#versus accepting and processing his behavior

[forgottenarias]

ooc | more aria thought rambles ;)

so obviously being locked up in stafford, aria doesn't know EXACTLY what was happening w/ the varmont bros @ malconaire, but i think after Amira's Terrible Tea Party, she started to get a bit of an idea! i def think she'd heard/figured out from someone that they'd been going to malconaire and when she showed up at a tea with eithne and the main topic of conversation from Amira seemed to be arthur, she put two and two together!

also our girl has a LOT of time on her hands so when arthur was suddenly being kinda weird and closed off (... i'm kinda just assuming there was a change in his behavior, even for a short while, after eithne broke the news of her engagement but @forgottenarthur please correct me if you think otherwise!) and not long after it became public knowledge eithne was marrying cassimir... i think she maybe connected the two?

so she knows but its not confirmed but also its basically confirmed in her mind that arthur had ~something going on with eithne! and i think part of aria might believe 'oh well obviously he had his lady he'd go see in the country and then i guess i'm just the lady in the castle to entertain him while he's stuck here!' but things have gotten more intense with them so she's not sure that's really true?

anyway, i do think there is some jealously/insecurity for aria knowing arthur had ~something going on with eithne! i sort of had this idea in my head that, pre-roderick, Eilia & Eithne & Eabha were representations of this 'idealistic' Astairan lady who was going to be the heir and a lady but were also kind and generous and beloved by their people! And then we know eithne is obviously known for her beauty and, at least at malconaire, had these young men who were infatuated with her and a lot of that Aria just doesn't feel she could compete against? (if this was a competition and she doesn't consider it that!) i think (probably that secret romantic side of her coming out) she envisions eithne as the sort of lady men want to make pledges to and save from terrible fates and fall in love with! And she doesn't view HERSELF in that way at all. at least w/ him she's been a bit standoffish and she pushes him and can be contrary and doesn't let her emotions show! so in that kind of crazy thought process i've imagined comes from her being alone with her thoughts a lot, Aria has cast herself as NOT the lady knights are charge off to rescue or woo or whatever from her stories-- eithne is that sort of lady.

but all that being said aria is extremely rational, right? so this whole line of thinking is absurd to her because she KNOWS that there's no way she OR eithne end up with arthur-- neither of them are acceptable in roderick's eyes so what's the point of even having these feelings? but they're still there. and i DO think that even if/when arthur + aria manage to communicate their feelings to each other aria still might have that nagging thought in the back of her head like 'what if eithne comes to him and does the same thing? does he pick her?' from time to time! but tbh i think that all really depends on where those two are at if/when they express ~emotions haha! like i think if its smth like arthur finds out abt aria's powers and is all 'idc i still love you' then she's honestly pr not really going to consider eithne into it at all at that point since she's literally the thing he's been taught to destroy and he just doesn't care! and also just everything that is happening w/ them is so! intense! i think the whole concept of eithne as her romantic rival (that sounds more intense that i feel like it needs to be haha) is just that little voice in the back of her head that pops up from time to time!

AND not that it really matters i do think if she hadn't been locked up at stafford and could have seen the eithne/arthur relationship in action versus whats going on w/ she and arthur... she would realize its diffierent. honestly probably would've put things in perspective for her about him?? but that's not a think so like i said its really not important ahahaha

[ilikekidsshows]

https://www.tumblr.com/

enonem/

778624504194859008 (broken up)

I feel this perfectly encapsulates the exact problem with the LoveSquare (and other couples) in MLB as it is rn - the writers keep claiming Marinette and Adrien are meant to be because everyone in the show says so but don’t really do anything to JUSTIFY everyone saying this. They’re soulmates just to be soulmates and nothing else.

---

You are absolutely correct, and I feel like that post perfectly encapsulates the general thought process that seems to go into this series. In Miraculous, the characters just say things and we’re expected to accept them as facts even when they go against things that have been explicitly shown to us, sometimes even including things that have been explicitly shown to us in that very same episode. The Miraculous writers do this with a lot of concepts they throw into the series, actually.

Like what we are told versus what we can actually see happen in episodes goes like this:

Marinette and Adrien are soulmates vs. Marinette can’t tell her own grandma what she likes about Adrien, other than that he’s “pretty”

Marinette is a great leader vs. Marinette constantly plays favorites and denies her allies basic information and she hasn’t improved on this even after that led to them losing all the Miraculous

Marinette always takes care of others and no one takes care of her vs. Marinette constantly makes her problems other people’s problem and gets instant support when she feels like having a cry

Marinette is the greatest Ladybug ever vs. Marinette let the world get destroyed

Cat Noir is arrogant vs. Cat Noir has poor self-esteem and treats himself as expendable

Cat Noir is unreliable vs. Cat Noir always picks Ladybug up after she has a crisis, at least once per season

Gabriel was a flawed man with good intentions vs. Gabriel was a child abuser

Emile is a flawed man with good intentions vs. Emile is a domestic abuser

André was a victim of Chloé and Audrey vs. André actively neglects his daughter and sends her away with her abusive mother when she becomes too much trouble

Audrey’s only mistake as a parent was leaving vs. Audrey abandoned her family for years, actively and purposefully misnames her daughter repeatedly, humiliates her on live television and planned to abandon her again afterwards

Chloé is a naturally occurring, born-evil hellspawn vs All of Chloé’s villainy consists of things one or both of her parents do, meaning it’s learned behavior

The Miraculous writers rely on telling so much that what they're showing isn't even a concern but, to make matters worse, they can't even stay consistent about what is said. This is why the "lesson" learned at the end of the episode might actually directly contradict what was established at the start. 'Reflekdoll' having Cat Noir go from "I have the easy job!" to "I didn't appreciate how hard your job was," and that being presented as a change is a prime example of this lack of consistency and care in the writing being a problem that's been there all along. The writers just don't pay attention to what they're doing nearly enough. It's like the show consists of completely separate scenes with similar characters because the connective tissue between different scenes just isn't there.

Like, when the only thing your supposed main romance has going for it is the girlfriend gaslighting the boyfriend, maybe your romance is just garbage. Maybe the Miraculous writers are just god-awful at writing romance, but, like, they mess everything else up so completely too it’s like the script is being written by a generative A.I. cobbling together bits and pieces from better written stuff. But, no, this is all-natural plagiarism without understanding what you’re plagiarising or even making.

[apenitentialprayer]

Women Are Physiologically Primed for Parenthood (And So Are Men)

In 2017 The New York Times published a short piece called "The Birth of a Mother." It explored something anthropologists have termed matrescence, or the process of becoming a female parent. The writer noted: "[T]his transition is also significant for fathers . . . , but women who go through the hormonal changes of pregnancy may have a specific neurobiological experience." The nod to fathers is cursory. The "but" that follows makes the sentence's point: that women are the sex hormonally primed for parenthood. This notion is so generally accepted that it escaped the fact-checker's scrutiny. Like most of the conventional wisdom about the hard-core nature of maternal versus paternal parenting, it's also misleading. Men undergo their own neurobiological experience as their babies-to-be gestate. Throughout the prenatal period, men in close contact with pregnant partners are physiologically primed to care for infants. Expectant fathers experience a rise in the levels of the pregnancy-related hormones prolactin, cortisol, and estrogen in proportion to that of their baby's mother. Additionally, testosterone, associated with competition for mates, declines. Second-time fathers produce even more prolactin and less testosterone in the company of a pregnant partner than do first-timers. [...] Throughout their children's lives, involved fathers continue to experience hormonal changes. In North America, men in long-term relationships like marriage and fatherhood almost uniformly have lower testosterone levels than their single and childless counterparts. [...] As anthropologist Sarah Hrdy observes in Mothers and Others: "Men are physiologically altered just from spending time in intimate association with pregnant mothers and new babies. To me, this implies that care by males has been an integral part of human adaptation for a long time. Male nurturing potentials are there, encoded in the DNA of our species. [...] [In the late '70s], psychologist Ross Parke and colleagues studied fathers of newborns in maternity wards. For most of the behaviors his team measured, fathers and mothers hardly differed. Men spoke to babies in high-pitched voices and responded with sensitivity to infant cues during feeding. They also exhibited patterns similar to their wives when holding their children. The major difference Parke observed was that fathers, unlike mothers, took a step back from their child's care in the presence of their spouse. [...] In a study that measured response times and hormone levels in parents listening to infant cries, mothers and fathers were equally reactive to wails of distress (recordings of baby boys being circumcised). When the cries were fussy rather than pained, mothers' physiological responses and then also their reaction times were a little quicker than fathers', though fathers' responses were quicker than those of childless adults.

- Darcy Lockman (All the Rage: Mothers, Fathers, and the Myth of Equal Partnership, pages 82-83, 83, 84, 85, 86)

[cherokeecharles]

#Hottakes #11: White Mediocrity at The Grammy’s Isn’t a Surprise Anymore.

It wouldn’t be award season if we weren’t talking about white mediocrity being rewarded or people being surprised that it was awarded. The never-ending saga of ‘I can’t believe Taylor won over [insert great black artist here]’ is now plaguing my timeline for the time being and what better way to break my silence?

During my writing hiatus, I went on an inspiration scavenger hunt—poking around pop culture, TV, music, and yes, even sports (times are tough, sisters). Yet, nothing sparked that writing flame. Then came the Grammys buzz, the usual drill: nominations, snubs, and the betting game of who should win versus who will win. We all would like to think of ourselves as Grammy psychics to some degree. So, imagine my surprise at the post-Grammys shockwave. Why the gasps for the winners? Why the faux shock when black artists get the snub? And seriously, why keep submitting music if it's playing hide-and-seek with recognition? It's like sending your resume to a job that never calls back—maybe it's time to rethink the application process, huh?

Jay-Z delivered a powerful speech while receiving his honoree Hip Hop award. Rather than talking about his accomplishment he went on to give a rant about his wife, Beyoncé, being the most awarded Grammy winner yet always falling short of her peers of winning the coveted Record of the Year award. The speech was compelling and it reflected what many of us said for years. I would’ve been moved by the speech if I knew they weren’t going to keep submitting their music to be snubbed yearly. The speech reflected all of my thoughts of Beyoncé being categorically snubbed every year for that award that we know is likely missing from her résumé. However, I don’t like the fact that it’s being deemed that she’s missing this one thing from greatness. Beyoncé is great on her own and her career, music, and work ethic back up that claim. I think that it’s unfair that her ‘shortcoming’ amounted to an award where the line is always moving.

The award show progressed, and we’re all left to simmer with Jay-Z's speech about snubbing at the Grammys. The end of the award show comes around, and the last and biggest award is Album of the Year. The album of the year award was presented by the one and only Celine Dion. The Album of the Year award is a coveted award, it’s essentially the album that shaped the year we just went through, and the cultural and social impact of said album are factors into who gets the win, or so I thought. The category for album of the year was groundbreaking on its own because this is the first time it has ever had seven of the eight nominations be women. The category on its own with poised for someone who showed great artistry through one album that spoke to the public, and to the Grammy voters. Imagine the lack of surprise on my face when Taylor Swift won. Taylor Swift’s album Midnights won the most desired award beating out SZA’s SOS, Miley Cyrus’ Endless Summer, Janelle Monae’s Age of Pleasure, etc. This Album of the Year award made Taylor Swift the most winningest recipient of the award receiving the most nominations and win in this category.

The aftermath was a storm of criticism that hit Taylor Swift like a hurricane. From her award-acceptance antics to dropping her album bombshell mid-show and dragging poor Lana Del Rey on stage, Swift's behavior was undeniably tacky. But let's not kid ourselves—the uproar wasn't just about her manners. It was the fact that she clinched the Grammys' holy grail, becoming the all-time winningest. Viewers collectively winced, wondering why Taylor got the crown instead of, say, SZA. We act shocked, but really, we've read the exposés, pondered the think pieces, and still tune in annually. Artists keep submitting, black artists keep getting snubbed. If Taylor's the poster child for white mediocrity, why do we willingly sign up for this annual masochism? It's like déjà vu with a side of irony.

I'm not exactly Taylor Swift's number-one fan (and never will be), and I join the chorus of critics giving her the side-eye. But what grinds my gears is the phony shock everyone's putting on. Sure, there are more deserving artists out there, and it's downright ludicrous that a powerhouse like Beyoncé hasn't snagged the top prize. Yet, when does the surprise party end? We've witnessed Grammys snubs so brutal they make 2024 look like a tea party. That's why Jay-Z's speech didn't move my needle. Valid points, definitely, but let's be real, you're still cashing in those Grammy chips and probably gonna play again. Our beloved artists secretly crave that Recording Academy nod and that's why they keep tossing their tunes into the Grammy ring. It's like a messed-up lottery where, once in a blue moon, an artist (looking at you, Zayn and The Weeknd) says, "Enough is enough!" If it's a rigged game, why keep rolling the dice? If you know the ending, why splurge on the movie ticket?

The Grammys will persist as the top accolade artists crave for artistic validation. However, it's crucial to grasp that Grammy wins don't make or break careers. Complaining without a push for change is futile. The Grammys will keep snubbing until artists stop submitting. Despite acknowledging the celebration of mediocrity, there's a glaring lack of transformative action. Perhaps, giving Grammys less power than fans and artists do is key. Even Beyoncé, the greatest artist, faces snubs. Does she need another Grammy to prove her greatness? No, because she already is. Embracing this mindset could make music more enjoyable, sans the Grammy obsession.

What do you guys think? Do you think artist should continue to submit their music to the Grammys? Do you think the Grammys are losing their credibility every year go on? What can the Grammys do to gain back the credibility?

Let me know what you think!

Until then…

Cherokee🤎✨

[galacticnova3]

I think the main reason why the audience reaction to Iru is so off is that most of his deeply unpleasant traits (like his bigotry, closemindedness, stomping over boundaries, general aura of Uncomfortable Guy who’s getting waaay too close to you for comfort, etc.) are more often told to us rather than shown, esp within the context people typically see him in, so they tend to come across more as informed attributes. You’re an excellent writer and I adore your work, but I feel like in certain instances you tend to hold back with him a little - the grotesquery of his behaviour and dialogue should speak for themselves, rather than just other characters telling us how much he sucks. I know part of this is intentional, because Iru consciously tries his best to keep his more unsavoury traits under wraps, but I think there’s plenty of ways to let it slip through more often while still maintaining that subtlety.

The main issue is that there's a big difference between Iru speaking to others in person versus Iru speaking to others over the internet, which so far has been the primary way I write him since I'm bad at setting up actual rps. Typing something out gives him far more opportunities to think "wait I'm saying the quiet part out loud" compared to him actually speaking with someone, especially now that he operates at organic speeds; he can still process things at an above average rate to the point of outpacing his ability to type.

Iru is extremely manipulative because he always wants to get people to look at and treat him the way he looks at and treats himself. He doesn't care(that much) if they only do it if he lies to them. This exact behavior was just talked about, actually— he doesn't give a shit about respecting identities beyond his own, but recognizes that wording his complaints as if he does will make himself look better. Plus, trying to draw attention to someone else supposedly being close-minded, in his mind, takes attention away from his own bigotry. That whole interaction in itself was an example of subtle ways he is a shitty person.

The manner in which he is a bad person is also just different than how it used to be. He isn't physical in the way he used to be because he has no reason to attack other ships, and as a mimic he isn't cold and callous and efficient in how he goes about hunting the same way Lon is. Iru is a people person, owing strongly to his history as an Umbramaker. He's talkative, he wants attention, he wants connection— ironically that's the reason he decided not to out Lon or stop trying to get with them. They, even if not honestly, indulged him for a while, because they did not understand or care about his opinions and behavior the way other people had, and he was desperate because he had nobody because other people wouldn't just accept his behavior the way Lon did/does.

There's also just the fact that like. Last time I wrote something that really showed off how genuinely awful he was in a non-rp setting, like seriously poured hours into it... Next to nobody seemed to actually read it. Not on here or on Discord, even when I brought attention to it multiple times hoping to get folks to check it out. The kind people who did read it didn't say anything about it that really meant anything in particular. I can't recall a single reaction that was specific to it, positive OR negative. Whenever I get useful or memorable feedback I keep it, but I have nothing from that time. The one person who expressed interest also kind of stabbed me in the back after blaming me for the resentment they allowed to build up instead of just talking to me, which doesn't help and is also far beyond the scope of this post.

Like, I love getting key smashes and OOOOOOO and emojis as much as the next guy, but they don't encourage me like actual feedback does. It really demotivated me a lot to the point that I've actually long since deleted what I'd written and haven't really had it in me to try again. Why bother? Why put the time and effort in if nobody is going to care about it any more than people care about the easier to write shitposts or chat-based rp? If it's not going to be any more impactful to people, what's the point of spending the energy? It doesn't do me any good because I already understand he's a terrible person and don't need to write a several thousand word story about it, but if I don't have reason to think others would read those stories... Well, why would I write them?

The same thing kinda happened with Lon, too, though at least my writing there was memorable enough to lead to the "Lon hates southerners" joke. But that wasn't what I wanted the focus or takeaway to be at all, so I still failed at my goal anyways. Another reason not to invest time and energy into that kind of thing.

Now I'm unmotivated to write it because there's the evident good chance that most people won't care about it AND a risk of the people reading it being gross about it. Whether directly or by intentionally misinterpreting it. For fuck's sake people have made [REDACTED] jokes about him and Isi. There's just not enough genuine interest that's been expressed to outweigh the fact that I don't want to deal with more of that, or violations of my blacklist, etc.

Maybe I'll try again eventually, but as things stand I just don't have the confidence to expect it to make a difference.

[circuses-and-childhoodtrauma]

So, guess who finally sucked it up and watch the final two (three? The two parter was a whole thing) episodes of danger force and…yep. It’s currently 5am so I’ll probably have more thoughts to post on the whole plot and what it means for character progression and endings in my mind once I’ve actually processed and thought about it. This may include what you’d consider hot takes on characters but just know it’s from a place of love and I wouldn’t want them to change (unless, of course, I’m talking about things I wished went differently) because that’s the best part of the show. Long post ahead and Spoilers for that btw

I will say I procrastinated the hell out of it after hearing a spoiler that Drex has an anticlimactic death, a spoiler which turned out to only be half the truth. I can’t remember where I saw it, but I will say thank you to whoever unknowingly spoiled it because y’all should’ve seen the look on my face when that motherfucker came back from his unimpressive dusty death. Truly, pure joy. The finale itself was weirdly underwhelming and I guess on brand for the show but I thought maybe they’d put more heart into it; you can really tell the difference of investment put into danger force versus the finale of Henry danger which was, despite Henry and rays final words being a joke, far more touching than the awkward, we know it’s abrupt ending that we got for DF. It feels a little odd as a Henry danger fan since it’s first season to see it end in such a way that leaves me with. Nothing really emotionally.

I’ll start with my thoughts on Ray’s character. Keep in mind it’s been a good few months since I’ve seen any episodes besides these last few (“Ray Forgives” and “The Battle for Swellview”) so forgive me if I’m rusty on some things I’m due for a full rewatch and so point out any contradiction or disagreements you may have because his character is one of my favorites to discuss due to the extremely polarized view fans have on him. I will say this ending truly showcases the final decline of Ray’s character as the show accepts him for what he truly is (see one of his final lines in the last episode as the DF kids try to process his departure “classic me”). Ray, I never had high hopes for you and I truly enjoy watching such a despicable person be our main mentor of the show and without you I would definitely be down a few class essays. I wish we could’ve touched on Ray’s inner workings and childhood as well as how his relationship with Henry is involved in any of this? The first part of that sentence I’m fine without simply because part of Ray’s charm is being a pretty vain character that gathers most of his motivations through that vanity and pursuit of his own goals, but the latter half? I really feel like the show is pretty lackluster for that loose end of Henry’s involvement which I now doubt we will see in the movie. More on that later.

As for Ray, I think I’ve mentioned in the past that his behavior over the course of the later seasons on HD as well as the first two seasons of DF (which is all that was out at the time) could really only lead to three options for his character. Either 1. he has to become so bad that he is actively a villain in the show (I say villain not antagonist because Ray has already been the antagonist of a few episodes), 2. He fully turns over a new leaf and actively works back to the strong figure he was in Season One of HD (too little time for that, get him a therapist), or 3. He spirals into a character so objectively and morally grey that he just leaves. I honestly figured they’d go for something more of 2 (or at the very least give us some growth and then lead into the third; which, no. The MILES system plot line does not count and I’ll explain why), but it seems the show went right for the third option. His character in the ending was just so shallow and lacking empathy that I was actually shocked. And sure, the show tried to play it off by saying “oh well he saw the kids prove themselves in the big fight”, when Ray had very clearly already announced his retirement before this happened?

The whole ending with Credenza felt very “Love Muffin”-esque in the way that you only see one aspect of Ray’s character (which makes sense in Love Muffin because he only had one portion of his character thanks to the muffin) but it was certainly a…decision…for the final ending of not just danger force but the full run of the Henry danger force series as a whole being considering there was no pause between the finale of HD and the premiere of DF. There’s just so much more to his character that could’ve been used there, and it contradicts a lot of things he’s stood for even as late as the second season of DF. Even if you follow his decline of character, there are still other notable qualities that would be far better suited for a goodbye like that. Ray is known for his childishness and his immature attachment style, I don’t think I need to show proof or references if you’ve seen the show but I will if need be. Ray is also shown with outbursts of anger and things like that which would have been a bit of a dud considering he did that in the HD finale and we don’t want a redo because this is something different. I really think the show could’ve done something better than just…calm acceptance? I could even call it delusion but it just wasn’t enough for a final goodbye. Ray’s immaturity, his anxious need for his employees to love him, his relationship with Bose? I can’t really think of a worse way to end things aside from Ray leaving offscreen like they couldn’t pay Cooper his final check.

It seems Ray simply doesn’t want to be a mentor anymore. Like other things, he grew bored of it? He found something better? One can only guess. But it feels almost as though the show is painting a picture that Ray was just doing the whole mentoring sidekicks thing while he looked for a hot date. Which, if so, was his whole goal from the beginning? Because Ray spent all 8 seasons of show trying his luck with various women and he was quick to jump in their arms at any moment to leave his superhero life behind. But then again, he was quick to take any opportunity to leave his job. It’s not a good characterization of him to say that he was just “looking for love” the whole time and once he found it, he was done with the superhero schtick. It disregards his whole obsession with the city of Swellview loving him. It disregards his childish idealization of super heroism (buying capes, creating other super identities) , something that persisted even after he’d worked the job for decades. You could say he “grew up”? But then why the “classic me” line at the end and why have we seen no other growth in any areas? I have my own view and characterization of Ray that was not changed by the finale, so I am ignoring a large portion of it, something you’ll see as a trend with the other characters. But, this is just food for thought.

And obviously, since he’s truly the highlight of the show in my eyes and the light of my life who brightens my face and day every time he comes on screen, I was very happy to see Drex make his presence in the finale. Of course I knew about him being Buddy Fudgers real dad (see the timeline I made for it because the initial reveal in the trailers and clips had me absolutely reeling trying to keep my own interpretations of the show at least somewhat in line with whatever canon threw at me). The simple fact of him *being* buddy fudgers biological father is the only good and useful thing to come of it in my opinion. The actual details…Credenza being Drex’s ex-wife?? Drex apparently being an active part of Buddy’s life for an undisclosed amount of time before leaving and then apparently finding the time to come back into Buddy’s life and having SHARED CUSTODY for an also UNDISCLOSED amount of time?? The retcons in this specific plot line and Drex’s plot as a whole make my head hurt. I’m not even going to touch on the marriage thing until I’m good and ready, but, let’s just say I have ideas for that. As for everything else? Scrap it, honestly. The show itself pokes fun at the paradox of Drex’s character (always losing for…some reason…as he puts it) and I am happy to keep my own Drex and Ray and hell even Buddy Fudgers dolls away from the canon of it all and leave it there.

I liked that the show didn’t try to put on an elaborate backstory as to why Drex and Ray really hate each other (because, hey, whaddya know, we already got that in Drex’s DEBUT episode in 2016, but it’s not like the writers are aware of that…) and they just left it at “I don’t know why we’re mad” as well as leaving any backstories of their friendship in one little photograph. Don’t bother with the details, we know it’ll make our brains hurt anyway. Even though it’s a bit of a copout, I wouldn’t have wanted to see one of the only stable and serious relationships in the show be reduced to a joke like “oh Drex are my last poptart 15 odd years ago and we’ve been enemies ever since”. A good part of Drex and Ray’s rivalry that still held up even onto season 3 of DF was because so much of it was left in the dark, we can only speculate. They always have just enough motive and reasoning for you to be like “sure, that makes sense” (In Hour of Power when Ray explains that Drex’s violent tendencies led to them just “having it out” provides a father-son Batman type feud between them as Drex’s rage is obviously not dealt with in a proper way, as well as in the finale of Henry Danger on the blimp where Drex’s thought-to-be final words to Henry are “I was always the better sidekick” implying a clear jealousy at Ray’s favor towards Henry). It kept things neat and clean and dark enough for Drex to be a good bad guy. And he makes a pretty good show of being a good guy in his fifteen seconds of fame (which btw had me beaming and shaking my screen at his happy saunter ahh I just love him so much I can’t)

And, of course, I must discuss, my Roman Empire, my magnum opus, Ray and Drex’s relationship. Or rather their father and son. relationship. Let me preface by saying of course you may interpret Ray and Drex’s relationship however you want (father-son, brothers, I think some people ship them as lovers as well) and by extension Henry and Ray’s. However, if you’ve caught even one glimpse of this account you’d likely see that I consider them to be scorned father and son. Same goes for Henry, I know some people think of him and Ray like brothers and that’s fine, but in my mind they will always have a pseudo father son relationship. Now, I’ve talked about all three of them and their relationships with each other a lot on my account, so I won’t waste space reiterating it. I do want to talk about the show’s portrayal of Drex and Ray’s latest moments together. Now, right from the getgo Drex is very much coded as a scorned son (or ex lover if you listen to Hour of Power’s euphemisms which is so gross not for Drex but for the implications the show put on Henry). He calls Ray “old man” and “pops” and even says something similar to dad if you’re desperate like me “finally got the outfit to match your dad bod”(excuse my paraphrasing on that last one it’s 6am and I don’t want to go look for the exact quote). But by the latest episode Ray calls him brother? I preferred the ambiguity; it’s not the biggest issue in the world but it feels like another part of Drex that they were trying to retcon. I have much bigger plans for him though, always.

There seemed to be a lot of copout “for some reason”s in the last few plots of the season but honestly, I don’t want to compare the two finales because they’re separate things and also one continuation of each other, and also I don’t care for the discourse between which is better. I simply look at this finale for a three season show that took the time to invest us in its characters and I just feel disappointed. I didn’t have high hopes for the ending given what they were working with.

Some other thoughts that didn’t make it into my totally “neat” paragraphs:

Ray getting decapitated was the total best move for showing just how unhinged and detached Henry danger force is from the rest of Nickelodeon in terms of censoring and morals, and I absolutely loved it.

Buddy turning into Drex, only to turn back into himself but bigger a few minutes later was…a choice. Although I did find it funny that the show pointed out his return back to Buddy-likeness.

I’m not sure where any of this fits into the movie but considering it didn’t begin work until after season three was done, it might have some impact. I would love to see Henry’s reaction to all of this.

I’m not sure why they felt the need to hammer home Bose’s dad being gone? It felt like a bad punchline the third or fourth time around and I was very confused and annoyed when they mentioned it 3+ times per episode despite it not being a prominent thing in any prior seasons. Felt like maybe it was supposed to be lead up for a conclusion that didn’t happen, so it was. Odd.

I felt like Chapa really got her spotlight in those final episodes which is cool but we also didn’t really see anything come of it, especially when Mika was the unofficial leader of the group, it seemed like Chapa was stepping up to take that place with her initiative. I’ve always felt like Chapa would be the one hero to stay in Swellview after CM if they took the route of only one hero taking over. But then again, nothing came of it.

Mike’s visions also got pushed to the back which, they kind of always have been, although it was always an opening to introduce new powers for the others, nothing came of that either.

As for Mika, no notes really. Great job. Although it seemed like there was supposed to be a romance between her and Bose that just never came to fruition either for time or other changes, which left us with something very similar to the Henry and Charlotte run. Bose and Mika seemed to have more intentional moments so I had a little more hope for them considering they weren’t just a few circumstantial jokes and a rushed one-off episode like Charlotte and Henry. Would’ve like to see something happen there simply because of the clear intent for something to happen there, but, unfortunately it didn’t happen.

Credenza I haven’t got much to say about, except the whole cult thing being ingrained into her by her ancestors seems like a cool aspect to her character that might lend to some neat little details in other stories. Buddy was cool, I think his character was fine as well although I never understand why they love to do this trope where these superheroes with SUPER SECRET IDENTITIES apparently “can’t ever keep any secrets at all” but it’s a gag at the end of the day and Mika suffers from the same trope at times.

That’s all my thoughts for now, I know it’s a lot, and I’ll probably have more once I’ve had time to fully flesh things out in my mind. I would love to use this for a chance to write new stuff, but unfortunately my laptop melted, so that’s that. Feel free to discuss your thoughts on any of this! Thanks for reading if you got this far I know it’s jumbled

[mysteriouspresence]

a comparison of themes

a brief comparison of the shared/juxtaposed themes between the works "the stranger" by albert camus, "no longer human" by osamu dazai, and "notes from the underground" by fyodor dostoevsky (will try to keep this spoiler-free as possible!)

opening notes: themes: alienation, apathy and envy, misanthropy and understanding others, pride versus conformity main characters meursault from "the stranger" yozo from "no longer human" underground man from "notes from the underground" premise meursault is a man who lives in french algeria. his initial characterization is established when his mother dies, and he doesn't care much. later on, he happens to commit a crime, and we are shown his detached nature throughout the legal/penal process yozo deems himself "disqualified as a human being" while examining his life; he finds himself unable to understand other people and is frightened by their strange emotions and behaviors while he spirals in and out of addiction and depression the underground man is a spiteful loner who drives away the people around him and favors his own fantasies over his real life; he chooses to indulge in his romanticized, emotionally charged perspective, which in turn causes him more pain

alienation: -- all three main characters are shown to be outcasts, unable to participate "properly" in society. in a narrative sense, all three end up "punished" by society for being different (either literally or as they perceive) -- all three characters try to form romantic relationships, only to be thwarted at some point (note: meursault was arguably most successful). in each case, their prospective partners were interested, only to leave them under circumstances that all arguablely stemmed from the protagonist's actions.

apathy: -- meursault is apathetic towards his uncaring nature in-of-itself. he is not bothered by his apparent loneliness and callousness, nor how other people perceive him. in fact, he barely sees himself as different, unlike our other two protagonists -- meanwhile, the underground man tries hard to appear "cool" and unaffected by what he sees as slights upon his honor, but he ends up raging anyway; he envies the status, wealth, and social connections that other people have and emulates those in his fantasies -- on the other hand, yozo is painfully affected by everything around him and overthinks every action both he and other people make. he determines himself as thoroughly unable to be human

misanthropy and understanding others: -- the underground man and yozo find themselves disturbed and perplexed by other's actions. both distrust others, believing society to be maliciously out to get them. they're ultimately hindered by this self-consciousness. -- yozo tried hard to "fit in" to the expectations around him, only to deviate more as he cracked under pressure -- the underground man tried a few times to be sociable but ultimately gave up and declared himself a member of the "underground", retreating into his own world -- opposing this is meursault, who is seen as the frightening, perplexing being by other people due to his apparent lack of emotion by the end of the book. however, before the climatic incident of the novel, he was seen as an ordinary, albeit bland, man who just goes through his life. he never tried "too hard" to fit in, even though through his narration, we can tell that he was already apathetic, to begin with. the incident merely called everyone's attention to him

pride versus conformity: -- ultimately, all three men chose pride, consciously or not. they refused (or were not able) to become molded to society's standards, and all chose the "wrong" path in the end, even though they tried to live "normally" at some point -- they stayed true to their nature (as outlined above) to the end of their respective novels. each novel resolved with a respective resignation/acceptance of their fates

[lynzishell]

15 and 43 for Phoenix and 3 for Dawn!

TYSM T!! 🤗💖 These were really interesting ones to dive into!

Dawn: #3 How often do they show their genuine emotions to others versus just the audience knowing?

Dawn comes across as the type of person who wears her heart on her sleeve, and probably thinks of herself as someone who doesn’t hide her emotions. But is that true? Well, it’s complicated… She has a gift for putting a positive spin on any situation. In the blink of an eye, she will take a disappointing situation and talk herself into believing it was all for the best. You’ll rarely, if ever, see her cry unless it’s tears of joy or in response to a sappy love story. She never sits in a painful emotion long enough to express it or process it fully. She wouldn’t think of it as hiding her emotions so much as talking herself out of them.

Phoenix: #15 What’s the most obvious difference between their behavior at home, at work, at school, with friends, and when they’re alone?

When Phoenix is at work he is focused, reserved, and serious. Some may find him intimidating if they don’t know him well. If he's not careful, he can become a bit of a workaholic.

Around close friends he is much more relaxed and open. He enjoys sharing stories and joking around. He laughs more easily the closer you get to him. And only those closest to him will get to see his softer, vulnerable side.

When he’s alone he keeps the music loud and stays busy. He’d rather play video games than watch TV. Though, he’s more likely to be cooking or working out. But, to be honest, he keeps time alone to a minimum. He’ll usually exhaust all other options first.

#43 What do they commonly misinterpret because of their own upbringing / environment / biases? How do they respond when realizing the misunderstanding?

Phoenix tends to misinterpret generosity as manipulation or attempts for control. He doesn’t ask for (or accept) help. It has less to do with pride and more to do with control. He needs control and independence. He doesn’t want to owe anyone anything or give anyone leverage over him.

In the case with Dawn, he was fine asking for her help because it was in the context of his job. He needed more resources to finish his project before the deadline. He wasn’t accepting her generosity; he was offering her a job. Even with Atlas building the website, he was donating his time to the shelter, and it was fully documented as such.

Personal favors or help is generally off the table, and he can become suspicious of (or even aggressive towards) people who push this or try to force the issue. Especially if money is involved.

Even if he later understands that the person genuinely just wants to help, it doesn’t change anything. He would feel indebted in a way that makes him extremely uncomfortable, so he can’t accept it.

I'm having so much fun with these! TYSM @simstrashkingdom !!

[marven-t-baldo]

“Proof of Faith”

     Faith, to be considered to be genuine, must naturally bear the fruit of good works. No true child of God remains in darkness.

True faith brings forth fruit of the Spirit.

     We’ve already established in previous episodes that it is by faith, not works, that we would be right with God. However, genuine faith in God is neither stagnant nor dead. It’s alive, active, and vibrant. It moves, grows, and bears fruit. Its natural result is significant positive changes in our mindset and behavior or a total 180° turn. Those changes won’t help but show; they’ll be visible, apparent, and noticeable.

     When we put our faith in Jesus, God sanctified us and changed us from our old selves which are not acceptable to Him to a new creation conformed in His image and is to keep conforming in His image with each passing day. Our new selves now desire to follow God’s will, know Him more, and learn of His ways.

     Since it is God who changed us, we will truly be changed. Its proof will be manifested in our lives and in our persons: in the way we think, talk, and move. This new attitude can’t be feigned or studied; it will just flow naturally. The absence of this proof means that regeneration never occurred.

     For this reason, it is necessary to clarify what faith really is what it’s probably not:

     There is a difference between putting our faith in God and mere agreeing with the information presented to us about God as if we’re believing them. Faith is our personal encounter with God, in contrast to mere giving a mental assent to the facts about God. There’s nothing wrong with the latter. It can be the starting point. But as such, it’s still on a shaky ground and is subject to change any minute. We may be convinced for a while of the truth of what we’ve heard and then shake it off once we’re again confronted by the vicissitudes of life. Unless something snaps, then we haven’t put our faith in God yet. In episode 1, we mentioned something about true faith in God versus a nominal belief in God.

     We need words to understand something. Words are simple yet crucial. The Apostle John describes Jesus as the Word, meaning Jesus is Yahweh in tangible form, the visible Person, though whom, we can truly know the invisible God. God’s earlier revelations through direct speaking, symbolic appearances, objects, and practices culminate in the person of Jesus, God’s ultimate revelation of Himself.

     Faith in its fullest meaning is the experience of our soul with the one true God. Its source is God’s personal revelation to each and every one of us through His mighty word, the Bible. Sometimes, it can be through the circumstances in our life or other unique ways, but it is primarily through the Bible.

     I hope we already made the distinction clear. Let’s now proceed to explaining a few selected verses.

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23a).

     How are we faring so far with the above-mentioned qualities expected in a person who say they believe in Jesus? Of course, we’re still humans; we’re not perfect. As new believers, we may be still in the process of learning to be good at the application of those virtues. But it is an altogether-different thing to say that we believe in Jesus and yet be totally given to the opposites of those enumerated in the verse above.

I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that live but Christ living in me. That life which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave Himself up for me (Galatians 2:20).

     Another idea we can get from Jesus’ crucifixion is so that we can also crucify our sin nature.

     To err is human, and we didn’t cease to be human when we put our faith in Jesus although God has changed us and made us a new creation. However, realizing the extent of Jesus’ love for us, we also need to make some sacrifices for our newfound relationship with God by, first of all, not letting our sin nature take control of us. We have all the freedom to do good works and be the best person that we can be for others, but we don’t push through with things we know are sin and of evil, wicked nature. Self-control is one of the fruits of the Spirit.

     When we were yet unbelievers, sin nature wasn’t even an issue; we just did everything that we please. But now as believers, it is. We’re already conscious of it and are now in an everyday struggle to keep it down and not let it overpower us.

Here is the patience of the saints, those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus (Revelation 14:12).

     Saints, or believers, are those who equally keep the commandments of God and faith in Jesus. Faith and good works here go hand in hand; they’re inseparables. As ones who have put our faith in Jesus, we delight in learning and obeying both the Old Testament and New Testament commandments. We are one with the psalmist in saying, I DELIGHT to do your will, my God. Yes, your law is within my heart (Psalm 40:8).

But the end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith (I Timothy 1:5).

     We already mentioned earlier that faith can’t be feigned. Pretensions of faith will eventually be seen through. We’ve also mentioned earlier that God has sanctified us when we put our faith in Jesus so that we have become new persons with pure hearts and good consciences. Therefore, no amount of malice should be found in our thought systems. We shouldn’t entertain it, more so, allow it to settle, brew, reside, take up space in our minds. If Satan seems to be persistently sneaking it into our heads, we should rebuke it and cast it out by the power of the name of Jesus.

     As believers, we don’t operate with malice aforethought. That is simply too extreme for us, and that belongs to the darkness. Jesus wants us to be childlike who excel at good things and are innocent of evil. We just do the things that would be pleasing to our Father and a blessing and a good testimony for others. We’re always trying to excel at the application of the fruit of the Spirit and other good things in life to be the glory of our Father, and we’re not interested in anything about evil things. We’re not touching anything of that nature, much less explore it. Jesus wants us to be wise, not wily, as serpents and harmless as doves.

If I have the gift of prophecy and know all mysteries and all knowledge and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains but don’t have love, I am nothing (I Corinthians 13:2).

     What’s the use our faith even if it can move mountains if we don’t know how to care for others? If it doesn’t bear the fruit of love, our so-called faith is meaningless. And it is as if we’re non-existent if our lives don’t make a difference for the better that will be beneficial to others. It’s all too easy to claim and profess. But the truth of what we claim or profess will be checked against the attitudes we manifest and the effect we produce.

Test your own selves whether you are in the faith. Test your own selves. Or don’t you know as to your own selves that Jesus Christ is in you? Unless indeed you are disqualified (II Corinthians 13:5).

     As we have discussed in previous episodes, faith is, first of all, a process that happens within ourselves and between us and God. We have to be very clear about our individual standing with God first, and we must make sure that we are indeed bearing the fruit of the Spirit as proof of our faith in Jesus.

     We can’t count on being in the company of believers to feel sure that we’re going to be raptured with them. Our faith in Jesus should be very clear in ourselves first so that even if other believers are nowhere to be found within our vicinity and we are left alone, we can still function as a believer and not backslide.

     Of course, faith in Jesus is not an individualistic kind of faith but a corporate one. Fellowship is very important. But our membership, attendance, and participation in an assembly of believers will only be meaningful if our faith in God is well-founded within ourselves first so that every word that we will say and every little thing that we will do in the gatherings will be Spirit-led and spiritually uplifting. As we said in our previous episodes, all our good works will mean nothing to God if, first of all, we haven’t truly put our faith in Him.

     So I hope I didn’t confuse you and made a muddled mixture of the concepts of faith and good works. Faith is still the thing that makes us right with God. But if it is indeed true, then it is expected to bear the fruits of good works and the fruit of the Spirit. Because true saving faith can’t be a mere stump of a tree. It is expected to have a continuous outgrowth of stems, leaves, and fruits.

Study the Bible with me: Faith series, episode 5

by: Marven T. Baldo

[el-jarado]

Interesting! Although also interesting is the difference between the intent with Odysseus’s apologia versus Eurylochus apologizing, too.

Odysseus gave a defense appropriate to the time period for an action he does not regret and is not actually sorry he did in the slightest. Eurylochus cannot give a defense partially because he has fully accepted what he did was wrong and he feels intense remorse for the deed. Odysseus justifies his behavior, as expected for a king in his era; Eurylochus makes no excuses but begs his brother’s forgiveness, not knowing Odysseus is already in the process of justifying sacrificing Eurylochus and five others to himself.

I have noticed there is one and only one break from “Odysseus never apologizes, he justifies,” which is the repeated “forgive me” at the end of “Just a Man.”

Greek Apologies

I keep hearing people say that Odysseus never apologized properly to Poseidon but in the Greek way he did.

Basically the Greek word that apology is derived from- Apologia means “Speaking in Defense”.

Basically the Greeks would explain why you did what you did while expressing sympathy and remaining respectful.

The reason why Poseidon didn’t accept the apology was because Odysseus permanently crippled Poseidon’s son which was like, a great disgrace for that time period- it would’ve been more honorable to kill Polyphemus.

But anyways- my whole point was that Odysseus DID apologize correctly but due to the disgrace of what Odysseus did, it’s why Poseidon was so angry and said, “This totally could’ve been avoided had you just killed my son.”

This is why Odysseus was quiet when Eurylochus apologized for the wind bag- because he didn’t apologize correctly per the time period, he just said “I’m so sorry, forgive me.” He didn’t give a defense or reasoning, he just begged to be forgiven.

[thandiwemasuku]

Cultural Humility Reflection

My understanding of Cultural Humility.

Treating the person not illness, that's right!!. To me, cultural humility is the practice of accepting one's own prejudices while remaining open-minded, courteous, respectful, and conscious of cultural differences and practices related. It entails acknowledging the distinctiveness of each person's cultural background, reflecting on oneself, and being open to learning from others. It also focuses on building relationships based on mutual respect and trust across cultural divides.

In the medical context, cultural humility may be defined as a process of being aware of how people's culture can impact their health behaviors and in turn using this awareness to cultivate sensitive approaches in treating patients (Chen, 2018).

I totally agree that culture humility in practice is very important and it can be beneficial for the client and the health care professional.

Evaluation of the events that took place at the hospital with regards to cultural humility.

This week, I was exposed to different clients from white and black ethnical groups. I had to experience and understand the white people's culture and be sensitive as I worked with her. Although it was hard at first, I also found it hard to communicate with her because of the language but I eventually tried because our languages are not the same. It was my first time dealing with a patient who is not part of my ethnical group but it was a fantastic experience of learning and ensuring sensitivity to her culture during sessions. I eventually developed a better understanding and started to get more relaxed in my sessions with her, ensuring that I respect her and she was doing the same which also strengthened our sessions. However with the cognitive diagnosis of my client, it was very hard to understand some aspects of her beliefs and participation. Because of language differences, I feel like some steps weren't explained well to the client which led to further confusion. But I had adapted a new way of communicating which is visual and physical prompting as well with to better engagement.

On my the other client that I had, we had common cultural practices which made it easier for intervention with him because I was aware of the expectations and the way he does things in his culture. He was very respectful in sessions and In did the same. I had to make sure that I do not undress her without asking for permission first because I know, some Zulu people find that very disrespectful to them and their culture.

How cultural humility helped me to grow as a therapist.

Cultural sensitivity and humility has taught me how crucial it is to comprehend a patient's culture, beliefs regarding their condition, rehabilitation, and preferred method of communication before deciding on a particular approach for them. Additionally, I discovered the value of collaborating with people from various cultural backgrounds when developing a treatment plan for patients, whether they are MDT or patients themselves. Cultural humility skills are vital for occupational therapists to provide effective and sensitive care. They enable therapists to understand and respect diverse cultural backgrounds, building trust and rapport with clients. Tailoring interventions to meet unique cultural needs and addressing barriers enhances client-centered care. Ultimately, this approach fosters better outcomes and promotes inclusivity in therapy practice.(Dowell, 2017)

Conclusion:

It would be better if all medical professionals were trained on the value of cultural humility before developing a treatment plan. Additionally, cultural humility should be given more consideration to patients as soon as they are admitted, and it should be recorded in the patient's file so that other healthcare members can get a complete picture of the patient.

References:

Ervalon, M., & Murray-García, J. (1998). Cultural humility versus cultural competence: A critical distinction in defining physician training outcomes in multicultural education. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 9(2), 117-125.

Hook, J. N., Davis, D. E., Owen, J., Worthington Jr, E. L., & Utsey, S. O. (2013). Cultural humility: Measuring openness to culturally diverse clients. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(3), 353-366.

Dowell, L. E., & Bokony, P. A. (2017). Cultural humility: A concept analysis. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 28(1), 74-81.

Chen, D. T., Jones, P. G., & Tian, T. (2018). Cultural humility: A systematic review of definitions and measurements. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 29(2), 195-203.

[ayejayque]

An Introduction to what Behavioral Finance is!

Markets often perplex investors in more ways than one! Sometimes they may find a stock overvalued. Ideally, it should drop in value to a fair price. But, in authenticity, it may keep on snowballing in value, and the quantum of overappraisal may increase massively. Sometimes, we see a share that is undervalued. So, the share should increase in value to a fair price. We see many instances where it does not happen. These incidences leave investors totally perplexed. This is because all finance textbooks have always taught them about a perfect utopic world. The markets are far from perfect. Over time financial analysts have researched how the markets fare as opposed to how they should fare. This area is organized in the subject of behavioral finance. Textbook finance versus behavioral finance For argument, let us amalgamate all the financial theories ever found in finance and economics textbooks, and call them textbook finance. This is all theory based and it depicts everything in an ideal world. It perceives that all stockholders have faultless and timely information. It never doubts their mental acumen to decipher this info in a balanced and impartial manner. Once these two assumptive traits are in place, mathematical equations can explain the rest of the theories. This is not how it operates. No one has access to perfect and timely information at all times. Nor do they have matchable mental acumens to realistically process all the information and come up with knowledgeable decisions. Emotions play a huge part in decision-making in the stock market. Many psychological processes and biases influence decision-making. These processes & biases are explained in the realm of behavioral finance. In it truest sense, behavioral finance is a mix of finance and behavioral psychology. Repetitive nature of the financial markets The recursive nature of markets makes them impossible to predict. This pertains to the fact that future predictions about the market do affect the market’s future. If someone predicts rain tomorrow, his/her prediction won’t actually influence the outcome. The prediction won’t cause any rain to occur. But financial markets operate otherwise. If a world-renowned investor of the stature of Warren Buffet were to make a prediction about a potential market fall, it might spread fear and panic among the market participants. This might trigger a sell-off, and the price would stoop down. Thus, the prediction would serve as a self-fulfilling divination. Behavioral finance does not deal with atoms and molecules but instead, with people. These people can be irresponsible at times putting the whole system in jeopardy. The behavior of individuals vs. the behavior of the crowd The psychology of the crowd is prime in behavioral finance. Individuals and groups behave differently. Markets are formed of groups of individuals. the group influences the behavior of the individuals it is comprised of. The market behavior depicting indices actually communicates the conduct of the whole group to the individual. Evolution has taught us to conform to group norms. If an individual sees the market indices going red, he/she feels the impulse to sell and confirms it with the group. The individual thinks that the collective knowledge pool of the whole group is better than his own knowledge. Similarly, when the indices rise up, there are burdens to buy after confirming with the collective decision of the group. Investors are expected to ignore this peer pressure and instead base their decisions on intelligence and knowledge. The importance of studying behavioral finance? All value investing is done around the concepts of behavioral finance. Value investing accepts markets to not be efficient. Fear, greed, and apprehension influence people to make unreasonable decisions. By understanding behavioral finance, one can identify these triggers. Behavioral finance gives you the knowledge to avoid common psychological traps. But instead, it will help you take advantage of the over and under-valuations which occur in the market because of the emotional decisions of a large number of investors. The main aim of behavioral finance is to aid investors to base their buy or sell decisions on facts. This would enable one to pre-empt the investors who actually delay the market as a whole to distinguish this error. By being rational and pre-empting, major positives can be achieved. Financial history is full of investors who churned millions in the dot com bubble, the collapse of the housing market, or any other crisis. Read the full article

[mermaidsirennikita]

Maybe it's because I never joined the Rice fandom before the show but I'm still surprised (though probably shouldn't be) at the complaints people throw over Louis' portrayal of Lestat. If anything else the show makes Lestat look a hell of a lot better than the book or movie, all the while giving us reasons as to why Lestat would still be an awful partner to Louis because he simply doesn't care to understand him or try to, and even if he technically accepts Louis' hesitation to kill, he looks down upon it because he views his human connection as unnecessary as an older vampire. And Claudia's version of events still ties to Louis' version of Lestat even if not completely since Louis' version is an outdated memory rather than a real time recording. Lestat turned her for Louis. He may have loved her in his own way but his approach to teach her how to be emotionally disconnected is destructive and frankly not good at all considering how he also went through similar shit? When Louis goes "you forgot how youth was" he wasn't wrong.

I also never joined that fandom, but I do know that it's super Lestat-driven. Lestat was Anne's favorite, he had the most attention paid to him by her, the most content driven by her.... So I get why the fandom loves him. They know him best.

But! Lestat is, in or out of his own perspective, a fucked individual.... which is why he's fun to read about. And the show's version is its own thing, with a lot of complex elements re: gender, race, and sexuality that were not confronted in the book!canon.

And I agree that he's way more sympathetic than in the original book or the movie. The show has already called out that Louis's narration is not reliable, something only teased in the movie at the end, and only really called out explicitly in subsequent books. Sam Reid is giving a muuuuch more nuanced performance than Tom did.

(I'll be real... I think Tom's Lestat was one of his more interesting performances, but I suspect that it's not so much immortalized because it's *good*. It's immortalized because it's the anti-Tom performance in his repertoire, and it's very unintentionally camp. Do you think he's doing good acting there? Or do you think he's doing drag and doesn't know it. BE HONEST. Whereas Sam is intentionally doing camp and PERFORMING.)

Louis calling out Lestat forgetting youth is accurate--and I'd argue that, as with many abusive parents, the issue is also that Lestat sees himself in Claudia on some level and kinda hates those parts of her he sees. I mean, Lestat berating Claudia for falling for a mortal when Lestat did that... also? And sure, his story ended differently, but lol, he knows Louis hates him as much as he loves him. So you either kill them or make them immortal and have a fucked up relationship.

I think the show is dabbling in a lot of gray, which people don't wanna accept. Louis and Lestat can love each other tremendously and be in a horrible relationship. We can want that relationship to continue while also acknowledging that it's bad. It can be an abusive relationship that we acknowledge as abusive and we can root for them to figure it out. Louis can be abused by Lestat and do his own fucked up shit in the relationship. Louis can be exaggerating some aspects of Lestat's behavior to put distance between himself and his feelings for him, and he can be telling the dead truth about other aspects. Lestat can love Louis and Claudia and be horrible to them.

Idk man--I think the show has done a great job of presenting nuanced, tragic figures who are hurt and also actively harm others. You don't win an argument if you spend your entire viewing experience trying to explain how LOUIS IS ALSO A FLAWED PERSON like lol... everyone knows that. But the power dynamic, on almost every level, is in Lestat's favor. There's a reason why we saw big emphasis on Louis and Claudia being able to *understand each other* in a way that Lestat couldn't, supernaturally.

[befuddledcinnamonroll]

Wow, I had no idea people were going there with their thoughts on the series, in terms of thinking Ming was cheating. And it kind of makes me laugh, because they can accept the story premise that transmigration of the soul is a real thing, but not that someone else can recognize that soul on a subconscious level? Even though multiple people are recognizing Joe in that way?

That's part of what I'm finding interesting in this series, because they are playing with this idea of what we know on a logical, rational level, versus what we know in a subconscious, deep-in-our-heart level. Which is an actual thing in real life - how often do we do things or make choices we can't rationally explain, but we are driven by something deeper? How often have we all had intuitive feelings about something or someone, good or bad, that affects our behavior?

I like to think of it as a type of soul-knowing. It's something I see more often in Eastern media, this acknowledgement of what our soul understands at a deeper level, and I think it adds a really interesting depth to stories.

Another example would be History: Obsessed. If you've never seen it, a man dies after his boyfriend tells him he's getting married to a woman. Our protagonist gets reborn ten years into his own past, with his full memories, and is determined to avoid ever meeting his boyfriend in the first place.

Which he manages to do at first, but then their paths cross again. And his boyfriend ends up acting completely unlike how he did in the original timeline, he literally gets obsessed (hence the title). He is willing to do anything and everything to get the protagonist.

Because he knows, at a soul level, that this man is his, and he cannot process why he's being resisted. There's an inner part of him that remembers what it was like to be in love, what it was like to lose that love in the worst possible way, and is tormented by it.

These stories open up possibilities, they are reflecting on what it means to be more than just a physical form, to be driven by something, whether it be love or need or desperation, at a level that cannot be measured.

Anyway this is a very long-winded way to say I agree with @poomphuripan.

what do you think of the comments on mdl of my stand in calling ming a cheater?

hi nonnie []~(￣▽￣)~* that's actually something i've been thinking to write about because i saw those remarks as well but it is such a controversial thing to discuss. if you don't mind, this discussion post will be filled with mild spoilers of the novel.

!!!!!! novel spoilers warning !!!!!!

alright so first of all, @ineffable-opinions wrote an excellent post about the danmei tropes in my stand-in (which i highly recommend everyone to read). this is a great post as they discussed the white moonlight trope presented in my stand-in.

i don't consider ming, a cheater because as i see it, tong was simply ming's white moonlight. ming never established a physical nor emotional connection with tong, throughout his time knowing joe. tong was always an idealised fantasy, he's mistaken it for it to be love. in other words, i see it as ming looking up tong like a delulu fanboy with an idol crush than him actually having any substantive feelings for tong ever. i mean if you had a partner that looked like a kpop idol, and sex with your partner makes you feel like you're achieving your sexual fantasy, are you cheating on your partner? maybe? maybe not? probably controversial and debatable question but for me, i don't consider it 'cheating'. i do think ming took for granted joe's genuine feelings and did not fully appreciate joe's affection (ming you ungrateful bish, repent).

during their time together playing pseudo 'not boyfriends', ming showed that he could be an okay partner. whether it's caring about joe's day at work, how hard joe's job as a stuntman, accepting joe's invitation to accompany him to his wrapped filming party.

i mean it's really bare minimum but that's already quite a lot coming from the dude who's afraid as hell once joe started mentioning the 'faen' word, triggering his self-defense mechanism, depreciating himself trying to claim that joe wouldn't be able to stand him.

i think one of the most obvious example of how afraid ming was to lose this relationship, was him using the word 'faen' in the last breakup fight with joe. this line was very ironic of him to say, because i'm sure even ming knows this line applies more to himself (how in this life, ming won't be able to find a better boyfriend than joe).

i absolutely love ming's emotion progression in ep 4 because it encapsulates perfectly his 21 year old spoiled brat attitude. he was confused when broken up over the phone, then mad and started throwing tantrum trying to get joe to coax him (like joe always does), until he realized it wouldn't work this time and he started frantically begging for joe to stay so they could go back to playing house and being happy.

personally, i don't consider it cheating because by around ep3/4, you can already started seeing ming settling down with the option that makes him "happy". some may even argued that by this point, he has 'recognized' his feelings (not me though, i think he just wanted his simple happiness/domestic bliss back, i still think it's during the period he lost joe 1.0 that he learned what love truly is).

now the most important question of all: is ming cheating on joe 1.0 with joe 2.0 or vice versa?

to quote chapter 63 of Professional Body Double (My Stand-In novel), i think the author puts it best how ming views joe 2.0.

He has fallen to the point of looking for the shadow of that person in a substitute. This is his punishment. When he thought that he was using [Joe] as [Tong]’s substitute, he was not aware of the actual person who had entered his heart. He had failed miserably with this method but still could not help himself from wanting to try. There are no other reasons. Just that he was in too much pain. He can’t endure anymore. He was adamant that [Joe] is not dead but no one could confirm it. That little doubtful voice in his heart is getting louder and louder, but is roughly suppressed by him time and time again. To continually be persistent with this thought, he needed a lot of willpower. He knew better than anyone else. Even if this [Joe] could bring him a little comfort, he wanted to be close to him, just like a long frozen person wanting to be close to a matchstick. This can’t save him… but he couldn’t stop himself from taking that little warmth.

i LOVE this metaphor and this little inner thought of ming we got because we can see how he's very much aware that he's falling right back into the bad habit that got him into trouble in the first place but... he's a fucking fool... who resorts to spiritual shamans for hope...

but also the familiarity he got from joe 2.0 is way too strong to joe 1.0. so for me, i'm seeing it as ming is using joe 2.0 as a means for comfort and relief as well as keeping him close to observe the similarities between him and joe 1.0, rather than viewing joe 2.0 as a replacement for joe 1.0 (because keep in mind, at this point he doesn't know they're the same person yet).

so !!!!!!!!! BIG WARNING of spoilers from the novel !!!!!!!!! if joe had considered joe 2.0 to be a direct replacement of joe 1.0, i don't think he would have had this conversation with joe 2.0 about joe 1.0.

Ming spoke right at this time. His voice sounded very faint and very soft, “Joe, are you hiding something from me?” Joe didn’t know what Ming meant by this. He asked cautiously, “I don’t understand what Khun Ming means.” Ming, “The feelings you give me is too familiar. It’s as if I’ve known you and have lived with you before. Why is this?” Joe forced himself to responded, “Maybe this is fate.” If it wasn’t because they are fated, they would not be in the predicament of today…with a relationship that is so unclear in both past and current lifetimes. “Joe. Tell me….If a person had been missing for more than two years, do you think he may still be alive?” Joe’s tensed up and smiled, “Most likely impossible. If still alive, he would have come back already.” “Why can’t he be alive? It could be that he didn’t come back because he doesn’t want to come back.” Joe is silent for a moment, “Khun Ming, are you talking about the other Joe?” Joe clearly felt Ming’s body stiffened. Then Ming asked, “How much do you know about him?” “I don’t know anything at all. I just heard from what others have said.” Ming quietly asked, “Then do you know what relationship I have with him?” Joe’s heart tightened, What relationship? You say, what relationship? He clenched his teeth in the dark, “I don’t know.” Ming’s voice is like the rising of the quiet abyss, cold and empty, “I feel that he’s not dead. He just doesn’t want to come back.” Joe heard his own voice dissociated from his thoughts and automatically asked, “Why won’t he want to come back?” Ming didn’t respond to his question, instead he tightened his arms around Joe.

i like that in the 2.0 timeline, we got ming learning but also not learning his dumbass mistakes at all. ming learned that he should be upfront about his feelings and be straightforward with his sexual partner, but at the same time he's still impatient, hot tempered and say hurtful things easily.

so i think through and through the second half of the series, you'll see his fidelity to joe (the soul) only. while perhaps it was the shadow of a back that mesmerized ming in the first place, but it's the kindhearted soul of joe that ming truly fell in love with, the person that showed him what love means, the only period in his life where he felt happiness.

© gif courtesy of the talented @alienwlw

you can also check out @befuddledcinnamonroll and @ineffable-opinions discussion on matters of transmigration, attachment of the soul with the body in their excellent posts, here and here. to sum it up, i think up kinda succintly puts it here in this interview.

of course, this is not to excuse dating/fucking anyone who resembles your missing ex but then treating them like they're your object ;_; like i'm just saying i don't think what ming is doing with joe 2.0 can be categorized as cheating (for me). it's something scummy, foolish, dumb, really stupid but... not cheating ┗( T﹏T )┛.

also if you notice, ming doesn't sleep around. surely he could have slept with dozen of nice looking man with similar physique to joe 1.0 to "keep the warmth" if he was that type of dude... but he doesn't... so for me, i see this proposal he has for joe 2.0 is not simply because of a physical attraction/similarity to joe, but it's the vibe/the aura/the ✨energy✨ that joe 2.0 radiates that is too similar to joe 1.0, drawing ming to him again.

tldr: ming is a lot of things but for me, i would never characterize him as a cheater. ming is a scummy, spoiled, arrogant, entitled, hot tempered hi-so brat but also a foolish little crying bag with zero wife-chasing skills. his only tactic is begging and getting his waterworks flowing.

ps: i'm not sure if this ask actually answers your question at all but hopefully some of my thoughts made sense ಥ_ಥ

[cilogram]

Memory of Jacques Tati, by Ron Mael

Jacques Tati entered the lobby of the Paris Hilton looking very much like Monsieur Hulot---same raincoat, same determined gait. “Hello, I’m Jacques. You can pronounce it like ‘Jack’.”

When a band is given the opportunity to appear in a film, it usually is a cameo in a prom night scene with adoring teenage actors feigning hysteria at the lip-sync performance of their new song. Here we were, in 1975, being given the chance to make preparations to appear not in an American teen comedy, but in a French film, a Jacques Tati film, and not as a performing band in one scene, but as actors in the entire film with Mr. Tati.

A Swiss record company executive had thought there were similarities in sensibility between Tati’s view of the world and ours. We were under no illusions as to the relative genius of Tati versus Sparks, but we kept our mouths shut and a meeting was set up in the Paris Hilton.

Perhaps Tati, who we doubted had ever heard of Sparks, had accepted the meeting and the inclusion of us in his next film as an attempt to widen his audience. We, of course, never asked him whether it mattered that we weren’t actors. The process began.

Over the next several months, we had numerous discussions with Tati in his Paris office about the planned film “Confusion.” It was to be centered in a television studio with Russell playing a television director and me playing some sort of technician.

We learned that the oft-debated “auteur” theory in film did at least exist in Tati’s world. Attending the meetings were only Tati, his sketchbook and notepad, his personal assistant, and the two of us. Our job during the “collaboration” was mostly to marvel at the brilliance of his ideas, a job made easy by the brilliance of his ideas. Each meeting would typically begin in the French manner of starting a statement with “no”, as in “No. we must be certain we are completely prepared before beginning anything,” in effect contradicting a statement that had never been made.

As the meetings progressed, it seemed as if there was a basic structure in his notebook on which to hang “gags.” I use the term “gags” with some hesitation as these were not modern American comedy-type gags or even silent comedy gags, but more visual playthings or visual puns. A highly decorated military general, wearing numerous colorful battle ribbons on his chest, finds the colors of these ribbons begin to run down his uniform into a pool on the floor. Another character would be shown to leave the frame of the film, much as Tex Avery characters sometimes do, perhaps in order to make you aware that you are in fact watching a film. Jacques, tell us where to stand and we’ll do anything.

Outside of his office, Tati seemed always to be studying peoples’ movements and behavior. He would always take public transport, never a taxi and most certainly never a limousine, in order to be able to watch people and not feel sheltered from the surroundings. Even a lunch at a restaurant would be more than just steack-frites, with Tati asking a waitress what part of the animal a certain cut of meat came from. When she demonstrated and left the table, he would mimic her action, not in a mean-spirited or patronizing way, but in what seemed like the transformation of her simple act into a ballet move.

At one point in the series of discussions in Paris, Tati and Sparks were asked to be guests on a Swedish television show. Tati’s only request of the show was that they supply a white horse for his use during the TV performance as a “prop.” No problem! (Our 25 year long search for a video copy of this performance ended when our recent pilgrimage to the same Swedish television station revealed that copies of the show no longer existed. Tragic). Soon, our meetings with Jacques Tati occurred less and less frequently. Perhaps there were financial problems. Perhaps there were health problems. We never knew. Finally, sometime late in 1975, our meetings stopped.

People in bands are always selfish about one thing or another. My selfishness was wanting to forever be linked in some small way to the brilliance of Jacques Tati. How ironic that after 30 years as a musician, my sole regret is not being able to have appeared in a French film, a Tati film. I will always remember that first Jacques Tati entrance into the lobby of the Paris Hilton and how, in a sense, being in his presence for even a short period of time made me an actor in Monsieur Hulot’s world.

------- Ron Mael

This essay was written by Ron and appears on pages 30-32 of the Guide Book. Paragraph breaks added by me for readability; punctuation/spelling errors are the book’s own. For copyright reasons, I haven’t included the Japanese translation by Tsuzuki Hajime, my apologies.

[picturejasper20]

Kevin Levin (Ben 10 reboot) character analysis.

Kevin Levin is a character that was first introduced in the episode ¨This One Goes to 11¨. He later becomes a very recurrent character in season 3 and season 4 often acting as an antagonist or anti-hero depending on circumstances.

Personality and character traits.

At first look Kevin appears to be the classic ¨lone wolf¨ arch type. In many of his episodes he is seen hanging out alone without any friends or family members. He also shares a few common traits with the bully arch type, such as annoying Ben constantly and starting fights with him.

He likes messing with Ben and takes the role of the antagonist in multiple occasions. His crimes, while not very serious, involve vandalism, robbery and scarring other people using the Antitrix´s powers. Unlike Ben, Kevin uses his aliens transformations to get into trouble and play pranks. (This One Goes To 11, King of the Castle).

Whether this reckless behavior had its origins on being a teenager or seeking for attention is left up to interpretation. However, it is possible he does this to compensate his lack of friends and parental figures.

Despite his criminal tendencies, Kevin rarely means doing any harm. When people get in danger because of his actions, he is willing to team up with Ben to stop citizens from getting hurt. (Introducing Kevin 11, Franken-fight).

Kevin can be arrogant like when he thinks he knows how to use the Antitrix better than Ben does. This leads to him to underestimate his opponents which puts him in difficult situations. (This one goes to 11, King of the Castle)

He sometimes has trouble accepting other people´s help when he needs it. This probably has to do with him trying to keep up his ¨tough guy¨ attitude and not looking soft in front of others.

He has a few hobbies he doesn´t like sharing with others since he thinks they are too embarrassing like when he didn’t want to Gwen to read his poems or let Ben know he likes watching a magica girl show, a genre that is considered for girls.

Family and background.

In ¨This one goes to Eleven¨ Ben explains to Gwen he knows Kevin from school. He would bully Ben and on his nerves. Ben also mentions how he had trouble eating his lunch because of Kevin’s bullying.

While the series doesn’t give away too much information about Kevin´s family there are many things that imply that his family is very dysfunctional:

First of all, Kevin is seen usually alone without his parents. He rarely mentions them. He never gets a call from them and they don´t seem to to care about Kevin´s whereabouts.

In the episode ¨Introducing Kevin 11¨ Ben insults Kevin by saying how ¨he has no one to run back to¨. This makes Kevin almost start crying and get really mad at Ben. This implies Kevin´s parents are neglectful to their son.

In ¨Adrenaland Jr.¨ Kevin explains how no one has ever took him to Adrenaland before. During a flashback it is shown that when Kevin arrives at his home his parents doesn´t welcome him and chooses to ignore him. It is heavily implied his parent is alcoholic and passes out quite often.

All these details prove that Kevin lives in a toxic family environment. His family is very neglectful of him and rarely show any love to him.

When a child is ignored they may try to find ways to cope. In Kevin´s case he prefers to hide behind a ¨tough guy¨ facade to cover up his insecurities.

It’s also hinted he likes annoying Ben because he is jealous of Ben´s caring family, a thing he clearly lacks. For instance, he wanted to mess with Ben in a family reunion in ¨Heads of The Family¨.

Eventually the protagonists start picking up Kevin´s issues and invite him to hang out with them.

In ¨Adrenaland Jr¨ Ben and Gwen ask take Kevin to the roller-coaster to have fun and give him a photo of the three of them as a gift.

In ¨Four by Four¨ Ben apologizes to Kevin for thinking he was up to something and they both work together to bet Gwen in Laser tag.

Kevin has a bad habit of teaming up with villains who betray him or trey manipulating him into following their orders. This strange behavior could be explained by the fact he is trying to find an adult to look up to even when said adult is a bad influence for him.Kevin changes allies regularly. He usually teams up the main heroes after realizing he is being manipulated by a villain.

Character arc.

For around first half of season 3 Kevin remains a antagonist and one of the biggest Ben´s rivals. He usually likes fighting Ben and causes a lot of trouble for the Tennyson’s. He could be classified as a ¨bully antagonist¨ than a real threat because he never really means to hurt people.

Most of the time he teams up with other villains of the show such as Hex,Eternal Knight,Xingo and LaGrange.He usually gets betrayed by them and joins forces with Ben to get revenge. There are a few examples in which he gets hypnotized or forced to do things against his will and latter gets save by the main trio.

Over time Kevin partially becomes friend with both Ben and Gwen and starts hanging out with them. Due to Kevin opening to them, they begin to understand Kevin is not exactly a really bad guy. As Max describes him in the film ¨You are just confused¨.

His rivalry with Ben stays the same in Season 4, the main difference is that in that season both are more likely to help each other when the other is in danger. Kevin is shown to have Ben´s cell phone number as well, meaning they chat and have a neutral friendship.

In the film ¨Ben 10 Versus the Universe: The Movie¨ Gwen and Max notice how Kevin is having the same problem that Ben had back in the season 1 finale and decide to help him. Kevin appears to bond with the Tennyson, surprised by how caring they are in comparison to his family. In one moment Max tells Kevin that he is proud of him which makes Kevin smile happily. When Vilgax arrives, he tries stopping him from taking the Antitrix but fails in the process. He later teams up with Ben and Glitch to fight Anti-Vilgax.

Because of his development in the film, it’s likely Kevin may one day join the Tennysons in their adventures and become a official member of the team.

In conclusion: Kevin is a interesting character who is well developed in contrast with other villains. He is someone who starts as a rival to later grown into a hero and becoming friends with the protagonists. While he may act antagonistic at times, deep down he is good person who just was raised by bad parents.