#without it there’s not a whole lot of moral superiority to stand on

[astrababyy]

ik this topic has been beat to literal death but btw nesta is, at most, three years older than feyre. elain herself is like one or two years older. the way discussions surrounding who is accountable for what happened pre-acotar with the sisters, you’d think nesta and elain were at least five or six years older than her, but they were all really young.

nesta and elain didn’t let feyre do anything when they were all actual teenagers. and even if that weren’t true, it’s not either of their responsibility to control what feyre does. the only valid critique about their behavior pre-acotar was that they were ungrateful and used all the money feyre got for them. even then, it’s not a great critique because those two weren’t characters before the last act in acotar.

the only person that can be blamed for feyre hunting is their father. he is the father. he should’ve been taking care of them. and we can go into a whole debate on whether we should be blaming him anyway because of both his disability and the state of his mental health at the time, but none of that is relevant for this conversation because nesta and elain aren’t at fault.

it’s so weird that the fandom holds them accountable for this (mostly holding nesta accountable but yk) when they have no responsibility over what feyre did or didn’t do. would it have been nice if they were more appreciative and less insufferable during those scenes??? yeah. but also- nothing they did was like criminal behavior lmao. they were just annoying, and nesta is like eviscerated by half the fandom for it.

[scrambledpancakes03]

I'm mad about The Dragon Prince

Especially Soren's character.

Like I'm just sitting here more than a week after finishing season 6 and I'm just spontaneously mad with zero prompting.

Spoilers...

So point 1: "WORD HANDS" WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK, AARON EHASZ, ARE YOU STUPID, DO YOU NOT REALIZE WHAT YOU HAVE HERE? LITERALLY WHY DID YOU DO THIS? YOU COULD HAVE WRITTRN ANYTHING ELSE WORDS ARE INFINITE THE WORLD.IS YOUR OYSTER AND YOU WROTE THIS GODDAMN JOKE??? COME ON MAN BE SO FUCKING FOR REAL! ARE YOU ACTUALLY THAT STUPID? COULD YOU NOT HAVE COME UP WITH LITERALLY ANY OTHER JOKE?

TDP had one element that made me overlook literally every little minor problem with the show, from the early animation issues, to some pacing awkwardness, to whatever the hell is up with the magic system that somehow no one seems to be freaking out that Callum can do magic nearly as much as they should, and that Ezran talks to animals (never explained how or why), etc....

That flawless, perfect element: GENERAL BADASS DEAF LESBIAN, MY LOVE, AMAYA. The scenes with and without Gren are fabulous. Not captioning the ASL (making if FOR ASL users on purpose) *chefs kiss!* splendid! Literally perfect way to handle this, I say as not a Deaf person, but a disabled person with Deaf friends who uses ASL sometimes. Deaf folks obviously can and should correct me if I'm out of line here.

Lots of media falls into the trap of making the silly/stupid comic relief character exponentially more stupid over time. But few fall into the trap that Soren is in, where the plot on paper shows growth in raw and beautiful ways, but every once and a while Ehasz and Richmond yell "fuck that" and make him as smart as a sack of horse shit dissolved in river water with no regard or awareness for anything actually going on around him. Then they try to just pick up the growth where they left off when its convenient as if they didn't just totally obliterate the serious nature of the character's story?!

Like literally, do Ehasz and Richmond genuinely expect me to believe that a Soren that claims in Season 6 episode 2 to have INVENTED "WORD HANDS" A REVOLUTIONARY NEW LANGUAGE, is the same soren that grows to defy his father's will and risk his life to oppose him and save Zym/fight alongside Callum, Ezran, Rayla, and *AMAYA* two whole seasons before?

Do they expect me to believe that Soren, growing up in Katolis, where one of the foremost top generals, the queen's sister, and a superior officer to him proudly uses ASL, never learned any? Or never became aware of its existence as a language? And if he didn't, do they expect that a person lacking that much awareness is capable of being anything in the crown guard of Katolis, having any emotional or moral development as a person, or worthy of any of my respect at all?

This man, who experienced temporary disability after being injured by a dragon (major plot point, season 2?) only to be healed by dark magic (a point of change for him, where he wanted to be better,) is made to mock an accessible language for a whole episode, and presented as stupid enough to think he invented it. Then, only a few episodes later, I'm supposed to fall back into the arc of his intended development to watch him stand up to a resurrected Viren? I'm supposed to take that seriously? The contrast doesn't work here, it's not good writing it's lazy comedy at the expense of interesting concepts.

Fuck that. I'm so mad. I loved Soren's arc, and as a neglected kid with a deeply loving but sometimes difficult relationship with my own parents... I'm mad that Ehasz and Richmond have the audacity to fuck it up this hard.

Soren had so much potential! His dynamic with Claudia and Viren was so fresh and rich with emotion, but every line they waste having him say something totally idiotic and not funny degrades the seriousness of his experience as an emotionally neglected and manipulated child. Even then, I was still invested... but after the " Word Hands" stunt. They just obliterated all the good work they did on him for one mildly ableist joke. Even if you don't see it as offensive... it's just also not funny?

I'm beyond disappointed. The only way I would forgive the writers is if they have General Amaya slap soren across the face and/or flip him off for talking about word hands in front of her. (Won't happen, but let your pal dream.) (If someone draws that, I'd be your best friend). (Might go attempt to draw that now just to feel something, lmao)

[flower-sunflower-blog]

What I think will actually happen in the Shelter lore

Ok, so…I’m kinda nervous about this xD

I’ve been wanting for a while to share my thoughts and analysis about the lore, and what I think will actually happen. This is always the part I enjoy the most, connecting the dots, interpreting a driving direction and thus giving the whole sense to the events occurring in the story. So...

Beings above

From what we know for now, Shelter is under the control/supervision (?) of some entities, I straight up call them gods xD It's mainly because s!Artea’s straight up used this term and referred to this idea. In general, there is a recurring theme of religion within this universe. 

I also think that the gods are common knowledge for everyone, and we, the audience, are the only ones left out about indepth details about them and their nature. They seem to have great power over everything. For me, they’re in this kind of neutral-bad area, as the control they have over this world is not something we could call…legit. 

They don’t seem to be the kind of superior beings granted with perfect moral standing and act upon a greater good. They’re straight up doing what they want, based on their own rules, and get away with this only because THEY are the superior beings. And how much they’re a big deal to you depends on how much you oppose their rules. 

That's why a lot of characters can actually have a chill life under them, as they either don’t have any reason to oppose them, don’t care, are fine living here as it is implied some came from worst places, and so and so. The “before Shelter” of the characters is something interesting to figure out for me, in order to understand everyone’s position and personnal struggles. 

For now i’d say :

s!Shade and s!Elk are chilling and the gods aren’t a big deal to them, at least not yet.

s!Hoot, s!Sweev, s!Ram, and maybe s!Heiwa, were in such a bad spot before coming in the Shelter, they just love being here despite everything.

s!Hayden and s!Luh have their own personal struggles to deal with for now. Maybe sAmora and s!Veni as well ? There are small moments where they seem to have things going on in their life, but we didn't see much yet.

s!Forest and s!Void, when they talked about it, seemed rather skeptical about the god situation, but just made the best of it without making trouble. 

In between, some of them seem to have a personal struggle related to the gods. The obvious one is s!Artea, I also kinda think there is something up with s!Miel and s!Void and their relationships with god entities that are still unknown. s!Lea seemed to have kind of an involvement with the magic gods altho it’s still mysterious. And finally, s!Mine didn’t get involved with gods yet, but some hints could make us think she’s a goddess. 

Safe or fair ?

The only one for now who seemed to straight up oppose to the gods is s!Cherry, thus showing us that this opposition have consequences. And the said consequences seems to also have collateral damage sometimes. That’s why gods’ opposition seems to be a collective deal : if you get in trouble, there is a chance you’re not the only one who will suffer from it.

Actually, there is also a chance that s!Ana is the one containing them, preventing them to go even harder on people. As if the “gold sacrifice” was a ritual that allowed the good to be less likely to lash out on people. 

In general, everyone is having a rather nice life, this world is still described as “safe” and a place you can enjoy living in. BUT it may not have always been that way, because some conversation give this sort of impression that work have been done in order to make it the way it is now. Again, I think it’s greatly linked to s!Ana.

If this world is peaceful, this world doesn’t seem fair. It can become an issue when, in parallel with this overall god situation, the members have their own backstories and motives. At the end, some people are in a fairer situation than others. Clearly s!Cherry is not happy with her current situation. And some people seem in a tougher spots than others. Altho we need more details, I think it could be the case for : s!Miel, s!Lea, s!Hayden, s!Luh, recently s!Void etc. 

It’s where stand the dilemma of choosing between doing things in order maintain  peace, or doing things in order to make things right. And I IMMEDIATELY thought about s!Pomme involvement in the story. s!Pomme has the goal to keep everyone safe, and surely will make actions in order to keep everyone peaceful, I think she’ll likely side with s!Ana. But s!Pomme has also this side of her who can’t stand unfairness, who doesn't accept abiding to the will of selfish beings and their arbitrary rules, who wants to burn everything. But would she risk to put danger upon her and her friends for this ? 

Losing battle

And we finally get to s!Ana’s case. I really see s!Ana as the driving force of the story. Her goal is to keep everyone safe and peaceful, in order to do so she both have to deal with satisfying the gods and preventing them to come after them, and with the member’s personal struggle when the said struggles can be a threat to the peace. 

s!Ana is a good soul and she cares for the well being of her found family. But I also feel like she worked so hard to keep things the way they are for her efforts to be wasted. She’s currently submitting 100% to the gods, she’s doing actions for everyone's common well being. It’s such a huge burden she have to carry when she’s only one person who doesn’t always know best.While I still have not listened to the playlist, I saw that a lot of the songs allude to her not feeling adequate or strong enough. But she’s also driven by love for her family.

This being said, I think I already see how flawed her character is even if her goal is really fair, and why it seems like it’ll be the main source of challenges in the story : s!Ana is in a situation where she’s imposing this “ideal” of peace to everyone, and wants to keep the status quo. But she's not taking into consideration that the “status quo” is not ideal for everyone. And sometimes her ideal can directly conflict other’s, again s!Cherry who will really find happiness through freedom and not submission. 

She also wants to get rid of conflicts and make sure everyone reach a mutual agreement. But on hand, she’s fighting a losing battle, as she could never end up satisfying everyone, and will always end up feeling like a failure. On the other hand, I also feel like thinking too much about “solving” a conflict is ending up neglecting the reason why there was conflict in the first place, and preventing people from expressing and working out deeper issues and feelings who are the cause of the occuring tensions.  

It seems like there are a lot of communication issues in general, and people don’t get to share their struggles with others, outside of some really close relationships case, like s!Ryan and s!Miel seem to be. Again, I think this is one of the main element that will push the story forward.

I'll quickly mention s!Shade, what I find interesting is that as much as not involved they are for now with the god situation, it seem they're the most strong and loyal ally to s!Ana, along with s!Lumi. He's one of the less likely to be a threat to the peace as they're not really opposing anyone nor going through big struggles that s!Ana would have to deal with, he's mostly doing his things and minding his own business. And he seems to be in agreement with s!Ana's goals and acting to serve her best interests.

Villains

I think we're in the story where there isn't really "antagonistic" character, but rather character that have antagonistic “potential” for some arcs. We have the morally gray characters who only plays by their own rules, I’m thinking about s!Pancks and s!Bipeo, both really interesting to me.

More about s!Bipeo :

More about s!Pancks :

On a quick note, s!Pomme is already upset with s!Pancks actions when he killed the children, I think it may come up later.

Going into antagonistic potential, we have s!Jean and his hot tempered actions, but I don’t see him as a “long term” villain. Just putting here my previous analysis about s!Jean for more details :

There is s!Ryan who is in my opinion the main antagonist of this arc, she’s a slow paced villain as she’s carefully planning everything. I really love her character because her actions are driven in my opinion by inner scars. She feels really deeply human, embracing the “villainess” role in order to not be hurt anymore.

More about s!Jean and s!Ryan as villains here :

I suspect s!Miel, while not having hostile attention, being a potential chaos element bringing mayhem all around. And finally, I think s!Ana has the great potential of being both the hero/main character, both the villain in someone else’s story. 

.

.

So yeah, that’s basically my assumptions, what I think will be the main conflicts between everyone, how the story will be driven, which main themes, etc !

[wildpeachfarm]

kinda sorta spitballing a bit here, but i think at least some of the UK group's behavior in this stems from wilbur being publicly exposed recently. because he was in their circle and close to a lot of them, and they are... very online, basing a lot of their understanding of morality/ethics/etc on a very twitter-esque framework that lacks nuance. where people can be neatly sorted into Bad and Good boxes and shunning the Bad Ones and grouping with Good Ones is something that happens pretty much automatically, and if you fail to do it that means you also go into the Bad box. obviously in reality, relationships are waaaay more messy and complicated, and there is no clear cut good/bad binary to sort people by. but when that's your worldview, finding out a close friend is actually a serial abuser, and you weren't able to see it until then, well, it really threatens to shake the foundations of what you think being a good person is and whether you are one. and when you have built yourself up to be better than others based on your perceived moral superiority (in your own or in others' eyes), having that perception shaken effectively shakes your sense of self. especially in your younger years, and the UK group is all what, barely over twenty at most now? i'm turning 28 this year and i have had so much therapy focused on dealing with centering an unachievable moral standard in my sense of self that meant that any time either my understanding of Being A Good Person was challenged or i failed to live up to that unrealistic standard, i ended up in (identity) crises. nowadays, i won't say i fully fixed that issue, but there is like... "more" to my own self-identity, so having one part of it crumble or change temporarily doesn't shake me as a whole so deeply. which is a very long build up to the point i'm actually trying to make. specifically, i think a lot of the UK group just had their own self-perception about their moral standing challenged significantly, and are/were looking for proof that they are "at least still better than someone else" which prompted them to point fingers and do it loudly. couple that with the - possibly subconscious - need to get prying eyes away from their own hurt and vulnerability, and you get rue comparing george and dream to wilbur, and max screaming at the camera. they're performing the outrage and anger that their (definitely twitter/younger skewing fandom influenced) standard for Being A Good Person demands, without having to center or focus the situation they are personally involved in, attached to, and where they personally may have failed to recognize and/or act against someone who was harming others. (mind, i don't think they should be doing the processing of their relationships with wilbur publicly, but this also circles back to a mentality of "everything must be done in the court of public opinion and also immediately" that is just... not healthy, not how it works, not actually solution-oriented) ANYWAY this got way longer than i meant it to but. tl;dr is basically: i think we are seeing a lot of "SEE? They do it too, so we're not bad! Actually, they are even worse!!" from the UK group that really is testament both of a lack of maturity on their part and also how toxic and counterproductive to personal growth the "twitter stan" approach to morality is.

possibly! We have no idea what goes on behind the scenes but this could be a fair guess

[visd3stele]

Corioleanus Snow is one of the best written, extremely interesting and complex characters and he's not developing at all during his book. no growth arc, nor the opposite, no change of values or principles.

at his core, he's a scared little boy. the truest self we see of him is in the arena, when it's bombed and he grips Lucy Gray's skirt whitout a second thought, going back to the times of vulnerability and fear from his childhood. usually when he feels fear, he's ashamed, but then he's too caught in time to reeber to feel anything but fright.

sometimes i even got the feeling he's amoral, no real distinction between good acts and bad deeds. the only thing he can see, understand, can matter to him is his survival and what stands in his way.

which is natural, after so many years of war. he has feelings, he has a skewed perception of the districts from before and during the war when they were the lower class enemy. he was raised to have the world at his little finger and it was taken from him, so he feels wronged by life itself. he saw his neighbours eating people and, besides the moral superiority it gave him, he also gained a whole lot of paranoia. he learned from a young age the world is cruel and, worse, unstable. at any moment, without warning, he can find himself back in the days of war, starving, not knowing if he'll see the dawns of a new say. so he seeks stability, control, safety. it's all that matters.

he learned to think like that, using everything, from social interactions and appearances to working underneath the surface with betrayel and secrets to "land on top".

he's also ashamed, which stems from fear. fear of being seen as less than, when his name alone once guaranteed respect all around the city. securing a bright future is all he can do to honor it and trully make himself feel at peace.

BUT he has moments when it's clear that he has a sense of justice, a moral compass and the potential to change its bigoted views on the districts. they're not exactly rare, but they're shadowed by other things posing a threat to his – and his family's, by extansion – life.

so Snow doesn't say a word about Clemmie's fate in the hospital, even though he's aahamed of not helping. fear of dr. gaul won, fear of becoming like her or being made lost by the head of Games won. he recognize his biasis and questions them, in regards of Lucy Gray mostly, but theese are always only fleeting thoughts. somethings he can think, but not feel in his core. maybe he could reach that, if he put someone else first (and that someone can be even granma'am or Tigris). but everything is always about him.

because he's still a scared little boy in need of safety and control of his life. he may have grown and have a sharp, intelligent beyond his age mind, but that was neccessarly to survive. his empathy, his feelings, everything regarding the heart and soul, remained frozen in time at those war years.

and when time comes, he doesn't consider other options, no matter if he feels sorry or not for what he's doing. betraying Sejeanus, betraying Lucy Gray. it's not patriotism, he's not a nationalist. he feels respect towards the Capitol as long as it can make him look good, be in the center of everyone's approving, loving attention and mantain the ilussion of control and safety he wrapped around himself. no, Snow does everything he does, taking these decisions with a cold, calculated mind, only for himself. his family is a second thought, yes, but primarely it's all about himself.

he doesn't know how to love, how to be compasionate. he needs and asks for everything around himself, like a little child, without giving in return. because he didn't develop the means to. he shut down – first time, during the war, unconscious, then he chose to – everything that could put itself in its way toward his goal. which isn't something villainy and evil, like taking over the world. it's having control over his life and others ( to make sure no one can hurt him ) because it's the only way he can understand safety. and safety he craves thoroughly.

and, HE DOESN'T WANT TO LEARN. he complies with his surroundings and what they make of him. change is not even a mere thought in his sleep depraived mind. he seeks to make the best out of everything thrown at him, but never considers changing the board entirely, changing himself. may be a trauma response or simply a lack on his part, too focused on winning playing by familiar, yet still foreign rules he needs to master. but what it surely isn't is crazyness. Snow's the bad guy fair and square, but not because he's out of it. on the contrary, what makes him so compeling and scary is: he has all means to be different and takes the conscious decisions to disregard it and become "just like his father" (with a cold, hateful look in his eyes).

his choice, thus, become even more tragic. because he actually could, he had the means to, make a different one. be good. be a rebel. help people, for he knows pain himself.

we follow a scared child playing in the snakes' den and CHOOSING to become like them to not be attacked and ostricized. no matter how beautiful the songbird sings, it can't keep him alive, fed and safe.

[tyrannuspitch]

@abby118 asked: 16. A tiny detail in canon that you want more people to appreciate

This answer got unreasonable long, so I decided to make it into its own post :D

OKAY. Hear me out.

As I interpret it, Thor has a tactical argument for invading Jotunheim, and that argument... makes sense. Like, it's not morally right, but it's perfectly logical. It's a lot more complicated than just senseless hate and violence.

A lot of what Thor says in his two arguments with Odin is posturing, but two lines stand out to me as meaningful: "They know you are vulnerable", and "The Jotuns must learn to fear me, just as they once feared you".

IE, Odin is weak, which is why he's passing the throne onto Thor - but Thor is young and untested (or rather, currently being tested), so it is vital that he proves that HE isn't weak as quickly as possible.

Because if he isn't feared, he's putting the whole kingdom in danger.

Like, as Thor sees it, Asgard is protected by its reputation as much as, if not even more than, its objective strength. They need to maintain the appearance of power, or their enemies, emboldened, could overwhelm them, and then the universe.

So, in Thor's view, defending his own reputation and pride is not self-indulgent vanity. It's a practical necessity for a warrior-king. It would be irresponsible not to.

This is, of course, still imperialism. But, still, I think it gives Thor's dark side a lot more depth if you see him this way. He's not thoughtlessly violent - he's actually very deliberate, and he really believes he's acting for a greater good.

It also makes Thor's view of Jotuns more interesting, and a little less heartless - Not: "They're monsters, so I should kill them, and they're no match for me, so I can kill them without any real risk", but: "They're monsters, so they're exceptionally dangerous and our victory is not guaranteed, so we have to use every weapon in our arsenal to keep them at bay, including psychological warfare [read: terrorism]." He's still very prejudiced, still justifying awful things, but he's coming from a place of genuine fear and a desire to protect his own people, not pure superiority.

But also, vitally: Thor is wrong. Not just morally but factually wrong. His logic is sound, but his intel is bad. He THINKS Jotunheim has the strength to pose a threat to Asgard, and they simply don't.

And this is Odin's fault. Odin's justifications for his own actions depend on the ongoing threat of Jotunheim being real, so he cannot admit to Thor that he lied, so he cannot make any argument against Thor's plan besides "because I am the Allfather and I say so", which of course only makes Thor rebel harder. Odin reaps what he sows, as always!

And finally... Thor may have swallowed some of Odin's propaganda whole, but here, he is also thinking like a propagandist himself. I love that! I really think that Thor is far more emotionally intelligent than he gets credit for. He comes from a family of manipulators; it makes sense for him to be one too. Maybe he doesn't come across like one... but maybe that's the idea.

[donnerpartyofone]

Without saying that AI imagery is categorically good or evil, art or not art, I think one of the worst consequences of its existence is how it has automatically added this Argument section to many online images where lots of people urgently make their smug assertions about whether something is fake or not, often in the absence of any clear way to tell what the truth is. And like if this gets heated enough it can make you (or me, anyway) not want anything to do with the image even if it's otherwise fun and interesting. Suddenly the whole point of its existence is this loaded thing about authenticity and fraudulence without anyone even saying exactly what those things mean to them, and this just creates a really bad smell.

It's like a mutated version of trying to watch a movie near a person who won't stop congratulating themselves for knowing that something is a special effect, and won't stop complaining that the fictional actions of the fictional characters are unrealistic, and won't stop trying to guess a twist ending instead of just experiencing the story. They just want everyone to know that they have outfoxed the movie, they have the superior intellect because the movie cannot trick them into having feelings or believing it is an unedited documentary about real life. But the AI arguments are even more onerous because movies are usually not trying to trick you into believing in a certain reality, where AI *sometimes but not always* is trying to do that. And I really do not blame anyone for worrying about getting tricked, but I do hate that we've come to this point where you can just paint every single thing you ever see with this "fake" brush, because that tends to encourage people to just check out and not give a shit. If everything is potentially fake then what's the point of caring about anything. We've gone from reasonable arguments like "the internet is full of misinformation so take X with a grain of salt" and "everything carries the editorial biases of its creators, nothing is objective" all the way over to like, oh well, everything you ever see is so likely to be a scam that the only correct response to any stimulus is to pound your chest about how cynical and unmoved you are.

Personally one of my main problems with AI art is not ethical, it's just that most of the common, accessible stuff is ugly. I really don't like the look of almost anything that comes out of Midjourney and the other immediately available programs that I'm forgetting the names of, and for me that can only be overcome by a really great and/or hilarious concept, which things are rare. I'm not interested in drawing moral conclusions about that production and I don't find it compelling to listen to people who are dogmatically for or against it. My only concern about the legitimacy or whatever of AI art is the ease with which some programs can make something that is a very close imitation of something from organic reality--and it's not just because of the potential for fraud, which is certainly worrisome, but it can also take the emotional power out of art experiences. I've seen a decent amount of truly weird, exciting AI images *that are obvious AI images* and that doesn't bother me at all. To me that's a right-tool right-job situation and that's fine. I'm more bothered by the stuff that is a very close reflection of analog creations from real life. There's someone on here who has basically invented a made-up "old master" type-painter and they post these images that are sort of acceptably familiar to something you might see in a museum--fauns chasing nymphs, ladies standing in cottage gardens, politician portraits, etc--and I'm not saying they don't have the right to do that, but I'm not sure what the point is. Like, really great real-life versions of those things already exist and I'm not sure why it's compellingly important to prove that computer software can closely imitate what's already out there. Another thing that I find sort of vexing for the same reason is the blog that posts AI images of fake tokusatsu productions. Both of the blogs I mentioned say what they are in their headers, I'm not accusing anyone of anything, but what happens to me when I see a reblog from that AI tokusatu blog is: I think "Oh cool, what show/movie is this from? What's the narrative? Was it popular or is it about to be rescued from obscurity? Who made it? Where can I see more of the filmmakers' work? It's awesome that something this unusual was constructed in real life, somebody drew this up and got it funded and then people built the suits and crafted those cool miniatures and painted the lovely matte paintings, and there was an audience for it, people used to actually accept and even crave really wild stuff like this instead of all the cookie cutter fan service-type crap flooding the market now, and...oh no, this isn't from a show or a movie. It doesn't tell me anything about a certain time period or culture or artist or type of production or the heroic things people do to realize their dreams or anything, it's just, like, somebody's modern, general idea about that stuff. Oh well, it's pretty, but now I have zero questions about it and I don't really care. I'm going back to watching actual tokusatsu movies because there are already tons of great ones from real life and I don't need anyone to simulate them for me, I can already experience the wonder and admiration they inspire for real." It just matters to me how a piece of art was made and when and where and by who, and I don't think that's crazy or backwards of me. There's more to art than just the question of whether something is a pretty picture or not, and moreover I think that if "pretty picture" is the only thing that really concerns you then that is actually OK, but you should just admit that and comfortably recuse yourself from any debates around what art is or is not.

[femsolid]

Can you tell us about your way into veganism?

I always felt a lot of empathy and love towards animals, most children do, it just never left me. As a kid I saw a documentary about the meat industry, specifically about the exploitation of pigs. I watched how the pigs were alive one second, wondering what the hell was going on, and then dead the very next. It was heartbreaking to me. The nonchalance with which all those lives were ended. They would be standing in line on a moving floor and a machine would pierce their heads one by one, or electrocute their brains, I'm not entirely sure, maybe both. The tools for the killing didn't shock me, it was the fact that they were treated like objects on a processing line. Their eyes would go empty, they would go limp and fall and men would start dismembering them. But some pigs were still alive and moving. It was very surreal, very cold, very heartless. These days they'd call it "humane slaughter". The piglets were manhandled like mere objects too, men would cut off their tails or sterilise them without anaesthetic. The screaming was horrible. I told my dad I didn't want to eat pork anymore and he laughed at me. Then I forgot about all this until, as an adult, I watched a very graphic documentary about all forms of animal exploitation (Earthlings). I cried the whole time and promised myself I'd respect my beliefs and feelings on the matter once I leave my father's home. So when I moved out I became a vegetarian wich I found very easy. You can eat most things in western countries as a vegetarian and you can buy anything that involves the exploitation of animals other than the actual flesh. It was hypoctritical of me. I kept informing myself on what was really done to the animals. I saw the cows skinned alive for our car sits, the sheeps tortured by sadistic men in the wool industry, little lambs dismembered alive, pigs gassed and dying in agony. I also learned about the absolute cruelty of the men who work for this industry, their misogyny as they torture and rape hogs, and the men who drive this industry, who make billions out of death and the destruction of empathy and our environment, men's obsession with the necessity of killing and the virility of eating meat and how much damage it causes our planet and our health. And also the sad fact that the explotiation of animals relies entirely on the exploitation of motherhood and the objectification of the female reproductive system. But that's not even what started my veganism. I became vegan because I have IBS and I was at my wits ends with the pain and the fainting, especially during my periods. I made a journal of what I was eating and realised that I felt ten times better and the horrible intestinal cramps stopped when I didn't eat things that contained milk and eggs. Especially milk. So I actually became vegan because of selfish health reasons. The change felt amazing. Truly a new life for me. I got to experience normal periods for the first time. So by following my political and moral principles I was also making myself healthier, doing my (tiny) part for the environment and resolving my cognitive dissonance. That's a lot of positive. I'm not just opposed to the exploitation of women and girls. I'm opposed to exploitation in itself. The idea that I am superior to others and therefore have the right to exploit someone else never made sense to me. Or the idea that my cruelty is okay because it's part of the natural order of things. Or that it's okay because it makes me feel good. We criticize these very notions when we talk about other issues like misogyny, classism or racism. It's the same logic. I'm trying to be consistent and helpful to myself and others.

[strangertheories]

Honestly, byler to me has become a stressful 'thing' now i cannot even enjoy it due to the whole discourse and drama surrounding it lol. Also it feels like the shipping culture kinda died because people just stopped shipping things for fun but it became a match where you have to prove your ship's 'validity' 'morality' or how it actually exists in canon and it should exist in canon (for this and that reason), and you have to constantly prove yourself that you are a master analysist and you Get The Narrative and that's why you ship this ship and if it doesnt become canon then it means the writing is dumb/poor and im like..? You dont really have to do all that and i get that sometimes feeling so passionately about shipping is natural part of fandom and i have been there and done that too, but this whole narrative and mindset surronding it is just really tiring. if a ship makes you this stressed and traumatized and if it happens you say stuff like 'imma kms' maybe just kinda take a step back idk. I ship ron/nce and i adore their dynamic, but i am well aware that it is not going to happen even if i see a certain level of dynamic between nancy and robin. and i get that it is different for will since will is canonically into mike now but the overall point still stands. you can still like a ship even if it doesnt become canon you dont have to try so hard to prove its existence or validity since the shipping is usually supposed to be... fun.

Anon, I'm convinced I somehow sent this to myself because I'm exactly the same. I get being critical of the show's queer rep and plot if Byler isn't canon or being disappointed which we saw a lot of post volume 2, but yeah. Being a Byler shipper has become not fun™ and it's become a requirement that you think it's going to be endgame in order for you to ship it. And I also think the sense of superiority a lot of Byler shippers have about being great critical thinkers or having media literacy can make it feel scary to ever question anything anyone ever says, although most people were actually quite supportive when I spoke about this. All of that to say, letting go of Byler endgame before S4 has been great for me; I love analysing and theorising about Byler without the pressure of needing it to be canon.

And I know people will read this as "you shouldn't be bothered by the show using Will" but what I and I believe the anon is trying to say is that fandom should be built off of fun and wanting your ship to have content because you enjoy it, not because you're terrified it's not gonna be canon. Easier said than done, but I think you need to take care of yourself and your mental health too. I'm not famous or anything but I have quite a few followers now and I'm not going to lie or guarantee 100000% that it will be canon because I just do not know and I genuinely think people's mental health will be damaged because they've been hyping up an expectation of ST5 for years.

If shipping Byler has become too stressful for you, try take a break for a bit (I've been posting less over the last few months partially because of this too). Especially since we all have hiatus brain where expectations and theories become more and more wild because we have to keep digging deeper into the same content. I'm so scared that S5 will come out and it doesn't happen because I like a lot of people in this fan community and if Byler isn't canon, we'll get angry posts for a couple of months and maybe some theories about interference or deleted scenes (this happen post S4 a bit as well) but then it's gone ): the community revolves more about being 100% sure Byler will happen instead of enjoying the pairing of Mike and Will so without canon Byler, I don't know what will remain.

Thanks for the ask, anon. Also Ronance forever! <3

[whumpsday]

I get that noble vampire families are Like That and they're what your story focuses on but. How about commoners families? Are they more Normal TM?

Thinking how humans used to keep chickens and pigs and other animals for food until fairly recently (we still do, but most of our meat comes from big farms and not like, a family keeping chickens and eating only what they raise), but still they befriended them/grew attached. And thinking about so many humans eating meat without thinking/purposefully ignoring the fact that they are eating a creature that was killed for them, technically.

Since commoner vampires generally eat bagged blood, are they the same level of being "unaware" of the fact that human blood comes from humans? How would a working class vamp react if they randomly inherited a human from their distant eccentric uncle who died with no close relatives/heirs?

(Apologies if you've been asked this before and for any mistakes in your lore - too many vampire media makes it hard to keep track)

Also sorry if this doesn't make much sense - I have acute brain wormitis tonight

great questions!!! :D sorry you've activated Fantasy Politics Mode

it varies! just like you'd find more conservative and more progressive people anywhere. nobility culture just tends heavily toward conservativism, and while vampire culture at large tends to be more conservative than whatever humans have going on, it's much more balanced outside the nobility, even among non-noble upper-class vampires (though in any society obviously you'll find more progressives in the working class).

more... 'traditional values' type vampires might have a mindset like "vampires are inherently superior to humans and it's fine for us to keep them as livestock", while liberal vampires might have a mindset like what you were talking about with how humans ignore the cruelty of factory farms because chicken yummy (this is the reason jim goes vegan post-escape. he can't help but think about it, now.) these two would probably be the most dominant mindsets.

much less common, but more progressive vampires (like bellamy) might have the mindset of "this whole thing is fucked up" and try to only drink ethically-sourced blood, if it's available to them. which it might not always be, depending on the vampire's location and how much money they have to spare. vampires are definitely all aware of where their blood comes from, but those that don't keep their own humans don't really have to think about it unless they choose to.

the scenario of a working-class vampire randomly inheriting a human from a rich distant relative is fascinating! obviously it'd depend on their personal political beliefs, but the fact is that there's a reason vampires without a lot of money don't tend to keep captive humans- they're expensive! humans eat a LOT and if you don't feed them properly, you're not gonna get all your nutrients either. like, think about how much a human spends on food for themselves vs food for their dog or cat. humans eat a ton! they take a lot of upkeep to take care of! it's cheaper to buy blood than keep your own human, because the blood factories can feed humans in bulk. so if the eccentric uncle didn't also leave behind a sum of money, probably gonna have to either sell the human or let them go, depending on the vampire's personal moral standing.

but if the eccentric uncle did leave some money too, this vampire could keep the human. could go a number of ways. keeping and using the human as food, trying that for a bit and then feeling guilty and letting them go, just letting them go to start with... possibilities are endless. but now i am very intrigued by the idea of a vampire caretaker inheriting a human, taking care of them until the long-term effects of persuasion wear off, and letting them go free.

[nerdyenby]

I made a playlist for the Life Series!!

It’s organized to be roughly chronological, primarily from the perspective of the winner of each season. I’ll be breaking down my song choices by season:

Third Life

Last Life

Double Life

Limited Life

I tried to make it based off canon events so it’s applicable regardless of what headcanons and theories you subscribe to, but here are some on my interpretations that informed my song choices:

Everyone remembers previous seasons and events outside of the games, the series starts as a means to get together and hang out

Grian organizes it but the Watchers got involved sometime toward the end of Third Life

I tried to keep it vague so you can interpret the Watchers however you please (as a manifestation of us the audience, as a more malicious entity, or some combination of the two) but in my mind they’re manipulative and invasive without being downright cruel and torturous. They’re the reason no one is allowed to survive and they pushed Grian into making Last Life, but none of the players are in the games against their will

There’s drama and tension within the games but everyone’s friends outside of it and they work out any lingering issues between seasons, they’re all chill

I have nothing against shipping the traffic series characters (not ccs obviously) but I don’t write them that way myself. (No moral superiority, I’m just aroace and uncomfortable writing that stuff and looking for it where it’s not explicitly there.) That said, Scarian kinda teeters that line but I personally interpret them as in that gray space between romance and queerplatonic but they never sit down to talk it out so no one knows, least of all them.

Some of the songs are romance-coded but that’s just the way most music is, sadly

I headcanon Pearl’s character as aromantic, that’s not necessary to understanding the way I tell the story but it definitely informed a lot of my song choices for her

As Limited Life is still fresh, there’s not as solid of a fandom consensus yet. I’m pretty happy with my characterization of Martyn but it might not fit what later comes to be most widely accepted. With that said, I interpret Martyn as having always craved glory but never having gotten the chance. As he realizes he could win, he claws for any advantage he can gain while avoiding antagonizing anyone. He excels at slipping under the radar, everyone expects him to be a support character, after all, but he’s sick of being stuck in that role. He wants to win and he’s not gonna let the opportunity pass him by.

As stated earlier, each season is told from the perspective of its respective winner (and sometimes those close to them). Some of the earlier songs for each season are intended to fit the vibe of the season as a whole but it quickly narrows in on who our victor will be

I consider this playlist to be a very loose retelling of the Life series as it stands today. It is obviously intended for those familiar with the source material but the goal is that someone not aware of the original media can listen and get a feel for the story and it’s characters. Its obviously oversimplified and from a very limited scope but I’m happy with it

Again, this is my interpretation of the stories and the characters, through the lens of my admittedly quite limited music taste

I’m not planning on adding on but if you want to recommend songs I’d definitely check them out :)

[dopepoisonivyoncrack]

I knew being into BG3 will bring me back into Slayers and today I already woke up with Filia thoughts! I definitely want to do a playthrough as Filia ul Copt at some point and it will be the 1 run where I know for sure I won’t romance Astarion, but will try to befriend and help him as IC. And here is the thing… it won’t be easy but Filia was able to persuade Lina and the gang, even Zelgadis, to go along with her quest. Threatening Astarion won’t work like with Lina, but it got me thinking about Filia’s character.

In the beginning Filia was the type of character for whom the purpose excused the means. She had no qualms with threatening Lina and exploiting her weakest point - her sister - at least twice. She even proudly confesses this view while arguing with Xellos. It is wrong when Xellos does the same thing because he is a Monster, but it is right when she does it because her goal is better, morally superior, as a servant of the Gods. 

It is an important part of Filia that changes as the story progresses, especially when finding the truth about her kind’s past. The golden dragons dared to excuse a whole genocide for the so called purpose of peace and were down to do a lot more damage going by the same principle. It is clearly a fundamental view of the golden dragons that serve the Flarelord Vrabazard and proclaim themselves as the keepers of peace, and that was ingrained into Filia throughout her life at the temple and simply by living exclusively among them. 

Yet, in the face of all that happens starting with the scene where Almayce appears in the temple, she is capable of opposing it. She opposed her leader, her own kind’s teachings and views, she searched the truth of their history and faced with the grim proof she renounced priesthood. Sure, being exposed to Lina and the gang helped, but she genuinely retained enough freedom of mind and desire to do the right thing. I don’t think it was an easy thing to do. Centuries of views and beliefs don’t change in the spare of 5 minutes just like that. It would have been so easy to just obey the Elder, or even agree with him, when he wanted to give the Sword of Light to Almayce and sell the other worlds to doom as long as it meant to keep DarkStar out of this one (a deal that had no guarantee but Almayce’s word, that could have very well been a lie). Yet she did not. She thought for herself, and opposed the Elder, and sided with Lina and went on to search the proof for Valgaav’s serious accusations.

The whole story’s moral conflict revolves around this - does the purpose excuse the means? With everyone having their own stance, through which alliances are made or broken and conflict is born between parts of different views. And it is interesting how their views change, not just for Filia, but also for Almayce, for his pals, even for Xellos that comes to better understand his Master and his own stance in all this. Also can’t go without mentioning my favorite thing about TRY, that it questions the purpose itself! the purpose of the eternal battle between Gods and Monsters, the purpose of maintaining the current world, the balance, the peace.

I might have deviated a little but Filia starts as someone for whom the purpose excuses the means, and realizes that it is not always the case, and shows enough strength, freedom of mind and genuine desire to do good, and stand by what she believes is the right thing to do and not blindly follow her people’s ideas.

[automatismoateo]

I'm tired of staying quiet via /r/atheism

I'm tired of staying quiet

Throaway account--

Tl;dr: We need to stop being passive, and start calling religious people out on being horrible human beings.

So, for many different reasons, I am a member of the US Military. Mostly, it's due to personal reasons. Now, I definitely don't live and die military. Or white and blue, for that matter.

If you are not aware of it, the military tries to accept and protect all religions or lack thereof, but it is inherently Christian. Most chaplains you meet are Christians or were raised Christians. A lot of upper leadership, you guessed it, are Christians, because they're old and that's how they grew up.

This isn't inherently an issue, but it can be, especially if left uncontrolled.

Now, this post isn't just about the military aspect of it. In fact, I am making this post to hopefully help you build some courage to stand up for others, even at the cost of your own comfort. Keep it in mind, however, that there are many layers to this post, so I understand you may disagree with some of my points.

Now, to the story:

My immediate shop "leader" is a Christian, with a big C. He loves and dies Jesus, and goes to Church every Sunday. To no one's surprise, he is also extremely conservative. Loves guns, loves big T, big DeS, loves his submissive wife, loves low corporate taxes, loves poor people, loves the uneducated, loves people without melanin on their skin, hates homeless veterans, the whole thing.

In the past, he has gotten in trouble for saying the big no-nos out loud: Being openly racist, homophobic, antisemitic, etc.. He shut his mouth for a little while, but like any other true Christian, he felt like he can't be silenced and his true colors just NEED to show. He's now back to saying anything that's on his mind, as long as he feels like he's with his safe group. Sometimes he lets it slip, though.

Being in the Military, we are obviously known to curse a lot. We curse, we say stupid shit, we talk about controversial topics, etc.. It's all obviously unprofessional, but they can't fire us, so who cares, right? On the flip side, since they can't fire you, some people think they can just openly be the same shitty fucking person they are at home, at work.

If that happens, there are one of two things we usually do when this comes from those above us. 1) Shut up and pretend to be on their side so we don't get fucked over or 2) Report the actions to the inspector general (not to management, because they'll likely just slap them on the wrist and tell them to not do it again). The problem is, the IG isn't as helpful as you'd think, because mission takes precedence a lot of times.

So you're essentially left with option #1, since you don't want to be any more miserable at work than you already are.

Except that, you know, this shit has been going too far for far too long.

Not just in the Military, but outside even. For too long, these Christians have been allowed to roam the country and spout the most racist and homophobic shit with no consequences because they know no one will do anything. They'll take your freedom because it doesn't align with their vision of what freedom is. They'll take away your books because it makes them look bad. They'll take your children from you, because you are in love with the wrong person.

For too long, they have been allowed in positions of power, making the lives of anyone with opposing views miserable.

So, for my own mental health, I have decided I need to speak up, even if it'll get me in trouble. At work, I have started calling my superior out on his bullshit Christian values in front of others. Any comment he makes that is out of line, I'll tell him how "that's not very Christian of you." Hates homeless veterans? "Wow, what would God say about helping others?" "Loves that Mexicans are being shipped to Brandon's house?" Yep, what good morals you have!

Once in a while, he'll feign ignorance and ask me what I mean. I grew up Catholic, so I'll tell him that I don't remember being taught to be so ignorant, so selfish, and just overall a bad person.

Overall, I am just trying to make people realize how fucking disgusting he is. For a long time, I used to think that "whatever bad values you have, just leave them at home." I have come to realize that is wrong, too. No, don't leave that shit at home. Don't go home to beat your wife because she didn't make dinner, or your kids because they talked back. That is exactly what this country has done for the last few decades, and it has all come to bite us in the ass.

For too long we have kept quiet. We have let people pass on these horrible traits to their children. Their children grew up thinking that diversity is bad, that God is the only thing that matters and any opposition is inherently wrong. They grew up being told that a woman's place is in the kitchen, that black people are inferior, that poor people don't deserve to be helped. They grew up knowing only Christian hatred, and they're becoming loud once again.

Here is how I see it: the people who are supposed to be there to help you, guide you, bring you the "love of God," are the most judgemental, pieces of shit human beings I have ever met. They'd rather let you rot in misery before helping you. I'm not talking about giving you money in the time of need, or a bed during a cold night out. I'm talking about helping society become better for everyone, not just the people they deem worthy.

They will tell you in your face that rape is justified, that only their definition of love is what matters, that kids deserve to die of cancer because "God works in mysterious ways." They'll spit you in the face and tell you it's your fault. They'll do this with no remorse, because they know that on Sunday someone will tell them that they did God's work.

These people have roamed free of consequences for far too long, and they've gotten too comfortable. They deserve to know when they're out of line, and we clearly we need to remind them of it.

Please, do your neighbor, your friend, your family member, and do society a favor: don't stay quiet anymore. Don't expect to change these people minds, but let's aim to influence those arounds us.

Let's be the change that needs to be made, one voice at a time.

Submitted March 05, 2023 at 06:25PM by religionequashatred (From Reddit https://ift.tt/K7UAnos)

[writingwithcolor]

Hi! So, ever since I was really young I've always been fascinated by Egyptian Mythology, and really want to write a horror/drama adaptation of the first part of the "Death of Osiris" where it shows the circumstances leading up to Set killing his brother.

A central theme of the story is to show how human the gods are, despite the fact that the vast majority of them act completely indifferent and "superior" to humanity, seeing them as mere ants (the exception of course being Osiris).

I'm particularly worried about my depiction of Isis, as she's normally seen as a pillar of good but in this interpretation she is fairly morally grey, but that concern pales in comparison to my biggest problem.

I'm a half white, half SEA sheltered teen living in Canada who has never been to Egypt.

Do I scrap the story? I don't want to appropriate anything, and the last thing I want to do is take away opportunities for people who are actually connected to Egyptian Mythology to tell their stories! The story means a lot to me, but I don't want to continue something if there's a possibility that I might end up doing harm.

What do I do???

Death of Osiris adaption, Egyptian Mythology

You’re asking whether it’s okay for you to write a story based on Egyptian mythology when you are not yourself Egyptian. This is a rubber stamp question, which as stated in the WWC FAQ, we no longer accept. However, I want to take this opportunity to make a few points regarding ancient Egypt and Egyptian mythology in western media. This topic has also been covered on the blog before (check out the ancient Egypt tag).

Ancient Egypt is among the ancient civilizations that have inspired Western media the most, and there are countless stories and retellings based on ancient Egypt and Egyptian myth out there. The vast majority of those have been written by people with little to no connection to Egypt or even Africa as a whole, and they often represent ancient Egypt inaccurately. One prevalent issue is the whitewashing of ancient Egyptians, who tend to be portrayed as light-skinned, brown or even white, when in reality, all evidence points to the fact that the people indigenous to Egypt were Black (like everyone else in Africa). 

There was certainly a great deal of mixing and cultural exchange going on with other civilizations around the Mediterranean, and some scholars believe it’s anachronistic to even describe ancient Egyptians according to modern racial categories, because there is no evidence that such categories existed or that skin color mattered that much in ancient Egyptian society. But the fact stands that if we were to try and fit ancient Egyptians into our definitions of race as we understand it in North America, they would undoubtedly be Black.

This isn’t only a matter of factual accuracy. The question of the race of ancient Egyptians featured prominently in white supremacist pseudo-scientific arguments that were used to justify slavery, colonialism and genocide. It would be irresponsible to write about ancient Egypt, even if it’s “only” fiction, without taking this history into account.

Here are a few things that writers who want to include ancient Egypt (or ancient Egyptian-coded fantasy cultures) in their stories can think about:

When you think of ancient Egypt, what do you picture? What are the base assumptions, imagery, general knowledge you’ve absorbed about ancient Egypt through your exposure to the ways this civilization is represented in media?

Now, question all of these. Where do they come from? Who came up with them? What actual historical facts are they based on? Chances are, a lot of it is inaccurate.

Start over. Read the work of Black academics on ancient Egypt. Educate yourself on the most recent research on this topic. Read fiction by authors who represent ancient Egypt and ancient Egyptian-coded societies without white-washing them. N. K. Jemisin’s The Killing Moon is a favorite of mine.

If you skip these steps, you are likely to reproduce the dominant media portrayals of ancient Egypt that already exist, and feed into the inaccuracies and erasure they perpetuate.

More reading:

Arab woman with Ancient Egyptian culture cursed to lose skin pigmentation

- Niki

Ask published Nov 2021

[kustas]

ok, without spoilers if possible but i'm EXTREMELY curious about your "this is how fights work in hxh" tag under the recent post, could you explain?

(the post, for reference)

HxH, like many battle shonen, has its own unique power system, called Nen. It stands out for several things, among which being extremely complex with an at-times mathematical precision, and for the creativity of the powers it create. This is because, in essence, the superpowers it creates are designed by their users, and strength essentially comes from training, unlike a system like Jojo's stands where characters are born with their superpower. Following this, said abilities tend to reflect who each character is like as a person, the same way that say, you could guess a bit about a scholar based on what they are doing their master's thesis about: it's something you are dedicating years of your life into digging into, it usually means something personal! In the world of HxH, skilled artisans end up using that magic even if they don't know about its existence (the training method used by the heroes is a gatekept secret), because their concentration and dedication to their craft helps inherently develop it.

How this ties into battles is that superpowers wielded by the characters are rarely directly related to combat - unless your character has a reason to dedicate years of their life into being the best fighter, it's unlikely they'll have created their abilities around this. Instead, you get more indirect and creative things. I won't give examples because I wish to respect your request for no spoilers! So we will stay in theory only.

With this, fights pit out OP anime characters but who's OP anime abilities are not "hit hard", so combats immediately go to strategy planning. Unless you already know your opponent by heart, which isn't always the case, you cannot know what extremely niche thing they've achieved (and boy does it get niche) so the classic "mid fight description of strategy" monologues of HxH are famously long and ridiculous! Let's use OP as an example: assuming we read their bragging on Tumblr and therefore know everything about their ability, we can make a profile. First, their ability revolves around killing, and they compare it to death note, we can infer they're someone with muddy morals and a sense of superiority: Light of the show kills because he's got his god complex of knowing better than the rest of the world. Drawing skill also plays into this ability, so OP must be an artist and a confident one too, why else would you link the aim of your ability (killing things) to drawing skill level?

The other thing this post features that is shared by HxH and perhaps my favorite aspect are the limitations. At it's core Nen works by "I have decided I wish to do this thing and will concentrate hard enough to willpower it into existence" (tying in to your passions, personality, and skills), but just as artists can reach heights by limiting their tools, you can reach higher power levels by limiting what you can do. It's a self given vow: I will not let myself do X, and in return I'll do what I want to do more powerfully. Here, the limitation is about the intelligence level of the target, and the art you have to draw to kill them. These limitations are brought up mid fight as part of the strategy planning, often from the POV character of the moment about their own ability, as they have to judge the terrain before they strike!

This makes for a text heavy manga at times, which has been memed a whole lot, and laughably long fight blabla. Given that post immediately starts by describing a niche anime magic attack and took up my entire phone screen, the comparison sprung fast to mind...

[blood-starved-beast]

Do you guys ever think about how insane it was for Marcus to imprison Vi? Yeah he might’ve saved Vi’s life in the long-run cause Silco wasn’t just gonna sit back and let her assault him but at the same time he’s imprisoning her.  And cause of the nature of Marcus’s partnership with Silco and Vi’s own character if she’s let out after a reasonable time she’s gonna go straight to Silco and therefore compromise their deal they got going on. 

So ideally, she ain’t ever getting out. 

It’s wild. Marcus’s feels guilty enough to save this kid cause his actions cause a lot of unreasonable death including that of his superior officer but he’s not brave enough to go the whole way. He imprisons Vi, this 14-16 kid, with her whole life life ahead of her, in a high-security prison to serve an indefinite sentence long exceeding the crimes she committed and without due process, a fate worse than death, cause he’s too chicken to stand up to the guy who’s actions are primarily responsible for escalating things the way they did. That’s insane but also so reflective of Marcus’s character, the guy who’s guilty enough bout his own actions to fantasize killing both him and Silco simultaneously with a bomb but not having the guts to go through it. Feels guilty, but not actually moral enough to rectify it.