There's also the fact that John and Arthur are constantly recapping what has happened and laying out what all their options and potential consequences of said options are going forward. To me, this (as well as the above) feels like the author's main goal is to make sure the audience is clear on Exactly what is going on At All Times. The episodes only come out once a month, after all, and it could be hard to remember what happened in the last episode if you haven't revisited it since then (also I am just now realizing that this is sort of paralleled with Arthur's month-long coma). There's also the thing about how apparently Patreon supporters can influence where the story goes, and I'm not entirely sure how that works, but it gives Guthrie another incentive to make sure the audience has all the possible options laid out for them.

But, while I do think this is done mainly for the audience's benefit, it does also tell us a lot about Arthur and John's characters/relationship. It says that, despite any differences of opinion or questions of trust they may have—they do view whatever they have together (which I have been told... changes over time, but for right now I'm just talking about their relationship up until where I've listened) as an actual partnership—they want to make sure they are on the same page, or at least understand what the other is thinking. They may disagree on the correct course of action, but Arthur pretty much always tells John what he's doing instead of trying to get one over on him. Also, since they do try to reason out everything they do, and Arthur keeps charging into risky situations ass-first anyway, it tells us that Arthur sees himself as a very intelligent and rational man, when really he just seems to be very good at justifying whatever stupid decisions he might make in the pursuit of Knowledge.

And then there's uh. Women. (I sorta mentioned this in a different post but I can't stop turning it around in my brain)

So it seems that Harlan Guthrie a) has decided to not hire any voice actors and just voice every character himself, and b) doesn't seem to believe himself capable of convincingly voicing a female character (or just doesn't want to. idk).

This doesn't mean that there aren't any women or girls in Malevolent—on the contrary, the podcast is full of them. They are all either old crones or daughters—crazy old women and wraiths and babies and missing girls and missing girls and dead missing girls. They cry, they wheeze, they laugh, they write letters to close friends (but of course, their friends are not there to read the letters), but they can never speak for themselves, in their own voices. They must be dead, or wordless, or both.

They haunt the narrative, and haunt the narrative, and haunt the narrative. They are metaphysically incapable of doing anything else. They can save Arthur's life, help guide his way, but they can never have a simple conversation with him. Obviously Arthur had to be in a coma for just long enough that Amanda/Sarah died before he could talk to her. It couldn't ever have gone any other way—the world doesn't work like that.

And then there's Arthur's daughter. She's dead. It hasn't been explicitly stated yet at the point I'm at (she's mentioned for the first time at the end of E9), but it's pretty obvious. Not only did he mention her name first when he was literally dying, but just. Of course she is. There's no chance she isn't, that maybe Arthur thinks she's dead but really something else has happened to her—all daughters are dead. That's just how it works. (except for that one baby, I suppose. The baby is interesting—I notice they explicitly refer to her as female when I don't think they had a way to know that*. She just Is a girl, she has to be. She needs protecting, therefore she is a Daughter, plain and simple).

And learning that Arthur has (had) a daughter has caused me to look at the rest of the girls in this podcast differently (and is honestly a big reason why I wanted to write this post in the first place.) Those missing-turned-dead girls, the baby, all those young girls haunting the narrative—they're all his daughter, naturally. (not literally but y'know, meta-narratively or whatever) They're not just haunting the narrative, but haunting him specifically.

Anyway, girls haunting horror stories and fridged women and whatever other tropes that keep women from fully participating in stories are nothing new, obviously (and I imagine that Guthrie is very intentional when he invokes those tropes—this whole thing is a big ol' nod to Lovecraft, there's no way this guy is doing horror tropes by accident), but the fact that it seems to be like that mostly because Guthrie just Didn't Want to Hire An Actor makes it way more interesting to me.

I'm sure most (if not all) of this has been discussed in the fandom already, but I haven't read any meta or anything yet and I just wanted to get my thoughts down. Honestly, part of why I made this post is that I feel like I can clearly see what Guthrie was going for in how he built this story (/is building this story) and how it works within the world of the characters, but I'm still trying to puzzle out how I personally feel about the choices he made. (ex: do I appreciate how clear he makes things for the listener or do i feel like my hand is being held to much and i'm not being trusted to understand what's going on? if the latter, is it integrated into the story well enough for me to forgive it?) Writing this has... not actually helped much. I'll let you know if I figure it out.

*Okay I went back to the transcript, and it seems they start using she/her pronouns for the baby as soon as the old woman gives her to them. I assumed that the baby was wearing clothes or swaddled in a blanket the whole time, but I don't think this is ever explicitly stated, so it's possible it could've been clear once John was able to get a close enough look at her. Still, this is very much glossed over. Which, granted, it would be weird if they took a moment in the text to like, look at the baby's genitals, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[zeb-z]

y’all ever think about how Harry loved Dora to such a degree it was worship, she wasn’t his lover but his savior, his deity, a symbol of the good and the lovely in the world - and she’s portrayed as Dolores Dei because of this, because his love was his religion and he put her on such a pedestal that when she left it absolutely destroyed him (because what else would losing your salvation, your hope, your god, do to a believer?) And how this comparison is a warning of putting someone, anyone or anything up so high and believing it can do no wrong, only to be devastated when it leaves. How she’s also the middle/upper middle class who can just leave the conflict, decide to fly away because they have the money and means, and leave the ‘poverty stricken fucks’ behind. The danger in placing blind and total faith in something that tells you (or that you tell yourself) its morality is infallible, and it will be forever, because you will be blindsided when it leaves or does something terrible, and that utter devotion will be the dagger you fall on when this clean and holy thing, this love, leaves you for something better, betrays you in the worst way.

y’all ever think about the comparison between Dora and Dolores Dei and moralism and middle class with the religious themes, how love is just as dangerous as wrath and despair and ego, how Harry wasn’t great, not even good, but there was nothing he could have changed. the layers of how he has to learn to live for himself instead of the woman who left him half a decade ago, how Dora is Dolores Dei is Moralism and the privilege to stay neutral with the ability to leave when things are rough, how he has to pull himself out of his misery and try his best and it’s not always enough it’s not going to stop the nightmares it’s not going to bring that holy love back it’s not going to save him, but it has to be better than nothing.

y’all ever think about that beautiful stained glass wall in the old church, Dolores Dei larger than life, a picture of innocence so lovely and divine - but all it’s ever been was glass, and it’s shards are all over the hardwood floor.

[thingamagob]

lrt ive been thinking about that sort of shit a lot lately. like i feel like the general discussion of misogyny got nuanced a bit too hard and now a bunch of people are basically softcore mra's

[infizero]

blah blah blah YES norman was going to allow ruby to partake in contests. doesnt change the fact he beat him up lol!

[aroaessidhe]

2023 reads // twitter thread    

A Day of Fallen Night

slow character focused epic fantasy prequel to priory of the orange tree

set during the grief of ages, when Wyrms are on the rise and devastating cities across the world

the teen heir to the throne, a middle-aged tomb keeper at the priory, a young warrior from the north, and princess from the mountains of the east

motherhood, survival, politics