#like i'd really really really like to avoid getting into issues with people directly

[rainbowtvz]

"why didn't you confront this random stranger online about it instead of blocking them and warning people about what they did"

[intheholler]

what do you think of all of the people being scared of appalachia? i don't know if this is recent or not, but currently i've been seeing a ton of shit online like "never go to the appalachian mountains, it's so dangerous", and i just don't understand it. my family's lived in appalachia for forever, and none of us have experienced anything paranormal or endangering to us. you're one of my favorite blogs on here and i'd just like to hear your thoughts on it

first off, it means a lot that i'm one of your favorite blogs and im really happy i can contribute something to your experience here :') thanks so much for being here <333

but ok so.

my thoughts on it are many. it's been bothering me a long time and i've been meaning to get it off my chest. this will be long and probably ranty, so it won't hurt my feelings if anyone skims lol

lemme preface this little diatribe by saying the obvious: folklore is an integral part of any culture. the mythos of a place/people is tied directly to their histories and unique experiences and struggles and they are enriching. this is true of appalachia too.

oral folk traditions especially are incredibly historically appalachian.

i mentioned in a post i made yesterday about murder ballads, how the purpose of these was to warn kids away from doing dumb shit and getting lost in the hollers--falling down cliffs n mineshafts and shit at night. gettin got by wildlife.

it spooked us safe. they served a purpose, and once you got old enough to realize they're as real as the tooth fairy, they just become enjoyable and nostalgic. because they're you're culture.

probably every mountain kid has stories about haints n boogers that were told to them by their grandparents, and they grow up to tell them to their own kids, and so on. some of it stuck with me because i grew up with the folklore.

by that i mean, i'm a whole 31 year old woman and i still avoid looking out a dark window at night cause it gives me the shivers. i still get spooked when i hear a big cat yowling in the woods. but the difference is i know there's not really haints out there crying--it's just a product of my childhood. ghost stories are fun.

the problem comes in when someone outside the culture gets their hands on appalachian oral folk traditions. then, it becomes a familiar problem: outsiders cherry picking appalachia and harming us with the mess they make rifling through it all.

it's all about the surface level and the visuals. they all love a good aesthetic blog, run by some local from out west or some shit who's never stepped foot here.

but as soon as the spooky photo filters come off and the real life marginalized person is left standing there just out of frame, we go back to being disgusting examples of what not to be. decrepit churches n buildings are aesthetic and quirky until they stop being on a pinterest board, and then they just become damning images of an impoverished region who deserves to be laughed at.

now, not to holler 'splain you--this is more for anyone not from here who might read this: it's been a systemic issue for decades; there were literal government campaigns to demonize us to the rest of the nation so they could garner support to cut into our mountains and exploit our labor and resources.

well, they were fuckin successful, and we have been falsely made out to be this homogenous nightmare of a place--"welfare exploiting" maga country who deserves everything we get, and nothing we don't.

by going so far as to take appalachian folklore that we tell each other and picking out the "aesthetic" stuff--the haints and general paranormal--they are pruning what they like from our culture--the safe things, like ghost stories--for their own aesthetic use.

but not only that, they are using it to demonize us… yet again.

'appalachia is scary. it's full of things that will kill you. don't look out the window at night cause a booger will get you.' only they don't call them boogers cause they ain't even from here. ask them what a haint is and they'll ask if u mispelled 'haunt.'

it gets even worse when you consider that so much of it has roots in native american culture, and how that continues to be exploited and misrepresented.

i'm not even innocent of that. a while back i had to check myself because i made a comment on here about ~spooky appalachia~ ignorant to the fact that what i was commenting on was actually a deeply important cultural and spiritual element to local indigenous tribes. my comments were harmful by my failure to educate myself and know better, thereby saying things carelessly.

my point being--i'm from the area. i should have known better.

when outsiders start saying the kind of shit they say about what they think they hear in the woods without even knowing where such an idea comes from, they're disrespecting a displaced, abused and exploited people, harming real cultures just for clicks without even knowing. that's on top of the damage they're doing to greater appalachia.

it's fuckin gross.

i think my favorite one i ever seen was this middle aged white lady going through her pristine mcmansion somewhere in suburbia, pulling the million curtains and locking the million doors, going "nighttime routine in appalachia!! 🤪🤪"

i could be wrong about this particular person--i didn't check their other tiktoks because im sick of them accounts and tired of giving them the benefit of the doubt--but it immediately came off as a transplant because:

1) mcmansion, 2) i dont know nobody here that locks their shit down like that (not locking up could even be argued as a part of my local culture, a reflection of our deep sense of community and trust in our neighbors).

and then the comments was all like "i don't know how you guys live there" and it actually broke my heart and pissed me off because even if--especially if--you're one of us, why the fuck are you harming us for likes? why are you turning people against us in a brand new way?

and to the transplants that do this--why?

you're not even from here, you moved here to this place you hate and made it worse just so your front porch would have a nice view, and are now benefiting socially from perpetuating bullshit about us?

you buy up all the land, land we often had no choice but to sell in the first place to survive instead of passing it on to our families, land we originally took from the indigenous peoples your content comes from.

you overdevelop it and turn it unrecognizable to make it more like the comfortable cities you come from. you gut a mountain town of its local businesses and cultures, you price people out of their homes...

...and then once you settle in all cozy like, you go tell everyone else how scary it is? how you can't trust the hills? like it's a cool paranormal bravery badge to wear? fuck off entirely.

so idk, in short my personal thoughts are: i personally enjoy a little myth as a treat, because the folklore is a part of the gothic, a part of our culture and a part of my childhood. i don't (intentionally) wield it as a weapon or use it as a pedestal to get the weird brand of attention that people like them are after.

and those who do this can get got by them haints for all i care.

[bitchesgetriches]

Bitches I need some advice.

I'm fat, okay? I'm not ashamed about it. It just... Is. I'm fat.

Being fat is also fucking me up. It's causing me sleep problems, it's fucking my joints, I can't walk as far as I used to, I haven't run in years.

I want to lose weight. Not for anyone else. For me. I want to be fit again.

I'm surrounded by people telling me I'm "not fat" and need to "love myself like I am". I'm 210lb and 5'3". Ya girl is fat. And I'm okay with that it's not a bad word. I love myself. But I also love the things I used to be able to do when I was fitter. It's just really fucking hard.

I've got zero support left and right. And I don't know what to do. I know this isn't your area of expertise, but you're such great internet mamas that maybe you can help.

My darling child, we are SO humbled that you came to us with this. And while this isn't an area of our OFFICIAL expertise... weight and athleticism is something that I, Piggy, personally think a lot about! So let me see if I can offer some support to you, my beloved fat child.

By way of background: I have never been fat. Heavier than I want currently, but not fat. So I don't completely understand what you're going through. I have always been an athlete of one sort or the other. But more than that, I have always had the privilege of being relatively skinny without trying. At peak fitness I was running and rock climbing and doing all the stretchy and weight-trainy stuff. I was 5'5" and 130 lbs of jacked Bitch.

I am also a proud Italian American woman, which means that after 30 genetics decreed that I start putting on weight and rounding out and coming into my full Zia-ness. I'm currently 155 lbs. and running/climbing/stretching/jumping about/weight training is getting harder and harder. And that's frustrating to me.

Fat is not a bad word, merely a descriptor. So I'mma use it just as you have! I'm proud that you are prioritizing your health and ability to do what you love over losing weight for the sake of just being smaller. Because let's be clear: weight and health do not necessarily go hand in hand. If your goal is to improve your sleep quality, energy levels, and joint pain, then you should focus on activities that will work directly on those issues. Maybe that'll lead to weight loss--maybe not!

A lot of the medical establishment is cruel to fat people, so I'd be cautious about approaching this with your doctor. But you SHOULD get medical guidance before embarking on any kind of physical change. If your doctor says "Well, just lose weight through diet and exercise!" then you might want to look for a new doctor. If they instead offer practical solutions for incremental improvement, then great.

One of my favorite athletes is The Mirnavator. She's a fat marathon runner and offers a lot of information on how to start walking more and running as a fat person. I think she'll be a good role model for you as she focuses a lot on energy and joint health.

Also, you should check out Aubrey Gordon's blog Your Fat Friend and her podcast with Michael Hobbes, Maintenance Phase. She's also got some great books out! She's a fat expert on weight loss and diet culture. And her insights into healthy nutrition and body image are amazing. Her data-based approach will help you avoid the extreme dieting and weight loss trends that can hurt your health. Plus she's funny as fuck.

Lastly I will just say that mental health is tied to physical health. You're bummed about not doing the things you use to be able to do... and that probably makes it a lot harder to change! Acknowledge any depression or anxiety you feel about being fat and give yourself compassion. Start small and do what feels good.

Now here are two VERY old articles I wrote when I knew less about fatness. I think they still have a little bit to offer, though:

Why You Probably Don't Need That Gym Membership

Run With Me if You Want to Save: How Exercising Will Save You Money 

Any fat members of Bitch Nation who want to weigh in? Uh... pun not intended.

[ingravinoveritas]

What do you make of David sayin he’s an ally, not an active participant (in queer subcultures)?

Did he come out as straight? I’m not sure anyone has ever asked him directly, not that he needs to give any explanations, I’m just curious because he gives off such a queer vibe even when he’s been married forever.

https://www.attitude.co.uk/culture/david-tennant-on-the-spice-girls-spiceworld-movie-was-being-developed-before-they-even-released-a-single-459815/

Oh, my Asks/DMs have been blowing up over this one. I did have a chance to read this interview with David (is it me, or is he doing nonstop press lately?) and...wow. Definitely enjoyable, and noticeably more unhinged/queer than most of his other interviews (which makes sense, given that Attitude is an LGBTQ-focused publication). But let's get a screenshot up of the most talked about bit, so we can discuss:

Obviously there is a lot going on here, so I'm just going to go with what stood out to me most. I don't think there is anything in the world less surprising than David naming bears first, given certain preferences of his (which I've discussed several times previously on my blog).

What's really interesting though is that the question was asking about queer subcultures, but all of the ones David listed are used primarily (AFAIK, though someone please do correct me if I am wrong) in mlm/gay male relationships. "Queer" can be many things, after all--gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, ace--and yet when David heard "queer subcultures" he specifically went for the mlm/gay ones, and that definitely feels like an interesting choice.

The second thing that I felt was worth discussing is that a lot of the reactions I've seen to this is people saying how adorably clueless David is, or how "he's a little confused, but he's got the spirit." And I'm sort of perplexed by this because we are talking about an almost 53-year-old man here, and I believe he knows damn well what all of those terms/subcultures are.

It's been brought to my attention (from what I would consider a very trustworthy source) that David is not at all as technologically illiterate as he pretends to be. Instead, it's actually part of a persona that he puts on to avoid dealing with issues that would arise from people knowing he is online. I had an inkling of this just from Georgia saying David was the one who set up all the equipment for when they filmed Staged at home (because why would such a task be put in the hands of someone who is hopeless with technology?). But having this confirmed also aligns with David creating a fake personal assistant in the early days of his career so he wouldn't have to fulfill certain social obligations, and to put a barrier between his real self and the world.

So why, then, wouldn't the same pattern possibly apply here?

I know there also tends to be this image of David as a "bumbling, goofy dad" type, and that's definitely part of him and what makes him so charming. But I don't think he is a fool, either--especially not after listening to him talk about Shakespeare or politics or anything else at length--and I think he certainly knows how to answer these types of questions. I think David is more than clever enough to give answers that are cheeky but not revealing, because he knows the purpose of all this is to promote the BAFTAs, not to be a deep, probing exposé on the life and times of David Tennant.

Which then brings me to the big, gay elephant standing in the middle of the room--a.k.a., "I'm an ally rather than an active participant." (Again...so many interesting word choices going on here, and none of it feels like an accident.)

Going back to what I mentioned about the focus of these interviews, I'd like to point out one notable thing that David himself said in the Radio Times interview earlier this week:

This, I think, sums up what we are seeing in all of these interviews: The version of David that he feels is safe to present to the world. He makes it clear as well that he is not going to reveal areas of his personal life while up on stage, and I would say that the same thing applies to these interviews. (It also speaks volumes that in the year 2024, the version of himself he feels safe presenting in these interviews is one who fully knows what bears and twinks--sorry, twinkies--are.)

So no, I don't think David is coming out as straight. I don't think he's coming out as anything, in fact, because he knows these interviews are not the place for that to happen. And I think that saying he is an ally but not an active participant makes the most sense as an answer for a public interview, but neither that nor being in a straight-passing relationship necessarily makes him any less potentially queer.

To reiterate what I said above, there is no one way to be queer. For some people, being queer absolutely can mean going to leather bars and participating in subcultures. But for other people, "queer" can mean something very different. It can mean being a Kinsey 2 just floating along doing your thing until you meet that one person who changes everything. The person who makes you go, "I've usually been more into this and not as much into this...but I'm definitely into you." It can mean being attracted to/falling for someone--a co-star, maybe?--that you never expected to feel that way about. And if David is queer, maybe that also means not shying away from anything, but at the same time not wanting to take the spotlight off the awards and the nominees celebrating one of the most important nights of their lives.

Those are my thoughts on the Attitude interview and David's answers, at any rate. Happy as always to hear from my followers with your takes. Thank you for writing in! x

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

🧃🧃

TLDR: am I the asshole for not bringing a gift to a Christmas party for a baby that doesn't know me?

Context:

This was my in-laws Christmas party. This was the second year I was invited. There were over 30 people at their house, including multiple babies and young children. A majority of the adults didn't bring gifts for each other, and my mil provided most of the gifts for white elephant. My partner ALSO didn't get a gift for their niece, they just sign off on whatever their mom picks out. Outside of white elephant, neither I or my partner received any gifts (not a complaint, I'm Jewish and they got their gift later). Christmas is the normal awkward affair. Then two weeks later, my partner's mom announced at the breakfast table (this is second hand info) that she no longer likes me because I didn't bring a gift for my partner's niece. Unprompted, and she'd had plenty of chances to take the shot to my face, but she just whips this out two weeks after. I've also spoken to her and been in her house since she said this and she hasn't brought it up to me AT ALL. I did bring desserts for the post-dinner buffet also. More facts:

1) My SIL is extremely combative and doesn't like me much, if I'd pissed her off she'd have said so in front of gd, the guests, and everyone right there on Christmas

2) This might be related to my mil being embarrassed that I'd told my partner about an inappropriate joke she made at my expense during dinner. She's extremely conflict avoidant and could be letting off steam over that, or any other number of holiday related events

3) During the breakfast conversation she also directly asked my partner if I was trans and for the sake of keeping the peace they lied (I've given them permission to do this)

4) Most importantly, yes I do see this baby semi-regularly because I have a responsibility to show up to family events sometimes. But also this baby doesn't know my name and couldn't pick me out of a lineup. She's also kinda spoiled (her parents have some issues) and gets mountains of gifts for every holiday, including Christmas, and is one of those kids that has to blow out the birthday candles at other people's birthdays or she gets upset.

5) My partner's nibling is 2 years old.

6) Other adults did bring her gifts, but not every adult at the party brought a gift for every kid

My partner and I are kind of baffled, mostly because she waited so long when she had ample opportunity to bring it up. They think she was just having a bad day and saying mean shit to blow off steam because that's what she does. I, on the other hand, have actually taken this really personally. I did a drastic haircut and have kind of written off having a relationship with her. I called my mom and she said it's iffy on whether or not I'm the asshole here, but that she doesn't personally expect people in their mid-twenties to be giving out gifts to other people's kids unless they're really close. AITA?

What are these acronyms?

[randyisrad]

hello shuake nation . i'm here to deliver my goro bpd essay that i promise like 2 months ago .

1) fear of abandonment/drastic efforts to avoid abandonment

I'D LIKE TO START THIS ONE OFF BY . showing examples of him being abandoned. Shido leaving him and his mother before he was born, and it's implied that his mom talked about it like. all the time (also not great for small child !) his mom attempting suicide , and goro being passed between foster homes.

goro goes to the most extreme lengths to prevent being abandoned again . creating an entirely different version of himself to get people to like him, assassinating people at shido's command so he won't toss him aside , and (this one might be a little bit of a stretch) murdering akira . this boy does nawt like being abandoned ! ! !

2) unstable relationships, often switching between idealized and devualued

do i even . need to explain this one . (im going to anyway)

goro's relationship with akira is SO unstable . he cares about him so much and that . really scares him , but hes so unbelievably jealous of him and feels that akiras "better than him" and thinks he pities him so he hates him . he praises him one minute and even if he hates it he genuinely means it , but internally he's terrified of akira looking down at him so he has such an anger towards him . akira is 100% his favorite person and he doesn’t know how to process that so he lashes out . i dont know how to put everything into words but im keeping this one shorter cuz its pretty self explanatory and if i got the chance i would not shut UP about it so

3) unstable identity and sense of self

he literally has 2 personas . one crafted out of lies and images of who he wishes he was, and the other crafted out of the hatred he holds . thats unstable as hell

4) impulsivity in at least 2 areas that are self destructive

went to his dad when he was 16 telling him abt his persona so he could get close enough to ruin him , constantly carrying out hits for shido to get close enough to ruin him , turning himself psychotic with his personas power . the list goes on

5) frequent suicidal ideology/behavior

goro turned himself psychotic , was fully prepared to be killed by the phantom thieves as long as they died with him, had no plan for what would happen after he murdered shido, fully accepted his death in maruki’s reality , etc .

6) emotional instability

he tries to keep a calm demeanor , but due to being neglected in his childhood , goro has no emotional maturity . he’s constantly lashing out , specifically at akira and the other thieves . he has a meltdown in front of them despite being deathly afraid of being vulnerable , and he has a habit of blaming every issue on akira like it’s his fault . this one is also a little bit of a reach , but he shows a bit of his true personality to akira after their rank 8 battle , and tells him he hates him . it doesn’t make a lot of sense for him to tell akira this , especially if he’s trying to keep up the detective prince charade , which he goes back to shortly after this .

7) chronic feelings of emptiness

this one is hard to directly point out , because it isn’t explicitly shown in game , but it’s obvious if you read in between the lines . we don’t know a lot about his childhood besides what he says in the bathhouse , but he seems sort of apathetic and empty about his circumstances .

8) emotional outbursts

this one is really similar to the 6th diagnostic criteria , but once again -- he lashes out at akira and blames him for his situation even if it isn’t his fault , lashes out at the phantom thieves , and has a meltdown in front of them . but i’d specifically like to mention the scene in his bossfight when his charade flickers , and loki is seen for a brief moment . he wasn’t trying to summon loki , but he’s so emotional that he comes out anyway .

9) stress ideation and severe dissociative symptoms

i can’t specifically think of any examples for this but . it’s real in my heart . trust . but if goro has ALLL of the other symptoms , it’s so very likely for him to have this one , too .

and that concludes my goro akechi bpd essay , i hope you enjoyed goro nation . :3

[jadagul]

@discoursedrome This thread is already too long so I know from experience I'm going to wuss out of having a good discussion on it due to the sheer Bigness, but I can't resist hashing it out about this stuff! Okay, a little bit:

This is basically the rules-as-physics argument, right, where you can deduce the rules from observation? It's not really related to narrative mechanics, it's the same phenomenon as "can my character deduce the exact success probabilities from repeated trials" or "can my character develop a quantum theory of survivability by experimenting on his own hit points". There's going to be a huge gap between the rules and the game setting as soon as the rules involve numbers! The normal answer to this is that these mechanics are heuristics designed to manage play and are rarely consistent or visible enough that it would be plausible for a character to infer them from experience. And if it's implausible then it smells like metagaming and you'd be justified in just not having the rule work that way in that case -- it turns out this moment works like all those other moments in your life that weren't engaging directly with the game mechanics! But I would agree that there's a lot of pressure to metagame when the stakes are very high, and it's often wise for a designer to avoid conflicts of interest there.

To extend the analogy, would you argue that it's implausible for characters in a novel not to become genre-savvy simply because the world they're living in operates on those genre rules? Or going beyond that: if people wrote genre fiction so that they did, would that be better? I think generally you need to assume characters don't become genre savvy even if it "makes sense", but I'd go beyond that to argue that it usually doesn't make sense -- characters can't tell when something is part of the narrative and when it's just something that happens, so this doesn't happen to other people but it doesn't even consistently happen to them. Similarly, characters in a game can't tell when mechanics are involved or how.

But the general point here is that unless a game explicitly tells you that the rules are "laws of nature" in the setting then they aren't, and if you bring that tension into the spotlight by having your character act like they are, it really forces the issue. The classic example is the character who is mostly immune to gunfire mechanically, but not narratively, so they shoot themselves in the temple with a huge gun to show off. The standard advice here is "they die", which is obviously not exactly right: the correct response is actually to go over how this all works OOCly, emphasize that if they do this the character will die and everyone will assume they killed themselves on purpose and be very confused, and then if they really want to they still can. And this isn't really a narrative mechanic, again, you get there pretty rapidly once you add hit points!

But I do take your point, which is that the disconnect can be a bit jarring, reaching a peak in games where the player is actively antagonistic to their own character, and it bothers some people more than others. Game designers should decide what audience they're targeting and avoid alienating people carelessly to no particular benefit. That's all fine; but I still feel the need to emphasize that it's always a matter of degree, and that the minimum you can pare this problem down to (outside of freeform or the far reaches of FKR) is still pretty large.

Now with regard to the earlier question of "should everyone use the same rules"; this IMO is mostly a flavour thing, it's about selling the objectivity of the setting and the idea that everyone casts the same Fireball. This is good, but it trades off against fussy and intensive mechanics, which is bad, so you think about what you want and you pick your poison. That said, there's a limit: the idea of using the same ruleset to cover PC ad-hoc crafting projects and off-camera NPC candlemakers is laughable. There's no way to do that without it being a mess; it's one of many, many places where "rules as physics" and "rules as game or adjudication mechanism" are irreconcilable. With legendary or magical items you can make it work, but the issue there is less difficulty than rate: there are always loads of people as powerful as the PCs, so if it's feasible for someone at that skill level to make, say, two or three magic items in a year, those people could all just be churning them out for the heck of it. But if it's much harder than that, the prospect of PCs doing it and especially of them doing it as their "thing" rapidly slips away. It's the same basic issue as "what if I want to train up as a competent doctor from a baseline of zero" -- well, the game's answer is not that it takes ten years, but that's got to be roughly how it works for the average person, right? You can just say that the setting has wide variation in potential and the PCs are at the upper end of it, I guess, or that some mechanism like "experience points" is driving their growth, but on some level it's kind of fake, right? You live with it.

First off, yeah, that thread was already too long and also it was on someone's post that I'd originally misread to begin with, so let's put it here.

I really have one major response to your post, which is

The classic example is the character who is mostly immune to gunfire mechanically, but not narratively,

what the fuck is wrong with you? Why would you ever do that? What does it mean to be immune to something mechanically but not narratively? Where do I apply to get your game design license revoked?

Like the game rules should tell me what happens if I shoot myself in the head without dodging. And they should tell me what happens when someone else shoots me in the head when I can't dodge. And those should be the same thing because it's the same action.

The version of this I've heard comes from D&D 3e: fall damage tops out at 20d6, so the maximum possible damage is 120. A typical level 11 barbarian should have 121 hit points (if not more through Con bonuses; I think they're very likely to actually have 132.) So by the rules, a full-health barbarian can reliably jump off a cliff and survive the fall.

And some people are like "yes but obviously a real human won't consistently survive a thousand-foot fall" but of course what the rules are telling you is that a level 11 barbarian is not, in fact, a normal human; they can absorb a level of punishment that no real person possibly could.

People periodically try to reinterpret hit points as, like, luck, or dodging ability, but as you say that never holds up once you start asking questions about what's going on. (The classic question is poison-on-hit attacks, but honestly the shooting someone in the head bit is also good.) In order for hit points to make sense, you kind of have to say that some people can walk off being shot in the head at point-blank range, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's just the world you're building.

(Or you can keep max hp low enough and gun damage high enough that a max roll crit will kill anyone, but that generally undermines what people want the hit points to do in other contexts. If you want people to be superhuman just let them be superhuman!)

---

For the last bit: yeah obviously you're not going to, like, make crafting rolls for everyone in the city. But if your mechanics are wildly at odds with a functioning economy you really should expect your players to (1) ask questions and (2) exploit the hell out of them.

The world has to work the way the rules say it does because otherwise what's the point of the rules and how do you know how the world works?

[piratecaptainscaptainpirates]

A while ago, I was writing about how it makes sense that the writers of OFMD felt they didn't need to beat us over the head with Ed's likeability and over-corrected in the opposite direction with Izzy, and it made me think about the very few things in s2 that I straight-up do not like at all.

There are two lines of dialogue in s2 that, if I had to pick two things I genuinely hate about s2, it would be them. One is Jim telling Ed "he was your friend" about Izzy, and the other is Lucius' line to Izzy about how maybe they should try chopping Ed's leg off next.

Jim's "he was your friend," I genuinely believe, is meant to tell us more about Jim than anyone else. It contrasts well with all Ed's dialogue last season about how pirates don't have friends (and anyway, if he did have friends, Izzy sure as fuck wouldn't be one of them). I'm pretty confident what they were going for was Jim's point being "this isn't how life should be, this is fucked up, we shouldn't be treating people like this." But it doesn't sit well with me because...no the fuck he was not Ed's friend, Jim! One of the first lines of dialogue in s2 in Stede's dream is reminding us part of what Izzy did last season - selling them out to the English - but there's no callback to how he mocked and threatened Ed, triggering the whole Kraken spiral in the first place, until Izzy's literal dying breath.

As for Lucius' line, I think that one sits badly with me because it's the last thing he ever really says about Ed, they never have another scene together, and it is so harsh. Lucius is 100% justified in his anger at Ed, but he's typically a character who balks from violence and cruelty. Him suggesting they hurt Ed to make him pay feels more extreme than if pretty much any other character had said it. What Ed did to Lucius was, easily, the worst thing he ever did. Lucius only ever tried to be a friend for him, and Ed gave him incredibly cruelty in return. Both Lucius and Ed are left unsatisfied with their attempts to feel better with each other; Lucius is able to move on better, but Ed never gets his closure that Lucius got closure, and they never talk again.

I wouldn't dislike either of these lines if they had more follow-up. Jim's, I can let slide, because I think they were trying to avoid emphasizing how badly Izzy treated Ed last season so his redemption arc would sit better. I get that; he was an antagonist so I get why they felt they needed to over-correct, and honestly I kind of think that having that line immediately before Ed asking him to kill him and Izzy mocking him for being too scared to kill himself directly kinda drives home how fundamentally broken this relationship is anyway. And for me, Lucius' would have felt better with even one more scene between them. And I'd feel better about both of them if I knew that we'd have a season 3 to finish tying up some of these lingering issues - this story just isn't finished yet!

I still absolutely adore season 2, don't get me wrong, but what I wouldn't give to see a cut where there was more time for interactions between Ed and the crew so we can see he really feels like part of the family.

[wishing-stones]

Hii,,, hope I'm not bothering you too much. I've been a really big fan of your writing for a couple of months now. You don't have to respond to my ask if it makes you uncomfortable, I understand.

I'm someone who easily falls into paranoia spirals, and constantly second guesses whether my behaviour is socially appropriate since I have such a hard time reading a room. I have a habit of unknowingly stepping over the line when I get excited and thus making people uncomfortable, and only being aware of it if I'm directly confronted about it? Though because I absolutely hate conflict I often distance/isolate myself from the people I'm close to and find myself forming deeper emotional attachments to stuffed animals than people.

Would the guys find this to be a problem? Would they particularly care about someone being more open to an inanimate object than them, or if they need to regularly switch between reminding the person of boundaries and assurance that they aren't a selfish or awful person?

(Again, feel free to ignore this if you don't want to respond, I won't get upset if this ask gets deleted for being too much)

- 🖍 crayanon

Okay first of all Crayanon is adorable

Secondly, sending me asks is in no way bothering me! If I don't have the time or energy to respond to them, I often sit on them until I do (or until I come up with a sufficient answer for some of them). The only ones I wind up deleting are the ones I legitimately don't have an answer to LOL.

Thirdly, I'm seeing some self-deprecation here, and I'd like to remind you that you aren't a selfish or awful person for your neurodivergence. I prefer the company of animals, stuffed or not, to people most of the time as well. It's no shortcoming of yours that you have issues reading social queues-- especially when excited. You're far from alone in that aspect, and honestly? You can't blame yourself for crossing a boundary that you didn't know existed. All you can do is keep that boundary in mind going forward. You're not psychic, so you can't have known, and anyone who gets mad at you for crossing a line you weren't aware of... might be someone you may wish to rethink being around. This is a very annoying thing that happens with Neutotypical people, I feel. They expect you to know the exact social standards of every single setting everywhere you go when they... don't communicate that whatsoever. It isn't your fault, and this is all a very long winded way for me to say: Don't beat yourself up over stupid unspoken societal standards. It doesn't make you a bad person, and neither does wanting to avoid these situations. You aren't selfish, and you aren't awful.

With that out of the way...

Generally speaking, the guys are really good with mental health and neurodivergence in general. It's kind of a monster society thing-- since monsters are all so vastly different from one another, they don't tend to balk at anything that has to do with appearance or mentality. It's just the way you are, and if it happens to cause problems for you or them, they're still very supportive. They might nudge you towards professional help if it becomes a serious problem, but on the whole, these guys are very hard to offend by behavior.

Killer also has issues with boundaries sometimes, and needs to be corrected. With the guys, this usually comes in the form of playful violence, but you can shove him off or tell him to back up or steep off just as easily. His are hard to cross, but if you manage it, he's pretty gracious with letting you know, and if he sees you edging up on that line again, he'll playfully remind you of it. He won't get mad. The most you'll get for your troubles is a noogie.

Dust may snap if his boundaries are crossed in any serious way, but he's kind of a withdrawn person. He doesn't mean to be mean, but he'll be firm. He might get a little short and brisk to get you to back off... but he'll explain why once he's wound down from it. He might get a little rattled, but he won't hold it against you. Learning to be around new people can sometimes have a steep learning curve that can go on for years after you've met and grown close to them.

Axe only snaps if you get near his skull injury. Otherwise, he's pretty chill. If it's a social boundary, he isn't bothered too much, and will remind you that it's there calmly. He'll also warn you off of it if he feels you're creeping toward his or anyone else's boundaries, and praise you with reassurances if you remember these on your own. It'd do you well to remember that one of his biggest boundaries is to not startle him awake, since... that's less one for him and more one for you, so you don't get hurt on accident.

Cross will gently bodily move you if it's a physical boundary and just... say your name correctively if it's a social one. He'll explain his boundaries, but prefers reminding you rather than telling you. He thinks that you'll remember these on your own soon enough if he just... nudges you away from them. He's pretty understanding, even if he looks stern. Baggs takes note of these behaviors and works with you on them. Little memory exercises to remind you of where general boundaries might be, offers different methods of mindfulness, and takes everything in stride. Even if you cross his, he's patient and explains gently. He also likes the subtle sort of nudging you in the right direction-- making your own associations and your own corrections are far preferable than straight directions. It allows you to build your own habits and reminders that are custom-tailored to you.

Nightmare has arguably the hardest time with this because he is not pleasant when a boundary of his has been crossed. He'll get a little sour, but still remind you carefully of what that was and why he didn't like that. It's really not you, it's him. He gets cranky and bitter when bothered, but... he also has to remind himself that no one here is psychic and can't possibly know what he's thinking. He likes to lead you into conclusions yourself ("Do you remember what happened last time?") rather than actively correcting it, and does so as gently as he can. This bothers you deeply, and he can tell. He doesn't want you agonizing over a simple mishap that, in the grand scheme of things, matters very little.

As for being closer to stuffies than to them...

...They might get a little jealous, but the most that nets you is them sitting with the plush so that you have no excuse but to spend time with them. Oh no. Fortunately, they can be pretty still and quiet if you don't feel like people at the moment. Just hanging around quietly is enough.

[stranded-ziggy]

Some advice for my fellow artists who are uncertain about doing commissions or monetizing/promoting their art in general:

Have equal parts respect for yourself and your client, and if you sense they do not respect you or your work, turn them down before any money is exchanged.

Mutual respect is so important in avoiding scams and people who will break your T&Cs, that's why I recommend turning down anyone who participates in supporting AI art and NFTs. These things have drawn crowds of people who actively have disdain for artists.

You may be asking "but Ziggy, why would someone hate artists? We just draw our blorbo's and help each other do that."

Damn right we do, but these people are jealous that we've found a way to still have fun in this dystopian hellscape we live in while their crypto keeps crashing.

A good mindset to have when learning to respect yourself and your craft if you struggle with that:

You've worked hard to gain the skills you have, it's admirable, there's people out there in awe that we can paint or draw even vaguely accurate things.

In this online space where everyone seems to be the next Da Vinci it can feel so demoralizing to be an artist, but think about it, before all this online BS you probably would have been one of the best artist's in your town!

(Actually, if you don't have crushing social anxiety like myself, consider doing art for local people, I did this once before and got paid very well, it was a traditional piece though, not sure if you'll get far doing digital art only like this but who knows! You might have local TTRPG groups who need some art.)

Finally, I'd like to say something about making your online experience better in general:

Have patience!

Social media thrives on people getting angry and afraid, sometimes rightfully so! But we gain so little (in fact I would say we lose more) by falling for fear mongering and dog whistles.

If you're just trying to run an art account, surround yourself with fellow artists, support each other, whether by boosting their art or sharing the occasional bit of advice.

I'm not a perfect person, but I try and be a force of positivity where I can, especially as my platform grows, sometimes this slips when I'm feeling the weight of the world but that's fine too, it happens.

In general, just make sure you have a support system that you can vent your frustrations to outside of twitter and tumblr.

We do need to speak out against things like AI and our unfair treatment by corporations and social issues that seem to get more and more frightening. But there's so many people out there who *want* you to be angry, and who profit from it and will use it against you.

So when you see something inflammatory, ask yourself why it's there and if you really want to directly interact with it and boost it to your followers.

Thank you if you read all of this! I hope it's helpful, but really I just felt like blabbering for a while x'D

[punderfullll]

Where would you recommend looking to purchase Touhou cosplay outfits? I've been looking through EZcosplay, But I'm really skeptical of the how the quality may be. Are there other sites that you think would be better? I know you make a lot of your outfits by hand, but I really just don't have the skills to do anything wonderful like that. Thanks! Love your work!!!

Hello! First off thank you so much! I do make some of my stuff but typically if I am buying cosplays I do so secondhand. Mostly because it saves me a bit of money! So sadly I do not have a lot of experiences purchasing new! However I'll try to help the best I can with what I know :D! If you are interested in buying secondhand please send me a message and I'll send you my big info pile on it. I have a lot more experience with it in comparison so I have a ton of links and information on it! Ok so for new! I think the best place currently in terms of price and quality is typically Taobao. A lot of stores like aliexpress and other online shops that sell touhou cosplays are often just reselling from Taobao. Buying off Taobao can be a little tricky but you will need a proxy. I know a few touhou cosplayer mutuals of mine have had a lot of success with bhiner cosplay It is basically a taobao proxy with a focus on cosplay and there is a whole touhou section here <--- I have only ordered here once and it was for a Yukari Parasol prop. It was a pretty good experience overall and the quality was nice. The only major issue recently is I've hear Bhiner has stopped accepting paypal for payment. I'd have to try to put an order in to confirm that but it might be something worth looking into another proxy for! At the very least its a great way to browse what is currently being sold and bhiner always links the actual taobao stores themselves, so you could easily go through another proxy! Another touhou cosplayer also made a handy guide on buying some of the more fancy premades as well I'll also link that here <------ A very helpful guide!! I bought a costume off a cosplayer that bought it from a shop called fm-anime . Can't speak for the ordering process but the quality pretty good! It was a Touhouvania Alice cosplay. It looks like they have limited stock these days with touhou but it might be worth a look! RoleCosplay seems to have a decent selection and even some less popular touhou characters. I've never ordered off here myself though so I'd maybe look into reviews a bit more! Maybe I should put in a test order and do a review one day LOL EzCosplay (as you stated) I have heard mixed things about! It used to be regarded as a pretty okay place to get Touhou cosplays from but more recently I've seen some people complain about sizing issues and quality in regards to their photos vs product etc! So I'd maybe avoid that one! Lastly there was this google doc made a little while ago with some shops listed. I do not know if this is up to date but I thought I'd share https://docs.google.com/document/d/12w82AVDHKmJ1dKRRZ3CAYiy1S5TbqOR_o91NCJVqgUQ/edit Also there is a touhou cosplay discord I could get you the invite to (just send me a message first) Its full of really nice and supportive people and theres a cosplay shopping talk channel and lots of people with experience there that can help out! There's also a secondhand cosplay sale channel as well if you wanted to buy directly off another cosplayer! Anyways I hope that helped. Again please feel free to message me anytime if you need specific help. I'm always happy to help people cosplay touhou in any way possible :D If you have a specific character you want to do I can try and get as many links for you put together that I can as well!!

[justicefortheunderground]

omfg I swear this is the last post I'm making on this. I'm so tired of it going over screenshots sent in the discord in order so it might be off, sorry. I don't HATE anybody, im uncomfortable with people and thus don't want to interact. In fact I was one of the last people in the discord server to voice my concerns. It's not something to be 'fixed', it's simply a boundary. All I'm asking is not to interact, if you don't want drama change or just abide by our requests to not interact?? We aren't like banning you from roleplay or anything that'd be stupid. Just make your own space if you aren't going to change, please. Also. I've never told anybody specifically to avoid any of the blogs. This was a decision most of you collectively agreed on, this blog is just being focused on fsr so that's where we're directing the posts. 1// Queer erasure is essentially intentionally or unintentionally removing a character or person's queerness. This is a bad thing to do for tons of reasons which you can research on your own time. This post will be long enough already. They/them Clover IS strictly canon, as a quote DIRECTLY from the developers says. Please get your facts in order. The issue isn't that Clover's gender is being changed, it's that their pronouns are being changed from more genderqueer pronouns, to more cisgender pronouns. Regardless of if this is intentionally or not, this IS queer erasure, and makes a lot of people extremely uncomfortable. 2// Try not to think about yourself that way, it comes off as guilt-trippy to people. And I was trying to go over each of your points to debunk, it was just a short quip. Sorry. 3//"it's just the internet" is a bad way to excuse your behavior. Don't. 4//Aging up characters in order to ship them in a less controversial way is almost universally a REALLY gross thing to do for so many reasons. There are a ton of videos that dive really deep into this topic, highly recommend. No NSFW should already be a given. 5//I didn't say choose another ship, I said another character. Yaknow. An adult. Also yes PLEASE stop interacting with underblog. We are not attacking anybody, we've only been responding to when you guys come to us. Genuinely we just don't want to interact. We have never EVER wished death on anybody. Seriously if anybody has I'm EXTREMELY sorry about that, if anybody has please let us know that's literally the worst thing somebody could do. In the discord KYS JOKES are even banned. I don't hate you, I don't think any of us underblog folks really do. We just are genuinely really uncomfortable and don't want to interact but this keeps escalating. I assume it's because you guys are young but honestly, please genuinely grow up. I don't believe any of this was intentional but the way it was handled was extremely poor. I genuinely hope you guys realize with time because I know I was absolutely like this when I was younger. It's not an attempt to flame any of you, I've never tried to flame any of you, only responded in ways I wish I'd gotten responded to when I was like this. I don't think any of us on either side are bad people, I think reactions were just handled badly. You can make your own roleplay space, honestly we really just don't like interacting with you guys. It's extremely draining. Please stop. And this is NOT just from me. I review these messages with the rest of underblog before posting. We're all just really fucking tired. Speaking of any of you (underblog) are more than free to add on your own thoughts below just keep it respectful.

[genderkoolaid]

in my brain, the whole "[size] dick energy" thing was always coined to de-stigmatise dick size with the usual help of humour. the sentiment being that it doesn't matter what your actual genital size is, what matters is your energy and how you behave regardless of it.

it's not perfect, no, but it's miles better than just omitting the "energy" part. society has been weird about genital size all along (see: small genitals being desirable in ancient Greece) so acting like it's gonna go away ever or overnight is just. eh.

I don't see where it's realistic to spend so much energy arguing about this as if it's life or death?

I'd rather rejoice that a human trafficker is in custody for reasons of his own making.

How, exactly, does using "small dick" as an insult destigmatize dick size?

You are still associating dick size with worth. Listen to me: your argument is ridiculous.

"You have a small dick" = bodyshaming insult

"You have small dick energy" = destigmatization? Are you being serious right now? Are you seriously trying to argue that slapping "energy" on the end of a bodyshaming insult is destigmatization? Would using "fat energy" as an insult destigmatize fatness? Are you for real right now?

The body part is in the name. Its not like, a code word. It did not come from any sort of attempt to destigmatize small dicks. It could not more clearly be based in the idea that having a big dick is seen as being something cool, powerful, and worthy. That is a basic fact of modern Western culture, and you would have to be wildly disconnected from modern Western culture to think that isn't the reason the jokes became popular in the first place.

It is not "miles better" than without the energy part. It is the exact same. People (transmascs and intersex people especially) who are directly impacted by this, because it is directly mocking our bodies, are saying that this is bodyshaming because it directly leads to our own self-hatred and the undervaluing of our bodies in society. If anything, its helping to continue normalizing this bodyshaming because of people like you, who for some reason that escapes me, think that putting "energy" after bodyshaming negates the bodyshaming.

Also, are you fucking kidding me? Really? "its been around forever so its not gonna go away anytime soon"? Are you really using that tired argument?

I know its been around for a while. I have, in fact, literally said that I don't blame people for using it without realizing its bodyshaming because its so ingrained in our culture and its not a well-known enough issue for the average person to even connect it with bodyshaming. I just want people who hear people explain why its harmful to stop making those jokes and stop defending them. I'm not "acting as if its life or death", I'm just annoyed that people keep making weak arguments about why it Totally Isnt Bodyshaming to avoid doing any self-reflection on how something that you take for granted may actually be harmful and against your own morals.

Which gets on to your final point, which I have also seen @transfaguette get. That we are distracting from the human trafficker getting arrested or something.

Literally the first things I did when I heard the news was make a post celebrating it, and reblogging the actual screenshots, and answering an ask saying that I live for the day Andrew Tate falls into obscurity. I didn't even mention the bodyshaming until someone else brought it up, and I mentioned how I was annoyed with people's lame justifications. But also, in the tags:

#wish greta hadn't used that insult but y'know greater good + i don't entirely blame her for not being aware of a#rather niche viewpoint on it#kinda same w how I feel abt people using empathy to mean compassion/being a good person#like it's not right but it's also not in the public discourse enough#for the avg person to realize why it's harmful

I literally said it was for the "greater good" and that I didn't blame her, or even most people, for using the joke without thinking about the bodyshaming element.

I did and am rejoicing at the human trafficker getting himself arrested in the stupidest way possible. I have been very openly happy about Greta's tweet since I literally first saw it. It is possible for people to both be happy with what happened, and wish that a different joke had been used.

The reason "small dick energy" as a joke is being discussed is because this is an issue I have talked about in the past, and since it was used in a very well-known instance recently, it makes sense to bring it back up since it's already in people's minds. Its not like I completely ignored what happened, or I'm out here saying that the entire thing shouldn't have happened because Greta made a joke I didn't like. I love that what happened, happened, and I continue to be happy about it. I was mildly annoyed she used a small dick joke, and I am far more annoyed with people like you who feel the need to make these weird, flimsy defenses of it?

You are just being actively resistant to the fact that connecting having a small penis, in any way, shape, or form, to being less of a man or worth less as a person or less cool or whatever is bodyshaming and it hurts people. If you can be as creative with your insults as you are with your defenses of bodyshaming, I'm sure you'll be fine.

[kedreeva]

Do you think you could give your opinions on the recessive / lethal yellow genes in mice? Do you think you'd ever consider breeding recessive yellow? (If you haven't already.) I'm just super curious about your thoughts on them as I don't really know a lot about genetics. Do you think it's possible to breed a consistently healthy line of yellow mice? I'm just super curious to hear your thoughts as a breeder

Well, this is a kind of long answer and I'll warn it discusses animal death, so I'll put it behind a cut.

Personally, I wouldn't, but not because of ethics concerns; I just don't like any of the colors made with RY/AY. They're just not visually appealing to me. I had a couple RY pop up from the Taylor black line when I first got it, and they were just enh. A good, rich red, esp a satin red, can be a really perfect looking mouse... but by god that's years of work and it never ends because Red is such a hard phenotype to maintain and I'm just not that determined. I'm convinced that people breed for red because seeing it opens all the ferret cages in their brain, not because they can be normal about it. If you want good reds, it's like you dedicate your life (and mousery) to it or you don't do it, and my life's already dedicated to the peafowl. My mousery is already dedicated to blacks and tricolors.

As for the AY gene itself, it's a "lethal" gene in that homozygosity is lethal but it's lethal at the blastocyst stage so it's not really an ethical problem imo. If it was lethal as in the pups deteriorate and die post partum, or if it caused well developed pups to die/be stillborn such that it caused the dam health risks, then it would be a problem. But, it doesn't. You just get smaller litters because some cells die way early on and get reabsorbed. I don't really have any problems with that. Show breeders cull litters down to 4-6 pups (for dam and pup health reasons), so it's not like all of them would be turning into adults anyway.

As for the genetic issues with the adult mice, there are three major health issues. The first is obesity (sort of), and the major problem there is keeping them in breeding shape (meaning, capable of doing the do at all). Curiously, in at least one study I remember seeing, there's a difference between an obese mouse of X color mutation and an AY that's considered obese because of its natural body type; for example, an obese black mouse will likely have a shortened lifespan, whereas an AY mouse doesn't (at least not less than any other mouse color mutation) unless it's obese for an AY. So this isn't really a problem as long as the breeder is watching their diet and ensuring they stay fit for their body type.

The other two genetic problems actually are health issues related directly to the AY gene, and that's being prone to diabetes and to tumors. However, these are both things that (any good) breeders would notice, cull, and therefore not breed forward, in order to keep the line as free from them as possible. Which really isn't any different than any other line that develops health problems of any sort. People don't keep health problems. A good breeder should be and usually is aware of the potential health problems in the lines they are breeding, particularly if it's a genetic one that can't be avoided (like you can't avoid AY if you're breeding AY), and will know what to look for and intervene as soon as possible. Diabetic mice urinate excessively so it's REALLY noticeable, and tumors... well. Hard to miss. And tumors of various sorts is a fairly common "select away from/cull" problem in any mutation, it's just slightly higher risk in AY.

So the short answer, in my opinion, AY isn't really an unethical gene to work with. It's not one I'd choose to work with, but I don't think the people who do are doing anything wrong just for working with the gene at all. It comes down to the same ethics as any other mutation; working to maintain body condition and selecting for health.

Honestly, out of all the animals I've seen bred and bred myself, I think mouse breeders in general have proven themselves to be the most concerned with what's best for the animal, not the breeder. The show clubs like FMBA and AFRMA etc won't recognize standards for things like snub noses or manx tails or anything else that would potentially seriously impact QoL by nature of existing at all, and at least in the groups I'm in, the members are not shy about recognizing when health problems mean no breeding for a mouse regardless of how pretty or sweet. When someone newer asks what to do, I've never seen anyone support trying to breed a mouse with issues, or usually even keep one whose QoL would be poor. They are very familiar with the kindest thing you can do is let them go. It's a breath of fresh air from the goddamn chicken groups, who will limp along any bird that's still breathing regardless of what's best for the bird.

I think the only morph I've seen that I have an ethical problem with is the X-brindle gene, which is a "brindle" gene on the X chromosome that causes the mouse to be unable to absorb copper. This means that the males DO founder and die after birth (which means most people just humanely euthanize the male pups, they aren't out here letting them suffer that I've seen), and females get a strange coat color and curled whiskers from low copper absorption. Does have a second X gene that's clean so they still can, but it's really an unnecessary mutation to continue imo. It hasn't been recognized by the show clubs that I know of, but idk if they can be shown under normal brindle or if you can tell at a glance, as I don't really know as much about them or any of the AY gene specifics. I have basic knowledge but since i don't breed them myself it's very in passing knowledge. I know it's rarely bred or worked with in the first place, and I hope it stays that way or disappears entirely.

[huntunderironskies]

Any tips for expanding on a Hunt by the different Pure Tribes? I’ve been thinking about how the Predator Kings would be direct hunters, in that you know they’re coming after encountering/escaping them once, although it’ll mean little if you’re not prepared since they’re the that’ll hunt unless you or they are dead, but I’m not sure how the Ivory Claws or Fire-Touched would hunt aside from some similarities to the Iron Masters & Bone Shadows

So one thing that's always fascinated me about Forsaken is the concept of bloodless hunts. I'd be remiss to not say that the Fire-Touched are probably the most okay with the concept. They've always been comparatively less violent than the Pure Tribes, which isn't saying much. It's not that they're less vicious, it's just they prefer to be subtle until they really aren't. Faith is the virus that must spread, and you can't infect a corpse. Going on a hunt to recruit people or steal territory isn't unheard of.

Fire-Touched talk. A lot. They're happy to do it, in fact, and they will give you a chance for diplomacy. It's not your fault you're ignorant, after all. You will know they're coming. The thing is, they're not happy with your death. Actually, they'd like to avoid it, but if you can't bend to what they want—to what Rabid Wolf wants—you might just need to. If you won't bend the knee, that's when things start getting scary.

It's your loved ones turning against you, and that plague of hatred suddenly spreading across your entire social safety net. It's not just you and the people around you getting physically sick, they're also becoming metaphorically sick, and this can extend to your territory itself if a Fire-Touched ritemaster figures out how to target spirits.

That's not to say that Fire-Touched can't hunt more directly, but they are less likely to do it and more likely to leave (badly injured whether psychologically or physically) survivors of a hunt. Mechanically they don't have as much staying power as the other Pure Tribes do and a lot of their Gifts run towards the indirect and socially manipulative.

Genuinely I think that Fire-Touched are the meanest as well. A lot of Pure Tribes are pretty cavalier about forcing humans to become Claimed but the Fire-Touched are probably the worst about it. They'll still try to ensure it's the right kind of spirits because they're pretty serious about respecting the Shadow but that doesn't really make things any better. For whatever reason within some groups I've been in they've gotten a reputation as the "nicest" or most sympathetic of the Pure Tribes when they are...not. Not saying they're unilaterally evil in the slightest because Forsaken has wayyyyy more nuance than that but, you know.

Side note, I think it helps here that their Tribal Oath is the only one that upholds a tenant that human morality generally values? Like, you're usually told as a kid lying is always bad (even though most ethicists are going to agree that the issue is complicated) and theirs is all about not permitting lies while some of the Forsaken Tribal Oaths can kind of be...a lot. That's neither here nor there though.

Okay, Ivory Claws next. Disclaimer, they're the Pure Tribe I tend to use the least, though when I ran a campaign set in Ohio they had a presence because one of my players was really interested in incorporating them into the character's backstory.

I'll say outright they're probably the hardest to pin down in terms of a style. Ivory Claws get compared to Storm Lords a lot but I think in a weird way it's almost more interesting to contrast them against the Hunters in Darkness while using Predator Kings as the foils to the Storm Lords.

I think Ivory Claws do best when it's emphasized that they're the ones who control the world. Just in general, but especially on the hunt. A Hunter in Darkness is very focused on their one little bit of territory and usually a specific place they've cultivated and may not even want to share much with their packmates (depending on their own personality and local traditions) but Ivory Claws get everything. They have money, social resources, spirit court allies, the entire world is at their claws. And that's without getting into the fact they pretty frequently experiment on themselves to perfect the werewolf condition. They exemplify werewolves as gods of the hunt.

You know what happens to the people who defy gods, right? Silver Wolf is also hurt, angry, and very, very vengeful, significantly more than the other two (plus Sky Hunter if you want to count in one of Chris Allen's Tribes) and because IMO Ivory Claws tend to skew towards the Flesh in a lot of regards, Ivory Claws are probably prone to calling a Hunt over seemingly minor offenses especially since their Sacred Prey is a bit floaty in terms of what it can encompass. It helps keep them balanced.

Predator Kings...yeah, they hunt like wolves. There's something comparatively very uncomplicated about them. They're not predictable, they are very good at what they do and hunting like wolves means hunting, not treating it like a military operation the way Blood Talons do. Once they get to the actual killing part, it's over pretty fast, but the lead-in takes place over a few days. I do think one really interesting angle that 2e incorporates is that they're also the most obsessive over Pangaea and have both rites and Merits that can make the world closer to what Pangaea was. This strongly suggests that, more than any other werewolf, Taga Dam is now a huge part of their spiritual life and identity. I actually quite like this angle, it gives them more of a thing than just "grrr civilization bad." I've always had a certain soft spot for them (inasmuch as you can for a Pure Tribe) and felt like they get misused a lot, so I can appreciate it.

[septembersghost]

Do you think Tay is holding back on what is released about her relationship with joe? Artist always find it challenging especially autobiographical artist when they are in long term relationships. I feel she can't talk abt conflicts where joe is at fault because of media and her own fans being extremely toxic. I feel since she started dating joe, she has been calling herself the sole problem which seems unlikely and heavily skewed.

no. i mean, she pretty heavily alludes to the fact that he struggles with depression and anxiety and some avoidance of his own (it's all over false god, afterglow, renegade, peace, hoax, slightly in the great war, etc), but the whole difference we're seeing right now in her flourishing professionally is coming directly from her being happy, healthier, and feeling secure personally. when she mentions that he gives her silence, it's that he helps calm all the outside noise and he's the one who does make her feel like a person when other things don't. everyone is always grasping at her, wanting things from her (including us), he only wants her as she is. the fact that she details conflicts where she felt at fault is because of what she was going through at those times, it's not like...she won't put blame on him, it's that there wasn't blame to place there, and she's, as she said, getting the poison out by vulnerably sharing that. her calling herself the problem isn't new (see, for example, white horse, or maybe it's me and my blind optimism to blame, or maybe i asked for too much, or wish i'd never hung up the phone like i did...there are MANY examples of her detailing her issues and blaming herself, just like she has consistently written about feeling like an outsider and about depression since pre-debut). it's not like he's perfect, i'm sure they've had arguments like any long-term couple where his faults came into play, but there's also a steadiness and gentleness to him that seems to be innate (this is not only in taylor's music but commented on by many people who've worked with him too). and that closeness and balance that taylor feels is nothing she's ever had before. she could place blame previously because there was blame to put on those other men, there's a reason none of those relationships lasted and why they damaged her the way they did. having someone who makes her feel content and loved and creatively inspired doesn't mean she's hiding anything. she's been more brutally honest than she's ever been before.

also, her qualifying herself as The Problem has nothing to really do with joe, and everything to do with years of mental health difficulties and trauma and some intense self-loathing issues and the vicious criticism of the media exacerbating all of that. there are moments when she seems to really think she's irredeemable and less than a person and it's heartbreaking. the light in the midst of that is that he helps her counteract it.