#unpopular belief

[xerxeswitch]

Unpopular Belief about "Deities"

Please take this with a grain of salt. I know there's going to be some hurt feelings about this. Just block me and save your time because I do not answer to hateful replies. They will be blocked immediately.

Ahead of time, I'm NOT telling you to NOT worship them. If you feel that intimacy with the "gods" you worship, then go on ahead. If you find fulfillment with them, please continue and move on.

I just want to state my mind on what I find is a sinister trend with pagan "gods." (I'm well aware that it's unintentional for the most part)

.......

No.

Not all "gods" love you.

Not all "gods" unconditionally love you.

Not all "gods" even know you exist.

Not all "gods" care about your wellbeing.

Not all "gods" are accepting when you worship someone else.

Not all "gods" act like animated characters that I've seen people make them out to be.

Not all "gods" will change your life for the better. (At least all the time)

Not all "gods" want to be a different gender as you idealistically depicted them as...as some strictly stayed where they were known for.

--

Some "gods" are misogynistic.

Some "gods" are misandrists.

Some "gods" are predatory.

Some "gods" are manipulative.

Some "gods" see you as replaceable pawn.

Some "gods" are toxic and controlling.

Some "gods" are genocidal.

Some "gods" will look at you and ruin your life if you don't know what you're dealing with. Some "gods" are not the paragons of morality.

These beings have different personalities, traits, stories, and capacities for certain things or for certain people.

JUST because they are deemed as "gods," that doesn't mean they all have this one dimensional, demanded expectation of what makes them "gods."

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

HUGE PLUS HERE; HUGE, HUGE RED FLAG:

Someone claiming the stories/myths about these "deities" are not to be acknowledged or that these "gods" shouldn't be questioned and unquestionably revered because they're "gods" -- are people I don't trust at all.

That could be potentially dangerous to new people getting into this.

What is a legend without the stories to know what happened?

...Or how they came to be along with their personalities, capabilities, and how they react?

The myths are absolutely something worth reading up on. You can't just will it away because they ruin YOUR desired vision of who they are/who you want them to be.

It's disrespectful to even the culture surrounding their flaws.

A lot of pagans/ex-Christians here are evangelizing them.

It's ironically painting them as all one and the same kind of being, and it makes the "gods" lose some form of identity and uniqueness.

Good or bad.

The myths exists. Without them, the concept of these "gods" wouldn't logically exist to us. It's a part of the culture too, good or bad. It's like history -- you can't erase history but know it and learn from it.

It'll be like saying, "I worship wendigos but don't listen to Native Americans about the part where they are known to eat people. These beings love and care about you. Remember that! They understand the time you put into them."

...I can't help but think this whole thing stinks of "I can fix him" intentions.

[sneakyboymerlin]

I have said it before, but Kilgharrah has a parallel-opposite arc to Morgana. His character is redeemed in the same streak of episodes where Morgana goes from an ally to a major villain. While Kilgharrah was often self-serving and manipulative in the first 2 seasons, this changes by the end of season 2 because Merlin chooses to show him mercy after incapacitating him. It’s the first real kindness that Kilgharrah has experienced in well over 20 years. Whereas, when Merlin shows Morgana mercy by making the deal with Morgause to save her after she’s been incapacitated, Morgana returns more vengeful than ever. Back to Kilgharrah, though…

Not only does he indebt himself to Merlin, he comes to see Merlin in an entirely new way. Before, when he would call Merlin kin, it was in the most literal sense—both are creatures of magic, cut from the same cloth, and should be allies. But now, they’ve formed a bond from that kinship (and in a literal soul connection sense, too, no less). Kilgharrah’s plea strikes Merlin with so much force because they’re both now the last of their kind, and Merlin cannot help but consider and understand what Kilgharrah has been through, despite the destruction he’s caused, because it’s happened to Merlin, too. When they see each other next, this is what they have to say:

Merlin: I didn't think you'd answer my call.

Kilgharrah: Merlin, I could not resist a dragonlord, even if I wanted to.

Merlin: I’m grateful, thank you.

Let’s focus on that: “…even if I wanted to.” Kilgharrah did not want to resist Merlin’s call for help because he’s come to care about Merlin in his own way. This development is easily traced back to Merlin’s show of mercy. It cannot be stressed enough: this was the first kindness Kilgharrah had been shown in over 20 years, after rotting away in a dungeon when he was betrayed in every way possible, suffering from the grief of his entire species going extinct on Uther’s orders. And with this one show of mercy, Merlin changed the heart of a creature that everyone had already dismissed as a monster (the same way Merlin sees himself), one who sought his revenge by razing an entire city to the ground. From the start, Merlin treats him as a person: “Why are you doing this? You’re killing innocent people!” No one who saw him as a mere beast acting on its true nature would ask a moral quandary of him. And in the end, this path leads to Kilgharrah being spared, and Camelot repeatedly being saved as a result.

Kilgharrah’s sincerity in his care for Merlin is consistent in later seasons, and is seen in more than just his rescues. In 4x02, he plainly urges Merlin not to sacrifice himself, despite the fact that Arthur’s life (and thus, Kilgharrah’s ultimate freedom) hangs in the balance.

Merlin: Arthur intends to sacrifice himself to heal the Veil. It is my destiny to protect him; you taught me that.

Kilgharrah: Merlin, you must not do this.

He shortly follows this with something we’ve known since Merlin mended the rift between them in 2x13:

Kilgharrah: From the moment I met you, I saw something that was invisible. Now, it is there for all to see […] It will be an empty world without you, young warlock.

Having failed to convince Merlin to let someone else be the sacrifice, Kilgharrah commends him. Not only that, Kilgharrah mourns him.

This is all to say that Kilgharrah’s actions in seasons 1 & 2 should not be the sole focal point for our judgment of him, when he undergoes such an extreme change of character. Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that Kilgharrah’s faith in the prophecies is anything but genuine. Alongside his newfound care for Merlin, his ultimate goal is his own freedom, and he believes that Arthur is the key to that.

Kilgharrah: We need Arthur to live […] Your destiny is to protect the young Pendragon until he claims his crown, and when he does, magic can be returned to the realm. Only then will I be free.

This logic is in line with what occurred in 5x13. Kilgharrah wouldn’t have said or done any of what he does in 1x13 if he did not believe that Arthur’s ascension to king would lead to his own freedom (even if it didn’t take immediate effect). Arthur’s place on the throne made room for an end to the wars, namely the one on magic. Kilgharrah did not make these prophecies up, nor is he the only one to believe in them. Alator and Finna possessed knowledge of the same prophecies, and both believed in Emrys’ vision/mission.

Kilgharrah had great knowledge himself, and tried to share that with Merlin to pave the best path, but he was not all-knowing, and he tells Merlin as much himself. Kilgharrah is merely a messenger, believer, and interpreter. So, he still believes the prophecy has come to pass, even if Arthur did end up dying anyways. The five kingdoms could now be united and magic restored to the land once the war was ended upon Morgana’s death. The prophecy was fulfilled within Arthur’s lifetime, despite the success of Arthur’s Bane. It did not go as Merlin expected, nor how Kilgharrah expected, but it still… went. This is what he means when he says, “No young man, no matter how great, can know his destiny.”

The idea that Kilgharrah simply played Merlin, when he was depending on Arthur as much as any creature of magic, and when he genuinely cared for Merlin as kin, is bad faith conjecture. How they got to the end point still mattered to him (i.e. Merlin must protect Arthur so that he has a chance to fulfill the prophecy), because that potential only existed through Arthur, and they all continued to suffer until that time came. Regardless of the age at which Arthur died, though, he was destined to fulfill these prophecies and return at Albion’s time of need. This, Kilgharrah knew. So is it any wonder that he maintained faith in it even after Arthur died? Especially after Arthur died, proving the prophecies true once again?

Kilgharrah: Merlin. There is nothing you can do.

Merlin: I've failed?

Kilgharrah: No, young warlock, for all that you have dreamt of building, has come to pass.

Merlin: I can't lose him! He's my friend!

Kilgharrah: Though no man, no matter how great, can know his destiny, some lives have been foretold. Merlin... Arthur is not just a King— he is the Once and Future King. Take heart, for when Albion's need is greatest, Arthur will rise again.

No, Kilgharrah did not predict the exact ending, but he did his best to help Merlin bring about the best possible outcome, and he said what he could to comfort Merlin when he was grieving Arthur. Kilgharrah was genuine, and his motives were in alignment with Merlin’s by the start of season 3.

[y-rhywbeth2]

'Astarion outliving his friends and possibly SO' is angsty and good for those who like exploring the themes of bereavement and all, and it is a possible outcome (he's not helpless), but it is my firm opinion that there is still a damn good chance that guy is gonna die first and be outlived by them.

[donnydamakkk]

unpopular opinion: there is no point in the show in which jeid would have made sense. jj never seemed interested in him, and his feelings always felt misconstrued and misplaced. they never had that kinda chemistry.

[compacflt]

I don’t know why, but I totally believe Mav is one of those skincare people. Just look at how he takes care of his body. Anyways, he doesn’t have a multi-step process since he’s busy, but does have a couple good pricey serums. I also think as a retirement gift, Ice got him an appointment to get one of those chemical peels that takes a few weeks to recover from. Okay, that’s it.

agree to very very much disagree. maverick wears hanes t-shirts that you buy in plastic-wrapped counts of 12 for less than $20 and he wears jeans that were on buy-one-get-two-free sale at macys. Sorry. you could not Pay me to believe that man invests in skincare.

imo ice & mav are superhumanly blessed with good skin & good hair. to the extent that they use dollar store shit and are totally fine and never ever see the need for nicer shit. like a neutrogena commercial will play on the tv and they’re clueless. like “who actually needs that stuff? just wash your face once in a while, you’ll be fine” (the same advice they give to middle school/high school Bradley, who finds their advice summarily unhelpful) they have no knowledge of skincare or any of that stuff because they’ve annoyingly never needed it. they’ll put sunscreen on when they go to the beach… but, like, that’s it. they’re just dudes.

[le-agent-egg]

leon and sayaka save me

[jimmycarterghostland]

Call me a narcissist, but I wish everyone had the same opinions that I have. Nothing upsets me more than seeing someone disagree with one of my beliefs, especially when it's something I feel very strongly about and the other person is being absolutely idiotic and not even realizing it.

The fact that people can disagree with my own opinions is one of the reasons why I will never be truly happy and at peace.

[philosophybitmaps]

[spurgie-cousin]

🔥 fundies

fundie influencers aren't good examples of your everyday fundamentalist, and the only reason i think it matters to point that out is bc it can kinda give people the wrong idea of what fundamentalism looks like, making it harder to recognize when those influences creep into your life. if that makes sense. the majority of trad or fundie influencers who focus on theology or preaching on social media purposefully exaggerate for shock value.

Influencers like Solie or Anneliese preach on social media for narcissistic reasons, they get something out of living a controversial lifestyle in front of people and 'proving' them wrong, ya know? I think they'd be weirdos no matter what ideological background you put them in.

[godblooded]

honestly? craven’s death hit me, but losing kevin conroy hit me.

[nix-that-rad-lass]

I gotta be real, and I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I think trans men are the most valid men.

Women just do it better 🤷‍♀️

Plus since female is default I guess you could consider that FTM is much more of a biological capability than MTF.

Not to say you can change sex, but rather, I think that trans men are much better able to transition and pass, and having been raised and treated as women, tend to be more capable of empathy.

This is not to excuse the rampant issues of gender ideology or the medical mistreatment and abuse of dysphoric women and girls.

[gloria-s-moving-closet]

the new Ariana Grande album is giving me old pop r&b vibes, in fact it’s giving me so many old music vibes that i started humming Can’t take my eyes off of you when i heard the intro to one of the songs (:

[mtvjedi]

feeling distinctly anti feminist today in like an amy dunne cool girl these awful pretender women kind of way

[mollyjimbly]

it's not a reality check, ur just a overly nihilistic asshole bringing down the mood...

my god i've had to deal with so many depressing people...

"nothing matters and were all gonna die alone" that phrase fucking triggers me...

i am so fucking sorry i am not cool enough to vibe with that >:(

[wilwheaton]

That whole campaign is sponsored by the people who own Hobby Lobby. They know that their toxic brand of hateful bigotry, disguised as religious belief, is radioactively unpopular. Through their own actions, they have turned off an entire generation.

So they spend money on a misleading campaign, designed to trick people into thinking that He Gets Us is an alternative to the toxic and hateful bigotry the sponsors of He Gets Us are hoping to drive them toward.

All of that money could have done legitimate good, made a meaningful difference, and would have actually made a better case for the Canon Jesus than their deeply misleading and sinful efforts to promote Fandom Jesus.

I am not a Christian, but even I know that if the Jesus described in the gospels was a real person, and if he actually said and taught the things the Bible says he said and taught, he would be at the front of the line, decrying the He Gets Us people.

Either they don't get that, or they don't care. In either case, spending money to trick people into following you, rather than spending money to meaningfully and immediately improve people's lives (as Jesus taught, bee tee dubs) just tells everyone that these people are American Pharisees.

If Heaven exists, I would pay a dollar to see the look on their face when the bouncer tells them they aren't on the list, as a consequence of their choices.

[menlove]

honestly i think a HUGE part of the issue is that most of the left doesn't really understand antisemitism

after wwii it became wildly Unpopular to be blatantly antisemitic. obviously, it still happened. but the result of this is that instead of antisemitism being studied as a historical and pervasive form of oppression that has been around for thousands of years & has many many precedents BEFORE the holocaust.... it became:

something just simply Rude to say or do. if you're a polite liberal/conservative or a leftist, it's just something that is socially unacceptable. there is no real weight to this.

something when FIRMLY believed is ONLY held by people like nazis and white supremacists. who, as we know, are The Enemy and none of us can ever be like them at all ever by the virtue of... not being them. no need to watch your own behaviors, bc you are not a nazi! only nazis could ever be Actually antisemitic

something that erupted out of the ground in germany in the early 20th century, culminated with the holocaust, and ended after. antisemitism did not exist before that and it was solved after when the saving grace of the united states and england liberated the jews from the nazis out of the goodness of their hearts

however absolutely none of this is true. antisemitism stretches back thousands of years and it has not, for the most part, been only "fringe" conspiracy theorists and white supremacists who perpetuate it

antisemitism has been, by and large, presented as very logical. throughout, again, the thousands of years of history of antisemitism, very regular people have been antisemites. and most of them had reasons they felt were perfectly logical and understandable and most of all just. jews were trying to kill their children, of course they hated them! jews were purposefully trying to keep them poor, of course they hated them! jews believed Wrong Things and were morally and spiritually corrupt, of course there was something wrong with them. jews betrayed their country, lost them a war that ended with their husbands and brothers and sons dead, and now were living among them and taking advantage of social benefits out of the goodness of the hearts of the german people, of COURSE they hated them! and the nazis themselves were backed up by science at the time. scientific racism was THE science at the time. charles darwin was a scientific racist. it was all very logical.

and did jews actually do these things? no. but these people saw enough proof that aligned well enough with their morals and their beliefs and their fears & so to them it was completely logical and justified. it wasn't a fringe theory that only an insane person would believe in, or something impolite. it was true to them. to their morals, to their fears, to their core beliefs. it was true.

and so now we see a LOT. a lot of leftists being dragged ass first into antisemitism. because they don't even think they CAN be antisemitic. THEY aren't nazis and THEY aren't white supremacists, of COURSE they aren't antisemitic. but... well. the jews are doing things that go against their morals. they're doing things that validate their fears. the jews are violating things that go against their core beliefs! so of COURSE it is LOGICAL that they should hate them. of course, it is still rude to say "the jews are evil" so it gets replaced with "zionist". (and before you ask yes i am anti-zionism and do deeply believe what israel is doing is unjust and cruel) but even that is slipping.

it is getting all the more popular to go that one step further and instead of just making posts like "spam the hanukkah tag because the Zionists need to learn what their religion stands for" that are blatantly just replacing "jews" with "zionists", they are logically moving to being mask off. if zionism is wrong and half the world's remaining jewish population lives in israel, what about the rest? aren't they suspect? would they not ALL commit atrocities if given the chance? aren't they all racist for believing they're an ethnicity? aren't they all complicit? aren't they all threatening our deeply held leftist beliefs? it's a little weird and everyone has been too quiet for too long bc it's been rude to say but now you can get 300k notes for posting blood libel so why would you keep quiet anymore?

why WOULDN'T you just say "thank god someone finally said it i was worried about stepping on toes" when someone makes a post full of antisemitic conspiracy theory. why WOULDN'T you say "i don't care if all of israel gets bombed and every single person dies after this lmfao they deserve it"? (which would wipe out, again, half the world's population of jews- many of whom living there are anti-zionist and actively protesting their government. or. you know. children.) why WOULDN'T you make posts about how jewish identity is just nazi aryanism? why wouldn't you make posts about how the jews are privileged in america bc they run hollywood and the economy? why WOULDN'T you say the star of david is a hate symbol to you now and that you mistrust anyone using it? or that you find anyone speaking hebrew suspect?

these are all perfectly logical. to you. and YOU are not a nazi or a white supremacist. so it can't be antisemitic.