#we can perhaps qualify them if there is a good argument

[batsplat]

How well is Marc actually doing on the GP23 cause I know he’s ahead by a lot to the other GP23s and no disrespect to them but I feel like they aren’t a good comparison because Marc is just better and has a lot more experience so how do you judge how well his season actually is would it be by adaptability or by looking at how good Martin and Pecco were on the bikes last year or by an entirely different criteria cause he does do well to keep up with the GP24s it’s really impressive. And Aragon and Misano did showcase how amazing he is in tricky conditions kind of like Sachsenring 2021.

y'know, in motorsports you can never know these things with any certainty. there's just too many confounding variables. like we know the gp23 is worse than the gp24, we can be reasonably confident it's a bigger gap between specs than in years past... but beyond that? it's not as much worse as bez is making it look, for instance. sometimes it really just comes down to how a rider adapts to a specific bike, whether they're being hindered by any pesky changes to the tyres, that sort of thing... but it is a problem, because bez was kinda supposed to be our benchmark going into this year. right now, marc doesn't have a great benchmark. again, we know he's adapted well, we know he's doing a 'really good' job, but obviously that's all pretty vague. you also can't compare what he's doing right now to what jorge/pecco were doing last year on the gp23... I've seen some people compare lap times between seasons, which, no!! don't do that! the reason why EVERYONE'S lap times have gone down by so much is because michelin have introduced a new rear tyre. it is a completely meaningless comparison. keep it away from me

so, yeah, we don't really know. I'm interested in misano next time out and the flyaways to get a sense of what marc's performance is right now in a 'normal' weekend. like, those two wins were undoubtedly impressive, but also they don't tell me anything I didn't already know. he's very good at anti-clockwise circuits! specifically sachsenring, cota and to a slightly lesser degree aragon... the margin he had over the field was exaggerated by track conditions all weekend, which were of the slippery low grip kind he's always been incredibly strong at, but this was always marquez territory. he also took full advantage of the brief rain at misano to do his thing - and he kept up a very impressive pace when it was drying out, though we were perhaps denied a more extended battle by pecco's physical condition and championship considerations. as marc said, he didn't have anything to lose in that race. but y'know, again this is all in line with expectations. during the summer break I did kinda think that marc's best chances of winning this year were a) aragon and possibly phillip island, or b) a gross ever-so-slightly wet race. his pace in austria was also strong, albeit half a step behind the two gp24 frontrunners - which is what you'd probably expect with the machinery deficit. it's obviously important that he's gotten back into a winning habit again, maybe ironed out a few of the gremlins in the gresini set-up. everything he needs to finish the season strong and come out firing next year

the one slight question mark I still have is the whole qualifying situation. he currently leads his teammate h2h 8-5 which... well, given the kind of disgusting beatdowns of gifted qualifier dani pedrosa he used to deliver,, it does raise an eyebrow. I'm perfectly open to the argument that this is all just about adaptation, about being unfamiliar with the circuits on a ducati, circumstantial factors and a string of bad luck... but, well. just something to keep an eye on. he did need a slice of good fortune in misano - otherwise you just wouldn't be in victory contention at that track from ninth. that's a problem! prime!marc would go entire seasons without qualifying lower than sixth; I know he has a reputation for being a crasher, but back in the day he was able to walk that fine line extremely well to give himself the lap he needed in qualifying without binning it. maybe it's a question of the margin for error still not being quite there at the moment (outside of aragon, obviously), maybe it's something about the risk/reward calculation... who knows. maybe he'll be closer to prime!marc again in qualifying in 2025. but obviously it's worth mentioning in this discussion; by every other metric, marc is completely brutalising the other gp23's

let's quickly compare average grid positions of marc versus his teammate throughout his premier class career

(btw, updating this made me see that marc's average grid position is still the third best on the grid, which.... I mean it's a gulf to second... but given how much I've been bullying him for his qualifying, this makes me deeply unimpressed by what certain other riders have been doing this season)

anyway, look, no cause for alarm, not got a terminal case of being washed quite yet. qualifying can sometimes be the thing that declines first... valentino was never close to the qualifier marc is (defo not a bad qualifier but very much a sunday man)... but that part of his game definitely declined sharper and earlier than everything else and he had some horrendous qualifying seasons when he was still otherwise competitive. it'll be interesting to track next year for sure, defo curious to see how the h2h shakes out with pecco

[soulsborne-pilled]

MK-S: (Unmarked talk about the final boss of the Elden Ring DLC ahead, but you already know about him. This warning is more for anyone else reading. Though feel free to PM me if you’d like me to resubmit this ask with any redactions, if you want to respond but don’t want the spoilers mentions, as I just saw you were censoring spoiler information.)

I was randomly thinking one day and decided to give myself a challenge to defend Miquella’s actions. (I don’t agree with them, but that’s what makes it a challenge; trying to think of things in a different way, and see if I can stumble across new ideas/theories in the process.) That’s when I realized something, and I’ll start a new paragraph for dramatic effect and intro. (Please keep in mind this isn’t my “headcanon”, but rather a possible “interpretation” of events.)

I had wondered for the longest time how Miquella’s “eternal youth” could be considered a curse. On its surface, it seems more like a minor inconvenience, especially compared to Rot. But as I was thinking about Miquella’s actions and this notion, a thought struck me: What it’s not just his body that was eternally young, but his mind/maturity? Physically unable to emotionally mature, and being stuck with a child’s outlook of the world. Now THAT could definitely qualify as more of a curse. And makes events take on a tragic new light.

Miquella seems to want to help people, like a kindly child, but he’s not able to truly grasp concepts like the importance of choice and free will. So in his mind, if he wants people to stop fighting and get along, the simplest thing to do is brainwash them and then problem solved, they stopped fighting each other. But he fails to truly grasp that he took something important from them.

Come think of it, maybe that’s what his promise with Rahdan was; if a truly young Miquella, as in only 12 years old and named an Empyrean, a god to be, sought comfort from his older half brother Rahdan, Rahdan may have made an offhand promise or agreement to help calm the distressed child. But since, under this interpretation, Miquella remains immature, then like other children he just operates under the mindset of “a promise is a promise”. So when Rahdan doesn’t follow through on a promise he didn’t really mean, or even thought was taken seriously, Miquella throws a tantrum and sends Malenia after him.

No wonder Malenia describes him as “the most fearsome Empyrean of all”; He has all these powers, he’s a genius as evidenced by the spells he’s created along with the Needle, and he’s too emotionally immature to be responsible with his gifts.

Hope this was entertaining to read. Again, I’m not saying nor suggesting “this is official, how it’s meant to be”, but just thinking about a different interpretation of the circumstances, and how those interpretations result in new stories and motivations. Good day to you!

See when it comes to Miquella I have many thoughts, especially with the vow he and Radahn made.

While I certainy see and understand the argument that perhaps his eternal youth also refers to his emotional maturity and mental state, I'm not a fan. But that's more a personal thing.

I feel like something that helps a lot with understanding him is the fact that he and Ranni are very clear parallels/foils in terms of their characters.

Unless of course someone doesn't understand Ranni either, in which case we get the takes such as "They're both evil but Ranni gets excused because she's hot" lmfao

They're both Empyreans, possible canidates to succeed Marika and become a god and when you think about it they take quite similiar paths in the end.

Ranni -> Orchestrates the Night of Black Knives in which she uses her step-half brother Godwyn to rid herself of her empyrean flesh -> Radahn and the Radahn festival play a key role -> The Tarnished essentially becomes her Promised Consort -> Age of Stars

Miquella -> Bewitched his half brother Mohg to use him for his plan -> rids himself of his empyrean flesh -> Radahn and the Radahn festival play a key role -> Promised Consort Radahn / Radahn Consort of Miquella -> Age of Compassion (Had he suceeded)

And there's of course the two most important points:

A god who forces his will onto the people, a god who grants the people true free will and their perception of love.

Love is something natural to Miquella. Love and affection are given to him freely by so many, for him love may very well have been taken granted, and why shouldn't he? Like I said everyone loved him, gave it to him freely as if it's the easiest thing in the world. And why shouldn't someone who's kind at heart wish to share this with the world? To unite all beings in a kind, gentler world.

And then he make his gravest mistake: to abandon his kindess and love. To rid himself not just of his flesh, but of the very thing he had promised to use to make the world better.

But he still wants to lead the world into an age of compassion, of love! And if someone rejects his love? Well, he'll just make them accept, makes them love him. It's better for their own good if he is the one who makes this choice for them.

Yet the truth is: What meaning holds "love" and a supposed "Age of Compassion" forced upon you by a god that cannot even love anymore?

But to Ranni? Oh to Ranni love is a precious thing. She's a carian, and boy, carians simply love at their very core. From Rennala, to Rellana, Rykard, Radahn, Ranni herself and even Blaidd: They all love. She loved and trusted her brothers, she loves Blaidd and Iji, sounds guilty when she speaks about how much they're both willing to give her, she chooses the Tarnished as her consort and let's them hold her heart in their palms. She does not give her love out lightly, because it is a precious thing, but she treasures it.

And on top of that she stands for the right to choose, to dictate your own fate without any god or order forcing their will onto you, to not be controlled by these things. That's the order she envisons, led by the moon into the dark night and far away from the world. Even if it means facing uncertainty amd being afraid, from that day on the people will have the chance to truly choose their fates without gods.

And this shows with their chosen consorts too.

Although they made a vow, it is entirely possible Radahn did not actually want to be part of this after the Shattering (unless I'm missing something), which possibly may have led to the Battle of Aeonia and could explain Malenia's line "Miquella awaits thee, O Promised Consort" right before she blooms. Even more so because I vaguely recall hearing something about Jerren and Radahn having made a promise to have Radahn die an honourable death at the Festival.

If that is the case, and the Consort Radahn we face may as well be charmed like Mohg was (it is his body too so like...) it yet again parallels with Ranni.

Because Ranni chooses the Tarnished, we are her only choice, and yet she does not force them. In fact, Ranni does everything in her power to ensure the Tarnished is well aware of everything even before she gives them the key, as shown through the conversations during the hunt for the Shadow in Nokstella. Hell, the ring itself holds a warning!!

Yet even after all of that, she still makes sure to let us know what the Age of Stars entails.

She has made her choice, and she chose us and she has been open and honest so that we can make a choice too.

I have said this before but all things considered, especislly the nature of the ring, the game could've easily locked us in the Age of Stars ending but it doesn't. And it is extremely reflective of Ranni as a character. She will not ever force us to do anything even if it means losing the chance to realize her order, even if it means experiencing heartbreak, well aware of what it can do.

Fate and love are things not to be forced no matter what, they are choices, because Ranni may have rid herself of her flesh, may be ready to betray everything, but she still holds onto her heart, her ideals, her love and the ability to love.

To Miquella love is a means to an end, a weapon if need be, and the right to choose does not matter anymore, because he not just rid himself of his flesh but of his love and ability to love. In the name of achieving godhood he has lost himself, he is but a husk with the empty ambition to fulfill a child's dream.

The worst part? Saint Trina, the part that was his love begs you to kill him, because godhood would be a prison for him.

Miquella is not evil, nor is he good.

Miquella is a tragedy.

[bleue-flora]

The second death wasnt rlly dying a hero either since c!dream and c!tommy were in an equal duel done by c!tommys own terms. It was during war. Giving the discs away for independence was heroism even though he provoked c!dream again in railway war, he explains throughout it that he was doing it to fight for lmanberg. (I dont get it either but that was his pov sorry i dont have the timestamp on hand) I don't consider the death in prison as him dying a hero at all as it wasnt protecting anyone. But I consider the death in finale as dying a hero especially the idea of going into danger with the goal of protecting the server since from his view c!staged duo were evil and he was told about their supposed plan to kill everyone even tho the plan was most likely a lie. However c!Tommy also isn't a hero at the same time because he's the one that caused the nuke to happen along with c!tubbo and accidentally doomed the whole server. But the nuke didn't kill anyone anyway, dreamxd transported everyone.

[context here & here]

Well I wasn’t really talking about whether Tommy’s other deaths were heroic or not, just whether his death in the finale fulfilled that “dying a hero” from the previous stream. Not sure if cc!Tommy meant that or not, but if we were to see it as such it’s an interesting story element.

The question I was having though, was whether we can say it does qualify as “dying a hero”. Or even further if it does because he is trying to stop staged duo and sacrificing his life for the rest of the server by keeping them there. Does that make it a different death than “self-sacrifice” because it seems very much almost the same to me? There is also the point to be made that does his premature death count as the selfless “dying a hero” since its before the nuke hits and he’s supposed to be stalling. Or because the whole point he’s there to begin with is heroic therefore he is “dying a hero”?…

As an aside, just some lore notes because I can’t help myself…

I’ve said this before but I think that since Tommy fully intended to take back his discs immediately after the L’manberg war [clip], it kinda under cuts his heroism. He doesn’t really give up his discs, because he’s not handing them over for Dream to keep permanently - something he actually does in the finale which actually rounds out his character arc nicely, by having him actually doing the heroic thing…

I am pretty sure the lore isn’t that everyone is teleported away by XD, but that everyone does die in the finale whether because of the Egg, nuke, or fight in the End (or Mumza takes/saves them) and then XD resets the world. Or perhaps because of all the death with the Egg and nuke, XD gains enough power to reset the world to stop the people from killing him in the End. Either way I’m pretty sure the nuke does happen and they do die but then are immediately reset or something.

Technically Jack sent the other nuke and it was him and Tubbo that fired the nukes so, really they are to blame lol. But anyways, I think whether or not clingy duo’s nuke plan was doomed from the start or whether or not staged duo were planning on killing everyone in the first place, doesn’t really matter or take away from the fact that Tommy was technically being heroic by facing Punz and Dream (the man who haunts his nightmares) to keep them there, knowing he’d die along with them, in order to protect everyone from being murdered….

And yet, still does that mean his pre-nuke death counts as heroism, fulfilling that earlier fate (making it some damn good story telling) - showing us what that Limbo is, or if because it’s too early and the circumstances are more specific around their conversation than the nukes, it doesn’t count?… a good argument for both sides I think. I wonder though whether cc!Tommy planned on that death being like the mirror of the saw trap or not…

[mayhemchicken-varneyposting]

Varney the Vampire, Chapter 16: Be Still My Throbbing Heart

[Previous chapter] [Next chapter]

Charles Holland waits anxiously in the garden for his meeting with Flora, ruminating on the vampire situation. He's made up his mind not to leave her, even if staying means he must suffer The Horrors.

Flora arrives, but at first she is too depressed to speak. After crying into Charles' shoulder for several minutes, she finally composes herself and begins to tell him, once again, that for his own happiness he must leave her. Charles, in some of the cheesiest and most saccharine dialogue ever put to page, swears his undying love and fealty to her in defiance of all misfortune that may befall them. His melodramatics are punctuated by a literal roll of thunder from the heavens, which causes Flora to freak the fuck out, thinking this is an ill omen from God. Immediately after, however, the clouds part and a single perfect ray of sunlight shines on the faces of the young couple, which Charles in turn takes as a good omen.

These celestial theatrics having concluded, Charles and Flora reavow their love for each other, and spend several minutes in silence gazing tenderly into each others' eyes. The romantic moment is interrupted, however, by the sudden appearance of THE VAMPYRE!

Controversial opinion but this chapter is bad.

Rymer can write a decent comedy sequence. He can do a horror sequence. He can even do a pretty great whump sequence. But he CANNOT write romance. My God, man, what the fuck IS this? What is any of this?

The chapter starts, as they often do, with a bunch of mostly-unnecessary rumination from one character's point of view, in this case Charles. The story's omniscient narrator is VERY opinionated, leading to sequences like this one where the story itself gets weirdly judgmental of a character's actions.

"Shall I," he said, "sink so low in my own estimation, as well as in hers, and in that of all honourable-minded persons, as to desert her now in the hour of affliction? Dare I be so base as actually or virtually to say to her, 'Flora, when your beauty was undimmed by sorrow—when all around you seemed life and joy, I loved you selfishly for the increased happiness which you might bestow upon me; but now the hand of misfortune presses heavily upon you—you are not what you were, and I desert you? Never—never—never!"

Charles Holland, it will be seen by some of our more philosophic neighbours, felt more acutely than he reasoned; but let his errors of argumentation be what they may, can we do other than admire the nobility of soul which dictated such a self denying generous course as that he was pursuing?

"Errors of argumentation"? Fuck off, man.

This sort of editorializing turns up a lot in Rymer's work - it's present in The String of Pearls as well - the idea that love, while noble in intent, is nevertheless an error of human reasoning and an enemy of logic. RIP James Malcolm Rymer you would have been an absolutely insufferable Reddit user.

The author spends several flowery (ha) paragraphs describing the garden. Of note is the "summer-house" (I assume some sort of gazebo) at its center, which will become a fairly important location in later chapters.

Flora now arrives, and my suffering begins. Now, I am aromantic, so perhaps I am not qualified to speak on this subject, but I am pretty sure people who are in love do not talk like this to each other.

"Charles, Charles, why will you add another pang to those you know must already rend my heart?"

"No, Flora, I would tear my own heart from my bosom ere I would add one pang to yours. Well I know that gentle maiden modesty would seal your lips to the soft confession that you loved me. I could not hope the joy of hearing you utter these words. The tender devoted lover is content to see the truthful passion in the speaking eyes of beauty. Content is he to translate it from a thousand acts, which, to eyes that look not so acutely as a lover's, bear no signification; but when you tell me to seek happiness with another, well may the anxious question burst from my throbbing heart of, 'Did you ever love me, Flora?'"

It goes on and on like this. It is endless. As if that were not enough, the GODDAMN WEATHER gets in on the drama.

"Then let sorrow and misfortune shake their grisly locks in vain," he cried. "Heart to heart—hand to hand with me, defy them."

He lifted up his arms towards Heaven as he spoke, and at the moment came such a rattling peal of thunder, that the very earth seemed to shake upon its axis.

Seriously what the fuck is this.

"Think again, dear Flora. Misfortunes for a time will hover over the best and most fortunate of us; but, like the clouds that now obscure the sweet sunshine, will pass away, and leave no trace behind them. The sunshine of joy will shine on you again."

There was a small break in the clouds, like a window looking into Heaven. From it streamed one beam of sunlight, so bright, so dazzling, and so beautiful, that it was a sight of wonder to look upon. It fell upon the face of Flora; it warmed her cheek; it lent lustre to her pale lips and tearful eyes; it illumined that little summer-house as if it had been the shrine of some saint.

"Behold!" cried Charles, "where is your omen now?"

"God of Heaven!'" cried Flora; and she stretched out her arms.

"The clouds that hover over your spirit now," said Charles, "shall pass away. Accept this beam of sunlight as a promise from God."

If this is what Rymer thinks romance is then no wonder he's so cynical about it.

Mercifully, Varney is here with perfect timing to interrupt this Boston Molasses Flood of syrupy sweetness.

A shriek burst from Flora's lips—a shriek so wild and shrill that it awakened echoes far and near. Charles staggered back a step, as if shot, and then in such agonised accents as he was long indeed in banishing the remembrance of, she cried,—

"The vampyre! the vampyre!"

Next: Varney ragebaits everyone

[mariacallous]

The prospects of a united front preventing Donald Trump returning to power in the US looked a little bleaker this week.

Let’s be frank they weren’t great to begin with. To an outsider Joe Biden just seems to be too old to be a viable candidate. He doesn’t pas​s the first impressions test. Look at him and you do not see someone capable of serving another four years.

True, he won Michigan's Democratic presidential primary a few days ago– but he was hit by a significant protest vote from left-wing and Arab-American voters angry about his qualified support for Israel's war in Gaza.

And at this point that second cause for worry, and, frankly, panic kicks in.

The left urged registered Democrats to vote for the "none of the above" category to express their opposition to Biden's Israel policy – and about 100,000 did. Their votes represent a wider chunk of the electorate who could well stay at home or vote for minor Green or left-wing candidates and deny the Democrats key states.

In a deeply divided country with a warped electoral system that favours the Republicans, it does not take many voters abandoning the Democrats for Trump to retake power.

I wrote at the weekend about how the Trump example shows how hard it is to unite against a dictatorial threat.  People, or to be fair, many people, cannot put aside their commitments and ally with men and women they profoundly disagree with for the greater good of defending democracy.

On the one hand, they cry that Trump is a fascist and white supremacist. On the other hand, they refuse to use all available means to stop him. Mainstream liberals do not moderate their demands to win over wavering conservatives. The far left sees the Biden administration as its true enemy.

The history of the struggles against Nazism are highly relevant to the dilemmas and the dangers we face today.  

As Hitler began his rise to power at the end of the 1920s, the European far left was in the same place as a section of the modern US left.  

The threat of fascism was as nothing when set against its hatred of moderates.

 In 1928 the communist movement adopted one of the cruellest and stupidest policies in its history, which considering the history of Soviet communism was nothing more than a history of cruelty and stupidity was quite an achievement.

Partly because it helped Stalin in his internal power struggles in Russia, Moscow ordered all Europe’s communists to follow an ultra-leftist policy. They were told to denounce moderate leftists as “social fascists”, and fight them to the death.

Communism’s triumph was inevitable, the party line went. No compromise was possible with anyone who stood in history’s path. Reformists were opportunists and traitors. They were social fascists who were as bad as the Nazi gangs which were already gathering on Berlin streets.

Or perhaps they were worse….

For an argument that is still heard today held that, say what you like against them, at least fascists were honest in their way.

By contrast centre-leftists were traitors who had been “bribed by the bourgeoisie” to deceive the masses, as no less an authority than Lenin had said.

They were hypocrites who pretended to want change while watering it down. Nothing could be achieved until they were swept away.

When Stalin’s enemy, Leon Trotsky, who was hardly a moderate, warned that instructing left-wingers to fight other left-wingers was a sure way of allowing fascism to “ride over your skulls and spines like a terrific tank”, Ernst Thälmann, the leader of the German communist party, denounced him for his ‘criminal counter-revolutionary propaganda’.

The result was a disaster. The communists and socialists fought each other instead of the Nazis, making Hitler’s rise easier. Thälmann went along with Stalin’s categorisation of social democrats as “social fascists”  until actual fascists came to power in Germany. They taught him the difference by holding him in solitary confinement for 11 years at the Buchenwald concentration camp, and putting him before a firing squad in 1944 and shooting him dead.

Today there are plenty of Thälmanns who believe with absolute certainty that the discredited centrist mainstream is the enemy.

Here is a columnist on the Washington Post greeting the Michigan result

As I emphasised in my previous piece, his stance is absolutely fine in normal circumstances. US leftists are perfectly entitled to refuse to support the Democrats if Biden’s behaviour outrages them.

But surely only enormous levels of delusion prevent them acknowledging that Trump is a threat to democracy.  If he wins, the American republic may be so gerrymandered and its civil service so politicised that it will be a Herculean task to remove Trump and his successors. There are plenty on the US far right who cite the rigged democracy of Viktor Orban’s Hungary as their model and dream, after all.

The​ alternative is to build alliances and once again history is a guide,

Having seen that their previous policy of treating moderate leftists as Nazis had resulted in Hitler coming to power 1933, the geniuses running the Soviet Communist party decided on a U-turn. Henceforth communists were instructed to support “popular front” movements where everyone opposed to the fascist threat would be welcome.

Some of the most interesting US writers have reached back to the 1930s to find ways of dealing with Trump. In How Democracies Die the US academics Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt found an example in the little-known story of how fascism was stopped in Belgium in the 1930s.  

Belgium might have gone the same way as fascist Italy or Nazi Germany. In 1936 far-right outfits —the Rex Party and the Flemish nationalist party, or Vlaams Nationaal Verbond (VNV)—surged in the polls, capturing almost 20 percent of the popular vote.

They challenged the historical dominance of three establishment parties: the centre-right Catholic Party, the Socialists, and the liberals.

The leader of the Rex Party, Léon Degrelle, was a classic far-right figure.  A journalist (like Mussolini, and so many other believers in simple solutions) he would go on to become a Nazi collaborator in the Second World War.

Levitsky and Ziblatt wrote that, “the Catholic Party, in particular, faced a difficult dilemma: collaborate with their longtime rivals, the Socialists and Liberals, or forge a right-wing alliance that included the Rexists, a party with whom they shared some ideological affinity.”

 Unlike the mainstream conservative politicians of Italy and Germany, who brought Mussolini and Hitler to power, or the mainstream Republican leadership who collaborated with Trump, the Belgian Catholic leadership declared that any deals with the far right could not be contemplated.

"Catholic Party leaders heightened discipline by screening candidates for pro-Rexist sympathies and expelling those who expressed extremist views. In addition, the party leadership took a strong stance against cooperation with the far right. Externally, the Catholic Party fought Rex on its own turf. The Catholic Party adopted new propaganda and campaign tactics that targeted younger Catholics, who had formerly been part of the Rexist base. They created the Catholic Youth Front and began to run former allies against Degrelle."

Right-wing Catholics knew that they must ally with socialists and liberals they normally deplore in a popular front. And it worked. The far right was beaten.

I think popular front politics are essential. But they are not easy or even particularly principled. Go back to the 1940s and you find George Orwell was utterly repelled by communists and conservatives allying to stop Hitler

He looked back with mockery on

“The years 1935-9 were the period of anti-Fascism and the Popular Front, the heyday of the Left Book Club, when red Duchesses and ‘broadminded’ deans toured the battlefields of the Spanish war and Winston Churchill was the blue-eyed boy of the Daily Worker.”

To Orwell, the idea of covering up the crimes of communists for the sake of the greater anti-fascist good was horrific. But that was what the left of the 1930s did. And that was what the British and American governments did during the Second World War. Defeating Hitler came first. They were prepared to forget about the millions Stalin killed until the war was over.

It's a hard choice. But in the circumstances US progressives face, it is an obvious one. There is no argument against making every necessary compromise to prevent a second Trump term. You will have no right to protest, if you do not.

[burdenedreverence]

Does your OC believe in the concept of a "just war" or do they believe that all conflict is to be deplored? Could they conceive of a justifiable reason for one nation to invade another - perhaps to free an oppressed people or prevent the development of a dangerous technology? Or would they only support a war of defence against an aggressor?

This is a good question.

I think we can very clearly establish from Hayden a willingness, perhaps need even, to partake in conflict. Before the age of 25 he had taken part in two wars, one to which he wholly believed in and another he simply wound up in because of obligation.

I think he believes in the concept of a just war. He is well aware that freedoms, and one's right to existence, cannot be won without some conflict. He is also aware that war is often a tool used by those in power to achieve personal aims, and not the aims of the institutions/people that they serve.

Any people, must be prepared, to violently defend their way of life and their people. Hayden loathes killing, any taking of life is murder to him. No matter how justified it marks the soul, it is a sin that he cannot escape. But life is a series of small evils. Before one embarks on a violent course of action, they must exercise every avenue and option.

Hayden knows his limitations as a man, as a soldier. It is why he entrusts the governance of the institutions he serves to more qualified men and women then himself.

Once war is started; Hayden seeks to end it as quickly as possible. To quote William Tecumseh Sherman:

"War is the remedy our enemies have chosen. Other simple remedies were within their choice. You know it and they know it, but they wanted war, and I say let us give them all they want; not a word of argument, not a sign of let up, no cave in till we are whipped or they are."

[psychologicalwhorefare]

I see your point and I'm really willing to agree with most of what you're saying. I admit that dubstep was a kind of meme answer. But if you're really willing to talk about this, then I have to say I simply disagree.

First of all I'm not trying to objectively present anything here. Art is a form of communication and as such can only be perceived subjectively. There is no objective to criticize art. Period.

That being said, you can absolutely apply hierarchy to this if you really wanted to. For example NSBM is a genre. Nazi Black Metal. Because of the statements of this genre, the participants and the aesthetic. It is inherently worth less than other forms of music. Especially since it tries to put other art down. The music itself does have a merit for its target audience and it does reach its intended purpose.

I fully understand where you're coming from with statements like this, because I used to think like this as well, but especially your focus on genres as set categories instead of loose relatives of similar roots and styles, is unhealthy, I think.

for sure this all gets hugely into subjective-land - i think that's pretty inevitable when discussing the rhetoric around anything. i've got my opinion about how we should talk about art, you've got yours, everyone's got theirs, such is how it goes. and i'll grant you that i probably do place too much value in genres as rigid categories! i just love to sort things, i'll admit it. but at the same time, these trends in the creation of music are still "real," in whatever sense one wants to accept, because the music itself is real and we can observe the patterns that exist within what we label as genres. if we stop accepting genres as something we can engage with as though they were more than just a name and a vague gesture, then the whole conversation has to switch to a much smaller scale where we talk about individual artists or even individual releases and the context around them, which can be valuable in its own right but is a different ballgame than the one we've been playing here. my argument is that we shouldn't criticize art by generalizing one genre to be inherently worse than another because it's reductive and unfair. that's all. the nuance that exists within discussion of any given genre remains untouched by my statement and equally as valuable as it would be under any other framework of viewing these topics.

as for NSBM...... that's tough. certainly it's a repulsive thing that exists, and i want to really stress that fact because of what i'm about to say next. so. FUCK ALL NAZIS FUCK ALL FASCISTS. to be clear. now, if we imagine my framework here, where all genres are, when observed in a vacuum, value-neutral with equal potential to produce good music and bad music, then that must include NSBM, right? and unfortunately, it does. because, as we agree, the evaluation and critical analysis of art is necessarily subjective, regardless of whether it's done on the level of the individual or by consensus. so despite the fact that ideologically NSBM is reprehensible, it is possible for a band in the genre to produce a record with a lot of technical skill and passion, and for someone to evaluate that record (again, subjectively) as being "good," if that person happened to be a shithead. evaluation of NSBM (and in fact the genre's existence in the first place) is not a damnation of the genre, because again the issue here is scale as well as subjectivity. it's instead a damnation of the broader political climate and like, the existence of vice within mankind, which is perhaps the most necessary thing out of any of this stuff to have discussions about, but is decidedly outside of the range of topics that i feel qualified to have a full intelligent conversation about in public.

[blackfemmecharacterdependency]

Sooo... So far, this is what it seems to be to me, and take this with a grain salt because I don't care about these people, so I may be missing something, or not be far enough along to see what others are seeing, but, to me...

I have seen a manipulative person in Mel Medarda. She's the richest bitch in town and a politician.

Do I think she qualifies as "mean girl with a big heart?" Absolutely! She's had to come up in some shit and survive the record of her lineage. She isn't blameless in the shit that goes down and we definitely did see her scheming.

I'm not sure why a fan wouldn't want to admit this. You can enjoy a character without revising what they've shown us and told us in the content. Do I think she's an ultimate villain? No. Not from what I've seen. But in this society and in her position, she is *a* villain. She seems to be trying to be a good person, and that definitely counts for an argument of whether or not she is redeemable or even likable. But, I wouldn't say that it accounts for severe antagonism. I would say that I think the writers gave her scraps, so most opinions formed about her would be mostly composed of headcanons and personal taste.

As a character, in those little glimpses of coverage her mother got, SHE was a more compelling character to me. I watched her and thought to myself, "Now this bitch... I wanna know wtf she got going on." I do not care about Mel. Perhaps season 2 will give me more than tragic pretty rich girl, and I get it: that can be quite empowering for a Black female viewer and I support y'all in your love for her and I cheer on your headcanons. I won't say at this time that any opinions of her are unfair so much as I think the writing was unfair. They gave us not much of nothing, Girlies. And I have loved characters with and for less, so I do salute the Mel fanclub. The writers have to give me more before I'm with her, with her.

Same for Sevika. Sevika is a fine muffugga though. Very much within my type, so I yearn to know more, but here we are, with a henchwoman whomst we don't really see beyond two personality things: fighting and smoking. Baby, show me more. I want more.

Sky Young... chile... what other info did y'all come across? She was in so little of the story, I don't know how there could even be much to break down. It was unfortunate that she died. But once again, the writers are at fault for what happened here. Why on Earth would it be this dying man's fault that lady decided to become the sacrificial negro of the year and try to pull him outta that shit? Listen. RIP to her, but I wouldn'tna done that shit and I don't think it's fair to blame him for her doing it. Blame the writers. The way that so much of the complaints I've heard about the fandom could have been curbed by good writing...

Do I think that the fandom probably has misogynoir galore? Absolutely. Every fandom does. But I don't think that it's solely on the viewers for not appreciating these Black femme characters and my reason is because it's the writers fault for writing them poorly.

If you took away the visuals of this show and just had it in book form or with less beautiful art, it would be absolute shit to me. I'm probably not even gon' watch season 2, tbh. This shit sucked. Lol.

Pretty AF though. I hope y'all find your people. Not me though. I'm just gon'be reblogging visuals. I've spent enough time down at the Arcane.

Update on the Arcane mission. I haven't had anybody really step up and say "I wanna habe Arcane friends," and so I decided to try to give this show another go, to figure out where I would personally land in fandom business.

I didn't fall asleep this time and have currently made it about half way through episode 5. So far, I don't give a shit about any of these people. It was sad when the lil' crew of bottom down people died, but I haven't had any attachments formed, though the wee baby Ekko is probably currently the only one in the running for my emotions.

Actually, I'm liking that skinny one-eyed fella. This is my kinda "villain." One with both rage and also some sense. Sevika is my close third.

I am definitely not a Jinx girlie. It makes no sense for smart people to keep bringing her bumbling ass to missions that need precision. She need to take a page outta that one dude on the statue book and just show folk how to do stuff.

And so far, Mel might be lovely, but nothing has happened that I care about her neither. At this current place in the journey, I could see why she hasn't gotten much fans. The creators gave us nothing but an impeccable design. I'm waiting to be gagged.

Vi is the most relatable person for me, but that's not to say that I like her or care about her necessarily. More like I think she's had the most opportunity for us to see different sides of herself and understand her more than a lot of these others who don't have as much story at this point.

Jayce is alright. Victor is mid. I have not yet seen whatever it is the girlies see in either or both of them.

RIP to ol'boy from the bar. Vance? Van? Chile, whatever they daddy name was. He was nice. You knew he'd die from the moment he showed up though. It was simply right there that this would happen.

Who else I done seen... Caitlin. Snoring boring. Actually around where I paused my watch mission to go to bed. Idk if I'm resuming when I get off work in the morning, but I'll resume at some point. This is the furthest I've ever gotten watching this, but now I think that I get why: because nobody grabbed my attention or appreciation and that's one of my things.

[best-bird-bash]

uh

do dragons count as birds

I would have to say over all no, unfortunately because dragons are amazing. However if the dragon is more bird like i do believe they could count.

[mordigen]

Unpopular opinion: Christians are not witches

I said it. Fight me.

There has been a trend that has been growing ever more problematic recently: overbearing, hyper-zealous, hyper-vigilant "acceptance" This means the pagan community is an absolute free-for all, and you are not allowed to so much as even feign the possibility that you do not agree with absolutely 100% of everything, lest you be named a gatekeeping, ignorant bigot.

Whether you like it or not - there ARE paths out there that have specific rules...regulations...stipulations...tenets - whatever the hell you want to call or classify them. End. Period. There's no other colour that comes in - that's it. Sorry for you, but they DO exist. In fact, there are many of them.

If you do not follow those rules, tenets, etc..., then you are not of that path. Point. Blank. And there is nothing wrong with that - it simply means that you are of some other path. That's it! That's all that means! It may be *nearly* identical to the path in question - but it is not, hence the 'nearly'.

If you happen to be a part of one of these paths, there is absolutely nothing wrong with saying so. If someone claims to be a part of one of these paths, but are absolutely, blatantly not - there is nothing wrong with saying that, and explaining why that is. Some people just honestly don't know there is a difference, or that these certain prerequisites are indeed a definitive factor - so they learn something, they broaden their horizons. Everyone seems to be all about educating themselves about being sensitive to other cultures and customs - except the pagan community, apparently, because this mentality does not translate across that pagan/witch line. Instead of taking it as a learning experience, you are immediately pounced on with notions of 'there are no rules!' 'you can't tell someone what to do on their own path!' Or, simply, the name calling. Well yes, while all of that is true - it still remains that how ever you want to practice or whatever you personally decide to do, may just simply not be what you are claiming, or calling it. It may just be semantics - but semantics matter when dealing with nuance. And paganism is extremely nuanced.

You can call a tomato an orange all you want to - but that thing will never be an orange, no matter how much you believe in it. And people are not wrong for informing you that you may have the wrong name, that is in fact, a tomato. If you go on deciding to call it an orange, you can do that - but that is willful ignorance. So, in your fight to be unapologetically accepting of every ridiculous notion, you are perpetuating willful ignorance - whilst being directly in opposition of your goal and being, *GASP*, unaccepting to those who follow a path where distinction and definition matters. You are completely invalidating those people's paths and beliefs while trying to defend another's (another who may, in fact, actually be wrong) and actively using their path & beliefs as the very reason to berate and ostracize them. Pretty fantastically hypocritical of you. Now...on to the second problem. I do not, at all, in any form, believe in "ritual magick" - as perpetuated by Aleister Crowley hardons. And no, that is not a knock on Crowley, just the idiot followers that don't understand half of what he taught and latch onto the superficial.

When you look at the origins and make up of magical beliefs, and magic itself as a separate entity - no matter which particular branch - they were all created by religion. They all have roots in highly spiritual cultures and customs. So, I absolutely do not believe for one second that you can believe in magic without SOME form of religion - whatever one you adhere to is your choice, but you cannot have the first without the latter. You cannot. Even if you claim that you have no religion, or spiritual faith, your practices absolutely do. You are calling on elements and agencies that absolutely have divine ties and connections one way or another. Oh, how many atheists I see calling on the seals of Arch Angels.... are you fucking shittin me? Really?? So let's bring it all together now - with the fact that many faiths DO have prerequisites, AND the fact that magic is religious/spiritual -- Christians are not, and cannot be witches or pagans. They are mutually exclusive. Not only because so many various paths have such prerequisites, and very define religious/spiritual beliefs that are contradictory to others - but simply because Christianity DOES, very much, have very clear and stringently defined Do's & Don'ts, and obviously the religious aspect itself clashes with the religious beliefs of others. Their religious beliefs clash with people who believe in their same god - so how could they not with those who believe in other gods?? Considering this, no other path would even need such stipulations themselves for them to be mutually exclusive, as Christianity already covers that issue so completely, but the fact that so many pagan paths do only exacerbates an already existing problem. That being said - that does not mean you cannot believe in the Christian 'god', by whatever name you know him by - or that you cannot believe in Jesus, and also be a witch or pagan. In fact the latter has an even bigger argument for believing in both, as paganism, generically, in itself is polytheistic, so it is very fitting to simply have the Christian god and Jesus amongst the many deities being worshipped. But those two things alone is not what makes Christianity. A good start, yes, but that is not all it takes - in fact, there are many that are shunned, excommunicated, banned, condemned and moreso whilst having those very two qualifying factors. You can find this in *every single* sect of Christianity, so...the proof is in the pudding, as they say, that it is much more than simply believing in 'God' and Jesus that makes a 'Christian'. And if you take that to heart and follow all those rules - you cannot be a witch or pagan, many times over, as you would be in direct opposition, or violation, of a number of their teachings - both on the aspect of simple 'rules', but also on a much deeper spiritual level of the entire foundation of their faith. Cannot serve two masters, and all that... If you do not follow those rules, then sure, you could be a witch or a pagan - but then you cannot be a Christian. That is just the facts.

Many people like to argue the use of magic and mysticism in the bible - but the issue is what parts of the bible they are found, and all the amendments of the further books. Again, what really carves out being a Christian vs. any of the other sects of Abrahamic beliefs. As, news flash - there is far more than just Christianity. And some of them, do, in fact, do hand in hand with magic. The Kabbalah is an astounding example of that - and, in fact, where a lot of the so called *ahem* 'non'-religious 'ritual magick' comes from. In this same vein, I would like to note that I have never had any issue or seen conflict with the Hebrew or Jewish take on shamans, mystics and witches, as they really do go hand in hand - They have their own very in depth, detailed, spiritual and sentimental form of mysticism that was a natural progression from pre-Abrahamic religions and culture, and grew into their teachings and belief system, so it does not go against their core beliefs the same way it very stringently does in Christian theology. Considering their ethnical histories and cultural heritage - this is a brilliant example of the natural evolution and progression of faiths - not simply ripped from the hands of the brutally oppressed and rewritten as a mockery to wipe out the preexisting notion of faiths -- as the Church has a history of doing. The Book of Enoch is another shining example of Biblical magic, or Angelic magic. But, this also also turns my point into a self fulfilling prophecy, as in the fact that it is accepted amongst all denominations as heresy, and it is taught that these magics - though they do, in fact, exist, were for the angels and completely forbidden from mankind. So, thusly, if you are a follower of Enoch, you are not a 'Christian', by name and membership, as you are outright going against it's teachings. You are a heretic, a blasphemer. Perhaps you may be one of the many other forms of the Christian god's followers - but not a Christian, as being Christian denotes a very specific set of beliefs and tenets - end of story. Magic, and paganism, is in direct conflict with those teachings, and therefore, cannot coexist.

On top of the logic - there is also the emotional issue. Christianity has a long history of abuse towards various pagan, tribal and indigenous faiths, while stealing our beliefs as their own, and demonizing those they couldn't successfully acclimate into theirs. To now be expected to be OK with this faith, yet again, latching on to *our* sacred rites and practices as being a part of their own is a hard pill to swallow at best, a slap in the face to most, and flat out perpetuating trauma at worst. Once upon a time, people sought out these very same communities and groups within their pagan circles as an escape, a safe space, and a shield and guardian against the Christian onslaught, torment, oppression, or just exhaustion - and now, we must not only tolerate them invading our private spaces, but must now welcome them with open arms and expected to be happy about it? Forgive me if I don't sympathize....

If we are going to now be forced into being shoulder to shoulder with them, the very least you can offer us is neutrality. You can be accepting of all and still be neutral grounds - not taking any one side anywhere, all you have to do is be respectful to each other. Disagreement is not disrespectful. Could someone who disagrees with a certain viewpoint *become* disrespectful? Sure, of course they could. But simply the act of disagreement is nothing hateful or hurtful in any way shape or form - in fact, good discourse is how progress is made. So we need to remain neutral grounds and normalize the acceptance of different viewpoints - we need to recognize and accept that, yes, there are paths out there that do have specific requirements, expectations and limits - there are paths that are going to disagree, or just flat out not believe in something. Instead of name calling, when someone of those paths decides to speak up and enlighten and elaborate on information that may be inaccurately described or depicted, you need to LISTEN and learn, and not just bludgeon them with presumptive judgement. You also need to accept that there are many, various different closed practices out there - beyond Native American & Voodoo practices (as those seem to be the only ones the pagan community recognizes) and if someone of those closed faiths tell you - no, you are not xy or z, that is also not being judgmental or hateful or hurtful - that simply is. ....a very important side note here is that acknowledging closed practices is also not a carte blanche for screaming about cultural appropriation. Please shut the fuck up about cultural appropriation. Not being of a specific faith is not equivalent to cultural appropriation - Telling someone "no, you're not xyz" is very different from telling someone "no, you can't practice xyz" (looking at you smudge-Nazis) You can enjoy, practice, learn or celebrate anything you want of any faith you want while not actually being apart of it - that's the beauty of sharing and learning. And I think that is where all the trouble boils down from:

Yes, you can do whatever you want and can create whatever path you want for yourself...just don't misrepresent it, don't call it something it is not, and don't deny those who are more educated & experienced in that particular department. We get enough of that from outsiders to start doing it to each other.

[the-lonelybarricade]

I totally stole this from one of those writing prompt blogs, but can you do Rhys and Feyre going to couples therapy together as a joke when they only just met?

Okay my love, I literally just finished writing this and haven't actually proofread it. It was meant to be silly and jokey but ended up being a bit more serious than I intended, but I'm a sucker for fake dating tropes so maybe I'll continue their story at some point. Anyway here's a modern Feyre and Rhys going to couples thereapy together (whilst not actually being a couple):

Feyre was absolutely determined to prove Nesta wrong. Usually her sister’s grating comments didn’t penetrate Feyre’s hardened demeanor at home, but something about their stint yesterday had thoroughly gotten under her skin. Nesta had a talent when it came to barbed words, so it was the casualness with which she’d said Feyre was boring and predictable that had kept the words ringing between Feyre’s ears. They lacked the usual bite and venom that was characteristic of Nesta, and somehow that made them impossibly worse.

Was Feyre a creature of habit? Sure. But she had always been content with her quiet, unassuming life. They’d grown up poor, with little luxury, and as a little girl Feyre had always believed all she’d need to be happy was paint supplies and enough time to get lost in a blank canvas. Feyre had that now, and she was happy. She spent almost every day in her studio, a paintbrush in one hand and a coffee mug in the other. And that was fine. She may not spend a lot of time with other people, but that was fine.

Routine is fine. Being focused on your career is fine. So why did the implication that her life is stagnant rile her up so much?

Feyre couldn’t articulate what, exactly, had bothered her so much, since she was perfectly happy with the current state of her life. Yet the next morning she’d woken up, vowing to take a day off and spend the whole day being entirely unpredictable.

She was going to pull a Jim Carrey in Yes Man. She was going to seize this damn day. And any voice in her mind that pleaded her to stick to her comfort zone was going to be diligently ignored.

When she set out to get her morning coffee, she ducked into the first cafe she came across without checking the reviews. And instead of ordering her usual chai latte, she asked the cashier to make her their favorite drink. She sat at a booth and sipped it experimentally. It was sweet and tasted of caramel; she decided she quite liked it. So far so good.

She sat wondering what brave venture she should do next, something that would be worthy of telling people about. Something so brash and crazy and unexpected Nesta would eat her stupid, truthful words.

“Mind if I take this seat?”

The voice was like smooth velvet. Feyre glanced up to meet a pair of eyes that were such a deep, peculiar shade of blue they almost looked violet. She was momentarily stunned speechless, which caused the impossibly handsome stranger to lift one of his perfectly groomed brows in question.

“Of course,” Feyre answered, her mouth feeling a bit dry. She quickly took a sip of her coffee to quell this strong reaction her body was having to this man.

She’d been expecting him to take the chair to sit elsewhere, but he slid into the chair at her table, directly across from her. Feyre spared a cursory glance around the cafe. Customers milled about, but there were plenty of empty seats strewn here and there. It was far from necessary to share a table with a stranger.

Her interest piqued, Feyre turned her attention back to this strange, alluring man.

“I’m Feyre,” she said, sounding much more confident than she felt. But today was about branching out of her comfort zone. Making the first move with an attractive man certainly qualified.

“Rhysand,” he answered with a charming grin, extending his hand into the space between them. Feyre accepted it with a mirrored smile, for a moment marvelling at the way his hand completely enveloped hers.

Feyre cleared her throat. “So tell me, Rhysand, what brings you to this table in particular?”

The way he wrinkled his nose was unfairly endearing. “Call me Rhys,” he said. “I only really use Rhysand in a business setting. And I chose this table in particular, because I saw a beautiful woman sitting here and was feeling especially forward.”

Feyre laughed in surprise. “Forward, indeed. Well, Rhys, I have spectacular news for you.”

“And what’s that, Feyre darling?” the suggestive tone to his voice sent shivers down her spine and instantly those warning bells in her mind were blaring. This man was too handsome and he was a complete stranger.

“I’ve decided to do something completely stupid and spontaneous today, and you’re officially invited to join me.”

Rhysand grinned, his eyes flickering with mischief at her proposal. She supposed that should be concerning, too, but she felt her pulse quicken. “And what stupid, spontaenous thing will we be doing, darling?”

Feyre leaned back, trying to regain composure by taking a too casual sip of her coffee. “I haven’t decided yet. I’m open to ideas.”

Across the cafe, a man stood up so quickly his chair tipped over with a loud thunk. Rhys and Feyre both whirled their heads at the commotion.

“This is why we need to go to therapy together!” the woman across from him screeched. “You can’t control your stupid temper!”

“I don’t have time for this shit,” he growled. “I’m not going to sit there for an hour so you can manipulate some dumb bitch into agreeing with you!”

“It’s not about sides,” she groaned. “I want to work through this with you!”

Feyre felt a tug of sympathy at the desperation in the woman’s voice. She could feel her pain and frustration second-hand, having been in similar shoes herself.

“Fuck this,” the man grumbled, storming for the door.

The woman followed after him. “Our appointment is in 10 minutes! Please, let’s just try it.”

The door swung shut behind them. Feyre watched the couple continue their walking argument down the city pavement, gesturing wildly with their hands.

Feyre sighed. “Man, that poor woman. It sounded like she really wanted to work things out.”

“That guy sounded like an absolute ass, maybe it’s for the best,” Rhys said. Then, his eyes lit up and he turned to Feyre with a slow, conspiring grin. “It does give me an idea, though.”

“What’s that?” Feyre felt a bit intimidated by the roguish expression on his face, even if it did make her feel breathless.

“Well, I do happen to know there’s a psychiatrist's office right above this cafe. If I had to guess, that’s where our friends were going to have their first session. And from the looks of it,” he nodded towards the couple, who were now striding in opposite directions through the city, faces flushed with anger, “they won’t be attending.”

“And your point is…?”

“Let’s go in their stead. Make a game of it. First person to break character loses.”

“And what does the winner get?”

“Well, if I win, then I get to take you to dinner.”

Feyre considered for a moment. Dinner with a handsome man certainly didn’t sound like losing to her. “If I win, then I get to use you as a model.”

“You’re a photographer?” His brows rose in interest and Feyre summoned all her will power not to blush. Since when was she bashful about her career?

“Painter.”

Rhysand grinned. “If you win, you can use my body anyway you wish, Feyre darling. Nude would be best.”

And that was how Feyre had ended up in Dr. Suriel’s office, Rhys by her side on the sofa. It was perhaps the most adventurous thing she’d ever agreed to.

“So, Mr and Mrs Mandray. Apologies, I didn’t get your names on the forms.”

“I’m Feyre, this is my husband Rhys,” Feyre answered, thinking it lucky they didn’t have to guess at the mysterious couple’s forenames.

“It’s a pleasure to meet you Feyre and Rhys. What brings you to my office today?”

Rhys immediately slipped into his role of the concerned husband. He placed his arm around Feyre’s shoulders and tugged her close. Rhys opened his mouth, then shut it, glancing at Feyre hesitantly.

“My wife and I have been getting into a lot of… disagreement lately,” Rhys answered carefully, and already Feyre thought this was going much better than it would have if the actual Mr Mandray had turned up.

“My husband,” Feyre said flatly, channeling her inner Nesta to put venom into the word. “Is insisting on painting our house purple.”

“I see,” Dr. Suriel says, assessing the displeasure on Feyre’s face. “And I’m assuming you want to paint the house a different color.”

Feyre pressed her lips into a thin line. “See, that’s just the problem,” she said, crossing her arms. “That’s exactly the color I would want to paint our house.”

Dr. Suriel frowned. “So you do want the house to be painted purple, as does your husband. Am I understanding that correctly?”

“No,” Feyre sighed. “He wants to paint the house blue, but is insisting we paint it purple, because he knows it’s what I want. This bastard refuses to be anything but accommodating.”

“We’re going to try to refrain from name-calling in my office,” Dr Suriel said calmly. “So, Feyre, you are clearly unhappy that Rhys wants to paint the house purple. What color would you paint it?”

“Blue,” she answered. “I know it’s what he secretly wants to paint it.”

“She doesn’t see the hypocrisy in what she's saying!” Rhys complained. Then, he turned to Feyre, looking impossibly serious. “Darling, I know you want to paint the house purple, and I already told you I’m fine with it.”

Feyre groaned. “I don’t want to paint the house purple! I want to paint it blue.”

“You’re only saying that because you think I want to paint the house blue.”

“Do you?”

Rhys hesitated. “No.”

“Don’t lie in front of our therapist,” Feyre said with narrowed eyes. “We promised to tell the truth while we’re here.”

“Then you tell me the truth, Feyre. Do you genuinely want the house to be painted blue?”

Now it was Feyre’s turn to hesitate. She could see the corner of Rhysand’s mouth twitch as she did so. “No. I mean yes! I do!”

“It sounds like at the heart of this argument, you are both ultimately concerned in pleasing the other person, is that fair to say?”

Feyre and Rhys glanced at each other, then nodded in agreement.

“Do you think there’s a color you could both compromise on, so that you don’t feel as if your partner is the only one making a sacrifice in this decision?”

Feyre met Rhysand’s brilliant violet eyes. In truth, she’d blurted the color purple because she’d been thinking about the color of his eyes. She'd never seen eyes that color, and they were wonderfully vivid. Feyre was lost thinking of painting a world in a monocrhome of violet, like a city that lived within his gaze.

Feyre realized she’d been momentarily swept away, snapped out of it by the humor that washed behind those starry irises. She blinked back the haze and tried to think of an answer to the question.

“Mustard yellow?” she proposed.

Rhys pursed his lips in mock consideration. “Mustard yellow,” he agreed with an emphatic nod of approval.

Dr. Suriel blinked in surprise. “All right, well I’m pleased we could solve that issue. Is there anything else you’ve been arguing about?”

“Yeah, actually. My wife,” Rhys gave Feyre a pointed glance. Somehow, despite being strangers, hearing Rhys refer to her as his wife sent waves of pleasure jolting through her. She felt her stomach flip on itself. “Isn’t satisfied with our sex life.”

Feyre instantly flushed at such an accusation, however fabricated.

“Is this true, Feyre?” Dr. Suriel turned her eyes towards Feyre and she shifted uncomfortably at having to make up stories about her sex life with Rhys. Making Feyre imagine rolling in a bed with him was certainly his goal, and she’d lie to say it wasn’t affecting her. Rhysand looked absolutely delighted to have made her squirm. Fine. Two could play at his game.

“Y-yes, well,” Feyre stuttered, the burning in her cheeks condemning. “I keep telling Rhys that 16 orgasms in a session is excessive. He’s much too generous a lover and he never lets me give as good as I get.”

Feyre felt satisfied with the way Rhysand’s face went crimson.

Dr. Suriel’s brows rose. “This seems to be a common theme in your marriage. Rhysand, would you say that you’re often prioritising Feyre’s desires over your own?”

“I think Feyre sorely underestimates how much pleasure I take from satisfying her desires,” he answered, his eyes flicking to Feyre with enough of a sensual promise that her heartbeat turned staccato.

“Rhys, it sounds as though your generosity is part of the way you express your love, is that safe to say?” Rhys nodded. “And Feyre, it seems as if you have trouble accepting your husband's generosity, both in and outside the bedroom. Do you feel that’s a fair statement?”

“I-I suppose so.”

“Sometimes people have trouble accepting their loved one’s generosity when they feel like they aren’t giving something in exchange. It can be hard to accept that kind of love when we don’t feel like we deserve it. Do you feel like this could apply to your situation?”

Feyre blinked. This was meant to be a gag, something daring and experimental. She hadn’t expected to be psychoanalyzed by Dr. Suriel, or at least for her analysis to hit so close to home.

Rhysand shifted forward on the sofa. “Is this true, darling?” he asked, sounding concerned. He took Feyre’s hands in his own, brushing his thumb along her skin as he met her gaze. “I think you deserve the world.”

She would almost think he was being genuine if she hadn’t met him only an hour ago. Feyre marked the conviction on his face, those burning pools of earnesty in his eyes, and marveled at what an incredible actor he was.

Somehow she ended up blurting part of the truth. “My family life growing up was kind of tough and I’ve never really known what unconditional love was like. I think a part of me still believes it's something I have to earn.”

“That sounds like it must have been very hard, Feyre. But it sounds like Rhys loves you very much, and that this is an issue the two of you can overcome together. When you feel the instinct to reject his generosity, try to remember where that message is coming from. And Rhysand, try to keep in mind that this is something your wife is still working through, and be patient if she feels more comfortable giving you something in exchange. This is her way of expressing love, too. At the core of your issues is both of you thinking about the other person, try to remember this when a breakdown in communication occurs.”

Somehow they’d lost control of their therapy session and were receiving actual therapy, which wasn’t part of the plan at all. But somehow, despite not actually being married to Rhysand, what Dr. Suriel said was reassuring.

Feyre turned to Rhys and smiled. “I think I understand better, now. You’re free to give me as many orgasms as you want, honey.”

Rhys grinned fiendishly. “And I’ll let you reciprocate in whatever way you feel comfortable, darling.”

Dr. Suriel clasped her hands together in approval. “Excellent. I think so long as the two of you take measures to accurately communicate your needs, you’ll find these breakdowns will occur less frequently. And that’s it for our time today, but I am happy to have the two of you back any time.”

Feyre walked out of the session hand-in-hand with Rhys, feeling a bit dazed. It had certainly gotten more serious than she’d expected, but perhaps her judgement had been misplaced in thinking therapy could be anything other than serious, no matter how joking the complaints.

“Well, that was certainly stimulating,” Rhys quipped once they’d left the office.

“And it seems we’re at a draw, considering neither of us broke character.”

“You do play my wife convincingly well,” Rhys practically purred, “perhaps I’ll let you take up the real role, if you feel so inclined.”

Feyre laughed. “I’m expecting a few other offers to come through. Give me a few days to look over the applicants, then I’ll get back to you.”

“Okay, well how’s this. I’ll give you my number, you can wait until all those applicants come back to you, and once you’ve decided that I’m clearly the obvious choice, you can call me.”

Feyre smiled as she pulled out her phone and handed it to him to insert his number. “You do make a very convincing husband. Perhaps I can hire you for weddings and Thanksgiving dinners?”

“Real husband, fake husband, a partner to do spontaneous, outrageous things with. You call me, and I’ll be whatever you want me to be, Feyre.”

It was perhaps the strangest and most generous offer she’d ever been given. When they parted ways, Feyre thought that she’d certainly filled her quota for an interesting story to tell. And maybe, most likely, she’d be calling that number very soon.

[bestworstcase]

#Not to absolve Ozpin of any blame for his choices and their consequences#But OP's argument smacks of trying to apply our morals and ethics to a setting that does not match our modern world#Sure child soldiers are wrong from our perspective but we don't have an endless horde of shadow monsters that want to kill everything#Is there a better way of fending off the monsters?#Very likely but this way at least means that if any of those teens finds themselves point blank with a monster they can defend themselves (via @viscen-vas-arlesburgh)

i would point out that the reason it's a point of discussion at all is that salem is really mad about his use of children to fight his war. she's also not the only character to remark on this; ironwood does it too, albeit obliquely ("do you really think your children can win a war?"). cinder also makes the implication, in her v3 speech, that training children as warriors is perhaps not as good or commendable as the huntsmen academies would like everyone to believe.

so while i agree with the general point that expecting modern ethical perspectives out of a fantasy world is often silly, in this case i do think there's a pretty strong textual basis for this being a question that the characters themselves are thinking about; it's one of the fault lines defining the central conflict of the story.

and... there's also a rather significant difference between training people to defend themselves as a matter of course and what the huntsmen academies do.

oscar is the perfect illustration of that difference. in v5, ruby asks him if he's really never had any combat training before, and he says (paraphrasing) "no, just the occasional small grimm, but nothing like this." very casual. so... oscar is a fourteen year old boy with no formal combat experience who, prior to his arrival in mistral, had never trained with his aura before and didn't even know what a semblance was, and he talks about fighting off "the occasional small grimm" like it's not a big deal.

which—blinks.

jaune, also a civilian prior to his enrollment at beacon academy, had never heard of aura before. every time we've seen grimm get into a city like vale or mantle, the civilians flee in screaming panic. in v4, the mayor of that small village—which is not noticeably destroyed, and where everybody seems to be quite relaxed—goes "that geist has been plaguing our village for weeks" (WEEKS!) about a grimm large enough to wear whole tree trunks for armor and which gave three top huntsmen-in-training a run for their money. the mayor is, like oscar, incredibly casual about this.

in v2, when ozpin questions blake about her background, she says that she grew up outside the kingdoms, where "if you can't fight, you can't survive."

now blake has an unusually high degree of training for someone who did not attend a combat school—that'd be thanks to the white fang—but her basic point stands: oscar grew up outside the kingdoms, and he thinks killing grimm without having a defensive aura up is not a big deal and not something that qualifies as "combat experience." the unnamed village in v4 isn't fussed about that great big geist bothering them for weeks. people who live outside the kingdoms, away from the huntsmen academies, don't act like the grimm are some ever-present, terrifying existential threat.

and that is because everyone who grows up outside of the kingdoms grows up knowing how to deal with 'em. which is good! if you live in bear country, you gotta know how to deal with bears!

compare this to the huntsmen model: a small group of elite warriors trained to stand as the bulwark between the grimm and hundreds of thousands of defenseless civilians who receive no training whatsoever, of any kind. this is a bad system for EVERYBODY: it's bad for the select few warriors expected to be the first and last line of defense against the grimm, and it's bad for the civilians who will die if they encounter a grimm without a huntsman or huntress close by.

what really should be happening instead is defensive aura training and basic self-defense as a core pillar of public education, available to everyone, from childhood through to adulthood, and then have the huntsmen for things like escort through grimm territory or crisis response in the event a large number of grimm attack a settlement all at once. but... the actual situation is that huntsmen seem to be the only people in the world who are trained in aura at all.

so the idea that the huntsmen academies as they exist in the show are justifiable because the children who attend them will be endangered by the grimm in any case, might as well train them to fight, isn't really sound, because the vast majority of people in this world aren't trained to use aura, and within the kingdoms the only people who are even taught to fight are... kids on the huntsmen track who attend combat schools.

aaand the reason for that is that the huntsmen academies don't actually exist to protect anyone from grimm; they exist to act as heavily-guarded fortresses defending the relics. everything else about the huntsmen system is tacked on as a secondary objective. it all sounds very noble and high-minded on paper until you get to the record scratch that nobody else who isn't a huntsman or in training to become one has access to training in aura or even basic self-defense. oh, and it's unlawful for civilians to defend themselves from the grimm in mantle—that's why rwbyjnor get arrested at the beginning of v7, "unauthorized use of weapons by unlicensed huntsmen," which has the practical purpose of making it illegal for ordinary people to fight back if grimm enter the city and attack them.

all of this is intentional and narratively meaningful—it's contrasted against the very casual way people born and raised outside of the kingdoms talk about dealing with grimm, and quite a lot of the narrative right now is about examining how traumatizing this system is for the children inside it.

the story is in part about finding a better way to deal with the grimm, because those better ways exist and we're given glimpses of them throughout the story: both in the small villages outside the kingdoms but also in menagerie, which is the most densely populated city in the world and yet doesn't weather a single grimm attack in all the time that blake is there in v4-v5. (in fact, grimm are never even mentioned as a concern by any menagerian characters, so whatever menagerie is doing to keep the grimm away clearly works extremely well, assuming it isn't just a case of "grimm don't attack faunus.")

leans out a window. it is not salem’s fault that oz uses child soldiers to guard his fortresses. it’s not her fault that he made a deliberate strategic choice to recruit children into a war they didn’t even know they’re fighting. (and it certainly isn’t her fault that he’s been getting kids killed in training for decades before she made her first move!)

he has been trying to destroy her for thousands of years while salem lived in exile, not fighting back, until one of those grown-up child soldiers found out the truth and gave her something to fight for. if your defenders are all children because you set up your fortresses to masquerade as schools, if you for decades continually made the choice to use children as unwitting human shields then you don’t get to blame the enemy when children die on the front lines. YOU PUT THEM THERE.

[eolewyn1010]

Interesting stuff and stuff I'd like to believe too! Frankenstein's not the only story that has incest, one of them she wrote pretty much a self insert who had an incestuous relationship with dad, and she sent it to her dad (who hated it lol), and she lost her virginity on her mom's grave... so I can't help but wonder

O...kay then?

See, you can believe about Mary Shelley whatever you like, and it'll probably be better informed than what I believe, seeing as I don't know all that much about her, biographically speaking. But I do have to wonder why you keep coming back to me about a point I have already said I don't care much for.

In the name of good faith, I'll discuss this to my best knowledge (which is, as mentioned, not much). Trigger warning for mention of child abuse, so I'll set a cut this time. Will be for the best anyway since this essay is longer. tl;dr - still no.

I looked up the story you mentioned, and I found Mathilda. I haven't read it, and it sounds way too dreary for me to invest money in it, so I'll work with what I've gathered from articles. Please note that I am obviously not completely informed.

Mathilda doesn't feature an incestuous relationship between the father and daughter. It features the father confessing his desire for his daughter, and then promptly committing suicide. As it was with Victor Frankenstein and Elizabeth, the incest itself doesn't take place; the "pair" is parted by death before consummation.

I think the evidence for Mathilda being Mary Shelley's self-insert is pretty thin. She's a depressed young woman dealing (or rather, failing to deal) with loss, fair enough, and her mother died shortly after her birth. So yeah, that sounds like a good case for autobiographical elements - but the crucial relationship doesn't qualify. Mathilda is raised away from her father and they only meet when she is already 16, and off we go with the unholy desires. Mary Shelley was very much a daddy's girl, was raised exclusively by him for the first several years even. We have a very different emotional situation here. So no, this doesn't convince me of Mary Shelley's incest fetish.

The theme of suicide is as present in Mathilda as is that of incest - more so, perhaps, because while the father's desire seems to be one-sided, both he and the daughter wish to take their own lives at some point; he does so successfully, she dies another way. If I had to take Mathilda the autobiographical way, this is what would jump out at me, hinting at a severe depression Mary Shelley might have had after the death of her children. The incestuous element may have been the trigger, but the tragedy discussed is loss - it might even be guilt, seeing as Mary Shelley's relationship with Percy Shelley resulted in the suicide of the latter's first wife.

Incest in literature was kind of a Thing in Regency. Jane Austen dealt with it before Shelley, Emily Brontë dealt with it after Shelley, and especially Gothic literature features it a lot. Percy Shelley had it occuring in Laon and Cythna, Lord Byron strongly implied it in Manfred (although he actually had a direct autobiographical reference for that), Edgar Allen Poe had The Fall of the House of Usher. It seems to me like that was just the shortcut for Romance Doomed To Fail back in the day; compare today's dead horse trope in YA literature - the goddamn love triangle wherein our heroine tragically has to choose between two equally attractive, equally bland love interests. Incest was Regency literature's go-to for a tragic romance subplot, and frankly, it can be just as cheap.

Then there's the angle of doomed to fail, of never consummated. Comparable to the medieval idea of courtly love, incest as Mary Shelley depicts it is a desire never to be fulfilled. Elizabeth dies a virgin, Mathilda's father rather kills himself than touch her. This plays into the argument I've already made before - that, at least when it comes to Frankenstein, the entire incestuous relationship is weirdly de-sexualized. Even if Shelley's interest in this subject were singular in Regency literature, I still wouldn't read it as fetish material. There are no overt sexual fantasies in it; the relationships are tragic and leave one party seriously bitter and broken.

Compare this with Flowers in the Attic. Or, worse, compare it with basically all Marion Zimmer Bradley has ever written. And the latter sexually abused her own children - if anyone can safely be said to have had an incest fetish, it's her. These days, I'm incapable of looking at her writing without getting nauseous, because she used to milk incest for all the titillation she could get out of it. The way she wrote it, that was fetish material. It was sexually explicit, it was apologetic, it was even glorifying. Mary Shelley writes about incest as a tragedy, as a cruelty of fate, not as a big opportunity for smut.

And finally, the anecdote about her losing her virginity on her mother's grave. Uhm. Sure? That seems to be a thing? Couldn't find more than anecdotal reference to it; I don't have sources. If I wanna be petty, I can say that the references went on about the churchyard, not the grave, but that's a moot point bc I wouldn't know either way. It sure is a weird thing to do, although the relationship consummated here is still that of Mary and Percy Shelley, who is about as far removed from either of her parents as can be. Her mother was a nonentity in Mary Shelley's life. No idea if she fantasized about her, but it was not as if there was any real relationship to build upon. She had an actual and pretty complicated relationship with her father, but the fact that he hated her choice of a partner and advised her not to publish Mathilda doesn't convince me that there was anything incestuous between them.

[29pageshomestuckeveryday]

Homestuck, page 2,629

Terezi: Open memo.

Author commentary:

The R41NBOW RUMPUS P4RTYTOWN is one of the more "Terezi" contributions Terezi has made to the story. Possibly only second to the time she uses her own blood to write instructions that rewrite the whole story to bring Vriska back to life, or when she preemptively convinces herself to dump Karkat before anything even starts. This whole memo is made primarily to troll Karkat, roast him for his own self-important memos, and provide a fun environment everyone likes better—a nice, easy-going space where they can have a good time and do some roleplaying (which is also meant to own Karkat). Also, he's not allowed to post. Of course, if Terezi really knew what was going on, she wouldn't have to work that hard to own him at all about his plan to troll the humans. She could just keep mercilessly pointing out that the only reason he wants to do it at all is because he has a hate-crush on the nerdy human boy.

Even though the trolls are at the end of their adventure, the attitude of everyone under Karkat's leadership is pretty much the same as it was when they began: much skepticism and ridicule surrounding his orders, with no one particularly inclined to take him all that seriously. Maybe it's because they're just used to acting this way by now. But the deeper reason is that all of Karkat's orders, everything he insists on as being "urgent," revolve around some unwitting need to serve his own objectives rather than something that serves everyone's needs in a clear way. At the beginning, he was desperately trying to pull the team together to play Sgrub, but mainly so he could prove himself as a great leader and a ruthless warrior. Here he's trying to get everyone on board with harassing some alien kids they don't know, basically for some combination of satisfying his own petty grievances and wanting an excuse to hate-crush on John some more. So when everyone's response to his "plan" is some variation on "Dude, this makes no sense at all," it's because…it doesn't.

Terezi tells a confused Gamzee from weeks ago to go peruse other memos. Perhaps ones that get started on the meteor in the future? Ones written during more fraught and suspenseful circumstances than this? How much advance reading has Gamzee been doing? How much studying? Planning? Biding his time? Makes you wonder, is all I'm saying. But it doesn't make you wonder too much, because we quickly get distracted by about 500 consecutive lines of Karkat and Terezi banning each other as they fight over the same keyboard. In the last book, I told you we would be reaping great rewards from these memos. I would never lie to you. Not ever, about anything. I would never risk jeopardizing this special bond of trust we have.

They have a point here. While it's funny to see the results of their keyboard mashing and mutual banning warfare in the form of the resulting memo text, we don't really get to see them do all this. We can only imagine what it looks like. So we also have to picture them typing these entire statements to each other on the same keyboard. And there's no way that can possibly work unless they take turns, where one troll waits patiently while the other is composing a testy remark to the other, right in front of them. It's a completely absurd way to have an argument. It probably also qualifies as another log on the Karezi fire, for those keeping score at home. It's important to keep score of all those logs. That way, you'll know the precise quantity of precious shipping lumber that gets erased from history once I retcon-shitcan their entire relationship off the website.

[lesbiansforboromir]

Let me tell you all about a very personally satisfying HC I have that, whilst perhaps explaining some things within the books, is really just for my own enjoyment. 

So, the idea originates in the concept that everyone in the Dol Amrothian line are very spooky. The close elven lineage and living near an old abandoned elven haven had particularly mysterious effects on the whole family. Sure there are Dunadain in Gondor and they can develop certain spooky traits, but the Lords of Dol Amroth start out spooky and usually stay that way. It goes up and down depending on the individual, but generally they are all uncanny at the very least.

Denethor can see into the hearts of men, yeah ok cool I guess. Imrahil goes down to the Dol Amroth harbour at dusk and whispers to the swans until midnight, he answers questions you were sure you did not say out loud, he can make you weep with genuine grief over a sadness he hasn’t even mentioned. Speaking with Finduilas sometimes makes you feel like time passes in an instant, or incredibly slowly, or not at all... except no... really... how much time has passed? Wasn’t it just morning? How is the sun setting already? Or, oh my gosh, I’m going to be late! Or... not..? it’s barely been a few moments, yet I feel like I just lived a lifetime...

Ivriniel insists this is all nonsense, doggedly, she refuses to acknowledge it, no matter how many political rivals raise her considerable ire and come down with a mysterious and debilitating illness the next day. Grandmother Duilindes is just straight up a witch. ‘It’s all for the honour of Eru’ she says placatingly, as she enters her rooms in the Palace that she forbids anyone else from entering.

Denethor had heard these rumours before meeting Finduilas and, sure, he sometimes feels like he is being hunted, only to turn and find Adrahil’s eyes on him. But Dunadain are just a little strange like that! Surely it’s been blown out of proportion. He believes this up until he comes to Dol Amroth as Finduilas’ suitor. 

Denethor: Shall we take a walk after dinner? Everyone looks up from their plates in alarm Adrahil: Are you joking? Denethor: ??? Imrahil: It's the seventh day! The gardens aren't to be disturbed! Denethor, whispering to Finduilas: What does that mean?? Finduilas, chuckling: oh, Denethor! 

He sees Imrahil whispering to the swans at one point and is about to call out to him before Finduilas quickly gestures him silent.

Denethor, whispered: What is he doing? Finduilas: Shh, if the swans hear us we'll surely be attacked. Denethor: But then shouldn't Imrah- Finduilas: SHH.

One evening Ivriniel sweeps in with a stormy countenance, muttering over Lord Garahel’s stupidity. The next morning Denethor hears Imrahil mention that Lord Garahel has been taken ill with some fainting sickness. The look he gives Ivriniel is enough for her to know his mind. 

Ivriniel: Your imagination will run wild Denethor, I had thought you more reasonable. You think I, what? Cursed him? Don’t be ridiculous. Denethor, turning to Finduilas: Do you think... she knows she's doing it? Finduilas: Oh no, in fact she's determined to remain ignorant to it. Denethor: Can you... do that? Finduilas: I havent tried :)

At some point Finduilas had told Denethor that ‘Imrahil is the odd one of the family’ and by the end of the visit all Denethor can think is ‘by what metric??’

Denethor had to admit to himself privately that he was not at all put off by Finduilas’ nature, but he did have cause to worry what their children would be like. Finduilas came across Denethor, early after Boromir’s birth, rocking him to sleep and murmuring softly; 'I may have my failings as a father, I am sure I shall, but I swear they will be honestly meant, I love you so dearly my son... please do not curse me when you are older and I do not allow you everything you ask. I promise I only ever have your wellness in mind.' And she thought it was very sweet and proper, but she didn’t tell him he was wrong! And for very good reason! 

Boromir was an unnerving child. He learned to speak just a little too quickly, and when he did he would often say uncanny things, too knowing things, indecipherable things that became daunting the longer you thought about them. He had such a powerful grasp of complex feeling that he would often solve arguments between adults, explain emotions back at his parents or offer reasons for another child’s behaviour that were so accurate it became uncomfortable. 

3yo Boromir: (explains the reason Denethor’s secretary was distracted that day unprompted) Finduilas: (laughs) yes that's right! Denethor: It's.... TOO right. Finduilas: Oh well children are intuitive aren't they? Denethor, picking Boromir up: ... I feel under qualified to teach you things. Boromir: (baby-giggles but in a like way too knowing way)

And then sometimes Denethor would be sitting reading on a bench on a balcony in the early evening with Boromir contentedly playing with a fiddle-toy beside him, and suddenly his son’s voice would break the silence with; 'When I wasn't here I was colder, so I think I like it here, I'll stay. The air isn't as delicious but there's more to see.'

And then he’d go back to playing as though nothing was wrong whilst Denethor had an existential crisis. 

Denethor: W.. where were you, before? Boromir: Well I didn't know, because I couldn't know, but now I can know things, just not that. I haven't decided if I like it.

He asks Finduilas about it as soon as he can find her and she just laughs, ‘don't worry he'll forget he knows that in a few years’ she says, as though that helps at all.

But in general this is as far as Boromir ventures into the ‘spooky Dol Amroth’ territory. Sometimes he mentions things he CHOSE NOT to do that suggests he is capable of more, but other than randomly forcing Denethor to consider his position in the universe and reading him for shit, the first five years of being a parent is fine for Denethor.

At one point, when Boromir was about two, someone asked Finduilas if they were planning for another baby soon. Finduilas laughed ruefully, as though everyone would know that was a foolish question. ‘Oh no, much too soon for that’ she said. Denethor knew he had to follow up on what the hell that meant later. But when asked, all Finduilas said was ‘Oh you know! If siblings are born too close then they align their powers. Haven’t you heard my father talk about my uncles?’ She says it with the same tone as reading something out of a parenting manual. Denethor doesn’t want to hear about Finduilas’ uncles, but accepts this is important and stops thinking about it.

And it’s a good thing they did wait because, whilst Boromir was unnerving, Faramir is straight up terrifying.

What Denethor realised was that Boromir had been showing restraint. Faramir however was very comfortable with his powers and saw no reason not to use them. Denethor would find himself lost in baby Faramir’s eyes, feeling unable to move simply because of the weight of his stare. Finduilas and Boromir would have to save him from Faramir’s grasp, an act that would make Faramir look very put out. 

If people irritated Denethor when he was holding his youngest son, then just a glance from this child would make them drop whatever they were holding, Faramir grinning victoriously all the while. If Faramir did not want to take a bath then Finduilas would have to be present in case the baby decided to make Denethor relive his entire childhood. 

Sometimes Denethor would come outside to see his toddler just surrounded by the street cats of Minas Tirith, conducting some kind of incomprehensible tribunal that all the cats appeared to abide by. At one point Boromir was holding Faramir when Faramir grasped his brother’s face and pulled so that their eyes locked. Boromir passively held Faramir’s intense gaze for a while in this charged and tense moment, before calmly looking away as Faramir pouted. Denethor once again begged Finduilas to explain, but all she had to give was a fond sigh and a ‘Aw, Faramir just wants to get to know him, but our Boromir is too canny, Ivriniel and I used to do that.’ Denethor is used to helpless bemusement and concern by now. 

Now the SECOND part to this HC- YES I’M STILL GOING, THIS IS ALL IMPORTANT- the second part is that Dol Amrothians ALSO get a kind of ‘choice’. (This is likely not at all canon friendly tbh but uwu I can have a leetle canon noncompliance if it doesn’t effect the vast expansive canon... as a treat) It is far more unconscious and happens in childhood, but there is a point where a child will ‘decide’ to continue being spooky or to be more mundane. This never overrides ALL the spookiness, hence Ivriniel’s intermittent cursing and Finduilas’ occasional time dilation, but Imrahil still out spooks the lot of them. Amongst the family this is known as ‘settling’.

Boromir settles when he is eight. One day he comes to breakfast and Denethor looks into his son’s face and feels like he is suddenly more in the world, more in the moment. Boromir seems as himself as ever, but he makes friends easier afterwards. Whereas he had always been liked, now he is popular and has close relationships with children, rather than always seeming too distant. This also coincides with one of Gandalf’s rare visits. He had been trying to connect with Boromir, trying to engage him on very specific topics. Boromir had not been amused. 

Denethor would never say that Boromir hating Gandalf’s vibes was the reason he settled for mundanity. Boromir had many good reasons, he is sure. But the fact that he chose that moment to settle, so that Denethor was allowed to watch Gandalf also realise that Boromir was no longer ‘apt to his hand’, well he might have gleaned some little pleasure from it. 

The only aspect Boromir retains is his general resistance to such spookiness. Hence his frustration in both Rivendell and Lothlorien, the time distortion of those places not effecting him and the imposed rest not touching him, meaning he feels every passing day keenly. It also explains his resistance towards the Balrog’s doomful presence, as well as his heightened distress at Galadriel’s ability to see into his mind, where he had always been able to defend himself before. 

Faramir on the other hand is seven when he settles, thoroughly content with his spooky powers and wanting even more command over them. It is with this settling that he becomes able to sometimes cause people pain for lying to him. Denethor... struggles as a single father for many reasons.

[nohara-rin-dot-mp3]

zabuza is interesting because even though he is technically aligning with the naruto narrative's glorification of self-sacrifice he's doing it for a cause that the naruto narrative. ermmm believed in at the time before gradually changing its mind. which makes the scene read very oddly in retrospect. i don't really think zabuza is particularly emasculated before his sacrifice so there's not much difference in his portrayal. although i do think it's worth noting that (possibly because of the context of suicide, possibly because early naruto had different gender standards) zabuza's expression of genuine care for haku does not detract from his masculinity.

and like. yeah. i know it's naruto. and naruto starts screaming sobbing crying every time someone mentions sasuke. but like notably naruto is really not a masculine guy. like. he keeps turning into a girl. he's not the pinnacle of manhood by the naruto narrative's standards.

i think your comparison to minato's sacrifice is super interesting because like. minato's death is perhaps the strongest data point we have signaling that the connection between suicide and gender in naruto is specifically masculine, because minato never strays from the ideals of the system, and therefore the increase in masculinity from his sacrifice cannot be attributed to him returning to the system. likewise, zabuza starts outside the system and finish outside the system, ensuring that we cannot attribute any gender affirmation from his death to a change in his beliefs.

i realize i forgot about kisame earlier also, but i think we also kind of don't see enough of him to judge the effect that killing himself had on his gender lol? like kisame is a very masculine character and he dies believing full-heartedly in his cause. very masc. idk i love kisame but he's a very static character i can't measure change very well.

in my humble opinion. although deidara fulfills the "killing himself" aspect of gender affirmation, he doens't count, because naruto doesn't just want you killing yourself, it wants you doing it for a *reason.* a good one. it's not very picky about what counts as a good one, but generally it has to be for the benefit of someone besides yourself, and because deidara is killing himself for art which is something only he enjoys pretty much, it doesn't count. but even if it did i don't know what the fuck it would mean deidara's gender is a mystery i am not qualified to analyze yet. i will try and get back to you on that later. but i cannot promise anything.

okay. so. immortality. healing is a feminine trait according to the naruto narrative, which i believe pushes seeking immortality into femininity? except notably that this is a selfish application of feminity, which makes it Evil, as opposed to suicide which is usually utilized as a tool for enforcing the system. i wouldn't say that seeking to live forever is the opposite of killing yourself per se because wanting to live forever is evil feminine and killing yourself is good masculine. and i guess good feminine might be like. fucking uhhhh wanting others to live forever and good masculine is killing others? incredibly sloppy framework that is probably not correct but you get what i'm saying. there's some kind of graph to be made there.

orochimaru is the obvious immortality guy and like. they're queer coded-to signal their evilness obviously they have feminine traits is the immortality one of them? i mean maybe? i can definitely see an argument for them being feminine specifically because they are seeking immortality. konan and kaguya are the only female major antagonists and uhh. kaguya is a goddess whose been sealed for a while so she's probably immortal. and konan has her weird fixation on preserving bodies which is a bit of a stretch. but you could for sure make an argument for immortality being a feminine thing. wait FUCK tsunade outliving everyone in her life + manipulating her appearance to appear young... is it evil? unclear. definitely girl-coded though.

wait wait wait is suicide/self-sacrifice a masculine trait by naruto gender rules?????? big if true