#no discourse intended ofc

[cheatcode-coins]

don’t you doubt me on my own post /j /nm

[generallyjl]

idk sometimes I feel like we should be more honest about the stakes of libertion. like trans liberation *is* a threat to the fabric of "western" society bc a coherent/stable sex-gender binary is a core organizing principle of society and patriarchy a core power hierarchy. Palestinian liberation *is* a threat to u.s. security/hegemony bc it requires dismantling a settler-colonial state and ridding an imperialized region of its most critical imperial outpost. just point blank, liberation absolutely is a threat to the entire white supremacist capitalist imperial order, and that's a Good Thing bc such a world cannot be allowed to continue to exist! I understand that we often want to push back on/minimize the justifications the state has for crushing dissent (tho I'd also question if the state really needs any genuine "justification" in the first place) but it feels worthwhile to not rhetorically sell out liberation as something that can implicitly exist alongside the global systems of oppression, exploitation, and death we need liberation from. being a threat to such a world as this should be the ultimate goal, not something to shy away from or to reflexively reorient our rhetoric around trying to deny.

[transmutationisms]

Forgive me if this is a silly question + no pressure to answer it ofc, but what would you 'replace' addiction with when discussing patterns of harmful and compulsive substance use? I agree with your views re: the disease model and its failure to engage with the material contexts in which these behaviours often arise, but I also find addiction a useful concept for talking about my own experiences with substance use (including severe physical dependency). It's a nebulous, imperfect term, but when someone calls themselves a [substance] addict you implicitly understand something of their relationship with that substance. For some the relationship is mutable, whereas for others it's a pattern that repeats throughout their lives; both can claim to have experienced addiction, as far as I'm concerned. But there are certain behaviours and attitudes that are very common amongst self-described addicts, and these commonalities form the basis of many peer support networks. Without the conceptual framework of addiction, would we not be even further isolated?

first of all i disagree that addiction is even a useful shorthand, and i think you actually contradict this notion yourself in this ask. if someone tells me they're an addict, do they mean they're a 12-stepper who views substances as external impositions onto the psyche curable by prayer to protestant god? do they mean they're physically dependent on a substance? that they have been in the past? that they subjectively feel out of control of their substance use? that it's escalating, or has been in the past? that it has cost them jobs or friendships? that it is subjectively enjoyable but exacts health effects they dislike? that they prioritise it over other elements of their life? that they use it as a form of escapism, as a form of self punishment, for some kind of spiritual enlightenment, as pain relief, as a distraction...?

if i care about the answers to these questions then the label addiction means nothing to me. i find out these answers by talking to people and the explanations are simply not summed up by that one word. i have met self-identified addicts with definitions of the term beyond my wildest conceptions & i'm sure i will continue to do so. "it's shorthand" is not factually workable if no one can even define what precisely is ostensibly being shorthanded. so on a basic level, no i actually do not think anything is being semantically sacrificed in challenging the idea of 'addiction' because it's a political dragnet, not a coherent psychological or experiential concept.

second, in a hypothetical world where the behaviour of using substances recreationally isn't pathologised, i don't really care that strongly what people do or don't call it. but i don't live in that world, i live in the one where the idea of 'addiction' is a clinical discourse born of a degeneracy theory discourse intended to produce economically useful citizens by pathologising inebriation. so i not only don't see the value in caping for the term, i actually think continuing to rely on these discourses is actively harmful. incidentally, and not to elevate my personal experience here, but some of the most heinous shit people have ever said to me wrt my own substance use has come from self-identified addicts too. because again, this term is not rooted in some kind of care model but in a political discourse intended to eliminate the behaviours it describes.

this to say: i'm not proposing an alternate name for addiction because i don't think it's actually a useful or liberating term, let alone a coherent description of any one psychological or personal experience. there are specific terms i sometimes use as far as they go: i might talk about physical dependency where applicable, or about feeling compelled to use substances (though i am becoming increasingly disillusioned with notions of 'compulsion' for basically the same reason, i use that term only as a purely subjective description, and frankly i may move off recourse to it at all).

but i don't see that the umbrella term 'addiction' is actually unified by anything except a political logic of attempted discipline & control. if i want to talk to people personally about our experiences using drugs then i already have quite a bit of vocabulary beyond the addiction term that i need & like to use for myself, & i solicit the same from the people i talk to wrt their own experiences & interpretive frameworks. i don't think using the addiction framework is good or even neutral in a politico-moral sense, and its conceptual heterogeneity means it's not even useful philosophically. what it does, and what it exists to do, is obscure the individual into a pathologising discourse intended to correct and punish a deviant behaviour.

[ilynpilled]

since we r doing this shit again my only thought about jaime redemption googoo gaga discourse, and it ofc still being a thing that exists in the year 2025, is that the possibility to make this discussion be meaningful and interesting to me at this point in time with an unfinished series and arc that was cut off where it was is damn near nonexistent. u guys turned the original question this story is dealing with of “can a person like jaime who had done these truly horrible and irreversible things ever be forgiven? is redemption possible?” into “will jaime be redeemed by george?” which is a different and frankly boring question with a straightforward answer that george already essentially disputed with “i am not intending to make that call for u.” it is already established by the author’s own words repeatedly that it is a story dealing with redemption and forgiveness, yet the discourse still seems to revolve around debating this for some reason (“is it a redemption arc or not?”). while george seemingly has his own perspective on the subject of redemption and forgiveness in general, he says that he does not intend to give a resounding and final answer to this question of “when, how, and why do we forgive people? what does it take to redeem us?” for u. in turn, it would be meaningful and fun to debate different subjective and coherent perspectives and conclusions in relation to how jaime dealt with the subject and whether he managed to meet your criteria once his story is finished, but trying to fervently argue and properly and conclusively grapple the original question of “is this enough to forgive this guy” right now is meaningless googoo gaga monkey doodoo for obvious reasons

[starryjkoo]

Respectfully, Jikookers not wanting tkkrs or tkk (ship) content in their spaces or community should NOT be a controversial statement lol, some of these takes are wild (& I’m talking about takes on other platforms too, this isn't aimed at anyone specifically). If we’re talking specifically about the creative community then of course that’s different, but that’s absolutely not what happened or what people were upset about at all? 😭

No one would have bothered that author for example if her fic wasn’t suddenly exposed to a massive group of people outside of its intended audience and largely outside of the creative community. If you’re actually in these online spaces you would know that the creative community is sort of in its own bubble. There might be some overlap with other ship spaces but most non-content creator shippers are not going to share content about other ships unless they advertise their page as multi-shipping. At that point it’s your own fault if you follow them and you’re bothered by it.

But that’s why it was so bizarre for that huge Jikook focused account to share that fic and why so many people were uncomfortable with it. It’s like… what if someone posted a tkk fic on the Jikook tag, or someone posted a fic without following proper tag etiquette on AO3? There’s a reason why that sort of etiquette exists in the first place (and it’s to protect the content creators too) even if it’s obviously not okay to harass someone over it.

Anyways, that was the main issue and why there was discourse in the first place. And the people trying to act like Jikooker’s do not have very valid reasons for not wanting to see or support content that’s going to be largely consumed and circulated by people who massively harass Jimin are being purposefully obtuse, I’m sorry. Just the fact that one of the first people who interacted and quoted that fic was someone who follows and engages with massive JM antis should tell you why we’d rather not see that or invite the people who consume (& for some, the ppl who create it) into our spaces.

It’s not just a few bad apples when the vast majority of tkk shippers skew massively toxic. Just look at the amount of followers/engagement their outwardly anti accounts have and then explain to me why we should be expected to trust and tolerate them in our spaces? Mind you, Jikook spaces are some of the ONLY spaces where it’s supposed to be entirely safe for Jimin and Jungkook (as a duo, as individuals) so trying to judge us for wanting to keep it that way by not inviting content that literally attracts antis is certainly a choice.

Let’s not pretend like the BTS community is a normal shipping community when it’s actually beyond toxic and very out of control. People have every right to have strong boundaries around the content they want to see and interact with. Anyone can opt out of all the drama and toxicity around shipping/solos/fanwars if they want and I fully and totally respect and understand that, but it doesn’t mean it just stops existing either.

Anyways, Jikooker’s are not obligated to like or tolerate tkkrs, or like or tolerate tkk shipping content, nor are they owed space in our communities, and no one should judge you for that. Some of the takes around that are frankly bizarre imo. The creative community is its own beast and frankly that’s why it’s better for certain things to stay WITHIN that community, which I’ve talked about before. OP was allowed to post whatever they wanted on their blog too ofc, but I think by everything I just explained it should be understood why it was an odd choice.

Again, no one ever deserves to be harassed over any of this, but the judgement and some of the discourse around people who would rather not have tkk content in Jikook spaces has been pretty odd and that's mainly what I wanted to address.

you know what, also going to link this related reading around shipping culture in this fandom

https://www.tumblr.com/starryjkoo/772165572901453824/im-not-against-the-fandom-wanting-to-have-fun-at?source=embed

[batsplat]

Hi I've been speed running reading though all of your posts on Sete and Valentino and Casey and Valentino and ough you're a godsend and literally your analysis on everything is just so good I've been euphoric for a good hour.

It's just so fun to read through all of these and I really really like that one point you made about Valentino having fun poking at Casey like he was a particularly interesting puzzle because yeah that's the best way I've seen it summarised by anyone plus Sete and Valentino's rivalry is never talked about enough in my opinion but in retrospect I'm also just very obnoxious about the two of them so maybe that's a me thing.

I hope this isn't annoying I'm just freaking out because I'm annoyingly into this stuff and all this analysis on them is like from my dreams wow thank you so much for all the work you've put into this!!!

oh this is so lovely, cheers! extremely not annoying and very much appreciated! interest in proper sete/valentino scholarship in these parts trending healthily, for casey/valentino admittedly still in the absolute gutter - but both of them SO niche that i always get very hype when someone else is enthusiastic about them. and i'm EXTREMELY up for talking about them... yes 2 me valentino having fun poking casey is so key like... he loved having that challenge!! it was a fun challenge for him!! casey's the toughest puzzle he could have been given! people must take the whimsy in the casey/valentino rivalry seriously...

okay so. as evidence of how up for talking about them i am,, i am continuing in a proud tradition of using an ask to discuss something kinda tangentially related. i have been thinking a lot recently about these two rivalries as a set. so,, this did get a little longer than i was intending but well. it is a very nice ask. here goes:

ofc on many levels, these two rivalries are VERY different. sete is unambiguously the rival-valentino-later-feuded-with who valentino pre-feud is closest to, joint holidays and all, whereas casey was always kept at a difference. a big part of the sete rivalry is how sete is framed as somehow 'lesser' and not as worthy a rival, which feeds into how eager valentino is to dismiss him and then erase him - whereas casey obviously gets to be The Most Talented and is a young challenger etc etc so a) is accepted more readily as a rival in public discourse, and b) is accepted more by VALENTINO. because casey challenging him is more flattering to the ego than sete challenging him. so by some metrics they're two of the most different valentino feuds. the vibes, they are very different

bUT i do think there's more to be said about how the two rivalries,, like... interact... firstly because to some extent there's ofc going to be a causational relationship, where how the sete rivalry played out affects how the casey rivalry played out. the casey rivalry follows on from the sete rivalry... casey quite literally takes sete's ducati seat... casey replaces sete as valentino's rival... believers of the 'sete was valentino's coming of age rivalry' thesis would suggest that valentino enforcing a certain amount of distance from virtually the start with casey was informed by his post-sete approach to rivalries. a valiant attempt to try and keep them a bit less messy. which is also sensible.... like personally i've always agreed with valentino on this, it's tough to completely separate your feelings towards someone from a competitive rivalry, it makes sense to kinda hate the person who deprives you of what you want most ESPECIALLY if it helps motivate you to beat them, it makes sense to not be ultra friendly towards your rivals if that doesn't really work for you. the problem is that on the casey end, he comes into this rivalry with SO much baggage in both a general sense (he's been through so much to get to the premier class) and related to valentino specifically (hero worship and how valentino low key represents casey's hopes and dreams for the sport) that this valentino approach very much Did Not Land Well with him. and it's kinda... for one and a half seasons, is valentino really doing anything THAT crazy to casey - that isn't also more or less matched by what casey himself is saying about valentino during the same period...? opinions differ! but, the thing is, valentino was always going to hurt casey. all of valentino's later rivals have all this weird hero worship baggage with him that's kinda disastrous to manage in a competitive rivalry situation... valentino was sort of damned whatever he did on that front, like i'm not saying he was at any point particularly interested in casey's emotional wellbeing but. laguna 2008 only gets worse if valentino is nicer to him before that. except he needs to laguna casey to win the 2008 title, so now what. he worsened that relationship in a way that has a clear competitive logic, but it's also understandable why casey took it so so poorly

and i do think! the fun link between these two rivalries is that at certain points. to some extent. casey gets to slip into the role of what valentino was doing in the sete rivalry. because to valentino, for the duration of their ON-TRACK rivalry, casey's this fun tricky puzzle to solve. and the bitterness and animosity only really comes late on when casey figures out how to properly piss valentino off post-2010. but for CASEY, he's all-in with the emotional investment. he cares SO much. it's his coming of age rivalry in the same way the sete rivalry is for valentino. by 2007, valentino's more or less the finished article. obviously all the later rivalries still affect him, but he's not going through a Character Arc the same way he is in 2003-05 where he's fundamentally a different competitive animal by the end of it when compared to the start. like he's done that already!! whereas casey does it with valentino, where valentino becomes so synonymous with SO many issues casey has with the sport and also manages to spark some specific bizarre neuroses within casey that it's just all... it ends up being So Much for casey. valentino is constantly the frame of reference within the sport to casey, valentino is the one who sparks casey's transformation

and the similarities do go beyond that. like,, valentino does kinda get valentino'd a bit. the turning point of the vale/casey rivalry everyone points to is laguna 2008, casey has HIMSELF called it the turning point of his entire CAREER, he STILL talks about it a lot. but the thing is, right, these two are not feuding immediately after laguna 2008! casey apologises at the next race for being so rude to valentino and saying he'd lost respect and all that stuff. obviously they do to some extent still reference laguna after that point, but it's very sparingly pre-2010 and the relationship only really sours in that mid-2010-11 period. two years later!! and it's just... when you think about how the sete/vale rivalry unfolded and there's this sort of delayed backlash, where valentino's clearly already not happy with the sete rivalry being a thing in 2003 (cf sachsenring) and then there's all these Complaints brewing in 2004 (mugello, assen)... and you've got valentino himself saying that qatar just provided him an 'excuse' not to talk to sete... i'm not saying jerez 2011 fulfils quite the same function for casey/vale because the relationship is already pretty fucked by then, but it is kinda that same vibe. the benefits of biding your time!! casey couldn't really fight valentino back in 2008, he just wasn't ready yet to have that fight, but in 2010 he WAS and valentino had broken his leg and wasn't the undisputed king of the sport anymore. casey was in a stronger position! he was very much in a stronger position by the time 2011 rolls around and he's winning and valentino's not. and he shamelessly takes advantage of that state of affairs to lash out at valentino at pretty much every opportunity - because now he finally can. it's that vibe of... these wounds festering, of them sitting on this grudge and being able to park it for extended periods of time, but it still Being There. and then when the moment arrives, they go for the kill

and it's really that vibe of malice. like i always feel what unites casey and valentino above and beyond any of the other big name riders is how *nasty* they get. not aggressive, not killer instinct, not insane or any other word used to describe some of these riders, but nasty. viciously mean, where they really have this air of maliciousness to them, the ability to twist in the knife. it's not just about winning, it's about making it hurt. valentino is a bit more discriminating in his targets - casey sometimes just says something insanely rude about some rando he's met twice in his life - but they've both got it. and i do think their respective coming of age rivalries helped them... embrace that evil energy. with sete, valentino's whole thing is this marriage of joy and cruelty where he uses his quirky lil post-race celebrations to actively humiliate sete - it's targeted, it's personal, it goes beyond anything valentino had done up until that point. in the biaggi rivalry he's way more reactive, in the sete rivalry he wants to break the other man. with casey... the thing about valentino being Like That is that it gave him this sense of (self) righteousness where he felt that valentino was such a deserving target that he could just completely have at it. free reign. but it's free reign to instincts he already had all along. and in 2011-12, it means that casey can attack valentino all he likes while keeping a pretty friendly relationship with his actual on-track rivals - it's almost like he gets it out of his system

my fave Fun Parallel for the intellectuals - vale/casey vs taking shoulder injuries seriously

(h/t to #1 sete scholar @bikefuckersoftheworldunite for that one valentino line)

'i don't think i hurt his shoulder' vs 'best shoulder doctor in melbourne hospital' like tbf that one did come back round nicely to bite valentino

like they're both assholes!! (casey and valntino, that is.) it's so key that they're both assholes with the potential to be cruel and petty and often lack any sense of what constitutes a proportionate response. gOT to be the starting point for understanding these rivalries. because the malice is such a massive motivation for both of them. which brings us neatly onto the next point - they're both LIARS about this. and they both lie about this in their autobiography specifically. with valentino, it's going from being very clear that he's motivated by his rivalry with other riders and sete specifically to almost entirely erasing sete from his autobiography and talking about HONDA lodging an appeal in qatar (again h/t to bike and specifically this super helpful post)

whereas casey goes from saying in 2012 that "i started to find other reasons to win. i just wanted to beat everyone, just to annoy them" to saying in his autobiography he didn't care who he beat and also that he 'never became obsessed' with his rivals, which is so laughable a statement you barely even know where to start

and in BOTH cases this weird autobiography retconning is an attempt to control the narrative about One Specific Rival!! valentino mostly tries to erase sete entirely, apparently preferring to pretend that whole thing never happened. casey obviously CAN'T do that but he does at times talk down the importance of that rivalry - and more often what he does is talk down the EMOTIONS of it. making it this sort of blandly respectful situation between them before valentino just!! attacked casey!! UNPROVOKED for half a decade straight while casey was simply trying to live his life. but casey never really cared about valentino, he just respected him as a rider! that's the only reason why valentino annoyed him! and it's kinda like. okay but how was laguna 2008 this massive turning point where you were confronted with the darkness of human nature or whatever if you only ~sort of respected~ valentino pre-laguna? but obviously casey is motivated to talk down this whole idolisation dynamic because it's painful... he doesn't want to make it sound like he spent so much time thinking about valentino because it makes him vulnerable... and it's kinda like that for valentino with sete!! where the fact that this guy who wasn't Supposed to be valentino's challenger lived so rent free in his head and had the power to betray him is just,,, so uncomfortable, that he'd really rather pretend it hadn't happened

and the thing is. the thing is! for both of them, it's worked! their preferred narrative of those respective rivalries is low key the most accepted one! sete was never a serious challenger to valentino and can be safely discounted, valentino was just sort of a dick to casey and casey never really liked him. because they're both pretty adept at this! and they also take advantage of existing narratives in The Discourse that worked out in their favour - people were predisposed to dismiss sete, valentino had gotten a reputation for making enemies out of all of his rivals. casey's whole coming of age thing with valentino is that he also has to learn to embrace the dark arts - both on-track aggression and whispering to the media, as he has repeatedly discussed. he learned to use those skills against valentino!! he's the rival who actually stands up to valentino rhetorically and not just on the track, who's willing to go toe to toe with valentino in the press. what casey says about valentino in 2011-12 goes so WILDLY beyond what any other rival has said about valentino, quite frankly in terms of sheer frequency it quite possibly outstrips what valentino has ever done to a rival. they're the two who are most adept at trading blows in the press! where they just have these proxy wars through the media that make you go. wow every single line is a banger here. both quite poor at saying any of that to each other's faces, mind, but that adds to the charm of the rivalry

so yeah... both of these as coming of age rivalries for valentino and casey respectively... both are kinda rivalries that made them WORSE. on some level anyway. valentino gleefully coming up with multiple custom shirts to mock sete versus casey being dragged kicking and screaming to a point where he competently uses the press against valentino. hey, you even get shirt drama in both! aND crew chief drama! they've got it all! idk i just love the vibe that they've both been on a lil corruption arc... ofc the way this works is that valentino low key corrupts himself and then very much helps casey along the way - like i haven't focused on it here but obviously valentino very much gives as good as he gets in the casey rivalry lol. AND they're both obsessed to the point where they're FREAKS about it,, like valentino is SO determined to humiliate sete and casey gets SUCH a kick out of humiliating valentino that it's very... wow you little weirdos... keep going... and they're never ever going to quite move on because they still have to be Weird about the whole thing and stick to their chosen narratives... idk!! i do think these two rivalries are in conversation more than people think. to a point where it also quite helpfully showcases the similarities between valentino and casey when you use the sete rivalry as a comparison. ughhh such top tier rivalries i love them

[plague-of-insomnia]

Is Sebastian a Narcissist?

Recently, I came across a series of old posts translating some things from Yana’s now lost blog, in which she did an exercise to draw 30 different facial expressions for Sebastian.

The “shy” one particularly caught my eye because the translation describes Sebastian as “ultra narcissistic” and therefore he can’t really be shy.

[begin screenshot]

[end screenshot]

Now Yana does indeed use the word “narcissist” here (“narushisuto”), but keep in mind that loan words often have slightly different meanings/connotations in Japanese than they do in their original source language.

I do not have a loan word dictionary handy unfortunately, but I did do some investigating in one of my fave online Japanese-language dictionaries (it basically lets you see definitions from various sources at once).

The top definition describes a narcissist as someone who is so in love with themselves they’re “drunk” off of it.

The definition does not use the exact term, but there is a phrase in Japanese that essentially has this meaning. It’s a kind of phrase called “yojijukugo,” and these are always made up of four kanji.

In this case, they are 自己陶酔, which literally means “oneself, self, pottery, drunk,” or less literally, self-intoxication. In other words, extreme vanity.

Additionally, the words weblio includes as synonyms mean things like “pretentious,” “conceited,” acting “full of oneself.” It has a negative connotation and is probably intended as the opposite of the Japanese cultural ideal of the group before the individual.

Put this together with how Yana explains that it’s difficult/impossible to flatter him because he’s such a “narcissist,” and I think we have to assume that Yana isn’t meaning it the way we might here in the West when we use that word. Instead, I think what she means is that Sebastian is self absorbed and overly-vain, which makes sense based on what we’ve seen of him in the manga.

Now, ofc we can use narcissist in a similar way in English, as dictionary.com says:

[begin screen shot]

[end sceeen shot]

But, often it has more of an association with the second one, and I think we definitely need to steer clear of that connotation when we look at Yana’s intent. (As far as I could see, that word is not used for the disorder in Japanese, but as I am not an expert on medical Japanese I could definitely be wrong, there.)

Nevertheless, I think we can all agree that Sebastian is vain and self absorbed, though I do think he’s changed significantly over the four years he’s been working with Ciel, and it will be interesting to see if he overcomes this “flaw” before the manga ends.

(I personally don’t feel you can apply a disorder to a nonhuman like Sebastian, but that is not really the point of this post and I would prefer not to get into discourse. I am not trying to say people with NPD are demonic or anything like that. Simply analyzing what Yana said and what that might mean.)

[ryuichirou]

Re: Gaslighter Rook. I wanna preface this by saying ofc people are free to hc whatever they want but I have some issues with what the other person said and how dismissive they acted about the whole thing. I apologize if this invites drama or discourse, that is absolutely not my intention, I moreso just want to share the other side's point of view for the sake of balance since you said you don't mind civil discussion even if we disagree. Firstly, yes a lot of the arguments for this come from the labcoat vignette. However, it is not all just because of one line. In the same vignette, Rook tells Vil he can't trust his own eyes because Rook knows him better than Vil knows himself which is a very common gaslighter tactic. He then further mentions that people will leave him unless he does what Rook tells him to and puts down the "me or everyone else" argument. Rook further tries to undermine Vil's ability to trust other people in Vil's dorm vignette by saying the other dorm members would never appreciate Vil's efforts for them even if they knew about them – a blatant lie that however still makes Vil withdraw from talking to them about it. During Vil's overblot, Rook refuses to give Vil personal space while he's having a mental breakdown and repeatedly asserts that Vil "doesn't deserve" it as well as claiming to be responsible for punishing him. After VDC, Rook not only claims that his vote was the deciding one despite having no way of knowing that but also claims it was the objectively correct thing to do as, again, Vil didn't deserve to win, simply because having a mental breakdown is ugly (since he was referring to the overblot, not the attempted cursing – which was never confirmed to be intended to be lethal by the way, that was also just Rook's assumption, one Vil, a character who already struggles to communicate with people especially if he feels they see him negatively, didn't fight but also didn't confirm). I also take issue with the claim that it cannot be abuse just because Vil respects Rook. Even ignoring how often irl abuse victims don't realize they're abused because of their warped perception of their abuser, we have examples of this even in twst. Mrs. Rosehearts wasn't a wonderful mother who suddenly became abusive when Riddle stopped making excuses for her behavior. Abuse doesn't stop being abuse because it isn't recognized and to a lot of us gaslighting victims, Rook's behavior is spot-on with things we went through, hence why we call him a gaslighter. Oh and a small note before anyone claims anything, according to multiple psychology sources, gaslighters aren't always aware of what they are doing. Me and others calling Rook a gaslighter don't automatically mean he WANTS to be evil toward Vil. Some of us see it that way while others don't but regardless, acting as though this headcanon comes from one single out of context line and not from a pattern of behavior Rook consistently displays feels very disingenuous and like it's trying to make us seem crazy when all we try to do is explain why we may not be comfortable with a character.

You don’t have to explain why you are uncomfortable. Neither me nor that Anon have made any judgment about it, and frankly, who cares why you don’t like a character. You don’t need reasoning for not liking him, a person might just think Rook’s hair is stupid or dislike characters with green eyes, and that’s enough. None of this makes you crazy, and this isn’t that deep.

If you look at the first ever reply I did on this topic, I said it then (and after that I said it time and time again):

Based on what you’re saying, your opinion is influenced by your past experiences. Which isn’t a bad thing, we all have our own biases, but it makes a proper discussion quite difficult, especially when there is trauma involved.

Because we love Rook as much as you hate him, and I fail to see why we should align our feelings and experiences with yours. This is not a public debate platform, this is not a discord server, this is my personal blog, and my opinion is always going to be prevalent here. I usually try to take the position “agree to disagree” also to avoid situations like this.

You’ve said that you just want to explain and share your side of the conversation, but in that case claiming that the other side’s opinion is dangerous or uninformed is a pretty shitty thing to do, just as it is shitty to completely ignore the points they were trying to make and put words into their mouths instead, alluding to them victimblaming and dismissing real victim’s struggles. What I’ve said multiple times at this point is that Rook Hunt isn’t a gaslighter. Not that it’s Vil’s fault for trusting him, not that if Vil respects him that it automatically makes Rook not an abuser (Anon didn’t say that either). Not that Rook is always right. Not that Rook has never hurt Vil. I’ve even said that we can’t say for certain that Rook’s brutal honesty is always helpful and doesn’t affect Vil in any bad way:

Maybe sometimes it would be better for Vil to just take it easy and relax instead of perfecting every single thing, but this isn’t what Vil wants for himself: he doesn’t want to be pampered, he wants to be appreciated for his hard work.

Just because this is what Vil wants doesn’t mean that this is what’s best for him. I still don’t think that it makes Rook an abuser, by the way (which is also a completely different topic from Rook being a gaslighter). You have ignored every single argument I’ve made in all of my previous replies, which is fine, but then I don’t really see the reason for you to explain yourself if you’re not even going to listen to me again.

No one tried to paint you as crazy, and even if I or Anon thought that this entire argument (argument, not you) was weird, it doesn’t concern you. If Rook Hunt hurts you, why would you even interact with any discourse about him? Why did that very first Anon confront me for not calling Rook a gaslighter, if all you (collective “you”) people wish for is to explain your point of view? I am not an emperor of Rook Hunt land; I am a rando writing hcs about dicks on the internet. And Rook Hunt is a character of a gacha game.

I’ll repost another thing from my very first reply.

Just ignore shit that you don’t like because while it might be traumatic for you, to us it might be one of the few things that bring us happiness.

Please read this part carefully. And respectfully, let’s stop this. I don’t agree with any of your points/interpretation, I find them drastically off from Rook’s actual characterisation to the point that it’s almost baffling at times (I have read all the scenes you’ve mentioned and I disagree with your every single point.) And guess what, it’s absolutely okay. Like I, wow, have said time and time again, we all have our biases. Yours happens to be to read everything that Rook does in the worst way possible and to compare him to Riddle’s mom. Mine happens to be very different, and insisting on me just missing the point or thinking or feeling the wrong way or not being educated enough about gaslighting or abuse (something that I also experienced, and you are aware of that) feels pretty disrespectful. This isn’t what I meant when I said that I don’t mind a civil conversation. This doesn’t feel like a conversation. Because, you know…

Even if it feels completely off to how I view it, I can appreciate or at least respect it if they respect the way I do things. And don’t imply that I don’t get it or I am stupid.

I won’t write an actual rebuttal to your points because one thing hasn’t changed from my very first post about the topic: this isn’t about Rook Hunt. And I don’t want to discuss the so-called danger of fictional tropes that don’t even apply to the character in my view. Also, stating that the way I headcanon a character’s behaviour and share my thoughts with others is dangerous to other people in real life (because someone is going to take my opinion as a course for their actions, I guess?) is also ironic. Why isn’t me drawing problematic ships or writing dark headcanons dangerous then? It’s the same logic, I have heard this argument multiple times, and I fail to see how it’s different right now. Rook Hunt is not a real person, we see his interactions with others from all points of view, he has actual writers with their own intentions (none of which is to portray Rook as a terrible, atrocious person, he’s not even 100% a villain, he’s a character that helped the princess in the original story, and I believe that his writers keep that in mind, ffs), and it is drastically different from the way I would treat this situation in real life: exactly because I would have to base my opinion on the lack of other perspectives and not witnessing the situations myself, and a bunch of other factors connected to the fact that this is real life, and in those cases I would prioritise the victim of someone’s suspicious actions. What a surprise.

I also believe that Katsu and I did our part so you could easily ignore our Rook-centric posts that make you uncomfortable. So please do your part and don’t interact with our Rook-centric posts (this applies to anyone who is deeply uncomfortable with this character or any other character, for that matter). Coming up with ways to mention Rook in posts so it's easily mutable for you and only you and still getting treated like an abuse apologist who spreads dangerous ideas makes one feel kind of silly for ever trying to be considerate and respectful. You’ll have to come up with ways to deal with that on your own now. This conversation is over.

This is also the last post I’m writing on this topic, every follow-up ask or comment about it (from anyone, anywhere) won’t be replied to.

[aihoshiino]

ngl just based on my memories of how nuclear the fandom discourse around this dungeon was i was actually expecting it to be a lot worse than it actually is, but running through it again relatively fresh not only is it not actually as bad as i thought it'd be, but the parts that are cringe inducing are obviously intended to be

shadows as they appear on the midnight channel are influenced not only by the person they emerge from but from external perceptions of them and the narratives created by the people who observe them. we see this more explicitly with rise whose dungeon is the most laser-focused on the horror and dehumanization of existing in other people's gaze but kanji sets it up here pretty straightforwardly; people make assumptions about kanji because of homophobic assumptions and ingrained stereotypes about not just queer men but any man who dares to poke one toe out of the tightly defined masculine role enforced upon him by society.

ofc this is still largely rather clumsy - kanji asserting it's girls who are the most homophobic towards him and not other men is laughable - and there will be a few too many Epic Homophobia Moments played for laughs later in the game for me to give P4 too much credit on this but i think for kanji specifically and in this moment, the narrative's heart is largely in the right place.

[malviral]

I have a bunch of scattered thoughts I wanna throw out there that are neither here nor there but have been beamed into my brain inspired by a bunch of posts on my dash. CW for mentions of SA.

I'm not really posting this to add to those posts or do any kind of discourse - friendly, ofc, everyone's posts have been delicious to read, and real and true, I'm so happy I have friends and mutuals who can talk about this kind of stuff and acknowledge the explicitly dark tone of Resident Evil as a series and actually want to engage with it BECAUSE of that cause lord I personally don't know what the fuck some people are doing here otherwise, but that's me and these are just some of my thoughts / opinions about general stuff and about my muse specifically.

So basically I'm very much in full support of writing/analyzing problematic content in fiction. I see no issue with this, specifically in like, an educational, artistic or otherwise personal way. I also don't really care if people are doing it exclusively for kink/fetish reasons. Not my cup of tea and not some shit I do personally, but I'm not a cop. I'm an adult who knows how to curate my space and otherwise not read/engage with things I don't like/am not comfortable with.

I definitely think people need to get more comfortable with being uncomfortable with Horror because that's literally the whole point of the genre. Its suppose to challenge and unsettle you. Horror is supposed to be an emotional experience and can be extremely cathartic for those reasons. If you think you're supposed to engage with horror and not feel unsettled/challenged in some way, to the point where you can't handle those feelings and think you need to sanitize the entire work and lash out at anyone who doesn't feel the same: horror isn't your genre and you need to stop making it everyone else's problem and I'm not gonna hold anyone's hand about that.

As a side note, once again, there are people out there who do find these things sexual/kinky, etc, and tbqh, that's not even the problem a lot of folks think it is, nor is it like... An indication of that person's moral character. Kinks are weird things. The human brain is a weird thing. The level of bad faith and paranoia I see people coming at people who have "weird" kinks/fetishes is completely unnecessary and totally detrimental to communities and society as a whole. Yes there are people out there who have "uncomfortable" kinks and fetishes and fantasies and sometimes they've done real harm to real people but they're the minority and in an online space where literally everything is fictional and completely intended to be kept that way the policing and paranoia isn't serving anyone in a positive way, its literally just abuse toward vulnerable people or people who have been dubbed "easy targets" for someone else's psychological gratification and that someone else is usually the real bad guy of the bunch, not the target of the abuse for whatever weird thing they might be "into" or might just be "suspected" of being "into."

Anyway, I digress, kill the cop in your head and stop entering spaces built from content/media that you know makes you uncomfortable with the excessive entitlement of thinking everyone should change/censor everything to cater to you and your personal tastes/feelings specifically. I don't know you and you don't know me in any meaningful way. I don't care. I'm in my lane and if anyone follows me with anything on their blog even vaguely suggesting they don't know RE as a series and are in anyway bothered or triggered by the core themes of either the series or my character specifically they're getting instant blocked and I don't care. No, I wont be tagging anything you could see within the games by default. I tag common triggers and things my mutuals and friends NEED tagged but ultimately, I'm not tagging core elements or tagging every little thing to make my blog "safe" for everyone or even caring about it being "safe" for everyone. No, I don't care that you only watched a youtube playthrough of RE8 or the RE2remake. No I don't care if those are the only games you've ever played and you only know my muse through DBD. None of that is my problem. On to Wesker specifically though and mentioning this cause it has been a theme of conversation and because it is something I've experienced so many times as a Wesker writer and because its just.... Popular in the fandom. No, my Wesker is NOT a rapist or sexual abuser in any capacity. This isn't none of that I need to sanitize him type shit, I just genuinely never read this from his character and I don't believe its present in canon or anything anyone could see as a suggestion of it is intentional in canon. This is my portrayal of Wesker, so, yeah my thoughts are: He has never sexually abused Jill. Personally, I never saw this as suggested and for me, the fact that I mostly only ever encountered it in very.... Shipping focused sphere (Whether for those who ship Chris/Jill as a point of ANGST or those who ship Jill/Wesker as an erotic or whumpy thing) tells me those factors are what primarily colors it. For me I don't need anything extra in the Jill/Wesker or Chris/Wesker ships to cause tension and skeeve. It is what it is on its own LMAO. Wesker also didn't bleach her hair and no her hair turning blond had nothing to do with Wesker's personal taste, certainly nothing to do with him liking 'blonds' or anything like that. Again. Most of the times when I encounter these perspectives they're heavily colored by shipping and not canon itself. He would not sexually assault or insinuate he wishes to sexually assault Claire. This was in the SD Perry novels and... They're not canon. Wesker's a bastard but beating the crap out of her was more than enough as far as being a wretched bastard goes.

He was not predatory toward Rebecca or sexually interested in her. Wesker and Rebecca barely ever interact and when they do there is absolutely ZERO suggestion Wesker is interested in her at all. Theres a scene in the RE1 remake where he shoots her with zero emotional lead up or response. Cold as fuck. I could see Wesker having an interest in her in the sense of her profession and because she was similar to him in that regard but he was not creeping on her in a sexual way. This comes from a easter egg were you can find an undeveloped picture of Rebecca in her sports uniform in Wesker's desk. that was nothing but weird pervy Japanese humor and had nothing to do with Wesker IC + theres about 1000 innocent reasons for it to be there. Theres also Wesker mode in RE0 which is not canon and is again just capcom being kinda weird but the idea was Rebecca in Jill's place, which again, since I don't think we're suppose to see Jill and Wesker as sexual, I don't see that for Rebecca either. Again, outside of a shipping tint, its just not there for me. To me, Wesker is not sexually aggressive or coercive. We've never seen any suggestion of him acting this way in canon. Wesker does bad things to people, such as "kidnapping" and experimenting on Jill, beating the fuck out of Claire and shooting Rebecca, but we've never canonically seen him behave sexually / inappropriately toward any of them. To me if this exists in canon in any capacity its always done as a weird gag and comes from Japanese humor which is not really a problem with Wesker himself but more with pervy Japanese game devs avatar-ing him for a non-canonical second due to the a difference in culture and what is and isn't ok/funny. We really don't see sexual behavior from Wesker at all. He comes off almost completely asexual in canon and that's how I depict him. I mean, on the two occasions when anyone made any sexual suggestion toward Wesker he completely ignored / rejected it. Both scenes boil the brains of gooners especially when the two women who made suggestions/passes at him are considered two of the most beauitful/desired women in the series. (Excella and Ada specifically.) I have literally seen fanboys discuss this at length and I love how they always come to conclusion that Wesker is just SO ALPHA MALE pussy doesn't phase him. Which, yknow. Not entirely wrong.

Personally, the asexual aspect of Wesker was probably the reason I took such interest in him AS a character way back when because ever since I was small the weird kinda asexual freak has been my freak because thats what I most related to. And for me this does SPEIFCIALLY take into account what Richard said about Wesker and sex in the sense of Wesker being someone who sees sex and violence as similar. I understand this COULD be used as evidence to the opposite and to the idea of Wesker indeed being a sexually violent person who would force himself on someone but I think that particular angle ignores all the other evidence to the contrary and to me Richard just didn't say it this way -- like, to me his intention was to give people the idea that Wesker was indeed somehow outside of the standard idea of heterosexuality and even homosexuality given he spoke about this in direct relation to someone asking what female character Wesker wants to sleep with or if Wesker is actually interested in Chris in a gay way. For me, the fact he said its not about gender for Wesker and he's rather interested in anyone who can ""challenge"" him was to convey Wesker isn't really as interested in sex as such as your Average Guy and further his interest in people has nothing to do with things like gender or superficial attractions like a pretty woman or even a hot man, its deeper than that for Wesker. And yeah he could have just said this in a "please all the shippers" kinda way but, idk. Mr Waugh is brained to me and made Wesker what he is as a character so, Idk. Again. I'm putting it with all the canon stuff we do see regarding Wesker and sex/sexuality which is pretty much nothing. And while I believe the moment with Excella was more the resident evil version of " Don't you wanna Rev up your Harley " in the sense I think its idiotic to think there wasn't actually something going on with Wesker and Excella, the fact is, no Wesker didn't have what the fandom or most people, especially heterosexual men, consider "the correct heterosexual man" reaction to what was essentially an incredibly hot woman he is in a close relationship with telling him he has a big dick and she's gonna bounce on it crazy style.

My next point is we have the relationship with Jake's unnamed mother. We know almost nothing about it but what we do have paints a very interesting picture of Wesker in the sense that Jake's mother genuinely seemed to love him and had absolutely no ill-will toward him and wanted Jake to love and respect him too. This implies it was a little more than a fling and more importantly that Wesker apperently treated her with enough kindness and respect that she thinks so fondly and positively of him even after he was no longer in the picture for whatever reason we could imagine. Lastly. I just don't see Wesker as the kinda guy who needs to utilize rape. Not even just in the sense that he's supposed to be extremely conventionally attractive and we're supposed to have the idea women (and men) would and have been throwing themselves at him, because we know rape isn't really about sex/lust/love, its about power and control at the end of the day and I also think Wesker has more than enough of his fix of power and control to not need to get it from forcing people into sexual acts.

And there are things in all of this that, to me, rather indicate that Wesker's probably been more on the receiving end of sexual harassment than ever perpetrating it. But thats really speculation/implication for me and me being someone who actually examines and leans into the idea of Wesker actually being queer and not the evil cishet perfect picture of the ultimate oppressor that the fandom often likes to take him as. Anyway, TL;DR, Weskers a lot of bad shit but to me he is not a rapist/sex pest/sexual abuser to me and especially not on this blog, thanks for reading.

[myjunkisyuzuruhanyu]

Do you think you'll ever feel the way you felt about yuzu or shoma about another skater? I've been a fan since the last olympic season (which isn't that long tbh) and while I like a whole bunch of skaters and always found myself finding a new skater to root for with every competition I watched, nobody comes close to how I feel about shoma, how much I wanted him to do well, how my heart would race when he was on the ice, how happy and sad I felt for him. I'm worried I'll never feel that way about another skater even though I really fell in love with the sport...

I thought about this question a lot actually and answering it feels like a closure to being a fan of these two - and they are retired not gone - , so I didn't answer when I first read your ask...so pardon me for answering late...and this isn't the end of being emotionally super invested into my "super favorites" even if it feels like the end of an era as a fan for me...

Yuzu and Shoma will always have a special place in my heart and both have contributed to my love for figure skating greatly. Yuzu is the reason I started to follow men figure skating and who made me interested in rules and fs technique. Shoma is the skater that made me go to figure skating competitions (where I met so many wonderful ppl who became real friends) and Shoma is also one of the reasons for a happy interaction with fans (bc truth be told I always felt much more welcomed by the Unoverse than by Fanyus). Then ofc there are all their skating programs and competition moments I loved to witness. In a way I don't think that I will ever find other skaters I will love as much and who make me as active in the fs fandom as Yuzu and Shoma did. I mean they are essentially the reason this blog exists and I even get to answer your question at all. I will probably most definetly not put as much work and thought into a blog for another skater (also partly bc I have grown up and I am now at a different point in my life than when this blog started. And tbh I value the fandom experience much less than years ago. This fandom was too much at times and also toxic occasionally and bc I am who I am I found myself thinking way too much about fan discourses and a detox from this way of interaction in fandom is what I strive for in the long run. Which doesn't mean I will disappear just that sharing will be less.)

I also do have experiences with my favorite skaters retiring (and even disappearing completely) I went through this with a lot of gymnasts that I stanned years ago since 2007 and also in figure skating with Yuna Kim and Mao Asada. Yuna Kim was and still is my alltime favorite female skater. And no other female skater that came afterwards I loved as much. She is the reason I fell in love with skating in the first place and imo the rivalry with Mao Asada is unparalleled up until today. This was such a great time in women skating era. But Yuna Kim quitting and later Mao too, made me not like the sport any less and this way I discovered new skaters - Yuzu first, later Shoma.

What I am trying to tell is that it's possible to find new "super favorites" AND I think as long as you like watching a sport you will watch the sport regardless if you have a personal "super favorite" or not. Just don't worry if you will ever feel the same about someone else. Because watching fs should bring you joy not worry. I don't think you can tell atm if you will EVER find someone else. Maybe you won't, maybe the feeling will be different but not less intense. It's always hard to tell what you will like and do at an "end" of something. Just never say never. I never imagined myself to go to competitions without Shoma or Yuzu in and for the last years I did that on a regular basis and intend to keep it that way (GPF 2024 in France anyone???). And maybe it's also nice for a change to not be so stressed about competitions with no "super fave" in them though maybe that's a lie to myself as I do still have favorite skaters I root for 😅.

I am not really sure where I am heading with any of this or if anyone can take anything away from my answer. Just "you do you"!

I just want to tell you that there is no right and wrong way of being a fan of this sport or a skater whether it's a skater you feel intensely about or you just like a skater enough to root for them, whether you actively take part in the fandom or not. In all these years I learned that feelings are feelings and you should live in that moment. The feelings may change over time, you may lose interest in a sport or a person, but just always do everything that suits the way you live your real life. And tbh the way I lived this fandom was too extreme at times, so maybe a little less emotional investment in a sport/skater is maybe not for the worst.

If there is one good thing to take away from Shoma's retirement it's that I will definitely not go to Boston Worlds and my bank account says "thank you Shoma" for that. Lol

Giving everyone who feels a bit sad or lost or at a crossroad with figure skating because of Shoma's retirement a virtual hug! 🫶

[dearweirdme]

(warning, this got way longer than anticipated sorry)

ik this is probably a dead topic to you and i apologize for bringing it up again but i was just rewatching the leaked jk videos of him in his apartment with that girl bc i saw some discourse abt it in another tkk blog’s comments. some jk stan who’s convinced he’s straight, that he was sleeping arnd/had a girlfriend, and that we’re all delusional came in the comments and basically started stirring shit lol. they mentioned they believed he was dating that tattoo artist girl who he was photographed w his arms arnd as well. but i thought she had a bf at the time of that pic being released? idk fs tho and that pic def gave off close friend vibes to me?

anyways, seeing the discourse made me go back and watch the video again and the more i watch it the more conflicted i get. like he is rlly all over her. arms wrapped all around her and walking holding her from behind like that. ofc it’s POSSIBLE that they’re just friends especially if he is gay/queer (ik that kind of physical affection is more typically acceptable between queer men and straight women than when both parties are straight). but to me for some reason it seems improbable and like that’s just an excuse to keep myself believing in tkk ? like really…we’re convincing ourselves him and the girl he had at his apartment at night alone w him are just friends when almost everyone and their mother would see that as clearly romantic and crossing platonic boundaries ? he’s THAT close, comfortable, and affectionate w a girl he’s just friends with ?

lol subconsciously i feel like im probably submitting this to ur account hoping ur response will give me reassurance that the interaction was not romantic even when it’s likely that it was. to me the video is clearly real and it is actually jungkook so that’s not at all the part that im debating about, but just the nature of the interaction ig ? like how long am i going to convince myself he’s queer and w taehyung when theres a lot that implies otherwise…

but then i think back on the reasons why i believe in tkk and that makes me even more confused lol. bc if i tell myself to just accept that jk is straight/not romantically involved w taehyung then idk how to make sense of many of tkk’s interactions either. like the kappa sweethearts tshirt is the one that rlly gets me for some reason. bc there’s no shot it was a coincidence they were wearing such a specific niche tshirt on the same day at the same time too. and why would friends wear matching literal “sweethearts” tshirts? they wouldn’t right? ik other ppl value the dream premiere and other moments more but those tshirts are so unarguable that it’s something i always circle back to. like to me saying their clothes at the dream premiere were intentionally queer coded is not something that is necessarily factually true. it’s more so an assumption after extensively digging into the background of their clothes which they may or may not have even noticed/intended. that to me could be argued as a coincidence but the kappa shirts are 100% the same specific tshirt and it was 100% the same day. that being a coincidence is less likely to me.

the other thing is the way they keep their friendship/relationship so much more under wraps than the others. but maybe that’s something we’ve just convinced ourselves of when maybe they haven’t rlly been that private/secretive abt it? idk i just go round and round in circles. i’ll come to a point where i feel SO sure that tkk are romantically together (especially with how explicit tae is w his support of the queer community) but then i’ll see some shit like that video of jk in his apartment w a girl and the whole thing gets derailed.

sorry i’ve just talked in circles atp and i could probably go back and forth w more examples for forever but yeah idk just wanted to hear your thoughts bc idk how you’re able to stay so secure in believing they are together. and i don’t think u seem like the type to just continuously convince urself of something that is delusional through confirmation bias and disregard of opposing evidence.

Hi anon!

Yeah, you probably ar submitting this because you want me to reassure you 😊 and that’s totally fine honestly. I mean, we are invested in Tae and Jk and stuff can really become complicated and confusing at times. Being confused is never a great feeling and you just want to not feel confused.

I need things to be realistic myself as well. I don’t need Jk and Tae to be together, I basically just think they are. I’m not afraid to step away from them if I feel they’re no longer together (or.. if they never were). And I will definitely let everyone know if/when I ever feel like something is off (and right after that I will hide because Jkkrs and anti’s will come for my head 😂).

To me it is all about the things I know for sure. Like Tae wearing that t-shirt for instance.. on the same day as Jk when he shot that mv. To me that is something strong and real talking in favor of them being together. Same goes for other situations: Tae and Jk at that hotel after/before Dubai, Jk singing that song to Tae, BH acting weird about them (and them alone), the way Tae constantly mentions Jk… and I could go on for a while probably. Those are actual things we have witnessed.. things that are real and when you look at the whole of it.. things that are consistent and that we have witnessed for a prolonged duration of time.

When I look at the footage of supposedly Jk with that girl, I see a person backhugging a girl for a real short amount of time. I have no context, I have no clue about there being more people or not. I can also clearly see that the footage is manipulated. I know it was released at a shady timing, with the purpose of harming him. I know that there’s an actual platform where people who hate him gather and plan stuff like this.

So when I put what I know is true about Jk and Tae next to what I know of that footage… the scale just tips over. I do not trust shady footage more than I trust what I know of Jk and Tae. And I might be wrong.. absolutely. But I just don’t think I am.

If I had no knowledge about Tae and Jk before seeing that footage.. maybe I wouldn’t have secondguessed it as well. But, I do have that other knowledge and therefore if I see something that goes against that.. I look at what’s fed to me more critically.

I don’t know if this has settled your mind anon. Personally I always feel fine with not having all the answers, but I can also understand that can be real unsettling. Maybe try and land in the ‘I don’t know for now’ zone for a bit?

[thepringlesofblood]

pls help me figure out what pride flags these are

so i've been making a pride flag index just for my own personal reference and several of the picrews i've been messing with lately have pride flag backgrounds that i just can't place. i've tried looking them up, with mixed success, and i figured I could use tumblr scrying as a last resort.

putting em under the cut bc pictures big but ill link the relevant picrews ofc

important: no one make fun of or do discourse about any of these identities/flags or be mean to the picrew ppl. I just want to know the the identity(s) associated with these flags bc I enjoy knowledge. might post my full index when I can.

also. there are many (good!) online flag indices. none of them have these. i just gotta solve the mystery

from this picrew:

1 (found! it's a boyflux flag!)

2 (found! it's the ace-spectrum (or acespec) flag!)

3 (found! this is a pomogender flag)

4 (found! it's the demiboyflux flag)

5 (found! it's a disability pride flag)

then from this picrew

6 (found! it's a relatively new sapphic lesbian flag by a biracial lesbian named Lydia - 7 is the original, 6 is a variant she made to look more aesthetically pleasing)

7 (this is the original, and the above is a variant rearranged for aesthetics)

this one. has many flags. i legit couldn't get through them all. i'm choosing to just try to find these 3. it's like a ball so i extended the flags a bit to make em more recognizable.

8 (found! it's the cenelian flag!)

9 (possible identification: a combination of the toric and trixic flags?)

10 (found! it's an abroromantic flag)

lastly, from this one

11 (found! it's the new polyamorous pride flag)

will update w answers if I find them. thank you for your service picrew creators o7

UPDATE: thanks @hernymills for letting me know that 11 is the new polyamorous pride flag, and 5 is a disability pride flag!

UPDATIER UPDATE: thank you so much to @allexistencevoid for ID'ing all of these! the only mystery remaining is if 9 is indeed intended to represent both the toric and trixic communities, or if it has a different or additional meaning. @allexistencevoid identified that a combo of the toric and trixic colors were used, but neither of us have found this specific flag on its own.

I found a bunch of other flag indices through googling all of these identities too! god i love information lol

[spotsupstuff]

You brought up something interesting about Pebble’s characterization the other day! You mentioned that he has self-respect and now I’m curious how you define it.

For me, I’ve always thought Pebbles was a kind of person who hid his own insecurities, fears, and vulnerability under his prickliness. He struck me as someone with an ego but didn’t think high of himself as a person. It’s not something he actively thinks and is just in the background of his own subconscious. Most of this headcanon comes from his entire existence being controversy, his constant comparison to Moon, and many people just not liking him. That sort of treatment would wear anyone down and affect their internal dialogue.

So I think Pebbles has self-respect and doesn’t tolerate the more obvious slights that push him past his limits, but regarding things like Sun? Not so much. Canonically, we get dialogue on his anger of Suns own faults in the Incident (TM), yet there’s nothing on Suns as a person (to my knowledge). How they failed Pebbles as a mentor and friend.

The only reasons I can think of are the rose-tinted glasses of Suns not quite coming off despite the anger, and Pebbles having low self-esteem. At least to the point where he wouldn’t consider how Sun’s personal faults have dragged him down.

Most of this just comes my own headcanon mind you. There was an immense amount of expectations placed on Pebbles from his colony, a controversy over his existence, demeaning opinions from other iterators, and then the comparisons to Moon. Put all of that on our little spitfire and you have what you see. Expectation combined with belittlement leaves little room for a healthy self-esteem.

My own idea of Pebbles healing comes from him learning to love himself. Part of self-love comes from acknowledging your own faults and holding yourself accountable. Another part is seeing what you deserve better people in your life.

This entire rant is summed up by, “Pebbles never seems like he loved himself enough to realize just how much Suns failed him. It was not just the rot pearl. It was their entire relationship.”

my idea is basically just that i like the idea of this person (Suns) who presents themselves in a glorious perfect light n ofc people are going to flock to that (as they want and intend) and this is something that Pebbles finds himself looking up to (+ the fact that in my stuff all of them are family) and so this intense sense of trust comes to be. even self-respecting people can slip and stay with someone if it's subtle enough. because there's no way this person who i trust and love so much could hurt me so much. and through the subtlety and the long time it takes to get better it evolves into smth worse without being noticed

the "godlike in comparison" comes to mind, too. he knows he's mighty, that's just a fact to be stated, and he won't downplay it and will rather flash it. he talks to survivor about it and i'm just imagining a person preening themselves in front of their pet. y'know. as a healthy n certain of themselves person would. Pebbles also says that the discourse over his creation never really bothered him and only gave to amusement. for the sake of variety and uniqueness, i choose to believe him, because everyone always likes to jump the "oh he has to have deep internal issues that causes this, what a poor guy" wagon. this repeats absolutely everywhere, everyone always goes to the "this character is very bad on it and emotionally unhealthy", how many times has one worked with a character that is actually stable and has strength in themselves?

as a person who has gone through dark things. as a person who believes that i'm good and stable now despite all the shit i did go through. i want to see a healthy fictional character dealing with social injustice and a rotten apple, fight for themselves because they know their worth and have a clear righteous goal set in front of themselves

it's a result of personal preference and perception, as well as my stated lack of care to stick to the canon guns religiously

[womenclature]

Hi, just putting this out there kindly. You might have misunderstood the language in the screenshot. I find this interesting and I hope my explanation helps a little. If it does not speak to what you are asking, let me know. The language in the screenshot is not saying whether or not the embryo is producing zygotes yet. It is saying that the embryo "belongs to a sex” (in this case, either male or female, ofc). It is true that the embryo’s biological sex is determined at the moment of fertilization. This occurs when the sperm, carrying either an X or Y chromosome, combines with the egg, which always carries an X chromosome. Later on, that embryo, depending on its biological sex, will produce either the large gamete (egg) or the small gamete (sperm).

As for how early this happens, gamete precursors (PGCs) are present and active in both XX and XY embryos by 4-6 weeks post-conception. Only XX embryos (developing ovaries) generate gametes (oocytes) actively during embryonic development, starting meiosis by 9 weeks. Meanwhile, XY embryos (developing testes) generate gametes (spermatogonia) later, only after puberty. However, again, the executive order shown above is not relying on the embryo to begin generating gametes before the embryo’s sex can be determined in a legal context. (In my opinion, the mention of "reproductive cells” there is a little distracting, but I think it is intended to take the discourse away from XX and XY chromosomes. I’m not sure, but maybe this is because XX and XY chromosomes tell 99.999% of the biological story, but there is that 0.001%. For example, various sexual development syndromes like Swyer Syndrome or AIS can potentially cause XY-chromosomed individuals to develop a female external appearance and reproductive anatomy (to varying degrees depending on the individual).)

quick question if any biologists are awake

how the fuck do we know what reproductive cell produces what at the moment of conception

doesn’t it take like a week for the zygote to even fucking make it’s way downtown to even start getting blasted with any hormones?

[louisliamforever]

https://www.tumblr.com/louisliamforever/780123397374050304/agree-with-your-takes-im-losing-interest-in-them

Ditto to your tags, like yes I get some entertainment out of the louara discussions because I’m nosey lol and I’m always down for celebrity drama gossip but also tbh I don’t really care lmao. Probably because I’m not a stan, no offense intended to any one who is ofc! I’m just mainly here for Lilo is all, if I stan anything it’s their amazing friendship and whatever tf else was going on or had potential of going on between them because good lord were they intense lol

Right! Like it was fun when it began and the L*rries and super attached Louie's were losing their minds but going on whatever week without any more content from Louara has my interest waning. At the end of the day my blog is the house of Lilo. I enjoy the kiki-ing and the discourse but it's kinda dragging without any major new Louara content.