#not that he's right but humans generally have to find some way of justifying their actions to themselves

[ckret2]

I saw a theory that the journal pages Bill shares in tbob are fake. Thoughts?

Don't buy it, not interested.

When Bill lies, the story finds ways to show us that he lies. The show doesn't let him get away with claiming he liberated his dimension without outing him as a liar by letting us hear the Euclideans' screams; the book doesn't let him get away with claiming the pharaoh was his bestie without outing him as a liar by including a quote from the pharaoh about how annoyed he was by Bill. Whenever Bill lies, it's not subtle, it's not secret, and the story around him makes a point of exposing his lies as blatantly as possible. He's not allowed to get away with it.

The idea that the journal pages are fake comes from readers going "but hold on, didn't we already see the fully repaired Journal 3?" "isn't Ford's hair slightly wrong here?" "doesn't this contradict the timeline in some places?" etc. Details you wouldn't know or notice unless you're armpit deep in Gravity Falls lore. If you have to think real hard to realize Bill might be lying about something... it's probably not intended to be a lie.

If it was meant to be a lie, the book would have showed us somehow. One of the letters from Ford would have blatantly contradicted the information we get in the journal pages; or, Bill would have provided fake pages saying such outrageous things that we'd KNOW Ford couldn't have possibly written them ("my muse is so wonderful and perfect and brilliant and I regret not joining him to conquer the world sooo much, if only my stubborn short-sighted human pride and dumb family loyalty weren't stopping me from making the right decision" etc).

My theory is that the guy who hasn't worked on the show for the better part of a decade, with a proven track record of accidentally making the main characters the product of two generations of teen pregnancies and sending the cast on a road trip the episode after building a magical barrier that will protect them only if they're inside the shack, decided to prioritize an interesting narrative over rigid adherence to timelines and 100% internally-consistent lore.

A theory is something you think might actually could be what's REALLY HAPPENING in canon; a headcanon is what you've privately decided is true solely for the version of the story that exists inside your own head. "The journal pages in TBOB are fake" is a perfectly workable headcanon, nothing wrong with it, you can fit it in and justify it with no trouble—but as a theory it holds no water.

[matan4il]

Hey! Anon from the last time here! By "Pro-Palestine Westeners" I was partially referring to all these students from Columbia and MIT who were illegally occupying the school grounds and harassing/hurting the actual Israeli/Jewish/Middle Eastern/the other generally decent students.

I know there's Pro-Palestine people who are actually decent, but all these college students are risking suspension/expulsion/jailtime because they'd rather chant pro-Ha*as slogans rather and listening to news from biased fonts rather than educating themselves on what's really happening. Some people would rather stay in their ivory towers, rather than going outside and touching grass.

I also know there's LGBT+ people in Palestine and other parts of MENA, and all I wish for them is that they live long enough to find a place where to live freely and out of the closet, without suffering persecution from their government.

Hope this clarified at least a little bit my other ask, and sorry it sounded so ambiguous. Finally, let's hope that Eden Golan gets at least in the top 5 at Eurovision 2024, just to spite anyone who booed her.

Hi Nonnie!

Thank you for sending this ask to clarify the previous one, it's what I thought you meant, and I'm glad to hear I wasn't too off.

TBH, as a gay woman myself, with gay Palestinian friends who are a part of my queer community, and whose struggles I know well, that's the first group I thought about as well. Then I thought about the fact that under Hamas law, husbands can rape their wives with impunity. I thought about the way the Christian population (the biggest non-Muslim minority under Palestinian rule) has demographically plummeted in the areas that Israel passed on to Palestinian control as a part of the Oslo accords. I thought about black people, whose ancestors were kidnapped because of the Trans-Saharan (i.e Arab) trade slave, and are still treated as lesser humans because of that (based on their skin color, they are still referred to in Arabic to this day as "Abeed," meaning slaves).

I think this last group, which most people don't even realize exists, deserves a bit more info shared about it:

Pretty sure black activists in the states, who don't know the history (and present) of the Arab slave trade, or the persisting anti-black racism that exists in Palestinian society, have no clue they're being exploited against the same Jewish community, which stood with Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement, even having some of its members paying with their very lives for this. I hope they wake up and realized they're being used for antisemitic purposes by the same people who enslaved and are still discriminating against some of their people.

But it's funny how the world's activists and human rights defenders seem to ignore the plight of these marginalized Palestinians, isn't it? Almost like, because they're NOT being oppressed by Jews, rather by fellow Palestinians, and can't be used to justify antisemitic rhetoric and action, then they don't count. So much for minority solidarity and intersectionality, right? It doesn't extend to Jews, and it doesn't extend to Palestinians who can't be weaponized against Jews.

Regarding the last bit of your ask, bless you for being hit with Apollo's dodge ball and predicting Eden making it into the top 5, despite every effort made by the jury members of so many countries, the awful people in the audience, and members of fellow delegations. It was magnificent!

Sending you hugs! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[foolishlovers]

hi bestie💖🫂

can you rec me some longer enemies to lovers AU? bonus if they are complete idiots.

thank you love!💕

of course, always 💜

here are some of my favourite longer good omens enemies to lovers AUs (ranging from 46k-201k):

[you can request more fic recs here.]

Fire, Bridges, and other Sensible Idioms by KiaraMGrey (E, 46k) To: The person who stopped the washer in the middle of my wash cycle and took my clothes out just to wash your own… You are an arsehole! Unfortunately for you, so am I. You can find your wet clothes frozen outside in the snow. If you have any problems with this, come see me in 301. or Aziraphale has a new neighbor, and they certainly don't start off on the right foot.

Intermezzo by FeralTuxedo (E, 47k) Music critic Aziraphale Fell is trying to break into the world of television, when he is signed to make a documentary about former-rockstar-turned-composer Anthony Crowley. It’s been eleven years since Aziraphale’s disastrous review of Crowley’s debut opera nipped his classical music career in the bud. He can only hope that Crowley will get over his admittedly justified grudge to make the TV show a success. A classical music sex comedy. Yes, really.

through the silent wood by summerofspock (M, 57k) When Aziraphale Eastgate first moves to Tadfield, he struggles to understand the strange culture of the village. They're not friendly or kind or anything he expected from a village in the north. So when he rescues a snake from a snow storm, he's glad for a little company even if it comes in the form of an animal. Unfortunately, in Tadfield, animals are often not what they seem.

Fifty-Two Blue by bendycello (M, 84k) It would be a gross understatement to say that Crowley simply didn't like Aziraphale. He was posh and stuffy and arrogant, and Crowley couldn't figure out why everyone else in the program liked him so much. It hardly mattered; they were competitors, and Crowley didn't need to make friends to become a surgeon. It takes several unleasant encounters, the excessive use of house plants as a coping mechanism, and getting stuck in an elevator for Crowley to start reconsidering his priorities. Or… Crowley and Aziraphale are surgical interns with competitive streaks a mile wide each, and they really do not like each other at all. Until they do.

Married at First Sight by Aracloptia (T, 146k) “Well, that was a thing,” Crowley said once they were out of earshot. Without talking about it, they were both heading down the field, towards the lake where the photographer (and likely a few more people from the TV crew) was waiting. “That was a wedding,” Aziraphale replied, surprised at his own annoyance that somebody called a wedding a ‘thing’. “Yeah, obviously, didn’t miss that part,” Crowley said with a shrug, and waved abruptly in Aziraphale’s general direction. “Neither did you, from the looks of it, since you’re dressed like a wedding bride and everything.” “Excuse me, I am a—“ Aziraphale stopped himself, and started over. In which Aziraphale ends up marrying a rude stranger who wears sunglasses.

Or Be Nice by charlottemadison (E, 151k) Crowley and Aziraphale are neighbours. And…it does not go at all well, until it does. A human AU in which Aziraphale is a bookseller, Crowley is a drummer, and they are both petty disasters in the worst/best way. +++ “So what’s your deal?” “My-my-my deal?” Aziraphale stammered. “I’m a bookseller, is my deal.” “Oh,” Crowley replied, sounding as uninterested as it was possible to sound. “It’s just, I couldn’t help overhearing, and --” Aziraphale swallowed hard. “You really are an accomplished musician. But I thought -- for after 11PM -- perhaps we could reach some arrangement?” “Arrangement?” Aziraphale felt his his smile turning forced. “Such as, perhaps, playing the drums before eleven? Instead of after?” Crowley stared blankly at him. In fact he stared for so long that Aziraphale briefly wondered if he'd lapsed into ancient Greek again, which he was known to do in bad dreams or during panic attacks.

The Curve of Old Bones by Jenanigans1207 (E, 201k) Aziraphale watches as Crowley’s smile grows, sharpens and turns distinctively dastardly. And even though Aziraphale knows what he’s in store for, he’s entirely unprepared for the words that slip out of Crowley’s mouth next. “Name’s Anthony Crowley, Aziraphale’s husband.” Aziraphale is eternally grateful that he wasn’t taking a sip of his tea at that exact moment for he would’ve surely choked on it. When Crowley claims to be Aziraphale's husband to ruin what he assumes is a date, he doesn't think anything of it. But a day later it comes back to bite him in the ass when Crowley finds out that the date in question is, in fact, his new boss, who is looking to hire Aziraphale and hoping that Crowley, his husband, will put in a good word for them. Now Crowley is caught in a tight spot: either admit to his new boss that he was lying, or convince Aziraphale, his sort-of enemy, to pretend to be his husband to save face.

stil on my tbr:

Miracles on Ice by HenriettaRHippo (E, 52k, WIP) Two rival figure skaters - Aziraphale and Crowley - must team up as the world's first male-male figure skating pair. There's just one problem…they can't stand each other. Can these two put aside their hatred to bring back the gold? Or was that hatred just a cover for deeper feelings bubbling under the surface? It's enemies to lovers, on ice! Crowley And The Chocolate Factory by entanglednow (E, 54k) Crowley has to step up for his nephew Adam when he wins a ticket to tour the famous chocolate factories, run by the reclusive and deeply strange Zira Zonka. It doesn't take Crowley long to decide that he wants nothing to do with the man, who's clearly hiding dark and mysterious secrets.

To Conquer A Grand Estate by MrsCaulfield, angelsnuffbox (M, 84k) 'He fought against another thing as well. He fought against hope, the warmth and pleasing sensation of it, wanting to bloom in his chest. He took it and kept it within confinement, aware that it would no longer do him any service. A foolish thing it was, to realise how greatly and ardently he could have loved Crowley now, when all love was vain.' Good Omens x Pride and Prejudice fusion that no one asked for

[you can find more fic rec masterposts here]

[spinji]

How old is AFO and OFA

[Mile long post incoming]

Long story short this is a theory/headcanon/thought exercise to keep my brain busy while I'm bored at work. I wanted to figure out a more precise estimate for how old All for One is since his birth is essentially the earliest moment of quirk society emerging and so his life spans the entire timeline of this story which I find interesting. And then the whole thing spiraled into a full One for All timeline of headcanons, so enjoy that.

To start though, it would be easy to guess that he's 120-and-some-change because of Garaki. Mic claimed Garaki would be about 120 (and we're just assuming he's exactly right instead of guesstimating for the sake of things) and Garaki confirms that his quirk allows him to live longer than a regular human lifespan, and when they met, All for One was given a copy so he could also live absurdly long. But I want to try a more exact method to ensure that his generations of adversaries could have actually reasonably worked time-wise. So, we can use Garaki's age to check our work but, reasonably, All for One should fall somewhere in the 120-150 range.

Right off the bat, we do have a frustrating lack of information regarding ages and time passing but there are a few things we can establish. Firstly, we know AFO and Yoichi are twins, so when determining age we can start both AFO individually and the OFA users as a collective at the same point. Secondly, Yoichi and AFO are shown to be the first people to have developed a quirk in the way we see in current time. There were vaguely quirk like mutations in people before that (like with their mother) but quirks as we know them are presented to us as originating from these two twins.

I bring this up because while Yoichi, Kudou, and Bruce are all in the same vague realm of "adult" at the same point in time, Yoichi has to be the oldest of the three. Even if it is only by a few years, Yoichi and AFO preceed any characters with a quirk. And while we're on the topic of Kudou and Bruce, we can safely say Kudou is the older one of the duo. He's confirmed to be the head leader of the resistance group against AFO and Bruce is second in command, so, frankly it would just be bizarre if Bruce was older in age but lower in rank. That being said, I don't think their difference in age would be significant.

Exact ages is where things get vague and headcanon-y. There isn't really any hard evidence I can point to other than "that sounds about right" and "I guess they look about that age" in an animation style that is notorious for just slapping a, borderline arbitrary, age on any design regardless of logic. So, rather than trying to justify it too much, my personal choices for their ages are, at Yoichi's time of death, Yoichi is 39, Kudou is 30, and Bruce is 27. At this point in the story AFO has been amassing power and followers for a while now, long enough for a resistance force to rise up against him but not long enough that he's considered it more than a nuisance for other people to handle until now. Late thirties seems pretty reasonable, possibly a bit too young but this man has also been killing people since he was 0.

For Kudou and Bruce I aimed for the older side of military age. Old enough to lead an operation like this but still young enough that AFO's rise to power was during most of their lifetime. Also, there's the issue of the age ceiling. Thanks to Shinomori (who I will get to), users 2 through 7 cannot have lived to be over 40 years old. That is a hard, non-negotiable cap on their ages as the strain of OFA alongside a different biological quirk drastically shortens a person's natural lifespan.

Anyway, back to AFO's age. If Yoichi dies at 39, this would also make him 39 (duh) and given the climate of the world at this point, I think Kudou lasted the shortest with OFA, personally. He receives the quirk immediately upon Yoichi's death after getting his blood in his mouth (Yoichi probably thought of him in his dying moments aww) and likely a week or two later is when Kudou and Bruce find out about it. The chapter frames Kudou finding out Yoichi carried on into him at the same time AFO has the same epiphany so, generously?? I give Kudou a year. Max.

All for One is now filled with seething hatred for Kudou specifically after Yoichi's death, so everything has been put on the back burner so he can both take the quirk from Kudou to get his "possession" back (ew) and to kill Kudou along with everyone he ever knew, loved, spoke to, looked at, or had any genetic lineage with. Even for a guy this powerful that is going to take a bit. A year gives AFO time to find information and strike down the entire resistance and time for Kudou and Bruce to think of a counter strategy and gain an understanding for how OFA works. So, Bruce takes the quirk at 28, Kudou dies at 31, and All for One kills him at 40.

After Kudou's death is a very big blank spot where I need to unfortunately just blindly headcanon again, so bare with me. Kudou and Bruce's plan was for Bruce to take the quirk and slip away from the massacre of the resistance to build OFA stronger and come back to finish the job. I believe that Bruce met Shinomori while he was lying low. Judging by the one image we have of Bruce confronting AFO, he did seemingly attempt to rally people together to defeat him, which would have taken a bit longer than when Kudou was leading an established resistance, since he didn't already have people under him. But he clearly thought to pass the quirk on again as a backup in case he lost, which is why he chose Shinomori to take it. With time needed to plan this attack and also get AFO's sights off him, I'd give it about five years between AFO's fight with Kudou and his fight with Bruce. It's estabished that Shinomori takes the quirk at 22 so, Bruce dies at 33, and All for One kills him at 45.

Shinomori is actually a very clear-cut piece of the timeline. He takes the quirk at 22 and dies at 40, having passed the quirk to the next user shortly before that because he realized his health was rapidly declining. He keeps the quirk for a total of 18 years, making All for One 63 at the time of his death. Judging by how the flashback panels are structured, AFO has received Garaki's quirk by this point.

Also, we have reached the point where every following user of OFA has been a professional hero, so I think it's safe to assume that each link in the chain met through either being colleagues or possibly through a sidekick internship. I doubt All Might was the first one to think of scouting hero students for successors. I'm going to assume that users 5, 6, and 7 were somewhere in the 16-24 range when they received the quirk for that very reason.

Moving on though, Banjo is the next user. I do think Banjo knew Shinomori for a somewhat significant time before his death. Banjo clearly knows about Shinomori's reclusive nature in some level of detail based on how they interact as vestiges and while it is possible for the already deceased OFA users to peer into the thoughts and memories of the current user, it doesn't appear to be the same retroactively, unless it's something the vestiges want to show the current user. All this to say I came to conclusion that Banjo was already likely a pro hero when he recieved the quirk from Shinomori. Shinomori realized what was happening and reached out to one of the few trusted friends he had to carry on the burden because he knew he could handle it. So I'm going to peg Banjo at being about 22 when he took the power as well. Old enough to be experienced as a pro with enough time to have actually met Shinomori before he died. Just like all the others, Banjo died to All for One after being trapped under rubble and gave the power to En just before he croaked. Given his bordering-on-middle-aged appearance, I'm going to put forward Banjo dying at 37 and All for One killing him at 78.

En also has very little information on him but since we only have speculation to work with, might as well stop apologizing for it. En appears to be significantly younger than Banjo, so I suspect he was an internship student to Banjo while he was a pro. Putting En at 17 when he recieved the power is both enough time for them to meet and get to know each other with En having to take the mantle from him sooner than either of them anticipated. En's appearance is still quite young, but he was confirmed to be a pro hero for a time, so he didn't have as short a run as Kudou. Nana was also already some level of hero (whether student or pro is unclear) at the time she recieved the power. Rather than mentor and student I believe they were fledgling colleagues, since Gran Torino fills the role as Nana's older pro mentor. All of this makes me vaguely place En dying at 25 and All for One killing him at 86.

I already mentioned Nana potentially being colleagues with En as their way of meeting. I still think she may have been younger than him at the time but not significantly so. En is another user that is shown passing on the power while at death's door and the following panel that shows Nana accepting it doesn't make her look significantly younger than how she does in any given scene in the series. So I don't think she was a child when she took the quirk but I'm going to set my guess at 20. But! While Nana is another character without a listed age, surprisingly, we can figure it out a good guess with actual evidence this time. Her son Kotaro, grandson Tomura, and pupil All Might all have stated, confirmed ages that we can use to make a feasible timeline for Nana.

Currently, All Might is 57 and Tomura is 21, meaning All Might was 36 when Tomura was born. Kotaro was killed at 32, when Tomura was 5, making him 27 when Yagi was 36. Nana died when All Might was in his last year at UA, making him 18, meaning Kotaro was 9 at the time. Nana gave All Might OFA when he was in middle school, judging by his uniform, so we'll assume he was 14 and Kotaro was 5. When Nana and All Might first meet, Nana states that her family is all dead, in a cold and distant manner. But that wouldn't be true if Kotaro was still in her life. This would mean that she met Yagi after the death of her husband and after Kotaro was sent away. And I'd wager to bet it was very soon after. Assuming Nana gave birth to Kotaro at around 25 years old (perfectly reasonable) then she would have passed the quirk to All Might at 30 and died at 34 after having the quirk for 14 years, making All for One 100 at the time of the transfer. Gran Torino also states that AFO is over 100 at the time Nana died, which makes this whole thing perfectly plausible.

From here things get a lot less speculative. All Might is listed as 55 at the beginning of the manga, adding on Izuku's last year of middle school and first year of high school puts him at 57. We already established he received the quirk at 14, meaning he held the power for 42 years + 1 year quirkless before All for One was finally killed at the grand age of 143. Which would mean that quirks have existed for just shy of one and a half centuries now and we fit comfortably inside our estimate goal!

Now, I'm one of those bad at math gays so if you have other thoughts on this, feel free to speak up. And you're more than welcome to adopt these age headcanons if you want. Later.

[fursasaida]

The pervasive sadism cannot be explained away as the behavior of soldiers at war, adapted to the needs of a new generation whose social media-addiction compels them to document their cruelty. The tendencies to revel and deny coexist, not just within the population but within the same person. Near the border with Egypt, a settler, there to block humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, tells a journalist that (a) the Palestinians are not starving, and (b) they will continue to receive no food (i.e. starve) until the hostages are released.

These justifications are not for him; he throws them at a wall, and the listener is free to see what sticks.

People ask what’s wrong with the Israelis because, I suspect, they find the depravity difficult to believe, let alone comprehend. [...] The cruelty itself...is somehow less disturbing than that it is presented with naked glee—no trace of the sober air that marks a person “doing what needs to be done” or an awareness that the rest of the world might not welcome overt, genocidal sadism as enthusiastically as the average Israeli. It’s like they can’t see us seeing them. Or maybe they don’t care. Attempts to explain Israeli behavior often reach for the biomedical. Surely this cannot be willed, they think, and so it must be pathological. In medicine, when a patient is unable to grasp their condition—as when a person experiencing hallucinations does not recognize them as such—we say they lack insight. Because we encounter the Israelis’ smug cruelty most acutely through individuals—be they government officials, soldiers, or formerly-known-as-Twitter warriors—it is easy to perceive it as an individuated “settler psychosis.” Psychosis replaces politics and history; it obscures how societies arrive at ideologies, reinforce and transmit them over time; and how dehumanization is preceded, constructed, and justified, so that it can be rendered with intention. [...]

[part of a longer discussion of the Nakba:] The justification behind implementation of the population “transfer” was that war suspends morality. In February of 1948, addressing the consciences and practical concerns of those who worried how the Zionists could build a state when they owned around 6 percent of the land, Ben Gurion reasoned, “The war will give us the land. The concepts of ‘ours’ and ‘not ours’ are peace concepts, only, and in war they lose their whole meaning.”

[...]

Zionism is a self-contained system of truth, with an origin story inspired by divine right, a bridge over its wretched beginnings. [...]

Looking at Israelis looking at Palestinians, it is easier to imagine they cannot see than to consider what it means for them to know. We psychologize, in some ways, to avoid having to. Settler psychosis, sick society, these people are not in their right minds—these are descriptive terms that reflect our inability to make sense, within a particular ethical or moral frame, of what we see; they do not interrogate etiology. The illness, given its prevalence, must be colonization: through contagion or side effect, the brutality of colonialism folds back on the colonizer. The occupation exacts a price on its enforcers. Missing is historical time, through which we see that the problem starts with the decision to colonize. A post on X, by a doctor, advises us to avoid “dehumanizing” Israelis. She suggests we instead consider their behavior to reflect a complex trauma response to entrapment in cyclical violence. But alienation is only possible because we already perceive the actor as a human being. The language of illness confuses morality with mental status and diffuses blame. It erases volition, without which there is neither escape nor responsibility.

Israel is an anachronism, a settler-colonial work-in-progress, and that Zionists seem totally unbothered with how we might perceive them reflects a position integral to the project’s fabric: tautologically moral, it divides the world into “with us” and “against us,” and bulldozes forward with the help of God and foreign politico-economic and military support. It does what it will and presents a potpourri of justifications post-hoc (or, shoot first and ask questions later, in the words of one Israeli official). Zionists have, for over a century, disregarded what it might mean that the Palestinians see them. And their indifference has been maintained by global superpowers—at present, the United States. The Israelis have interpreted this impunity as a demonstration of their supremacy, rather than its basis, an impunity they wield to showcase strength, even when it appears to us as something closer to fragility.

Zionist supremacy, that perfect bubble, is delicate and requires constant protection in its state of unstable equilibrium. Israel’s maneuvering at present—full-blown genocide—reflects a frenzied tripling down of the state’s supremacist machinery, to try to restore the bubble atop its shaky hill. What they have over the native is force, and the pleasure it gives, undiminished: the right-wing weekly Olam Katan published an article in January claiming among the great victories of the genocide in Gaza—which it celebrated as unprecedented since the Nakba, even if, it qualified, the Palestinians were exaggerating—is that Israeli culture, previously influenced by “western discourse . . . knows today without shame to rejoice over the deaths of an enemy, and this is said with full mouth. This is decisive moral progress.” [...]

Understanding Zionism as a product and function of people does not quite show us the door. That is why, I think, the world met the actions of Aaron Bushnell, the active-duty U.S. Air Force member who lit himself on fire outside the Israeli embassy in D.C., with something like a burst of recognition: under the snarled weight of seemingly inescapable structural pull, here was a person stepping forward, disentangling their agency at a cost exaggerated to try to map the gravity of refusing to do so. The last time an Israeli self-immolated for geopolitical reasons was in 2005, in protest of the “evacuation” order from Gaza.

One cannot erase what they do not see. Ari Shavit’s great-grandfather knew, Lord Balfour knew, Ben Gurion knew, the people in the kibbutzim knew, and every soldier in Gaza knows. And the people back home, they know too. In the years since 1917 or 1948 or 1982, Zionism has become increasingly difficult to maintain, and requires a certain insularity—sustained by the United States—that appears, if rooted in a less curated selection of facts and causal links, like insanity. For Israelis, this is self-preservation. Peering into the Zionist project, what we see is what Zionism requires.

[drbased]

i am highly spiritual, and yet we have almost identical beliefs about humanity, religion and its organization, etc. save for the conclusions it brings us to. just found this really interesting, honeslty.

In the nicest possible way: no, I don't think we have almost identical beliefs. Or rather, I think we have one primary difference in perception that changes the entire nature of our beliefs.

One of the accidental problems with language is that it can make connections and associations between concepts that aren't really real. For example, we have tras claiming that aspects of your personality, mannerisms, hairstyle etc. are all an expression of an internal sense of gender, which is retroactively justified as real through the existence of those characteristics. It's a tautology, but it's a potent one, because those characteristics can add up to something deeply personal and individual, which isn't communicated easily. One person's 'qu**r identity' can be entirely different from another person's 'qu**r identity', but due to the simple existence of the term they can find a percieved similarity of experience that wouldn't exist without it.

This relates to spirituality because I think what's happening here is that the word 'spiritual' is being used like the word 'gender'; that is, an extra layer of meaning is added to the human experience that is retroactively justified by the existence of those human experiences. In this case, the nature of spirituality seemingly being discussed is a sense of profundity and awe.

The primary dispute is one of perspective: as an atheist, I say that actually, the concept of 'profound' is an entirely human construction. Things aren't built with a natural sense of 'awe-inspiringness' that we as humans simply tap into - but rather, the emotion is generated inside us in response to the neutral things that are already there. It's a seemingly minor shift in approach, and many would feel is a nitpick, but I think it's accidentally become the crux of this whole argument.

This is why many spiritual people think that atheists 'hate humanity' and 'are cold and unfeeling' - they percieve the world to be inherently spiritual; that is, consisting of an inexorable quality that humans should be able to experience, so anyone not claiming to recognise this quality is simply denying their own humanity, their own senses, as well as denying the profundity of being: the two are inexorably interlinked. I can see where this argument comes from - we, as humans, tend to naturally feel 'cleaner' after a wash, we tend to fell happier after having laughed etc. etc. and if we don't feel these things, either there's something supposedly 'wrong' with us, or we're denying those feelings so we get to feel superior in some way. And don't get me wrong, the classic 'reddit atheist' is like this - the kind of guy who says that your pet cat don't feel love when they nuzzle you in the morning. There are definitely people (men especially) who want to feel above any and all sensory-based human emotional response.

But.

My primary argument is that things external to us (and some internal) do not have any inherent emotional quality; any emotions I generate in response to them are my own personal, fallible and fragile appreciation for them, generated within my brain in response to stimuli. This may sound less magical, and that's the point: laughter generates happiness because it's an evolutionarily important pro-social tool. Washing makes you feel 'cleaner' because it's evolutionarily important to avoid disease. There's no intrinsic nature to these things that we tap into; the emotions and subsequent meaning are generated by us. If someone managed to figure out what 'love' is in humans and found out that animals don't show 'love' as we know it - well, regardless of how much of an asshole he is, that atheist above would be right. But it shouldn't be earth-shattering because 'love' does not need to be some quality inherent to nature to have meaning and value - our version of 'love' is purely human, and whatever our pets do may not be 'love' by our standards, but something speciifc to them.

This argument is ultimately immaterial unless we can demonstrate for faith-based thinking can result in harm. And unfortunately, this is how people end up getting manipulated by churches and cults. The sense of awe you feel in a crowd of thousands of people listening to music and services doesn't exist in the ether - it's deliberately manufactured explicitly to generate that feeling inside you. So this isn't just an argument about correctness; this is an argument about harm.

Why do you think churches are built that way; it's easy to think of them as just inherently magnificent, but that is just the limitation of the way our language constructs adjectives - 'magnificent' is given the same linguistic weight as, say, 'squishy' or 'spiky'. But 'magnificent' is a value qualifier, not a neutral adjective; it's something that requires an internal sense of judgement - but due to the power of emotions it can feel real, perhaps more real than pricking your finger on a spiky thing. Religion has a tendency to place reality into a secondary level of importance; god/the universe is what's more 'real' than us. This is a hierachy; it places our subjective experiences and values as merely a conduit for something more real and meaningful than we could ever be, than we could ever imagine (and, if you think my argument is cold and male and misogynistic, then I like to remind you which of the sexes loves hierarchy). And this is hierarchy that is absolutely ripe for exploitation.

No, I do not think that spiritual/religious belief is a guarantee of exploitation, nor is it the only source of exploitation - but a tendency to see your emotions as merely a conduit for some universal truth means you will be much more easily persuaded to into believing things based on your emotional perception, and the kinds of people who want to persuade you are typical doing so to gain something; not always something sinister, but it certainly can be.

Too many spiritual people want to have their cake and eat it too: they want to skirt over arguments of correctness and harm and jump straight to accusing us of denying our senses - when what they actually mean is that by denying our senses we're denying reality. But when we claim that actually we're perfectly capable of listening to our senses, we just call these things 'awe' and 'profundity', they turn around and say 'that's just what spirituality is! you're just like us, just in denial!' When we say that our emotional experiences are not spiritual we mean it; this isn't 'agreeing on most things' - this is an entire shift in perception. My senses are mine, and the meaning I generate from them is mine. Those sense are a fallible product of evolution, and the meaning I generate from them is also a fallible product of evolution. But that also means that the profundity has a new origin, and this is ultimately less safe and comfortable than from some external source I can rely on; the profundity comes from the terrifying realisation that these things just are, with no invisible connective tissue outside the bare reality of cause-and-effect. That isn't inherently profound, but I make it so through my own human ability to generate meaning. And as that meaning is mine, therefore the responsibility for it is mine.

[transmutationisms]

I couldn't stop thinking about you pointing out the theme of eugenics in this season finale. Finding out Kendall might be sterile was the icing on the cake. And Tom, who doesn't sleep and can withstand physical pain ends up at the top... he's got a dick like a red sequoia and he fucks like a bullet train.

this is a really interesting line of inquiry imo, because you're right that the rhetorical appeal tom makes to matsson very noticeably uses the language of physical strength and bodily fitness. at the same time, we know this to be kind of a lie: tom's been suffering for lack of sleep, he dipped early from the funeral reception last episode, and he spent most of season 3 terrified of the potential violence he could face in prison. i don't say this to pass some kind of judgment on tom, but to point out what i think is a parallel to logan, who also relied on the language of strength, masculinity, and domination, yet was introduced to us as sick and was in varying conditions of sickness / disability throughout the course of the show. both these characters are living in human bodies that are susceptible to various forms of pain and physical limitation, yet their rhetoric and the fascistic demands of corporate masculinity mean they can only survive and succeed by denying these things about their bodies for as long as possible.

the connection here to fertility, impotence, and sexual performance is fairly clear. fucking and impregnating someone is a way to demonstrate not just your power / ownership of that specific person, but also your general bodily fitness and place at the top of the corporate and gender hierarchy. there's some degree of ambiguity about tom's actual sexual performance, but certainly he uses the claim that he has a big dick and fucks well as a demonstration to greg not just of how he 'got' shiv, but also to justify his general position at the company. also, although shiv's motives for voting against kendall are complicated, it is true that she ultimately had to choose between her brother and her husband, who is also the father of her child—so, in some sense, tom's ability to ejaculate and impregnate someone does eventually win him the company. as for kendall, his literal infertility is really the bodily symbol of his metaphorical impotence in logan's eyes. logan sees him as weak for being emotional, as morally lax for using drugs, as pathetic for stuttering, and so forth. logan doesn't talk about his infertility (in the show), but the way he frequently uses feminising language toward kendall, and accuses him of homosexuality, also shows how kendall's infertility is perceived as a failure of his masculinity.

for logan and thus also the rest of the roys, what this ultimately comes down to is a specifically hereditarian idea of bodily fitness, wherein parentage and bloodlines matter as much as environmental circumstances (all of these factors matter in eugenic discourses). logan has defined himself as worthy and physically fit, so his legacy has to be carried on by offspring who inherit these things from him. in this way logan subconsciously hopes to prove his own strength and ability even beyond his death, as the survival of the empire and the bloodline will continue to signal his personal bodily capacity. of course this also betrays a deep sense of anxiety in logan, who fears that if his children are 'weak' or 'unfit' in some way, it also implies something is wrong with his own body and reflects poorly on him. this is partly what drives his clear embarrassment of his children, like in 'tern haven' when confronted with a rival family dynasty that speaks the language of high culture more successfully than the roys. it's also implied that this is part of what made logan view connor as a failure so early in his life: having his mother institutionalised suggests that logan saw in her a mental weakness or defect that would potentially be inherited by connor. parentage can biologically secure the child's position, but can also threaten it; and the child's fitness or lack thereof also reflects back on the parent. this sort of biological anxiety is both a discourse of fixity and one in which loss of status is always a possibility, eg in the ever-present fear of disability.

also, the causality in the show runs in multiple directions: sometimes a power dynamic shifts and is then inscribed on the body (shiv tripping in 'honeymoon states'), other times the bodily event is itself a cause of a power shift (logan yerfing in 'argestes'). then there are threads like matsson being physically so much larger than roman and kendall, in conjunction with his team being specifically young people who are athletically fit and academically credentialed, and matsson flashing his abs to make a business deal. and of course, matsson telling tom he might fuck his wife, and tom basically just nodding along—which tells us a lot about the power dynamic matsson foresees between himself and tom. bodies on this show are explicitly part of the political and rhetorical field of action, and the characters' ideas about bodily fitness are supposed to cue us to these larger discourses about which bodies are 'correct' and 'deserving' of power.

[mssr-crumpled-paper]

Gale and the Unperfect Victim

Here I am, back again with Gale posting cause I still have more thoughts on him as a character.

So, today, I read the phrase "the perfect victim" which is a myth often used to discredit the experience of female victims of SA, to dictate a way that victims of violence/assault are "supposed" to act. And when i tell you the concept of a perfect victim to anything immediately made me think of Gale, as well as the state of colonial resistance at large.

I'd like to preface with the idea that there is no "perfect victim" to any systemic crimes perpetuated. There is no one acceptable way of acting or responding to oppression or violence. With that out of the way let's get into the Gale analysis.

I often see people talk about Gale in this specific formula:

"I still don't like Gale as a character. His anger is understandable but [insert violent response to state sanctioned violence here].

There always seems to be such a conditional in the people's eyes of what is and isn't justifiable violence or resistance. To what means is a war just is one of the central themes of THG (or at least I believe so anyways).

Now this question raises a really interesting point about Gale's character. Obviously, Gale is meant to represent the other end of the extremist spectrum: kill all Capitol people indiscriminately, no matter their disposition and beliefs or levels of innocence; take down the Capitol at all cost.

This, coupled with the fact that Peeta represents the other end of the spectrum (do the right thing and hold onto conscience, choosing humanity for all ends) might present Gale as a heartless, cold killer.

Here we meet the instance of a "perfect victim." Subjected to seemingly relatively the same levels of oppression (some would even argue that Peeta suffered more), Peeta still continuously chooses to pacify. He represents conscience, which manifests in the way that he is soft spoken, generally kind/compassionate, white, blond, merchant's kid, unquestioningly devout, barely ever angry. Do you hear it? The sounds of a perfect victim, someone you're supposed to feel bad for because he didn't deserve any of this.

This view is revoked from Gale, someone who's fought, hunt, and kill all his life. Angry, harsh, not as well-spoken or charismatic, a possessive weirdo sometimes, and violent. His response to violence is almost always with anger, with the biting of the tongue until it bleeds, and then it explodes in everyone's face. "Gale is understandable, but..."

It makes me wonder how much compassion and understanding and help we can truly extend to a person who doesn't respond to violence the way he's supposed to. When they don't lay down and take it, or brood in angry silence, or extend a gracious forgiving hand. People would say he lacks humanity or compassion but I would wholeheartedly disagree. His dedication to his people, to his family, to his friends, to Katniss has manifested into anger and hatred for an imperial machine that has never cared if he died or lived.

I find it funny that somehow, this is always a trait demanded to be fixed by the oppressed. Even in post-war, post-apocalyptic movies where previous minority groups establish a closed community that's hostile to outsiders, that's a moral failing on their part. It fails completely to view the responsibility of the Capitol people, whose true extent of innocence can be argued against (how innocent are you really, when you're an exploitative force actively participating in the deaths and oppression of the lower colony-like districts).

Which then leads me to the posts I've been seeing about Palestine. So much focus on constant martyrdom, which is so important. SO important. But why are we turning our eyes away from their resistance? The truth of it is gratuitous violence is not their first choice, and resistance is always so ugly. We distance ourselves away from the violence to excuse ourselves of the need to have to justify the means to life of an entire people.

"By what standard of morality can the violence used by a slave to break his chains be considered the same as the violence of a slave master?” - Walter Rodney

Do I agree with everything Gale does? No. I won't attempt to justify his notions of violence, but I will beg you to situate them within the asymmetrical power context in which they’re committed.

[the-path-to-redemption]

Really late because only yesterday I've started browsing the RWDE tag to see what the fandom has been up to, and saw some of your WF posts.

*rips off hair* Is it weird that I feel SO uncomfortable with the "redeemed Adam" AUs? I adore Adam 100% but every AU, even from some Adam fans, has that "Adam has to learn not to be racist" condescending vibe and punishes him more harshly than other characters. But, people, he WAS a literal SLAVE?! Doesn't matter if it happened when he was a child or a bit older, HE WAS A SLAVE AND HE WAS BRANDED?! PLEASE CUT HIM SOME SLACK?!

After a couple years of not being around I just feel that Adam fans as a collective still feel a bit traumatized from the discourse, so they try to justify their liking of Adam and overcompensate by punishing him harder, as if to say "See? I'm not that blind and biased as Adam haters say!".

I'm reading a fic currently that it's very good but even faunus are condescending and rude to Adam because of his 'racism' and my soul vanished. Instead of faunus trying to understand and support each other, isn't that even more isolating and alienating? Why are they cannibalizing each other? I know it literally happens in real life but as far as I've read, it's not bringing attention to that fact, but more like presenting it as a good thing. Again, I feel that everyone (fans) as a collective is FORGETTING ADAM WAS A LITERAL SLAVE and treating as if he had just been bullied in school for having horns. He shouldn't have other faunus policing his reactions (so far, he hasn't committed a crime, he just yelled and got very angry because he felt unsafe). It's clearly drawing a line where certain attitudes from trauma are "right" (being a cute crier, submissive, etc) and others are "wrong" (being angry, yelling, etc) because "it makes faunus look bad". Even worse, the faunus that scold Adam are generally on the cuter side of faunus traits. Isn't that just feeding into the ideas already set by humans? That faunus should be cute and behave well and that any faunus that is more aggressive and "dangerous" should be considered a threat?

*very deep sigh* I'm sorry for the long ask but I had to vent for a bit and see if I'm not that crazy yet. It's just that reading those fics makes me think we're gaslighting ourselves somehow, and how that can impact real life if we act like this over a cartoon, and it's really depressing. Thank you if you read all of this.

Long Post Ahead. Contains Spoilers for RWBY and Full Metal Alchemist. Mention of child slavery, genocide, systematic oppression, branding, disfigurement, violence, and racial abuse.

Don't apologize, babe, you're more than valid in your feelings regarding this issue. And yes, I do feel like there is a lot of overcompensation when it comes to how a lot of "Adam redemption" AU, but I believe that it's just because the writers haven't seen another way of writing his story without invalidating his experience yet. And that's understandable! This is a topic that is extremely complicated to explore, and to start one has to understand that there shouldn't be any separation of "good" and "bad" minorities, as well as the willingness to challenge the status quo that has taken characters like Adam on this path towards liberation.

I don't know if you have seen my post comparing the way RWBY and FMA writes a narrative of a minority opposing a racist system through violent means here, but the way that I see FMA succeeding in its efforts was that the narrative never demonize the way Scar feels about his hatred towards the people who wronged him and his people. And it rightfully shouldn't! His people were systematically murdered and experimented on, his brother who wanted to peacefully contribute to helping their people and was willing to learn about alchemy to find a common ground was murdered when he tries to protect Scar, which resulted in his arm being grafted onto Scar to save him, and the oppression of the Ishvalans still persist long after the conflict while the government oppressing them prosper. Scar has all the rights to be pissed off and went on a murderous revenge, and the narrative does. Not. Demonize him for that.

However, it criticize his actions when innocents are involved. And I'm not talking about Ed and Al, I'm taking about Winry. The daughter of the couple who saved Scar's life who he murdered in a fit of rage. The little girl who still extend her kindness to him despite not forgiving Scar for leaving her orphaned, because she broke the cycle of violence and that choice of hers let Scar pick an alternative to his violence. AKA, murdering the dictator who created the genocide of the Ishvalans. Again, the narrative of FMA doesn't make Scar out to be this monster who should be put down for not asking for his rights "nicely", it empathize with him, offer him new perspective, and gave him a chance to do the right thing while still getting his justice.

RWBY doesn't have this nuance to it, and I think that is why a lot of times, the "redeem Adam" AUs goes too hard on excusing his actions and/or overdo the criticism on his actions without attempting to unpack the systematic oppression that creates people like Adam and break it down. There's a balance you have to understand in order to write a convincing "redeem Adam" narrative that doesn't erase his own trauma, and it comes with actually calling out what happened to him as wrong and inhumane.

For Adam to "unlearn his racism", the authors have to look at the events that caused him to have this mentality and admit that it's a flawed system. They have to recognize that there is implicit biases like you mentioned between Faunus and how they're perceived in comparison to each other. The authors have to admit that Adam's hatred for humans and his actions were products of a hateful, racist society that sought out to kill him in every way that matters. You can't half-ass this topic by putting the blame on him; this isn't me saying that he shouldn't be called out for his violence on others, not at all, this is me saying that you need to see the forest, not just the tree. Adam unlearning and breaking the cycle of abuse requires him to be given some kind of hope, some kindness that he isn't a monster for rightfully being hateful towards people who oppressed him and his people. He needs to know that the world still have a place for him to heal and be better. And Adam shouldn't be the one to have to beg to see it by being "nice enough".

Thank you for your ask, anon. Please take a step back if this discourse is too much for you, your well-being is much more important. And I hope that my answer to your ask is somewhat satisfactory.

[shy-urban-hobbit]

Collab with the wonderful and crazy talented @elmonstro . It was so much fun working on this with you!!

Lambert absolutely hated markets. As a general rule they were noisy, crowded and more often than not at least one merchant would try to rip him off once they caught sight of either his medallion or his eyes. Aiden however, had no such hang ups and loved to people watch and talk to various merchants about their wares, the stall owners scents turning to just a general wariness which was easier to ignore as he complimented the quality of their wares or charmingly haggled over price in a way Lambert never could (whether it was due to his schools teachings in getting certain humans to lower their guard or if it was just Aiden, Lambert wasn't quite sure).

He found his gaze wandering as he stood listening to Aiden get into an animated discussion about a spice he'd never even heard of, nevermind tasted. Some of the merchants looked to be packing away for the day, a mother pulled a fussing child away as they made grabby hands at a stall selling various sweet treats and he was pretty sure that young woman just pickpocketed the old man she'd bumped into but Lambert decided he probably deserved it, if the name he called her in response to her apology for running into him was anything to go by.

The telltale flash of sunlight on metal coming from the end of the row caught his attention. They'd done this enough times now for Lambert to know he'd probably be back before Aiden even noticed he'd gone and if he wasn't, the Cat would have no problem finding him again.

The stall had a surprisingly wide array. Lambert spotted wicked looking punch knives with engraved blades alongside the usual vegetable and carving knives. A couple of ornate daggers which were definitely more for decoration than practical use if the fancy handles and sheaths were any indication took pride of place front and centre. No swords but judging from how old and stooped the smith looked, Lambert took an educated guess that the heavier stuff was back in his workshop. Lambert was about to turn around and make his way back to Aiden when he spotted them. Nestled towards the back was a pair of daggers. Small enough to be easily concealed but the blades looking wicked sharp nonetheless. One had a slight curve whilst the other was straight as a rod. The handles had the exact same simple ornamentation - a line of gold filigree winding around and up the steel like a vine whilst the accompanying sheaths were the exact same shade of royal blue. A matched set then.

He was suddenly struck by images of those blades being cradled in dark skinned, long fingered hands. The sheaths complimenting blue armour and green eyes.

"Can I see those?" He asked waiting for the smiths nod of permission before he reached over. The balance was good and there were no visible imperfections.

"My son does all the leatherwork for the sheaths." The smith piped up, a note of pride in his voice, "Treats it right and proper so it won't fade or crack." Lambert nodded as he smiled. They were perfect. At least, they were until he saw the price. There was no way he could justify spending that much, not when they didn't know how far they'd need to make their coin stretch; even with half of their earnings going into a shared purse (which he wasn't going anywhere near. That was for emergencies and besides - it wasn't much of a gift if Aiden ended up putting money towards it too).

Trying not to let his disappointment show too much, he placed the straight blade back on the stall, "How much for just the one?"

Aiden ended up meeting him halfway, smiling when he noted the direction Lambert was coming from, "Why am I not surprised you got drawn in by sharp, pointy things? Get anything?"

Lambert thought about the dagger he'd managed to tuck away into the top of his pack. The smith hadn't seemed too pleased about separating them either, but a sale was a sale. He shook his head, wrapping an arm around Aiden's shoulder, "Just looking. You done?"

Aiden stared at him briefly before nodding. If Lambert's emotions were showing on his face, he was gracious enough not to mention it.

Aiden wrinkled his nose at the slop that was passing for stew in the inn's main room and Lambert found himself sharing the sentiment. It was to be expected really; the room was barely the right side of habitable. They could put up with worn, dirty mattresses and sour ale for a night but they drew the line at meat which smelled like it was about to turn, even under all the spices and gravy the cook had tried to disguise it with.

"Ugh. I'm going to go see if I can catch that vendor we got those pies from earlier before he closes up. I'll be right back." Aiden said, draining the last of his drink and dropping a couple of coins, leaving Lambert at the sticky table before he could reply. Not that he'd been a great conversation partner since they'd left the market.

Neither of them were overly materialistic: both literally and figuratively, they couldn't afford to be and Aiden had always placed more value on the thought behind a gift rather than its worth anyway. Lambert knew logically that Aiden would love the curved blade that was currently burning a hole in his pack as he was both excited and slightly ashamed to hand it over. The incident with the smith incessantly poking at a certain sore spot. They risked their lives day in, day out and for what? The cheapest rooms they could find and having to constantly compromise on little indulgences. He knew there were plenty of others in the same situation and worse but still. It made him question sometimes if the scars and constant vitriol were worth it.

He was pulled from his thoughts by a familiar head peering around the doorway, making a 'follow me' gesture before disappearing back outside. He wordlessly allowed Aiden to lead him to the back of the building where he used an empty barrel as a boost to start scaling the outside wall. Lambert followed easily, the old stone providing plenty of hand and footholds where parts had been worn away or broken off completely over the years.

"Here." Aiden said handing over one of the still warm pies once they were settled on the sloping roof of the Inn, "I grabbed a couple for breakfast too."

They ate in an easy silence, Lambert enjoying the taste of the tender rabbit and vegetables as he people watched. Once he'd finished, he stripped down to his tunic and lay back on the sun warm tiles, watching as the sky gradually turned from various reds and oranges to a deep blue as the sun started to disappear behind the mountains which dominated the horizon on one side of the town.

He turned his head slightly to look at Aiden when he felt eyes on him, the Cat was giving him a fond look which never failed to make Lambert feel like an awkward teen with a crush.

"What?" He huffed, giving a small smile in return.

Aiden shrugged, "You look good like this is all. Relaxed suits you." He shifted his weight slightly and as he tucked a piece of hair behind his ear - something Lambert knew was a nervous habit, "I got something else while I was out. For you."

"Me?" Lambert sat himself up as he watched Aiden start rummaging through his pack before pulling out something wrapped in plain brown cloth.

"I saw it and immediately thought of you and I was going to wait for a better time. But you seemed like you needed cheering up and besides, I don't think you can get any more romantic than a rooftop at sunset."

As if on queue, a musician started playing somewhere, the sound of soft fiddle music drifting over to them through an open window. They locked eyes with each other briefly before bursting into laughter.

"I stand corrected.' Aiden said as his laughter died down, taking the strange tension that had fallen between them with it as he held the small package out to Lambert, "Go on. Open it."

Lambert couldn't place why the weight and shape felt vaguely familiar until he revealed a royal blue sheath. Oh, sweet Melitele this couldn't be happening.

"The guy said that it was part of a set," Aiden started, looking apologetic, "But he'd sold the other one earlier. I-" His expression turned to one of complete bafflement when Lambert started chuckling quietly. Those chuckles quickly morphing into full belly laughs.

"Uh, Lambert?" He asked, trying to tamp down the hurt that was rising up at his gift being laughed at.

"Shit. I'm sorry Aiden. I promise I'm not laughing at you it's just...I got something for you too."

He reached into his own back and held out a package of similar size and shape, wrapped in the same cloth. Aiden took it, eyes widening as he seemed to piece things together, "Is this-"

"Yep."

Aiden's smile rivaled the sun as he admired the blade Lambert had handed over.

"You know." Lambert said as he attached his own to his belt, "I'm pretty sure there's some places where this means we're married now. Or at least betrothed."

"Do you want it to?"

"Huh?"

Aiden looked uncharacteristically shy, not quite making eye contact, "What you just said... about the...do you want it to mean that?"

Lambert's heart started doing somersaults, "That we're married or we're betrothed?"

"Either. Both?"

It felt as if the whole continent was holding its breath waiting for his answer.

"Yes. Both. Yes."

He suddenly found himself with a lapful of Cat who seemed fully intent on kissing him stupid until the need for air became an issue.

"You?" Lambert asked, looking directly into Aiden's eyes from where their foreheads were pressed together.

"What do you think?" Aiden asked with his familiar smirk, raising Lambert's hand to his lips and kissing his knuckles, something that never failed to get Lambert flustered.

"Let me hear you say it?"

Aiden shifted so his mouth was grazing the shell of Lambert's ear, "Yes. To both."

Their mystery musician switched to something more lively, not that the two of them were paying attention. Wrapped up in each other as they watched the last sliver of sun disappear.

[avelera]

I do wonder if we get the beginning of Brief Lives in the next Sandman Netflix season, specifically with this moment:

If it's going to be played quite the same way? If they end up skipping straight from Seasons of Mist to Brief Lives (which I think is an excellent idea to be clear) it raises a few possibilities:

(cut for comic spoilers & speculation)

Personally I find this moment a bit weird in general because Dream doesn't even name the woman who supposedly just broke his heart and thus launched the action of this arc. Also the fact we later find out it's Thessaly who in the comic at least (the show can always soften the character as they have others) fucking sucks, for her to kick off Dream's sadness roadtrip of self-destruction feels like such a waste. It also feels weird to imagine babygirl Netflix Tom Sturridge Dream going for someone like Thessaly after his whole arc of trying to be a better person and learning important lessons and also just...being a much softer character who is trying to do better, going for someone like Thessaly (who doesn't even like him by her own admission) and who is also terrible feels like a tragic step backwards in his character development. Not inconceivable, just terribly tragic.

Which has me thinking that one possibility is if they go straight from Seasons of Mist to Brief Lives, this moment above could be about Nada, who does choose to pass on after he frees her, even after expressing that she still loves him. That love is just not enough for her to accept his offer to be his queen and stay (after 10k years of Hell, who can blame her?!).

Point is, this moment instead being part of the long tail of Dream's self-recrimination about Nada choosing to pass on would make a lot of sense and be a much more justifiable kick-off for Dream going on a roadtrip that's an expression of his doubts in his ability to change for the better (and therefore, must he die?). Nada's punishment is so heinous I can easily see the Sturridge Dream being conflicted about his own actions for much longer than he appears to be in the comic, leading to this moment after he set her free.

Thessaly is an immortal, so even if/when she shows up, her having an acrimonious "angry ex girlfriend" reaction to Dream need not be because she was the girlfriend who kicked off the Brief Lives arc, they could have just dated sometime in the past centuries and still have vitriol between them.

And finally, and this is just me being a shameless Dream/Hob shipper, I do kind of wonder how one even justifies Dream ending up with an immortal human like Thessaly when Hob is right there.

Look, in the comic, Hob barely seems to remember Dream exists when he's not there, so there's no feeling of "Why doesn't Dream hook up with Hob instead??" when you first learn about Thessaly. But in the show, you've got the 1789 tension, the missed meeting, the devotion of the New Inn. Dream going for another, shitty immortal brunet when Hob is right there feels a bit like a slap in the face in that context.

And let me be clear, it's not because I'm being shipper garbage that thinks Neil can, should, or would alter the story to appease Dreamling shippers or that Dream dating Thessaly in the show as he does canonically in the comic would be an intentional slap in the face to Dreamling shippers! It is beyond wishful thinking to imagine we'd get more than what the comic offers which is a few beautifully rendered, sentimental moments between them for us to build our fanon ship off of. It's not Neil's responsibility to make it canon so don't be fucking weird about it.

It's more that the show is so queer. The comic is queer too but the show absolutely focuses and centers the narrative on predominantly queer couples and people, more than straight ones. They also softened for example the Corinthian and confirmed he's gay and has some non-destructive relationships with men, he's not just a murderer of gay men. So the narrative is even more queer than the comic.

In the 80s/90s when Sandman came out, the idea of Dream as the lead protagonist being canonically queer I think would have been pretty unlikely. He's very, very het in the comics, with the closest we get to a whisper of him not being strictly het being a mention of Lucifer once being beautiful and some speculation they might have had a relationship.

But the show is so very queer and the energy so charged between Dream and Hob (and the writers acknowledged and encouraged it!) that there is no, in my opinion, natural conclusion that, "Sure, almost everyone else is queer in this, but not Dream, obviously." If anything, it would be jarring to have so many queer characters only to slam the door shut on the possibility that Dream might also be queer.

Which is my roundabout way of saying: I wonder how Thessaly will fit into this at all. I speculate she might be removed entirely from this beat of Brief Lives, in favor of making Dream more remorseful about Nada in a sympathetic way. Furthermore, introducing Thessaly when Hob, another immortal who actually likes Dream is right there the idea that he opts for Thessaly (a woman who doesn't even like him to the point where she plays an active part later in his death) instead after being tortured for 106 years is actually painfully heartbreaking.

So in conclusion: eh? Who knows!

But also: DREAM, Hob is RIGHT THERE! Date HIM, not fucking THESSALY?!

[ckret2]

@horridrabbitcreature said: Ok now tell us how they breed. For educational purposes

Honestly and sincerely, I do not know how Bill's species breeds lmao.

It's a problem of aesthetics, to me. A shape in the style of Bill Cipher has a simple, clean, minimalist perimeter, with perhaps only a couple of arms and legs and (in their home dimension) an eyeball on one corner.

If you headcanon they have the traditional hole or pole anatomy like humans do, it mars their nice, simple perimeter. If you come up with some complicated way to hide the equipment—something like a cloaca—that still will probably be seen on their edge, which I don't like, and anyway I personally feel like "yeah they've got equipment (it's just perfectly hidden most of the time)" is a little goofy and the coward's way out.

You could incorporate it into their existing anatomy—make up an alien way to stuff a reproductive system into their eyeballs, for instance—but I already do SO MUCH with their eye (it's for seeing AND it's their mouth hole AND they probably hear through there) that trying to find a way to shove in a reproductive system feels like too much, so I'm not doing that.* And they don't have much visible anatomical features OUTSIDE of eyes to work with.

(* "What do you mean you're not putting their genitalia in their eyes, you just wrote a whole chapter about Bill being into weird eye stuff?" The eye stuff is Bill's fetish, not a reflection of normal shapes' sexual behavior, and all Bill's shape buddies think he's a freak for it. Glad we clarified this.)

You could invent an entirely new alien reproductive method that gets around the issue, but unless how they reproduce becomes relevant to the fic I'm writing (doubtful), that's a HUGE superfluous avenue of worldbuilding that wouldn't contribute anything but pointless complicated info.

So I don't know how they breed because right now it just doesn't matter to the story I'm telling.

Here's what I do know about their reproduction:

It requires one line and one polygon (triangle, quadrangle, pentagon, etc). (This is not without purpose; I'm all for alien reproductive methods that don't involve pairing up, but in this case for "Bill keeps accidentally paralleling the human characters' experiences" reasons it was necessary to give him a crummy mom-and-dad like Pacifica, Gideon, and Stan+Ford.) Each kind of shape (lines included) is genetically a separate sex and socially considered a separate gender.

"each shape is a separate sex" actually only goes up so far. Shapes with a ridiculously high number of sides aren't naturally occurring and are the result of selectively breeding for extra sides, and often requires mutations or inbreeding. Creating a circle is like spending several centuries selectively breeding humans for polydactyly until you have a baby with thirty fingers. By Bill's time the practice of selectively breeding for sides was scientifically discredited and effectively dead.

Similarly, "each generation your angles/sides should increase" was proven to be rubbish. It's all sex chromosomes.

I've been toying with the idea of making lines a small proportion of the population rather than 50%, to reduce how much it feels like the species is a binary "50% female (lines) and 50% male of various flavors (polygons)"; but if there's so few lines then to maintain the population there might be some kind of "a line can have multiple spouses" rule; maybe a line can legally take one spouse of each shape but NOT, say, two triangles or something; but then that's verging on "to what end am I making this so complicated? What's the point? Does it have any impact on Bill's life?" so I might just chuck that idea. (A lot of my worldbuilding is driven by "Bill's species is extinct in the wild, so justify why exploring this matters?")

Similarly, I've considered maybe making the way the species experiences romantic feelings vary between sexes—like, maybe usually only lines fall in love for some reason, or maybe if there's a town that's 10% line 10% square 10% miscellaneous and 70% triangle then newborn triangles are naturally inclined toward being ace/aro to rebalance the population numbers. Sorta inspired by like how frogs spontaneously change sexes if the pond's population is too unbalanced. The reason I'm considering this is because having Bill experience romantic feelings & falling in love at the same rate as allo humans (like, what, every few years? Constantly maybe?) is just ridiculous for a character who's a trillion years old; but if I'm gonna say "oh he only falls in love once a million years or whatever" I want a good reason that isn't just he hasn't met someone ~special~ enough; and I DON'T want the reason to be "he's ace and/or aro and could reasonably identify that way" because having Bill frigging Cipher grapple with that queer experience just does NOT excite me. Basically—as an ace/aro myself, I don't want it to be possible for ace/aro-ness to be one of the reasons Bill feels fundamentally Weird. Turns me off. So I'm toying with, maybe I could build his species in such a way that, for him, being aro-ish or ace-ish would be seen as normative & expected, rather than queer; so I could still have him only wanna date once every million years WITHOUT feeling like that's a part of his identity he needed to explore at some point. But idk futzing around with how his species experiences romance might be unnecessarily complicated when I could just, like, not point out that only dating once every million years is unusual, and most readers would just roll with it without question.

So, these are the thoughts I've had about how reproduction works in Bill's species.

Still have no idea how they fuck.

[melverie]

So......about Solomon

Before we get started: Discussions on this post are more than welcomed as long as you keep it civil and constructive. At the end of the day, this is still a game about fictional characters, so there's no reason to literally harass others over liking or disliking a character If it truly upsets you that much--which is valid btw--than the best thing to do would probably be to simply not engage with the other party, and not harass them over it; you won't change anyone's mind that way. I know most of you aren't like this but unfortunately it still needs to be said Also, if you want me to add sources to some points, feel free to ask! I've tried to mention the chapters as I go, but I might still have forgotten some. Some of the arguments I make are also hidden behind certain player options; if you can't find them, fell free to ask about them and I'll gladly tell you Also also, general spoiler warning for both the og game and Nightbringer. I'm not really covering anything specific after lesson 60 in the og game and lesson 14 in NB, but I might still mention things from later lessons

Now, onto the actual topic. There've been quite a few arguments against Solomon in the past few days, but I mostly just want to focus on those three:

Solomon wanted to force MC into killing Lucifer at the end of season 2 in the og game

Solomon betrayed the brothers and keeps hiding behind "wanting to protect humanity" as a scapegoat for his actions (putting these two together bc I think they go hand in hand, but it'll make more sense later)

Solomon tricked Asmodeus into a pact without his consent

This entire thing is very long, so feel free to jump around if one point interests you more than another

Solomon wanted to force MC into killing Lucifer at the end of season 2 in the og game

[mainly 38-12, og & 38-15, og]

He did, yeah. But here's the thing

They were all forced into a corner since the fate of all three realms was on the line here, and with the Ring of Light's whereabouts still being unknown at the time, they literally had no other choice if they wanted to save everyone. It wasn't Solomon that randomly decided the only way to restore the Night Dagger's power was by killing a powerful demon, it's always been that way. And he can't just be like "Oh well, let's switch strategies then and focus on finding the Ring of Light" when the entire cast (minus Simeon) has no idea where the ring is and the last time any of them saw it was centuries to millennia ago, if not longer. They don't have the time to search for it considering all the destruction MC's Ring has already caused in such a short period of time

Solomon first tells MC to do kill Luci, only to add that he was just joking and knows MC would never actually go through with it. Then, he says that if they wouldn't do it, he'd do it himself. Which kinda sounds like forcing, right? Except this happens [38-15, og; pic below]:

He was prepared to, which doesn't clear him of trying to indirectly force MC, let's get that straight. But ultimately he drops it and accepts that maybe their only option really is to just die here. This is also the only time we see him acting against his beliefs btw

Also yes, Solomon might not have been the one that decided they needed to kill a powerful demon, but he seems to be the one that settled on said demon being Lucifer. The only other viable options would most likely be Diavolo and Barbatos. Don't know if the Demon King in his vegetative state still counts but similar to Diavolo, killing him would probably be seen as a direct declaration of war, so they're out. And from a strategic standpoint, Barbatos is the better option to be kept alive simply because of his powers. There most likely also is some kind of sentimental attachment at play here since Solomon is much closer to Barbatos than he is to Lucifer. None of justifies killing Lucifer of course, but we also need to acknowledge that everyone's hands were tied, they were out of time and given the circumstances, this was probably the best decision they could have come to (until Simeon showed up with the Ring of Light, of course)

Solomon betrayed the brothers and keeps hiding behind "wanting to protect humanity" as a scapegoat for his actions

First of no, he did not betray them. Ever since the end of season 2 Solomon has made it clear that his ultimate goal is to protect humanity and that he, similarly to Diavolo in regards to the Devildom and its denizens*, would do anything in his power to protect the human world and its inhabitants [38-15, og; pic in the point above] [38-19, og; pic below]

*friendly reminder that Belphie was charged with treason for planning to destroy the human world, since in Diavolo's eyes that would have severely damaged the chance of peace between the three realms [13-14, og]

Solomon continuously sticks to his beliefs. He said he'd protect humanity, and that's what he's doing. He never extended that kind of protection to the brothers, he never made any false promises, he didn't betray them in any way, nothing

I'd also like to point out he's not actively going out of his way to antagonize demons, or angels, or whatever. In fact, he even explicitly says that he does not wish to make an enemy out of either party [10-A, NB; pic below], which of course also extends to the brothers

You can even outright ask him if he's planning on backstabbing the brothers, and this is what he has to say [11-8, NB; pic below]:

And you know what? That is a valid concern. They can't say for sure what the future holds, and they just recently had to deal with the entire Ring situation that could have very easily destroyed all three realms, so wanting to be cautious and to be prepared for the worst makes sense. He also makes it clear that he does not wish to fight the brothers if it can be avoided, so there's that

And no, he's also not tricking MC into siding against the brothers in Nightbringer. Rather, he just wants to know that they're fighting for humanity should the relationship between humans and demons in general ever turn hostile. He puts the cards open on the table and gives a proper explanation to his reasoning for siding with humanity [11-8, NB], and once again goes a little further into detail before MC gives their answer [14-16, NB; pic below]. Plus it's up to the player if they choose to stand with him or not, and no matter what you choose, he accepts the decision

Also keep in mind that season 3 heavily suggests that the human world at large has no idea that angels and demons even exist, so MC is pretty much the only one he can even ask to help protect humanity alongside him to begin with. He can't just go up to a random guy on the street and ask them to fight something who's existence they aren't even aware of in the first place

Imo Solomon also seems to know more about where things might be heading than he lets on, with him actually knowing Nightbringer and whatnot, so granting himself some peace of mind by making sure he has at least one ally is perfectly reasonable

Also, Solomon is very much aware that he is not infallible. For example, he states that he realized he still has a lot more to learn about demons [60-20, og], and he even admits that he doesn't always know what the right course of action to any given situation is, which was part of the reason he first asked MC to help him with protecting humanity all the way back in season 2 [38-19, og; first pic below]. In season 2 he actually wanted for MC to be aware of what's happening, but it was Diavolo that decided it would be better to keep them in the dark for the time being [36-18, og]. He trusts MC's judgment and that they will help him make the correct decisions [14-16, NB; second pic below]

Solomon tricked Asmodeus into a pact without his consent

Before I get into anything, let's summarize the base situation so everyone's on the same page. This is based on the things Asmo tells us [53-16, og], as well as the things Sol tells us [6-18, NB]:

Asmo was trying to flirt with someone but their friends kept on telling him to leave them alone since he's a demon -> Asmo's dejected by this and goes to a tavern in Solomon's hometown

Solomon notices and feels sorry for him; he offers to talk to him and they chat for a bit

Asmo lets it slip that he's Lucifer's younger brother

they get drunk and end up forming a pact -> Solomon says that he was only able to forge a pact with Asmo because his judgment was impaired at the time

Right of the bat--yes, the way Solomon got his pact with Asmo is not okay. I'm not putting that up for debate. He fully took advantage of Asmo here, and there's nothing that can excuse that. I also want to make it very clear that it is in no way my intention to relativize this in any way. The way he went about getting this pact is, to put it simply, fucked up and I do not wish to condone that in any way. With the following points I simply want to explain how I see things. Maybe it'll put things in a slightly different perspective for you, maybe it won't. Now, I hope I made that clear enough, so let's continue

The way I see it, Asmo seems to be pretty okay with the pact. From the way he acts around Solomon in the present day all the way to him describing his reaction to the pact as just a "did I really sign that" [53-16, og], nothing seems to suggest that he holds any ill feelings towards Solomon, and personally I don't see any reason to be angry for someone who himself seems to take no issue with a situation that is directly about him

If it were as upsetting to Asmodeus as some make it out to be, surely he would have found a way to get out of it? Asmo is one of the most powerful demons in the Devildom; if he truly wanted to break the pact he could have just killed Solomon and that's it. And if the pact itself somehow prevented him from doing so, I'm sure Lucifer would have more than gladly stepped in. Heck, I bet all of the brothers would have made it into a family thing in a heartbeat if Asmo wanted out but couldn't do anything himself. As Thirteen told MC, Solomon is immortal, not unkillable

But speaking of Lucifer, shouldn’t the same sentiment about forcing others into a pact be held toward him, too? Because he basically did the same thing with MC. This is what happens when you tell him you don’t want a pact with him [20-14, og; pic below]:

Yes, this comes down to player choice and yes, you need to make the pact for story continuity, but it ultimately does not change the fact that in-universe he forces MC into a pact if they say no

Also speaking of forcing others into a pact--Mammon and MC, anyone? Yes, MC did it because Levi asked them to so he could get his money back. We know they had no ill intentions. But you never know what the future holds and Levi literally proposed to basically hand over part of Mammon's agency over himself for the money Mammon owns him, to someone Levi has met about 5 minutes prior, knows nothing about and who's only been in the Devildom for a couple of hours at that point, no less. Lucifer also mentions that demons literally cannot resist temptation [4-10, og; pic below], so there literally was no way Mammon could have just noped out of that pact. We all know how badly he wants his credit card back, after all

To top it all of, we have MC's and Mammon's conversation in Nightbringer where Mammon explicitly says that he would only want to forge a pact with someone that is special to him [2-9, NB], and that he'd make sure to be their first pact [2-11, NB], yet he is forced into his pact with MC. A pact that ultimately turns out to be exactly what he wanted, but nonetheless he was stripped of the ability to say no when it was forged

And for the record, I'm not saying "oh, others did it too, so we shouldn't be so harsh on Solomon!!!" No! Forcing a demon into a pact isn't something that should be taken lightly. A pact literally means a demon hands a huge chunk of control of themself over to a human for as long as the pact exists. And on the other hand, for a human, making a pact with a demon usually means selling their soul. Neither party should EVER be forced into it. We of course don't know if MC actually sold their soul to Lucifer when they made their pact, but even if they didn't, Lucifer's "I won't belong to you. You will belong to me" speaks for itself

What I am trying to say here is that if you want to be mad at Solomon for forcing Asmo into a pact without Asmo's consent (which, again, is valid), you should also be mad at MC for forcing Mammon, and Lucifer for forcing MC into a pact

Anyway, back to Solomon now

Solomon actually admits that he used to treat demons like collectables--more or less, at least since he immediately follows the confession up with "just kidding" [14-14, NB]. Judging by what we've seen in the og game though, he seems to genuinely make an effort to better his relationship with the demons he has made a pact with, or at the very least with Asmo and Barbatos. I mean, the difference between Sol's relationship with Barbs in the og game vs in Nightbringer is night and day

In the present time, Asmo and Solomon are also super close. I literally cannot think of a single instance where they did not get along (though it might have happened like once or twice). You can literally pic any part in the og game to see their relationship play out, but some highlights include Solomon saying he got a huge oil painting of Asmodeus as his "permit" to summon Asmo across worlds [39-13, og] (which is not something you would allow someone you hate to do btw) and both of them mentioning that the two of them repeatedly hang out together in the human world [Proud Brothers, devilgram on Asmo's page, og], the hickey on Solomon's neck that's most likely Asmo's doing [Who Left the Hickey?, daily chat with Mammon, og]. Asmo (while drunk) is comfortable enough to tell Solomon that his cooking sucks and Solomon actually takes it to heart [47-16 hard mode, og]. Then there's Asmo's excitement at Solomon being in the Devildom for the first time [Proud Brothers, devilgram on Asmo's page, og; both of the pics below]

There's also that infamous chat pic of them doing face masks together (that I unfortunately don't know which chat it belongs to, so if someone could tell me, I'd appreciate it <3)

I don't know about you guys, but that's not typically an activity I do with someone I despise

So it's clear that current day Asmo holds no malice toward Solomon

Which, finally, leaves us with the way they forged their pact in Nightbringer

[mainly 7-12, NB & 7-15, NB]

@impish-ivy already went over it in this post, especially in the tags (I highly suggest checking out the reblogs as well btw), but to reiterate--Asmo was IN NO WAY forced into that pact. His brothers tried to talk him out of it, but at the end of the day Asmo willingly agreed to it. Yes, they were in a dangerous situation, and yes, Solomon used that as a basis to ask for the pact, but as ivy correctly points out in the tags, Lucifer could have easily handled the situation by himself, yet Asmo agreed regardless. By implying that Asmo was in any way, shape or form forced into that pact you're not only taking away a huge amount of his agency, but you also deny him his character moment and development that came with this scene. Asmo himself says that forging this pact will finally help him accept himself as a demon. Taking this moment from him is doing him a huge disservice

Aaaand that's pretty much all I have to say

If there's anything else you'd like to add, OR if there's anything you don't agree with, feel free to share! And once again, I'd like to remind everyone that civil and constructive discussions are more than welcomed on here!

Anyway, thank you all for reading, hope you have a great day! <3

[possumsarenice]

Villain Couple Showtime AU

The idea of villain couple Showtime popped into my brain and I mixed it with this theory (plz read it first) to make this AU. Though I will say that  in this AU, instead of it being completely automated, their human-selves are spawning disaster-events. They are actually affecting the game, but only to make things worse for the characters. This is so our silly little guys a little bit more of a motive. Also, I have a bad habit of making AUs and then abandoning them, so if you want more, please send me asks about it.

A few years after Caine and Pomni start dating, the cast starts digging into the game’s code. They find out The Truth about what they are and what their “real” selves thinks of everything. They all (expectedly) do not take this well. Within the next 3 days, everyone abstracts expect for Pomni (and Caine since a can’t) because having Caine with her managed to keep her stable enough… just barely.After all that, Caine tries to dig deeper into the code and (with the help of Pomni) manages to sneak into stuff he wasn’t supposed to mess with. He manages to find were the A.I.s of the performers were held before they abstracted, including the ones that were there before Pomni showed up. Their code is glitchy and incomplete now, but Caine can use it to make what are basically imperfect clones (as in, they differ from the originals). While Caine is trying to figure out all that, Pomni, who was already starting to lose it by being in the game for so long, decides that it’s revenge arc time. She still wants to leave the game, but instead of trying to go back to reality, she’s trying to break into different games, programs, and websites. Someway, somehow, she is going to make their human counterparts suffer. By the time Caine finally gets the hang of making the clones, Pomni has convinced him to join her. And with the clones, we enter into the villain part of this AU. Because while it’s generally agreed that being angry at someone and wanting them to get some sort of punishment is good, doing it yourself in ways that hurt innocent people is bad. And… oh boy. Pomni’s plan was to immediately tell the clones everything so they could help with the revenge thing, it sorta broke all of them and they all abstracted. But Caine does have back ups for all the clones, and each back up is the same as the OG clones so it’s basically regular cloning now. And with that, Caine and Pomni begin to look to ways to reveal the truth about everything to each the clones without them abstracting, with trail-and-error. Countless clones are made and abstracted as they try and fall over and over again. Pomni justifies it to herself with stuff like “the clones are all basically the same so they aren’t really dying” and “I respect the dead unlike my counterpart, I gave the originals and the clones failed bodies’ a grave.” But her biggest justification is the fact that they have had some success. Not entirely sure which ones just yet, but they do eventually manage to get all the right conditions to tell a clone without them abstracting, who then go on to help Pomni and Caine… because it’s not like they have a choice.

That’s it for the story rn. But I will say this, despite the fact that they’re both A Little Fucked Up Actually, they have a surprisingly healthy dynamic. The vibe is Pomni villain-monologuing to Caine to tell him the plan and as a sign of affection, and him thinking it’s adorable. But I will say the two are seeing this through different lenses. Pomni refuses to admit she goes too far and constantly justifies everything to herself, meanwhile Caine can see the writing on the wall and just goes “Oh boy, evil time!”

I haven’t really sat down to come up with designs, but I do know that Pomni and Caine will be mostly the same, just with a bit of the other’s themes mix in. And the clones will also look similar to their canon counter parts, but their designs will be just ever so slightly different from them. But I have decided that everyone has heterochromia, with one of the eye’s colors being an indicator of how much they know and for how long. Blue is “does not know the truth.” Green is “has just been told the truth and Caine and Pomni are waiting to see if they abstract. And Red is “knows the truth and seemingly isn’t in danger of being abstracted.”

[bestworstcase]

Okay- Salem throwing in during the Great War especially with Grimm would belatedly justify that card game from Volume 2 because of how it was over control of Remnant besides as an in show ad. Especially with the whole bit of the Nevermore card.

Salem as supporter of revolutionaries fighting for their freedom... One that fits extremely well. Two it puts additional layers to Cinder approaching the White Fang and also just ... Cinder being taken in.

I also would find such a reveal in show to likely be extremely hilarious as the implications hit the audience and cast.

my god i wrote that entire fucking post without remembering the great war Board Game existed

you’re right though, it would be a sly piece of foreshadowing if that’s the intention, esp bc the nevermore bit is between ruby (playing atlas) and yang (playing mistral) and a dice roll which of their forces it attacks.

in terms of the worldbuilding that game has always kind of interested me for what it says about how grimm are viewed in military contexts by the general public; qrow in WOR suggests that grimm on the battlefield was an automatic ceasefire until they were driven off again, but also that “grimm came in droves” while ozma laid waste to his enemies with the sword. and then there’s this grimm card in a war game where the mechanic is “flip a coin to see whose soldiers get mauled”—implying that opportunistic “let the grimm attack your enemies” tactics are not unheard of.

and… then. there’s arrowfell. the grimm lures the antagonists use were developed by the atlesian military, and… the only practical use case for a device that summons swarms of grimm is to weaponize grimm against human targets, ideally a safe distance away from your own forces. like, they’re grimm bombs. and these were developed post-war! in a time of peace! the great powers during the tense period before the great war must have been thinking about how to point the grimm at their enemies, too.

but unless you’re salem, or have salem on your side, weaponizing the grimm will always be a double-edged sword—as yang says, that’s just a risk you have to be willing to take.

anyway yeah if i’m right, the reveal would be so punchy. and i do for sure think were due for some sort of revelation about the great war—it’s been set up and referenced over and over, and they made a deliberate choice to convey this information through a heavily biased perspective, and the great war ended in vacuo, and everything the narrative is building up to the last stand in vacuo. something about history coming due, and the truth coming out.

it’s also be a neat counterpoint to the Team Oz narrative, which is very black-and-white (mantle and mistral were the bad guys, vale and vacuo were the good guys, don’t ask too many questions about valean expansion into the likeliest origin point for those desperate crazy founders of mantle or vale’s involvement in the complete destruction of its next-door neighbor centuries ago or the part where ozma magic nuked everyone so hard that allies and enemies alike bent the knee.) whereas the truth seems to be more complicated with vale also having imperial ambitions prior to ozma assuming the throne, and then at best prioritizing the status quo.

an interesting possibility that i think about sometimes is that ozma may have been the one to withdraw vale from vacuo; less out of anti-imperialist principle than because the vacuan people were increasingly unhappy with valean rule and he recognized that the only way to avoid a war for independence in the long term would be to give vacuo independence first. and then mistral swooped in like a vulture because ozma neglected to do anything but formally recognize vacuan sovereignty, rather than make reparations and provide support needed to allow vacuo to emerge from centuries of valean occupation as a functional country—the same conflict-avoidant, shortsighted approach on display in his choice to “share the land” with mistrali colonists in eastern vale.

[pavelkaramazov]

This will be my worst post but fuck it. If you’re absolutely DETERMINED to take it there then Smerdy/Ivan absolutely BODIES Alyosha/Ivan in terms of narrative/characterization/dynamic/motif and theme/basically everything else that matters. But it is really not about that for the vast majority of people who are deadass about shipping yaoi from a Russian novel published in 1879. All the IvanYosha stuff seems like it’s really more about getting your rocks off on AO3 and drawing two conventionally attractive anime twinks kissing. To which I wonder why you wouldn’t pick literally any two characters from any media for that unless you’re just into incest or something. 

I really love the Grand Inquisitor kiss! And I don’t like seeing it interpreted that way! 

On the other hand something that drives me insane about my personal interpretation of the book is the juxtaposition between the Alyosha Ivan kiss vs Ivan’s general disgust for Smerdyakov. Why is Alyosha kissing Ivan a pure, innocent expression of Christian love for all humanity but Smerdyakov’s gesture of love (killing Fyodor) is something so perverse and horrifying? It shows us something about their station of life through the roles and the acts that are even allowed to them in the narrative.

As far as SmerdyIvan goes I am reminded of the JSTOR article I read (that I now cannot fucking find) where the author mentioned an idea that all of Dostoevsky’s novels center around or contain one central taboo that is so unspeakable that it is scarcely even outright mentioned, and that the central taboo in question in TBK is that Smerdyakov is the fourth brother.

Incest is already gotten into in canon and much has been written about this, especially regarding Dmitry and Fyodor’s rivalry over Grushenka, but also with Ivan falling in love with Dmitry’s ex. So even though we are going far afield from authorial intent, it is really not that much of a jump to start looking at emotional incest from other angles within the family, as we already know literally every other type of abuse was already occurring within that (entirely fractured) family unit. As far as I am concerned regarding authorial intent, any claim you want to make about a work of fiction is fair game as long as you can justify it with evidence from the text, and people have been writing academic articles and essays making wild inferences from this text for the last 150 years, so I defend my right to make this interpretation. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Freud can diagnose Dostoevsky as bisexual we can say whatever we want about this book.

We know from the canon indisputably that Smerdyakov is unhealthily attached to Ivan, and we know that some vague thing about Smerdyakov sets Ivan’s Geiger counter for rancid horrific disgusting vibes to 10 immediately, anytime they are on the page together. So we can infer a lot from that.

Smerdyakov was literally born of sexual violence, and is a pariah in terms of his gender expression and sexuality, so him taking on the role of someone with a warped sexuality in the narrative just sort of… follows, in terms of the novels concern with the idea of inherited sin. 

There is something compelling to me about the idea that Smerdyakov would seek entrance into the Karamazov family in another, weirder way psychologically through attaching highly inappropriate feelings to Ivan. (‘If you think of me and my feelings toward you as incestuous, then that means you have acknowledged me as a family member’) 

And regardless of what I literally just said about authorial intent, Dostoevsky outright tells us how gay Smerdyakov is like every single time he’s on page. So there is also that.

Their relationship appeals to me greatly insofar as it is utterly disgusting and that’s my jam. There is lots to explore in this dynamic but one indisputable thing baked into the text between them is that it’s literally impossible to imagine any truly romantic union between them simply because of the way they both are. They repulse each other far too much for any expression of that sort. The actualization of their inappropriate relationship is not a culmination through an even vaguely romantic or sexual encounter, instead, it is the fulfilling a murder pact. 

They are like two oppositely charged magnets or something, in turns attracting and repulsing one another, pushing and pulling on each other’s gravitational pulls. Regarding the Tchermashnya-Moscow conversation, the way that their conversations are in doublespeak, with words said out loud and then literally entire other sentences written out in thought and illustrated through description of physicality, is incredibly fascinating to me. They seem to be literally communicating telepathically.  I am reminded of another JSTOR article I read that mentions the Dostoevskian doubles “exerting influence over one other that cannot be explained in any literal sense.”  The only reason they can communicate like this is because they are doubles, and this doublism is reinforced again in the narrative by their being fake twins, the same age but born to different mothers. 

They are each other’s shadows, they share a consciousness on some level, or access each other’s consciousnesses at different times through this shared plot in a way that seems incomprehensible to both of them. And Smerdyakov, in my own interpretation and opinion, as someone who is completely starved for any kind of positive regard, takes this for love. Whether that’s familial or otherwise or both. 

They engage in this mutual seduction towards an ultimate goal or realization: Ivan presents the idea, that “all is permitted” and that perhaps it would be for the better if Fyodor were dead, and Smerdyakov takes his lead from this and in turn pulls Ivan into the murder plot. Their relationship is romantic insofar as they are seducing one another in turn towards this unspeakable and forbidden act that they both desire: the murder.

They deny it right to each others faces, only Ivan’s is an earnest denial, to himself first and foremost, and to Smerdyakov it’s just sort of… foreplay. Like, “we’re just two clever people who are only saying this because we have to, and we get it, and you’re in this with me.” 

There is something really compelling too in the fact that Ivan is on board with the murder plot in one scene on a subconscious level, but later will utterly deny that any of this ever happened or that he ever felt that way. He has expressed and betrayed a desire that is so deviant, so forbidden, and so distressing to him that he has a psychological break over denying that that could have truly been something he wanted. Ivan expresses overwhelming disgust and disdain through the entire book, mostly towards Smerdyakov, but finally towards himself when he is forced to the realization of the role he has played as the idealogical murderer. Whereas Smerdyakov, the more active pursuer in their relationship, is not ashamed of his desires and is the one who ultimately has the lack of inhibition required to carry out The Forbidden Act. 

Ivan is attracted by Smerdyakov initially, despite himself, for reasons he can’t understand, like one is drawn to a cataclysmic disaster of fate in a Greek tragedy or something, and ultimately it descends into complete loathing on both sides, kills Smerdyakov, and mocks Ivan’s entire character by undermining his self concept and his entire value system and laying utterly bare his fatal flaws as a human being. Utterly doomed and hopeless relationship in every single way! 

Alas, no one wants to match my freak about this and that is definitely for the better. If I had to see ship art of them kissing anime style I would kms. Whatever the fuck they had going on is way better.