#they meta'd the meta

[deanwasalwaysbi]

DEAN SAID HE WAS PICKING THE MUSIC OVER THE SONG

"I'D LOVE TO CHANGE THE WORLD" by Ten Years After

In his first appearance. In a show Jensen started. BC metaphorically chuck had won. & Robbie & Executive Producer Jensen Ackles & Dean is back & Dean's never gone he's right here & Jensen's in charge of what happens to him & I don't even care right now that it basically confirms Dean gave John the letter.

Jensen's in charge. Dean's in charge of his own destiny. Freewill Entertainment. Dean won. Jensen won. We won. I'm-

[breaddo]

I thought your icon was an edgy picture of Dean Winchester this whole time r u kidding me 💀

HELP.

[raayllum]

soren for the character bingo, please!

Soren is definitely a character I adore; I love thinking about his childhood because of the glimpses it gives us of everyone at their most interesting (foreshadowing things to come later, but simultaneously everything wasn't nearly as bad) for both sets of families he interacted with (his own and the Katolis royal fam). I have a lot of thoughts about Soren being uniquely burdened with memory / as the keeper of the boys' childhoods now that everyone else who can remember is gone and/or dead. I think I like the inverse of the character who sets out to get glory (and subsequently be remembered) being the one who eventually Remembers and tells other people's stories. An equally important if more humble job. Even if he's not particularly unhinged

[honorhearted]

Hot take, but Ben might have supported The Thoughts of a Free Man pamphlet if the suggestion was that he be the one to replace Washington ???

@retrograderesemblance

That's an interesting theory! But alas, this is probably the first time we've ever disagreed on something lol, because I don't really see that being the case. Ben is very driven, passionate, principled, and ambitious, absolutely, but he's mostly driven, passionate, principled, and ambitious for the sake of his friends and country. I don't think he would opt for a position that'd take his focus away from what mattered to his heart, seeing how w.ar is a time of uncertainty -- you're alive one moment, and then possibly gone the next. For the sake of argument, Ben's certainly a control freak, but I don't think he actually wants all of that responsibility, AKA ALL THOSE LIVES on his conscience. Keeping his friends alive was taxing enough on his stress levels, so I really don't think he'd want GW's job since he'd suddenly have to worry about an ENTIRE A.RMY and every A.merican civilian. His guilt over Hale, Samuel, Sackett, Sarah, and even Worthington (for that brief flicker of regret) showed he doesn't have the temperament to be a long-lasting leader. He did eventually guard his heart (a bit) in S4, but he still feels far, far too deeply to handle such a task.

Would he accept the position if asked? Yes. I think he would -- not because he wants GW's job, but because he's the type who considers it a moral obligation to do so. When Ben said he wished to resign in S3, it was because he felt he was no longer being beneficial to the Cause. If he's incapable of doing his very best work, he doesn't want the position, because he can't handle the guilt that comes with letting down his men, his friends, his commander. At the start of the series, Ben put his friends/family first (i.e. The B.attle of S.etauket), but around S3 onward, we started to see a shift where he grudgingly realized that in order to succeed, he needed to redirect all of his focus to the Cause, no matter the consequence. This shift is especially noticeable when Ben asks Anna to go speak with H.ewlett in S3 (i.e. Anna's "Sometimes you ask too much of people" line).

tldr; Yes, I think Ben would accept out of duty, if asked, but no, I don't think he'd actually support the pamphlet if it listed himself as the better option.

[the-captains]

Maybe the real couch theory this season is Buck learning that he doesn't have to wait until he is perfect and always makes the right decision in order to feel he has worth. He could just... be comfortable now and not have every decision carry so much weight.

I know this is anathema to say in what often feels like a "find your monogamous soulmate forever" culture, but it is OK to have your self-worth be separate from whether you are in a relationship or not.

It is ok for Buck to realize that life doesn't last forever and seek to be happy in the moment.

It is OK for him to want to make peace with his parents. He does not have to forgive them to learn to live with them as people who are trying to do better now, if he wants to do so. This is being an adult! He is growing and learning!!!

I too would love to work out my vicarious loneliness through Buddie but I don't see the end of the season as negating Buck's character and growth as much as is going around. He hasn't reverted. He's being portrayed as a traumatized but surviving, growing human person. And I am here for it, because it heals me too.

[starspanner]

Rob Bricken, one of my faves over at Gizmodo, asked a bit disgustedly if this New Republic we're seeing in The Mandalorian episode "The Convert" is really what Luke Skywalker defeated the Empire for. We see the rich who "stayed out of politics" to preserve their own lives and wealth at the cost of so many others, and people who have suddenly come to power start to treat their former enemy the way they had been treated not so long ago.

And while it isn't happy, it's probably realistic.

The people of the New Republic are afraid. Afraid of the remnants of the Empire (and since we have a look at the future we know they should be), and afraid of those who once belonged to the Empire. Whole planets were ravaged and destroyed, even before the Death Star came online. I assume that the body count must be well into the billions. They dread that happening again, but they don't want to admit that's the place they're governing from. They use words like compassion and cooperation and order, but it's a mask over the fear. And since the Empire ruled through fear, they begin to mirror each other.

I think it's the more realistic take, even if it isn't idealistic or fun, and perhaps hard to watch. It's very human. Look at the world, and especially Europe, after WWII. Those raw, open wounds they were dealing with as they put their continent back together led to a whole new kind of injustice and suffering imposed on the guilty, the complicit, and sometimes the innocent (You can tell I've played My Child Lebensborn).

It took a long time to heal. There are still scars from it. And we really can't ever put it behind us completely because we have to make sure that sort of thing never happens ever again. Because it sure seems like it could sometimes. But we can't be afraid and overreach either, because then it's like fulfilling a prophesy by trying to stop it, and suddenly we are the thing that we were trying so hard to avoid.

We know from the books and movies that it never really gets better before the First Order shows up and Palpatine somehow returns. Perhaps the real take is that a government as massive as a Galactic Republic just cannot realistically exist without falling into corruption and despotism. I mean, Luke began to realize that the Jedi Order had to become something new and different, which we assume Rey will create. The political Galaxy probably has to begin something completely new as well. Something less EU and more UN, perhaps.

In any case I'm super enjoying The Mandalorian. Star Wars is home, and I love spending time there. Grogu continues to be the cutest thing ever and I love how we can see Bo Katan's mind working even under the helmet, trying to work out what to do about what she saw in the mines, and how she can perhaps use it to her advantage.

Good stuff.

[amtrak12]

IT FINALLY HAPPENED!!! Someone asked why toddler!Rory's wings are white instead of pink in my fic! :D :D :D

Do you even know how long I've been sitting on that explanation? FINALLY! I HAVE PERMISSION TO META! \0/

[storgicdealer]

@mangocrown NONONO HOLD ON YOU'RE COOKING. YOURE COOKING SO HARD RIGHT NOW

if we're talking about how outernet and internet would interact with each other directly. i genuinely doubt that there WOULDNT be a firewall (i cant call it a. firewall specifically but it did take a shit ton of strength for tco to break through the ip sky AND the screen of alanspc. could as much be allegorical to going through a firewall)

and because of that. it IS possible for victim to not. know of things specifically because this whole thing blocks out random parts of internet material. making it impossible to predict or understand what happened and what didnt

but then it does make me think how exactly does. rocket come in to the stream?? if the stream itself is also alans own thing from the internet how would they hack into it to a point there's their whole logo for a good second or two ?? and then appear right after in the stream itself??

and. if they ARE watching the stream in-universe. are they able to see the their own selves later. until the camera pans to them in the outernet again and it goes on and on like two mirrors placed in front of each other. alan your meta level meta'd so hard it out meta'ed

[case-of-traxits]

I’m sure you’ve probably talked about this before, but how do you think reeve’s inspire works?

So funny fact here: I've never actually formally meta'd about this publicly. I'm pretty sure. I've talked to a few individuals about it, but never in like, a definitive, "This is definitely how I think it works," sort of way.

Maybe it's time to change that?

First though, let's talk about why I use the Inspire ability at all, because a lot of that leads into how I think it works.

An Argument for Why I Use the Inspire Ability

I would love to start with Reeve's original bio, but of course, as we know, Reeve didn't get a bio in the original game manual. So instead, we're forced to rely on his Ultimania bio:

The head of the Urban Development Department. Involved in the construction of Midgar from the very beginning, he watches over the town’s development like that of a child. By utilizing his special ability, “Inspire”, he is able to cause inorganic things to emit life; his “child”, the “cat”-shaped robot, Cait Sith can be controlled from a great distance. After Meteorfall, he became the director of the World Regenesis Organization (WRO), which is devoted to the purpose of restoring life to the planet.

For what it's worth, Reeve's bio has been shockingly consistent with including his Inspire ability. I go into that a little bit over in my WRO Reeve + Heartbreak meta.

Now, I know a lot of people don't like the Ultimanias. They find them confusing, or contradictory, or whatever the current "I don't use them," reason of the day is. That's fine! Let's take a look at Cait Sith's original bio from the game manual:

Cait Sith rides on the back of a huge stuffed Mog he magically brought to life. Megaphone in hand, he's always shouting orders and creating dopey attacks...

So there you go. Mog and Cait Sith cannot simply be robots, since it's stated quite plainly that Cait Sith brought Mog to life magically.

(As a side note, Cait Sith in the OG comes equipped with the Manipulate materia. This is a fun multi-layered reference, don't you think? Pokes a note at him being a spy and kind of gives you a thing to consider about how he possibly controls Mog.)

(As a second side note, Cait Sith also has one of the highest magic/spirit scores in the OG, so he's clearly meant to be your caster.)

Now, that said, Reeve clearly did build Cait Sith as a robot. His Ultimania profile clearly refers to Cait Sith as a robot, and in BC, Cait Sith has a controller of some kind in his back, and he gets damaged and broken into pieces and the Player Turk has to put him back together.

(As a side note there— and I swear, I'll stop doing these soon— if I recall correctly, the pieces the Player Turk has to collect are the body, the head, and the crown, implying that Cait Sith's crown is in fact an important part of him, and not just a cute fashion accessory.)

In addition, it is worth noting that Rufus Shinra is well aware of Cait Sith and that Reeve "controls" him, and yet, Reeve is able to directly communicate with AVALANCHE during a board meeting where Scarlet and Heidegger are talking Rufus into loading up No. 26, the rocket from Rocket Town, with huge materia and crashing it into Meteor in an attempt to save the world. Reeve not only does this, but Rufus gives no outward indication that he's aware of it. So however Reeve "controls" Cait Sith, there must not be a visible component to it.

My point is that Cait Sith, from what canon shows us, appears to be a robot that Reeve can control directly, without need for any sort of external control system. And, based on some thoughts that Cait Sith has during BC that cannot reasonably be attributed to Reeve, Cait Sith is still somehow independent of Reeve himself.

So why don't I go with Cait Sith simply being a learning AI of some kind? Well, mostly because of Mog. If we go back to the original bio for Cait Sith, it reads very similarly to Reeve's Ultimania bio. So Reeve grants life to Cait Sith, who can, in turn, grant life to Mog.

Functionally, Cait Sith is a mini-Inspire of his own.

Canon Exploration of the Inspire Ability

Now that I've written out my premise for why I go with Inspire Reeve, let's get to the heart of the original question:  How do I think it works?

Well, let's look at what we have to work with:

[Ultimania Bio] Reeve causes inorganic things to "emit" life.

[Ultimania Bio] Reeve sees Cait Sith as a child.

[OG Game Bio] Cait Sith inherits the Inspire ability.

[OG/BC/DoC] Cait Sith is capable of acting autonomously.

[OG/BC/DoC] Cait Sith can be directly controlled (to some extent, at least) via Reeve.

[OG] Reeve can speak through Cait Sith without other people in the room noticing.

[OtWtaS] Multiple Cait Siths can be 'active' at a time.

[DoC] Reeve and Cait Sith can move in sync with one another.

[DoC] Even if Cait Sith 'dies,' he can somehow convey information he learned right up until his death to Reeve/other Cait Siths.

How Does the Ability Actually Work?

So, with all of this in mind, here's how I usually go with Reeve's ability working:

The short answer is that I see it as a low-key, always-on mental connection between Reeve and Cait Sith.

A longer explanation starts with the fact that I see Reeve's Inspire ability as sort of... it has both passive and active modes for me.  Basically, in the passive mode, Reeve is always influencing inorganic material around him.  It's more noticeable when his emotions are heightened, but things like his phone and his car develop... quirks.  His car isn't really conscious, exactly, but it does read his intent, and to some extent, it basically functions as a self-driving vehicle when Reeve is the one behind the wheel.

Now, for my Reeve in particular, this is in no small part because the car was his father's, and he has worked on it extensively over the years.  It's a classic car, basically, and it gives him an outlet for fiddly work that's outside and not in a reactor or tied to Shinra.  If you're going with a Reeve who doesn't love his car as much, then obviously, that probably would be a bit more odd.

A more common variant on this, I think, would probably be that I usually roll with Reeve having... partially Inspired the reactors.  All of them.  All of the ones he has access to.  And in this case, it's less because he wants them to be alive and more because he wants to have that access to them.  He wants to be able to check statuses and know what's going on with a reactor at any given moment, and no matter how advanced the tech is, nothing will be faster for him than a direct mental connection.

Of course, that can have some less than stellar side effects when, say, a reactor explodes.  @ladykf-writes wrote me some amazing ficlets that feature my headcanons about this after much rambling with her about them. So I highly recommend checking those out if you're interested in this idea.

Then he has the active mode of his ability. I've written a ficlet (Heritage and Legacies) about the process of actually Inspiring Cait Sith (and it makes mention of Reeve's first disastrous accidental Inspiration), but in short, it involves more or less willing the inanimate object to life.  I usually go with the explanation that Reeve is literally feeding the object a bit of his own personal lifestream (or soul, depending on how you want to talk about it) until it starts circulating it on its own.  This gives me a built in explanation for why he doesn't animate hundreds of things at once and such.  I do like to have caps on things.

But because it was his personal lifestream that he used, he can basically retain... think of like a narrow, unseen string between Cait Sith and Reeve, no matter how far apart they get. And across this string, they can send thoughts, memories, and sensations.  That's how Reeve knew what happened to Cait Sith when Nero ate him with shadows.  Cait Sith had immediately connected with Reeve and told him.

Now, I do a few hand-wavey things for my own sanity when writing.  I assume that when a Cait Sith dies, all of their memories get imprinted in Reeve's mind, and when he Inspires the next Cait Sith, they get a copy of all of those memories.  This can create a bit of a jarring dissonance within the memories for a new Cait Sith, as they might remember being Cait Sith 1 and being Cait Sith 2 in the same conversation.  But for the most part, it works.

The other thing I usually do with Cait Sith specifically is that I say that when he was first Inspired, he was very much like a baby or a toddler.  He needed to learn a lot of things.  I don't have any fics currently up featuring this (I will after the holiday events though), but basically, I go with it having taken Reeve a while to get Cait Sith to talk at all for example, and that he had to learn a lot of things on his own rather than relying on Reeve's memory of the things.

Now, because of the hand-wavey memory thing I already talked about, new Cait Siths don't have that same initial problem.  They basically just get imprinted with everything Cait Sith 1 learned before he died.

(And for what it's worth, since Cait Sith's accent is supposed to be based on Reeve's parents, I always go with Cait Sith not speaking at all for a few months after he was Inspired.  Reeve tried everything, from toddler help books to reading books to trying to bribe him, and couldn't get a single word out of him.  And then, finally, Reeve was on the phone with his mother, trying to discreetly ask her for advice without admitting to his abilities or to what he'd done, and when he hung up the phone, Cait Sith looked up at him and spoke for the first time.  In the accent Reeve hadn't realized he'd slipped back into with his mother.)

The other hand-wavey thing I do is that I usually have Reeve and Cait Sith share the ability to communicate mind-to-mind, no outward dialogue needed.  I mostly justify this with it being a side-effect of them sharing the same personal lifestream rhythm.

I will say though, something I do that I don't know that I've seen anyone else do (I don't have any fics left up featuring this either, actually) is that I say the control can go both ways.  So Reeve can reach for Cait Sith and speak through him, but so can Cait Sith.  Now, I usually say that Reeve has to let Cait Sith do this, whereas Reeve can just take control from Cait Sith, but I  chalk that up to Reeve being the one who did the initial Inspiring.  Following that suit though, it would make sense that Cait Sith could do the same thing with Mog, if he wanted.

Now, I also headcanon that Reeve does his absolute best to let Cait Sith have whatever autonomy he can.  My Reeve, in particular, didn't exactly have the happiest of childhoods, and he has spent a lot of time being told exactly what he can do and when, so he tries to give Cait Sith the childhood he never had.

If you read all the way down here, oh my goodness, but thank you.  It's... a lot.  Like I said earlier, the short answer is that I see it as a low-key, always-on mental connection between Reeve and Cait Sith.  And I kind of flex it around, depending on what exactly I'm doing with the fic in question.

[v-arbellanaris]

irt the sera discussion from yesterday I would like to add that she's also dismissive of city elven culture—it just doesn't come up as much bc inquisition does its very best to ignore city elves' existence. the most memorable example for me is a quote from her WOT entry—"stupid tree. didn't go, didn't stay" or something like that. You're definitely right, her whole deal is just internalized racism, it's not strictly prejudice against the dalish like some people claim lol. (I believe anneapocalypse has a meta on this exact subject actually) very frustrating that there's barely a hint of growing out of it though—if it were some other flaw, maybe id be fine with it (I do love when characters get worse.), but given that it's a white writer writing internalized racism. well. but that's a subject that's been meta'd to death by better writers than I.

yeah, i love @anneapocalypse's sera meta, it was very compelling to think about!!! and idk! unfortunately, i DO know people irl who are like this (and don't seem to be getting any better about it). again, on its own, i think there's a lot of value to sera's story, even if it's not my story - the problem comes when we look at specific details in sera's writing and how her writing fits into the overall portrayal of elves - and dalish cultures, as well as city elves which as you've pointed out are almost entirely erased in dai which is truly horrific when you are directly dealing with the aftermath of the slaughter of thousands of elves in WEWH.

from that perspective, coupled with how minimal sera's growth is (especially if you're a lavellan that didn't romance her but had to deal with her internalised racism with no way to call it out as the PC without resorting to ableist insults) (and i use minimal here not to discount that her growth exists but how tiny it is compared to what we have to face in-game in terms of her internalised racism, and how most of her growth is shoved into codex entries or into trespasser and even then it's a couple of throwaway lines, at best)... it starts to feel a lot less like a well-intentioned portrayal of internalised racism, with some hits and misses, with the intention of resolution and self-love being the outcome.

and again, what IS IT with bioware and having their white characters dealing with fantasy racism??? like, i'm sorry, but sera is literally white. there's a black woman IN GAME and no one even ACKNOWLEDGES that racism/colourism towards her exists except for one tiny banter with cole for a SPLIT SECOND... and vivienne, a black woman growing up in a heavily andrastian-influenced circle of magi with chantry values... literally has no character arc... even though she's a black woman supporting incarceration of her own people... but the white elf's got an entire arc about internalised racism???????????????? what is the narrative reasoning behind this???

AND ANOTHER THING! the issues with sera are also an issue present with a lot of the other characters in dai - you discuss slavery once with dorian, where he gets defensive of it, and even as a lavellan romancing him, it never gets brought up again until bloody tevinter nights, which isn't even in-game material. you can't argue with cassandra to disseminate the cure for tranquility or get to change her mind on ANYTHING; you can't argue with cullen about mages; you can't argue with vivienne about the circles (not with actual logical arguments with any kind of nuance, which is a limitation OF THE GAME when they can give vivienne lines of nuance for her arguments for why the circle should exist); you can't argue with varric's centricism, etc, etc. even if you do get to confront them, it's one or two lines that are then mysteriously never touched on again in game. in da:o and da2, they didn't do this well either, but at least they had leliana come up to an elven warden after they correct her to apologise - there's clearly an acknowledgement of where she went wrong, and an intention to be better, etc, which is SUCH a fascinating writing direction. you don't have that in... any of the other games. none of the characters are allowed to be wrong, unless they're pushing for justice or equality or freedom in which case they will do something evil (like slavery or mass murder) to make you doubt the validity of their argument. instead they're representations of a specific stance and you're expected to just accept what they say as fact - which is incredibly ironic for a game that hides most of it's deep lore via conflicting codex entries for a sense of realism when it comes to reporting real life events.

it's incredibly exhausting.

[das-a-kirby-blog]

The best part of RoMK was when Meta Knight said "it's Meta time" and Meta'd all over those guys

[iamanartichoke]

How do we know that post abt loki possibly causing ant man to die isn't fake?

Okay, so.

- I just want to say right off the bat that this isn't meant to be a personal attack on you, dear nonny - but, your ask is a perfect example of what, I feel, is one of the biggest causes of strife and wank in fandom spaces (and misinformation irl), and that is people consuming a Thing, misunderstanding it, and moving forward with a narrative that was not necessarily true in the first place.

You wrote: "How do we know that post about Loki possibly causing Ant Man to die isn't fake?"

The answer to your actual question is that we don't, it popped up on my facebook feed bc I keep clicking Marvel things so I get suggestions for pages I don't follow and certainly haven't vetted. I saw the post, took a screenshot, and brought it to tumblr. I didn't even bother switching from my phone to my laptop; I spent more time finding the reaction gif than I did vetting the post. So OP could be talking out of their ass, I don't know.

We don't know it's not fake. But with the actual answer out of the way, let me break down why this ask sent me (and, again, it's not personal to you, the asker, I am just using your ask as an example of a much larger problem):

Firstly, I never claimed (nor did OP ever claim) that this was anything official. It read, to me, like pure speculation based on fan theory (in other words, OP presumably meta'd themselves into a theory as to how Loki would have a bigger role in the wider MCU). Asking "how do we know it's not fake" is the same thing, to me, as taking any one of the numerous meta posts on tumblr and asking how we know said meta isn't fake. Yknow? Like, "real vs fake" in the context of speculation isn't really a thing.

Much more important, I take issue with your wording: " .... Loki possibly causing Ant Man to die ...?" " .... Loki possibly causing Ant Man to die ...?"

" .... Loki possibly causing Ant Man to die ...?"

Nowhere in either the OP or my own post did anyone say Loki is going to cause (or possibly going to cause) Ant Man to die. What the post says is:

if Scott Lang dies

if Scott Lang dies

The OP of the fb post is speculating on two separate events. There has been speculation that Scott is going to die somehow in the 3rd Ant-Man; I've seen those theories and I don't even pay attention to Ant-Man. I think a trailer came out or something, but I can't remember where I saw it - but, it was short, like a teaser, and it showed Scott pretty beat up and generally Not In Good Shape, which I'm sure fueled the theory that Scott might die.

Scott's death, if it occurs, would be a result of whatever Big Bad takes him down in Ant-Man 3. It would have nothing to do with Loki. What OP is saying is that, should that death occur, it would create an opening for Loki to then step in and play a key role in assembling the new Avengers. To be fair, I am not exactly sure how that would work, as I don't know what Scott's role is in assembling the new Avengers or how the story would play out so that Loki would be the one to fill that role (bc aside from the throwback parallels, there wouldn't be much reason? I could be mistaken but, like, Scott and Loki barely existed in the same universe when Loki was actually alive, and TVA Loki literally exists in another timeline, so I'm not sure how all that would work) - but, that's not the point.

The point is that OP said, "Oh, look, the alphabet, be a shame if something happened to G bc it's pretty important to the overall alphabet."

And then - *something happens to G, creating a hole in the structure of the alphabet*

So OP said, "Look, here's a 7, if we twist it up a little bit, we can put it where G used to be - then, the hole is filled and the alphabet works again."

Except Scott is the G and Loki is the 7 and the alphabet is the New Avengers.

But your interpretation reads more like: "So, wait, if 7 kills G to take his place -" like -

So, this is why my brain record-screeched when I read your ask. And idk if you or anyone is even reading this bc a) yes, it's just a misunderstanding or maybe that's not even what you meant, and b) who cares, but the thing is that by implying that Loki causes Scott's death, especially in order to benefit (by taking over a role Scott previously played), it contributes to the overall unfair narrative that Loki is always the villain, Loki is up to nefarious deeds, Loki kills for fun, etc. It reveals and unintentionally contributes to the overall gross misunderstanding of Loki's character in general (and said misunderstanding is at the root of most if not all of the wank in this fandom).

When really, the truth is that some random Loki fan was speculating on how Loki's MCU role could be larger and more integrated into the main story if (independently of Loki) Scott does, indeed, die in his 3rd film.

So, yeah. Again, I apologize; I've just taken my adhd meds for the day and my brain is firing a hundred coherent miles per hour, and I had feelings, and that's the space I'm in when I'm seeing your ask.

But, so, this is just a general psa to all: please read things more carefully, especially when it comes to speculation, character analysis, and fan theories. Obviously I love discussions as much as anyone else, and I don't mind (respectful) disagreements, but when the foundation of the conversation comes from misinformation, it renders the entire thing moot and potentially wanky.

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk.

[masterserris]

lmao just beat a guy in ranked double battles in scarlet and his team was flutter mane, iron hands, roaring moon, and amoongus. fuckin meta'd out team and i wiped the floor with him lmao

by meta'd out i mean everyone EVERYONE uses these pokemon and they are broken good. like click button and win good type of thing.

me and my dusknoir, milotic, scizor, and krookodile outta left field beware hehe

---------------------

dusknoir set: min speed, max sp def. holding safety goggles

ability: frisk (shows me enemy items when switched in)

tera: electric

moves: ice punch, trickroom, shadow sneak, will-o-wisp

(trickroom reverses the speed of pokemon, so slow pokemon move first for 5 turns. shadow sneak always goes first. will-o-wisp burns opponents and halves their attack too)

---------------------

milotic: min speed, max sp atk holding flame orb

ability: marvel scale (buffs def when under a status (burn) without hurting my fire power since burns half your attack. milotic uses only special attack.)

tera: dragon

moves: life dew, coil, hydro pump, dragon pulse (could be switched for ice beam or moonblast)

(life dew offsets damage from burns and attacks and is a tank with coil as well to boost accuracy and defense for hydro pump to never miss)

----------------------

scizor: min sp atk, max atk, holding clear amulet

ability: technician (boosts power of "weak" moves. moves under 60 base power)

tera: dragon (wanna switch for flying maybe i need more tera shards)

moves: swords dance, bullet punch, bug bite, aerial ace

(swords dance is a 2x attack buff, bullet punch always goes first, bug bite, bullet punch, and aerial ace are "weak moves" so they actually get a power buff from technician ability. bug bite can also eat an opponents berry if they are holding it. aerial ace never misses. on top of all that, clear amulet means its stats can't be lowered. so as long as it stays in battle, it can keep all of its attack boosts)

----------------------

krookodile: min sp atk, max atk holding covert cloak

ability: intimidate (attack debuff on opponents when switched in. stacks.)

tera: ice (wanna switch it for fairy or smth i need more tera shards)

moves: protect, stone edge, crunch, high horsepower

(nothing to say, coverage moves with a lot of power and protect for defense. covert cloak protects it from the additional effects of moves. like debuffs or statuses)

-----------------

bonus pokemon in my team that i didnt use that time:

dragonite: min sp atk, max atk holding bright powder

ability: multiscale (first attack taken does less damage than normal)

tera: water

moves: outrage, dragon dance, aerial ace, extreme speed

(dragon dance to boost speed and attack, extreme speed always goes first, aerial ace for flying coverage and never misses. outrage just hits like a truck. bright powder means that moves have a chance of missing dragonite. even if they are normally 100% accurate)

------------------

gastrodon: min speed, max sp atk holding leftovers

ability: storm drain (draws in all water moves and heals from it)

tera: water (wanna change it for grass tera)

moves: earth power, protect, ancient power, ice beam

(coverage hard hitting movies. heals every turn with leftovers. protect for defense and extra healing from leftovers)

------------------------------------------

i wanted to make a "non-meta game" team with solid pokemon with no legendary or paradox pokemon and it's a solid team!

weak to grass and ice, but that is where steel and flying moves come in and water types.

fairy is also a bit of an issue but bullet punch and tera changing dragonite and krookodile can save them

no issue with fire types or electric. i have coverage and defensive options. same with ground type. and fighting. the bases are mostly covered.

[deanwasalwaysbi]

“Let Me Call You Sweetheart” - Breakdown of the “Let's Misbehave” Dance Scene from Heroes’ Journey

Cas, as it turned out, was lamp.

“Let Me Call You Sweetheart” - Gene Kelly's iconic mop dance. Of course the difference between Dean Winchester and Gene Kelly is that Gene Kelly got to use an umbrella.

oh boy guys - strap in cuz we’re going to get deep into Old. Gay. Musicals. One of these references foreshadows Cas showing up in Dean's heaven. If they did that on purpose then I'm ready to Misbehave. 👀

TBC - the Entire sequence is about Dean wanting what Garth has but didn’t realize he could have with another Man, or with Cas. That’s not up for debate in this post. There is a long history of characters 'coming out' in dance sequences, and I can not divorce this in my mind from the fact that Mac from Always Sunny, a character that had been closeted nearly as long as Dean Winchester, had recently come out in a dance number (x).

Instead I’m going deep dive on the chosen music and the dance references. 

Let's Misbehave, Cole Porter, and Queercoded Innuendo

Let’s Misbehave was a gay anthem all about living outside the law written by Cole Porter, a gay man in a time when that was not a thing you were allowed to be. His work like I 'Loved Him (But He Didn't Love Me)' or 'I'm a Gigolo' ("a dash of lavender found next to a passionless dowager") is full of innuendo which is, in hindsight, extremely gay, but written ambiguously in ways that flew perfectly under the radar of censors at the time. His more famous musicals are still on Broadway regularly.  

In order to change up the pacing of some of his shows, the songs have been switched around somewhat.  “Let’s Misbehave” was actually written for the female lead in a show called Paris, where two characters who’ve been working together only now realize they are in love. I wonder whether people working on spn know that.

It was dropped from ‘Paris’ in favor of “Let’s Do It” (which the censors demanded be renamed, “Let’s Do It, Let’s Fall In Love” sure guys, you totally fixed it, GJ.)  35 years later it was added to the Second Act of the much more famous, “Anything Goes” where it joined songs with lines I know you will all enjoy such as “Baby, if I’m the bottom, You’re the Top.” More on Anything Goes at the end of the post. It's fun stuff, there's a lamp.

The Hays Office had a lot of issues with his titles, but ironically when they renamed works like ‘The Gay Divorce’ it became the infinitely funnier 'The Gay Divorcee'. Bigots not getting it: funny for 100 years and counting. 

Dance Breakdown

Garth and Dean start dancing in white tuxes with straw hats and canes which could reference any number of B&W old movies. Dean is learning from Garth how to dance, copying him.  Just like Fred Astaire's call and response solos in Top Hat White Tie and Tails which has this lil move. (This one is fun for the audio Astaire adds with the cane.)

then Dean goes to throw his cane and his partner is missing - he isn’t there. 

Eright - now this part - this part I want to be wrong I really do.  I really do. Now tell me this show is not referencing the one time Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire danced together when they have Dean and Garth dance together. TELL ME. 

Because here’s the thing about this number.... the one time they danced together it was to the ‘The Babbitt And The Bromide’, a song where two men repeatedly meet, beat each other up, dance together in close embrace, and then separate for decades. “they both were solid citizens they both had been around” they spend their lives with their wives, and then they meet again in heaven ..... sigh.

“A harp each one was carrying and both were wearing wings, and this is what they sang as they kept strumming on the strings, You've grown a little stouter since i saw you last i think, Come up and see me sometime and we'll have a little drink” (x)

Gunna be honest. I had never once thought about the lyrics of this number before. So did the spn writers? Or were they just referencing the famous dancers? Because if it is on purpose, which is a BIG if, but if they thought about it and it's on purpose? ... Then it foreshadows Castiel in Dean's heaven in the finale. I'm going to keep going, but that is absolutely the headline.

(This is actually not the first time we've seen Dean do that little heel click move. It appeared in season 6 so Jensen has had it under his belt for awhile. I just enjoy that fact.)

There is Dean doing that dance without a partner by his side. So next Dean makes like Gene Kelly - and he finds one. See the Lamp vs Mop Gifs at the top of the post. That's Gene Kelly dancing with a mop to “Let Me Call You Sweetheart”, something we all know Dean Winchester never says and certainly has never called Castiel.  (x)

When he’s done, Dean blows a kiss at the lamp and moves on with his dance reference tour.  Dean taps up the stairs in a likely nod to Bill 'BoJangles' Robinson, the highest paid black actor or performer of his time, famous for his stair tap dance. (x)

Back to the history of ‘Let’s Misbehave’ for a second. In '72 it was used in the opening credits of the movie ‘Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex* (*But Were Afraid to Ask)’. Then in '81 Christopher Walken strip tap danced to it on a pool table surrounded by women and photos of nude women until he revealed a giant tattoo of a heart on his chest in ‘Pennies from Heaven’ (x). So of course that's the very thing that Dean does. Well, the tap on the table, not the stripping. 

The dance he does up there is almost a cross between a tap and a Charleston, the signature dances for the time and used in Anything Goes.  It's also vaguely reminiscent of a dance Fred Astaire did in Swing Time that would only be called an homage to Robinson if we're being extremely generous to Fred Astaire.

Jensen ends on a sequence of tap I find extremely impressive at its speed for someone who only learned for this very dance, and I just want to recognize and give cred to it.

It's not specific enough choreography that I have placed it to any one dancer or dance yet, just presented with skill. I know there are more references & nods, including the little cane hop at the beginning, so if anyone picks more out I will be editing the post.

Anything Goes - keep reading

Like SPN, 'Anything Goes' a show that people think of as lighter fair, a guilty pleasure - pulp - not much meat there. It’s easy to digest for a general audience that isn’t reading too much into anything... but try telling that to the people analyzing it... 

Anything Goes was the first successful Broadway musical comedy to build a story on two threads of pointed cultural satire, apparently. It was riske for the time. The show includes the “yes they really did put that on stage in 1927″ song lyric “If love affairs you like with young bears you like....”  and yes, that meant the same thing then.  

because I know this fandom, The show also includes the song “Blow Gabriel, Blow,” it’s all about sex, but is disguised as a religious hymn about the book of revelations, and it's set to Jazz [the devil’s music] and ‘is about’ praying to an archangel to blow his horn and bring the end times already, because we’re already living through the apocalypse:  Enjoy some famous lines  (x): 

"I've been a sinner, I've been a scamp, But now I'm willin' to trim my lamp” ;

“Once I was headed for hell, Once I was headed for hell; But when I got to Satan's door I heard you blowin' on your horn once more, So I said, "Satan, farewell!"; & “'Cause I've gone through brimstone, And I've been through the fire, And I purged my soul, And my heart too, So climb up the mountaintop, And start to blow, Gabriel, blow”

Remind you of any boys we know?

So, like in any spn analysis, the question becomes, "What did they do on purpose and what was an accident?"

Did they purposefully pick a gay song by a gay man?

Did they know about the original intended plot of the song?

Do they know about the duel nature of Anything Goes?

Did they just pick random famous dance numbers to reference or did they pay attention to lyrics and subtext?

Lamp. I'm just going to write lamp here

The episode was written by Andrew Dabb and directed by John Showalter, these questions keep coming up with the two of them. That being said, clearly the whole sequence was choreographed by someone else, and that someone else was Gordon Hart (x), who is, according to his instagram, married to a man. I don't know about you, but if that Babbit & the Bromide stuff is on purpose, I am also ready to Misbehave.

In this case Cas was quite literally Lamp.

[honorhearted]

👉👈 in philosophy (semester 2, eclectic boogaloo) we’re discussing the “ethics of belief”, for some reason, Ben’s Fight for what you believe, season 1: episode 1 speech came to mind… so, in the short(est) form possible, what does he (Ben) believe? If that’s too hard to answer then how does he justify his moral philosophy to himself?

(Also ooc answer, I don’t think Ben has time to overthink about his overthinking cause, you know, circumstances forces Ben to make a lot of decisions people in not war-time are usually not forced to make.)

This is probably going to come off as incredibly lazy and anticlimactic, but I've meta'd about this same basic idea quite a few times in the past, so I honestly don't think I can give any more original thoughts to the topic. Instead, I'm just going to link my five most recent metas and hope that works! HERE | HERE | HERE | HERE | HERE And ofc, here's my meta tag in general: (x) There are probably more instances discussing what you're asking throughout that tag -- I only deep-dove for 6 pages' worth.

(^Me, burning away everyone's faith in me.)

[glamaphonic]

I keep seeing I LOVE THAT HOMOPHOBIA DOESN’T EXIST IN OFMD and HOMOPHOBIA JUST ISN’T SOMETHING THE CREW HAVE TO DEAL WITH and that is [Siegfried voice] patently falsssh. And it’s extremely important to the overall themes of the show!

OFMD is fundamentally a show about masculinity and toxic masculinity, in particular. Homophobia is an inextricable part of the exploration of those themes, especially in a show that’s centered around the romance between two gay men.

The show takes care to gentle this so that the audience isn’t constantly being bombarded by it in a way that can be harmful or triggering, but it’s still undeniably there.

Stede Bonnet is a flamboyantly gay man and homophobia is the clear subtext of much of the derision he receives from representatives of toxic masculinity like his father, the Badmintons, Calico Jack, and Izzy. He’s soft, he’s weak, he’s not a “real” man. Nigel Badminton excoriates him for crying all the time and picking flowers, for fuck’s sake. He’s a “fop,” a “ponce,” a “namby-pamby.” Derogatory terms absolutely meant to imply unacceptable homosexuality without hitting as “hard” slurs for a modern audience.

Stede makes the Revenge a place where piracy (read: masculinity) doesn’t have to be abusive and toxic, which, in turn, allows for authentic expression of emotion, including queer affection and desire and that is part of why the toxically masculine find it such a weird and/or unbearable place ("What the fuck kind of pirates [men] are these?"). Stede, for all his faults as a leader, creates a space where it’s safe for Lucius, who explicitly talks about bearding and was implicitly expelled from his previous life for being gay, to find and be openly affectionate with a boyfriend and be beloved by his peers! A space where Pete who starts off with pretensions of toxic masculinity can shed that and be in a loving gay relationship. A space where Jim can say that they’re Jim and that’s the end of it. Stede helps create a space where he can “ruin” history’s greatest pirate by making it safe for him to be flamboyant and emotional and fall in big, sweeping, first, last, once-in-a-lifetime love with another man.

And you go “oh but Jack and Ed used to fuck” and “oh the subtext is that Izzy is gay for Blackbeard” but that doesn’t magically remove the homophobia they perpetuate!

Homophobia isn’t just “MLM bad, the end.” It’s Izzy’s subtextual unrequited feelings for Blackbeard being forever unspeakable and inexpressible except through the veneer of horrific masculine violence. It’s the idea of m/m desire being purely sexual. Men just fuck and that makes it not “really” gay. Jack thinks that “anything goes at sea,” that “dalliances” are fine and to be expected, but Ed’s genuine affection for Stede is inexplicable, anathema to what he understands about being a pirate (read: being a man). Izzy hates Lucius’ open gayness and the fact that everyone else DOESN’T hate him for it, and he literally thinks that Ed being in love with Stede is brain damage. (“He done something to my boss’s brain.”) Izzy also thinks that Stede, as a flamboyant gay man, is a pathetic creature that needs to be put down, and that Ed “corrupted” by him into a similarly open and flamboyant gay would also be better off dead. This mirrors Chauncey’s diatribe about Stede not being human and needing to be wiped from the world. It's all textbook homophobia!

And you sell the show short by pretending that it isn’t engaging with these things, because it is and it’s doing an amazing job of it.