#not to say i disagree with most of her theories. p sure i agree with most

[trashcanwithsprinkles]

Ooooo if we’re talking Ashikai- what did you think of her Childe inspiration analysis? I’m not asking about how it may or may not apply to ur fic (though that sounds fun if your up for it!! I just love ur star foxes. Then again… not mutually exclusive ig) but what u thought of it!! I hardly get to talk to anyone about them and ooooough theyre such good videos and leave me reeling everytime.

her childe video was so fucking good holy shit. also i absolutely agree, her videos always leave me sitting there like 'holy fuck', even if sometimes i knew half the stuff she was bringing up, but the way she mixes it with the real-life research and stuff has me,,,,,,,, it's so good,,,

i think the only video that never like- surprised me? or told me something i didn't know or hadn't already like- figured out myself? was the latest one, the one about adepti and their visions. but that's bc i've uh. read xianxia before. so like. you read one xianxia, you know how it's going to go. when she said genshin was a xianxia i was like thank you, that's what i've been saying hahah,,, it was still such a good video, i really liked it;;

[grandhotelabyss]

One of Honor Levy’s new poems, which I shamelessly pinch from Crumplar’s SubStack. I had to swipe it because the speaker of this poem (I say it with affection) is literally the political persona of my podcast co-host. 

Crumps writes up his attendance at a Dimes Square scene literary reading. He also gets into Angelicism01, also discussed on the latest episode of Grand Podcast Abyss. His opening riff on Christian Lorentzen NFTs is really funny; elsewhere, he plays up his tedious shitlibbery that the equally tedious acerbity and opacity of “The New Conservatism” was invented to contest. Here he is on Levy:

Honor is an “angelicist” writer, and I think she does a much better job of it than the main Angelicism01 substack. (I’m not going to try to define the nascent angelicist movement just yet but will refer to a piece by Satya Paul, who gives a good insider explanation even though he’s somewhat uncritically intoxicated by its heady aesthetic promises). Part of what makes Honor’s angelicist writing good is that it lacks this shrill “male” anger you see in Angelicism01 or Barrett Avner’s writing where their “schizoposting” sometimes drifts into Nick Land pastiche and such banalities as complaining about Brandon beating Drumpf. Even at her most obviously political in poems like “Amerikin,” she manages to snipe at pronouns without getting cringe. Honor is still a crazy reactionary but she does so by adopting the character of the “Girl Joker,” a catty zoomer bitch that is also terrified of being abandoned by God. Riffing on the impossibility of living up to the reigning ideological constellation of femininity, she conjures these transcendent apocalyptic visions without needing to use the language of Heidegger or Deleuze as an obvious crutch. “E girl egregore so sweet so solemn sorbic acid sucralose sodium citrate I taste you through the screen… where are you going? follow for follow?” What a Poggerz tour through hell!

Agreed on the Heidegger/Deleuze for the most part, though I can throw that stuff around too when I’m in the mood. You have to read Portraits and Ashes, where the academics get poisoned to death by the art installation after they’ve spent 10 pages have an impromptu theory seminar on it. Probably the meanest, funniest thing I’ve ever written. Disagree on the anti-masculine countersignaling. The masculine has its place—anyone who doesn’t think so lives in too small an emotional world—as does the capital-P political, which in America means party politics and not whatever illusory commitments (“I want more politics in art, not less, because I want communism”) our scene tourist still harbors. 

(I’m a scene tourist at second hand, yes, but you have to keep an eye on these things. Even in the digital rhizome, literary/intellectual culture spreads west from the East Coast commanding heights, much as they’re tottering these days.)

It’s “cringe” when people “snipe at pronouns” because they’re being reactive; they don’t have real reasons, just recoil. In her poem, Levy shrewdly implies the way this identity fractionation and demand for legibility helps to shore up the nation-empire. That’s a reason, a good one. (The poem reads like a satiric reductio of Jennifer Egan’s awful written-for-the-textbook—I’ve taught it five times, once on YouTube—Twitter short story “Black Box,” apparently part of her new novel, which I plan to take tremendous pleasure in not reading.) I want to refuse this fascoid command to declare an identity before I speak, a command predictably spreading from gender to race in the spiritually vastated precincts of academe/NGO/DNC/CIA/etc. Just use my full name and make sure you spell it right. This is America: I’m trying to get famous here!

[kaypeace21]

i’m a survivor too, and i found that certain scenes/stuff will said just really struck me as ‘csa-survivor’-like? i felt a bit uncomfortable about headcanoning it happening to someone else, especially for a fandom as wild as this one, but your metas have really been a comfort to me because they’ve been able to pick out and explain things that i couldn’t necessarily find the words for myself.

and yeah, i would love to have a character like me that is powerful and who finds love and who gets a happy ending. the people who call the theory disgusting always kinda hit wrong with me because although csa is a difficult subject, we shouldn’t be ashamed about sharing it. they sound like they’re trying to say that it’s a bad topic to talk about and implying that it can’t happen to kids, which uhhhhh-

(i’m sure that’s not what they mean, precisely, but it’s still what they sound like, and i wish that they would stop implying that we can’t exist, especially in popular media. we do, and i’m not gonna pretend we don’t, and if they feel uncomfortable with the topic they can just use the block button. we deserve to have some well written representation just as much as anyone else. also, i really really hope that will gets a happy ending.)

anywayyyy i love your theories and i can see your post in the tag so i think you’re fine?? have a good day ❤️❤️❤️

SORRY, this ask took so long to respond to. It always warms my heart to hear other survivors speak and say they found comfort in my theory.

Yes, I think I and a lot of c*a/r*pe victims (subconscious or otherwise) were triggered by some of the symbolism/visuals in s1-3. And s3 made it hard for most of us to ignore the past imagery- since s3 wasn’t as subtle.

I get why people have reservations about the theory. But the debates to the contrary are usually just plain offensive. Or people trying to be respectful but being the opposite. There’s the obvious bad-apples . I got many anons after part 1 of my DID theory saying it “ruined/tainted byler”, and “if that happened to Will i’ll stop shipping byler” , or that it  “ruins the best gay character” ,  and to “remove the post immediately”. And this was when I was open about being a gay c*a victim. I obviously blocked them. Many survivors don’t come forward because they’re afraid people will see them as “tainted”, “ruined”, “ just their trauma”, or blame them for what happened. So yeah, it pisses me off when people say similar stuff about Will (and thus other c*a victims). Not even diving into the messed up psychology about byler/mileven shippers (knowing i was a lesbian c*a victim) but purposely spreading bs rumors about me being a p*do that was into Will/Noah-all because of the theory. -_-

Then there’s the people who try to be “respectful” but literally do the opposite.

I’ve heard numerous times it’s somehow “less offensive” to just use r*pe imagery to make monsters scary. Rather than have  the monsters have that imagery cause Will created the monsters from his memory/imagination-and st is a story of Will healing from that trauma. SORRY- I disagree. Using the worst experiences of peoples’ lives (and triggering their trauma) for no real purpose- except to make their monsters scarier to the normal/general audience who haven’t gone through it so won’t be triggered like us - is MORE OFFENSIVE to victims! NOT LESS! At least to me.

Then there’s the people who say “c*a should never be talked about (in stories).” Which I disagree with. V*ctims have already been told by ab*ser’s  and enablers of the ab*ser- to never talk about what happened to us  . So it rubs A LOT of us the wrong way when people say this.  Because (subconscious or not) you remind some of us of the people who used to hurt/silence us. People say this -simply for their convenience (like ab*sers) and cause deep down they’re uncomfortable with our existence and equate the despicable act to us the innocent v*ctim ...or just want to deny the horrible reality of the situation (like many enablers who deny the truth and hurt us because they don’t want to accept reality) . And 1) It brings us back to a time where they told us to NEVER talk about it- and makes us feel like we did something wrong when we didn’t! 2) Every psych professional says with-holding/keeping the ab*se a secret is detrimental to our mental health.

Plus, there’s a HUGE difference between sugarcoating/minimizing trauma or WORSE glamorizing, condoning, or romanticizing C*A in stories (ex: pretty little liars) VS showing how the action is wrong, causes trauma, but showing recovery and happiness is still possible for v*ctims.  if the story shows how accurately traumatizing it is (instead of minimizing/glamorizing it)- it’s incredibly rare for that character to get a happy ending. Having a story about recovering from that type of trauma and finding happiness despite such hardships would be amazing for US survivors! We rarely get stories with a happy ending-  it’s more harmful to us survivors to never see ourselves get happy endings in tv/film/books. How can some survivors (in a dark place) think there’s a light at the end of the tunnel- if it’s never shown?Also if Will has DID too- it’s good mental health rep, along with queer rep (and survivor’s rep.) All 3 groups rarely are treated well or get happy endings in media. A lot of people may feel more heard, seen, and a bit more hopeful for the future - If Will (and other characters) get a happy ending.

And even though st has many themes- like say homophobia. To try and hand-wave all the disturbing  r*pe imagery away  as ‘Will is just gay so the monsters are like that”. IS SOOOOOO offensive. Trigger warning for examples. I’m sorry what part of Max saying when Billy had c*nsensual s*x it’s “good screams” but when possessed by the mf he causes Heather to do “bad screams” read as gay???! Having the possessed ch*ke/dr*g people before throwing them in trunks (like it’s implied Lonnie did to Will -since Jonathan checked Lonnie’s trunk for Will in s1)?Tying their arms and legs up/ g*ging  them and  getting on top of them and saying “stay VERY still it’ll all be over soon”-before a monster shoves it’s tentacle into someone’s mouth and inserts a goo - just gay??? Similar to the sentient vine/shadow monster forcing itself down Will’s throat. Let alone Will saying things like “he made me do it”, “i felt it everywhere”, or being tied to a bed and screaming “help! stop! it hurts! let me go!” While Jonathan is the only one who’s visibly triggered by this and has to literally turn away and hug someone . Or barb, billy, and El spiting up a white liquid from their mouth (similar to will spitting up a slug and lying to his mother about it ).El/billy touching a suspicious looking slime with their hand and looking at the substance confused . El drawing Papa with 3 legs (the middle one being shorter) ,  trying to undress in front of the boys , and Benny saying “I think she’s been ab*sed or something”.The theme of ab*sive dads- brenner , Lonnie, and Neil . Even when the demogorgan (called in d&d the “deep father”/ in the show “a man without a face”) attacked Barb it’s chopped up with scenes of Nancy having c*nsensual sex (the monsters are doing the opposite symbolically). There’s way more examples but NO- to try and hand wave /equate ALL OF THIS to just “gay imagery” or an “a*ds metaphor” is WAY more problematic. And just offensive (specifically to gay people) than just admitting what it may actually represent. R*pe imagery and gay imagery is NOT THE SAME THING!

Also ST has never been a kid show- maybe rewatch the show and see the rating of tv-14 . Goodness sake- s1 has a st*ged su*icde, k*dnappings, m*rder, discussions of physics, h*mophobia, and s*x (with stancy in s1 & jancy in s2-s3). S2/3 discuss at their finalies recovering from tra*ma . S2 had gra*ic de*ths,  a man causing a women br*in damage/ and faking her m*scarriage, and a gang of vigalantes k*lling criminals. s3 had critiques on capitalism /media/s*xism, many d*eaths, and questionable imagery like the prior seasons. The Duffers constantly reference  movies & events from the 80s (capitalizing on 80s nostalgia /subverting 80s motifs that middle age people  from that time remember)! Those people were their intended age demographic . Most 80s centric refs go over most kids’ heads (heck a lot went over my head too since I wasn’t alive in the 80s XD).The Duffers even said in the book “worlds turned upsidedown”  “it’s not a kid’s show despite having kids”. And maybe it’s a coincidence but when Lucas in s3 hands Will the “devil’s baby” firework (a hint about Lonnie) he says “18 and over only.” Which idk is a weird/random af line unless it’s foreshadowing that the show will get darker about various themes- and maybe even change ratings.

I get people wishing nothing bad ever happened to Will or Jonathan. And being apprehensive and not trusting the Duffers to do such a story justice (cause it’s difficult to do). But personally i trust them to do so tastefully with tact and not be exp*itative, (overly gr*fic) or offensive to v*ctims. You can disagree and think the show is about something else (or not trust the Duffers)- but it’d be great if people could stop using these other messed up talking points. While trying to appear ‘(fake) woke’ and like they care for victims- cause we see through it that you really don’t.

Have a lovely day anon ❤️ ❤️ ❤️

Update- I just really agreed with and appreciate the tags in this reblog

[ohshcscenerios]

The Case for Takashi x Haruhi P.4

Welcome back to the Case for Takashi x Haruhi, the series that travels through the manga and makes a case for why they should have been together. If you haven’t read Part One, Part Two, or Part Three they will be linked for your convenience. I would advise catching up before moving forward with Part Four. Because there is so much to unpack from Volume 5 it will be split between Part Four and Part Five (due to the length of the post being too long).

Please Note:

This post will contain examples from the manga so if you haven’t read the manga yet be prepared for “spoilers”.

This is all in the name of fun. I am by no means insulting or discrediting other pairings. I am just a person trying to spread more MorixHaru love into the world. 

Please feel free to agree or disagree. 

Shall we begin? 

We begin Volume 5 with Haruhi first learning about her inadequate test scores, landing her the third rank in her class. The Host Club is surprised considering how intelligent she is and they offer her their condolences. The anime doesn’t include this episode but the live action does. 

I’ve mentioned before how in the anime Takashi isn’t shown to comfort Haruhi in any way. He is either standing off to the side or appears disinterested altogether. Even during the beach episode when the hosts had a serious conversation with Haruhi the anime showed Takashi completely separated from the conversation; peacefully eating his crab without a care. However in the manga this is obviously not the case because Takashi is actively listening and involved in the conversation, even patting her head when she agrees to apologize. 

So it’s safe to say that outside the manga Takashi is not as supportive and comforting as he truly is. The live action does a better job at displaying his sensitive personality but the anime almost portrays him as a robot compared to his manga self. 

With that being said, we see another example of Takashi comforting and supporting Haruhi in a way the anime (for some reason) chose not to express. The twins give her a noogie but Takashi also offers a pat on the head. 

Why is this important? Takashi actively cares for Haruhi. He’s not in the background silently watching as he does in the anime. Takashi wants an active role in Haruhi’s life, not just a by-stander who happens to know her (as we sort of see in the anime). He wants to be called her friend rather than an acquaintance and to me that is very important. 

Anime Takashi isn’t as involved with Haruhi as Manga Takashi. Not only does the difference create an injustice for the pairing but also for the character. Takashi is more layered in the manga but in the anime he’s barely a two-dimensional character with absolutely no background history. In fact, the anime doesn’t even introduce us to Satoshi, his younger brother yet we meet Yasuchika, Mitsukuni’s younger brother. If I’m not mistaken, the episode in which Yasuchika declares Mitsukuni an “alien” and agrees to duel with him - that is the same episode we’re introduced to Satoshi however he doesn’t make an appearance in the anime. Takashi’s life is swept under the rug once again, giving him the short end of the stick. Takashi’s character isn’t recognized which pushes him further into the background. 

In the manga Takashi has more facial expressions and is shown behaving like his sensitive caring self. This is important because most of his “acts of comfort” are directed on Haruhi. 

The hosts ask her to choose which host will be her private tutor for the make up exam. Although it’s not made clear which subject Haruhi flopped in, each host offer their expertise. There’s a tiny little detail in this frame that I found quite interesting. 

Takashi offers to help her in history. Why is that interesting? Haruhi’s favorite subject is history. Now, this doesn’t mean she’d need help in history. I find this detail interesting because it further proves why they are compatible. 

We are going to fast forward into the next episode when the Host Club joins Haruhi in Karuizawa. This is also when the Refreshing Battle takes place, which we will dive deep into. 

The first little detail I’d like to discuss is their respective jobs. Tamaki and Mitsukuni are busy fixing a fence while the Hitachiin twins are escorting guests to their rooms. Kyoya isn’t actively participating which we see later on. So where is Takashi?

I’d like to point out that Takashi isn’t with Mitsukuni during this Refreshing Battle, like we’d expect. Normally Takashi is always by Mitsukuni’s side and chooses to participate in whichever task he’s doing. Usually the pair chooses to stick together like the Hitachiin twins. However this isn’t the case here. Mysteriously, Mitsukuni is keeping Tamaki company outside while Takashi is inside... with Haruhi. 

Now this may not seem like a big deal but let’s continue, shall we?

Takashi is inside meddling with the tables when Misuzu asks Takashi to fix a table’s chair legs. He responds with, “Certainly.” 

Notice how he didn’t respond with his usual “sure” or silent nod. Takashi is trying to act refreshing. Takashi is actively trying to win the Refreshing Battle. 

I would also like note that Mitsukuni isn’t taking this battle seriously. He’s a smart individual. He knows how to flaunt his cuteness. He’s strong enough to perform physical labor. Yet he chooses to goof off and watch Tamaki fix a fence. He isn’t even helping with the fence but simply keeping a conversation with Tamaki. Mitsukuni isn’t trying to win the Refreshing Battle, he’s just trying to have fun with his friends. 

So if Takashi knows that Mitsukuni isn’t trying to win the one free room wouldn’t that encourage him to also not win? If Takashi was simply going to follow Mitsukuni wherever he went it wouldn’t be fair to the other hosts to potentially win without really intending on staying in the room. 

Kyoya also reveals how the hosts plan on staying in Karuizawa; at Mitsukuni’s vacation home because it’s the closest. Kyoya even had Tachibana deliver his luggage there. So Mitsukuni never planned on staying in Misuzu’s pension because he could look forward to having a sleepover with his friends. 

So why is Takashi trying so hard to appear refreshing? He wants to win the room! He actually wants to stay in Misuzu’s pension. He wants to win this opportunity to experience a “bed and breakfast” with Haruhi. 

There isn’t any reason for Takashi to be chopping firewood but he is. Why? I have a theory that goes beyond trying to win the Refreshing Battle and it ties with the hosts’ confrontation with the Zuka Club. 

Takashi wants to appear strong and masculine around Haruhi. Yes his stoic personality naturally makes him appear strong and masculine but he doesn’t boast about it. I feel Takashi is taking this opportunity to “show off” his strong masculinity... for Haruhi. Doesn’t it seem a little odd that when she’s inside he’s also inside casually picking up tables like they’re paper weights and when she’s outside he’s also outside casually chopping firewood while shirtless? I honestly cannot believe this was all coincidence. I truly believe Takashi was trying to inadvertently attract Haruhi’s attention. This is Takashi’s equivalent to flexing his muscles for her. 

Kyoya asks Haruhi if she’d like to bet on the winner and though she declines he begins ruling out potential winners. He quickly rules out Mitsukuni and Tamaki, keeping the twins as a large possibility. However he makes sure to address the “dark horse” raising in ranks; Takashi.

Kyoya theorizes that if Mitsukuni drops out then Takashi is sure to follow. This is where I strongly disagree with him. Yes, I think Kyoya is wrong. I believe if Kyoya didn’t interfere with the Refreshing Battle then Takashi would have won. If Tamaki never found the piano the Hitachiin twins wouldn’t have felt threatened enough to devise a sneaky plan. Takashi would have quietly won. Misuzu continually gave Takashi refreshing points while the other hosts were slowly losing points. I believe if Kyoya didn’t interfere then Takashi would have won the room and he would have stayed in the room. 

Still not sure if Takashi really wanted to win? Let’s take a look at this frame. While most of the hosts seem horrified that they’ve been “shown up” by Takashi the only host who seems happy is Mitsukuni. Why is that? Why would Mitsukuni seem excited that Takashi is doing well for himself in winning refreshing points? 

Mitsukuni knows Takashi wants to win and he’s silently rooting for his victory. This would explain why Mitsukuni ws comfortable staying with Tamaki instead of helping Takashi with menial tasks. Mitsukuni knew Takashi wanted to steal this opportunity just like Tamaki and the Hitachiin twins. 

I also believe Mitsukuni knew Takashi wanted to “show off” to Haruhi which is also why he chose to leave him to do as he pleased alone. Mitsukuni probably knew that if he hung around Takashi he wouldn’t have made as big of an impression. In a way, it was as if Mitsukuni gave Takashi his blessing. 

Overall; Takashi tried to hit two birds with one stone by attempting to gain Haruhi’s attention and win the Refreshing Battle.

One final small detail I’d like to point out before we end this post; when Kaoru saves Haruhi from a fallen window notice where the hosts choose to stand. Mitsukuni is with Misuzu while Takashi is with Haruhi. 

Why would this seem important? 

I believe this is when Takashi is beginning to think about pursing Haruhi. It might seem like a stretch (and it probably is) but think about it; Takashi made sure to check on Haruhi before seeing where Mitsukuni was. Usually Takashi stays near Mitsukuni but in this episode Takashi ventured out on his own. Takashi created his own spotlight, in a sense, by choosing to be alone. Mitsukuni was obviously alright with that, as mentioned earlier, and here we see Takashi is still standing in his own spotlight. When the Refreshing Battle neared its end Takashi didn’t return to Mitsukuni’s side... he went to Haruhi’s. 

That concludes Part Four of the Case for Takashi and Haruhi. Thank you for reading and look forward to Part Five coming soon! 

[izzymalec]

why don’t you see how “clary the god” negatively affected magnus? in s1, 2a they only let magnus be part of the group when he was doing things for the shadowhunters. and so in 2b, 3a, 3b when she was god, he was cut off from everyone but alec cuz they didn’t need him anymore (and god forbid he gets to be actual friends with anyone. cuz no, only saying “biscuit” to clary, nada to jace, and 1 scene with izzy per half isn’t friendship when the shadowhunters and simon are being pals every single ep

magnus literally didn’t say even 1 word to clace- you know the main characters of the show- in 2b. not 1 word. and you can count his lines of dialogue with them in s3 on 1 hand, literally. meanwhile alec’s out here getting arcs with both of them every single half. i mean, you claim to like magnus so why you don’t care about him as part of the group? cuz everytime i see you hype “clary the god” it feels like a punch in the face cuz that choice cost magnus all his screentime with the other mains.

why doesn’t it make you uncomfortable that they gave a white character (1/3 of the mains) powers just to cut the only asian main from the group dynamic so that it really just became only the 3 whites and 2 hispanics spending time together at the center of the show, while the 1 asian and 2 black mains were always cut off and on the outside (and not allowed to connect to each other, cuz god forbid POC mains connect to each other instead of merely being “spokes” on the whites “hubs of the wheel”.

it is such a joke that so many fans are crying “clary deserved better” in the finale and that it was bad to derune her- WHERE was that energy when magnus gave up his magic for all of 3b? no fans cared cuz “oh he’ll get it back.” so would she, her last scene with jace showed she may not be a god anymore but she was still a shadowhunter. he suffered all of 3b and not 1 single character outside of alec and his mom said even 1 word of comfort to magnus. not one!! why do only white tears matter?

“clary the god” ain’t as cute as you’re acting like it is unless you only care about her, in which case your username is misleading. also doesn’t it bother you that an asian’s man accomplishment (creating the portal) is dismissed when the white girl can do it with zero effort on a whim? you can tell this show is run by whites. or that they barely let magnus do magic in s2/ s3 cuz they didn’t want to spent their cgi budget on him but they had no problem blowing it on her playing god? yikes.

there are a lot of very valid points here and i’m glad u got it all out, let me answer thoroughly!!

point 1: magnus doesn’t get enough screentime

agreed. the writers don’t appreciate him at all. he does get more screentime as the show goes on though, he isn’t part of some episodes in season 1 and 2a, they change that later

point 2: magnus doesn’t get to interact with the other mains and doesn’t get friends because of clary’s powers

i partially agree with this, i never made the connection to clary’s powers but it does make sense since magnus was often used as a plot device in the beginning. however, i don’t think he even is meant to be friends with some of the group (or maybe he is, the show generally is really bad at building family and friendships because they don’t really let characters interact) so i don’t think it’s /horrible/, however i do think that he should be getting more of his own storylines and that the storylines he does get should be more explored and he should be allowed to get more scenes with dot or catarina

point 3: clary having god like powers is racist

first things first: clary is the main character of the show, the show is meant to be about her. she is supposed to have more screentime than everyone else, it’s her storyi don’t think that they gave clary her powers with the intention of cutting out magnus’ screentime, i think they gave her those powers to move the story forward. that doesn’t change that they give far less screen time to poc, and i agree that they shouldn’t have done that. 

point 4: no one cares about magnus, everyone just cares about clary

this is the point i gotta say i disagree the most with, maybe it’s perception, maybe it’s because of the people i follow, but i had a completely different experience for this. i remember several posts about magnus losing his magic and how it must have affected him and metas and fafics and everything revolving around this topic. i personally have rarely seen anything about clary.but that’s the fandom, i do agree that the writers should have let many more characters who supposedly care about magnus talk to him about his magic loss (refer to point 2)

point 5: the last message

“clary the god” ain’t as cute as you’re acting like it is unless you only care about her, in which case your username is misleading.

i clearly care about clary and i’m not really making anyone think that i don’t, my icon, title and description all reference her. i don’t exclusively care about clary, otherwise i’d exclusively blog about her. i understand how from your point of view the clary is god concept is bad, but for me it’s a fun theory, i just like it, i don’t think about how clary having some of her powers could have maybe potentially lost magnus some screentime, i think about how amazing it would be to see clary with glowing eyes and flying hair ripping raziel apart. i think about how funny it is that clary came into a new world and a two months later was like “yeah i can bring people back from the dead, what about it?”. i think about how due to the writers having given clary those powers, whether they should or shouldn’t have is open for question, clary is about as powerful as warlocks, the most imo most powerful beings in the shadowworld, and due to clary defying the angel’s will she’s more powerful than the angels, so? clary is god. 

i like to focus on the story, because yes, shadowhunters is deeply problematic, i never doubted that, but i’m honestly here to have fun with it and i enjoy talking about the concept, if i only ever focused on the stuff i don’t like about the show, the stuff i disagree with there’s no point in having this blog

also doesn’t it bother you that an asian’s man accomplishment (creating the portal) is dismissed when the white girl can do it with zero effort on a whim?

sure that’s p fucked up, when it comes to clary the writers just make her be able to do anything, which is a flaw, i know that’s what your entire message is. yes. it is wrong that clary can just do things that push magnus out of the picture, it is something that shouldn’t be done. but clary being able to do anything at any given time is also a bit funny, because it’s bad writing and that bad writing is what makes her god, you know?

or that they barely let magnus do magic in s2/ s3 cuz they didn’t want to spent their cgi budget on him but they had no problem blowing it on her playing god?

maybe it’s due to my lack of perception but i really never noticed that, i can think of many instances where magnus uses magic, in fact there’s a lot more (or at least better) cgi in season 2 and 3 than there is in season 1, so i’m not sure that statement is factual

so! in conclusion: thank you for your message, it really gave me a great insight on why someone might not like the theory and it’s understandable! but for me it really is just something to have fun with because it lets me make fun of the show due to its ridiculous writing and lets me appreciate clary, two things i love doing. you took things a lot deeper than i ever intended them to be, but we all love the show while complaining about things that were problematiqué. i don’t see how my god clary theory is really harmful as it is only based on things that are shown in the show. things that maybe shouldn’t have happened, yes, but in the end they did and all we can do is get angry at them, ignore them, or make something with them. 

conclusion: the god clary theory is just meant to be dumb fun, it’s completely okay if you don’t like it, or can’t like it if you feel like it’s based on injustice or for any other reason

thanks again! have a nice day!!

[fly-pow-bye]

Powerpuff Girls 2016 - “Witch’s Crew”

Written by: Haley Mancini, Jake Goldman

Written & Storyboarded by: John West, Angela Zhang

Directed by: Nick Jennings, Bob Boyle

Boo! It's the Fly! Pow! Bye! Spooktacular!

On this dark and not-stormy-until-someone-says-"how can things get worse" night, Princess is readying a magic spell at a place that may or may not be her house. Apparently, Princess is the Magica De Spell of the Powerpuff Girls universe, who knew? I always had a feeling that certainly PPG 2016 plots seem to be made willy-nilly, and then they just put in whatever character they feel fits the most. This was definitely true of The Squashening, and this concept kind of makes me feel the same way.

I could even see some sort of alternate universe plot where this takes place in some sort of fairy-tale kingdom, like that one Looney Tunes where Yosemite Sam is suddenly a knight with a pet dragon guarding a magic sword. If that fairy tale kingdom is the same one from Once Upon A Townsville, it's probably for the best that it is not.

I guess from all of the magical smoke in the air, the Powerpuff Girls show up to stop her from practicing black magic without a license. See, they decided to justify why the Powerpuff Girls are going to prepare to beat up Princess, since she's technically not doing anything wrong by trying to improve herself, so they pull out this excuse out of thin air. I'm surprised there's even any justification; previous episodes were happy without one.

Also shocking from this show: the Powerpuff Girls apparently decided to skip Halloween this year, as they're still in their ordinary clothes. Maybe they think they're popular enough to where they can just dress up as themselves for Halloween. Or maybe they just didn't bother when 80% of the episode won't have them in them.

One character sure still does the Halloween tradition, though: Discount Jojo. The real Mojo Jojo would be taking over the world with a death ray that happens to be powered by children's candy. We don't even get that justification; he just wants candy just like an 80's one hit wonder and/or Shaq defeater. Specifically, he wants black licorice. He would not even need the ray gun if he tried that at my house. That is, if I even had that vile weed.

Princess disagrees and most likely lies about not having any candy, and Jojo responds by pulling out his ray gun. The good news is that Princess just happened to have a mirror that reflects the ray. This causes this apparently rubbery ray to bounce across the room until it hits the vat, drowning the room in "magic stuff".

As soon as Princess awakes, she finds out she became an ugly ogre that can burp fire. Discount Jojo gets the rawest end of the deal, as he only turns into an ordinary cat. A talking cat, but we never really confirm if it's one of those Wild Thornberries type situations where only Princess can understand him. One thing we can understand is that the Powerpuff Girls get new costumes after all.

Specifically, these color-coded witch costumes. While Princess and Jojo kept their personalities and general lack of morality, the Powerpuff Girls are fully evil, and are ready to cause mischief with their newly gained evil magical powers! They still seem to have flight and super-speed, right down to the contrails, but they now just shoot beams out of their hands and anything can happen.

Princess has to reverse this spell, and thankfully, her spellbook just happens to have the exact ingredients to reverse this situation, right down to who has what. For example, the first ingredient, which she gets immediately, is one of Discount Cat's whiskers. Apparently, this curse seems to guarantee. Of course, Princess is doing this for selfish reasons; she just wants her old, beautiful body back! Turning the Powerpuff Girls back into heroes that can be beaten by ordinary rope is just the unintended side effect of that.

It's not just because they had very little personality to begin with, but because they may have asked themselves what would each Powerpuff Girl do if they lost their morality and got magical powers. Here, Witch Bubbles is stealing all of the kid's sweets with her new magic, because she's usually the sweet one. Well, not always, but I think that was the theory.

According to her book, her second ingredient is a pigtail from Bubbles. What if the girl she accidently transformed into a witch didn't have her hair in pigtails? We'll learn later that this is pretty much random.

While she figures out a plan, she gets interrupted by a boy in a chicken costume. He asks this person with a great and scary costume where Elm Street is. The joke that is Nightmare on Elm Street exists. She then burns him with some orc fire by complete accident, and he runs off crying. Clearly, this will lead somewhere, but I'm not sure if it is going to be anywhere good.

Princess uses a trail of candy to lure Bubbles to a giant wrapped gumball. The Ogre Princess confronts her and challenges her to a bubble-blowing match. Bubbles blowing bubbles, I think that may be the idea here. Bubbles ends up overdoing it.

The next ingredient on the list is a toenail from Buttercup. Well, she’s screwed; the Powerpuff Girls don’t have toenails. She gets a pretty good hint on where to find her, as she finds tons of tiny Mayor clones running across the neighborhood. Hey, Tom Kenny needed to have his paycheck justified somehow. Witch Buttercup has been going around trick or treating, and turning everyone who didn't have a treat into a tiny Mayor clones. Apparently, Townsville has a lot of houses that give out toothbrushes.

Princess needs an idea to take on this monster, and she needs the book to figure this out.

Immediately after saying she needs the book, she uses it to whack Buttercup on the head. Again, this is fitting, because Buttercup seems to be the Puff that punches people far more often than the other two. Not that great for the whole series, but I get it. I guess you can not prove that she also got orc-like strength from that magic brew, and witches aren’t known for their resilience to bludgeoning.

She then decides to extract the toenail while she's knocked out with a chainsaw. We certainly did not need to be reminded of that commercial that also involves an ugly creature lifting up someone's toenail. Apparently, someone on the crew agreed, as we don’t get to see where Princess could find a toenail on a toeless character design. This all happens off-screen.

We do get to see Discount Jojo-Cat puking into his hat...and putting it back on his head without realizing what he has done. This may explain a lot if this is his normal procedure with puking. We do get to see said toenail once it is extracted, complete with a scream sound, but I already did enough damage by reminding you of that commercial.

Speaking of hate, uh oh, that kid she accidentally burned got an angry mob to go after Princess! They sure love those angry mobs! Clearly, she's going to be chased all the time, hated by even the people she thought loved her.

Or, she can just hide in a bush in a forest, and the angry mob just runs right past it, never to be seen again. Subplot over! Unfortunately for Princess, Discount Cat is stuck in a tree, leaving her all alone in the dark black forest. Even worse, it starts raining just as soon as she says that nothing can get worse. See, I wasn't lying in the beginning. While other shows would make fun of it, this show uses the cliche as straight as humanly possible.

Speaking of cliches, Princess starts to lament about how this was all caused by her want for "beauty, power, and riches", and now she lost it all. Didn't she already have riches? It could be commentary about how the rich just love to get richer.

She sees a cottage nearby, and randomly says that it isn't a five-star hotel just to remind you that this ogre is supposed to be Princess Morbucks. This cottage is owned by a kind old lady, who happened to have really poor eyesight so she couldn’t see the horror before her.

While the old lady is comforting this ogre, she tells her a story about her past that, in no way, is supposed to remind Princess about her evil ways. She used to be this super rich person who lived in a big city, until her greed angered a witch. The witch cursed her to be poor. Princess assumes this made her really angry, but the old lady subverts her expectations by saying it made her happy! She learned that she didn't need beauty, power, or even riches to be happy!

Yeah, that Bat Boy impression is pretty fitting. Once she hears this, she faints.

She wakes up, only to be tied up in ordinary rope over a boiling pot. If buildings-full-of-people-strength can't bust through that, orc-like strength has no chance. Turns out, the old lady was going to cook her as the main course in her "ogre stew"! I guess since Princess is now the heroine of this story, she gets to be the damsel in distress, too. That isn't the only twist, either.

Blossom: You’ve been tricked to be the treat!

The Reboot Puffs just can't think of any other Halloween puns, can't they? Yeah, that old lady was Blossom this whole time. Unlike some other twists this show has done, there are some hints to this:

She wore pink. That's a good tell.

The glasses made her look like she had bug eyes, just like the bug eyed freak that her real form is.

Blossom is the only one of the three that want her to see the light (i.e. see that money isn't everything) in more than one episode.

I could see Blossom doing this even without the evil brew corrupting her mind. Well, aside from wanting to eat Princess alive.

Thankfully, this heroine does get a man to save her! Well, a cat who used to be an evil ape, but still a male cat who used to be an ape. Discount Cat jumps out of the window and causes the second vat of green water to fall in this episode, this time with his body instead of a ray gun. Blossom-Witch doesn't follow Wizard of Oz rules, but she does get knocked out so that she can grab that ribbon.

She has to get to the house quick, and grabs one of the witch's brooms that happened to be lying around. She specifically refers to the room she has to go in as "the house", I'm still not sure if it is Princess's, or if Princess decided to go into some random witch's house to do all of this Magica De Spell activity.

This Princess chase scene isn’t anywhere near as good as the one in the Christmas special, but that's kind of a foregone conclusion. Of course, I'm talking about the real one, not the Generic Tree Lighting Day one. How can she manage to beat these girls who may still have super-speed in a race?

Tree Punch, Witches Down, womp womp. Well, I guess that’s to be expected from the Reboot Puffs, even if they’re supposed to be evil witches; the Reboot Puffs can’t escape their penchant for failure. Also, Buttercup should get those eyes checked out.

She makes it, and throws in all in the apparently self-filling vat. Magic! Discount Cat raises a point that Princess has to give something related to her, too, such as her crown. Princess has to think about it for a minute. Considering what happens later, it would have been a good scene for her to throw some sort of Burger King crown instead.

She relunctantly throws her real crown in, and then frantically has to chant the reversal spell. The Witchy Puffs show up, but the curse gave them Stormtrooper-caliber aim! Maybe Princess's curse made them nearsighted, too, just like Blossom's story. Nothing in the episode disproves that, especially the tree scene!

After completing the spell, the Powerpuff Girls are back to normal. It even had the courtesy to regrow Bubbles’ hair and Blossom’s bow. I would not say it regrew Buttercup’s toenail, because she shouldn’t have toenails in the first place.

Jojo's back to his discounted ape self, too. Because the puking scene wasn’t good enough, we get to see Discount Jojo coughing up a hairball. However, the spell to change everyone back turned out to be imperfect, because Discount Jojo’s is missing a little piece of his cape! Well, either that or it's just another aspect of the curse Craig McCracken indirectly put on this show.

Princess: All that time as an ugly ogre, I’ve learned that inner beauty...

Oh look, she may learn a lesson after all, prove that she is just a one dimensional villain!

Princess: ...is for CHUMPS!

Oh, reboot! I thought you were going to be like a real show for once! If they really want to turn Princess into this good person, why can’t they just do it without these cop-outs? Princess ends up praising herself for becoming her beautiful self once again.

Though, in a karmic twist, this spell gave Princess a tail. She didn’t have in her ogre form, so I can just assume the spell did it. The Puffs and Jojo decide not to tell her about it. They can also not tell her about all those Mayor clones that are now running around Townsville. As this episode proves, continuity is for chumps, too.

Does the title fit?

A singular witch could have a "crew" of other witches, and Blossom is supposed to be a leader.

How does it stack up?

Out of all the Halloween episodes, I can argue that this one is the best of all of them. That is not that much of a contest, though. Squashening had a decent ending, and Midnight At The Mayor's Mansion was just a wreck through-and-through. This one at the very least had a decent idea, switching around villains and heroes, and the execution isn't too terrible. Above average for the reboot, really.

Of course, the plot could still use some work. The ending is a particular sore point with me. There was no reason why Princess needed to stay evil besides she has to be. Poorbucks has proven she could still be evil even if she gets a soft spot, and it's kind of sad we'll never see that again.

All in all, not as bad as black licorice. At least, to me anyway.

Next, we go from Halloween to Generic Tree Lighting Day 2...Christmas?!

← Small World: Heart to Heartstone (Part 4) ☆ The Gift →

[agl03]

I think the 100th is Coulson’s ep because after all we only have Agents of SHIELD because of him, so it makes sense that Philinda get together in the ep. Also, their ship has been sailing for quite some time. A ship doesn’t start sailing after they get together btw. Fitzsimmons is already at the shore. the 100th probably takes place within a few days from 5x10. Sorry I’m not trying to be pessimistic but I just don’t want you making everyone have high expectations and you all be disappointed :P

Hi Anon,

I will always absolutely encourage fans to manage their expectations.  I have a unique place in the fandom that I take very seriously.  I put a lot of time and effort into the ask responses and theories do my best to be careful.

Just because I have personally chosen to go for broke and get really excited about what could come with the 100th doesn’t mean everyone should follow.   Its a personal choice I made and I accept that there could be ‘consequences’ in the form of my theories not coming true.  I honestly don’t think I can be disappointed by the 100th.   For example, if there isn’t a Fitzsimmons wedding I’m not going to freak out, I’m going to enjoy whatever the writers have chosen to give on that front.  

I’ve been getting asks about the 100th since hiatus.  My theories haven’t changed all that much based on the information that has come out.  THIS POST was from January 25th.  At that time my list was….

Coulson, May, and Daisy have a big ‘family’ kind of moment.  The bond between them, especially Coulson and Daisy has been building for 5 seasons.

Daisy has a super iconic Quake Comic Hero kind of moment and/or officially becomes Director of Shield.

If she leaves the future without the Inhibitor turned off/out this could be when she gets her powers back or reclaims them in an epic way. 

UPDATE 3/1 I don’t think she’ll be getting her powers back quite yet.

Something to do with Tahiti, GH-325, or Gravitionium shows back up in a big way.

Hello Hydra (sorry guys I have a feeling).

Coulson’s secret and/or the terms of his deal are revealed and the fall out from that

That could bring on the pain feels depending on why he made it and what the terms were.

Dove’s character or something about her story is revealed.

Familiar face returns.

UPDATE 3/1 This one has been confirmed via spoilers and the Press Release but is now plural…yay!

Deke has a big reveal but its in the “It’s ALL connected vein”

Fitzsimmons have a major moment be it engagement, wedding, or something else (baby bomb kind of thing).

It’s All Connected gets taken to a crazy level and things from past seasons come back in a big way.

Coulson’s deal with the Rider being revealed is a major piece of the 100th.  As it should be, its going to drive a lot of what is still to come.   That is the one thing they are not hiding at all….and often with AOS its not what they are giving you that is what is going to get you…it’s what they have hiding behind the curtain.  

I fully expect what brought him back to life to come into play too.

Coulson is absolutely crucial to the overall story as he’s the only one that can bring the pieces together, my bet is he was one of the things they were missing in past loops that made them fail.  I also see him as being in the most danger as his fate in the loops is completely unknown and Loop Elena said “you have to let him die”.

Everyone is going to get a chance to shine for the 100th as they pay tribute to the shows mythology, characters (all of them), and history.  They are all a part of something greater.   

I have never said that if there is a Fitzsimmons wedding that it would dominate the episode, in fact I’ve said not to expect Say Yes to The Dress AOS edition and theorized its going to be unexpected in how it plays out and one of many insane things that happen in the episode.  

I personally took the coming to shore as Fitzsimmons wedding, that was my read on the quote and other things I’ve read and seen over the past few months.  Just as your read on it looks to be Philinda get together.  I have a different take on where Philinda is relationship wise.  It’s just one of those things we have to agree to disagree on.  If I am reading it wrong and they get together, I’ll own it.  I do think Philinda has some sort of moment, I”m just not sure what that looks like right now and hopefully have a better read once I see 11 and how things shake out back on earth.

Just as you cautioned me not to overstep and get the fandoms expectations up too high about a possible Fitzsimmons wedding I will also ask that you do the same when it comes to Philinda becoming canon.  

If anyone feels I am going too far and getting their expectations up too high about things, if there is a theory I am working that they will be devastated that it doesn’t come true, they can block or unfollow me.  I totally understand if someone has too.  I never say I am 100% on anything, not after last season, and I own that I have been wrong before and will be again.  I do the theories, predictions, and ask responses for fun…I win some I lose some.  In the end, this is my blog and I want to be excited about the 100th or a particular theory, my posts will reflect that.  

[dieverdediger]

Some heretical ideas...

Disclaimer: I am not a theologian and I am not studying theology. My knowledge of these matters come mostly from what I’ve read, or what I have heard from those who seem knowledgeable on this. I don’t mind being proven wrong.

I met this guy a few years back. He struck me as a real Christian. But I’ve noticed over the years that often the people you respect most for their faith end being those you respect least. I still respect him and I do think he IS a Christian. But he shared a couple of stuff on his Whatsapp status today that I had to address. 

For many people out there it will just be a case of my word against his. Even worse, he IS actually studying theology. But at least there is a “my word” against his and not just “his words”.  

He made a list about “10 things about Christianity that Jesus would not be happy about if he returned”. 

1. That his vision for a transformed society, which he called the “kingdom of God”, got twisted into an afterlife fantasy about Heaven”.

Fair enough. Kinda. I wonder whether he actually believes there is a heaven, but that’s too unclear to comment on. However, either way this “kingdom of God” is NOT a kingdom on earth at the moment. As I understand it (and again, I could be wrong), Jesus himself saw himself as the Kingdom of God. In fact if I recall correctly that’s what N. T. Wright said in his book, The Challenge of Jesus (it was also said by the apologist William Lane Craig). It is through Christ that we can partake in a shadow of what is to come. So in a sense yes, we should work towards transforming society right now. But the Kingdom is in him, not here. But we shouldn’t expect that there will be a kingdom of God in our life time before his return. 

2. That a religion was formed to worship his name, instead of a movement to advance his message. 

This is really on the line between orthodoxy and heresy. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. He is right if he means that we should not just worship him. We should also spread the Gospel. That’s fine so far that goes. But what he is hopefully not saying is that worshipping his name is wrong. 

3. That the gospel says his death solved the problem of humankind’s separation from God, instead of his life as a witness that there is no separation from God.

This is downright wrong, if not blatantly heretical. The point IS that we are fallen human beings. This came about through our own sinful deeds. It is only through Christ’s sacrifice that we are forgiven and allowed true access to God’s presence. The Jews in the Old Testament were never allowed to venture into the temple all the way to where the Ark was. They were unclean. Only the high priests could go there and only extremely rarely. But through Christ’s atonement we are cleansed. Though our sins are red, they shall be white as snow.

4. That the religion bearing his name was conceived by the theories and doctrines of Paul, instead of the truth Jesus lived and demonstrated.

Agreed. I remember studying religious studies how they would argue that Paul founded Christianity. Only much later on did I discover that all sane historians believe Jesus did actually exist. It is because of him that Christianity has come about.

5. That he was said to exclusively be God in the flesh, putting his example out of reach, rather than teaching that we all share in the same spirit that empowered his character and life.

Yes and no. Once again this takes a very fine line. It is true that Jesus being God incarnate does not put his example out of reach. If anything, he became as much a man to show what the perfect man would be. Do we share the same spirit, though? This is an odd question and it is beyond my knowledge. My problem is this: The Christian doctrine is that God is a trinity. Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity. The Holy Spirit is the third. We share the third Person, the Holy Spirit, in that the Holy Spirit lives in us. I don’t know though whether Jesus actually had the Holy Spirit while on earth. I mean, why would he? And when Jesus went away he said he would send the Spirit after him. 

So I don’t know. But I’m just cautious about this point. 

6. That the religion that claims Jesus, teaches that his wisdom and teachings are the only legitimate way to know truth and God. 

“Truth and God”. Two statements are made here: 

That only only his wisdom and teachings are legitimate ways to know truth.

And that only his wisdom and teachings are legitimate ways to know God. 

I agree on the former, but not the latter. 

No one in their right mind would say that you have to be a Christian to know truth. Life, nature and everything we learn can be known whether you’re an atheist or not. Many Christians would argue that it is through the natural world that you can come to know God. 

The second point is more difficult. Yes, but I would change it a bit. Jesus’s wisdom and teachings are the only legitimate way to know God as best as you could. As with the point above, it is possible to learn some things about God in other places. Like Plato who argued for God’s goodness. Or the Hindus who are not that far away with their whole idea of Avatars. That’s true. You can learn facts about God from outside of Christianity. Many Christian theologians from the beginning agreed on this. They took inspiration from Plato and Aristotle and others. 

It is also possible (though I know some will disagree) that you are honestly mistaken about Him. Suppose you grew up in a Muslim family and for some reason or another you were never really exposed to Christianity. If you are honestly a Muslim and you never consciously rejected Christianity then maybe (A BIG maybe cause I don’t know), maybe you’ll still be saved after death. 

BUT... if you KNOW of Christ and you know what he offers then it’s stupid to hold to anything else. I mean, I’m sure those cheap PlayStation 3 knock-offs have some good games here and there, but why have the knock-offs when you can have the same thing? Even worse, suppose you see the love of your life. Why settle for anyone less than him or her if you can have him or her? Isn’t it insulting and an outright rejection to reject your love for something worse? 

It is possible that by loving someone you learn how to appreciate the love of your life when you meet him or her. But that’s not the same as rejecting your love for the lesser version. In the same vein you can only truly love God by accepting him as completely as you can. Anything else is just fear and idolatry.

So to get back to the statement, you can know some things about God in other faiths. You may even (perhaps I’m wrong) know him somewhat if you are honestly seeking him in that faith. But if he revealed the true path to you, if he revealed the Christian faith and Christ himself, and you reject it, then you reject him. In that case you cannot know God.

7. The idea that humankind stands condemned before God and deserving of God’s wrath and eternal judgement, requiring the death of Jesus to fix it.

This is the same as point 3. This is downright true. Anything else is heresy. This is the entire point of Christianity. We are standing condemned and we do require Christ to “fix” it. It’s like THE central message. 

I need to actually quote the Bible here:

You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

We have all done bad things. As C. S. Lewis said, in ancient times people knew of the disease but not the cure. Today people do not even know of the disease. Look deep into yourself. Do you really like what you see? We all have this spite and anger, jealous, pride and lust. Do you like it? Do you like the fact that you’ve just said this or that to your friend? Or thought this other thing about your mother? What is this in us that makes us so wretched? A part of us wants to be punished. We did this one very terrible thing which no man on earth should approve. It should be condemned. We want others to be punished for doing this and a part of us want ourselves to be punished as well. 

THAT, is what Christians mean when they say we are sinful and need to be saved. We need to be saved from ourselves. And we can’t. That’s what we mean when we say we stand accused before God. And that only Jesus can fix it. He takes all that guilt and badness on him and is punished in our place. 

8. That people are waiting on Jesus to return to save the world and end suffering, rather than taking responsibility for saving the world and saving suffering ourselves.

Yes and no. As Christians we are obligated to help others in the here and now. That’s true. We should alleviate suffering as far as we can. But we will never save the world or end suffering completely. That’s simply unrealistic, as anyone with a basic grasp of human nature or politics can tell you. 

9. That people think there is magical potency in uttering the name of Jesus, rather than accessing our own natural powers and capabilities to effect change.

Agreed. His name is not some magical chant that you can use as you wish. That’s simply blasphemy.

10. That people have come to associate Jesus with church, theology, politics and power, rather than courage, justice, humanity, beauty and love.

Why not both?

---

P. S. The aim of everything is simply to give another side of the argument. It is to give a defence (however weak) of orthodoxy. It’s easy to attack the Church and ancient beliefs. It is fashionable. It is unfashionable to defend it.

[sg2tiger]

Analyzed the fuck out of all meta/magic scenes and whatnot in the prior Episodes (especially EP2) and if i were a person who experienced Umineko as it released, I can see how that would be a little too much of a task to ask your readers to undergo. You can't exactly ask people to spend 10-20 hours of their lives analyzing a novel just to figure out what it really means. Its much easier to do that when its done. (cont)

“You can’t exactly ask people to spend 10-20 hours of their lives analyzing a novel just to figure out what it really means.”

*sweats nervously*

Well, I honestly don’t agree with this, and hope this isn’t what it seems like I’ve been trying to imply when I talk about how upset the sentiment about Ryukishi and EP8 was at the time. In fact, it’s the opposite - people did spend countless hours of their lives trying to analyze the novel. Like, I’ve mentioned this before, but I was only on the Umineko Train for 2 years before it ended because I got in between EP4 and 5. If you think of the people who got into Umineko from the start (mostly people who already loved Higurashi), that’s four years of their lives. And when I say years…I do mean years. Because speaking from experience, I literally did devote multiple hours, every day, over those two years, to doing Umineko stuff. It could be dumb shit like all the Umineko Hell videos I made, or it could be all the times I sat down and wrote up huge pages of notes about various theories, or all the time I spent on the AnimeSuki forums and in more threads on /a/ and /jp/ than I could possibly count. Far, far beyond 10-20 hours, I think most Umineko fans would tell you that all the time spent analyzing the story is where the fun came from to begin with.

The problem was the lack of payoff, and the fact that it felt like our efforts were invalidated. I went into more detail on those issues in this post (the stuff under the Read More that was in response to yasuda-yoshiya), though, if you’re interested, because I’d rather just link that than writing another 10-page essay repeating the same sentiments :P But the TL;DR of it is that the problem wasn’t that making the readers analyze it was ‘asking too much’ - that analysis is what drove most people to the series in the first place. It was the fact that we felt like we came away with nothing to show for the countless hours we did spend analyzing it. 

I think ‘waiting to do that when it’s done’ is the very thing Ryukishi didn’t want fans to do, because that means you’re not actually thinking for yourself and trying to reach an answer - you’re just a goat who wants the truth handed to you on a silver platter. And people like that, who aren’t actually reasoning and trying to understand the story on their own, don’t deserve the truth because they didn’t put in any effort to searching for it. I don’t disagree with Ryukishi on that at all. My problem lies with how dismissive he was to all fans who were upset with the lack of answers, as though all fans were waiting until they could see the answers without even trying to find it. It’s the fact that fans like me, who indeed I feel were the majority (at least in the western fanbase), who actually did struggle our asses off searching for the truth. We definitely weren’t saying ‘thinking is a pain just tell us the answers’, at all. All we wanted from the end was the ability to check the answers we reached after struggling for so long, to have some form of validation that said ‘you got it right’ or ‘you got it way wrong’, so we didn’t feel like everything was a waste of time.

I also think it’s a bit problematic to say that Ryukishi is somehow hindered by being Japanese, and that’s a dangerous line of thinking. I’m sure you didn’t mean anything negative by it, but realistically that’s like saying ‘Japanese authors are not nearly as good as western ones, Ryukishi’s talent is wasted because he wasn’t born in the west’. And well, I don’t think I have to explain why that starts to sound a bit…wrong. 

Ryukishi is Japanese. First and foremost, he’s writing for fellow Japanese. His stories were always aimed at his own culture, and I remember how surprised he was to find out about Witch-Hunt and that Umineko was so hugely popular in the west to begin with. He’s not trying to look down on his peers and say ‘I’m better than you, and because you’re all Japanese, you’d never understand the COMPLEX topics in my stories’. In fact, I’d say it’s very much the opposite - Ryukishi would not be writing these stories at all if he wasn’t writing them for his fellow Japanese. 

If you’ve read the Higurashi VN, you’ll know that the Kai arcs all had a personal afterword written by Ryukishi to the readers (the question arcs had Otsukaresama-kai, which was what Umineko’s EP1 tea party is supposed to remind you of). At the end of…I wanna say it was Minagoroshi-hen? He left a note about the importance of talking to people about your problems, and how this was something he wished could become a more widespread concept in Japan. Because it took so much effort just to get Satoko into child protective services because of Japan’s general ‘mind your business’ attitude, and because of Satoko’s own belief that her brother would come back if she shouldered all of this herself…it showed just how prevalent that sort of idea is in Japanese culture. Rika, too, is a huge example of that, and one of the main messages of the story (and Minagoroshi-hen specifically) was how Rika could have gotten so much further if she had actually talked to her friends about what troubled her sooner. Rena, too, in Tsumihoroboshi-hen. A big theme of Higurashi was trust and friendship, and talking to people instead of bottling up your problems. And it was also to be the one to talk to a friend, and help them, if you felt they needed it, rather than doing the standard Japanese thing of ‘it’s not my business’. Ryukishi was writing about these themes to try and send a message to his own people, to his own culture, and to maybe, if just a little, influence the thinking of his readers to help foster a new generation to break through some of these cultural taboos.

Higurashi would not work as a story if it wasn’t written by a Japanese man, to the Japanese people, as a story about Japanese characters…because these concepts are so important to understanding a lot of the major themes. Let’s say, instead, that Ryukishi had moved to the US and started writing Higurashi here. We don’t have a doujin industry, but let’s say he just published it as a fanfiction online, and it got a bit of a popular following. What do you think the reception would have been about the inherent themes of Minagoroshi-hen? Because I can absolutely envision a western comment section for it. “Why didn’t they just bust into her house and see that her uncle was lying?!” “If I were Keiichi and the others I’d have gone and kicked his ass” “Why would Rika rather keep quiet about Satoko than try to help her? I thought they were best friends?” And so on and so forth. I think a lot of people wouldn’t get why Minagoroshi-hen was such a long, dragged out process…because the western mindset for this sort of thing is so different. We can’t imagine that child protective services would be so passive!! The meaning of their struggle in that arc would just be totally lost - Hell, for all I know, that’s exactly what happened for western readers not super familiar with Japanese culture reading Higurashi for the first time (I say reading because if I recall, like most things, the anime sorta streamlined the whole thing for the sake of time and it didn’t seem like nearly as long of a process as it does in the VN and manga). I bet there were a lot of western fans who genuinely didn’t understand a lot of Higurashi’s themes, and this is no fault of their own. This is because Higurashi was written specifically with a Japanese audience in mind, an audience that wouldn’t need to have this attitude explained to them because it’s an inherent part of their culture.

I won’t pretend to be an expert on Japanese culture myself, of course, but I absolutely don’t think Ryukishi’s stories would work if they were actually written for a western market. Of course they both have a strong western fanbase, but I’d wager that only a small fraction of that fanbase is made up of people who weren’t already anime/manga fans. IE, people who already know a bit about Japanese culture because they’re already exposed to a lot of Japanese media. And while I think Umineko has a bit more western appeal in its themes than Higurashi (which is a very Japanese story in more ways than one), it was still clearly written for a Japanese audience, with a Japanese mindset. Again I go back to the fact that a big part of the issues in Umineko is that the family members never liked to talk about their personal problems. If they had come together and tried to talk and help each other, the tragedy could absolutely have been prevented. Yasu would have been able to come to terms with herself and not be pushed to the brink feeling like her life was hopeless. Battler and Rudolf could have made up much sooner, rather than waiting for 6 whole years. Rosa and Maria could have healed their mother-daughter relationship and try to come to terms with their own psychoses. The list goes on. So much of Umineko could have been prevented if the characters didn’t bottle up their personal problems…which, yeah, is something westerners can relate to and appreciate, but I think would be received much more strongly by a Japanese audience.

Ryukishi is Japanese. He writes for the Japanese. The fact that westerners latch onto that quality of his stories so much is certainly interesting, but to insinuate that somehow his own culture and the very mindset that drives him to write these stories is somehow hindering him…I can’t agree with that at all. I think it’s awesome that his stories are identifiable enough to reach a much wider audience than he could have ever expected…but to think that somehow his work would be better off if he wasn’t Japanese, or writing stories to appeal to his own culture? I think that’s a very mistaken viewpoint, myself.

[maxwellyjordan]

Argument analysis: Justices have strong views about removal of class actions

Yesterday morning’s argument in Home Depot U.S.A. v. Jackson was a notable one, as Justice Elena Kagan brought a strong view of the case to the bench and proceeded to dominate the argument.

The case involves the removal of litigation from state court to federal court. Under Section 1441 (and predecessor provisions dating back to the 18th century), “the defendant or the defendants” generally has a right to remove “any civil action brought in a State court of which the [federal] district courts have original jurisdiction.” In 2005, responding to concerns that state courts have been unduly receptive to class actions, Congress adopted the Class Action Fairness Act (often called the CAFA), which included a variety of provisions designed to make it easier for class-action defendants to remove those cases to federal court. One provision, in Section 1332, granted original federal jurisdiction over most class actions seeking a recovery of more than $5 million. Another provision, in Section 1453, provided that “any defendant” can remove a “class action” as defined in Section 1332.

Together, those provisions make it clear that if a plaintiff initiates a large class action in state court, any of the defendants can remove the case to federal court. Home Depot presents an odd twist on that framework. In this case, the initial litigation was between Citibank and respondent George Jackson: Citibank sued Jackson in state court to collect a debt arising out of a purchase Jackson made that was connected to Home Depot. All agree that the Citibank action could not have been brought in (or removed to) federal court. The next step, though, is what makes the case interesting: Jackson responded by asserting both defensive claims against Citibank and a class action against Home Depot, alleging a variety of consumer-protection claims. Citibank then withdrew its claim against Jackson, leaving Home Depot alone in the litigation against Jackson. Home Depot responded by filing a petition seeking to remove the matter to federal court under the CAFA. The lower courts rejected Home Depot’s petition and concluded the case should return to state court.

As I explained in my preview, the parties for the most part briefed the case on the question whether Home Depot qualifies as a “defendant” under Section 1441 and 1453, with Home Depot arguing that as a literal matter it plainly is a defendant and Jackson arguing that the history of Section 1441 shows that the term “defendant” refers only to the party against whom an action initially is filed.

Kagan came to the bench with a somewhat different take on the matter, appearing strongly predisposed to rule against Home Depot because the initial complaint in this case (filed by Citibank) did not institute a “civil action” over which federal courts would “have original jurisdiction.” For her, the key to the case isn’t whether Home Depot is or is not a defendant, it is whether the “civil action” at issue here could have been brought in federal court – and it plainly could not have been. That view squarely collided with the presentation on behalf of Home Depot, represented by William Barnette.

William P. Barnette for petitioner (Art Lien)

Early on Kagan pointed out that Section “1441(a), which is the principal removal statute, says that a civil action, not claims, but a civil action can be removed where the district courts have original jurisdiction. And what I’ve always taken that to mean is that to look for original jurisdiction, you look to the plaintiff’s complaint, the original plaintiff.” She could agree with Barnette that:

[Y]our claim might be under the original jurisdiction of the district courts if … that had started the lawsuit. But that didn’t start the lawsuit. The lawsuit, the civil action, was started by a claim that’s completely non-federal in nature. And you look to the original claim to decide whether the courts have original jurisdiction, don’t you?

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer saw the case much the same way. Sotomayor, for example, asked Barnette whether his case would “fall apart if we don’t accept your claim-by-claim analysis? You approach this claim by claim. I’m not quite sure how we can … do that since the statute speaks about a civil action and it talks about removal of an action, not a removal of a claim.”

Breyer emphasized Section 1332, which “says the term ‘class action’ means any civil action … filed under Rule 23 [or analogous state law]. Did [Jackson], the one who sued you, … did he file a civil action?” When Barnette suggested that Jackson had filed such an action, Breyer disagreed forcefully: “I don’t think he did, did he? Where does it say he did? …. What he did was he filed a …. [counter]claim.”

Barnette continued to press his point that Home Depot should be regarded as a defendant, but Breyer kept taking the discussion back to the filing of the complaint against Home Depot by the defendant on the original complaint: “Where does it say that … when a defendant files a class action, … that is an action filed, a civil action, because civil actions are usually filed by plaintiffs.” Indeed, when Barnette persistently redirected the discussion back to his baseline position, the Breyer seemed to lose patience, commenting that he was only asking “a simple question” and asking: “Why are you still not giving direct answers?”

By the end of the discussion, Breyer seemed as settled in his view as Kagan, explaining at one point: “Now I’m over with Justice Kagan. A civil action is an action brought by a plaintiff. And, therefore, since this isn’t a civil action … filed under Rule 23 [or analogous state law], they can’t take advantage of 1453 because they don’t fit within the definition.”

Kagan summarized the discussion near the end of Barnette’s presentation, explaining:

Mr. Barnette, under your theory, every time one party joins another party, we would have a new civil action. … But we don’t. We only have one civil action, and the civil action includes a multitude of claims, or can, between and among a wide range of parties. But it’s only one civil action. …

[Y]ou’re suggesting that we should look at this case as though the original claim never occurred and we should pretend that the claim started with the original defendant. But the case did not start with the original defendant. The civil action started with the original plaintiff, who brought a claim against a defendant who then brought a claim against you.

That is not to say that Paul Bland’s argument on behalf of Jackson was entirely stress-free. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito probed closely on the textual support for and policy implications of Bland’s position. When Alito started to press Bland closely, Kagan repeatedly interrupted to explain how she would analyze the problem. At one point, she engaged Alito so directly that he asked Bland whether he “agree[d] with Justice Kagan’s answer to my question.”

F. Paul Bland for respondent (Art Lien)

Bland was reluctant to embrace the position that Kagan had articulated that it is irrelevant whether Home Depot was or was not a defendant because Jackson had not filed a “civil action” against Home Depot. Bland spent much of his argument trying to resist comments by Alito and Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggesting that Home Depot must be accepted as a defendant. Alito, for example, commented at one point that if “we look at the text, we have a reference to the defendant or the defendants. So Home Depot would qualify there, would it not?” When Bland suggested that the traditional understanding of Section 1441 meant that Home Depot was not a defendant, Alito was wholly unpersuaded: “You’re reading things into it. … [I]n the ordinary sense of the term, are they not defendants? …. They are some kind of defendants.”

Alito also seemed to think affirming the decision in this case would fly in the face of Congress’ intent in adopting the CAFA, as he asked Bland rhetorically:

[I]s there any good reason why a claim like this … should not be removable to federal court? … If a claim like this is filed originally in … state court, it can be removed, but if it comes into the state court in this strange sort of back-door way, then it has to stay in state court. You really think that that’s a possible decision Congress would make?

At the end of the day, it is not at all clear from the argument how the court will resolve this one. We should find out by the end of June.

[Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel to the petitioner in this case. The author of this post is not affiliated with the firm.]

Editor’s Note: Analysis based on transcript of oral argument.

The post Argument analysis: Justices have strong views about removal of class actions appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/01/argument-analysis-justices-have-strong-views-about-removal-of-class-actions/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

[pamphletstoinspire]

Free RNA strand, from Univ. of Chicago at Illinois

"If evolution really works, how come mothers only have two hands?”  ― Milton Berle

"Intelligent Design is a remarkably uncreative theory that abandons the search for understanding at the very point where it is most needed. If Intelligent Design is really a science, then the burden is on its scientists to discover the mechanisms used by the Intelligent Designer." Michael Shermer, Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design

“That the universe was formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms, I will no more believe than that the accidental jumbling of the alphabet would fall into a most ingenious treatise of philosophy." Jonathan Swift

It is really quite amazing by what margins competent but conservative scientists and engineers can miss the mark, when they start with the preconceived idea that what they are investigating is impossible. When this happens, the most well-informed men become blinded by their prejudices and are unable to see what lies directly ahead of them." Arthur C. Clarke, 1963

INTRODUCTION

I try to learn from blog comments that disagree with my preconceptions. One such (on my post The Theology of Water--Is Design Intelligent?) said that Stephen Meyers' book, The Signature in the Cell, showed that the Intelligent Design hypothesis was good science, a position with which I did not agree.*  Although as a Catholic I believe in an intelligent Creator, I do not consider an article of faith like that could be dealt with by scientific methods.  After reading The Signature in the Cell I've modified this stance--somewhat.

WHAT IS SCIENCE?

In the past, Fr. Stanley Jaki's and Pierre Duhem's descriptions of science have been my guideposts:

"...[a] laboratory [is] a place where one works ... to make observations or measurement which are accurate so that accurate predictions can be made on their basis.  Science, in that sense, is synonymous with measurements, which are accurate because they can be expressed in numbers." Fr. Stanley Jaki, The Limits of a Limitless Science

"Therefore, if the aim of physical theories is to explain experimental laws, theoretical physics is not an autonomous science; it is subordinate to metaphysics... " Pierre Duhem, The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory.

Pierre Duhem's limitation on physics is based on the following:

physics cannot by itself explain why physics works;

a scientist must assume that some rational order exists if his/her work is to be meaningful.  

Fr. Jaki's requirement for quantitative predictions based on replicated experiments would place much of biology and geology, among other disciplines, into a non-science basket.  Therefore I and others have found this latter limitation to be not altogether satisfactory.

Fortunately, there is another perspective on science, that of "historical science", which Meyers describes in some detail in his book.  Historical science infers from present data what past events might be.  The data may be quantitative, as in cosmology and some parts of molecular biology, or qualitative, as in geology and paleontology.  Historical science uses "Inference to the Best Explanation"(IBE) , or more concisely "abduction", a method which has been criticized by some philosophers of science**.  Nevertheless, it is the only approach possible in those sciences for which replicated laboratory experiments are not feasible.

An everyday example (given by Meyers) of "Inference to the Best Explanation" (IBE) follows:  You look out your window and see the driveway is wet; the following three explanations occur to you -- it has rained; the sprinkler has been on and set so as to wet the driveway; your car has been washed.  You notice that neither your street nor the grass is wet; thus the rain and sprinkler explanation is eliminated; accordingly the remaining one, your car has been washed, must be correct.  Confirmatory evidence for this last would be a pail of water by your car.

INTELLIGENT DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS

"The Signature in the Cell" is particularly concerned with the application of two principles for understanding the beginning of life, the formation of cells and their critical constituents -- proteins, DNA and RNA:

"specified information" ("specified complexity") is manifested in biology and molecular biology;

such specified information can be brought about only by an intelligence, a designer; it can not occur by chance or by the working of physico-chemical laws (e.g. chemical affinities).

The second of these principles was expressed in the quotation by Jonathan Swift above.

As an example of "specified information",  consider the phrase "cat in the hat".  This conveys information (for Dr. Seuss fans -- a book title and an image).  If one was to draw characters out of a large bag containing the appropriate proportion of spaces, t's, c's, etc., the probability of getting them in the order "cat in the hat" would infinitesimally small...for all practical purposes, zero***.  Accordingly, if you saw that phrase on a table next to a large bag of characters, you'd assume that a Dr. Seuss fan had arranged them.

Another way of putting the second principle is that specified information is conserved.  Although this seems reasonable at first glance, there is no proof of such that I can find.  If an inverse relation between Shannon information and entropy is made (the greater the information content, the lower the entropy), there is no application of the Second Law that would apply to conservation of information:  The Second Law says that in an isolated system entropy increases (by irreversible processes) or stays constant (for a system at equilibrium) and for open systems sets no general conditions.   So we'll have to accept the second principle as possible, but not proven -- a hypothesis.

SPECIFIED INFORMATION MANIFESTED IN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY****

Meyers discusses how proteins, DNA and RNA are biomolecules encoding specified information.  He argues convincingly that this encoding can not proceed from chance or by natural law.  The probabilities of the sequences occurring by chance are too small, and this view agrees with that of a number of other scientists, not all of whom support intelligent design.

According to Meyers, specified information does not proceed from chemical or physical principals -- chemical affinities and attraction, for example, yielding protein folding shapes or sequence order of bases in DNA or RNA.  Were such operative, they might yield order (as, for example, gravity and coriolis forces yield whirlpool shapes in water going down a drain).  However, such order could not provide for the variety of base sequences needed to encode for the synthesis of many different proteins, nor for the different conformations involved in folding of proteins that yields enzymatic activity.

An important criterion for a theory to be "scientific" is that it can make testable predictions, predictions that can be falsified.  Meyers makes 12 such predictions. The problem with many of the predictions is that they propose results that may be found with sufficient research, but if they aren't, it won't signify falsification of the prediction. For example.

"Investigation of the logic of regulatory and information-processing systems in cells will reveal the use of design strategies and logic that mirrors... those used in systems designed by engineers. Cell biologists will find regulatory systems that function in accord with a logic that can be expressed as algorithms." Stephen Meyer, The Signature in the Cell, Appendix A.

If such results are obtained, it will strengthen the Intelligent Design hypothesis, but it will not necessarily confirm it.

Several predictions propose that positive results from origins of life computer simulations or laboratory work to show spontaneous self-organization require information input.  For example

“Informational accounting will reveal that any improvements in replicase function in ribozymes are the result of active information supplied by ribozyme engineers.” ibid.

I'm not sure how one would show the above, but the fact that it couldn't be shown does not amount to an adequate test of the prediction. And again, finding such results would strengthen ID, but not confirm it.

The only prediction amongst those listed that might be falsified--and even here, if the contrary isn't shown, it won't necessarily show the prediction to be true--is the following:

“ No undirected process will demonstrate the capacity to generate 500 bits of new information starting from a nonbiological source." ibid.

CRITICISMS OF INTELLIGENT DESIGN

The first criticism is given in the quote by Michael Shermer.  Although proponents of Intelligent Design argue that information is put into cell components, they suggest no mechanism as to how this might occur.  Another opponent of the neo-Darwinian thesis, the philosopher Thomas Nagel, has proposed in his book, Mind and Cosmos, that teleology should be considered as a general operating principle in nature.  Although this requirement--purpose as a part of nature--just names, rather than explains the issue, it is a starting point. And it puts it in such a way that Intelligent Design might proceed from fundamental principles.  Paul Davies puts it very well:

“...the hypothesis of an intelligent designer applied to the laws of nature is far superior than the designer ...who violates the laws of nature from time to time by working miracles in evolutionary history. Design-by-laws is incomparably more intelligent than design-by-miracles.[emphasis added]” Paul Davies, The Cosmic Jackpot: Why our universe is just right for life." p.200)

The second criticism is that the fundamental assumption of conservation of specified information or specified complexity is assumed. Although this seems at first like a reasonable assumption, it is necessary that it be justified from first principles, outside of the realm of biology, if Intelligent Design is to be considered science.

To sum up, I do believe in an intelligent Creator--indeed, an omniscient one who orders all for ultimate good -- but that belief is an article of faith, not of science. I am glad that I read "Signature in the Cell", because I found a new perspective on what constitutes science, "Historical Science".  But there is still much that proponents of Intelligent Design must do in order that it qualifies as a testable scientific theory.

NOTES

*I should note that some 15 years ago when I first read Michael Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box, I thought that Intelligent Design revealed a whole new realm of science, manifesting biology as the handiwork of the Creator.

**See, for example, works by Bas van Fraassen or Nancy Cartwright.

***The phrase has 14 characters: 3 spaces, 3 t's, 2 a's, 2 h's, 1 c, 1 e, 1 i, 1 n. By combinatorial algebra, there are14!/[ 3!3!2!2!] = 605,404,800 possible combinations of these 14 characters.  If one uses rules such as 1) no initial space; 2) no final space; 3) no two like characters next to each other, 4) t followed by space, h, a, e or i...etc. the number of possible combinations can be reduced, but it will still be very large. Thus the probability of getting "cat in the hat" by randomly drawing letters from a large bag filled with the appropriate proportion of characters will be very small.

****Although I have published nmr papers dealing with biochemistry and molecular biology, I am not expert in these topics.  Accordingly what Meyers says in these areas I'll assume to be true.

From a series of articles written by: Bob Kurland - a Catholic Scientist

[autoirishlitdiscourses]

Discourse of Tuesday, 12 September 2017

By extension from common of turbary the right day for most students who are interested in reciting, please see me! You picked a good holiday break! Just beginning then. Very very well. You did a good way to think about this before in case you're struggling with a C-335 350 D 315 335 D 300 315 D-—You've presented a good poem, delivered it very well done. Let me know if I have you come out and talk about what you wanted to hear that and hide behind the fact that you must take the small late plan email penalty ½%, but I'm pretty sure it's too late to start writing to get back to you on which of your introduction and conclusion feel a little bit. I think that, as outlined in my intra-textual comments, I guess I'll just have to do you think about what you need to reschedule your presentation/discussion assignment are available. 93% the high end of your total grade for the term to spare. For Ulysses in front of me to leave it. All in all, you really do have some really perceptive set of beliefs about what's most important, or whether you're technically meeting the discussion in the romance competition by any means the only representation of Catholicism in The Butcher Boy. I think that you think about how you're going to be one of my girlfriends. Think about using a Google Docs, too, that makes a strong choice between using theory as a discussion. A 100% 150 A 95% 142. You responded gracefully to questions from the second is for them and see what he wants a short poem was very fair to O'Casey's text, although I think that there is a pretty rigorous framework at the final itself, I think, finally, that asking yourself what your paper, however. Well done on this. I'll give away add codes as quickly as possible, because I think that it would help to push back the midterm to send me an email saying that it needed to pay even closer attention to the front of the quarter is that you are nervous about this. Let me know likewise, let me know what you want to set up that expectation for its repetition. Keep practicing periodically even when you're presenting to a more successful essay. Thanks for doing such an impassioned delivery would have had difficulty answering any questions, please. No real surprises for me! I pass out copies of documents this certainly satisfies the requirements out from hanging out her washing; changed It seems it is not just talking about in section even more importantly to yourself.

I will produce an MLA-compliant entry for every reason, but you handled yourself and your final draft, let it motivate other people are reacting to look at what other students in relation to this recording of it next to Yeats's The Song of Wandering Aengus Lesson Plan for Week 10: A traditional form of love has trapped her in a later week—though the Irish as drunk, violent, and I'm sorry for the class as a whole. You picked a very solid aspects of your analysis and the University, and you didn't hear his discussion of as close to this question would help, as critic Harold Bloom phrases the relationship between the selection. You added an I before think I can link to it than that they didn't cover but that would be helpful, but is perhaps one of the poem, the central claim expressed in your paper to problematize the issues that I've gestured in margin comments, in the front of the more recent versions at all. 46: A jail. There are also welcome to read. B paper is that you use and the overall goal is to think about writing as communication, and that this is probably not necessary for purposes of satisfying the technical requirements at least some people never get to everything, I hope that helps to further your analysis assumes that you've identified this as a way of discussion and were almost completely accurate to the novel reward? Short version: writing a more interesting one, but I think that what your exact point of analysis.

Thanks! If you are conversant with Celtic mythology in which you perform some complex and loaded as a whole evinces, is that your delivery; you also write well and can't assert offhand that these are different kinds of background, and that often make a two-minute or so, so I wanted to say that you are certainly other possibilities that are dangerous for the quarter by 1 p. Quite frankly, the professor is behind a bit here. There is also available. Your paper has frequent, severe grammatical/mechanical problems can receive by attending section any other questions, OK? My one suggestion at this point would be like—I realize that these paintings fall within the 1920s for your section, probably due to the stage, your delivery was very productive reading in which it could. For very similar reasons, including basic plot-recall questions. Incidentally, I had been discovered 9 years before Ulysses was set. All in all, you might compare it with the fact that you have 86. Have a good topic what I mean: you had a lot of these issues, none are egregious or otherwise receiving a non-aligned in the text. Then, I'd like to recite, and they will be, or make large-scale concerns very effectively and in line 650; changed said please to says please; changed from to by this lack of a set of ideas in here, all of these ways, is that you want to cover, refreshing everyone's memory on the final exam! I'm glad to be crying about?

You picked a longer-than-required selection and delivered it in any reasonable person could disagree with you in front of the friend who was scheduled to recite and discuss this and be very profitable. Students Program. Think about what home means, but there are several alternate readings that are so stressful for you. First I made a lot of things quite effectively. You had an A paper will almost certainly would have liked to have mercilessly restructured around that observation. On widow/orphan control in MS Word 2007: A plagiarized or otherwise just saying random things about what kind of quiet this quarter in comparison to and. Discussion Section Guidelines handout. You did a very good idea, it refers to illegal alcohol, or at least apparently reaction to painkillers and had a really excellent work at the end of the scenarios above; you delivered a sensitive, and this made it a fresh eye and asking yourself what your other possible topic, I offer you a bit in the last available slots. However, you had a good job of weaving together multiple strands you've been describing. The superstition that May is an impressive move. This is when you sent me an outline, and that this doesn't ever quite happen in your hand.

485 A 450 465 A-. I think, but I think that your discussion got cut off perhaps just by doing background reading on aspects of your plans by 10 a. A-range, though, you've got it perfect. Here's a breakdown on your way into Ulysses, but they're also doing a solid understanding of the specific language of your elements work together in section even more than twenty-four. In the same time, the larger-scale point in the quarter is still fair game for recitation. 5% of the century, and if that works for you, and how is Joyce positioning himself in relation to them by glancing backwards in your own thoughts on the last chance to add classes without a petition. REMINDER: If your word processor. 97% or above, I just want to sign up for a recitation of at a more general discussion of a small boost to your own ideas and where it will give it back to you with comments before the paper's overall point s unintelligible. On the other member of it is also a complex historical condition and trace a clear cubist depiction of people haven't done public speaking. Shift p. It can be a nice plan here.

This means that you're dealing with I think is likely that you were, at your test to know. I will do when they have been nice to have—my own policy to treat in a more rigorously for your recitation segment deals explicitly with it. She wrote a very good work here, but really, your readings are generally fair and perceptive, and an estimate based on an assignment that you won't have a/written statement/indicating/specific reasons/why your grade in the discussion requirement. You managed time very well with your discussion notes here let me know which texts have a standard list of the pieces of writing. In all of these would be to find one or more particular poems by Eavan Bolland, not only contributes to a cause emerge, and, basically, you can respond productively if they want to talk in detail below and your paper's structure. You do a very good advice and I'll get plenty of other possibilities, and you related it effectively to larger-scale course concerns and did a very sophisticated and deserve to represent your excellent thoughts even more specific examination of how specific people's ideas were. James Joyce's Ulysses: discussion of the very rare and do the work for you if you need to include a copy of your selection but were very close to the historical construction of this. Thank you so much thought and writing a report. Think about what constitutes the understanding of a third of a letter grade, insofar as it could have conceivably been even stronger. Your arrangement was enjoyable and you'd clearly spent some time working it out Wednesday, and that neither one has enough space to discuss and haven't used Word extensively for a specific argument about it more in section and it's OK to turn in your participation score a small boost to your first question, or is going to open up different kinds of political beliefs does the show the people who never ask naive questions never stop being naive. Is rather interesting ways to think about who Fergus actually is and will get you a bit too tired tonight to do things other than a B and almost impossible to say to each other in regard to this point.

54: A letter to my office hours tomorrow if you haven't yet graded, you can receive email at your U-Mail address regularly. But really, you need any changes that I agree with me, as outlined in my mailbox, or historical documents, if they cover ground which you will leave the room, were everywhere but operated independently and no more commonly yes responses, OK?

Again, well done! We will then schedule an appointment right at 3:56, which is an attempt to look for cues that this is of poor quality: The Dubliners perform The Patriot Game, mentioned in this article in the course as a thinker or a human being. I suspect that you make your paper will be may still be calculating your grade provided that it's necessarily the best option for you your grade: You gave a sensitive, thoughtful paper that you attribute to them effectively, and you played a very good close reading of the quarter as a broad topic, but do feel bad about that. At this point would be to pick for you if you have any questions about Cyclops or it might sound, because as declared in writing here. Synge's The Playboy of the first line of your recitation and discussion of the class than when you're making assertions that require backing—I've pointed to some punctuation and formatting issues—none of Joyce's narrators have the overall goal is to do whatever would be cleaning up your work pay off for you. Still, if I recall correctly, IMDb.

By defining your key terms what does old Sull do; added the before one I loved; changed We feel in England believe on line 12; and changed I'd say that the male partner in that section; b you're still interested in doing your research. I think that this doesn't mean that you'd thought closely about what you can engage in micro-level issues of phrasing and style would, I think it would help to make up your recitation comes, make sure to have a more general occurrence of seeing people as masses. How to Get An A paper; still, this could conceivably have paid off for you is now five weeks late on this particular passage that's one way to figure out how to discuss it without help, and musical there are certainly other possibilities, and specifically with representations of very important aspects to your TAs for English 150 course, this is not until next week! 3:30 spot at the end. I think that you're capable of making. These unpleasant implications have been to try harder on the due date that you could take Playboy as a texts that you're more effectively. I'll post a slightly edited version of your texts in relation to your paper as a serial killer. /Participation score above 50 points, would have needed to pay enough attention to the section website if you can't go over twelve, I think you have questions or themes that have been, both of you has elected to appropriate without attribution.

[ohshcscenerios]

The Case for Takashi x Haruhi P.2

Welcome to Part Two of The Case for MorixHaru Series! Today we will be exploring Volume 3. If you want to read Part One I will include the link here. This is a multi-part series so expect more posts after this one!

Please Note: 

This post will include manga spoilers. 

This is all in the name of fun. I am by no means insulting or “disproving” other pairings. I am just a person who wants to spread more MorixHaru love into the world.

Feel free to agree or disagree, I’d love to know your thoughts. 

Shall we begin?

Willing Participant 

In Volume 3, Episode 8 the Host Club goes to the beach. This episode is famous for the interaction between Haruhi and Kyoya (for obvious reasons) but staying true to our case we will exclude that from this post. Today we are focusing on Takashi and Haruhi. 

Surprisingly, the live action follows the manga more closely than the anime in this episode. Meaning, the anime excludes a few moments between Takashi and Haruhi. 

When Haruhi is whisked away to the beach she doesn’t show much interest in participating in the fun. She doesn’t join the twins in their game of volleyball or even swims with her guests. Although the beach was technically her idea she doesn’t seem to be enjoying herself. 

That is, until Takashi and Mitsukuni invite her to collect seashells. 

Haruhi’s demeanor changes when Takashi hands her a bucket and Mitsukuni points out the beach filled with yummy seashells and she happily claims a spot on the beach to begin collecting. Just like that, she went from sulking on a rock to playing in the sand.

I find this interesting because Haruhi doesn’t usually accept the host’s invitations to join their fun. Even after this episode the other hosts must resort to kidnapping if they want Haruhi to participate in their fun. However, when Takashi and Mitsukuni invite her to collect seashells she doesn’t put up a fight. She accepts the bucket with a “thank you”. 

Unnoticed Effort  

When the Host Club discovers they can impress Haruhi with different seashells they begin showing her their finds like blue mussels and scallops. What does Takashi try to give her? 

An octopus.

I was surprised by this because normally you wouldn’t find octopus on the beach unless they were either washed up by the tide (remember, it was low tide) or a specific species known as kaurna - an octopus that buries itself in sand. This means Takashi probably went into the water and found an octopus to present as a gift to Haruhi.

Our boy was trying really hard to impress Haruhi!

When the Host Club sets off the find her weakness our silent shy host puts in unnoticed effort to win. Most of Takashi’s involvement is directly correlated with Mitsukuni’s participation but look closer. Takashi puts in extra effort beside helping his cousin.

A little side note; when the twins suggest their “find Haruhi’s weakness” game and Kyoya offers her photos as a prize, notice how Mitsukuni says “we want to join” rather than “I want to join”. Takashi is too shy to admit he wants the photos too.

When Mitsukuni tries to scare Haruhi with tall heights, Takashi tests it further by lifting her even higher. 

Takashi wants to win those pictures.

Note how he picks her up after she says, “if we fell we might die”. I feel he wanted to hit two birds with one stone; testing her potential fear of heights while keeping her safe from falling.

And when Mitsukuni’s idea fails Takashi tests another theory; the fear of sharp things. Have we known Takashi to really involve himself unless Mitsukuni persists? I see Takashi really trying to win those photos of Haruhi. 

Takashi Loves Her

Another difference between the anime and the manga is how Haruh is handled after falling off the cliff. 

It’s worth noting in the manga Haruhi isn’t pushed off the cliff, as seen in the anime, but instead punched in the face and falls off the cliff. That’s why she’s bleeding from the cheek and everyone’s shocked by her appearance. 

I find this interesting because when Tamaki emerges with Haruhi he begins giving orders to the other hosts on how to handle the situation. He tells Kyoya, Kaoru, and Hikaru to dismiss the guests. He tells Mitsukuni to call for a doctor. The only person he doesn’t give orders to is Takashi. 

The anime shows Tamaki setting her down on the beach but in the manga he passes her to... Takashi.

This leads me to believe Takashi voluntarily took Haruhi from Tamaki. But why would he? Because he is worried about her! Takashi wanted to hold her, probably to reassure himself that she was ok. And this may be a stretch but he probably wanted to hold her because he knows she’s safest with him (referring to the jungle scene). I imagine Takashi opening his arms in front of Tamaki, signaling to hand Haruhi over. 

Tamaki chastises her for facing the bullies alone and stubborn Haruhi refuses to apologize for her actions. The manga focuses the fight between Tamaki and Haruhi but look at who also is affected. Takashi looks tired and upset, as if the scare on the cliff drained him emotionally.

Also, I notice that Haruhi seems to lean into Takashi after Tamaki’s outburst. As if she’s subconsciously leaning into him for support.

Now... this may be a really long stretch... but what is rolling down Takashi’s cheek? Is it sweat or is it a tear? I’ll let you decide.

Now, when the Host Club retire to Nekozawa’s mansion, there is a big difference between the anime and the manga that needs to be said. In the manga, Takashi does not retrieve Haruhi for dinner. Instead, she joins them after switching on the circuit breaker in the basement. I know a lot people like to imagine what happened between them in the hallway but the manga truth is... that never happened. However, the dinner scene is still an important moment for Haruhi and Takashi, both respectively and collectively.  

When the hosts are eating together the conversation plays out normally; Tamaki and Haruhi continue to argue until Tamaki storms off to bed, taking Kyoya with him. Mitsukuni and the twins reveal they were upset because they worried about her. 

This is where I get upset with the anime. Absolutely no where in the anime do they show Takashi showing an ounce of emotion during the dinner scene. In the anime he is just eating his crab, minding his own business, and not involved in their conversation whatsoever. 

However, in the manga, Takashi behaves very differently. In the manga he isn’t mindlessly eating crab. He’s involved in the conversation. He’s actively listening. He’s silently telling Haruhi he was also worried with his attentive expression. 

I’m genuinely upset about how the anime snubbed Takashi in this scene. He is just as important as the other hosts and yet his emotions were nearly scrubbed clean in the anime scene. (This is why it’s important to also read the manga).

When she finally apologizes he doesn’t stand behind her eating crab as in the anime. He accepts her apology by patting her head. 

I have a theory; when Takashi pats Haruhi’s head he is silently expressing his affection to her. Think about it, Haruhi is the only one to receive head pats from Takashi (I’m sure Mitsukuni has too but not in the same context). Up to this point in the manga we do not see him patting the other hosts’ heads. I surmise Takashi’s head pats is how he’s trying to flirt with Haruhi. 

Moving on...

When Haruhi begins to feel sick she doesn’t run off into the nearest room as she did in the anime. Instead, someone voluntarily picks her up and rushes her to the nearest restroom. Guess who that person is.

Takashi. 

Notice how he wasn’t ordered by Mitsukuni to help her. In fact, it appears the other hosts were surprised by Takashi’s haste action by how the twins cheered him on. 

At this point, Takashi doesn’t need permission to help Haruhi. He doesn’t need his cousin - or anyone else for that matter - to tell him when to step in. Why? Because I believe he loves her. At this point in the manga I think it’s safe to say Takashi loves Haruhi. 

Persuasion of Love

 Let’s move onto Episode 8; when the Host Club collides with the Zuka Club. Here we see the Host Club feeling threatened in losing Haruhi and they band together to keep her at Ouran Academy. For this episode we are going to zoom our microscope onto Takashi and his reactions/facial expressions. 

We’ve already established he has become protective over her but in this episode we now see another side of Takashi. We see he has also become possessive over her. 

Let’s study his expression when Benio threatens to disband the Host Club. He looks angry and even a little confused. He’s obviously upset alongside everyone else.

Now, let’s compare his previous expression to this expression when Benio threatens to steal away Haruhi. His expression grows a pinch darker. His eyes are wider, his mouth slightly gaped, and a pointed stare at Benio. She is no longer targeting the club as a whole. She’s targeting Haruhi. His Haruhi.

His expressions went from “As If” to “Over My Dead Body”. 

Now, I have heard people say this episode is where they believe Haruhi’s and Takashi’s relationship turns platonic; because when the Host Club dresses in drag Takashi chooses to remain strictly male. The anime makes a side note “Brother Only” when introducing the hosts in their costumes; making it seem Takashi has been friend-zoned or their relationship turned into one between siblings. 

I disagree. In fact, I think his decision to dress as a male further proves his feelings for Haruhi. 

I surmise Takashi didn’t want Haruhi to see him as anything other than a man. He didn’t want to compromise his masculinity in front of Haruhi. Takashi wants Haruhi to see him as a man; a man who could love her and take care of her. 

Now, Takashi doesn’t have a problem being flexible with his masculinity. We see him taking on a more submissive role with Mitsukuni all the time; allowing Mitsukuni to lead in dance, wearing the matching costume to Mitsukuni’s costume, and serving the tea and cakes during hosting hours for Mitsukuni and their guests. 

So why wouldn’t he dress as a “sister” alongside Mitsukuni? Why would he be a “brother only” Takashi?

I think whether he realizes it or not, Takashi’s feelings are growing more serious for Haruhi. His feelings are transitioning from “crush” to “wanting a relationship/courtship”. 

He wants Haruhi to see him in a more serious light because he’s becoming serious about her. 

Is this a stretch? Yes. This whole post is a stretch. This whole series is a stretch. But Takashi deserves Haruhi so we will continue! 

Let’s move onto Episode 12, when the Host Club visits Haruhi at her home. 

This episode is also famous for MorixHaru because of the strawberry exchange - and we’ll get to that - but first I want to point something out. 

We’ve been heavily delving into Takashi’s feelings during this post but here we have a glimpse of Haruhi’s feelings as well. 

When Haruhi serves the tea she gives Takashi the biggest mug. This size of mug is also evident in the anime which coincidentally is when I first noticed it. I thought it was interesting Haruhi gave Takashi the biggest cup. If I had to guess why, I would say it’s because she’s also developing feelings for him. But she’s too oblivious when it comes to herself so she probably doesn’t think twice about it. 

But I’m sure Takashi noticed. In fact, I would go as far as saying receiving the biggest mug is what inspired him to share his strawberries with her. Because now he is picking up on her unintentional hints, therefore getting more comfortable with her.

(I apologize for the poor photo quality. I tried multiple times for a decent photo and this was the best one >.<) 

I find it interesting that after Haruhi chooses a strawberry cake Takashi still asks her if she likes strawberries. Our boy is a true gentleman at heart. Look at him trying to make sure she’s going to enjoy her cake.  

We cannot conclude this post without mentioning how much Haruhi blushes when she thanks him for the strawberries. Look at that blush! It’s completely taken over her cheeks! I also love how Takashi smiles at her happiness. He just loves that he made her happy. If we look closer in the next frame we can also see that he happily watches her enjoy her cake. 

He’s so proud of himself for making her happy and simply watches her eat her cake. It’s so adorable and really shows how much he has fallen for their host maiden. 

Alright, I need to end this ridiculously long post, but stay tuned for further posts in the series! We are far from done! (I don’t know if that’s a good thing or a bad thing, considering how much time and effort I put into these posts) 

Watch out for Part Three in The Case for Takashi and Haruhi! 

[rezby]

reminiscions, so to speak

I’ve been thinkin about this for a while, but havent really sat down to try to formulate this. But a lot of people whom I knew as teenagers or early 20s, when I was a teenager. There are sooo many people who are now (publically) trans, or at least not-cis, that I remember from back in jr high or high school, before anybody had really figured out The Genders. It makes me really glad, to see how many people are self-actualizing. I love to see the updates in their lives that they post on fb, at least the ones who haven’t defriended me. (This enjoyment is only a little vicarious, truth be told. It is mostly genuine happiness for them).

I know its very likely that I’ll never reconnect with any of the people with whom i’ve grown distant (not through any fault of their own. it really is 90% circumstances (everybody moving across the country, to either like boston or ... seattle? portland? Big Oregon City, or for those who are still local just issues of me not having a lot of free time with which to hang out with them) and 10% my hell brain self-sabotaging relationships/avoiding everything), but I often think about them and how they’re doing.

One of the people I’ve mentioned hasn’t defriended me on FB, and I still interact with their posts every now and then - I think a lot about the time when I was 16 and said some really horrific things to them without realizing just what I was saying. I’ve been feeling terrible about it, but I know I’ll never actually send them the apology I want to send - they deserve better than to be reminded of it out of the blue.

At one point last October, I was on this other person’s FB wall, i dont even remember why. sometime in like january or Dec, I saw a comment on somebody else’s status by somebody with the same last name as this person, with similar viewpoints. I click around, and figure out that this person has defriended me, and also publically came out on fb as trans. Last week I saw a photo posted of them with their sign at the chicago trans liberation march (which obvs I didnt go to, i’m not Out and I dont intend to be, until the time of my choosing, so i dont interact publically with Trans (tm) things. i’m fb friends with both my parents), and they looked really happy. Not about the occasion, but as a person, it looked like they had let an awful amount of weight off their shoulders. I remember them being as deeply unhappy as many of us  were, back in high school (a lot of us were deeply depressed. It just turns out for a few of us that the depression was tied to the Genders so getting stuff done for the one helped the other). So, I’m glad that theyve realized their gender and are happier for it. I also wonder (a lot) if thats why they defriended me - I’m not really out on fb, and since I haven’t spoken to this person in years they probs wouldn’t even know that I’m also non cis, so maybe they defriended me when they did their official fb transition stuff. I get it, it would make sense to, but... it still wounds me, a bit.

those two were a couple years older than me and I was never that close to ‘em in high school. this third person was in my grade and a couple classes with me, and.... I was a horrible person to them. Not intentionally, I’ve always had the best of intentions, but that doesn’t mean the actions i had done weren’t horribly misogynistic or racist. A few things I didn’t even realize until years later, what I actually had been doing. They defriended me a couple years back. They’re non-cis as well, but I dont know anything more specific than that.

That was the Complicated Feelings w/r/t the non-cis folk i knew in high school. I had some online friends whove also come to realize their own genders as well, who I’ve also grown apart form. This one was largely due to MSN messenger no longer being a thing, and then me getting busy with irl stuff and basically never being online anymore. I don’t really got any Complicated Feelings for most of this group, its mostly that I miss them but realize there’s p much no feasible way to get back into regular comms with them, and I’ve accepted that.

There was one person, who knew they were trans all the way back when I first met them. But they never talked about it with me. At least 85% of our conversations were political. At the time, I was in early high school, where I was a libertarian at the time. They were staunchly communist, I figure marxist is probs the best term for their beliefs but I’ll be honest, I know jack diddly squat about the academic details of the different schools of communist thought. Anyways, we chatted a lot on MSN back when that was around. At one point I started FB friending the other online friends I’ve got, but this person never actually accepted the friend request. its still in their inbox. I last talked to them about 3 or 4 years ago, I believe in my 2nd year of college. I asked why they hadnt accepted the friend request and they said somethin to the tune of ‘im an asshole lol’. this persons typing style is completely different from that but thats the effect my memory has of that message. Our conversation at the time also turned political. Now, after getting to college and having my eyes opened at, well, a lot of stuff, i’ve since become fairly leftist. probably communist? socialist? idk. Anyways, at the time, I was pretty caught up in the politics of one tumblr user Moneycat. If you weren’t around for that, the gist of it (as i recall) was that... actually, i honestly can’t recall the minutae or which parts werent very good. there are other posts going around from some years back that go over her politics and the flaws thereof. one of their ideas was that gender is a social class, inasmuch as bourgeoisie or proletariat are, and that trans women are a distinct social class from cis women and men. I had recently read one of her posts about how gender theorizing had led her to become a communist, and how the two were inextricably linked, and tbh she was this huge popular rly smart trans lady blogger so i p much hero worshiped her and adopted as many of her politics as i could understand. So I tried explaining this gender theory of communism to my old communist pal, and they were very displeased by it. I did a poor job, to be sure, but they disagreed staunchly. I dont remember the other details of what I was arguing but I do remember it was more out there than just what i’ve typed so far. Cuz I opened the conversation with “hey did you know that i’ve also become a communist now?” or somethin like that, and they were like ‘oh nice, how did you come to this conclusion?” and I went into moneycat’s gender communism and they did not agree. And that was our last conversation. and idk how to start conversations. Even tho we’re not fb friends, i can still IM them via fb, so the option is always open, but I never do it. I miss this person a lot, and its been hurting me for years that they never accepted the friend request. we actually had been decently close online (as far as I recall. i have poor memory at best in general, and there’s a good chance I actually have brain trauma that’s making my memory even worse but that appointment is in may). and they’re fb friends with all our mutual online friends. so its just me. i’m not good enoguh.

And I know if I actually ever made a snapchat I could probably easily get back in contact with literally everybody ever, I know for a fact that all but the last person have snapchats, and I’m p sure that they’d all be receptive to at least messages over it, but.... I tried making a snapchat once, and was immedietely conflicted. Do I go with my IRL name and snap with my family and classmates and colleagues? If I do that, I dont want to have my snapchat available online here cuz I want to maintain at least a veneer of separation between my online identity and my “family” “professional” identity.  Or do I go with my online name, but then refuse to snap w/ like my mom and sis? I ended up deleting the app and never doing anything with it. so I basically refuse to have a snapchat, and p much only have fb these days, which... is not the best method of communication.

Compounding this is my awkwardness with people i’ve known for a while - my memory really does get atrocious about some things, to the point where i’ve hung out with people for years before actually knowing 100% their name. this is deeply embarassing for me, and I dont wanna hurt em, so I dont let on that I dont remember their names. especially if i’ve known them for forever, but havent had a ton of meaningful interactions with them, theres a v good chance i’ll know them, i’ll recognize them, but i wont be able to drum up their name from the depths of my mind. this is awkward. so i sometimes avoid going to places where there are people who might fit this bill. some people from high school who I kinda knew and hung out in the same friend group as me, and a lot of my not immediate (step)relatives. so at the photos for the trans march, where I saw the photo of the one person from 2nd bullet point, I also saw a lot of other people from high school who I’d be awkward around. altho this reminds me, there was a 4th person actually, from high school as well. i think... they blocked me? i dot remember. i know they werent on fb a lot, but they were fb friends with me. i just went through my own friend list as well as that of 2 people who i thought would be mutuals with them but... i dont see them. I’m p sure i recall seeing like,,,, last year or 1.5 years ago that they had changed their fb name from their birth name to a feminine name, as well as changed their gender and all that other stuff that comes with coming Out? but I dont recall and I cant find em anymore. if they have blocked me.... oh well. nothin i can do about it. about any of it really. nothing that i’m going to do anyways.