#with The Aesthetic being one of our main appeals’

[r-osehips]

just watched angels & demons (a perfect airplane movie) and i really think they just should have let ewan macgregor become pope after he did all that. like, if you:

kill the pope without arousing any suspicion

design a bunch of very metal ambigrams

go to great expense to hire a highly competent assassin; then kill that assassin without him seeing it coming

plan four murders that the phantom of the opera himself could not outdo in terms of aesthetic, drama, and doomfulness

risk your life to fly a jar of antimatter into the sky in a helicopter

parachute out of said helicopter, backlit by the coolest and most beautiful explosion ever seen, and not only survive but land perfectly and dramatically on the steps of the vatacin

literally brand yourself with a brand you had custom made for that purpose

manipulate hundreds of cardinals with your pleasing manner and dutiful acts

all while being a clean-shaven, soft-spoken ewan mcgregor who was tragically orphaned by the UVF?

you should get to be pope.

[dykepuffs]

How Do I Make My Fictional Gypsies Not Racist?

(Or, "You can't, sorry, but…")

You want to include some Gypsies in your fantasy setting. Or, you need someone for your main characters to meet, who is an outsider in the eyes of the locals, but who already lives here. Or you need a culture in conflict with your settled people, or who have just arrived out of nowhere. Or, you just like the idea of campfires in the forest and voices raised in song. And you’re about to step straight into a muckpile of cliches and, accidentally, write something racist.

(In this, I am mostly using Gypsy as an endonym of Romany people, who are a subset of the Romani people, alongside Roma, Sinti, Gitano, Romanisael, Kale, etc, but also in the theory of "Gypsying" as proposed by Lex and Percy H, where Romani people are treated with a particular mix of orientalism, criminalisation, racialisation, and othering, that creates "The Gypsy" out of both nomadic peoples as a whole and people with Romani heritage and racialised physical features, languages, and cultural markers)

Enough of my friends play TTRPGs or write fantasy stories that this question comes up a lot - They mention Dungeons and Dragons’ Curse Of Strahd, World Of Darkness’s Gypsies, World Of Darkness’s Ravnos, World of Darkness’s Silent Striders… And they roll their eyes and say “These are all terrible! But how can I do it, you know, without it being racist?”

And their eyes are big and sad and ever so hopeful that I will tell them the secret of how to take the Roma of the real world and place them in a fictional one, whilst both appealing to gorjer stereotypes of Gypsies and not adding to the weight of stereotyping that already crushes us. So, disappointingly, there is no secret.

Gypsies, like every other real-world culture, exist as we do today because of interactions with cultures and geography around us: The living waggon, probably the archetypal thing which gorjer writers want to include in their portrayals of nomads, is a relatively modern invention - Most likely French, and adopted from French Showmen by Romanies, who brought it to Britain. So already, that’s a tradition that only spans a small amount of the time that Gypsies have existed, and only a small number of the full breadth of Romani ways of living. But the reasons that the waggon is what it is are based on the real world - The wheels are tall and iron-rimmed, because although you expect to travel on cobbled, tarmac, or packed-earth roads and for comparatively short distances, it wasn’t rare to have to ford a river in Britain in the late nineteenth century, on country roads. They were drawn by a single horse, and the shape of that horse was determined by a mixture of local breeds - Welsh cobs, fell ponies, various draft breeds - as well as by the aesthetic tastes of the breeders. The stove inside is on the left, so that as you move down a British road, the chimney sticks up into the part where there will be the least overhanging branches, to reduce the chance of hitting it.

So taking a fictional setting that looks like (for example) thirteenth century China (with dragons), and placing a nineteenth century Romanichal family in it will inevitably result in some racist assumptions being made, as the answer to “Why does this culture do this?” becomes “They just do it because I want them to” rather than having a consistent internal logic.

Some stereotypes will always follow nomads - They appear in different forms in different cultures, but they always arise from the settled people's same fears: That the nomads don't share their values, and are fundamentally strangers. Common ones are that we have a secret language to fool outsiders with, that we steal children and disguise them as our own, that our sexual morals are shocking (This one has flipped in the last half century - From the Gypsy Lore Society's talk of the lascivious Romni seductress who will lie with a strange man for a night after a 'gypsy wedding', to today's frenzied talk of 'grabbing' and sexually-conservative early marriages to ensure virginity), that we are supernatural in some way, and that we are more like animals than humans. These are tropes where if you want to address them, you will have to address them as libels - there is no way to casually write a baby-stealing, magical succubus nomad without it backfiring onto real life Roma. (The kind of person who has the skills to write these tropes well, is not the kind of person who is reading this guide.)

It’s too easy to say a list of prescriptive “Do nots”, which might stop you from making the most common pitfalls, but which can end up with your nomads being slightly flat as you dance around the topics that you’re trying to avoid, rather than being a rich culture that feels real in your world.

So, here are some questions to ask, to create your nomadic people, so that they will have a distinctive culture of their own that may (or may not) look anything like real-world Romani people: These aren't the only questions, but they're good starting points to think about before you make anything concrete, and they will hopefully inspire you to ask MORE questions.

First - Why are they nomadic? Nobody moves just to feel the wind in their hair and see a new horizon every morning, no matter what the inspirational poster says. Are they transhumant herders who pay a small rent to graze their flock on the local lord’s land? Are they following migratory herds across common land, being moved on by the cycle of the seasons and the movement of their animals? Are they seasonal workers who follow man-made cycles of labour: Harvests, fairs, religious festivals? Are they refugees fleeing a recent conflict, who will pass through this area and never return? Are they on a regular pilgrimage? Do they travel within the same area predictably, or is their movement governed by something that is hard to predict? How do they see their own movements - Do they think of themselves as being pushed along by some external force, or as choosing to travel? Will they work for and with outsiders, either as employees or as partners, or do they aim to be fully self-sufficient? What other jobs do they do - Their whole society won’t all be involved in one industry, what do their children, elderly, disabled people do with their time, and is it “work”?

If they are totally isolationist - How do they produce the things which need a complex supply chain or large facilities to make? How do they view artefacts from outsiders which come into their possession - Things which have been made with technology that they can’t produce for themselves? (This doesn’t need to be anything about quality of goods, only about complexity - A violin can be made by one artisan working with hand tools, wood, gut and shellac, but an accordion needs presses to make reeds, metal lathes to make screws, complex organic chemistry to make celluloid lacquer, vulcanised rubber, and a thousand other components)

How do they feel about outsiders? How do they buy and sell to outsiders? If it’s seen as taboo, do they do it anyway? Do they speak the same language as the nearby settled people (With what kind of fluency, or bilingualism, or dialect)? Do they intermarry, and how is that viewed when it happens? What stories does this culture tell about why they are a separate people to the nearby settled people? Are those stories true? Do they have a notional “homeland” and do they intend to go there? If so, is it a real place?

What gorjers think of as classic "Gipsy music" is a product of our real-world situation. Guitar from Spain, accordions from the Soviet Union (Which needed modern machining and factories to produce and make accessible to people who weren't rich- and which were in turn encouraged by Soviet authorities preferring the standardised and modern accordion to the folk traditions of the indigenous peoples within the bloc), brass from Western classical traditions, via Balkan folk music, influences from klezmer and jazz and bhangra and polka and our own music traditions (And we influence them too). What are your people's musical influences? Do they make their own instruments or buy them from settled people? How many musical traditions do they have, and what are they all for (Weddings, funerals, storytelling, campfire songs, entertainment...)? Do they have professional musicians, and if so, how do those musicians earn money? Are instrument makers professionals, or do they use improvised and easy-to-make instruments like willow whistles, spoons, washtubs, etc? (Of course the answer can be "A bit of both")

If you're thinking about jobs - How do they work? Are they employed by settled people (How do they feel about them?) Are they self employed but providing services/goods to the settled people? Are they mostly avoidant of settled people other than to buy things that they can't produce themselves? Are they totally isolationist? Is their work mostly subsistence, or do they create a surplus to sell to outsiders? How do they interact with other workers nearby? Who works, and how- Are there 'family businesses', apprentices, children with part time work? Is it considered 'a job' or just part of their way of life? How do they educate their children, and is that considered 'work'? How old are children when they are considered adult, and what markers confer adulthood? What is considered a rite of passage?

When they travel, how do they do it? Do they share ownership of beasts of burden, or each individually have "their horse"? Do families stick together or try to spread out? How does a child begin to live apart from their family, or start their own family? Are their dwellings something that they take with them, or do they find places to stay or build temporary shelter with disposable material? Who shares a dwelling and why? What do they do for privacy, and what do they think privacy is for?

If you're thinking about food - Do they hunt? Herd? Forage? Buy or trade from settled people? Do they travel between places where they've sown crops or managed wildstock in previous years, so that when they arrive there is food already seeded in the landscape? How do they feel about buying food from settled people, and is that common? If it's frowned upon - How much do people do it anyway? How do they preserve food for winter? How much food do they carry with them, compared to how much they plan to buy or forage at their destinations? How is food shared- Communal stores, personal ownership?

Why are they a "separate people" to the settled people? What is their creation myth? Why do they believe that they are nomadic and the other people are settled, and is it correct? Do they look different? Are there legal restrictions on them settling? Are there legal restrictions on them intermixing? Are there cultural reasons why they are a separate people? Where did those reasons come from? How long have they been travelling? How long do they think they've been travelling? Where did they come from? Do they travel mostly within one area and return to the same sites predictably, or are they going to move on again soon and never come back?

And then within that - What about the members of their society who are "unusual" in some way: How does their society treat disabled people? (are they considered disabled, do they have that distinction and how is it applied?) How does their society treat LGBT+ people? What happens to someone who doesn't get married and has no children? What happens to someone who 'leaves'? What happens to young widows and widowers? What happens if someone just 'can't fit in'? What happens to someone who is adopted or married in? What happens to people who are mixed race, and in a fantasy setting to people who are mixed species? What is taboo to them and what will they find shocking if they leave? What is society's attitude to 'difference' of various kinds?

Basically, if you build your nomads from the ground-up, rather than starting from the idea of "I want Gypsies/Buryats/Berbers/Minceiri but with the numbers filed off and not offensive" you can end up with a rich, unique nomadic culture who make sense in your world and don't end up making a rod for the back of real-world cultures.

[littlemonday]

So much of the difference in player response to the Emperor vs. Raphael comes down to aesthetics.

I’ve been seeing a lot of fan posting of Raphael lately, which is honestly fine. I enjoy seeing fan creations on all the characters. But I feel like I need to address something that is, for me, rather glaring in the fandom. Raphael is a pretty popular character, while the Emperor gets so much hate posting I’ve had to block users and entire groups on other sites because it was so over the top. These characters are functionally quite similar in the game, but the disparity in how they’re each perceived couldn’t be more different.

Both characters need to form an alliance with the main character. Both characters need the main character to defeat the brain. Both characters are willing to manipulate the main character to meet their own ends. But, one character is a conventionally attractive middle aged man, and the other is a humanoid squid monster. (How many times have we all seen posts about how upset someone was when their hot dream guardian turned out to be the squid monster?)

Not only is Raphael conventionally attractive, but he stays that way when he reveals himself as a devil.The Emperor presents himself as someone the main character would trust, but when he’s finally revealed, he bears no resemblance to the facade he was wearing - a facade that he sincerely believed was necessary to keep himself safe and to win your trust. Raphael is quite literally the handsome devil. His ascended form barely makes an appearance, but even so that form is not alien. It’s devilish, but not alien, and “alien” unlike devilish, invokes a deeply discomforting fear of the unknown.

Raphael is all opulence and performance, wearing tailored clothing and living in a grandiose house that hides the horrors of what happens there until late into act 3. While the mind flayer colonies by comparison are grotesque organisms that look like the inside of a body, and the Emperor’s home is a bare bones cellar with the last remaining keepsakes of his former life. The chains he uses to hold his victims are right out in the open.

Raphael is like an old school campy Disney villain who tries to entertain you all while openly admitting that he wants you to come to him when you’re desperate and all hope is gone. And like those old Disney villains, he just enjoys being evil. He even comes with his own villain song that he sings. He enjoys your suffering. He’s openly playing with his food. The Emperor does try to seduce you, but mostly tries to appeal to your pragmatism and empathy. However, he doesn’t have Disney villain camp to help him out here. He embodies all the body horror and fear over the player's loss of humanity by virtue of him being a mind flayer. He does have a song, but most of us miss it on our first play through and don’t hear its tragic lyrics.

Raphael, and this one is perhaps the most frustrating to me, imprisoned and tortured Hope for years! He takes advantage of people, including orphans, and gets them to sign away their souls for eternal torment in exchange for something they desperately want or need in life. While the Emperor has that one infamous cutscene in which we see him enthrall Stelmane, but it comes on the heels of the player dehumanizing and provoking him. A lot of players will refer to this as a “call out” and a “mask off” moment, which is very disingenuous framing. It’s frustrating that so few players never seem to consider the deeper role their choices may play in triggering this scene: you treat him like an inhuman monster, and you get an inhuman monster. Players will complain all the time about how the Emperor manipulates you and lies about everything, but apparently in this one scene he’s suddenly being completely honest and not manipulating you? So many never consider the possibility of confirmation bias when it comes to this character.

As I said, this cutscene is an obvious threat, but I know that just because he’s threatening you, it doesn’t mean there’s no truth to what you’re seeing. However, it also doesn’t mean that this is somehow “the truth” as so many players seem to think it is. I’ll write more on this in another post, but there’s just not enough information in the game to make definitive conclusions on their relationship. And I bring this up because I don’t see anywhere near the outrage over Hope as I see over Stelmane.

Then there’s Ansur. The Emperor killed his love, Ansur, out of self defense (we know this from Ansur himself), and for a lot of players, this was what solidified their hatred for the Emperor, and they will endlessly hate post about it. Raphael, on the other hand, never killed any of his loves. But the reason he never killed any of his loves is because he’s never loved anyone. He’s incapable of it, and anyone he has killed was, at best, a mere tool for his use.

Which brings me to my next point, even though both characters are trying to manipulate you to their own ends, only the Emperor sees you as more than a means to an end. Raphael does not. In fact, I wrote a lot of words on this very topic.

I’ve had people tell me that they like Raphael more because he’s upfront with his intentions, while the Emperor isn’t. That’s not entirely true. The Emperor tells you he wants his freedom, even tells you the power he uses to protect you is power he’s stolen, but he goes to great lengths to hide his identity, where Raphael barely goes to any lengths at all. As I said, the Emperor sincerely believes he must do this to protect himself. He likes to puff his chest out, but he’s quite aware of his own vulnerability, so he lives a life in which he’s constantly hiding and disguising himself. He’s surviving, as he puts it in the end. Raphael is essentially a prince in the Hells who wields a lot of power, and whatever vulnerabilities he might have are well protected. Whatever difference this makes is not enough to justify the gulf in how much hate the Emperor receives versus how little Raphael does.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this is not me saying that you have to like one character or dislike another. That’s personal, and I’m not going to waste time telling people how to feel. So please don’t take away from this that I want to see more hate posting about Raphael. I don’t! Please don’t hate post about any characters, and if you absolutely must, please don’t use character tags to do so. What I am saying is that there’s a clear double standard in this fandom, and I want more players to engage with this media in a way that is both empathetic and analytical. I think both of those things together can prevent a lot of toxicity.

[starsnsparkles]

i was so excited for the new winx reboot sneak peak i kind of forgot to write down my initial thoughts so here it is (i’m so curious on how this opinion of mine will hold up once the show comes out!!)

first impressions - i actually really like it!

look, i love 2d animation just as the next guy, but i don’t think we’re ever getting back the s1-s4 animation (2d animation from s5-onwards was SO stiff and jarring looking, huge no thank you), and if that’s the case, i think the 3d style that they went for in the reboot is one of the better solutions for it.

it’s vibrant! it’s colourful! it’s giving “magical girls”! it just looks aesthetically pleasing! also i’m OBSESSED with the way they animate their hair, especially bloom’s, it’s giving “bratz series” level of eyegasm hair animation for me. so getting this after the moody, edgy, dramatic “fate: the winx saga” tone set in, i am so relieved we are going back to our roots babeey!! (now here’s to hoping that animation doesn’t tank as the series goes on like how miraculous ladybug is animated by like, 2 different studios and then one episode feels amazing and the other is “hm”)

now for bloom:

her iconic bangs are back baby!! i love how they translated them into 3d without them being too uncanny. the outfit is very cute, but can we PLEASE stop putting bloom in pink?? one of her major appeals as a main character in a girly show was that she wasn’t a pink lead! and blue works so well with her colour palette of red hair & blue/turquoise eyes it’s just aaaaah! replace the pink parts with blue and she’s perfect. (tbh these are still wip, so it could change!)

i’m still warming up to the idea of denim leg warmers though, they look weird to me now (will probably get used to them) but they kind of go with her character, because it looks likeee our bloom s1-s3 personality is back!!!!!! I’M SO HAPPYYY like YES!!! i missed her for a DECADE

next up is mitzi!

they nailed her design imo. she looks like original mitzi, but she also feels like a proper, “updated” version of her look. modern, but not too modern so she’s stuck in the era, but also retains the character of og mitzi. overall, no complaints on my part, only praises!

and then we have the new logo!

IT’S JUST DOING THINGS TO ME IDK it feels so pleasing to the eye?? the purple to orange gradient is just right, the pink is sprinkled in just right and the blues are there to accent it, it’s just. SO AESTHETICALLY PLEASING to me it truly does feel like a natural update on the og winx logo. it’s amazing!!

and if their transformation is the one originally leaked in 2021?? i think it’s on a very good path to being a great reboot! now i’m still really trying to keep my hopes as low as possible, because rarely do i watch a reboot of a beloved series and think it’s on par or better than the og (actually, only shera really comes to mind…), but! i am liking what i’m seeing! i choose to trust mister straffi on this one!!

[comicaurora]

(this ask is based on the, I'm not sure if unfounded, assumption that at least 1/6(?) main crew members has some sort of non-ace/aro attraction): How do you write allo characters as an aro person? I'm one of those annoying allos who's *hyper-romantic* and working on hypersexuality for my own health, so I color most of my writing with that and struggle to write ace people. I know a lot of writers can distance themselves more. I guess I'm just curious how you inspire your characters to act socially outside of the way that you interact, specifically in terms of romanti/sexual relationships. I'm pretty good at getting my characters to engage with the world outside of my way of doing it until it comes to romance.

It's… tough, and I'm working on it. I still need to remind myself that a lot of people legitimately do experience sexual attraction and thus find certain other people in certain situations extremely physically appealing, in contrast to my own platonic attraction (the people I like, I typically like the same amount no matter what they're doing or how they look) or aesthetic attraction (when I like how someone looks in a specific situation, it is still in an extremely hands-off "I'd like to draw that" way).

I can work my way through the logic of romance, I think. I've been told that it doesn't feel the same as friendship, and that it places another person in a somewhat uniquely structural role for one's life. I've heard it described as being someone's "everything-team" - the person they want by their side at any endeavor - which is the only thing I've ever heard about romance that I don't think applies to a good percentage of my IRL friendships.

Romantic attraction is definitely the more confusing one, because everyone I know in a romantic relationship insists it's different than their platonic ones, but can't really explain why or how, only that it is. The thing is, this makes me believe them more. I know how hard it is to explain a unique inner experience to someone who has a completely different one. Their partner is their best friend, or at least top three (understandable) and also in a unique position in their life (confusion??) I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything, and I think I love my friends as much as I'm capable of, and there are people I'm friends with who I could see as a theoretical partner - except that it would change absolutely nothing about our current relationship. This is why I don't identify with the label of "aromantic" where I definitely do with "asexual", because I think I experience what people are talking about, I just feel it kinda everywhere instead of nowhere.

So the hack I think I can make work to do this in my writing is:

Sexual attraction is like aesthetic attraction, but with a hands-on component. Replace "I want to draw that" with "I want to get my hands on that" and go from there.

Romantic attraction is evidently its own beast, but it contains concepts like "I trust this person implicitly," "I care about them and want them to be happy," "I would be happy coming home to this person," "I want to protect them," "I like that they care about me," and "this person helps me see the world in a different way" which are all individual sentiments I understand, even if I personally feel them about a large number of people rather than a single Special Someone. Point them at a single Someone and have the two characters involved act accordingly, and I can probably pull a romance out of it.

Like all writing-an-alien-situation stuff, it mostly pays to identify the specific details that correlate to things you DO understand and then extrapolate from there. Or you can fake it and black-box their motivations and be like "here's where I'd put their sexual attraction to each other if I had one"

[slavghoul]

Interview from Classic Rock Magazine #309

What stands out in your memories of 2022?

TF: Going back to touring was a fantastic feeling! In the beginning it felt almost unreal; still with a bit of restriction, which was kind of unintuitive, but the last tour we did, in August/September, was as good as normal. We released the record when we said we would, we managed to back it up with seventy shows. We cancelled one show in total. That's a good result.

Impera has dark, historically rooted themes, but it's also music that makes the listener feel so many things - joy, aggression, excitement, sorrow... After such a turbulent couple of years there's something cathartic about that.

I am very happy about how the record came out, and that it seems to be well-received among our fans. That's a tremendous feeling. I feel like I managed to do a lot of things I set out to do. We're gonna continue next year, we still have a lot of things to do. But right now we're just recharging a little.

Kaisarion has been a hit live. For a song about the brutal murder of a female Roman philosopher, it really gets the party going.

Yeah, I'm still surprised that with a song that does what it does - and was so well received and opened up the shows - there's never been talk about turning it into a single. Which I don't understand. But at the end of the day it's a label decision, and people around that decide which ones will, quote-unquote, 'work best'. And I've realised that I'm not really capable of choosing. I remember Mary On A Cross was a B-side.

It's weird how that happens with some songs.

Yeah, I must say I feel very optimistic with regards to how that song is taking a life on its own. Even though it was technically a B-side on a fun additional thing [2019's Seven Inches Of Satanic Panic] - it was not our main single from a new album we have always played it ever since it came out, on every show. Maybe a few exceptions, but I've always pushed that song as something that I felt very good about.

On that subject, you're viral on TikTok now. What is it about that platform that appeals?

I hardly knew what it was until two months ago! I have two almost fourteen-year-old kids, so of course I'd heard the phenomenon mentioned. It's an insanely big thing among kids and teenagers. What happens is they create these short snippets, funny, sad or emotional clips, to which they often tag some sort of music or sound. And if you are a creator of sound or music, you might be tagged on to a clip that might go 'viral'. That way you hit a lot more people that you might never entertain, you know, aiming your guns at. So it's a bit of a crap-shoot as well. We are not a big mainstream act, so obviously there's going to be a mixed bag of reactions. Because people in general are kind of strange to a lot of these aesthetics of rock, and especially the darker aspects of it.

It has brought the band more attention.

But if all that attention is a good or a bad thing, we do not know yet. There have been people who might have come on to the track, and as soon as they see what the band is about - or what they perceive the band to be about - there's backlash, because it's like: "Oh my, God fearing hater!" "I don't like it!" "This is communist bullshit!" So there are two sides of the coin. But it's a great bonus if we can get new people, especially kids, into liking rock music or other things, or if it makes them feel in any way better-informed, if you will.

Do you think TikTok will be a bigger deal for musicians in the future?

I don't know. I think when you're a musician, and you're making records, you need to have a certain strategic mind. But your job at the end of the day is making records and playing live. That is the heart of the matter. If you sit around waiting for a viral thing to happen, you can wait a long fucking time.

Back in May, the identities of the Nameless Ghouls were confirmed on social media. How do you feel about them not being strictly nameless any more?

Well, they haven't really been for quite some time. So for me it was not an overnight sensation. As long as it doesn't in any way interfere with what we are doing, there's no desire that I have for people not to feel proud or happy about what they're doing.

You've lamented not being able to play more guitar. If you could be the guitarist for a day in any band, which would it be?

Good question. There's several bands. I would have loved to be what Mick Taylor was in 1969, coming into the Rolling Stones at their best era - but I would have stayed around! That would have been a great experience. Very fun music to play. Definitely within the limits of what I can play really well. I spent a lot of time as a kid learning how to play guitar. Otherwise I would love to play in the Red Hot Chilli Peppers; I love what John Frusciante does. Def Leppard might be a good fit too. Joe Elliott spoke very highly of Impera when it came out. That would have also been really cool. Also a fantastic band. In an alternative reality, in an alternative life, I would have wanted to do a lot of other things. But I did hear that [Joe said those things], and it was very heartwarming, of course. A very big honour.

[lexiandliterature]

let's talk about rupi kaur and why she's everything wrong with online culture.

i've heard many a good review about rupi kaur and her poetry and i will tell you right now that i confidently disagree. in case you don't know who she is, rupi kaur is a "poet" on instagram with over 4.5 million followers known for her short but impactful poems that captivate the hearts of millions of people around the world.

her rise to fame caught the tidal wave of internet virality as she self published her first collection, Milk & Honey, earning critical acclaim. I like to call it milk our money but i'll get to that in another post.

let's first define poetry for what it is. though this definition can depend on who you ask, i like to think of poetry in four main categories: theme, meter, form, and intention. theme is just the general topic of the poem and the way the poet goes about addressing it. meter is the rhythm and rhyme pattern; it's the way it sounds when you read it aloud and the way that sound hits your ear. form is the way it looks, the way it reads, how that affects the way you say it and the way the words are perceived. and finally let's talk about intention. how is she choosing her words, how is she placing them in an order that is interesting, and how is she using literary devices to aid her story?

(if you want to see these categories done well, then it will have to be a whole different post because this could take awhile.)

so let's talk about rupi kaur's poetry in these four categories starting with this 2 LINE POEM that doesn't have a title.

"and here you are living despite it all"

-rupi kaur

wow. inspirational. 2 lines, with no punctuation whatsoever. this isn't even a sentence. we're off to a great start.

so theme. this poem is about overcoming something difficult. what difficulty? i could not tell you. there is no more information. at least she has an idea. the "you" is likely addressing the readers, thus suggesting that the purpose of the line being so general is to appeal to everyone (this is another issue i'll get into some other time).

let's talk about meter now. there's really nothing to say, there is none. there is no rhythm, no rhyme scheme, no nothing. and i'm not saying every poem has to have these things, it's just to say that if she doesn't have this, her poem needs to be interesting in other ways (which spoiler alert it isn't).

now let's talk about form. she breaks this "not sentence" into two lines. this enjambment is random and without thought. there is nothing interesting about separating this sentence other than for aesthetic purposes. nothing about the shape of this poem is interesting and nothing about it has meaning.

and finally, let's talk about intention. she uses "you" to appeal to a wider audience which suggests that this poem is more likely written to be relatable than to be sincere. is the "you" talking about a friend? a lover? a sibling? a friend/lover that's a sibling? (im just kidding) like come one. give us nothing. the ambiguity of "all" has a similar connotation. what is she overcoming? a cold? the death of a loved one? spilled milk? what is it? i shouldn't have to give meaning to the poem FOR HER. THIS IS HER POEM.

so if we're grading this out of 4 points, we'll give her a point for theme (because at least i know what she's talking about), no points for meter, no points for form, and certainly no points for intention.

this poem is a 1/4 or a 25%. congratulations rupi!

if this is the standard at which we are holding one of the most POPULAR poets of our generation because her poetry is accessible, easy to read, and relatable, then we are in a bit of trouble.

taking time to understand why the words are put in a certain order is what makes poetry so beautiful and if we can't even stop to sniff the roses sometime, what are we even doing? nothing in life is easy, and we are slowly diluting everything difficult into something that is meaningless. part of the beauty is in the time you put into understanding its message. rupi kaur is a perfect example of someone marketing off of our short attention spans and our need for instant gratification.

what i'm getting at here is not that a poet i dont like is extremely popular but rather we're letting people profit off of mediocrity while also losing the essence of what that thing really is. we're letting it become easy and accessible and "relatable" when part of the beauty is often what makes it different. it's not that rupi kaur is the problem but rather an example of the ongoing issue.

thank you for coming to my ted talk.

[mr-laveau]

-hands you my Love listener and also all my actual love ily booboo-

One. They have been called Love and/or Asset and will name themselves Ariel.

Two. Unfortunately, we already know all there is to their backstory 😭

Three. They’ve played around with the idea of lots of aesthetics and have settled on a sort of pastel, casual look with academia elements.

Four. They’re gender-fluid, so they switch from male, femme, and androgynous presenting on a whim.

Five. (Now that I’m really reading these questions, I’m so sorry for sending you an Android 😂) Marcus is an anime nerd in the worst way, so Ariel was deffo made with East-Asian features.

Six. They were made to look in their early twenties.

Seven. Slender and androgynous.

Eight. A Scorpio, though I’m not confident about that answer, I’ll admit.

Nine. Anton, who is the only person they feel likes them, and James, who is the only person who they feel respects them.

Ten. They’re still discovering hobbies and interests but so far, they’re enjoying listening to music and learning piano.

Eleven. Hmm, I think it’d be interesting if it was Psyche, Greek Goddess of the Soul, since it could be argued whether they have one.

Twelve. RedactedAudio 💕

Thirteen. Ariel is a sex-neutral/averse ace, so when they do sex without the obsession-code, it’s done with curiosity and the partner’s pleasure as the main priority.

Fourteen. Hmmm… that’s a new question for me. I think they actually don’t know yet.

Fifteen. I am Not a Robot by Marina and the Diamonds. It unironically makes them feel a lot of things.

Sixteen. Lowkey Natalie Portman’s character in Ex Machina.

Seventeen. Almost like a stock photo or a model’s shoot. They are symmetrical and physically attractive, beautiful almost, but there’s something impersonal about the stiff way they hold themselves and the lack of emoting on their face.

Eighteen. They really want to meet a dog. EDM music confused them and holds up appeal. They wish they could try coffee and lemons.

Thank you, my love 🧡

LaVeau-gue - design #003 - Asset/Love - Ariel - Lexi Sun

You are most welcome Lexi, always an honour to get to work with my first redacted friend, especially when it comes to this bean, Ariel! I still remember a few of the details from our previous conversations in regards to how you see them so I hope this does them justice!

Design Notes

Approaching Ariel's design, I had already had remembered conversations with you in regards to previous inspirations you'd mentioned for your take on Love. I also added in a bit of my own inspos to the mix to see what would take

For Ariel's design I wanted to keep in mind the solid collection of notes you'd written up so I could incorporate as much as I could whilst also condensing the design so I could make it simple to redraw (as I do with some of my other designs). My main focus when getting into this design however was to create a human and android Skin similar to how I'd made my Asset, Prim.

A big inspiration I had for them was Jenni from My Life As a Teenage Robot and Hatsune Miku so I decided that white metallic plates reminiscent of Jenni would work and blue hair similar to Miku would tie things together. Additional, I also chose to include colours from the PM title cards to establish that visual parallel .

As for clothing, I followed your instructions as best as I could, creating an androgynous fit that was pastel and had hints of academic elements! On top of that, I incorporated musical notes as a reference to the singing Ariel from the Tempest and the little mermaid does and to reference her proclivities for piano music. To reference back to your choice of Psyche as a god to represent Asset, I included butterfly designs on their overalls. To balance the whole pallette I combos the PM pallette and the pallette of their clothes which ended up being pretty readable overall! Another fun fact is that I also ended realizing that Ariel shares a clothing pallette with my Caelum!

Wanna have your listener designed by me? Check out my rules for LaVeau-gue and send an ask my way! Also, currently I am looking for money to replace my computer so any interested parties who wanna help can check out my commissions!

[paintaboveyourbones]

All Roads Lead to Ween

Ok, ok, so for various corndog-related reasons, I've decided I need to share my headcannons about Marius' weiner with you all. But, that being said, I come with receipts, and like it or not I hope to convince you all that I have a point.

Click for weiners, wangs, pee pees, I'm talking the worm that needs burping, the noodle that oozes, the gherkin that gets the jerkin - all below the cut.

The historical evidence.

So, if you've ever looked at any form of Roman-Grecco ancient art you'll notice that there's a stylistic trend to depict penises as very small.

There's a lot of debate as to why this is. Some have put forth the proposal that this was merely for public modesty and that the general public might have felt uneasy with statues that depicted full-size, adult male penises in public. Believe it or not, Rome went through some very strictly moral phases now and then, depending on who the emperor was.

However, other scholars often point to Greek ideals in order to decode Roman ones. While I think it's a little simplistic to simply say the Romans stole Greek culture wholesale, there's no denying they absorbed quite a bit of what they admired. That being said, in The Clouds, Aristophanes writes, "A gleaming chest, bright skin, broad shoulders, tiny tongue, strong buttocks, and a little prick" when describing an ideal of masculine beauty. So the idea of small penises being something that could be aesthetically appealing isn't that far off.

I've also heard some classists argue that a small penis is a symbolic representation of intellectual prowess. That it's less to do with the size of the organ and more visual short hand to show a man who has conquered his baser animal instincts. Put a pin in that.

I mean, honestly, I could go on all day about penis theories. Believe me when I say I've only touched on the very tip of the iceberg on this one. But for our purposes, I'll just stick to these as a few main talking points.

But! You might be saying - that can't be true all across the board! And you'd be right! Romans did love their big weiners, too. Just take a gander at these fat cocks.

Wowzerz!

But what's up with that? These big thick fat salami-sized dicks usually appear when connected to mythical figures or gods. Sayters are often times depicted with big hairy schlongs because it's comical and it reinforces the animal half of their nature - its part of the joke. Other times god's are depicted with bigger willy-whackers because it's a sign of good luck or fertility or protection. But it's important to remember these depictions were the exception rather than the rule; they usually served a purpose and were meant to be the focus.

Now we get to Marius. My big, beautiful, awkward, half-barbarian baby.

All roads lead back to weens. I know this isn't a particularly hot take or even an especially erudite thing to put in a tumble post, but men take their jhonsons way too seriously. How much of early manhood and becoming a man is directly tied to the idea of a penis before it even has the chance to be put to its intended use?

And in the Roman world, it's not like this was an area where there was a lot of secret-keeping. People attended public baths in the nude, men exercised naked at the palaestra, and having sex with slaves and prostitutes was a very normalized right of passage Pandora even makes a point to mention this when she talks about growing up in her father's house and hearing the point after the banquet when the raping of the house salves takes place. In short - probably most people in your personal orbit knew that the size of your wang was whether you wanted it or not.

But what if? WHAT IF MARIUS HAS A HUGE WEINER DONG AND HE'S LIKE TERMINALLY EMBARRASSED ABOUT IT???

Like! It's SO un-Roman! He wants to be a scholar, god damnit! How is he supposed to be taken seriously with this huge donkey dick just bouncing around and knocking about between his thighs when he's just out trying to buy new scrolls in the marketplace?

Imagine being a young man and learning how to wrestle with the tutor and the other upper-class sons. When he goes to get in position, somebody yells out, "Careful, you don't get crushed to death by that barbarian club he's smuggling!" Then they all laugh! The shame! The humiliation! If you all only knew how hard I laugh thinking about Marius' weeny being of such a particular size that others use it to humiliate him.

BTW I think this also makes sense to think of it as being super small or really thin. Like, something that he tries to justify by saying it's proof of his superior intellect but everyone knows they don't buy it. Then Pandora's jibe hits differently. And as someone who likes to think of her being the domme in the relationship this leads to even more salacious wonderings, but that's not the point of this post so I guess I'll just stfu for now.

You too can read about Roman dick artifacts here!

[fartface025]

MY 6KAALAA MANIFESTO

copypaste ty to @anonymocha for being a sounding board and my ally/discussion partner in this cruel world. yes this is a crackship. im aware. i just… i just. i think theyre neat. i think they kiss sometimes when theyre like. umm. headcanon post 2 coming soon whatever if u even care. read my other posts abt cristallo and the others if u want.

first draft thoughts

6kaalaa is basically its not that 6 is really repressed i think he would act the same way abt romance even if he wasnt 6. maybe more interested just bc its an interesting component of his existence.

i rock w both hcs abt demiromantic or asexual 6 and also ones where he is unlabelled, not averse to anything but not seeking romantic love. i see him as the latter but like.

theyre like pavzima. theyre not a romantic relationship as normally construed or imagined, but theyre def romantic in nature. they have a good friendship before they ever consider romantic entanglement.

6 is gen interested in kaalaa and vedic astrology, kaalaa finds his life interesting. also they have close familial dynamics in sophia 37 and 210, and kanjira and shamane.

disclaimer, not an expert on kaalaa or 6, i missed mor pankh, i dont have kaalaa bur i know aspects of her character, 6 i am good friendship w did his story event when we had the 1.6 update, but havent gone past c5

HOWEVER!

LISTEN!

firstly, kaalaa is great at math. vedic astrology as she practices demands great skill as a mathematician. she’s qualified to be a professor. she has to be excellent at it to calculate planetary movement. compared to any average person, she’s a prodigy in this field. i feel confident saying that out of the cast members that aren’t of the 1.6 island, she’s one of the best mathematicians. (john titor i dont know much of, i would assume she is a great mathematician too)

idea: i see both kaalaa and 6 on the same scale of demiromanticism. 6 understands aesthetic attraction, but he doesnt seek or need romantic love, and i think the same is true of kaalaa and i think sex is just a if it happens it happens. but they have a romantic relationship. i j think they both understand aesthetic appeal and kaalaa is the single most beautiful reverse 1999 woman. send tweet (this depends pn hpw down bad and horny i am for kaalaa. i speak my truths)

kaalaa is an astrologist who depends on seeing fate into something that can arguably be attributed as math. math as fate…why does that sound familiar…

the difference is kaalaa is of the opinion fate can be altered or is divergent and is never cemented. atticus was defined by his destiny and it eventually fulfilled and became him, but he was resistant. and from what we see of him in his event story and his interaction w the other worshipper in his second story implies remaining elements of humanity and individuality from his identity as atticus, PLUS he was curious for sophia and her human normal behaviors. this intersection between two people who know fate and have it entwined in their life, who both know math well and use it to define a large part of their beings, but the main differences of preconceptions of fate and exposure to human emotion, culture and illogicality? it feels opportune for a story, especially with the islanders learning that human traits are good and make life worth living (personal thinf, i Love humans and our illogical persistent emotions. even apathy is an emotion. we are inescapably made of them.) i think, from what ik so far, thagt c5 and the whole MATH ISLAND FREE FROM VICE AND EVIL AND DANGER thing as well as the themes of rigidity versus freedom and logicality versus love is shaping up to be like actually maybe there is worth to empathy and all these other things. i think 6 and kaalaa’s friendship and dynamic revolves around this growing understanding, esp w their respective close friend groups

i hope this doesnt sound like romantic love teaches someone to “be human”. i explained that i think of them as a close friendship that naturally becomes romantic in nature, but i dont see the romantic love as the Woahhh hes human now. i see it as this as well as exposure to arcanist and human culture and nuance (a journey that him and 37 embark on) informs his worldview and its really secondary to both kaalaa and 6’s familial love with groups who care about them dearly (kanjira and shamane, 37, sophia and 210).

REGGHHJNNNHGHSHSBSBSBSHSNNANNAN J JSUT LIVE THEM. I LOBE THEM

[a-strange-inkling]

If it were up to you ( one of the best hellcheer fanfiction writer) what would you fix or change about the fight of Icarus?

Aw shux, that’s high praise! I really don’t think I’m worthy of that, but thank you 🤍

Oh God… what a laundry list 😆 read at your own risk below (I think I’ve finally run out of things to say about this book and will be moving on now 😅)

I’m going to be honest, the best way fo fix it would be to not write a book. Point blank. If I was involved with the show at all I would have NEVER written a book about Eddie in any official capacity. I don’t know if the author was aware of just how unhinged certain parts of his fanbase are (I’m sure she is now) but you’re not going to make anyone happy with this. Eddie’s ridiculously popular yes, I get it, but part of his appeal for people was how untouched his background was.

Flight of Icarus is kind of a mess plot wise with pretty weak/poor characterizations. There’s some good elements and scenes in it. It’s not bad, but it’s not great either. It’s pretty mid. I mean books based on tv shows aren’t exactly known for their… luster. It’s obviously going to lack the passion of an unpaid fanfic writer who has spent endless hours watching season 4 and doing in-depth research and analysis for their work… but that’s what we’re all used to. That’s our standard. So it’s kind of already set up for failure.

But, if I was in charge of a book like this, here’s some of the things I would do differently:

I’d have picked ONE main plot to focus on because there is way too much going on in these 280 pages for me to have the time to be invested or care about anything. There’s like three plus storylines going on with Eddie all to push ONE narrative which is basically him choosing between risking everything for a fantasy/dream of fame and money or staying true to himself and what’s real which is the steadfast loyalty of his friends and family. This takes the form of Al vs Wayne, Paige vs Ronnie, LA vs Hawkins, solo career vs band/hellfire, dropping out to try to become a rockstar vs being the first Munson to graduate, who Eddie wants to be vs who he truly is deep down.

It’s just too much.

I’d have taken a little more time making Eddie three dimensional. I know he’s a side character, but a lot of heart and thought went into creating him (at least on Joe’s end). I’d have made more conscious choices for his character, especially if he’s narrating in first person (I would have not used first person). His outer dialog is great (the dialog throughout the whole thing is actually really great, you can tell the author’s a screen writer and it’s one of the stronger elements to the book) but his inner monologue is pretty ooc and at times really off. He lacks a lot of the things that drew people to him in the first place or it’s just not as strongly presented I guess. He doesn’t feel fully formed.

If I was going to give Eddie a love interest (I don’t know why you would do that to yourself at this point, his fanbase is volatile at best and either ships him with Steve, Chrissy, or themselves, no one is going to like it) I’d have given her WAY better writing than an immersive wattpad character with little to no character traits outside of her aesthetic and interests which is an alternative style and liking music. Wow. Groundbreaking. I would have her make decisions based on a fully formed personality verses the convenience of the plot. And if not, if she’s going to be a means to an end, I’d at least go all in and make her wild or evil or a total bitch or conniving or funny or grumpy or goofy or something. She’s not given enough focus or time to be well rounded so I’d just have fun and go batshit crazy with her (don’t worry Paige, you’re mine now and I will give you an actual character and vindication).

Eddie choosing between his dad and Wayne would have probably been the plot I picked to focus on and I would have really dived into that. The good, bad and the ugly of the Munson family. Because Al (that would not be his name btw 🤢) and Wayne reflect the two sides of Eddie’s character. A charming, self serving, cowardly asshole and a good, strong and kind person who protects and looks after others. I like Ronnie a lot and she’s probably the best written character in the book, but Wayne needed to have more spotlight for this.

I’d have definitely made the plot a lot less fantastical and way more of a simple character study. Just Eddie deciding between embracing the infamy of the Munson family or choosing to rise above it. Does he decide to scheme and cheat like his dad to get more out of life or does he do the right thing and stay the course to actually graduate and make something of himself. That’s it. All that’s needed. Eddie getting a shot at being a rockstar at eighteen in Hawkins is already kind of odd, especially when his in is a twenty year old “junior scout”??? Who just happens to be at his dive bar and have the hots for him and fucks him and pretty much offers him a life in LA on a silver platter with no issues other than having to bail on his band and high school club?? It’s… a bit much for our unlucky loser boy we see in the show. Book Eddie is as lucky as they come, but he’s a total dumbass and decides to trust and scheme with his deadbeat father??? Who has always failed him? Why? I get he needs money but his kinda girlfriend’s got a job and he’s pretty much got a record deal. What even is this? That whole storyline would be scrapped to hell. But hey, at least it’s more believable than an actual drug heist and a kingpin and a shoot out. Oh and arson. It’s giving… *shivers* Riverdale and not in a good way.

Lastly, I’d have taken the opportunity to develop characters from the show a little more. Not a ton, but like the author did with Higgins. I really like how he was written in the novel. He had a lot of fire and personality out of nowhere which was kind of hilarious. I probably would have expanded Jason the most actually, I’d have added more to that tense rivalry. And I’d have left Chrissy pretty much out of it. The talent show is best left to the imagination and we already have a delicate narrative between them because of the forest scene. I wouldn’t want to add too much there. But she’d have a cameo for sure. Like brief eye contact or a shared smile or something at the very end of the book. Just a little glimmer of what’s to come. I’m also a Eddie has always had a little bit of a thing for Chrissy truther, so in my bias I might have him quietly admire her from afar or something.

And there you go.

I mean you’re going to get my version of his backstory eventually anyway and bonus he and Chrissy live, get married and have kids. Yay!

[centrally-unplanned]

Like a lot of media, anime has ideology. They tend to come up the most in the themes for shows - I have talked before about the Cult of Fun, characters struggling to do X or losing a relationship with person Y and those experiences are justified, made good, by the line “we had fun, right?”. Nothing wrong with that idea, but anime ideologies tend to play their greatest hits over and over - I can name hundreds of shows with that theme! (Dress-up Darling was last season’s obligatory Cult of Fun show). From The Power of Friendship to Shinzo Abe Says Make Babies a lot of anime can be slotted into a select few groups. Which doesn’t stop them from being great, but over time you really start to value less overplayed ideas.

Which is why I think Call of the Night is my favourite anime airing this season so far - its theme is “being an aimless nocturnal streetwalker fucking rocks” which is a very refreshing take on the vampire romance genre. Ever since the “urban fantasy” David Bowie-style vampire turn of the 80′s emerged, the vampire media ecology gained this “the Call of the Night, a life of back-alley raves and fancy parties and endless indulgence” sheen that, despite its obvious sex appeal, is almost always portrayed as fundamentally bad and also ridiculously excessive. Unending baroque orgy raves sounds fun in the abstract, but for most it would be unobtainable and also exhausting - you aren’t cool enough to pull it off, sorry!

Call of the Night is referencing this concept right in its title, but to make the genre work for its 14 year old loner protagonist it needs to scale back the ambitions: this is an anime about our high school drop main guy Kou Yamori befriending/being seduced by/being fed upon female street-hobo vampire Nazuna Nanakusa. And they spend their time literally fucking around on the streets of Tokyo together, drinking from vending machines, hanging out in parks, and just doing nothing. Every night they go back to Nazuna’s apartment for feeding and it literally looks like this:

Straight up “single men can live like this and be happy” meme level of zero fucks given. 

The Call of the Night in Call of the Night has zero glitz and its entirely positive and fun, because what makes the call appealing isn’t the raves or the orgies, but the night itself, the ideology of the night:

Why do you think people stay up at night?

Because there is a show they want to watch, something they want to do?

[Nah,] It all boils down to one reason:

They aren’t satisfied with how they spent the day

The night means freedom...

Which sounds all dramatic except the inhibition released is high fiving a passing drunk guy who then throws up on your shoe: 

Which is actually totally freeing! You never would high-five a drunk guy at 4:00 PM, 4:00 PM is the time of responsibilities, social pressures, the obligations of existing. But no one expects you achieve goals at 3:00 AM, everyone who could judge you is asleep! I absolutely feel this theme in real life and also don’t think I have seen it captured in anime before, or at least not very often - I didn’t know I wanted a show to reflect this part of me until I saw it.

And it leans into this aesthetically too. In CotN the night itself is gorgeous all the time in different color swatches of purples and yellows; who wouldn’t want to live here even if its all spent sitting on park swings: 

But meanwhile, our main characters are not ideal seductresses. Oh sure, our vampire is a hot anime girl who wears like a leather crop top and mini skirt, its still anime, but like:

Nazuna has those tired eyes, her head is kindof flat, she spends most her time being either confused or a snickering gremlin - you aren’t shocked she is a little desperate for a blood buddy. Here is her “hey can I suck your blood” face before it goes evil:

Hell, indulge me here or skip if its cringe for you, but even her breasts are realism-first - here is her at her most seductive, moments she absolutely has, don’t get me wrong:

But notice how those aren’t the round perky bouncy anime tits of the average 2D hottie? I have had conversations with people with breasts like these about how their shape makes them insecure, which regardless of if they should be is certainly something *anime* normally agrees with. 

The point is Nazuna’s grunge-flecked hotness, just like the beautiful-night-but-at-a-vending-machine aesthetic, is all calibrated to make the ordinary and stupid liberating via the socially-emancipatory potential of the night as an escape from having to worry about being stupid and ordinary. And it works, hands-down.

The actual plot mechanic, since I haven’t mentioned it, is that Kou wants to became a vampire to join the nightlife permanently, and you do that by being bitten by vampire while in love with them, while Nazuna is happy to indulge his attempt if she gets to feed on him in the meantime (which isn’t deadly). The sex metaphor is hilariously on-the-nose:

Which is a sign of the show understanding what level the audience is at when it comes to cultural awareness: it doesn’t need to play coy, you've seen vampire shit before so why not laugh at it? The plot is all normal them-getting-closer stuff, this isn’t a visionary show, instead its just a good version of a typical show. It does however have a grand time playing with the gender roles of this relationship: Kou is absolutely the girl of the two during bite time:

But it isn’t just jokes, like this scene of some now-consensual biteplay after Kou, delightfully, was insecure that Nazuna was just using him for sex blood and he isn’t special and Nazuna assured him no baby, it’s more than that:

I mean its still A: hilarious, and B: hot, and its great how Nazuna carries him around the city because she can fly and always climbs on top of him and initiates everything and all of that. If its your kink this show is absolutely here for you, Kou just needs some thigh highs, cat ears, and an Intro to Haskell and she will be Tumblr-ready in no time.

But the strength of this show is in how tight it is, how all the elements stack up. What are those themes again? The night frees you, not to be a brazen orgy-raving vampire lord, but to not have to deal the day-to-day stresses? Responsibilities, obligations, social expectations, you don’t have to put on a face and live up to all those under the forgiving light of the stars?

Including the onerous, demanding, constricting ones that come with Being a Man, maybe?

[mutodaes]

Happy pride month everyone!!

What better way to kick the month off (for me, at least) than by showing off the main cast of Hematemesis.

Because Hema takes place in an "alternate" Earth, gender and sexuality doesn't exist as we know it. Many societies and species have different gender and sex structures than humans do. The above labels are what the cast would say if asked by a human, but none of them would personally label themselves this way (beyond Rhyvet, at least)

Lets talk about it under the cut!

Howdy, nice to see you here!

Firstly, I want to cover the fact that Ausvardian/Seivei, Szolka, and Ofrians do not have the same gender structure western cultures have in our world.

Ausvardians/Seivei (Aus, Mhere, Jaxx) have one the most analogous structures that humans do when it comes to sexuality and genders! These cultures span across multiple bisex species that have sexually dimoprhic traits, so western identity labels can be easily placed without much room for error. That said, it's very common for individuals to transition from one gender to another or to forgo the sexual binary entirely. Trans and/or intersex individuals in these cultures are often raised as non-gendered and sacred individuals, often finding their place as religious leaders or healers. When it comes to raising young, children are often born from the "main" pairing of a family line, with side partners being an optional part of life. It's frowned upon to treat all of your partners equally in Ausvardian culture (but not for the Seiveihei!).

Szolka culture encompasses many trisex species. Their sexes are based on testes, ovaries, and ovotestis that are all located in the same region of the body with no visual difference. Shadoulai (Djeri) and Telleib (Yeirek) belong to highly social species where sexuality is more based on the amount of partners you have rather than the sex/gender identity of said partners. When there's no true sexual dimorphism in your species, you tend not to attach sexual and gender identities to yourself and others ^^

It's incredibly common to see a male Telleib pared with multiple male, female, and intersex partners, all coming together as a family to raise their shared young in small pod groups.

Shadoulai, on the other hand, communally raise their young regardless of parentage, so having an ever-changing list of partners is common for them! Monogamy in Shadoulai populations is incredibly rare (and sadly, often frowned upon). This is because Shadoulai settlements can consist of up to 80 members!

Ofrians (Aestus, Ofris) are synthetic organisms that can swap parts and change their appearance at will as long as they have the resources and time to do so. Gender to them is an accessory rather than an innate part of who they are, often times switching between multiple gender presentations throughout their lifetimes. Subsequently, sexuality is equally as nebulous to them. Ofrians are more focused on overall aesthetic and personality of their potential partners than sexual appeal based on gender categories, with many falling into the aroace spectrum. With the ability to build your own child from scratch, sex becomes an entirely optional part of life. Single parents are a common sight!

And lastly, for the culture that is rather rigid with their gender and sexual identities, Algelhi! Rhyvet's culture worships a god of Duality, who can split into both a man and a woman (or so they say...). This has lead many Algelhi to uphold strict structures of gender and gender performance, though the ideal woman is expected to be much more masculine than western human standards. Anyone who falls outside of this system tends to be ostracized, with exceptions in Algelhi populaces that regularly intermingle with other cultures. Shadoulai that are Algelhi, perplexingly, also follow the Algelhi gender binary, to very mixed and detrimental results. Monogamy is expected and encouraged, though there's no particular focus on heterosexual relationships. That said, labels are important to the Alga! Being able to firmly put yourself in a box is viewed as necessary to forming beneficial long-term bonds with your partner.

[tornioduva]

GERUDO REDESIGN - Physique part 1

Hey there! so, welcome to the first part of this design journey. it'll probably be quite long, already i wanted to make the first post with a full page of illustrations, but i managed to do only the first part, uhuh.

This redesign will be divided into sections, the first one being the bodies and appereance of this women.

Before starting with vomiting ideas, a few clarifications:

The main goal of this redesign is to make them less of a biproduct of our world's racism and sterotypes and a more grounded species of its own, with more defined characteristics and distinctions from regular humans.

In Hyrule there are many different species with their own characteristics. while the Gerudo are a different species, i personally consider them a subspecies of, without a better in-universe term, Humans, the macro category that includes them, Hylians and Sheika.

When i talk about average characteristics of them, it means that those are the most common and defining of the whole species, but exceptions can and do exists, sometimes even in large numbers, though maybe sparse.

this is a silly experiment of mine, an excuse to excercise while sharing it. many of my ideas will probably be flawed and i never intend for them to be considered "the right way of doing things", they are just my subjective opinion on the matter.

With that said, let's begin!

In the Zelda Canon, Gerudos as a species are defined by:

being able of birthing only women

generally taller than hylians

generally of dark orange skin tone (but as shown in later games, that too also varies), also a mix of middle eastern/african facial traits

resilient enough to endure the harsh conditions of the desert with less equipment than your average Hylian (kinda)

The poity noses seamlessly attached to their forehead

This list alone (hoping i haven't missed something) does not a good job in differentiating them from just a segregated group of regular hylians, just with brown skin and some genetic peculiarities, and thus the icky part. I don't want to reinvent them completely, but to craft a more (to me) interesting species of people out of these bases. Their appeal definitely skyrocketed with the Tears of the wild; though their improvement is mostly in their cultural and aesthetical display of things, there are some things in how they look that i'd like to keep.

Now, onto my first main changes:

I know, sorry if you expected something more drastic. the fact is, i love the way they look in Tears of the wild, and to change them more it would feel too much like making a up a new species to me. so i wanted to build off their canon appeareance.

They are already quite tall (Urbosa canon height seems to be around 6.7 ft, and many cited a girl in a bar lamenting being 8 ft tall)...but i say why not taller. and bigger too! I honestly prefere the idea of them being somewhat giant beings, that impose themselves by presence alone. as they are, yes, in the game you feel the height difference, but somehow it got mundane pretty quickly. so again, with the goal of making them much more striking and distinct from other humans, they are on average much taller and with bigger proportions now!

Another feature that stood out to me in the games was their often really pronounced hips, with these protruding pelvic bones. that is a nice idea i think, so i decided to keep that on average, Gerudo have really protruding hips with really deep dips before the thigh. Probably i could've exaggerated that part even more, i'll try to going forward.

Body hair. here we go, this is the main idea and the thing that may ruffle the most feathers. I thought about what else could make them more striking than they are, then about the fact they always expose so much of their skin to hars conditions, and came up with the idea of giving them a lot of body hair. All this hair has the property of not only maintaing some body warmth and protecting the skin, but it also absorbs the cold of the night and balances it out. i don't know how it would work (magic hair!) but i think it could be neat that their survivability could be tied somewhat to their hair and how much they have of it. On a technical level, to sell this concept even more i think i should'ave covered her even more, but i'm already at my limit since i hate body hair ahah. you're free to draw you're own with fur on it.

A thing that is not represented here for clearness sake, but that will be explored later on, is that they also have facial hair! the way they style it will be in the culture section, but in my interpretation they can also have a beard and moustaches.

One last thing, Muscles. The way the games portray them, especially in Tears of the wild, make it seem like they naturally become shredded while growing up (aside from some chubby ones, but i guess the muscles might still be there, just covered). If that's the case, i honestly do not like it. Sure, it may be that they are naturally a species of naturally muscular women, but i think this misses the oppurtunity of making them more interesting for it. In my interpretation, they are for sure naturally strong, but mainly do to their height; task that a normal hylian would struggle with sure are easier if you're 3 meters tall! They do not acquire definition naturally though, that's entirely u to culture, living conditions and training regimes, which will be explored later on.

Ears. This is the thing that may change the most going forward since i'm not entirely sure, buuut...i don't like it that much that they have the same ears as hylians now. it's not that big of a deal, plus it has a pretty believable explanation, but i prefere a middle ground. Yes, millenias of evolution annd interbreeding with other humans has led to a difference in ears, but i prefere for it to be slightly elongated round ears instead of just elf ones.

And that's it for now, i think it's already a pretty long post uhuh. In the next part i want to explore (with drawings of course) skintones, facial fatures (noses my beloved!), hair colors and maybe something more.

Let me know if you like my ideas so far, i'd love nothing more than to start a discussion and to see other people's ideas flow freely! or to just criticize mine, uhuh.

[decepti-thots]

Oh my god please discuss the sliding scale of personhood autobot vs decepticon in the Bay movies it sounds genuinely fascinating

Okay. So. Full disclaimer, it's been a while since I sat down and dedicatedly rewatched Bayverse- I keep meaning to and then getting confronted with the slap in the face that is actually having to do it, so. This is by necessity going to talk only in broad strokes, plus you should take it with a pinch of salt or ten since my memory is a crapshoot tbh. But hey ho!

The Decepticons are interesting because they move quite freely, depending on the character, film and even moment, between a wider range of 'is this a person?' compared to the Autobots. The Autobots have two main modes: people that are mostly comparable to humans (however flat and uncared for by the narrative) and beloved, domesticated animal (again: the boy and his car-dog thing, this is mostly just Bee's role).

The Decepticons might include depictions of them as, in any given film: a person who is thoroughly Othered from human people in some capacity, a monster, also some kind of domesticated pet or creature (spoiler: that's Wheelie), or something pretending to be a person. Let's go over some of why that is, and how Bayverse creates such a stark contrast between the two factions as compared to something like G1.

The designs are the most obvious thing to point to here. People often deride Bayverse's designs as universally incomprehensible, but this elides the fact that the Decepticon designs are very clearly intended to be more incomprehensible visually. They are often more alien, less humanoid or humanlike, and less conventionally appealing than the Autobots. Indeed, I've said before that I tend to prefer the Decepticon designs in Bayverse because they lean much further into the aesthetic of noise and weirdness, and this makes it feel more like a choice; but that's not a neutral coincidence! They are designed in ways that adhere to common wisdom about what makes a character design 'appealing' or 'unappealing', what is used to present characters as 'relatable' or 'not relatable' inhuman characters to an audience of humans with certain assumed biases.

Compare 2007 Optimus and Bee to Megatron and Starscream, for example:

Broadly speaking, OP and Bee, even with all the over-engineered noise of their designs, have clear, recognisable faces that draw your attention to the eyes. Optimus' design sits as the most humanlike, with Bee's divergence from standard human faces primarily drawing attention to his muteness (which we discussed previously) with the 'gag' where his mouth might be.

Starscream, meanwhile, is more obviously inhuman by a wide margin. He has a bird face- he is explicitly animalistic! Why doesn't Starscream mirror his G1 design even a little when OP and Bee do? Partly it's because one goal of the design choices here are to make the Decepticons seem monstrous in a way which more clearly delineates the two sides than the G1 designs do. Megatron is not nearly so specific in what he evokes, but looking at him side by side with the Autobot designs, you can see how it carries over. He is broadly humanoid but lacks a lot of the definition that gives Bee and OP a more humanlike apperance, in part due to how his being monochrome makes him seem less clearly in possession of a humanlike anatomy (Bee has pecs!), plus his eyes are small and set far apart in a way that evokes certain types of animal skull. And like. He's got "horns", haha. THAT TOO. Not subtle.

But Megatron and Starscream are both shown to be intelligent, of course. They speak, they communicate, they are not shown as beasts even as their designs evoke a more monstrous affect to distance them from our human baseline. They possess some degree of personhood in how they are presented (it makes for better central villains!). But it's a personhood a few steps further removed from human personhood than, say, Optimus'. The Decepticons have (scary, inhuman) people among them- but they are not exclusively, or even mostly, made up of people the way the Autobots tend to be presented.

Moving along the line. Another Decepticon is Wheelie, who is shown in a similar way to how Bumblebee is- like a kind of super-pet, the fantasy of having a cool robot who's smart enough to communicate with you but who is still, well, your pet. His design is obviously very far from humanlike, though as he's intended to be endearing (theoretically) rather than menacing, his design more like a harmless spindly bug than a 'monster'. Bigger eyes in a deeply inhuman face: that's not a person, that's a pet that can talk to you, the movie says! Imagine, a dog that humps your leg and makes really awful sex jokes. What a dream.

He arguably follows on from a template that Frenzy established the movie before, where Frenzy was presented like his undomesticated equivalent in this uncomfortable analogy. Their designs evoke similarly inhuman vibes, where the influence is insectoid and therefore unpleasant but not super menacing. Compare the slapstick way violence against Frenzy is framed versus how even unsympathetic characters like Starscream tend to be shown in fights- it's implicitly just not violence being done against a person as opposed to like... a cockroach that learned to talk. Again: he's visually further than any Autobot from human by a significant degree, and he exists on a different narrative level than Decepticons like Megatron. In universe, no difference; but to the audience there sure is.

Then we have the ones that are just... monsters of a very beastly variety. I'd argue Barricade in the 2007 movie fits this despite ostensibly talking and showing humanlike intelligence; he speaks very differently to like, Megatron, for example, all brusque repetition that doesn't evoke someone who's done more than memorize the question, and throughout his big 2007 setpiece he's then basically treated like a predatory animal; largely silent beyond his couple memetic lines, seeming too intelligent for his form at times when we see him in alt (his alt mode being so prominent in creating paranoia really mirrors the idea of an animal stalking its prey IMO, and how scared we are when animals seem to display uncanny-to-us intelligence and thought). Barricade is not a person to be fought, he's a hunting dog let loose, the framing suggests, and the goal is to put him down before he tears out your throat. He's a good example, I think, of a single character moving between modes within a single film. He has a brief moment of personhood (for gag purposes) but easily reverts to that predator-animal template. Decepticons can be wild animals too, then.

Even further along that axis is something like Revenge of the Fallen's Devastator. That's just a big scary monster, y'all! Look at it! RotF as a film is not interested at all in the implications that this is a combiner, let's be real, so we will also put that to one side and not come up with some bullshit about how 'maybe it's because he's a combiner', like let's be real guys, RotF isn't bothering with that thematic stuff. It's RotF, that movie is so goddamn dumb. Anyway. So this:

This is a monster, not a person; that face is a maw, not a face. Proportions are all weird and truly animal-like too. A speechless, destructive monster who exists less as a person to fight and more a natural disaster to resist; and another type of Decepticon that will not find an Autobot counterpart, because Autobots are people bar a couple domesticated exceptions, but Decepticons go all over the conceptual map, with this as an extreme!

And the whole idea that a Decepticon that is not a person might be mistaken for one is of course then used for horror at one point. When we see Alice the pretender, the fear comes from how convincingly she apes being what she is not: a human yes, but also a thinking, feeling person of any description. Her true form is partly creepy for having a bunch of unnecessarily humanlike features warped into something grotesque, and does not speak after she's revealed I think. My point is that the scary part of Alice is that idea of mimicry that can't be detected, and oh boy oh boy is there some fucking subtext to that scene we could read into it. By the way. Remember how there's an implicit dick joke and oh god RotF is a godawful film I hate it so much. I know you all know this, but I do. ANYWAY. I think she'll round out our trip down the 'scale' for now.

The above is in no way comprehensive (and leans real heavily on the first two films- there's actually potentially some interesting stuff about how Megatron, specifically, changes in how he is framed going on, and arguably becomes at one point the only truly personified Decepticon character). I haven't even found a place to get into how yes, the reproductive cycle stuff theoretically applies to all Cybertronians but is only ever shown when the Decepticons are doing it, and is notoriously weirdly animalistic and visceral; they have like, egg sacs, they have a very organic but very inhuman and upsetting life cycle thing going on with their babies and all. This is extremely scattershot! And missing stuff and possibly at points a bit off base because again, I'm running off my memory here. But I hope it shows a bit of how and why the spectrum of 'person or not' is a much broader question for bayverse Decepticons than Autobots, and how it often skews further to the 'not' side by a wide margin.

And it's also very all over the place in terms of the resulting implications. Some of it has its roots in very charged stuff; some of it could be read a multitude of ways! Where the Bee post is more clearly a matter of 'here is how casual ableist assumptions play out in Hollywood blockbusters without thinking', this is a wild combo of everything from 'here's how they reverse engineered transmisogyny' to 'here's why cannon fodder in dumb action flicks is designed like this so often'... but there, assumptions about 'appealing character design' are not politically neutral. (Take the old 'bigger eyes are always the more appealing option!' thing, that's a culturally specific assumption that has all sorts of follow on discussions about orientalism, for example.) The whole thing tends back towards something reactionary at basically every turn, though the 'what' might vary.

But ultimately I think the takeaway is: the bayverse films set you against the Decepticons not through obvious ideology- I doubt anyone got a coherent idea of their aims or anything out of the movies- but by sliding the scale down to 'not human' in many ways and letting our brains fill in the rest.

[cross-border-communications]

The Magic of Street-Side Trees. Beauty, Coolness, and Urban Prosperity.

The beauty, coolness, and urban prosperity brought by street-side trees.

Trees lining urban streets are integral elements of the urban landscape, serving multiple ecological roles and socio-economic functions. In general, incorporating trees along the roads in urban areas can elevate the aesthetic appeal, regulate temperatures, and foster prosperity growth. And if our goal is to enhance the role of cities in driving economic growth and fully utilizing human resources, then we must prioritize making tangible improvements to urban environments.

Trees are crucial components for creating appealing and hospitable urban environments that enhance citizens' psychological and social well-being. They play a vital role in reducing air temperature and humidity, which helps alleviate the effects of heat waves and global warming. Trees bear witness to the history, culture, and identity of cities, which they preserve and pass on to future generations. In addition to their undeniable beauty, trees are valuable allies in the fight against climate change.

They provide a range of local benefits that are often ignored beyond the global role of absorbing carbon dioxide. This article aims to increase awareness among readers about the importance of trees for cities and the planet. It seeks to motivate all of us to value, preserve, and protect the urban tree heritage through a participatory and accountable manner that involves citizens and institutions.

Street-side trees are more than just beautiful to look at. They are an essential resource for cities, providing numerous benefits to residents' health, well-being, and quality of life. In their article on Monocolo, Paolo Massi and Giulia Papaleo highlight the main advantages of trees in urban areas. La magia degli alberi lungo le strade. Bellezza, frescura e prosperità urbana

Among the benefits that trees bring to the urban environment, we can mention:

Trees perform ecological, social, and economic functions that contribute to the well-being and development of cities. They help to reduce air pollution by capturing particles, filtering harmful gases, and producing oxygen. Trees also absorb carbon from the atmosphere and store it in their wood, making them beneficial for climate change mitigation. Additionally, trees create shade, cool the air, and reduce energy consumption for cooling buildings. They prevent flooding, improve water quality, and increase biodiversity by providing shelter and food for many species. Trees enhance the urban landscape, mitigate noise, and even increase the value of properties.

Moreover, they promote physical and mental health by stimulating physical activity, reducing stress, and improving mood and concentration.

Therefore, roadside trees are a valuable resource for cities and their inhabitants. It is critical to protect, care for, and increase them through various means, such as public policies, private actions, and guaranteed maintenance over time, recognizing their fundamental role in the quality of urban life so that maintenance, which develops jobs, in particular, is 'guaranteed' over time,

Urban forestation and eco-neighborhoods.

Urban forestation refers to designing and creating green spaces in urban and peri-urban areas to incorporate nature into the landscape. It is important to both develop new green spaces and enhance existing ones.

Eco-neighborhoods serve as an example of sustainable and livable urban environments. They are designed considering the environment and the health of their residents. Sustainability principles are followed to improve the landscape and economic assets of the urban context. The design of an environmentally sustainable neighborhood aims to reduce its environmental impact during construction, throughout its life cycle, and even during decommissioning while prioritizing the comfort of its residents. These neighborhoods are built to improve people's quality of life by emphasizing energy conservation, renewable energy, environmentally friendly materials, reducing water and waste consumption, and promoting sustainable mobility. They are tangible parts of the city that contribute to the well-being of its inhabitants.

In addition, urban forestation is another example of how urban environments can be made more livable and sustainable. We can seamlessly blend nature into the urban landscape by integrating street trees, gardens, and parks. They represent elements of nature that help purify the air we breathe, capturing pollutants, storing carbon, and mitigating the climate of cities.

In summary, street-side trees are not just a decorative element but a proper green infrastructure that improves the quality of urban life. Therefore, It is vital to encourage planting, caring for, and preserving trees in urban areas, with the participation of government institutions, businesses, and residents, in order to achieve a shared vision to promote sustainable progress.

🟠 Italiano

Intro

Gli alberi sono elementi essenziali per creare paesaggi urbani attraenti e accoglienti, che favoriscono il benessere psicologico e sociale dei cittadini. contribuiscono a ridurre la temperatura e l'umidità dell'aria, mitigando gli effetti delle ondate di calore e del riscaldamento globale. Essi sono testimoni della storia, della cultura e dell'identità delle città, che conservano e trasmettono alle generazioni future. Alleati nella lotta ai cambiamenti climatici, oltre alla loro innegabile bellezza offrono una serie di benefici locali che spesso tendiamo a trascurare (al di là dei benefici globali di assorbimento dell’anidride carbonica). Questo articolo quindi ha lo scopo di sensibilizzare i lettori sull'importanza degli alberi per le città e per il pianeta, invitandoli a conoscere, apprezzare e tutelare il patrimonio arboreo urbano coinvolgendo i cittadini e le istituzioni in un processo partecipativo e responsabile.

La magia degli alberi lungo le strade. Bellezza, frescura e prosperità urbana.

Gli alberi sono una risorsa preziosa per le città, non solo per il loro contributo alla mitigazione dei cambiamenti climatici, ma anche per i molteplici benefici che apportano alla salute, al benessere e alla qualità della vita dei cittadini. In questo articolo del Monocolo gli autori Paolo Massi e Giulia Papaleo, vogliono illustrare alcuni dei principali vantaggi che gli alberi offrono alle aree urbane e alle persone che le abitano. La magia degli alberi lungo le strade. Bellezza, frescura e prosperità urbana

La magia degli alberi lungo le strade dunque non si limita alla loro estetica. Gli alberi sono elementi essenziali per il benessere e lo sviluppo delle città, in quanto svolgono funzioni ecologiche, sociali ed economiche. Tra i vantaggi che gli alberi apportano all'ambiente urbano, possiamo citare:

Riduzione dell'inquinamento atmosferico: gli alberi catturano le particelle sospese nell'aria, filtrano i gas nocivi e producono ossigeno.

Mitigazione del cambiamento climatico: gli alberi assorbono il carbonio dall'atmosfera e lo immagazzinano nel loro legno, contribuendo a ridurre l'effetto serra.

Regolazione termica: gli alberi creano ombra e rinfrescano l'aria attraverso la traspirazione, diminuendo la temperatura e il consumo energetico per il raffreddamento degli edifici.

Conservazione del suolo e dell'acqua: gli alberi riducono l'erosione del suolo, aumentano la sua capacità di infiltrazione e ritardano il deflusso delle acque piovane, prevenendo le inondazioni e migliorando la qualità dell'acqua.

Incremento della biodiversità: gli alberi offrono rifugio e cibo a molte specie animali e vegetali, arricchendo la diversità biologica delle città.

Valorizzazione del paesaggio urbano: gli alberi creano scenari naturali, armonizzano l'architettura, attenuano il rumore e aumentano il valore immobiliare delle proprietà.

Promozione della salute e del benessere umano: gli alberi favoriscono la salute fisica e mentale delle persone, stimolando l'attività fisica, riducendo lo stress, migliorando l'umore e la concentrazione.

Gli alberi e le aiuole a verde lungo le strade sono quindi una risorsa preziosa per le città e i loro abitanti. Per questo motivo, è importante proteggerli, curarli e incrementarli, attraverso politiche pubbliche e azioni private che ne riconoscano il ruolo fondamentale per la qualità della vita urbana affinché la manutenzione, che sviluppa posti di lavoro, in particolare venga 'garantita' nel tempo.

La forestazione urbana e gli ecoquartieri

Con il termine forestazione urbana si intende la progettazione e lo sviluppo di aree verdi urbane e periurbane, facendo della natura un'importante protagonista di questo paesaggio. Chiaramente è importante non solo progettare e sviluppare nuove aree verdi, ma anche rivalorizzare e riappropriarsi di quelle esistenti.

Certo! Gli ecoquartieri sono un esempio di ambienti urbani sostenibili e vivibili. Sono quartieri costruiti nel rispetto dell’equilibrio ambientale e della salute delle persone che vi abitano. Sono conformi ai principi della sostenibilità e puntano alla valorizzazione del patrimonio paesaggistico ed economico del contesto urbano in cui sono inseriti. La progettazione di un quartiere ecosostenibile punta a ridurne l’impatto ambientale: dalla fase di costruzione, al ciclo di vita, fino alla sua dismissione, senza mai dimenticare il comfort di chi lo vive. Si tratta di vere e proprie porzioni di città edificate con l’obiettivo di innalzare il livello di qualità della vita e sono realizzate ponendo l’accento su: risparmio energetico; uso delle energie rinnovabili e di materiale ecologico; riduzione del consumo di acqua e di rifiuti; promozione della mobilità sostenibile.

Inoltre, la forestazione urbana è un altro esempio di come gli ambienti urbani possono essere resi più vivibili e sostenibili. Le alberature stradali, i giardini e i parchi urbani rappresentano degli elementi di natura che contribuiscono a purificare l’aria che respiriamo, catturando sostanze inquinanti, immagazzinando carbonio e mitigando il clima delle città.

Come si può notare, gli alberi lungo le strade non sono solo un elemento decorativo, ma una vera e propria infrastruttura verde che migliora la qualità della vita urbana. Per questo motivo, è importante promuovere la piantumazione, la manutenzione e la protezione degli alberi nelle città, coinvolgendo le amministrazioni pubbliche, le imprese e i cittadini in una visione condivisa di sviluppo sostenibile.

images created by The Board Behind © 2023

More related topics on this matter you might like:

Landscape Architecture: self-reflection on improving and enhancing our cities' run-down suburbs. English /Italian

Give color to the city to celebrate the joy of living.

I appreciate your kind presence and attention on this matter. Thank you for joining us today.

⏩ The Board Behind