#which is like... I think perspective and healthy modeling is great

[rawliverandgoronspice]

tbh I'm kind of... I tend to not entirely understand what limit we place between the "all need to strive to behave gracefully and being socially respectful and always understanding the space we must take to participate in society politely and productively with others", and the "we need to make space for mental illness and acknowledge it and destigmatize"

I'm not saying the two are incompatible, I don't think they are, but like. By definition, mental illness is about some form of incompatibility and dysfunction. Stigma is borderline impossible to avoid then. And I don't think we should follow unhealthy standards of human behavior from people who have unbalanced brains/trauma/haven't figured their stuff out yet, but I do find it complicated to reconcile the importance we put on good social behavior with the calls to try not to shame the mentally ill. I feel like they go hand in hand, by design. And I don't have a good solution, I don't even know what I think about that. But it is a thing I think.

[awakenedsalamander]

So I’ve been wanting to write about this for a long time (my friends can probably attest to the fact I will talk about it unprompted) but I can’t find it way to do so concisely. Here’s my best try.

Is Mage: The Ascension (in its presentation of the Technocracy in specific) anti-science?

I don’t think so, not anymore. But I want to explain why. By the way, I have to imagine that this won’t be all that accessible if you don’t have much knowledge of Mage, but you’re free to stick around if you want to.

So, here’s the thing— the Technocratic Union is pretty much a stand-in for the advancement of the scientific method, “the Enlightenment,” all that. The whole point in the first edition of Ascension is that the Union is science, the science that dispelled notions of magic, and that this is a Bad Thing. They are oppressive, heartless, and cold. The villains, plain and simple.

In later editions, this gets softened, partly due to the notion of “Science is a conspiracy the elite uses to rule the world and keep you down” becoming less fun and more toxic as it gained more sincere believers, and partly because fans really liked the Technocracy.

I think the common read is that Ascension then took the direction of the Technocracy being anti-villains— the Union has noble goals, and many of its members are sincerely brave and compassionate, but ultimately it is too extreme, too callous. It has to be stopped.

This is, to be fair, an improvement over “science is evil,” but “science is too dangerous,” is still not great. And for a long time, this was my view on Mage: The Ascension. Fun ideas, maybe, but the core conflict of the game was just too reckless a portrayal of what seemed to me like a mirror of real-world conspiracist ideology.

And to some extent, I still think that. Especially in the early editions, this is a very fair critique. That said, the game still spoke to me as I looked into it, and for the longest time I wasn’t quite sure why. A piece of it was my own opening up to the notion of our subjective viewpoints affecting our reality— something that deserves its own rambling essay— but a related part of it was me realizing that there was something about the Technocracy that rung true to me, despite my misgivings. And I think I figured it out.

See, the Technocracy isn’t a stand-in for the scientific method, but for scientism.

If you’ve not heard the term, “scientism” is a controversial (we’ll get into why a bit later) pejorative term for the belief/perspective that science, as a body, composes essentially all useful and/or reliable knowledge about the world.

Notably, those who critique scientism rarely hold the view that scientific knowledge is bad or even inaccurate, just that it is an incomplete model of reality. This is not an anti-science position, but a skepticism towards the trust people place in its ability to solve every mystery. Vaccines, for example, are great! No one can reasonably dispute the benefits and efficacy of vaccination. When it comes to medicine, the scientific method has done incalculable good— the lives saved by vaccination alone are countless.

To be against scientism, then, is not to argue that medical science is a failure, or overrated— but to point out that there is more to life than being healthy. Everyone should be glad we have learned so much about treating illness and alleviating suffering. But what of having a sense of purpose? What about love and compassion and justice? What about satisfaction, having gone through a life worth living?

Again, none of that is to say that science or the scientific community is the problem. But if you take the Technocracy as an example of scientism gone to an extreme, one in which things like kindness and equity must be left behind in favor of only the virtue of material knowledge, I think Mage: The Ascension starts to really work.

(I originally intended to write a MUCH longer piece including references to the military-industrial complex, the rise of automation and AI, as well as the increasingly algorithmic nature of culture but this is so long already. And yet I worry I said essentially nothing. C’est la vie.)

[jariten]

My Favorite Manga in 2023: Part 2

Like in part 1 I will skip the titles I already covered in previous roundups.

女の園の星 (Onna no Sono no Hoshi), Yama Wayama

初恋、ざらり (Hatsukoi, Zarari), Zaku Zakuro

うちのクラスの女子がヤバ��� (Uchi no Class no Joshi ga Yabai), Seiko Erisawa [Ichi-nen Ichi-gumi omnibus edition]

インターネット・ラヴ! (Internet Love!), Kiko Urino

レイニー通りの虹 (Rainy Doori no Niji), Keiko Fukuyama

葬送のフリーレン (Frieren: Beyond Journey's End), Kanehito Yamada & Tsukasa Abe

Yama Wayama appears to be on a continuous upwards trajectory as the manga comedienne of the reiwa era which I got to confirm for myself with the hit Onna no Sono no Hoshi. The episodic comedy about a teacher daily terrorized by his students and coworker. And with the scanlation well on its way I just want to say please experience it for yourself.

Uchi no Class no Joshi ga Yabai I had eyed ever since I started learning Japanese and the new omnibus that coincided with the ongoing sequel series gave me a great reason to finally pick it up. Box of Light by the same author was on my list last year and I not only liked the premise of it but also loved the anthology format of the story. For similar reason I really liked Uchi no Class: In the world of the series high school aged girls may experience the activation of powers.... that are completely useless and troublesome. We follow the students of year one class one, a class infamous for always having the highest concentration of useless powers. Dreams projected into the sky, X-ray vision that turn everyone around you into terrifying anatomy models is only the tip of the iceberg. I can't resist a gimmick premise done successfully and the variation of characters and powers kept the premise fresh like older characters who haven't yet "grown out" of their powers or a trans girl storyline.

Hatsukoi, Zarari follows the young woman Arisa diagnosed with a light intellectual disability and autism. Living between jobs and having a hard time turning down men who only want to have sex she has always struggled with her own self worth. This is until she falls in love with an older coworker who is charmed by her personality and quirks. But will things change if she opens up about her diagnoses? Zaku Zakuro has made manga and shared online about living with ADHD and asperger syndrome, giving this story a very personal and different perspective focusing especially on how stigma around developmental disabilities can be what causes the most friction and pain.

Internet Love! is a love story for the social media age with a budding romance that goes across borders. Bisexual nail artist Tenma has for years been a fan of a completely ordinary man from Korea named Uno who appears to be addicted to posting his life on instagram, daily filling up his story until the posts are lined up like dots. Thinking he held nothing but a healthy distance of "standom" for Uno, but he instead hits rock bottom when his insta favorite posts a girlfriend reveal. Tenma no longer able to bring himself to open the daily insta stories sinks into a depression, but Uno takes note that a certain someone stopped checking up on him... I was instantly charmed by this and was especially taken by how their clumsy attempts at communication without being able to speak each others language or no lingua franca was portrayed and the personal styles and fashions of the characters I just adored the whole thing.

[traintrainingmontage]

Skarloey Appreciation Essay: Interpersonal Intelligence

I know that I still have several ficlet ideas to write, but instead, have an analysis. This one's about Skarloey, mostly because he's my absolute favorite, but also because there's a lot to say about him. This is primarily based off of the Railway Series and Model Series seasons 1-5, since they're what I'm most familiar with (although it's been a while since watching the show, so please pardon me if I miss anything from that perspective).

For this analysis, I want to briefly mention how the various sagely characters excel in different types of intelligence. Some know a lot about the world and are happy to share their knowledge (Edward), while others are highly experienced and have that experience to fall back on when trying to guide and help others (Toby). However, out of all of them, I would argue that it's Skarloey who has the best interpersonal intelligence, in that he's great at creating healthy relationships between himself and others, and by extension, maintaining a measure of relative peace on his railway.

(There's also an Edward Appreciation Essay for you all to enjoy!)

Interpersonal intelligence is defined as "the ability to understand and interact effectively with others. It involves effective verbal and nonverbal communication, the ability to note distinctions among others, sensitivity to the moods and temperaments of others, and the ability to entertain multiple perspectives" (University of Tennessee).

To start, I'd like to give some examples of how Skarloey is good at this. Skarloey is a "do no harm, but take no shit" kind of character. When done well, this kind of character tends to be highly compelling. (In fact, Toby could also be classified in this way, albeit differently flavored.) Some Skarloey-specific examples include:

-Skarloey scolding the coaches after they sabotage Sir Handel (Old Faithful). Skarloey essentially scolds them for endangering the passengers, and when they try to blame Sir Handel, Skarloey's not having it. What's particularly notable is that he doesn't take sides here; he doesn't validate the coaches' feelings nor does he defend Sir Handel. Instead, he focuses on their professionalism, and the coaches really don't have anything to say in their defence.

-Building on the previous point, this whole event, especially with Skarloey pushing himself on the passengers' behalf, resonates with Sir Handel. It ends with Sir Handel thinking that "Skarloey is the best engine in the world," which is high praise coming from an engine that referred to Skarloey as "rubbish" in his debut (Sir Handel). It's almost a shame that Skarloey left for six years to be mended, as if he'd stayed, a number of Sir Handel's more overbearing qualities might have been ironed out sooner.

-Skarloey's own character growth is also on full display in terms of the way he treats others. The worst comeback he actually has in the RWS, toward anybody, is when he says to Sir Handel that all respectable engines want to work, and then immediately follows that up with advice for Peter Sam (Peter Sam and the Refreshment Lady). Every other time another engine says something rude or ridiculous, Skarloey says nothing and winks at some other engine, or keeps it to himself ("Rusty told Duncan about the bad bit of line, and warned him to be careful. 'Huh!' he grunted, 'I know my way about, thank you! I don't need smelly Diesels to tell me what to do.' Rusty looked hurt. 'Never mind,' said Skarloey, 'you've done your best.' He said no more, but he thought a great deal.") (Rock n' Roll). He's come a long way from the hot-tempered engine who threw petty insults at Rheneas (Stick-in-the-Mud).

-Skarloey delivers lessons in ways that aren't just "you shouldn't do this because I said so." This way of giving advice to headstrong engines often gets ignored, as seen when other sagely engines try it. Instead, he takes a more cunning approach, as seen by his tactic of goading Sir Handel into facing off against George (Steam-roller). There are other engines who are cunning, certainly (just look at Donald and Douglas, or some key Thomas moments), but they don't really try to pit other engines against each other. The only other one who does in a notable way is Diesel, and he's not really protagonist material for most of the series.

In this case, the other engines (let's be real, it's Peter Sam and Duncan) are fed up with Sir Handel's boasting, so they tease him. However, he just shrugs them off. By contrast, Skarloey recognizes that trying to be straightforward won't work, so he decides to appeal to Sir Handel's pride in the hopes that he and George might teach each other a lesson. It's a strategy that ends up working exceedingly well, and also doesn't undermine his standing with Sir Handel himself. Honestly, Skarloey can be a little bit devious and that's such a fun character trait (it shows up again when Skarloey just doesn't tell the others that Culdee's Godred story is made up (Bad Look-out), choosing to let them stew and perhaps be a little more mindful of their behavior, and those moments are some of my favorites).

-Skarloey earnestly compliments others when they do well. He's incredibly grateful to Rusty for fixing the track, and tells him so. He speaks earnestly about Rheneas, and compliments Culdee upon hearing about his railway. Not a lot of other characters do this unless under duress or when they feel bad for taking things too far! In fact, tying into this point is that Skarloey doesn't kick others when they're down (see above), and stops the other engines' teasing when it gets out of hand (Peter Sam and the Prickly Problem).

There are certainly other examples of Skarloey's excellent character (one of my favorite character traits of his is how he owns up to his mistakes and even talks about them as proof of how he's grown instead of trying to hide shameful moments from his past, making him more relatable), but I'll instead pivot to why he's my go-to for a shining star of interpersonal intelligence by comparing him to some of the fandom's other favorite sages.

-Edward is probably the most wholesome character in the whole series. He's kind, he's giving, he doesn't complain, and you just want the best for him. However, he's also been worn down by life to an extent. His coworkers are often rude to him for no reason, even while they begrudgingly respect him, and unlike Skarloey, who is undoubtedly the moodmaker on his railway, Edward simply isn't; Gordon is. While I feel bad that Edward is treated this way, I also can't help but wish that Edward would have stood up for himself and others more, particularly in the early days when the railway's culture was still being figured out, because everyone on the NWR always has something to prove. It's super fulfilling when Edward proves his worth and shows that not only is he still useful, but that he has an unmatched will. However, while letting his actions speak for themselves is great, all he's really done is prove that he too can still run with the young'uns. He's earned their respect in terms of his abilities, but not their respect for his authority as an experienced engine with good advice to give, or their respect as an equal, really. He's a coworker who's shown that he can handle his work, but his opinion doesn't hold as much weight as theirs.

Perhaps part of this is that Gordon is a physically larger engine with an ego to match (after all, size DOES matter in the inherent engine pecking order, and the Skarloey Railway engines are all the same size so that's much less of an issue). Perhaps it's that Edward simply isn't confrontational, and would rather just let a lot of this slide. Perhaps another part of it is that the NWR just has so many more engines now and without that groundwork, it's very unlikely that the railway's culture can be changed at this point without a lot of effort from multiple engines. However, everybody constantly picking at each other's old wounds and feeling defensive all the time does not lend itself to a kind railway. Edward just doesn't stop that nonsense in its tracks the way Skarloey does, and he doesn't really come to the defense of some of the smaller engines. He moreso manages the fallout and is a counselor for the others, reactive but not necessarily proactive. Edward is a kind, nice character, and I absolutely adore that about him, but he often comes across as just rolling with the punches or being a shoulder to cry on for the others instead of taking a proactive role in setting the other engines straight. (To be fair, what he needed most was James or Henry having a character arc that would let them get out of the shadows of their inferiority to Gordon or their own selves/circumstances and back Edward up more often so that people actually heeded and respected his advice, but that's hardly Edward's fault.)

-Toby, on the other hand, takes no shit from anybody and will bite you if you give him grief. That's also a great character trait, but it has the side-effect of making him difficult to get along with. He's filled with great advice, but the other, haughtier engines don't want to listen so Toby doesn't want to give it; he's happy to watch them fail abysmally and come crawling back. I absolutely love Toby as a character, but these kinds of people are rather difficult to get along with in real life. I find that Toby and Duck are particularly similar in this regard; they don't take shit from the other engines, but come off as more prickly for it. Everyone except their closest friends are coworkers at best, and so they also don't necessarily improve the vibes of the railway as a whole. Toby and Edward are two ends of the spectrum, two extremes in this regard.

Thus, to me at least, it's Skarloey who wins out in terms of being the most interpersonally intelligent sage character, who makes his railway a good place to be for everybody on it. He uses a couple of different strategies to help other engines see sense, whether it's being straightforward with them, using a story as an example, or cajoling them a little bit. He scolds others when necessary, but doesn't use their shame as ammunition and doesn't tear them down. People may not like the story "Pop" Special because it makes Duncan seem too nice, but I like it in the sense that it shows how decades of being around people who are good to you and treat you well can lead to an insular, angry person becoming kinder and more thoughtful. Who made that the culture on the railway and enforced it? Skarloey.

Like I said at the start, this analysis is limited to the Railway Series and Model Series seasons 1-5, so I'd love to hear others' opinions on what I've put forth here. I hope you enjoyed; ficlets to come soon(-ish)!

[love-karens-style]

School of Style – Suave Summer Style: 3 Fast Facts

(source: © Mararo Italy, via Pinterest)

“Watches are very personal things – expressions of who you are.” –Eric Ku

1. Metal Man – First and foremost gentlemen, this sub-heading, is with regards to the model’s watch strap. Now gentlemen, I don’t know about you, but for me, punctuality is indeed important. In his book, G is for Gentleman: Lessons in Life, Manners and Style, author Sam Martin, shares a sensible style statement, which is, “A fine watch is always the sign of a responsible and responsibly stylish gentleman.” Personally gentleman, I am an avid watch wearer, and I never leave home without a wristwatch. This is because, I enjoy being on time, as I do not like to keep people waiting. I am a lover of manners and etiquette, and being late is typically frowned upon by etiquette experts. Gentlemen, years ago, a wise woman said to me, “There’s always an excuse for being late, but never an excuse for being early.” Is it sad that I deliberately set my watches five to ten minutes later than the actual time, so that I think that I have less time than I do, to ensure that I am always on time?

2. Hygienic Hands – Gentlemen, the next tip that I’d like to share with you, may sound obvious, but I like to state the obvious, because it can sometimes serve as a relevant reminder, is about the importance of gently and thoroughly washing your hands before they come in contact with your fabulous face. As you know gentlemen, our hands do a lot for us, and handle a lot of things, throughout the day. Things that you may not want to come in contact with your skin, if you are serious about maintaining a clean complexion. Gentlemen, I would now like to share a quote, by the sensational Scottish singer, Lulu, who, in her book, Lulu’s Secrets to Looking Good, who succinctly states, “Wash your hands with soap before cleansing so you’re not transferring germs to your face as you cleanse.” This is indeed important, in my view gentlemen, because a gentle yet effective cleanse, is a great way to ensure a ‘clean canvas,’ so that your ‘follow-up products,’ such as serum or moisturiser, perform properly, for a healthy and happy complexion. In my opinion gentlemen, if your hands are not properly cleaned before you begin your cleansing routine, then unfortunately, your face will not be either.

3. Accessory Aesthetic – And last, but by no means least gentlemen, I’d like to kindly draw your appreciated attention, to the model’s spotted scarf. From my personal perspective gentlemen, the model’s silk scarf adds a ‘fun factor,’ to the model’s overall outfit. In my ‘December Edition’ last year, I mentioned, that an interesting item, or detail on an item of clothing, especially while on a date, could serve as a 'clever' conversation starter to help reduce the chances of any potential pauses, at the end of a conversation. Of course, it’s always great to keep the conversation flowing, while you are on a date, so that you do not experience any awkward silences. Hopefully your date, will notice your interesting item(s), which will make you a memorable date. Gentlemen, may I also share another observation, regarding the model’s silk scarf? Notice how, the scarf perfectly pulls his outfit together, smartly and simply. And why does this matter? Because, Coco Chanel once said, “Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance.”

Love, KF X

Happy to help: karensworldofstyle@live.co.uk or karens_style on X (Twitter)

This article was researched, written, edited, produced & published by Karen, on 12th April 2025

[ciswomenofficial]

I’d just like to state off the bat that this is my limited perspective on the matter. I know what I know, I feel what I feel, and I don’t know what I don’t know. I do know that I exacerbated and caused a lot of these issues by being toxic, as I was stewing in misery, unsure of where to start working on myself, and unable to see a future without my maladaptive coping mechanisms which I had developed mostly from my parenting and schooling. Some of my toxic behaviors were in turn shaped by the circumstances i found myself in. The former roommate I’m going to talk about is not the worst roommate, evil, and I can’t decide whether they are irredeemable only they can do that by choosing either to stay the way they are or move on and try to be better as I have.

I was not safe to live with my parents. I ended up leaving their house and moving into an apartment supported by the person in question. They wanted me and everyone else in the house to look for work, which was honestly a fair ask, but I had a hard time contributing how I ideally would have. First of all, the job market wasn’t great, but also I still find job applications to be a Sisyphean task, a bunch of busy work that usually gets me nothing. In the middle of a nonstop psychotic episode and depressive spiral, naturally i was not any better at trying to get a job. I don’t think they were unfair on this front, but not what I needed, and them constantly holding money over my head the whole time we lived together made me feel like a burden, which made me worse. I needed more support to get me into a place where I could have a job without killing myself, to get my body back in shape to a point where I could do more physically demanding jobs. Looking back it feels like I had to do all that myself and their guilt-trippy ways around money just got in the way of that. Now they have a college education and probably a better chance of getting a decent job at a higher pay grade than me, payed for by their partner’s work. They can life that middle-class lifestyle whether they continue to live stateside or go through with that move to Europe. Good for them I guess, but I’m left having to claw my way closer to actually being able to get even a fraction of that and it feels like all they did was drag me down further, although to be fair maybe we did that to each other. I wonder what they’re doing to help other people in their life who may be treated as burdens now, for my part I’m trying help my partner battle their uncle so that he can’t make our three trans guy roommates who I don’t love and can annoy the hell out of me sometimes homeless.

I have always been a combative person. I tend to argue and not take things lying down. Now I’ve chilled out a lot, but back then that could easily take the form of shouting matches rather than a more productive form. Now when I lose my temper at someone and say something unfair, I’m more likely to catch myself and apologize, and while I’d sometimes do that back then I was less good at it. Even a healthy degree of confrontational and argumentative behavior can play out in a non-productive way with some people’s trauma and that was definitely a factor in our relationship. They saw any challenge to themself as an attack, they rejected any model that didn’t revolve around them being the most moral actor. They would threaten to kill themself in the event that their partner ever theoretically left them and then insist that they were a bad person for it until their partner would coddle them and tell them they weren’t abusive, and that it was fine because “you mean it, and would actually kill yourself.” Their partner would also have to reassure them that they weren’t playing the victim in the way that they were acting cutesy, “you’re actually cutesy so it’s fine.” But they absolutely were, I’ve met people who acted all cute and didn’t use it to play the victim since then and it’s a world of difference. I honestly think that they were abusive to their partner, while them and I were merely toxic to each other. Regardless, they refused challenge, refused change, refused anything but psychological stagnation. Eventually, unable I fell back on a secondary way of responding to their behavior than direct confrontation of simply bottling everything in and avoiding each other. This put an end to even the chance that they would work at all on self-improvement, leaving them to surround themself with coddling.

As we started to fight, they made friends with someone who’d cut me off with the final straw in our conflict being their actions in response to our conflict not my own, their former enemy being their new friend, their transgression being the reason why I was unforgivable to that friend, the other transgression being yelling (to be fair including some things that weren’t necessary) at a 17 year old “innocent minor” for being a racist. We interacted less and less and always negatively, they ruined my ability to have any kind of relationship with my longtime friend and their partner. At the end of the road they left me alone and friendless back with my abusive parents several months after the beginning of the Covid lockdown.

I hope I’m not painting a rosy picture of myself here, and I don’t mean to cast them in an unfair light either. We were two traumatized people, unable to provide each other the emotional support we needed, having trouble getting over our maladaptive responses which had once been necessary for our abusive environment and which now only damaged ourselves and the people around us, and I truly wish nothing for them other than healing and health. I also wish them a healthy breakup, not as a punishment but because I don’t know if that relationship can grow into anything healthy for both parties. But yeah, I do have a lot of negative feelings to the situation we were in together and how toxic it was to both of us, how it nothing but stagnated my ability to move forward, failed to give me the support I needed, and shafted me in the end, and how my toxicity was the only toxicity that mattered between the two of us.

[mesetacadre]

@mithrifer Only party members in party elections. In non-ruling parties, it's easy to understand why I think. For ruling ones, it's first a question of how democracy is expressed and carried out in the worker's daily life. Democracy in a worker's state cannot be simplified down to the election of a leader. Even if the party Congress is an extremely democratic organ, a vanguard party by definition cannot include everyone as a member. Rather, the democracy in which everyone participates in is one that's simply lacking in any capitalist state, which is self-determination in the economic and political day-to-day life. Taking decisions on how your workplace is run, how resources are administered and to whom, who should be in the local and regional government, and even who should be in the local party organs, are what's extended to every single worker in a socialist state. I think, like with most things, Anna Louise Strong makes this point much better than I can:

The entire pamphlet is a great read for understanding democracy under a democratic-centralist party. Of course this is only the example of the USSR, but ALS' ample accounts of Soviet democracy are unparalleled in similarly influential instances of socialism, and keep in mind communists parties that have taken power have, to varying extents, used the Soviet model, taking into account its advantages and disadvantages, to instate their own democracies.

Besides this, in every socialist state with a democratic-centralist party, there have been from local to country-wide elections for public positions, usually with additional mechanisms such as recalls to have full accountability. This is especially visible in countries where the state and party are more separate, which wasn't really the case in the Soviet Union. Cuba is increasing this division and I believe Vietnam also has a significant separation. The DPRK's WPK doesn't even rule alone, there are a few other parties that represent specific social groups, such as The Chondoist Chongu Party, which represents a religious movement in Korea, Chondoism. Talking of the DPRK, ALS also has an account of their elections, before the Korean War.

Once again I recommend reading the whole thing.

One assumption I find permeating a lot of questions along these lines (not saying you specifically, mithrifer), is a presumption of bad intentions on a party's part to misrepresent and mislead the workers once they achieve power. Countless discussions and campaigns have been produced within these parties at all times to drive a higher participation of the masses in every possible aspect, to produce a mass of workers who are un-still, who want to concern themselves with the future of their class as a whole, and who want to actively participate in reaching that future. It's this generalized participation in every aspect of a worker's life that the party listens to and from which it learns.

The election of a leader is not the placing of trust on an individual's ideas, it's the placing of trust on someone who is able to, along with the Central Committee and its associated organs, synthesize feedback from every aspect of a society into a single will. By participating in everyday decisions and administration, the masses themselves are making of the communist party a more democratic organ because it amplifies the amount and quality of perspectives and experiences from which to draw from. It's not simply the rule of the majority, it's the synthesis of the entire working class. For a healthy democratic-centralist system, the election of a general secretary should not mean a radical change in direction per se, it should mean a superficial change for a system that at all times takes in, as best as it can, the will of an entire class of people, and produces a political and organizational leadership capable of sharpening and conducing that will.

I told the incident [of a non-party candidate being unanimously favored over a party candidate] to Andrei Zhdanov, Leningrad party chief and one of Stalin’s closest friends. I added that it would be hard to explain to Americans an election in which the local Party leaders congratulated the people on throwing out the Party candidate. He hardly got my point, but said, “What we build cannot be built by passive people.”

The Soviets Expected It, Anna Louise Strong (1941)

hey! this is a dumb question, but why are general secretaries elected for life?

They aren't. The procedure in democratic centralism is that a Congress is called periodically, typically every 4-5 years though that might vary, where a new Central Committee and its associated organs are elected, including the General Secretary. The Congress is the most powerful organ in a communist party, above the CC and gensec. Members of the party are chosen as delegates from their local cells, and they each have one vote, as well as having the duty to participate in the debates.

In the USSR, Lenin was actually never the general secretary, then Stalin was elected repeatedly despite him asking to step down multiple times. He died whole being gensec. Khruschev was replaced by Brezhnev in 1964. Brezhnev did die in 1982, and afterwards there were two quick successions both ended with the person holding the position dying, Andropov in 1984 and Chernenko in 1985. Gorbachev of course died 2 years ago, as he was overthrown. It is true that after Stalin the USSR had a very aged leadership, that's why Brezhnev, and especially Andropov and Chernenko died in the position.

In Cuba, before the revolution, only José Peña Vilaboa died while being first secretary and he only held it for a year or two. Fidel left office in 2011 and he died in 2016. Raúl Castro succeeded him and he left office in 2021, he's still alive. Now it's Miguel Díaz Canel who is 64.

In Vietnam, Trần Phú died while in office in 1935, then it wasn't until 6 general secretaries/first secretaries, including Hồ Chí Minh who died 9 years after leaving the position, Lê Duẩn died while in charge in 1986. No other general secretaries have died except for Nguyễn Phú Trọng who died last year.

In China, there is more of a marked difference between the state and party, but it's honestly not that hard to research. Most have not died in office.

The DPRK is a big exception, the Worker's Party of Korea, which to be clear isn't even the only party in the DPRK, has had 3 previous general secretaries (Kim Tu-Bong, Kim Il Sung, Kim Jong Il) who have all died in office. I'm sure someone can explain this in more depth, but the Kim family was so well-regarded and initially chose as general secretaries because they were almost legendary guerilla fighters against Japanese occupation, especially Kim Il Sung. Anna Louise Strong talks about this more here in chapter 3 Government and Elections. Whatever the case, each member of the Kim family has been very involved in the WPK, and due to the accumulated experience elected.

Whichever country you were thinking of when you sent this ask, which is probably the USSR or the DPRK, nobody is chosen until death. These positions are regularly and democratically renewed or reconfirmed, and I don't think that someone being elected multiple times is undemocratic. If people are happy with how something is run, why would they change it? and besides, let me remind you the General Secretary is not that supremely powerful. All decisions in a democratic-centralism system are taken collectively, taking into account previous debates and the constant feedback from the base. Many, many people are involved who the Central Committee rely on, and the CC itself often changes members even more between congresses. Idk, the USamericans chose FDR for almost 4 terms an nobody talks about the FDR dictatorship. It's not hard to believe maybe FDR was simply a good president most people liked, and who was in charge during a crucial time. The DPRK has been under constant siege since its very creation, under sanctions and with some of the largest military bases and exercises on its border, run by the people who killed around a fifth of your people. Changing leadership often might also be conducive to instability and a rapidly-changing course, which the Korean people would understandibly not want.

Same with Stalin. He was the general secretary during a crucial time, the collectivization of work and industrialization on par with the US and western Europe, followed by the Nazi-fascist invasion, and then the very costly reconstruction.

Non-ruling democratic-centralist parties typically have a much faster rotation of general/first secretaries, you can look at a list on Wikipedia for most parties out there and you can compare with their death dates.

[doyouthinkimenjoyingthis]

Bodies, bodies, bodies

I hated my body growing up. I was okay but not until I was 12 that I started bleeding. When I was in Gr4, I was envious of my friends getting their period earlier. When mom and I go shopping, I take pads and pretend I have period even if I don't have. Mommy don't care. I wear them but January 2006, I woke up with blood all over my sheets, and pants. There's some pain in my core. I rushed to my parents' room and mom was nonchalant and told me that I was practicing already so I should be fine.

And everything about my body is changing. I started having breasts around 7. Just small bump so I still had to wear baby bra. I hate it. It's annoying, it's itchy and very uncomfortable. And as a very active kid, if it get hit, it hurts. I never liked it when puberty raged on.

Hair all over that I have to wax, chests growing out that it's noticeable from my uniform. my glutes, waist and hips rounding. What's worst was skinny jeans and tight leggings, body con dresses, baby tees are the trend and elephant pants are out.

I also disliked the attention I was getting most especially from creeps, and weird uncles.

Even from the girls or women, I didn't like it. I wanted to be skinny flat like a boy. Athletic, no fats hanging around.

So there it began my unhealthy relationship wit fitness and food. I kept subscribing to these teen magazines, candy and 17tee. Although they promote healthy habits and talks about eating disorders, I still don't see a model that has the same body type as me. No voluptuous one. Just your usual skinny, and lanky. all of that and the questioning of my sexual and gender identity.

I asked Mrs. Pagaduan when we were on that topic. I said that I wish I ripped off anything that identifies me as feminine. She called it body dysmorphia. You hate the body you are in. She guessed correctly that it might be feeling of transexualism.

Maybe. But I do not exactly want something hanging between my legs. I'm fine with my genitals but I didn't want my framing.

I ate less, worked out more.

Roxy had that skinny body that ive wanted. And just like me, she is developing unhealthy habits.

I've met Hollmae and in which I reflected eventually and it changed my perspective.

Hollmae wanted to be thicc. It's a slang for voluptuous.

We have covered many conversations about it. We can share a lot with our experiences how fucked up society is. Especially towards women and beauty standards. Also, how the Filipino society is shit at that thing.

We can't win. So, I gave up. I continued to living healthy because I don't want to die and I still want to look androgynous. Free of femininity and masculinity.

I've discovered non-binary. I've learned that you don't need to look or dress the part. But you eventually have to because it's a feeling you have to follow. It's an identity.

Today society is progressing where body shaming is a no-no. But it's still difficult to rewire society's standards. Sure, just confidence. But how many people actually, internally believe that.

My mother was among those who is body positive. Easy for her, I think she has a great body. She's quite boxy too. Fairer skin. As a stylist and dressmaker, she does say a lot that the important piece in dressing is believing you are hot.

She says confidence can easily be detected and absorbed. It can easily shut people up. Or stutter them.

I believed her, until you are pitted against other women in terms of male gaze. Which I am a very unwilling participant.

Since I turned 18-20, I felt some changes in my body again. I started to feel old. I started to see myself as old. My aching dysmenorrhea though has lessened. It wasn't like before.

I still work out but I feel like it's not achieving what I have in mind. So I started to starve myself again to lose those muscles then restart.

Comment: There is what we call transgender body dysmorphia. Although you don't desire to be a man, but you also do not desire to be a woman. You are in between.

I think the assault that happened to you when you were 13 might be the perfect explanation for this. You were budding with puberty. The violation of your body in which case the assailant saw you as a woman not a child, would perfectly explains it. As you are very wary and scared of male gazes and even women's for thatatter that you didn't want to be associated with the body that you have. You have complained a lot about that. Of how men started to treat you when you were growing especially from what you call as creepy uncle's who are family members or close to your family. And any men for that matter who is not supposed to see you as an object of desires. Like a teacher. It's your body's response to being protective.

You don't hate your femininity. In fact you embrace it gracefully. It's just not that exact kind. you are protective of your femininity. For you being feminine gives out a signal of vulnerability and you don't want to show it.

[copperbadge]

Sam, you are NOT a “weirdo.” The neurology of the human mind exists on a spectrum; ALL humans are *biologically* “neurodiverse” and have extremely variable interior experiences. One of the most difficult concepts for ANY writer to grasp is that of “other minds, other perspectives”, and on that you already WELL ahead of the curve. 😊😎

Yikes, my response to this turned into a whole-ass essay so first, two things:

1. Thank you for the compliment, a number of people reached out to tell me that I write very well for people who see images when they read. That is extremely reassuring so I very much appreciate it.

2. I’m about to say a lot of shit that is only vaguely, tangentially related to what you’re saying here so my usual disclaimer applies: I appreciate what you said and I am not yelling AT you, I am yelling NEAR you. :D 

So. On the one hand, yes, humanity is diverse and we can only be ourselves, or a version of ourselves that is tolerable to live with. On the other hand, culture also sets down rules that say this is usual, this is unusual, this is acceptable, this is unacceptable. We don't live in a spectacular culture for "this is acceptable" but most of us are aware that what we think of as "normal" is narrow and fucked-up. But it’s tough to go beyond that to discuss how we relate to “normal”. 

It's something I'm grappling with and it's not something that it's easy to grapple with visibly because of that -- because the minute you call yourself weird or a freak or anything that denotes "not normal", or even when you just talk about “normal” as a concept, people reassure you that normal is an illusion, it's a construct. Which is true! And it’s good to model self-acceptance for people who are still struggling with that. 

The problem is that it limits how much you can discuss feeling outside of normal. And I do feel that way, because of the ADHD diagnosis and other stuff too. I feel that way a lot, these days. Like, a painful amount. Like, a questioning who I am on some very basic levels amount. So...there have to be ways to talk about the reality of normal. 

While normal is a construct, it’s still there -- as a culture we have a concept of normal that matters, regardless of whether it ought. We don’t have great pathways to say “Hey, I’m struggling with feeling like I’m not normal” because people want to assure you that you don’t have to feel normal...but sometimes you want to, because normal is what is culturally approved and it’s hard to be an outlier. Worse, if you’re visibly outside of normal, we tend to very violently police you for it. 

I’m lucky in that I’m pretty ordinary-looking, so I don’t get policed very often, but I‘m very aware of the policing of invisible disability because I have siblings with learning disabilities, and my whole family has some degree of mental illness. Lately I have watched my mother struggle because she needs aids to walk and feels like people are staring at her and saying she’s old and of no worth, a drain on society. The world reinforces that by doing things like making her get to the airport FOUR HOURS EARLY in order to get wheelchair service (and then “losing” her name so she still almost misses her flight). 

You don’t have to be normal, but if you aren’t, you still have to put up with the dickheads who think you should be, who will punish you for deviance. There's a disparity between "healthy ways for you to feel about this" and "how society will feel about this". 

To circle back to my mother, who internalized the ableism and misogyny of the 1950s and 60s and barely escaped being labeled a Fridge Mommy in the 80s because of my brother’s autism....I was raised in a family where there was a very strong value placed on being normal. It was particularly strong for me, because I was the normal one. My parents could not handle the idea that all of their kids had special needs. They needed me to be normal, not least because if I was normal I could help raise my siblings, which I did. And that's been my identity my whole life: the normal one.

Normal is a construct but unfortunately it’s the construct on which my entire identity has hung for forty years.

And my attitude -- not that this was conscious -- was that if you have to be forced into that role, if you must fulfill the exhausting demands of being normal, then you should also get the rewards. The more normal you are, the more power you have. That’s incredibly unhealthy but it’s even more harmful not to admit it happened. And so I have been shoving myself into this identity of “Oh no, that’s not me. I’m not disabled, I’m not queer, I’m not special, I’m a mediocre white dude” because to admit otherwise is to relinquish the protection of normal. 

So...I wish we had a word like “normal” but with an extra connotation of “Look, I know normal is just a privileged idea of what everyone should be but it’s also heavily enforced in our society so we need to acknowledge it still exists”. 

I’m not normal. I am a weirdo. I’m more a weirdo now than I’ve ever been. There has to be a space to say that, to say “Normal exists and I’m not it and I feel fucked up about it” because how else do you rebuild an identity? 

I think it is important to reassure people that normal is an idea, not a law of nature, and I appreciate everyone who chimed in with that. But I think it’s also important to acknowledge that it’s really hard to suddenly find yourself outside of normal, and start thinking about ways in which we can support that struggle when we see someone stuck in it. Maybe disability activists have something to say about this and I’m covering old ground; I’m not well-read beyond the basics. I don’t know what the answer is myself, I’m still really stuck in the middle of this, but I think there must be more options open to us than the reassurance that normal isn’t real. 

[roo-bastmoon]

Let's talk about Yoongi and Taeyang

My thoughts and impressions of this episode are below the cut to avoid spoilers for folks.

Okay so first of all, let's all agree that our Lil Meow Meow was going THROUGH IT. He started fanboying before he could even get to the introduction and he was consistently twitterpated throughout the entire show. Adorbs.

I won't recap everything, but a few things stood out to me as significant insights into character.

Taeyang mentioned he used to eat only one meal a day. (As someone recovering from disordered eating, I have VIEWS about this but let me hush up and stay on topic.) Then he said when he served in the military, he had to eat three meals a day and do physical labor, so he gained 10kgs (22lbs). Which by the way is still a healthy weight. And he said he had to "work hard" to lose it again. I hate this. I hope all our boys come back from their time in the military used to regular meals, regular sleeping hours, a regular BMI and stick to it. They will have the power to reshape the standards of the industry if they refuse to make themselves fit into a smaller space. Just my opinion and I doubt I'll be changing it any time ever.

Taeyang said Jimin re-recorded their song 15 times. As far as I know based on the documentaries and Masterclasses I've watched from other famous musicians, singers, and songwriters, studio time is precious, even if you own the studio. Recording is expensive. A great deal of time is spent after recording on mixing the best takes to get to one master track. But our Jimin seems to have wanted to get it perfect all in one. He really does hold himself to a standard higher than most Grammy winners; I'm not kidding.

Yoongi then of course praises Jimin for his work ethic. The praise, THE PRAISE, Y'ALL. I LIVE. Jimin keeps working even when he cramps up in pain, our dear artist... Remember when he couldn't go to Jin's birthday party because he was recovering from muscle cramps? We called it; it was because of choreo.

Interesting how in the same breath, Yoongi compared Jungkook's organic genius to Jimin's effortful genius. I'm a huge Jikook fan but I don't want to make this out to be a shipping moment, because honestly it's just about styles of approach to work. And this isn't the first time we've heard this about Jikook as a unit. We hear it from members, producers, friends, choreographers, collaborators...

Yoongi also is sure to rat Jimin out about how much he mimicked and idolized Taeyang as a teen and it's like... you're saying this while admitting to doing the exact same thing and knowing all his songs, but still, it's super sweet. It reminds me of when Yoongi admitted to writing fanfic, lol. Even better is how Taeyang mentions several times he knows all of BTS' work. That's a discography of 200+, my friends.

But seeing Yoongi praise both Jimin and Taeyang so highly makes me wish that this episode came out before VIBE released. Maybe his trusted perspective would have softened the resistance many people felt toward supporting the project.

Especially because Taeyang really comes across as a good guy. He seems humble, considerate, grounded, a team-player, sensible, deep-thinking, and kind. He also seems to be focused on being a family man, making good music, and becoming a role model for the next generation. Now yes, both times I've seen him this way, he's appearing on TV to promote his single. But as far as we can know a celebrity while they are in front of a hot camera, I feel like his character is genuine enough, and I trust the tannies when they say they ALL admire and respect him deeply.

BTS has been around in the industry long enough to know when people are full of shit. And yeah, there are some seriously problematic assholes in Big Bang. There were legit scandals involving drugs and sex trafficking. I won't be rushing out to consume their products. But they did play a part in shaping BTS and Taeyang shouldn't be painted with the same brush just because he landed in the same group. He seems like someone who might have matured out of a lot of mistakes, like appropriating hairstyles or speaking on subjects outside his lived experience. I'm willing to give him a chance, here, in 2023, to get it right.

I also appreciate how honest and vulnerable Yoongi was and continues to be the moment he gets a few drinks in him. Talking about being so nervous without his members for That, That that he wanted to throw up. Mentioning the fear and disappointment when news of their hiatus caused all hell to break loose. Stating openly and without any qualifiers that he loves his members. To me, this is healing.

Yoongi was also adorable as fuck, let's face it. Giggly, blushing, toe-tapping, squirming, gushing, flirting Min Yoongi managed to ask Taeyang if he could produce a song for him (as if anyone in the world would say no thanks). And Taeyang is like "come over to my house and eat dinner with Jimin, I'll cook kimchi jiggae for you guys."

Oh and by the way, Taeyang and Joon apparently go to dinner and hang out and go to museums? AND WE WOULD NEVER KNOW. Do you know why? Because unless they choose to share aspects of their personal lives with us, WE DON'T ACTUALLY SEE THE MAJORITY OF THEIR PERSONAL LIVES. So just because you don't see evidence of members hanging out doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Everyone needs to chill about this with regards to Jikook. They went to ground around the same time that bullshit insurance premiums "scandal" broke and they've been to ground since. That's all.

Side note: Considering the shitstorm online earlier this week because Taehyung followed T-Top for a few hours on Instagram, I'm wondering if 2023 is the year most of the tannies stick to work-only promotions for their social media. You get burned enough, there's no payoff in sharing your vulnerable sides with strangers. It's such a shame, because we had a window to their inner landscapes, a glimpse at their real personalities and their real lives, but ruiners ruin everything. So a special Fuck You to people sending them hate for following or working with people you don't like. Know your place as a fan. Feel free to protest with your pocketbook but don't you dare talk shit and spread hate.

I digress. Back to Suchwita.

Taeyang advised Yoongi to surround himself with good people (members, staff, friends)... people who can tell him no. They had a great talk about staying realistic and humble, reminding themselves all things come to an end, being normal and grounded.

THIS is what makes BTS so easy to champion. They are uniquely talented, clearly the most hardworking, and even have streaks of artistic genius. But they forever remain set in a beginner's mind. They are the top dogs in their industry with an underdog mindset. I love this about them enough to set alarms to vote for awards and buy multiple copies of their work so they chart. I, Roo, who has never been to a popular music concert in all her 43 years; never been a groupie of anyone; never owned a piece of merch--I want them to succeed because I know they will never take it for granted.

And they keep it simple, even when it comes to how they work. Now, as someone who writes for a living and does bullet journaling every day as part of my therapy, I cannot tell you how delighted I was to learn that Yoongi writes with a pen and Taeyang with a typewriter. I am exactly the same. There's something intimate about it. I type more than 95 words a minute for work but it's not the same when crafting something personal. I also write original works better away from a designated work space--it's too much pressure to sit in a sterile environment and try to create. Real, meaningful words come from real, messy, organic moments in life. I just loved this level of detail in their conversation.

All in all, this was just such a great episode. I feel like I got to know both men better, was shown real insight into their mindsets, learned about their lives and work, and so I felt excited about VIBE.

Speaking of VIBE, we still need lots more sales to help Jimin get to Hot 100. Please contact accounts on twitter to get a gift card, make another itunes or amazon account, and buy it again, if you cannot persuade others to buy-in. Jimin worked so hard and wanted this so badly. I'm deeply troubled that ARMY couldn't cough up a buck-twenty-nine for him. It's like With You all over again. Unacceptable.

We are up against Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, and Sam Smith. We need the sales to get the points. We have a day and a half to get it right. PLEASE buy it.

We also only need 1.2 million more views on YouTube to get it to 50 million in its first week, so please stream today and tomorrow!

Consider it practice for next month, when PJM1 drops. Because by all accounts--from everyone who has ever worked with Jimin--he deserves it.

If you got this far, thanks for reading. Please feel free to share your thoughts in the comments!

Yours,

Roo

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

Feel free not answer, by the way.

Is there a healthy version of feminism that focuses on women's rights without becoming a cesspool of negativity and hatred for men, while still keeping in touch with traditional values? I don't know if something like that exists but I thought I'd ask anyways.

In your opinion, do you believe women—in the past, at least—were truly oppressed? I feel like the narrative told by radical feminists is incomplete, since they like to approach things primarily from a men hate women perspective.

One last thing, what are your thoughts on SCUM Manifesto? Reading the book, even back then when I was more radfem-aligned, made me feel uncomfortable. I couldn't relate to weird ramblings that she wrote about. Looking back now, I feel like Valerie was a deeply unwell women with a lot of unresolved issues that she dumped entirely on men. A well-adjusted person wouldn't harbour such extreme hatred. I find the same 'unwellness' in most radical feminists and it kind of makes me sad.

"Is there a healthy version of feminism that focuses on women's rights without becoming a cesspool of negativity and hatred for men, while still keeping in touch with traditional values?"

The only things I'm aware of are small pockets called "Individualist Feminism" or more recently "Ifeminism", which focus on equal rights for both women and men and leave it at that. But the women going by that label are such a incredibly tiny minority and are often distrusted or even attacked by the other feminists who, particularly from the 1970s onwards, are so deeply rooted in man-hating "Patriarchy Theory" that anyone refusing to join in is instantly categorized a traitor and enemy.

My point is, women who refuse to blame men (or the fictional "Patriarchy") for everything will never be welcome within the larger movement, so I'm not able to see the point of identifying that way myself.

"do you believe women—in the past, at least—were truly oppressed?"

I suppose I think the great majority of people could be said to be "oppressed" in some way at some point in their lives: any time an individual or the state uses violence against you, any time a person in authority targets you unfairly or discriminates against you, or compels you to do something you wouldn't choose to do, you have some sort of argument for being "oppressed". Feminism is idiotic and actively harmful because it puts forth a conspiracy theory collectively blaming exactly half of the entire human race for things individuals of all sexes, races, sexualities and political affiliations can do, and it wrongly presents that model as the best way of understanding all past and present human events.

Universal gender roles are overwhelmingly a product of evolution, of adapting to the hostile world over millions of years to best survive: if there ever was a society that sent its women out to hunt and to war while the men stayed home and played with the kids while baking bread, that society was quickly wiped out by war or starvation or population decline, and entirely eradicated from history because of how stupid and delusional it was.

The societal demands on both sexes must have seemed unfair to many people at points throughout history, and there must have been individuals who felt hard-done to and constrained by societal expectations in every age, whether it be the teenage boys being shipped off to die in war against their will or sent down a coal mine every day of their life, or the bored middle class Victorian girls who wanted to make more of themselves in work or travel the world having unaccompanied adventures. I've said before that the most repressive societies in regard to women - such as Islamic societies today - can be best understood as overprotection rather than misogyny: the more warlike or under attack a society perceives itself to be, the more it locks its women away to keep them from being stolen or killed.

Don't know if that fully answers your question but those are some of my thoughts on those matters.

"what are your thoughts on [the] SCUM Manifesto?"

I used to own a copy of that book in my feminist youth. Valerie Solanas was obviously a mentally sick, hysterical and evil woman, but sadly she was the canary in the coal mine for what was to come: There are tens of thousands of Valerie Solanases wandering the world today, making life worse for everyone, and they all seem to have a Tumblr.

[glitternightingale]

Yeah so I'm also here post-animation process video drop and your brilliant break-down about Bruno's belly. Hi! I’m not on Tumblr and hope you mind a long ask in lieu of reblogging/adding to your OP.

The confirmation has been validating, is one big thing. But is it weird that with regard to the three whats/whys in your break-down (artistic choice, chub, malnutrition), I was like “ah but couldn’t it be a little, or be some combo, of all three?" - said with an intonation à la Mirabel’s "and I think it's all because of me?" I think I'm a bit of the mind that his belly is round (and "disproportionate") more due to malnutrition than from having actual healthy adipose, based on its shape? and stuff, but that's probably me reading way too into things.

There's this other part of me that's also like, what are the chances that someone like Jared Bush, who does answer questions about the canon on his Twitter, would further confirm… or maybe not confirm per se, but shed a lil insight into some of the choices?

And and: have you been able to compare the 1st and final passes at the chase scene animation? I’m no artist, but I feel like I noticed a few differences between the two Brunos (using side-by-side screen grabs bc I am 100% Like That). Ex. when he’s running toward the camera and goes to leap for the pipe: in the 1st test his stomach actually looks larger than it does in the final test; and, in the final his chest/rib cage/sternum area... and kind of his whole frame tbh... look smaller and more... shrunken/visible. Which I’m sure makes sense since it’s the final version and stuff like the muscle rigging(?) gets tweaked, but I just found the changes interesting in light of your post, the discussion, and because process stuff is cool.

This is all over the place, sorry! Last thing I swear: I love your fic, WAACH - and your art! More and more with each chapter. Always so happy seeing a telltale alliterative title in an email from AO3 :)

Oh, it could definitely be all three! I actually only broke it up into sections to structure my mess of thoughts on the matter. Well, then I forgot to point out exactly that. 😅

Here's the link to the referred post: Bruno's Belly: Artistic Choice? Chub? Malnutrition?

Bruno's Belly (2): Artistic Choice? Chub? Malnutrition?

When I wrote the first little meta about this topic, I was also really thrown off by the frames you mentioned:

(I tried my best to keep them comparable, but the more rendered version is from a slightly different, more dynamic perspective.)

And then we have this, where his belly disappears completely:

I know nothing about professional 3D animation, but this difference really strikes me. It doesn't seem to serve the purpose of exaggerating the action (like stretch and squash, for example), so where -- and why -- did it go?

Please, if anyone who reads this is brave enough, ask Jared Bush on Twitter! I need a concrete explanation. 😭

I once came upon a post where people were discussing the notion that these two Brunos aren't even the same model in the final version of the movie (correct me if I remember it wrong):

At least there's continuity where Bruno's wrists and ankles are concerned and that is that they are skinny all the time:

Here's my humble opinion on the matter in general:

I absolutely agree with your take, anon, and I think that it makes too much sense for it to not be canon. I believe Bruno is malnourished (as mentioned in my latest part of WAACH) in both meanings of the word. My fic works with the implications that Bruno had too little food (and that it wasn't of great nutritional value), as well as a diet with little variety.

Extra:

I'm so glad you enjoy my fic! I'm always really scared that I'll ruin it with my updates and that everyone who keeps up with it will be disappointed. BUT! The next installment will be called "Building The Base" and you can already guess from the first letters who it'll focus on. 😉

[thatgirl4815]

It's really interesting how morality has divided the fandom. Some people want to brush it off, some want to be blunt, some want to create petitions - which feels a lot like virtue signaling, imo - but there really is a gamut of emotion that is going on. Makes it a tense experience sometimes.

Although I think it shows that the show is doing its job at getting people to engage with it and not be apathetic.

But people who petition, I hate to say, have the least critical thinking skills of the bunch.

Hello!! :) Ah morality...the topic to divide all fandoms. Morality is such an interesting thing, because I think everyone--at least, I'd like to think everyone--knows that the dynamics in this show are far from healthy. There is manipulation, there is toxicity, and while we're at it, there's just flat out murder all the time (we can't just forget about Kinn shooting that one guy in the face in the opening scene of Ep1).

I agree that some people choose to simply brush it off as a product of the mafia genre, but I actually enjoy the discourse around morals...where I get frustrated is when people act like the show should be cancelled because of it. I mean we get a disclaimer at the beginning of each episode that the creators are not advocating for any action in the series. Additionally, BOC has taken measures to warn people about certain dangers, particularly those associated with Porsche's drugging. They know that what happened in Ep4 was wrong, and more importantly, they want us to know that they know that.

This show was going to be polarizing no matter what. But I think it's only truly polarizing if we assume that everyone who watches and enjoys this show encourages its content in the real world. Morality as a subject, particularly a psychological subject, is a necessary consideration with a series like this. I agree with you that it's important to engage with this type of media.

For me, it's just plain fun to think about the characters' perspectives. And yeah, you can acknowledge that KP's dynamic was born out of toxicity, but you shouldn't feel guilty for liking a show like this. At the end of the day, it's fiction that doesn't pretend to be a model for real-life relationships. It's like every other show about gangs and crime. You can be interested in the characters, heck you can even root for them to succeed in their crimes, but that doesn't mean you think what they're doing is right from an objective standpoint.

Finally, people who petition...yeah. I just don't see what they hope to achieve with that? I can't lie and say I didn't see this coming after that first trailer. After Ep4, I contemplated coming back to SM at all because I knew this was going to be polarizing. But I'm glad I did because I think talking about these concerns is necessary.

Anyways, thanks for the ask! :) Have a great day!

[zandracourt]

Some thoughts about Episode 2x12 of 911 Lone Star and subject of physical abuse. I’ll put behind the cut for those who don’t want to read:

I work in the field of abuse of adults and one of the hardest realities of my job is that I have to hold the word “abuse” lightly because the spectrum of what is experienced as abuse by the parties involved is wide, for many factors, including enculturation, personal history, physiological make-up, emotional maturity/intelligence, and mental health. There are legal definitions of what constitutes abuse/assault in every jurisdiction and there is the basic understanding of power/control and the role that plays in the relationship. Even the word “healthy” when it comes to relationships is difficult to define because what I regard as “healthy” is not something someone else considers valuable enough to work on or worth separating from their partner over. It is surprisingly personal and while I have laws that I enforce, the reality is that even when an incident meets the legal criteria, if the victim says it wasn’t abusive to them, there is not much we can do other than to keep offering the victim that there is another way to love and be loved.

That said, I’ve seen a lot of posts of fans very upset about TK’s shoving Carlos when he was angry. And I am not here to say that interpretation is wrong. However, I do understand why the writers and actors would have created that scene and not consider it all that problematic. Again, not justifying, simply offering some thoughts from someone who works in this field. These are my own and I know other investigators in my own unit who would think differently, so it is just one perspective. Also, I am not a sworn officer. I enforce civil law, not criminal.

1) I don’t believe TK’s reaction is out of character. When he is emotionally compromised, he self-harms. He does that with substances and we have seen him seek out fights (the bar which leads to the police station scene and with Judd, both S1) when he is upset. I read his pushing Carlos as self harm over abuse because his actions betray that he is trying to get Carlos to *hit him*. Which Carlos, being a police officer who is trained to remain calm (they are supposed to be anyway), responded by restraining TK. TK’s response is then not to calm down but to get more upset and tell him to leave because TK is *not getting the emotional release that he wants* which is physical pain. He wants to feel physical pain to mask his emotional pain but Carlos won’t participate in that. So this isn’t abuse in the typical way we understand it. It is manipulation on TK’s part and unhealthy as hell, but is actually in keeping with what TK does when he’s hurting emotionally.

2) This scene is highly-feminine coded. There are hundreds of examples in tv/movies where a woman is upset and she beats her fists against a man’s chest (who is almost never who she is actually upset with/about) and the man endures it for a bit and then restrains her until she calms down. We see it all the time and while also problematic, generally we don’t object to it because we view the woman as not being able to cause the man any real harm or pain. Women get away with a LOT of domestic abuse because of this bias. So given that trope, it is very possible that the writers and actors viewed this scene through that same bias. That TK isn’t really hurting Carlos because he is bigger and more muscular than TK. Again, not great, but something to consider when evaluating the choices made by the creators of the art in question.

3) The Fight or Flight response is so deeply ingrained, it is very difficult to stop. When I enter someone’s home as part of my work, I am there to investigate an allegation of abuse. Even with the word INVESTIGATOR on my chest, and with everyone knowing why I am there, there are some perpetrators who are so reactionary in their fight/flight response that they try to threaten and intimidate me (fight). They are displaying abuse behaviors to the one person you would logically think they would want to hide those behaviors from. And many do. But for some, they literally cannot stop the response. Makes my job a little bit easier because now I am a witness to their abusive reactions and can document it. In this instance with TK and Carlos, I’m not necessarily saying that response was triggered in TK, but again, he has a much higher propensity for Fight than Flight in general so I can’t say it’s *not* a factor either.

4) Many have expressed wanting to see the apology between them that was not shown. In some ways, I can understand why the showrunners chose not to. That should not be a quick conversation. And in the context of a show like this, where there is no other way to do it, I think would ultimately be worse. If TK apologizes and Carlos accepts without much conversation, there is no reason for anyone to expect the behavior to change on TK’s part. This actually models abusive cycles. Any conversation where Carlos confronts TK about his behavior would take real time because they’d have to get at the reasons why TK had that reaction in the first place, and given that Carlos has already addressed this (in their convo at the police station after TK is arrested for brawling) and it hasn’t changed. Therefore, the scene would need to either put Carlos in a role of continuing to bring this up while addressing why he is putting up with the behavior from TK, or Carlos needs to do some self-reflection about why he’s still in this relationship. So to do it in a way that is actually “healthy” doesn’t take them where the writers wanted them to be later in the episode. So, in many ways, their apology scene is best served by a well-written fanfic than it would be by a 2 minute on-screen scene that would either serve to perpetuate an unhealthy cycle or push them further apart. This way, there is an ambiguous element where everyone can pretend that some long-ass conversation occurred and the two of them came to a healthy resolution.

5) DV scenes between men are *way* bloodier than any other scenes I encounter. In my experience, when men are abusive of men, it’s very brutal. And again, what equals abuse is sometimes hard to define and even harder to address. So a little shoving, while not great, is also not even in the stratosphere of how bad it often can be. Is it right to view abuse with that kind of relativism? Hard to say. But when you exist in this world, it is hard not to and I have to go by the people in front of me and what they are expressing about how they feel about what happened. If you, the viewer, watched this and reported it as abuse, I could go investigate. But if TK and Carlos say to me, “Nah, we didn’t feel that at all.” Then it doesn’t matter what you, the witness, feel about it, or even me. I can offer my educated and experienced view, but that doesn’t mean the two parties will accept it. That’s why I have learned to hold it loosely because adults have the right to self-determination and the right to make poor choices. And believe me, that is very hard to do, especially when I encounter a victim who is clearly so beat-down that they can’t imagine anything better for themselves. But if I tell that victim, “You must...” then I am simply becoming the next person controlling their choices. Instead, I offer “You could...” or “Here’s some options...”

To me personally, I read TK’s shoving Carlos as evidence of unhealthy self-harm behavior more than TK abusing Carlos, because the action wasn’t rooted in power and control and ended fairly benignly. Would it be awesome for them to still address it? Absolutely. But I also understand why they chose not to.

[the-other-art-blog]

To me Amy always seemed petty when she gave up her dream of being an artist. Maybe it's me, but that "I want to be great or nothing" doesn't sound all that healthy.

I agree that seeing the world from such a black and white perspective leads to nothing good. It’s like those kids whose parents pressure them so much to get As all the time that they end up with anxiety issues. While you need to understand that it’s BS, it can make you feel miserable and like you’re not doing enough unless everything is perfect.

And the thing is that Amy is a good artist, which I suppose contributes to people’s criticism. There are several moments throughout the book where people compliments her works. Jo asks for Beth’s portrait, her works sell like candies during the Chester fair. In Valrosa, Laurie tells her she has talent. He also congratulates her for the drawing she did of him just there.

One of the things that I like most about adaptations is when they show Amy’s art. In the 2017 miniseries, there’s a funny moment where Amy is drawing Marmee and it’s a mess. Then after the time jump, she’s doing an amazing self-portrait.

But I have to give Greta Gerwig the credit she deserves. She did one thing right! I think this is the first adaptation that proposes a deeper reason behinds Amy’s “lack of genius”. She brought modernism into the conversation. For some this new trend was great and liberating, but not for Amy. She was old school, she liked rules. I’m not saying she hated it, but she wouldn’t be doing that art. In the sequels it is clear she still follows the traditional way. To me, it looked as if Amy realized that her time had passed, she was 50 years too late. I think genius is linked with innovation, it’s not just about being good at something, but Amy was against it.

And eventually, I think she learned that academic art was gonna be around for a few more decades. So, she went back.

The problem with this and any other adaptations is that they don't really show Amy taking lessons before Europe. As a result, many people think she just gave up after a few months. But really she had at least 4 years of art lessons, thanks to Aunt March. I think  the 2017 miniseries and the 1994 movie are the only ones that tease at it. However, I don't remember the 1994 film addressing that particular moment in the discussion in Valrosa.

Now, we have to remember that she was only 20 years old when she said that. I think sometimes because they are getting married and having kids, inheriting big enterprises, we forget they are really young adults. But these people were still figuring out life and when you’re young you have so many aspirations.  

Also, the art world was very different back in the 1860s. There were very specific institutions mainly the Paris Salon that determined whether an artist was worthy or not. There was no internet where people could show their paintings, get followers and earn money. Back then the idea that "anyone could be an artist" and "art could be anything" was ridiculous, same for “art for art’s sake”. The idols were Michelangelo, Raphael, and other masters, there was a path to follow. It’s easy to be overwhelmed by those giants and feel like you will never make something as spectacular as the Sistine Chapel.

Plus, women artists had much more obstacles. Their formal training lacked major elements such as anatomy and they were more expensive. They were relegated to still-lifes, portraits, landscapes, and genre painting. All of these very noble genres but in that society, the hierarchy said those were below the historical painting. Of course, some took risks and learn in clandestine environments. They hired models, sometimes prostitutes and we all know Amy wouldn’t be doing that.

This is why the painting wasn't exactly a profession wealthy people wanted for their women. It was too scandalous. In chapter Camp Laurence, Kate Vaughn says that her mother only agreed on lessons once she proved her talent. Yet, I highly doubt her parents would have let her pursue an actual career. And certainly, they would have wanted that from their daughter-in-law.

Furthermore, people believed a woman had to choose between her career and her family. Unfortunately, May died weeks after giving birth. But in those two years of marriage, May Alcott (real-life Amy) got some of her greatest achievements. She put her second painting in the Paris Salon, wrote How to travel abroad and do it cheaply, put another painting in an exhibition. Plus, she was pregnant.

In Jo’s Boys this is said about Amy, who's about 40 years old:

...she was one of those who prove that women can be faithful wives and mothers without sacrificing the special gift bestowed upon them for their own development and the good of others.

I think this part of Jo’s Boys is linked with May’s own life experience. I'm forever gonna love Louisa for giving Amy this life.

So even if Amy said she'll be "nothing" and an "ornament to society" when she was young and frustrated, we know she actually continued painting. Amy goes back to painting, even if it doesn’t take her to the highest levels in the art world. I think she ended up realizing that she love art because it made her happy, not to be famous. Even after she tells Laurie that she won’t be pursuing a career as a painter, she keeps sketching. Because that’s who she is, Amy wouldn’t be Amy if she weren’t drawing. It’s like if Jo stopped writing. What she did do, and that's very mature, is understanding her limitations both personal and circumstantial.

Another thing, Amy is not only a painter but a sculptor. She did several busts of her family. She even works marble which was one of the most valuable and difficult materials.

Would I have loved if she became a famous painter? Sure! But I also admire her for her resilience and her ability to adapt. Moreover, she inspires her daughter and other women to become artists!

If haters wouldn’t have bothered May, Louisa would have written more about her in Little Men. And if May wouldn’t have died, she would have also been more present in Jo’s Boys. Who knows what Louisa planned for the character but at least we know she never actually stopped painting.

This turned out to be longer than I expected, but I could talk about Amy (and May) for hours. So I'm always happy to answer asks, messages, whatever.

[fanficmaniatic]

The "Anti-Chat" Theory.

(Which is also why Chat Blanc 2.0 wont work and why Ladybug needs to be akumatized).

This is a turducken on my thoughts for S4 and the future of the show so just roll with it.

So, Season 4 has been wild so far, and if clues given by the writers and people involved in show are any indication, this is only the beginning, we are in for a bumpy ride and things are just going to keep getting worse.

In all the discourse revolving season 4 something that we are all mentioning is how “Chat Blanc” is still a thing and there is no guarantee it won’t happen again. If anything it now seems more likely Chat Noir will get akumatized considering the imminent Ladynoir fallout, and how Adrien is still living with his Father, as his isolation keeps getting worse. And though I am always In for some good Character angst, and I feel like it is necessary for Adrien to know about Chat Blanc, and/or for Chat Blanc to reappear, I don’t think Chat Blanc 2.0 is something Adrien nor the show needs right know.

This theory has many parts, I promise it all ties neatly at the end.

First things first, I may be a little biased, Chat Blanc is an episode I really enjoy. I love Time Travel shenanigans, and I was dying to see Adrien finally find out about his father. The heavy consequences of the episode were obviously erased, but the impact of it all still remains trough Marinette, whom we see in the episode ‘Sentibbubler’ is having nightmares about the whole thing. But still, I love the episode, and I really don’t want an “Stormy Weather 2”… which is an episode I heavily dislike, compared to THE BEST formulaic episode of the Whole show, a.k.a “Stormy Weather” a.k.a My favorite episode. So yeah, this whole first point is just me REALLY not wanting an episode called “Chat Blanc 2.0” But there is more to it, and is the fact that I don’t see how it could work out.

“Chat Blanc 2.0” is unnecessary, and the reason why is that bringing him back wouldn’t actually do anything besides perhaps bringing Ladynoir further apart. Ladybug still CAN’T know Chat noir’s identity, (Let’s be honest and admit that’s prolly s4 finale OR happening during s5) so the show would go out of its way to make his dialogue as plain as possible without mentioning his father being hawkmoth. And yes, I do realize that Chat has been bottling his emotions and it all is likely to come out during THE ladynoir fall out… But people are ignoring the elephant in the room which is that Chat Noir DOES NOT fight Ladybug.

I promise this is relevant.

Chat Noir, unless mind controlled, would never attack Ladybug. The most clear example of this is in “Gamer 2.0” when he straight up says “I could never bring myself to fight you” as he sacrifices himself for her, that added to their classic “Is us against the world, My Lady” every season finale, and Marinette’s “In case something happens to me” In ‘Optygami’, it all could pretty well be a foreshadowing of a Ladynoir fight, where Ladybug is akumatized, and Chat has to willingly fight her. Yes, one could argue that he did fight her during ‘Chat Blanc’, but it could also be read as more of him trying to make her listen.

Where am I going with this? Chat Blanc 2.0 would be unable to bring the nuance the story needs right now. Chat Blanc still wouldn’t fight his father, because I doubt they won’t leave that for season 5. Chat Blanc still doesn’t have a motive to actually fight Ladybug. But the most important part is… What would happen at the end? What would be the change? What conversation are we having? What would be different than what we got in the original Chat Blanc?

To be fair, maybe I am wrong, maybe it can work out, this is just a theory. Maybe all the things I crossed out as impossible will actually happen, but I have been watching the show for 6 years, and If I have learned something about it, is that it is a slow burn, in ALL the aspects.

So yes, I believe Ladybug/Marinette needs to be akumatized, but I also think that Adrien has to learn about Chat Blanc, and that Chat Blanc needs to reappear, having a bigger Role than just a nightmare. So… how does that tie with everything I just said? Easy, the “Anti- Chat” Theory’

So you probably remember “Anti-Bug”, one of the best episodes from season 1, where Chole tries to help Ladybug, she doesn’t listen, and Chloe ends up being akumatized into “Ladybug but evil” … In theory, that is the deal, and is no wonder I am picking Felix Graham De Vanily to fill this role.

From an animation perspective, Felix is the obvious choice, he is identical to Adrien, and if following Anti-bug’s logic in costume desing, that would mean they can reuse Chat Blanc model with no alteration needed.

Now, How would this work? By giving Ladybug a jump scare. She thinks she has to live one of her worst nightmares again, to then find out “Oh… This is not Chat Noir” while still creating enough tension, by looking scared and distraught, that she HAS to tell him that she is scared of him being akumatized WITHOUT actually needing to mention the alternative timeline. This gives Chat noir the chance to lash out, once he realizes this is part of why ladybug is keeping him away, which can lead to Ladybug’s future akumatization.

Why this way? And please hear me out. Chat Noir NEEDS to let his emotions out, and I don’t think lashing out at ladybug is the best way but I see it as necessary. Adrien needs to take on more responsibility while being Chat, but he also needs to learn how to healthy express his emotions, because he is not allowed to do that in his current situation. Ladybug being akumatized because she feels guilty about Chat Noir allows Adrien to do BOTH. Because to save Ladybug he would have to realize “My emotions are valid, and is okey to let them out, but the way I did it was not the right one”, and both Ladybug and Chat Noir would have to apologize because this whole thing is not miscommunication… is a misunderstanding of their partners character. Ladybug needs to relay more on Chat and Chat needs to take on more responsibility… it won’t happen if Ladybug is the one that needs to save Chat Noir.

Adrien needs to realize that he needs to save himself, and that there’s people outside of his father that care for him. Ladybug is this figure that he looks up to and Admires, and is from a side of his life that his father has no control over, (At least from his perspective). So if she forgives him, if they are able to fix their relationship he will realize that things can get better.

Now, going back to Anti-Chat… his deal is way bigger than just bringing The Ladynoir fight… Is about setting up seasons 6 and 7.

What do we know so far? The Love Square and Gabriel’s Hawkmoth is going to come to an end by season 5. Which has left many fans wondering “Then what is happening on seasons 6 and 7?” And the best answer we have so far is in the episode “Timetagger” where Bunnix reveals that there is a whole team of miraculous holders fighting the Hawkmoth of the future, which is by the same episode confirmed to not be Gabriel Agreste. Besides this, I think it is safe to assume that the specials are quietly setting up themes that could come back In seasons 6 and 7.

Now, when speaking about characters that could be future villains the fandom seems to have its collective mind set on two individuals: Lila Rossi, and Felix Graham De Vanily.

Besides ‘Rocketear’, (E17), ‘Wishmaker’ (E18), and the special ’Shadow Moth’s last attack’ (Eps 25&26) we don’t know the names of the episodes of the second half of the season, which is really uncommon for miraculous ladybug, and the reason they gave us as to why is “You would know who is akumatized based on the names”… Which AGAIN, is really uncommon for ML. If you have been in this fandom for a long time you’ll realize that most people working in the show don’t really seem to care about spoilers. Now, this is kinda a conspiracy theory, but If you saw that there was an episode called “Anti-Chat” would you have assume it was any one other than Felix?…. No, right? That’s what I though. Miraculous has proven that it is good at subverting expectations, so when they are pointing at something (like a Chat Blanc 2.0 episode) it may not be as we want or suspected it to be. So I think an Anti-Chat episode makes a lot of sense.

Now, Why am I saying that this can set up future season? Buckle up, pals, here we go. What do we know about Felix?

He is evil, or at the very least seems to be ill-intentioned, if his attitude and look at the end of his episode is anything to go by.

He is after jewelry. Which, yeah, was only shown in that one episode he appeared, but this could pretty much be a foreshadowing of him later on going after the miraculous.

We know that he is bound to appear 3 more times

For this theory to work, I need it to happen in episode 22… Yes, the feared 100th episode of the show. It is not as important why Felix is akumatized, but what is happening WHILE he is akumatized.

Besides what has already been discussed, with Ladybug being scared, Ladynoir should not be able to work together. They are tumbling on each other because Chat Noir feels like she doesn’t trust him, but Ladybug NEEDS his reassurance right now, which he wont give.

This, is directly parallel with what is happening between Anti-Chat and Shadow Moth. Because Felix, even though he wants the miraculous, he won’t let himself be bossed around. He is demanding things from SM, and like in Robustus, Anti-Chat tries to, not just take Ladybug’s and Chat noir’s Miraculous, he wants to destroy Hawkmoth too. Which will lead to Shadow Moth being the reason he gets de-akumatized, instead Ladybug and Chat Noir saving him... bringing more fuel to the Ladynoir fire.

Now, Why should Felix have an attitude with Shadow Moth? Well, my friends… Do you remember, years ago, when the producers of the show said “The peacock miraculous holder will make Hawkmoth look like a baby”…. That’s not Mayura. Nathalie is a great miraculous holder, and she is really clever. But instead of making Gabriel look like a baby, she makes him look smart because he has someone like her on his team. What I am saying with this is that Felix, will suspect/ figure out Gabriel is Hawkmoth at the en of Anti-Chat, and that he will get the peacock miraculous during “The Last attack of Shadow Moth.” Thus, setting up a villain for future seasons.

This makes Felix 3 appearances be: In episode 22 (Anti-Chat), In episode 26 (SM last attack, part 2), and during S5’s finale. Felix situation will be much like Lila’s during s1 and s2 where she was introduced at the end of the first but not used until the end of the second.

Conclusion:

Felix Graham de Vanily has the potential to be a future villain and bring the Ladynoir conflict to finally surface.

And to clarify, The Ladynoir conflict, just like this Felix theory, is not something that will, nor can get resolved in one episode. If anything the fight will be around the end of season 4, and it will get resolved during season 5.

But again, this is just a theory, and I will probably be death wrong, but who knows?