#or by having some knowledge of the classics

[unsolicited-opinions]

Sorry to rain on the victimhood cultivation but the MOSAD is the most powerful spy agency around the world. Israel is jam-packed with money, secret spy agencies and more.

But perhaps we ommited this for convenience? It's easier to sympathize if you paint the country as victims. Oh. And we don't talk about the colonisation of the XIX either.

Classic Anon Hatemail:

Where Mossad is spelled "MOSAD," facts are invented, and history is apparently something you just...vaguely gesture at.

"Mossad is the most powerful spy agency in the world."

How would one measure the 'power' of an intelligence agency?

Are you one of those guys (it's always guys) who watched Fauda once and now thinks Mossad is basically the Avengers?

Here in reality, Mossad has about 7,000 employees - compare that to the CIA (~20,000), FSB (~200,000), or China's MSS (massive and opaque).

Does Mossad punch above their weight? Yes. Israel punches above its weight in pretty much every way, but not because of illuminati omnipotence, just necessity.

"Israel is jam-packed with money."

According to data from World Bank, Israel's GDP per capita in 2023 is decent. Slightly higher than Sweden's, slightly lower than Austria's. That's pretty impressive for a country smaller than New Jersey which has much more limited natural resources than Sweden or Austria. If you're interested in how they accomplished this, Start-up Nation is a really interesting read.

Like the US and much of Europe, though, Israel also has a high cost of living, a struggling middle class, and very real poverty rates.

Jam-packed with money? No. But they do have universal health care, and I'm envious of that as an American.

"Jam packed with money" makes you sound like an antisemitic 60s Batman villain, not someone who knows anything about economics - but if you'd like some suggestions for introductory texts in economics, my Asks are open.

"Victimhood cultivation."

The idea that Jews are faking being attacked, displaced, or killed is not edgy or clever - it's just reheated antisemitism and in denial of history. Jews have been targeted globally for millennia including just in recent weeks, a Jewish governor's residence being attacked by arson, two people murdered for walking out of a Jewish museum in DC, and yesterday, senior citizens including a holocaust survivor being attacked with molotov cocktails.

But you think Jews are just making it up?

That says a lot more about you than it does about me, buttercup.

"We don't talk about the colonisation of the XIX."

My guy. What are you talking about?

If you mean 19th-century European colonial projects, scholars and activists never stop talking about those. Postcolonial studies departments are built on such talk.

If you mean Jews returning to their ancestral homeland in the late 1800s, many do talk about that - but it's not colonization when you're indigenous to the land you're returning to and aren't a franchise from an empire shipping goods back to the monopole.

It's like an international game of Middle East Antisemitic Conspiracy Mad Libs.

"Israel is secretly run by _______, controls all the _________, and is faking ________ to distract us from __________!"

Thanks, regardless. It’s important to hear from voices across the spectrum, including the deeply confused - because it reminds us of the knowledge, intelligence, and rhetorical skills you don't have. 😘

[fiercestpurpose]

So you want to go to grad school: An FAQ for people considering a humanities PhD in the US

There’s a lot of qualifiers in the title of this post and that’s because I can really only speak to the specific experience that is humanities PhDs in the US. Science PhDs are different, PhDs in Britain are different, getting a master’s is different.

I’m an English PhD student. I have friends in the comparative literature, Middle Eastern studies, religious studies, classics, history, and art history departments. My information is based on my own experiences as well as theirs but should not be taken as 100% true in all cases.

The following questions are addressed under the cut:

What does getting a PhD involve?

Where should I apply? / How should I decide where to apply?

Should I get a master’s degree first?

What does PhD funding look like?

What kind of jobs can I get with a humanities PhD?

Why should I not get a PhD?

1. What does getting a PhD involve?

Broadly speaking, there are three stages to getting a PhD:

coursework

exams

dissertation

The requirements for these will be different at each university/in each department.

Coursework means taking classes; sometimes these will be grad-only classes and sometimes they will be grad/undergrad combined classes. How many classes and which classes you’re required to take will depend on the program you’re looking at.

Additionally, many programs will have foreign language requirements. They might require that you learn German and French or they might require any three languages; it depends.

The exams are the tests you take to prove that you are ready to be a PhD candidate. These vary from school to school and department to department. (Are you sensing a theme yet?) Exams can be written (whether that’s a standard short-answer exam or a longer series of essays), oral (answering questions posed by faculty or giving a presentation), or a combination.

The dissertation is the long paper that proves you’re ready to do academic work. Typically, this is a book-length document (roughly 200 pages, but again, it depends) that presents a research project. Some departments allow students to do alternative dissertations (video projects, coding projects, creative projects), but that depends on the school and the department. Finishing and defending/presenting your dissertation is typically the last step to getting your PhD.

All requirements vary by school and department, so make sure you check what each school you’re applying to would require of you.

2. Where should I apply? / How should I decide where to apply?

The key here is FIT, not prestige.

The main thing to consider, in my opinion, is what you want to study. If you’re really into Judaism academically, you don’t want to go to a religious studies department that doesn’t have any Jewish studies scholars, even if it’s a really good department! Look at what classes are offered, what the professors are interested in, and what the current grad students are interested in. This should all be on the website.

Also, I recommend talking to your advisor in your field/the person who will be writing your recommendation letters. They probably have some knowledge of the field and what schools are good for what you want to study.

Besides that, some other things to consider:

Location — You have to live there for around five years or more, so you want to make sure it’s somewhere you can tolerate. The political climate of Florida or the literal climate of upstate New York might put you off of those places.

Department size — Small departments can be hotbeds of drama; large departments can make you feel like you’re getting lost in the shuffle. What is going to work best for you?

Vibe — What’s the grad student culture like? Do the graduate students hang out with each other outside of classes? Is it cliquey? Is it cutthroat? The best way to figure this out is to talk to some current grad students in the department.

Degrees — Does the school give you a master’s degree on your way to a PhD? This is important because you might change your mind after three years, and you want to have a master’s degree to show for those three years.

Funding — This one is less for applications and more for picking a school once you have your offers because it’s hard to know about funding ahead of time, but you can ask how funding is typically handled.

I applied to twelve places for undergrad but only five for grad school. The “safety school” logic of undergrad doesn’t really apply to PhD programs, and there’s usually not a point to applying anywhere you feel wouldn’t be a good fit. If circumstances permit, it’s better to take a year off for a job (or to stay in your current job) and apply again next year than to go somewhere that wouldn’t be a good fit.

3. Should I get a master’s degree first?

Ehhhh maybe? It depends on your circumstances.

Pros of getting a master’s first:

It makes you a more competitive candidate for PhD programs.

It’s a good way to feel out the field and get an idea of what you might want your area to be without committing to a full PhD program (which is usually at least a five-year commitment) immediately.

It can help you become more confident in your knowledge and your writing and research skills.

If you find you don’t want to continue with academia, you will still have a master’s degree, and they can be useful.

Cons:

Master’s degrees cost money (usually).

If you do two years of a master’s degree, you might still have to do two years of coursework in your PhD program, so it adds to the overall time until you have your degree.

For me, the extra time and money were really big strikes against the master’s degree, but that was based on my specific circumstances. Your circumstances may be different.

To be clear, master’s degrees don’t always cost money - it’s possible to get fellowships that cover the cost of tuition completely. But, based on what I’ve seen, master’s funding usually happens semester by semester, while PhD funding is based on a contract, so you know ahead of time how many years you’re guaranteed funding for. More about PhD funding in the next question.

4. How does PhD funding work?

It, like everything else, depends on the school and department.

Generally, funding is composed of two parts:

tuition remission — money you don’t have to pay the school for tuition

a stipend — money the school gives you, often in exchange for some labor (teaching or assisting a professor with research)

When you get accepted, you should get an offer letter outlining what your funding looks like and how many years of funding you are guaranteed. Sometimes, the school will guarantee only four or five years of funding even though they know that it takes the average student more time than that to complete their PhD. Sometimes there may be opportunities for post-contract funding (funding beyond what is guaranteed) and sometimes there aren’t.

The advice you’ll hear is that you should not pay for a PhD. You should not have to pay anything in tuition and you should not have to take out loans to cover living expenses.

How feasible this advice is in the modern day is going to depend on your field, but I think it’s a good baseline to work from. Go in with the expectation that you won’t have to pay and then moderate your ideas from there. Personally, I did have to pay for one semester of tuition.

The amount of work you’re expected to do to earn your stipend and how livable a stipend it will be are also factors that depend on where you go. Some places expect you to TA for one class a semester, some places expect you to solo teach two classes a semester, and some places give you the money in exchange for you simply continuing your studies.

The best way to find out about funding at a particular location is to talk to current grad students.

5. What kind of jobs can I get with a humanities PhD?

Great question!

PhDs train you for a very specific job: doing academic research. There are not that many jobs out there that you can get that involve doing academic research. There are, very generally, three categories of jobs:

Faculty positions

Alt-ac positions

Other positions

The ideal job that most PhD students want is a tenure-track faculty job that involves both teaching and research. There are other faculty jobs that are not tenure track, such as short-term appointments like “visiting professor” or “adjunct professor.” There are also positions that are long-term contract positions but not tenured, like teaching positions.

Alt-ac stands for alternative academic positions. This means positions that are in academia but are not teaching or research positions. This includes writing center professionals, administrative positions, and academic advisors.

Other. This is everything else, and I’m not really the best person to speak on this, as I’m not super informed. One option is consulting, as consulting firms like to recruit humanities PhDs for their problem-solving skills, but that’s a very specific option (and in my opinion, a not-very-moral one). Another option is teaching at the high school level, which of course comes with its own problems. There are also field-specific opportunities. Art history PhDs, for instance, often end up working in art museums.

The best way to find out about what your options might be professionally is to talk to people who have recently gotten their PhD in the field or to faculty members who have been keeping tabs on the recent PhD grads.

6. Why should I not get a PhD?

To be honest, you probably didn’t ask this question, but I feel obliged to answer it anyway.

I have a couple of warnings about getting a PhD. First, grad school is hard for many people. Grad school may be difficult for your mental health, especially if you rely on having a set structure, have a history of depression, or suffer from impostor syndrome. This isn’t to say that people who have depression shouldn’t go to grad school (that would be hypocritical!), but just to say that you should be aware that it might present challenges.

The second reason is more practical, and that is that academia is not particularly healthy right now. The job market isn’t good, and funding is getting cut for all disciplines. It may be hard monetarily while you are in grad school, and it may continue to be hard even after you have a PhD. The current presidential administration has definitely made this worse, but we have been seeing trends in this direction for at least twenty years.

Getting a PhD is a lot of work, it can negatively affect your mental health, and it does not guarantee you a job at the end of it. I would encourage you to talk to PhD students in your field or any young professors to get a sense of whether or not getting a PhD is right for you.

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask me and I will answer to the best of my ability. Or ask a grad student or professor in your field!

[wolfofcelestia]

I find it so fun how Zayne and Sylus are both such smart beans but in starkly different ways. Sylus would HATE uni. Probably not attend the lectures and if he had to, he’d just read the recommended readings and submit his work, get his degree, and go.

I could see him taking online courses that give enough freedom for him to take them on his own time.

Zayne on the other hand is all about structure. Med school, housemanship, specialisation. All he does is study and all he will do is study for the rest of his life until retirement. And maybe then some if he chooses to stay in academia and do research. Just classic STEM guy things.

But if I were to hazard a guess, I’d say Sylus has the broader knowledge between the two. Simply because he’s exposed himself to more. He seems the type who’s both into STEM and arts and philosophy. He’s definitely read Plato and Aristotle and all the classics in different languages. Probably loves poetry. Definitely knows music theory. Probably a history and mythology buff too. Learns languages in his free time not just for business, but because he has fun. Tinkers a bunch. Probably can do woodworking. Definitely would enjoy making stuff with clay on a wheel (and reenact that scene from Ghost because he’s a corny loverboy 🤭)

Actually I’m not too well versed in Zayne. Does he have interests outside medicine and confectionery?

My man's second bed is a pool table 😭😭😭😭

Known to be a master at billiards, he knows how to handle his big stick and put things into holes 🫶🫶🫶

He also snowboards and has an interest in history. He likes to browse museums and has intricate knowledge of medical practioners in ancient times. I'm still on the lookout for anything related to ancient Egypt in a possible future myth for him

I don't know if you can call it an interest or hobby now in light of the new main story chapters, but he suspiciously has a lot of knowledge about fortune telling and divination. He also doesn't rule out the existence of mythical creatures, which, again, in light of the new chapters make a lot of sense. So like... In my headcanon, he likes to research cryptids lmao

Zayne is also quite the artist. He can draw really accurate anatomy pictures, so I assume that he'd be able to draw people really well too if he ever tried. He's also good with jade carving and ceramics since he seemed to have no issues with carving a jade moon for MC and making matching mugs together. Considering he's good with his hands, even as a beginner, he has enough artistic instinct to produce better work than other beginners

Good example is this:

Also, I think this was from the silk ball event chibi, but he did mention that he doesn't know how to sew or that he's not good at it? Which just sounds like the biggest lie ever or him being way too humble because as a surgeon, he sews people up on the daily. He even threatens to show us how he ties knots!! And he uses a surgical knot on the jasmine sachet we get from him at a certain affinity level so he definitely does know how to sew

I feel like MC would ask him to heal/sew up her plushies whenever they get holes in them. And tbh I can't remember if that actually happened before or if I just dreamed it up ajdlslshsdl

Edit: ok yeah it did happen before lmao

Also he plays shooter games now thanks to MC lmaooo

Maybe that's where he learned to hold that gun at an angle

Imagine them playing GTA together?

"come on, zayne, you need to loosen up. Go shoot someone and steal that car!"

[woahjo]

mmmm high lord katsuki and new attendant reader…

he’s a cold man, with an icy stare and a fiery temper that is set off at the drop of a hat. the high lord katsuki has a reputation for being harsh on his peers and servants alike, though he has enough political sense to keep the peace.

he’s from an important family, born and bred with a silver spoon in his mouth and taught all of the niceties of good society. katsuki has read all of the classics and, in addition to an impressive family home (which he manages along with familial business), he has an extensive library, which he visits frequently.

you are low-born, only granted to opportunity of reading because your father taught you before he passed away. you’d been forced to find work when he passed and, by some stroke of luck, someone in the kitchens was willing to take you in and have you keep inventory for a small monthly salary. reading and writing comes in handy for that.

you consider yourself unlucky, however, at being noticed by katsuki’s first officer and personal attendant, kirishima, who happens to be of common birth with a position that should belong to a noble and thus, outranks you. well, just about everyone our ranks you. it’s him who recommends you for the “promotion” and lands you in katsuki’s personal office in the main house.

“my lord,” he says, stepping into the room with the comfort only a noble could have. “i’ve brought them.”

“who?” katsuki doesn’t raise his head. his voice is low and gravelly.

“the new serving staff, my lord,” he states. “the one from the kitchen inventory.”

katsuki looks up at this, his gaze unimpressed and unyielding. he looks you over for a moment, staring as if to size you up.

oh, he’s beautiful. it’s shameful thing to think of such a harsh man, but it’s the truth. he almost looks like a painting, with hard set eyes and round lips. you’d expected someone frightening, with harsh features and sharp, cutting proportions befitting of a man with rumors like the ones surrounding him. instead, the man who sits before you seems a prince with a slightly colder gaze. you suppose that his beauty is drowned out by the other rumors surrounding him.

“you said they could read?” katsuki snaps.

“yes, my lord,” he responds.

katsuki doesn’t comment on this, instead, he shifts his gaze to you and harshly barks a question.

“you’re willing to work?”

what does that matter? you don’t have much of a choice.

“yes, my lord.”

“very good,” katsuki says. “kirishima, see her to her quarters.”

kirishima excuses himself and you bow deeply and do the same. katsuki’s gaze lingers on you for a moment as you bow. it is so intense that you can almost feel the moment he tears it from you and returns to pouring over the papers in front of him. he does not look up again as you shut the door.

katsuki gives the impression that he is made of stone, stubborn and immovable. you imagine that his peers have trouble convincing him of anything and you briefly wonder, judging by the hard look he’d given you, if you’ll run into the same trouble.

[wackywatchdotcom]

what intrigues me abt caines dynamic w the rest of the cast is the way that none of them seem to understand why he is the way he is. like not in the comedic sense but how they dont seem to have a clear concept of his motivations or anything of that sort

we havent seen toooo much of it. but we have seen how pomni, zooble, jax, ragatha, and gangle view him and its so fascinating

pomni is like. she doesnt understand what hes doing but seems to view his actions as malicious in some way. i dont think she sees him as a 'mean' person but with how she says she thinks he wants her to suffer its very illuminating of how she sees him as someone who wants all of them to hurt. i dont think she knows why he would, but its the only conclusion shes got. it also speaks to her distrusting nature that upon being hurt by him her first thought is that its an intentional decision to harm her, and unfortunately for caine she hasnt actually been given much of a reason to think he feels otherwise. i dont know how she thinks caine feels about them but its clear to me how she views his goals and hobbies for lack of a better term

zooble doesnt trust him. they find him to be annoying but more significant is that they KNOW he likes them all. it adds an interesting tone to how they see him, that they specifically say that whats 'holding caine back' is that he 'likes [them]', which on one hand is them interpretting caines actions as being done from a place of liking the players, and that his actions are coming from a place of NOT hurting them, because he likes them (its interesting to note that they have participated in less adventures, so its unclear how much they know abt caines adventures firsthand). but on the other hand is implying that they think caines holding himself back at all. that there IS a desire or a capability to be cruel that theyre wary of. theyve also seen caine at his most vulnerable (in the show itself at least) and their comment, 'whose therapy session is this again?' implies theyre at least aware that this is caine having his own problems, though i dont think theyre comfortable safety-wise with how these problems affect them and the others. them asking caine 'why did you think i would like that?' speaks to the idea that they do think hes genuinely trying to appeal to the players, but they seem to find his lack of understanding of the players frustrating and unsafe for all of them

jax i think is pretty vague since most of his lines to caine are brief, and the most telling line he has abt caine is the only one we have. but he seems neutral on caine as a whole. caine is just a guy who makes things for them. he tries to entertain them and thats all jax really seems to be concerned with- whether his 'its not in his nature' line is reflective of him genuinely Believing that is smth i see debated often but i think no matter what, it conveys that jax Generally sees caine as someone who isnt malicious. hes not trying to hurt them, and whether or not he thinks caine is capable of hurting them is whats more vague. either way, jax doesnt seem to like or dislike caine

ragatha has very mimimal interactions with caine and not many lines about him, but i think her line in the pilot, 'thats just one of caines little adventures. theyre just something fun to do to, yknow, prevent us from going insane,' is extremely telling of how she sees caine. of all of them, she seems to have the most positive view of caine, since she interprets his actions as an active attempt to stave off abstraction in the players. whether or not she thinks caine is acting from a place of wanting to stop disruptions or if he wants to ensure the players arent doing as unwell as they could IS up for debate though. the way she talks about him in the pilot in general reads like she has some level of trust in him, but it seems like a surface level trust in him at the worst- she knows hes not malicious and knows he wants to help. she knows he can help her when shes jumbled. but its not clear if she Likes him. she seems to enjoy the adventures though (which, ill keep it brief so i dont derail this, but it honestly reads like a deliberate parallel writing-wise that the two of them both seem fond of distractions as an acceptable solution to a bad situation- if her assessment of Why he makes the adventures is anything to go by)

gangle is harder to read on this front, as she has way less lines about him, though she does have multiple notable interactions with him in ep 4, in the way of her seeming genuinely enthusiastic about his adventure (it doesnt seem completely directed at him, but she seems genuinely a bit happy about his praise of her leadership skills). when she calls him it doesnt convey TOO much i dont think but the way she talks to him and requests he make a punishment could imply she doesnt think hed normally make one, but also that hes not opposed to it, which is confusing in what it means about how she sees him but it feels important. her interaction with him at the end of the episode also doesnt convey much in this way (i feel like caine is not the main focus of most of that scene- which works for the scene and is good writing wise bc the scenes important for gangles writing of her own problems, but in terms of breaking down this idea it means im not sure this scene conveys much about how she sees him)

and then. i didnt mention kinger at the beginning specifically bc i dont think we have... almost any indicators of how he sees caine. he tells caine abt kaufmo in ep 1, suggests caine could find pomni in ep 2, doesnt address the thing pomni says abt caine in ep 3, and even his suggestion in ep 4 to sit out the adventure doesnt convey almost anything. the only throughline is that kinger sees caine as someone who can help them if they ask, but it doesnt convey any thoughts on what he thinks caines motivations are or his thoughts on caines actions. which frankly reads like a deliberate choice when kinger should be the one with the most history with caine

this post is long but i just am bery intrigued by this. i thinka ll the character dynamics are so deeply fascinating but with caine being the closest the show has to an antagonist (which of course is a loaded statement but i mean it in the writing sense and not in the 'antagonist is evil' way) it means that the way the characters see him holds a lot of weight. it conveys a lot abt them all with how they interpret the person that has (at least on the surface) the most control over the situation

[mikadll]

i'm gonna be honest, i am highly annoyed by the fact that this is one of the few times we actually get to see medic involved in direct combat and the comics decide to just kill him for the sake of, what, motivating heavy to face off classic heavy? boring ass writing decision

don't get me wrong i love the comics but i highly dislike how they played up medic to be important only to kill him off just to further the plot and give heavy more screen time 😐 they made him as disposable as a connery-era bond girl and it sucks ass so bad. what was the point of subverting the "passive healer who can't fend for themselves" trope with medic's entire character in general when you end up playing it straight for drama in the comics anyway? Fuck's sake lol

[kittykatkatelol]

should i get into fallout,, i’ve been considering it but um. idk. what is ur opinion…oh mutual of mine..

YES YES JOIN US CRAWL INTO THE FALLOUT ITS GREAT TRUST

[staticymaticyyourlifeisatravesty]

I love Mircalla just for the sheer hilarity that is seeing a bunch of Blood angels only to find that with the Angel's daughter there's a fucking Night Lord and the night lord is perched on her lap with a dumbass smile on her face.

like that is both horrifying and adorable. Of course that's as a serf. In public they do be a little more restrained. Sort of. They have been caught kissing in hallways. Usually you can't tell because of Lilth's wings but rest assured if she's trying to hide something with her wings, it's most likely Mircalla who has no qualms at all about being with her girl friend openly even if it's borderline scandalous.

[catastrxblues]

i am DONE with olivia rodrigo and conan gray

[throwing-roses-into-the-abyss]

really need to take a course in art and literature history or something because I feel like no matter how much I read and how much art I see I still don't know shit and definitely don't know how to engage with it beyond 'pretty picture' and 'fun book' and I want to be more academic about it and know how to actually analyze art and see the metaphors and meanings and connections to other art but I never know how and it's frustrating me

[a-god-in-ruins-rises]

jay dyer is a good example of why degrees mean nothing to me. dude apparently has a degree in philosophy but he is still somehow a total idiot.

[theduckseeksduck]

I just know im gonna struggle to get through season 6, jesus christ.

[hopecomesbacktolife]

classical music rant ahead~

I’m not gonna reblog the post itself because people can’t be normal in the notes* but oh my god that “if it sounds like X, it’s Y composer” post is the most infuriatingly, wildly inaccurate thing. “mansplaining” for Wagner?!? REALLY?!? Saying Bach sounds “like a vampire” what does that even meANNNN. don’t get me started on the Beethoven (!!) and Shostakovich ones or I will turn into an incoherent seething mess. it’s worse than just being inaccurate even, it’s insulting to their music and range how inaccurate that user’s descriptions are.

like. there’s so many ways to make FUNNY posts about classical music!!! throwback to my prof bringing in shot glasses and grape juice when we covered Tristan and Isolde! Throwback to my cinnaminim meme!! Throwback to the [redacted] symphony members MEME GROUP where we EXCLUSIVELY SHARED CLASSICAL MUSIC MEMES. throwback to my Bach shirt with CHICKENS ON IT. Composer memes. Symphony memes. Translation memes. Oboi. drunk sugar plum fairy. old twoset skits. like.

I just. keep classical music accessible, yes. criticize it, yes! love it, yes! meme on it, yes!! remix it in sillygoofy ways! yes! Be silly and unserious or serious and yearning about it! Or both/all/more all at once! by all means!!! just. don’t make a joke that’s unfunny because it’s wildly inaccurate, then get mad at me for not laughing. 😐 like. lemme just call you the scarecrow because of this wild strawman fallacy logic you’re exhibiting.

*apparently some tumblr users can’t understand the concept of “this joke isn’t funny and it’s probably because the ‘joke’ isn’t really very accurate to the subject matter itself” because any time someone in the notes says that, people accuse them of being “elitist about classical music” like bro what. that is just. false equivalence. saying a joke isn’t funny because it’s inaccurate isn’t elitism it’s just the truth

[shadowscommand]

well what DOES Nikto listen to

heh.. wouldnt you like to know 😏

[moreaugriffins]

3 having a big fat crush on the brig, but thinks the brig is straight (army man and ex-wife and all)

until brig starts saying some gay code shit ('friend of dorothy', going to brighton, knowing polari, etc) and oh, he isnt straight after all

anyway, 3 asks him out, and of course the brig accepts

and later 3 mentions that if brig hadnt dropped the clues, 3 wouldn't have had the courage to ask him out

brig has absolutely no idea wtf he's talking about

(it was all just a fucking coincidence)

[yusuke-of-valla]

Anyway Berry Blast Brigade actual plot thoughts from the manga

I think Yukari is just in charge of protecting six people if anything goes wrong. They're short staffed.

Minato and Hamuko can both do the Magician fight because Naoto stole an Evoker from Ikutski's room so they both have one and then Thanatos is a fusion attack thing? It makes sense in my head

Yukari 🤝 Naoto: investigating Kirijo group besties

I think Hamuko is officially field leader in Tartarus because she and Mina have the same amount of field experience (five minutes) and Mina wouldn't volunteer

Priestess fight's the same but I'm keeping Minato the train nerd from the Drama CD because that's important to me specifically

The kids are filled in on everything because they like. Remember the dark hour, I think they chill at the dorm? There's no great options here it's either "chill in the dorm where shadows might attack" or "chill in the base of Tartarus where shadows are likelier to attack but at least you'll have Mitsuru there?"

Anyway Fuuka stuff happens in June, Naoto does all the investigating because they'd like to be INVOLVED damn it.

The kids are at the dorm with Natsuki and try to stop her when she goes to Tartarus but Uhh shadows happen. Whatever. Emperor and Empress fight.

By the Lovers fight they're like. Ok we know big aggressive shadows happen on the Full Moon. We have to leave the dorm to deal with them. Someone has to babysit the kids but also we don't want to leave any party members, time to bully Shinjiro into babysitting

Naoto sneaks out anywya and awakens during the Lovers fight

Yakushima is ???? It's technically a vacation but it's also blatantly sees business so I think Yusuke, Sumire, and Kasumi get left home alone and Shinjiro babysits again.