#positive critiques

[throesofincreasingwonder]

You know what? I want a whole post for this:

Sex Repulsion is not the same thing as, or an excuse for, Sex Negativity

non-negotiable!

I am a sex-repulsed asexual. This means that I am uncomfortable and repulsed by the idea of engaging in sexual acts. This does not mean that I have an excuse to be repulsed by other people's sexual attraction or the right to police how other people engage in or express sexual acts or attraction.

Young queer people need to learn the difference between sex repulsion and sex negativity, and actively work to unlearn sex-negative attitudes. Asexuality, even sex-repulsed asexuality, is and should be fully compatible with sex positivity.

If you are uncomfortable with the idea of other people feeling sexual attraction or engaging in sexual acts that do not involve you in any way, that is not sex repulsion it is the cultural Christianity and you need to seriously work on that.

[reineydraws]

had to draw this to understand the way i feel about him now that the manga's ended. 🥲 on that note: if you like hawks and his ending, maybe don't read my tags lol. it's not bashing (imo) but they're not v nice. 😅

bg + unobstructed pose under the cut!

his expression's a lil different 'cuz i only changed the merged layer, all the lighting effects already flattened onto it. 💀 alas.

[merakiui]

Nerdy Vil definitely pushes thkse glasses up his nose before calling you both ugly *and* stupid 😭 but before you know it, he's taking them off to rest them on his nightstand and suck your soul out of your coochie 😭

AAAAAA OTL nerdy Vil……… Vil who always has his nose in his potions book…… spending most of his time in the alchemy lab mixing up all kinds of poisons and whatnot. You think he’s so uptight and annoying, always so critical over everything you do. To think that smart mouth of his can leave you a sobbing, shaking mess as he coaxes yet another orgasm from you.

Maybe the both of you are academic rivals.... oh, to be competing alongside Vil for the spot of Pomefiore Housewarden........ the two of you trying so hard to best the other and make the strongest, most effective poison. Maybe the competition doesn't even matter to you anymore. You just like feuding with Vil.

Academic tension so grand it leads to the best hate sex of your life.

[penofwildfire]

I actually refuse to watch reviews of Ninjago that come from non-fans, including YouTubers I enjoy, because I'll listen to one of my tumblr mutuals bitch about some aspect of the show they think is shit for HOURS but I'd rather walk a mile over Legos barefoot than listen to some OUTSIDER judge my beloved kid's show from 2011

[alwaysbewoke]

This obsession so many liberals and leftists have with RFK just proves that many of them are not actually paying attention to policy or political positions these candidates have. The left is supposed to be the ones that act more intelligently however moments like this really proves how much in common the left has with the right.

[padmestrilogy]

teehee

[3-aem]

chill tf out i was just giving an advice, you have no right to treat random ppl like that, especially when i was just trying to help. you’re a proper asshole, hope ppl realize that

who tf asked for it though

here i’ll spell it out for you since you clearly don’t understand and id like you comprehend why you giving unsolicited advice is broadly seen as entitled and a dick move by the entire creator community online: we are not an art critique circle

if your criticism ever hurts someone and stops them from wanting to draw you failed as a critiquer. your criticism wasn’t constructive it was destructive. and the chances of this happening on the internet is High.

point blank: you don’t know if someone is doing drawing something someway because they like it or not. and you voicing your opinion is thus not ‘helping’ as you so very much want to believe, it’s entitlement to think you know better.

people draw and post on here to get away from real world where critiques from ur boss or ur colleagues actually matter.

there are times where creators solicit advice or suggestions. give them there.

[myfandomrealitea]

The other post I made about it was pretty vent-y so I'm going to make another one on the same subject, but;

Going into spaces specifically intended for the positive appreciation or enjoyment of something with the intent to be negative or the attempt to convert it to a negative space is both a shitty thing to do and it Will Not get you the result you want.

As one reblogger on the post said; Reddit is appalling for this, but Tumblr is already hot on its heels.

People create spaces around the things they enjoy because, well, they enjoy them. They want a space to create and share that enjoyment. They want a space where they can cycle that positivity into content and community.

These spaces are founded on the enjoyment of the source and the belief that it is good. TV shows, movies, books, games. These spaces are based on the pure fact that the people within them, by majority, like what they are consuming.

And obviously, that doesn't mean you can't be critical of aspects of it, or not like parts of it, or be disappointed with things that have happened. But the point is that the good should vastly outweigh the bad.

And if you're trying to wedge yourself into those positive spaces with the bad outweighing the good, that is not the space for you. That is not the purpose of the space, nor is it fair to the people who created that space with the intent of being positive.

It is not, by any means, toxic positivity to have a specific place designed to revolve around the enjoyment of and positive perception of something.

That place is not for you and your voice. Your voice does not have the right to speak over theirs within that space. Positive spaces are not obligated to allow you to speak within them.

You're not going to change minds by being negative in those positive spaces. You're just going to make people avoid you and dislike you and be unwilling to listen to what you have to say.

[ratcandy]

Big Huge Irritated Rant About The Latest COTL Update's Story Choices and the Implications

So the lore drop in the new Cult of the Lamb update, Unholy Alliance, pisses me off. The writer's confirmation of what that lore drop means pisses me off more.

Why? Because it's unnecessary recontextualization that was made pretty obviously in favor in one character in particular, and somehow in that process makes that very same character way less interesting. I think it's incredibly detrimental to the story and I will Explain Why in a second.

But before I do, I just want to put this out there: Prior to this update, my opinions on the Bishops and Narinder and that entire plotline were pretty neutral. I'm an NPC enjoyer, I spend my time thinking about that moth with two lines of dialogue. I did not previously have strong opinions on Narinder or Shamura outside of mild dislike for fandom treatment. So I'm not coming from a place of bias here (or at the very least I'm not trying to be). I genuinely, wholeheartedly, 100% believe this writing decision was unnecessary and the Wrong one to make, and I think it severely undercuts the original plotline because this was a retcon and one that sucks pretty bad.

Ok we're on the same page here? Ok awesome. Long rant ahead, and obvs spoilers for the Unholy Alliance update

So first, what the hell am I talking about? What part of the update do I not like? Let's clarify that first.

It's Shamura's dialogue. Like, all of it. For ease of understanding, here is all the dialogue I will be talking about:

"Ah... we gathered here, the four of us, a council of war and I the general. I have not forgot. I did not tell them that chains to bind a God must be forged of Godly matters. What matter of Gods? What matters of Gods? I have not forgot. The betrayal of kin, the breaking of spirits, blood spilled, his and ours. ...the sacrifice of what we had sacrificed so much for... ...shaped into shackles for our own brother. And our wounds always to weep. Such sharp claws..."

--

"He sought to break nature's own laws. Death was his, yet he placed his sacred duty in peril. His experiments... Experiments I encouraged. I am not... blameless. My soul, stained... yet I do not... Ah, The story. Yes the story... He wanted to open the doors between Life and Death, to... to allow their return. Those mere... mortals. Even though he knew their sacrifices, their faith, their fears sustain us. Death must be the end. Otherwise, what use would they have for Gods? They began to flock to him. What he promised, we could not match. He swelled with devotion... while we waned. Would he have let us perish? I could not take... the risk... the hunger... You are lucky there are none left to force such a choice on you. Hail, Lamb. Last God... lonely God... Ah... I feel... unburdened..."

And for fun, before anyone tells me I'm misinterpreting any of this or that it's left up to interpretation or is intentionally vague, Word of God (the writer of CoTL):

And it's this being Word of God that's spurred me into making this post to begin with. Because prior to this, I just seethed about this dialogue's implications in my server and hoped I was wrong. But now it's been confirmed what this means, and I'm . Disgruntled, to say the least!

And since I've started writing this post, there's been another addition made to further clarify parts of this. But I'm going to go over that addition more towards the end, because it also irritates me for separate reasons.

So, let's get this straight.

Prior to this update, the specifics of what happens between Narinder and the Bishops were pretty vague. We were told Narinder was "gluttonous in his ambition," per Shamura's previous dialogue, and that they "introduced him to ideas of change" but "Death cannot flow backward." Heket somewhat elaborates on this by saying he preached "heresy" and "noxious ideals" that would not be tolerated. Heket also notably refers to Narinder as a flat-out "monster." Narinder attacked his siblings and left them each with a big, symbolic wound. Then he was chained by the four of them, with Shamura the one to lead it (in their own words).

There's a lot of talk of betrayal, but before this update, it was unclear if the betrayal was meant to just be Narinder's experimenting with death (which even then was pretty heavily suggested to be resurrections) or the wounds inflicted upon his siblings. There's also a lot of talk of sacrifice, i.e. from Leshy if you kill Heket before him: "After everything we did. After everything we sacrificed. He will not be satiated."

Regardless, the picture this painted was of Narinder being this ambitious, evil, violent God that even his fellow Gods (Kallamar) feared and felt needed controlling. The idea that the wounds could have been in the nail in the coffin to this entire ordeal made sense; as they were obviously planned by Narinder to some extent (otherwise why be so intentional about who got what wound?) and a fair reaction to Being Mutilated would of course be to chain him.

Then of course there's the idea that the wounds were given while he was being chained and in self-defense, which only seems possible if you think Narinder could take on all four of his siblings at once like that and only manage to lose his claws in the ordeal (which was only revealed in this update to be something he's implied to have lost thru the relic). I thought this at first too, but realized it seems pretty impractical for that to have been the case if the wounds were also purposeful in who got what. I mean, sure, they could all be coincidentally symbolically appropriate for each Bishop, but I have doouuubts?

but now we're here, with this update, and all has been revealed.

And what's been revealed exactly?

Narinder's thing he was doing was indeed resurrections (we knew that)

Shamura encouraged him to do it (we also already knew this)

It seems like he did literally nothing else outside of that

His siblings got pissy about this because it made their domains purposeless and got all their followers to flock to him

"Would he let us perish? I could not take the risk" - Implies they literally did not even ask him

Shamura knew that in order to forge chains that could keep Narinder down, it would require a sacrifice of their bonds AND their flesh

They DID NOT tell the other Bishops this

Their wounds were requirements to chain him. They had to get the wounds they bear now in order to chain him. ONLY Shamura knew this. That means they allowed their siblings (and themself) to get attacked knowing full well what would happen. They may have even encouraged it, perhaps provoked Narinder into it, seeing as they knew the wounds were necessary to have him chained. (Or they just knew he would retaliate. Which, like. Yeah. They're condemning him after he went down a path they encouraged and, as far as we can tell, nothing else.)

And for... what?

In this version of the story, Narinder was experimenting with resurrections, and Shamura told him to keep doing that. Then he was successful, mortals turned to him, and his siblings (including Shamura, the one who told him to do it) got mad. That's it. That's their reasoning for chaining him. There's nothing else given. "Would they perish?" We have no idea. Is that how it works? Seems like Shamura doesn't know either. Or at the very least doesn't know if Narinder intended for that at all. Gives the vibe that literally no effort was made to talk to him and figure this out. They don't even really go down the "it puts nature out of balance!" path, which would at least have some merit, maybe. It's literally just "we are no longer sustained. What's the point of Gods in this world?" <- idk babe you had all the other ones slaughtered. So you tell me

And then Shamura just took it into their own hands, leading their siblings to their shared wounds (WITHOUT consulting them) and their inevitable destruction because of........... reasons, I guess. (I mean, if you think about it really hard, they probably also already knew what would happen following all this. With the lamb genocide and Narinder's resurfacing and etc. And they had their siblings wounded anyway. For no god damn reason)

And now why does this make me mad?

Because, honestly, in and of itself, there's not anything necessarily wrong with this added context. It's not contradicting anything in the main game. Shamura knowing what was needed makes sense, after all.

But it's... unnecessary. It screws up the motives and makes them more shallow, less nuanced, more... petty. Making gods petty is cool and all, I love doing that honestly, but in this case it just feels like a waste of potential.

But beyond all that. But most importantly.

This entire recontextualization of events REEKS of being made specifically to absolve Narinder.

I mean, come on. He's made out to be the victim, here. Shamura knew what he would do, knew what he would become, and knew exactly what would happen to their siblings if they sought to chain him (without doing so much as talking to him beforehand), and yet they encouraged it.

All blame is being shifted on Shamura. All Narinder did specifically against his siblings was inflict the wounds, which at this point seems to be hinted as self defense or a retaliation against threat or insult (assuming he was provoked into attacking, somehow). Because the wounds were part of the process.

And almost equally irritating, this seeks to arbitrarily absolve Leshy, Kallamar, and Heket as well, as they had no idea what the plan was and were just strung along. Which is just kinda worse, right? As far as they are aware, Narinder did just randomly attack them for no reason, and this wasn't foreseen, and surely couldn't have been stopped. All because Shamura didn't tell them any of it.

Shamura is being made into the big bad. Shamura is at fault for everything, for all of it. Narinder is a victim of Shamura encouraging him down a path they later condemn him for, their siblings are victims of Shamura and Narinder both (the latter of which could have been resolved at any point prior), and now any possible intrigue about Narinder being this big bad guy who tore apart his siblings due to his own ambition getting the best of him is ERASED.

It's GONE. All in favor of making him more sympathetic.

And sure, about a million different excuses could be made for Shamura, or could be used to headcanon whatever you want about exactly what happened. But with what we're given right now, just from the source, no attempt as made to stop Narinder before it got to this point. It is literally suggested they didn't even talk to him.

"Maybe they were too scared" - For the other three, maybe. Shamura is the eldest and clearly the most respected one, by Narinder as well (he holds some amount of respect for them even STILL. After EVERYTHING). They at any point could have stopped this.

"Narinder could still have been a bad guy outside of the attacks" - Sure, but we're given little to nothing on that front. In the old dialogue, literally all that's mentioned is the resurrection stuff and the wounds. Shamura is the one who said his ambition made a glutton of him, by the way. And hell, this isn't even touching the very real possibility that all of the Bishops (Narinder included!) are unreliable as hell.

"But Kallamar feared him even before his chaining, that suggests he was still a bad guy beforehand" - Sure, it could! But that's about all we get! And hell, in this new update, Kallamar's fears are fucked with, too. He states:

"Once, long ago, Followers would worship at my altar just to glimpse the beauty of my temple… of course, it could not last forever. Perhaps my siblings did not understand this, but I have always known. It did not make me less afraid. Cowardly Kallamar, ha…"

Here, it seems Kallamar's fears have been changed to be more about the decline of his temple and the loss of his followers, which was happening because of Narinder. He refers to Narinder's plans as "foolish" as opposed to... idk, horrifying, or threatening, or whatever. He also fully takes on the 'cowardly' title, giving the impression that his fears were somehow unfounded, which wouldn't make a lick of sense if Narinder indeed sucked ass outside of the wounds.

Not to mention he "didn't want to hear it" when Shamura "revealed the plan," but we know because of Shamura that they didn't mention anything about the wounds, so Kallamar didn't want to hear that they... had to chain Narinder? That's literally all he could've been told about the plan. Why wouldn't he want to chain Narinder if he was scared of him up until that point?? Doesn't make any sense!!! EDIT AFTER I POSTED: On reconsideration this might just be referring the lamb genocide plan, but that's hardly better, because now this update absolves Narinder, Leshy, AND Kallamar by making them blameless in everything (both Leshy and Kallamar expressed not fully understanding the plan for the slaughter or, in this case, not wanting part in it). What's up with THAT. Why is Shamura getting the blame for LITERALLY EVERYTHING.

Anyway, my point is

This was a story decision made to make Narinder sympathetic. It's so blatant. And it's so, so irritating. It gets rid of so many potential cool flaws of Narinder and replaces it with "Actually, Shamura was the bad guy the whole time! Huzzah!"

And honestly, had the entire game come out like this to begin with, released at the start how it is right now, I don't think I'd care this much. But being added now, as an afterthought, after the fandom and devs alike have grown to favor Narinder above all others, it just...

It reeks of favoritism. It smells of revising the story to make Narinder more likeable. It's just erasure.

And for what. Like, I don't want to be That Guy, but I cannot help but notice that one of two nonbinary characters (outside of the Lamb/Goat themselves) is being this heavily demonized in favor of absolving a Man of his crimes. What's, uh. What's up with that.

Oh, and that addition by the writer I mentioned was made while I was writing this.

This was made after Jojo was questioned whether this was a retcon as to who caused the wounds, as this whole thing could also certainly be read as Shamura being the one to directly wound their siblings (which I didn't think was the case, but still).

"I don't know if they thought it would be so severe" - How do I put this in a nice way. This feels like a weaseling out answer. This feels like giving Shamura an out only after being questioned on this writing choice. How could they possibly not know how severe it would be. This spider is Knowledge. This spider has Foresight of some kind. And how do you not know what they thought. You are the Writer. If you want to clarify something like this you gotta say it with your full chest.

Not to mention a good portion of the fandom probably won't even see these tweets, so this context is all missing from the story presented in the game. This is Tacked On Context on top of already Tacked On Context. It's unnecessary retconning all the way down.

Anyway. I realize the fandom at large will not care about this, because (and I mean this in the nicest way I can manage) the Narinder favoritism in this fandom is already impenetrable, but for me personally? This retconning that was so clearly done out of that favoritism?

It ruined Narinder's character for me. More than the fandom possibly could have. I mean, if it's fanon, it can be ignored. But this was canonized. Because Narinder is the dev team's favorite guy.

And I can't stand it.

[ciipher-arts]

Excellent way to promote your art. Denigrating a show that you're making art of.

All I said was that I was disappointed in the way the show went and decided to make a reimagining for fun.

I figured it's more productive and positive to make something creative and enjoyable out of that disappointment rather than spending my time and energy angrily complaining about something endlessly for the sake of it.

Fix-it fics are a thing. Reimaginings are a thing. It's not to make fun of it or degrade it, but to take your criticisms and issues and make something creative and fun out of it.

I like to think it's always better to create and make something fun out of a piece of media rather than spew mindless hate online that doesn't contribute to any sort of constructive criticism for something. The world could always use more fun creativity, I think.

[tanadrin]

do polls of the whole country tell us anything? don't you need to look at swing states?

National polls aren't useless, because movement in polls tends to correlate. If a national poll moves a couple points in one direction or another, that will tend to correlate with some degree of movement in several states. As I understand it, though, certain subgroups of states (e.g., ones with similar demographics) have much closer correlations in how their polls move, so that a shift in the polls in one Sun Belt state should correspond to a similar shift in the polls in another. This means you can make predictions like "If Donald Trump wins Virginia, he's probably winning a crushing victory nationally," because his performance in Virginia should correlate to his performance in many other states.

Swing state polls are very valuable, but keeping those correlations in mind helps to understand whether a swing state poll is an outlier or not. If a poll shows a shift in a certain direction, but that's not correlated with similar movement in similar states, it's worth questioning of that poll is accurate. Ditto if the poll shows unusual breakdown of results in demographic subgroups: if Trump is winning (say) 30% of young black voters, given the way demographics and party alignment usually break down, he should be winning a massive margin with other groups.

One reason I am not so bearish on Biden is that my understanding is that a lot of polls have had these demographic anomalies, with Trump's lead coming largely from support among younger, politically disengaged voters of color, and Biden, apparently, doing well with demographics like older whites. It is not a coincidence, in this view, that Trump seems to be performing unusually well with demographics that are particularly hard to poll in the modern polling landscape--response rates to telephone polls are very low among millennials and gen Z--and while there are various ways you can try to compensate for non-response bias, those depend on your model of the electorate.

Now, I am not extremely confident about this, because I am the furthest thing in the world from a polling expert, but as I understand it, there are two possible situations here:

One: the polls are broadly correct, and Trump is ahead. The election in November, if current trends continue, will feature a historic realignment of voters along demographic lines like age and race of the likes not seen since the 1960s (called "depolarization" by some commentators), perhaps driven by the rise in far-right internet media and social media.

Two: the polls are broadly incorrect, and we should be more agnostic about the state of the race, or even assume Biden is a little ahead, because such a massive realignment is extremely unlikely to have occurred in only two years since the 2022 midterms (where no such realignment was in evidence, and Democrats broadly overperformed polls), and polling right now is plagued by historically low response rates in the same key demographics that give Trump his lead.

Some commentators, including commentators whose field is polling, seem to want to have it both ways: the demographic crosstabs are wrong, but the top-line polling numbers are right. I'm not sure how this can be true. On top of that, big political realignments usually take time (i.e., we should have at minimum seen some evidence of this coming in 2022), and are unlikely to occur in a race where both candidates have been president before.

So on balance I think the second scenario is more likely. Now, I am not a stats person, nor particularly knowledgeable about polls; all of this opinion is second-hand from other commentators. As such, I am not going to claim any kind if ironclad certainty about this, and you're perfectly entitled to rub it in my face if I turn out to be totally wrong. And if I do stumble across someone who does know the polls really well with an explanation of why I'm wrong (even just at the level of "you are factually wrong, here's why the crosstabs are actually perfectly normal") I may well revise my opinion.

[hyumjim]

Wow what a cool feminist opinion this guy has. I bet his opinions on other stuff are really cool t—

Oh! That’s strange, isn’t it? “Henry,” you may say, “this seems very incongruous! Why would this gentleman bravely espouse this feminist anti-pornography position, while also posting nazi conspiracy theory rightoid propaganda?”

You would be forgiven for being unaware that these issues are very much linked!

[flower-boi16]

So uh.

Critical community's thoughts on this video?

[camscendants]

With Rise of Red while it ABSOLUTELY could have been better.

It also could have been worse 🤷

[itsalwaysforyou]

jay not asking coach about letting lonnie onto the team bc he doesn’t want to do anything coach might disagree with…….

[thespacesay]

brought to you by me hosting a friend for two days who grew up in the same cultural region, and tbh will not be invited again.