#"Examine it to Better Purpose"

[hypewinter]

Danny had awoken from a pod in a strange room only to be quickly whisked away to a medical room by a group of costumed teens. He then proceeded to go through multiple medical evaluations before being bombarded with information.

Apparently, he's the clone of Superman. (Great! Who's Superman?) Ah, he's an alien who helps protect Earth. (Awesome!) Wait, does that mean Danny is an alien too!? Yes and no. As it turns out, Danny is in fact a clone. (Oh the irony.) To make matters worse, he isn't the first or even the second for that matter. He had been created when the first two individually went rogue. While the other two were half human, Danny had a secret third thing added to his DNA that no one could figure out. Because of this, they weren't quite sure how much Kryptonian he had in him or what powers he would display. (That's kind of a bummer.)

What they did know was that he was supposed to be a living weapon devoid of all feelings or motivations. Superboy, or Connor as he insisted Danny call him, also known as the original Superman clone had discovered Danny's existence and come to rescue him before they could use him for such purposes. (That was nice of him.) Still, it was apparently quite surprising how - to quote the doctor examining him - "animated" he was. (Little did they know how surprising he could be.)

As if all of that information wasn't enough to take in, Connor had even more news. (Oh joy.) Evidently Superman wanted to meet him. (Cool!) Or maybe not cool judging by Connor's face. Connor revealed that Superman hadn't exactly reacted the best when they first met. (What a dick.) Danny was quickly reassured that Superman had gotten better and was now more affectionate. A little too affectionate. It would seem that in an effort to make up for his previous dickiness, he had become overly attentive. Superboy warned Danny that Superman might be a little overly excited to have a clean start with him and told him that if the man started crossing any boundaries he shouldn't hesitate to say so. (Oh please after having Jazz Fenton as an older sister, how bad could this Superman guy be?)

.....bad, really bad.

[carriesthewind]

Yeah so anyway, I'm making my response to this fucking garbage its own separate post in case people want to reblog it without having to reblog a scare-mongering lie.

This video pisses me the fuck off whenever I see it, and today I'm not in the mood to just scroll past.

Wow! Am I being lead to panic by scaremongering algorithm fodder completely unsupported by real evidence?! test:

The reason you think something exists is just what you're being told by a nefarious *them*, there is actually a conspiracy behind it!

I, an ordinary person with no expertise who critically examines the world around me, have uncovered this conspiracy.

"That's what they're telling you." (put the emphasis wherever appropriate for the conspiracy of your choice - in this case, it's on *telling*)

This new tech thing is actually a bad idea and the old school method was better - which clearly proves there must be a secret conspiracy, because why allow the possibility of incompetence and investor tech-hype when you can instead assume a highly-competent evil conspiracy?

I will now tell you my conspiracy theory while scrolling rapidly through a document without pausing or allowing you to actually read any of it. This allows me to look like I have proven my claims while doing nothing of the sort. Because do you really think someone could do that? Quickly flash a document on screen and just lie about what it says?

But Owl! This is real! A user upthread found the patent and it *does* prove it!

Yeah. I read the linked patent. Did you?

Let's quote the "real purpose" hidden in the patent, as claimed out in the video:

"The real purpose of these screens is to use the little camera at the top right here to scan your face and use AI facial expression analysis to judge whether or not you like the packaging designs of the product you're looking for."

This is complete made up horseshit.

First, let's look where the reblogger directs us, to column #4 on page 17:

"Preferably, each retail product container further comprises customer-detecting hardware, such as one or more proximity sensors (such as heat maps) , cameras, facial sensors or scanners, and eye-sensors (i.e., iris-tracking sensors). Assuming cameras are employed, preferably cameras are mounted on doors of the retail product containers. Preferably, the cameras have a depth of field of view of twenty feet or more, and have a range of field of view of 170 degrees with preferably 150 degree of facial recognition ability. Preferably, software is employed in association with the cameras to monitor shopper interactions, serve up relevant advertisement content on the displays, and track advertisement engagement in - store." (emphasis added and references to figures removed for readability)

That is the extent of the "nonconsensual data collection."

Now, to be fair, there is some stuff on page 18 and 19 which kinda-sorta-maybe has at least some relation to the claim in the video:

"Preferably, the controller/data collector is configured such that as a shopper stands or lingers in front of a given retail product container, the display associated with the retail product container changes yet again. At this point, preferably the controller/data collector has been able to use the customer-detecting hardware to effectively learn more about that particular customer, such as gender, age, mood, etc. The controller / data collector is configured to take what has been detected about the customer to determine which advertisement and other information to present to that particular customer on the display associated with the retail product container in front of which the customer is standing. By tracking shopper data in parallel with which advertising content is being served on all displays within the viewing range of the shopper, the retailer and the brands are better served, providing new analytics. As such, the system provides advertising, influence opportunities at the moment of purchasing decision, optimizing marketing spend and generating new revenue streams....

"Additionally, preferably all inputs collected by the IOT devices will be analyzed locally as well as remotely (via cloud) to provide the feedback inputs for the system to push more relevant/targeted content, tailored for the consumer. The analytics are preferably conducted anonymously, images captured by cameras are preferably processed to collect statistics on consumer demographic characteristics: (such as age and gender). This data is preferably subsequently analyzed for additional statistics for the retailers that are valuable for in-store merchandise layout design and smart merchandizing, including the ability to track the shoppers “traffic” areas, known as “heat maps”, areas were [sic] customers would concentrate more and spend more time exploring, etc." (emphasis added and references to figures removed for readability) (And note the repeated emphasis on preferably - they don't have a patent to do any of this.)

Which, like, not great! I fucking hate the idea of shit like this! But there is literally nothing here about monitoring your expressions to sell the data about how you react to packaging!

This isn't a nefarious plan hidden in the patent. It's tech bros adding on totally sick ideas about how they can sell this shit to walgreens. (Because to be clear, I'm sure walgreens's corporate office would love to collect and sell this kind of information. But just because they would, doesn't mean they can or are. And this patent sure as hell doesn't prove it.)

Because let me be clear: the image capture of consumers is so irrelevant to the product that it literally isn't even included in the claims section of the patent.

Because the patent is quite explicit and detailed about the idea they are selling big retails stores on - this is a better, new, innovative, tech-driven way to "provide an innovative advertising solution"! (The words "AI," "intelligent," and "machine learning" are deployed liberally, but in the same way that "blockchain" was a few years ago. It's advertising tech hype.)

I want to make it clear - the OP in the video is straight up lying to you. Whether for fun or profit or just attention, I don't know and I don't care. If you shared this, you probably should have know better, but everyone makes mistakes. OP, on the other hand, is just a fucking liar.

But Owl! What about "the senators looking into this"?

I don't know how to tell you this, but thing linked about is a press release by a politician's office. That doesn't mean it's not true, but it's not evidence on it's own. Like, the letter linked in the link included links to sources, but is not itself evidence (ooh, layers of links to actually get to a source, my favorite)(actually my computer wouldn't even goddam open the links to the source, I had to independently search for it).

Anyway, the letter to Kroger linked in the press release by the senators contains a single sentence and a single link relevant to the claim here (linked for your convenience because it sure as hell wasn't for mine). Unfortunately, this article is itself based on a goddam press release (That isn't linked! Again, you're welcome.)

And when we finally get to the underlying fucking source. "In addition to transforming the customer experience and enhancing productivity for associates, the EDGE Shelf will enable Kroger to generate new revenue by selling digital advertising space to consumer packaged goods (CPGs) brands. Using video analytics, personalized offers and advertisements can be presented based on customer demographics." So it's purporting to something *kind of* like the claim in the video, but an entirely different format completely unrelated to the thing the video is scaremongering about.

Now Kroger did actually start using the advertising screens in 2023. And you can believe what you want about the data privacy claims and the claims about not using video, just sensors (which remember is entirely consistent with the patent). But remember: being skeptical of a company's claims is fine and good! It does not mean you have proven they are lying, and it especially does not prove you have claimed they are doing something extremely specific! And most of the articles, and the letter from the senators, are (much more reasonably) concerned about so-called "dynamic" or surge pricing. (Which is not related to the screens.)

Like goddamn. Aren't there enough real problems with surveillance and price-gorging to be concerned about without having to make up fake ones? Hell, why can't we at least be concerned with the real problems with those dumb screens, which is that the a) make shopping harder and b) catch fire?

[m1ssunderstanding]

Understanding Lennon McCartney Rewatch Part 4.3

Oof! Got him!

“She loves you and he loves him and they love each other”. You know when you've got something to say but you don't want it to look like you really wanted to say it specifically so you throw it in between two other things? No? Just me and John?

I'm obsessed with John just heaping praise on Paul in this interview. Every song the interviewer brings up it's “best” “my favorite” “all Paul” “good piece of work” “somewhere I have the tape of him doing it” “damn good” “one of his masterpieces” See also: Paul’s a good lyricist, he just doesn't try because he's insecure. And: one of the most innovative bass players of all time.

John mixing up In My Life and If I Fell “although I don't know why I'm confusing them, they're nothing alike but they have the same–” The same what? Same target? Same muse? Hmm? “It's really about–it's not about Cyn.” He's barely hanging on to not saying it here, like, by a gossamer thread. 

John confessing that the consistent character flaw of Paul's which hurt him ((hurt. Not annoyed. Not angered. Hurt.)) was insensitivity. Not bossiness or lameness or sneakiness. Insensitivity. What John couldn't handle in the end about Paul was that he wasn't aware enough of John's tender feelings. 

He's also so cruel in this interview. And what you've got to pay attention to is the theme connecting the songs he's cruel about: Let It Be (let John go) and The Long and Winding Road (the long and pointless fight). 

The Japanese Monk comparison doesn't quite land for me because it implies that John purposely broke up the Beatles because he knew they were at a peak and he wanted them to stay gold. And I think that's what John would like the story to be. It makes him feel better inside. It makes him look incredibly wise and courageous. But it's clear – John even stated it himself more than once on record – that the breakup was not purposeful or calculated. It was a terrible accident that nobody wanted, least of all John. 

More quotes to live by when examining John's post breakup “ow!”

I find it fascinating that John thought of Paul's and Dylan's lyrics as very similar and says so twice in this documentary. But nobody else ever draws that comparison. In mainstream thought, Bob Dylan is one of the greatest lyricists of all time if not the greatest (it's me. I'm mainstream. Subterranean Homesick Blues my absolute beloved.) and Paul is the worst lyricist to ever get successful. And you know what? I think Paul gets punished for being physically pretty and financially savvy, and I think in the exact same way his music gets punished for being melodically pretty and commercially successful. 

John about Paul's inscrutable messages in his songs: if one knows the person, one knows what's coming down. John in I Know (I Know): and I know. What's coming down. 

I will always love how he says in the same breath . . . “I've compared it to a marriage a million times" and "Paul and I were together.” 

You really do gotta be like “Johns say the darndest things sometimes.” I mean that's what Paul did, right? Because genuinely most of the time he's a fucking sweetheart. After he's sat there defending Paul's insane mourning bus movie, the interviewer asks him to compare himself and Paul. And after saying there's never been a question about commerciality, he says this. 

Nobody think about Paul writing “One of These Days” just before John's death then “This One” a decade later. Don't do it. I do recommend. 

Free as a Bird is such a beautiful song. It's a gorgeous melody, and it's got such complex emotions. He's still mourning something that was lost, but he's hopeful. He's on his way home. 

You all know that long distance interview Paul did right before John died where they bring up some of the awful things John said recently about him (ignoring the millions of loving and admiring things). When Paul's voice cracks and he looks up at the ceiling and struggles for a minute and the lights go out, I have a theory that it's one of their kids being protective. She was messing with the lights before to be silly and then when the bad question comes she turns them off again as a sort of protective sabotage. 

What If though? What If that's true? 

Quote of all time!!! “The person I actually picked as my partner, who I recognized has talent and who I could get on with, was Paul.” He doesn't say ‘as my sidekick’ or ‘running mate’ or ‘captain’s mate’ or ‘second string’ or any of those things that traditional Beatles fans tend to push on them. Partner. 

Serious question, because I swing all over the place as to what I think actually happened between John and Paul physically and emotionally. If we agree that Real Love is about Paul (a baby and another on the way lalalalalala farm . . . Just call him on the phone) Then what about this lyric? “Was I just dreaming (a word of theirs and something they thought they shared) or was it only Yesterday (Paul's biggest song) I used to hold you in my arms? Is that to be taken literally? John used to hold Paul in his arms? i.e. frequent hugging and cuddling?

The heart monitor cuts so harshly into John singing “Grow Old With Me.” As we see beautiful images of John and all the people he's leaving behind. I'm dry heaving. This documentary is so much more painful this time around than the first. 

Anyway I'm glad we got coverage of all the “for Paul” songs. Which. Btw fuck you Sean and Peter. You proved absolutely nothing.

[shaunashipman]

Honestly I was thinking about it and I have no idea what the writers are doing with Eddie’s character. I’m not sure if it’s on purpose and will be addressed but man his treatment of the women he dates is awful and doesn’t help to make him likeable. I don’t even dislike him but I think the writers need to address his constant mistreatment of the women (Shannon, Ana, Marisol and Kim) he is involved with and how that affects Chris as well. By constantly bringing women into his life, having them form a bond and then ruining the relationship.

Also it’s not lost on me that his fan base are the first ones to demand big apologies of Tommy for his microaggressions and misogynistic remarks (as a Black women yes saying that Hen has New York bitchiness or whatever the exact quote was is misogynistic and shouldn’t be undermined as that is apart of his character growth, him acknowledging that the things he did in the past did not make him a good person) but continue to excuse and make light of Eddie’s treatment of the women he dates. I think that as well is why I get so annoyed when they chalk it up to the only explanation is just being queer. It’s both misogynistic and homophobic at the same time. It’s distasteful.

I've gotta be honest, I am losing patience with eddie. I don't want to dislike him; while he's not one of my top faves, I don't dislike any the mains, and I actually really like his friendship with buck. but his stans are making me start to actively dislike him, and I don't want them to have influence over my enjoyment of the show in any way. so I'm basically trying not to think about eddie rn, so when the show comes back and we get actual eddie instead of the echo chamber version they're touting, I can just enjoy him.

but the writers definitely do need to acknowledge his treatment of women, and I really hope they don't just go the trauma over shannon dying route. obvs they have to deal with that elephant because they decided to do the kim storyline, but I hope that means we can finally put it to bed in s8, cause I was done with shannon 5 seasons ago.

actually, having chris in Texas with his parents* could be the perfect way to have eddie deal with his treatment of women, because it does clearly stem from how he was raised, and having a good reason already for him to be in more contact with his parents (and hopefully sisters) hopefully means doing a good examination of those relationships.

I do think at least a small part of ppl's insistence that eddie's treatment of women is because he's gay, is that they don't want to admit their fave is misogynistic, cause then he's "a bad person" and they shouldn't like him, rather than seeing it as a character flaw** that he needs to grow from. no, instead it basically boils down to "he's confused", so that makes all his actions okay.

*I do not ascribe to the opinion that the diaz's are evil for taking chris back to texas, nor do I think it was their idea. it could have been something they floated to chris in their talk, but I do believe it was chris' decision. I also don't ascribe to the opinion that the diaz's are evil in general. helena def needs to have a conversation with eddie and apologize for her "dragging you down with him" comment, but we've already seen that ramon has realized his mistakes and is trying to do better, there's no reason helena can't do the same. also, despite many fanon portrayals of them as being ableist and babying towards chris, the little direct interaction we've seen of them with chris does not support that.

**just because I"ve seen this complaint recently: in real life, misogyny, racism, and other forms of bigotry are not character flaws, they are just bigotry. bigotry that people can grow past, but still, not just character flaws. but fiction is used to teach life lessons, sometimes very heavy-handedly, and so in that respect, they are character flaws.

[team7-headquarter]

Naruto Classic is so fucking good and critical and it never meant to hide how wrong was the system or how awful was Hiruzen's view of politics.

I've just reached the introductory speech Hiruzen gave before starting the preliminary fights for the third stage of the Chuning Exams. Hiruzen starts by clarifying the truth about the Chuning Exams: it's not about friendship or goodness of the heart, but rather “a war-in-miniature between all the allied shinobi lands”.

It flew over my head when I first read it as a child.

At the moment, after years of conflict fighting over land and resources, the nations who were geographically close to each other decided to make an alliance and create a stage where they could show off their strength and challenge the other villages, without so much death. Hiruzen calls their alliance “temporary” and said that the Chuning Exams were a better way, compared to the old conflicts between territories.

To which Naruto responds that it is the stupidest thing he has ever heard, naturally.

There's something about the way the jonins stand in the background, something about how you can almost feel the memories of the last big shinobi war. To avoid another war, to avoid anything like that, those lands decided to replicate the violence through the Chuning Exams. Quoting Hiruzen:

“... It serves as an arena wherein, for the honor of their respective homelands... Young shinobi may fight... To death, if need be!”

The war never went away, it just became a sort of exclusive event.

My favorite part is that almost all the kids of the Konoha 12 decided to question the true purpose of the Chuning Exams. You got Tenten and Ino and Sakura and Kiba and Naruto boldly facing the Hokage on it, while others acted surprised or just endured it. Suddenly, there's no more fairytale or romantic side to the shinobi life. You are a tool, a weapon expected to die for your land, and if you are not strong enough you are a disgrace that is gonna be forgotten to die somewhere and if you are strong enough you're gonna be sent to die at the battlefield...

They even invite the rich and powerful and the most influential to watch the examinations, so they can decide what Hidden Village they should commission for their missions. They are indeed selling a product: their ability to kill if necessary.

Hiruzen's speech makes me sick. It is imperialism taken to the extreme of a mercenary ruled world.

Here's the transcription of the following passage because holy shit:

Hiruzen — and when one land is strong in battle and the village coffers overflow with the fruits of the many outside commissions this begets, then that village may say to its neighbors, "beware, for we possess prowess and riches and the influence of political power!"

Kiba — So?! Why is it necessary to stake our lives and fight... ?!

Iruka — ...

Hiruzen — The strength of a country is derived from the strength of its village and the village draws strength from the shinobi who live there and the greatest strength of those shinobi only emerges in the midst of a desperate life and death battle!

Now it makes sense why Orochimaru and Jiraiya pushed Sasuke and Naruto to the brink of death so they could "unlock" their hidden strength. It's the way Hiruzen thought, the way he probably taught them. Tsunade at least was gentler with Sakura, even if she broke most of her bones and was strict as the rest of her team.

Another Hiruzen quote, so it can fully hit the tone of his opinions:

“As you struggle for the sake of your very lives and your people, you help to fulfill the dream that was envisioned by your ancestors.”

Mind you, Hashirama dreamed of a world where kids didn't have to fight and get killed. That year, Hiruzen allowed 12 genin kids to participate in the fights, just because their instructors told him they were ready--- in retrospect, the Chuning Exams were a tragedy waiting to happen.

“To preserve the balance of power at the risk of lives is the essence of the friendship in the world of shinobi”l

At some point he tells the kids they are taking not an ordinary test and I think that he would finally tell them they should retire if they value their lives or something like that. All the other jounins tried their best to scare them away, okay? However, he was talking about how they could risk the dignity and prestige of their villages.

I've never been more thankful for the way Gaara told him to shut up and go on with the exam.

Those panels are a masterpiece. They make it very clear that there's nothing romantic about the shinobi system as Hiruzen conceived it. All those "peaceful years" were superficial and consisted of some of the worst crimes ever committed like a massacre, human experimentation, making the children fight to preserve the power balance, etc. they were a lie, one that explains many things.

Tsunade sending a team of rookies after Sasuke doesn't sound so crazy with this in mind.

It's just natural for the jonins. That's the world they grew up in, the one they learned how to move through. But the kids??????

The Konoha 12 was already revolutionary in their thinking regarding the system. You can see in their eyes how they refuse to accommodate such standards, how they plan to change it all.

[muaddibstyleguide]

This is probably a redundant post I’ve made 100 times, but when people talk about Dune, they make a lot of the quote

No more terrible disaster could befall your people than for them to fall into the hands of a Hero.

but when they do, I think they are probably spending too much time on the role of the hero and not enough on the role of the people.

If you’ve been in this fandom long enough you have been shamed, shamed someone else, or seen someone get shamed with the common wisdom “Uhhh Paul’s the bad guy, idiot!” And the thing is, for as much as people say it, it’s not really supported by the text! When challenged on that, it’s often hard for people to pinpoint what in the narrative, if anything, Paul could have done differently besides die (an option that isn’t even available to him very long). Yeah, awful things happen, but if anything the text goes out of its way to paint Paul’s actions - and later the actions of his son, Leto II(I) - as unavoidable and outside of his control, if not actually good in the long run. Paul is aware of how terrible it all is, and is frequently troubled, morose, terrified of all that’s wrought in his name, but he crucially can’t really stop it - and we know this because by the time we get around to Dune Messiah he’s gotten a lot better at the whole prescience thing. The rules of the universe conspire to exonerate him. Being a hero is awful, and Paul loses so much.

By the time Children of Dune rolls around Paul is actively engaged in trying to undermine his worship and his sister’s profit on it, and ultimately his biggest failure is that as much of a monster as he’d become, he does not think he can be as horrible a monster as mankind absolutely needs or it will go extinct. You hear that? Paul can’t bring himself to become the horrible oppressive tyrant that will be necessary to save humanity. He’s too nice and sensitive! That honor goes to Leto II, who we get to see behind the curtain in order to understand that he’s really good, just playing the part of someone bad for everyone’s best interest.

For all he says in interviews, Herbert’s books don’t really show us Atreides-boys-as-villains. Herbert’s real target is mythmaking, what he saw as a harmful, primitive, and regressive tendency in people to become whipped up into a frenzy about mere men just because they’re leaders, to dedicate themselves to making those men gods. He reserves particular scorn for people who profit off the myth making and feed into it on purpose for their own ends.

And the reason Dune gets called a white savior story and gets questioned on its racial politics is because it isn’t fair or a particularly clear eyed view of the colonial dynamics Herbert was examining to show the (ostensibly white) hero as beleaguered and powerless in the face of his adoring (ostensibly brown, nonChristian, “uncivilized”) throngs’ hunger for violence

[wildgirllz]

Hello! I saw your post about requests and was wondering if you could do a Sam Winchester x reader story inspired by tattoo song (Loreen). Maybe with a little angst and a cute happy ending.

Ofc! Here you go <3

Like a Tattoo

Warnings: Angst, kissing muahaha, I’m such a cornball please 😭

The sound of the music filled the room as you sat on the edge of your bed, staring at your reflection in the mirror. You had always been a fan of tattoos, but never had the courage to get one until now. You had finally decided to take the plunge and get a tattoo on your wrist that read, "It will come a day, when we will find our way.”

You had chosen the quote because it reminded you to make the most of the time you had and to live your life to the fullest.

As you sat there, lost in thought, you heard a knock at your door. "Come in," you called out.

The door opened and in walked Sam Winchester, the tall, dark, and handsome hunter you had been crushing on for months. He looked at you and smiled, "Hey, Y/N. What's up?"

You turned to face him and held up your wrist, showing him your new tattoo. "I just got this tattoo. What do you think?"

Sam walked over to you and examined the tattoo. "I love it. That's a great quote. Where did you get it done?"

"At a shop down the street," you replied, looking up at him.

Sam nodded and then hesitated for a moment before speaking, "Can I ask you something?"

"Sure," you said, curious as to what was on his mind.

Sam took a deep breath and looked at you with a serious expression, "Do you ever feel like our lives are just a never-ending cycle of pain and suffering?"

You were taken aback by his question and paused for a moment before answering, "Yeah, I do. But I also believe that we can find happiness and purpose in the midst of all the darkness."

Sam nodded slowly, taking in your words. "I guess I just feel like no matter how hard we try, we can never escape our past. It always catches up to us in the end."

You reached out and placed a hand on his shoulder, "Sam, we can't change our past, but we can control our future. We can choose to keep fighting, to keep living, and to make the most of the time we have."

Sam looked at you, his eyes searching for something, "Y/N, can I tell you something?"

"Of course," you said, sensing that whatever he was about to say was important.

Sam took a deep breath and then spoke, his voice barely above a whisper, "I'm afraid that I'm never going to find peace. That I'm always going to be haunted by the things I've done, the people I've lost."

You could hear the pain and anguish in his voice and it broke your heart. "Sam, you're not alone. I know it's hard, but you have to keep fighting. You have to believe that things can get better. And you have to have hope."

Sam looked at you, his eyes shining with tears, "Y/N, you give me hope. Every time I'm with you, I feel like I can face anything."

You were taken aback by his words and your heart skipped a beat. You had always known that you had feelings for Sam, but you never thought that he felt the same way.

Before you could say anything, Sam leaned in and pressed his lips against yours. The kiss was soft and tender, but it was filled with so much emotion and passion. You wrapped your arms around him and pulled him closer, deepening the kiss.

When you finally pulled away, you looked up at Sam, your heart racing. "Sam, I-"

He interrupted you, "I know, Y/N. I feel the same way. I've been trying to tell you how I feel for weeks now, but I didn't know how."

You smiled, feeling a wave of emotions wash over you as you realized that your feelings for Sam were reciprocated. You leaned in and kissed him again, savoring the feeling of his lips on yours.

As you broke the kiss, you looked at Sam with a smile on your face. "So, what now?"

Sam smiled back at you, "Now, we keep going. Together. And we find our happiness wherever we can."

You nodded, feeling a sense of relief wash over you. You knew that life as a hunter was never going to be easy, but having Sam by your side made it all worth it.

Over the next few weeks, you and Sam grew closer than ever. You spent your days hunting monsters and your nights curled up together, talking about your hopes and dreams for the future. You felt like you had finally found someone who understood you, someone who could relate to the pain and suffering that came with a life of hunting.

One night, as you lay in bed together, Sam turned to you and spoke, "Y/N, I want you to know that I love you. I know that we haven't been together for very long, but I can't imagine my life without you."

You felt tears prick at the corners of your eyes as you heard Sam's words. "Sam, I love you too. You're my rock, my constant in this crazy world."

Sam leaned in and kissed you again, his lips soft and warm against yours. As you broke the kiss, you both knew that you had found something special, something worth fighting for.

Over the next few months, you and Sam continued to hunt monsters and fight the forces of darkness. But you did it together, with a newfound sense of purpose and hope. You knew that life was never going to be easy, but as long as you had each other, you could face anything.

And every time you looked at your wrist, at the tattoo that reminded you that we are all stories in the end, you knew that you were writing your own story. A story of love, of hope, and of never giving up, no matter how hard things got. And you knew that Sam was a major character in that story, a character that you would never forget.

[angstics]

inspired by this post by @ephedrineshot:

and they still goin. real interesting how much negativity towards mcr at their come-up had to mention the theatricality and make-up (Several times). interesting because this is the beginning of the mainstream's "we're okay with gays now" era. par exemple: mcr was criticized for using "gay shock factor", which was apparently soo 90s -- said while prop 8 was being voted into law. some critics pretended the band was simply Too much -- operatic, overzealous, ineffective. this way, they avoid the base fact of being uncomfortable with feminine men in make-up, or homoerotic music / performance, or interest in stereotypically gay art like theatre + fashion.

this is a thing straight people do - camping the uncamp to ignore its seriousness. what parts of mcr are camp is debatable (to me, it's the alter egos, some songs like sing, the androgyny). but the entire band is not a camp object. using susan sontag's notes, the object has to be very earnest about a message that fails to reach the audience. it has to be self-involved to the point the style supersedes the meaning. though mcr has an extraordinary mission that should've failed and made it into a proper camp object, they succeeded. they were instant flames with a major label debut in 2 years. the work is taken seriously -- from the themes of mental illness and religious guilt to the complexity of the music. the most common accolade given to my chem is "this band saved my life". proven by the success of the return tour and foundations of decay, mcr accessed a huge audience that wouldnt have been interested in them if just for their aesthetics -- which in turn made them special as the mainstream band with style.

camp objects are either assigned as camp (like hollywood stars) or created as camp works (like john waters' films). if there is a circle of "camp aficionados", then its membrane cannot be penetrated. it can only reach out. which is to say: people who like camp choose what's camp. at the same time, self-aware camp objects do not seek out people uninterested in camp. which is to say: aware camp does not try to go mainstream (ryan murphy tv is lackluster for trying). camp is essentially an intellectual genre (sontag also talks about this). aficionados pride the work on being expressionist, referential, cultured. even when the naive camp object is mainstream, the quality of camp is a hidden gem for people "in the know".

to better understand my point, here's an argument for a camp aspect of mcr. the band's androgyny was misunderstood into obscurity to the point of being campy. while researching contemporary attitudes during the first era (articles, online posts, essays), i didnt find any indication that audiences understood the purposeful nonconformity of their looks. observations did not go beyond "gerard way looks like christina ricci" -- a focus on style over meaning. the greatest impact was the mcr-pioneered emo style inspiring male / nonbinary / trans / gnc people to dress femininely. perhaps fueled by gerard's post-break up conversations on gender, one of the most celebrated aspects of the band TODAY is the gender nonconformity. the rolling stone describes their first 2022 performance (may 16, at eden sessions) as "an understanding of what emo always was as a subgenre and cultural movement, and is now appreciated for being – a camp and feminine enterprise" (source). i am choosing to interpret this quote as describing the emo aspect of my chem, opposed to limiting the band to the single emo label. in that sense, this quote is a revelation in past and present existences converging as misunderstandings of genderqueerness are reconciled. the campiness is assigned today by people who recognize this under-represented aspect of the band -- camp aficionados.

to end of, theatre is not inherently camp. neither is homosexuality. nor is the sole state of being grand, stylish, or loud. the intent and result of the work has to be examined for the assignment to make sense. you've already failed if you use "camp" as an insult. but if the assignment also doesnt make sense, then you're purposefully using "camp" as shorthand for "i dont want to engage with queer junk". you've failed as both an intellectual critic and decent person.

aside: gay people often misuse "camp" to mean "fun". this is fine because i love gay people. we also pioneered the term. who's to say this isnt a hidden meaning... camping camp...

[nrdmssgs]

Any advice in making a character

Oh, I`ve got so many, I actually had to restrain myself))

Be self-indulgent! This is the most important thing to do. If any of my further tips conflicts for you personally with this one - this must always win! The main purpose of your character is for you to have fun, to get a voice, to be able to talk about whatever is important to you! Pay no attention whatsoever to people accusing you of making Mary Sue or Bella Swan. It is ok to learn, make mistakes, make characters, that will make you cringe in a few years.

Make as much moodboards as you need! 5 pinterest boards for 1 character is ok, even great! Don't hesitate to make a full moodboard for their home, even if you are planning like 1 short scene in the house.

Moodboards are good not only for pictures! Feel free to add quotes, that remind you of your OC, make playlists for them, go to your favorite clothing online catalog and pick, what would they buy from it! I for example have a thing for scents and I make perfume moodboards for characters (just helps me to feel them better). I use Miro for multimedia moodboards, highly recommend it.

Try starting your character as an 'archetype'. What I like to do is to go to this page and take a test from a perspective of my character The results often help me understand, how would my character react to different people and manage different situations. There are different personality tests, you can use. I believe, this one is the most well known, but I find my first option more helping in writing.

Character 'growth' is not obliged to be something positive. Your character can always become a worse person and it is still a growth.

'Play' with your character constantly! Even if you made them for one short text - ask yourself questions about them every now and them! Would they pick the same type of cheese as you? What was their favorite music genre, when they were 10? And now? What was the most awkward date, they ever had? Dont be shy, use writing promts to come up with little stories about them. This all will give you an indepth understanding of your character.

One of my favorite games to play with my characters is '3 interviews'. I imagine my character taking part in: 1. a talk with a psychologist 2. a cross-examination in court 3. an interview with a journalist. These are 3 situations, that motivate the same person speak on very different topics and relive different emotions. So I like to just examine their behavior. You will be surprised, how many ideas this little game adds to your character.

Don't be shy to ask others to tell you about your character. Request little stories or headcannons about them. The goal here is not to have the same perspective on your OC as your friends do. The goal is to understand, how others see them and which detail (and why) work good or bad for you. There are some authors out there, that take requests and commissions for others OCs.

It is ok to make your characters look like an average person and it is absolutely ok to make them look incredibly beautiful. Don't force yourself to change anything in your OC just because their partner is very good-looking, or because some said to you, that such a beautiful person has no place in this fandom.

Give your OC friends, hobbies, interests outside their job and love-life. Please. You will be surprised, how useful it is to keep this emotional hideout for your character.

Killing your OCs parents is not the only way to make them move out of their parents house. (don't worry, I myself have 2 OCs, whose parents are dead).

Making your OC kill someone is not the end of your OC. Your readers wont start hating them.

The more power your character has - the less freedom they get. Life of a queen is planned to the minute, life of a peasant - endless pool of possibilities))

Watch video essays where therapists talk about different characters in popular culture! There are so many ideas, you can get there for your character. My favorite channel is cinema therapy they have so many wholesome, funny, serious vid on this topic!

By the way, never be afraid to borrow some ideas.

Wanna see a trick? Ok, I'll describe briefly a character to you and you will try to guess, who am I talking about. So our guy, a middle-aged man, lives in a depressing gray world, full of violence and indifference. He loses his job and escapes his constant suffering in fantasies, where he is famous, has his own show on TV, the audience loves him and even his favorite late night show host applauds him. But these are only his fantasies, when in reality nobody care about him except for his senior mom, who genuinely loves her son. Youre thinking something like "Arthur Fleck" or "Joker"? Well, I've just described you Rupert Pupkin, the main character of 1982 American comedy "The king of Comedy", which had a great impact on 2019 film Joker.

My message here: it is not bad to revisit your favorite stories and characters and let them form your OC.

Abandoning one OC and moving on to the next is not a betrayal. Having multiple OCs for one fandom is not an inability to concentrate. Your brain produces many ideas - it is ok to give yourself creative space.

Self insert can be fun and interesting. Just don't forget, that you are not obliged to insert yourself in one and only character - you can always give your thoughts and traits to multiple characters in the story!

Your character needs flaws, not because it is a shame to write somebody perfect. They need flaws, because that will actually help them navigate through their lives.

[aressida]

Old entry: "If you are unwilling to QUESTION your beliefs, how will you know that if you are following the truth or lies?" - Aressida. 9.4.19.

This one question: “What do I know for certain?”

That is tremendously powerful. When you look deeply into this question, it actually destroys your world. It destroys your whole sense of self, and it is absolutely meant to be. You will not even try, very likely unless you move forward; you will be lacking the sense of certainty that allows you to tap the deepest capacity that is within you.

Here is the rule: Do not ever be ashamed of something you like or believe in. Write about what you believe, above all else.

Change is inevitable. No matter how personal and spiritual evolution yours is, it will always be seen as a betrayal by those who value you. There is nothing more spiritual than being free. Look into yourself and examine your reactions to persons and situations, and you will be appalled to discover that the prejudiced thinking is behind your reactions.

Here is some amazing quotes:

1) “So the universe is not quite as you thought it was. You’d better rearrange your beliefs, then. Because you certainly can’t rearrange the universe.” – Isaac Asimov.

2) “The authentic self will never lead you to believe that you have anything to defend, prove, or be puffed up about because your true identity is not determined by what your ego or the world has to say about you” – Dennis Merritt Jones. 3) “I went deep inside myself. I had time to explore my beliefs and because of that I’m stronger.” – Bob Marley.

That is all I want in life: for this pain to seem purposeful.

Freethinkers are those who are willing to use their minds without prejudice and without fearing to understand things that clash with their own customs, privileges, or beliefs.

Why do I have to defend myself, my beliefs, and my morality?

If you raise your standards but do not really believe you can meet them, you have already sabotaged yourself…

Why “Truth” is a secondary consideration to everyone else? I mean this is the very reason we get into arguments.

I am doing the best that I can for my family and friends.  I am going to keep working hard and one day our situations will improve. Truth always withstands scrutiny. Always question everything and please do your research properly.

Your beliefs create your reality. Changing your reality is both simple and easy – Follow some new beliefs. Seriously limiting yourself that will not help at all. It helps to acknowledge the limits of your capabilities.

A life that you make it is easy to forget that. Remember everything you think you know about the world, is based on assumptions, beliefs, and opinions. You are the way you are because that is what you believe about yourself.

This shape every action, every thought and every feeling that we experience. As a result, changing our belief systems is central to making any real and lasting change in our lives.

To have a state of openness and trust is Faith. The attitude of Faith is to let go and become open to the truth, whatever it might turn out to be.

Hey take a think about this one – Six months from now, you can be in a completely different space, mentally, spiritually and financially by simply to keep on working and believe in yourself.

The most direct thing that I can say to you is to not believe your mind. And you will need to learn to shift your focus from the mind to the Heart, which means affectionate awareness and stillness.

“If your beliefs are telling you, “I’m fat. I’m ugly. I’m old. I’m a loser. I’m not good enough. I’m not strong enough. I’ll never make it,” then don’t believe yourself, because it’s not true. These messages are distorted. They’re nothing but lies. Once you can see the lies, you don’t have to believe them. Use the power of doubt to challenge every message that you deliver to yourself. “Is it really true that I’m ugly? Is it really true that I’m not good enough?” Is this message real, or is it virtual? Of course, it’s virtual. None of these messages come from the truth, from life; they come from distortions in our knowledge. The truth is, there are no ugly people. There is no good enough or strong enough. There’s no universal book of law where any of these judgments are true. These judgments are just agreements that humans make.” – don Miguel Ruiz and don Jose Ruiz, The Fifth Agreement.

Your mind may not like you doing this at first but with some time and patience, and more than a little love, your mind’s reactions to the old beliefs crumbling will become less and less troubling. It is your goal to justify your beliefs in a rational and meaningful way.

[aflamethatneverdies]

i can't access any tumblr messages at all. but anon, when i say i want to abolish universities, i'm not proposing anti-intellectualism.

I was talking about how most universities keep their reading lists, access to good libraries and in the case of science, high-end equipment only for use of the students enrolled in that particular university or in rare cases for exchange programs.

When the type of structures I want to envision are ones that would allow access to those to anyone who wanted to really learn, irrespective of whether they joined that university or whether they could afford that. When I say I want to abolish university, I mean university as an institution as it exists right now. I don't want to abolish knowledge, how would that even work? and it seems facetious to imply that that was what I meant.

Why does it have to be a slippery slope when we point out that universities are a high end club which really mainly serve for entry into the professional classes, and serve to gatekeep knowledge otherwise, to assuming I'm proposing I don't want any knowledge centres or learning to exist or anti-intellectualism? Intellectualism shouldn't be limited to universities anyway.

I do want centers of learning and knowledge, but university as it exists right now is not serving the purpose of disseminating knowledge. Academics regularly complain how students use chatgpt for assignments and are only interested in passing courses and getting a university degree and not learning for learning's sake but that's because the structures are set up to incentivise that.

A lot of people here see universities as a requirement to get a white collar job. Universities still mainly serve as a way to make connections with other people in the industry more than for any other thing. What I'm suggesting is de-linking that.

Also there are other criticisms about university, such as how they prioritise certain ways of examining texts and critiquing them over others and certain ways of writing essays, which are rooted in western colonial knowledge production models. Universities also take concepts like decolonisation and de-fang them till they lose all meaning and edge. It irks me when universities do land acknowledgements while continuing to take large grants and monies from wealthy billionaires and the military industrial complex. So many western universities have deals with weapons manufacturers and many engineering students go on to work for them. Universities are bearing down on their own students for pro-Palestine protests right now. Universities as they exist uphold the status quo, they do not abolish it.

Modern universities as they exist are also deeply extractivist and colonial in nature. They use the knowledge of local communities and then publish papers on it. I do have lots of examples from my own political work infact. We get lots of requests from universities for doing research on the grassroots communities, for giving access to those communities, but in the end, the researchers carry out their research, publish it in big name journals, get fame, and do nothing material for the community. We turn them down almost immediately now.

And yet we also need the legitimacy of universities to ensure that the work we're doing gets better reach. If we don't quote western philosophers in our research, we also don't get legitimacy anywhere. I do find that deeply deeply unfair. Our work with grassroots communities is producing knowledge and even if i may be so bold, new knowledge theories applicable to our society. It is just not something that can be made palatable for universities as they exist. And people from grassroots communities have a lot of knowledge and could probably write many papers, but since they cannot be part of universities they cannot publish that work and get recognised for it as having created that knowledge, as having contributed to research.

Also this is a small point, but, even when it comes to universities, there's a hierarchy. universities in the west carry more prestige and legitimacy compared to universities in third world. It doesn't matter whether the learning is the same, research from third world universities is never taken as seriously by anyone. This is why many students from here want to enroll in foreign universities all the time. But the barriers to entry for foreign students, especially from third world countries are immensely high. Western universities select for the elite class from here to educate in their own universities, these people are already indoctrinated in western ideals and ideas. It is an exception when a working class student from here gets accepted to a western university on scholarships, not the rule.

Not to mention how university requires years of schooling, which itself relies on you being able to conform to the capitalist system as it exists since schooling also serves to produce complacent workers. If you're disabled, if you otherwise cannot conform, then barriers to entry make it almost impossible to enter university even though you might be interested in learning, even though you might have a lot to contribute. Not to mention exorbitant fees involved especially if you're an international student, but for local students too, people go into debt to be able to afford universities in US. But there are many issues with universities even beyond fees.

So no, I am not advocating for mass anti-intellectualism, I never did. I still stand by abolishing universities as they exist now.

[loverandservantoftheahlulbayt]

🍃🕊🍃 Question 19: Resurrection

Question: Please discuss the issue of resurrection in detail both from a rational and a natural or instinctive perspective. Please refer to important books regarding this topic.

🍃 Brief Answer

The answer to this question will be clarified by examining three philosophical perspectives—that of Masha’ (Peripatetic Philosophy), Ishraq (Illuminationist Philosophy), and Hikmat al-Muta’aliyah (Transcendental Philosophy), as well as the opinions of Kalam (Theology), and ‘Irfan (Mysticism). Among the topics discussed by scholars on this issue include topics such as the possibility of resurrection, its concrete existence, its proof, and the circumstances surrounding the occurrence of resurrection of the body, the soul, or both. Hence the answer will be comprised of the following:

a. The concept of resurrection.

b. The possibility and actual occurrence of resurrection.

c. Claims and descriptions pertaining to resurrection.

d. Proof of resurrection.

a. Concepts such as:

1. Returning to one’s original abode.

2. Death after life and life after death.

3. Existence of a world similar to this world and the gathering of all mankind.

4. Return of the soul to its origin and source.

5. Transfer of the soul from this world to the next.

6. Gathering of individual souls within the collective the soul.

7. Resurrection or rising of people from their graves.

b. Firstly, the possibility of resurrection and its occurrence must be proven. Its possibility can be easily understood from the existence of this world.

c. Many scholars and philosophers believe in the resurrection of the body and the soul. However, they disagree on the manner in which the body is resurrected—whether it is the material body of this world, or the imaginal body of the purgatory, or perhaps the particular intellectual and metaphysical body that returns.

d. The logical reasons provided in the Qur`an for resurrection are as follows:

1. The afterlife is a requirement for the purposefulness of this world, the establishment of justice, and the perfection of humanity. The same Allah who created mankind in the first place and Who wills seeds to grow in the earth is also very much capable of resurrecting mankind.

2. Among the logical reasons for resurrection is the existence in every human of a single unique soul which is not affected by changes in the physical characteristics of the body. Perfection is not achieved during the period the soul is with the body. It is reached when resurrection occurs. The death of the body is a consequence of the soul’s attention to the next world and is its homecoming or return to its origin and eternal abode. The idea of creation necessitates that mankind are transposed to a better world. The return of the soul to its origin is a necessity of the concept of resurrection. The soul has greater desire towards its origin than it does to its physical body and its greatest joy is to see the truth. Resurrection is the manifestation of some of the blessed names of Allah such as the Returner, the Enlivener, the Gatherer, the Cause and etc.

3. Natural Reasons: All of the fundamental principles and secondary precepts of religion, including resurrection, come naturally to human beings—being innate and inborn to the soul. The desire to be eternal is natural and will be realized through resurrection. The ultimate desire of mankind is not material pleasure. The fear of death and what’s associated to it is a clear indication of the natural desire to be eternal.

🍃 Detailed Answer

The answer to this question will be clarified by examining three philosophical perspectives—that of Masha’ (Peripatetic Philosophy), Ishraq (Illuminationist Philosophy), and Hikmat al-Muta’aliyah (Transcendental Philosophy), as well as the opinions of Kalam (Theology), and ‘Irfan (Mysticism).

Each of these will be discussed in further detail depending on the availability of resources and sometimes quoting from authorities in order to further clarify the topic. It should be noted a perusal of the works of Ibn Sina reveals the fact that he did not offer any logical proof for resurrection. He was of the belief that the only reason to affirm the reality of resurrection was its confirmation by the Prophet—after which he saw no need for a logical proof. However, he did express his opinion on other topics related to the afterlife.

But now, as to the scholars of Kalam, a brief quotation from them will suffice to illustrate their opinion with regards to the resurrection:

Since mankind is composed of a body and a soul, the conditions of his return to the next world can be discussed from both a physical and a spiritual sense. In general, any discussion on resurrection can be divided into two sections: proving resurrection and its necessity, and the manner in which it occurs—whether physical, spiritual, or both.

Philosophers have generally either not given much attention to the first section or have paid more attention to the manner in which resurrection occurs—concentrating on its physical dimension even though they may accept both physical and spiritual resurrection. This is because physical resurrection has typically been more controversial. In line with this, the subject of resurrection in this question can be divided into four main topics:

🍃 a. The Concept of Resurrection

1. Returning to the original abode

2. Death after life and life after death

3. The creation of another world similar to this world and the gathering of all mankind from the first to the last.

4. Return of the soul to its origin

5. Transfer of the soul from this world to the next

6. Gathering of individual souls within the collective soul (Allah)

7. Resurrection meaning the rising of the people from their graves in the afterlife when Allah will judge their deeds and the angels will enter in rows upon rows

One of the conclusions that can be reached from the above points is that the fundamental condition of resurrection is being transferred to the next world. Hence, subjects such as death, survival of the soul, eternal life and etc. are only preliminary discussions.

🍃 b. Possibility of Resurrection and its

occurrence

It is senseless to discuss any topic unless and until its possibility has been proven. Whether it is proven through the proof of something that is its kind, or through the proof of something that supercedes it. The creation of another world is either like creating this world, or it is even easier. The very existence of this world is indicative of the possibility of the existence of such a world, and hence the possibility of the existence of a similar world, meaning the next world. Thus we can discuss the occurrence of the next world and resurrection.

🍃 c. Claims and descriptions of

resurrection and the circumstances

of its occurrence

According to Mulla Sadra, many scholars, philosophers and a group of scholars of Kalam believe in both a physical and spiritual resurrection based on the return of the soul to the body.1 He also introduces his belief as the return of the same identical body to its soul and believes this to conform to both logic and religion. He believes that disagreeing with this is blasphemy (kufr) and is denying the text of the Noble Qur`an.2

Meeting in resurrection; the body of the dead is returned with its same parts so that if someone sees him, he says that this is the same person that was in the previous world.3

According to the principles of Mulla Sadra, man although one, has three realms and dimensions in which he subsists: sense, imagination, and intellect. Man’s existence is initially material and of the order of the natural world, but with its development it becomes spiritual and then goes on to become the intellectual being that is of the next world. All three bodies pertain to the same single individual and are akin to the changes that occur in a person from childhood to old age. What personifies the body is the soul and the soul is one. Therefore, the body of the next world is the same body from this world that has reached perfection.

However, according to the scholars of Kalam, the return of the body occurs through the gathering of the physical parts of the body and reintegrating them into one whole. These body parts have unique characteristics due to the fact that they possess one unique soul. As a result, by the will of Allah each body is recreated from its own parts. After this stage the body rejoins the soul and the same worldly human is recreated.

Even though Ibn Sina believed in both a physical and spiritual resurrection, he was unable to provide a logical argument for physical resurrection and obtained his belief from religion; conversely as for spiritual resurrection, he believes it is verifiable through logic and presents it with logical arguments.

Shaykh al-Ishraq does not believe in physical resurrection, namely the resurrection of the body alongwith the soul. Instead, he believes in a body of the world of purgatory (Barzakh) and that the soul returns to its origin because of its love for it—returning once again from the disarray of the lower world to the world of light.

🍃 d. Proof of Resurrection

1. Logical reasons extracted from the

Qur`an

a. Allah is the Truth and does not do anything in vain. An aimless world is vain. Thus, a world in motion must have a goal toward which it is moving and in which it will find its rest; this world of rest is the world of resurrection.

b. The All knowing Allah never does anything that contradicts His wisdom and justice and because this world is not able to provide what is just for a believer and a disbeliever, there must be a day on which all receive justice for their deeds.

c. A concomitant result of the mercy of Allah is that mankind eventually reaches perfection. Hence, there must be a resurrection so that mankind can reap the benefits of his deeds and reach perfection.

d. The Almighty Allah who created mankind in the first instance is most certainly capable of creating the same humans a second time.

e. When a seed is placed in the earth and water and earth surround it, logically it should decompose; instead it opens and splits into a root, which penetrates the ground, and a sprout, which grows out of the ground. This is a sign of the power of Allah and His infinite wisdom, something that is also capable of bringing about the resurrection.

🍃 2. Logical Arguments

a. According to the Mulla Sadra and his Hikmat al-Muta’aliyah: In his Asfar, Mabda’ wa Ma’ad, and Shawahid al-Rububiyyah he mentions certain principles which are either altogether or for their most part specific to his own philosophy. He goes on to declare the actuality of physical and spiritual resurrection on the following basis: Although the properties of the body change, the soul remains the same and is what personifies the body. Thus the body and soul of this world are resurrected.4

b. Existence is good and awareness of it is also good. The more complete an existence, the greater the good. Thus the existence of intellect and cognition is nobler and its contentment greater. The pleasure obtained from understanding is indescribable. This is because intellection is more intense vis a vis perception, the perceiver and the perceived that sense perception. However, this greater good is not attained when the soul is dependent on the body and it will only be achieved when this restriction is removed.5

c. When the soul reaches a level where its dependence on the body is lessened and its attention towards the afterlife is greater, it will separate from the body through a natural death. This separation is not because the body is incapable of keeping the soul but instead due to its natural attraction to the other world. If this were not the case, the body’s incapability to keep the soul would have been more evident at the beginning of its creation.6

d. Mankind has been created with great intricacy and detail. A high-ranking angel has worked his mould for forty days. It seems very illogical that Allah would be content with his annihilation; instead He wills that mankind leave this low status towards a noble station.7

e. Return of the soul to its origin is a necessity of the phrase ma’ad or “return”. Return means going back to where one came from.8

f. Perspective of Shaykh al-Ishraq: The desire of the soul towards its origin is greater than towards its own body. The more it disassociates from the material, the greater its desire towards the other world. If the body is defeated, at the moment of death, the soul returns to its origin. For the soul, there is no greater joy than achieving perfection. If the soul does not achieve this because of being busy with the body and the material, after separating from the body, all the facts will be revealed to it and the blessings of Allah will rain down on him.9

g. Pespective of scholars of Kalam: Religions sent from God have promised rewards and punishments for good and bad deeds. However, Allah’s justice is not fully realized in this world alone. Hence, there must be another world, which is deserving of this realization.

h. Gnostic’s perspective: Allah is certainly worthy of the manifestation of all His blessed names and qualities. There is an appropriate time and place for each blessed name and quality. The full manifestation of blessed names such as the Returner, the Giver of Life, the Gatherer, etc will occur in the next world.

🍃 3. Natural or innate reasons for

Resurrection

a. The source of all fundamentals and branches of religion is from one’s nature; otherwise there wouldn’t be any coherence between creation and its guidance.

b. The ultimate desire of mankind is not the material world. This is true since by reaching it, the desire does not dissipate. Human nature is focused on achieving perfection. After traveling through the various stages of life, man’s attention will be on the afterlife and his potential will reach its limit and he will return to his origin.

c. The desire for everlasting existence is natural; otherwise mankind would never fear death. All the natural desires of mankind are so that he can reach perfection and have wisdom to them. The wisdom in this is the existence of another world, since this world is not deserving of eternal life.

d. The fear of death and what is associated with it has clearly shown itself throughout history and is a sign of mankind’s natural desire for eternal existence.

🍃🌺🍃~*~⛲️~*~🍃🌺🍃

🍃🕊🍃 Sources 🍃🕊🍃

1. Al-Mabda` wa al-Ma‘ad, (pp. 488-489)

2. al-Mabda` wa al-Ma‘ad, (pg. 490)

3. Ibid

4. al-Asfar al-Arba‘a, (vol. 9, pp .185-197)

5. Ibid. (pp. 121-123)

6. al-Mabda’ wa al-Ma’ad, (pg. 527)

7. Ibid. (pp. 526-527)

8. Ibid. (pg. 528)

9. Hikmah al-Ishraq {Farsi Translation},

(pp. 367-368)

🍃🌺🍃~*~⛲️~*~🍃🌺🍃

🍃🕊🍃 al-Islam.org 🍃🕊🍃

.

[fallsekings]

A Meta About William's Fantasy world

It's been a while since I've talked about this guy, but I feel the need to do so because I had this huge disconnect with the direction that they were taking William in \W/estworld S3. I didn't understand it, what happened, why the huge change in character and his shift in personality towards the Hosts... etc. etc. But I am going to put my thoughts about that now, that I have had some distance, beneath a cut because this can potentially have a lot of triggering topics for some folks.

I would say that I am not going to go into a lot of depth about this but it might get pretty lengthy. I have a lot of thoughts about this now and some personal first hand experience that I've gone through recently, and something I am trying to work on... However, it's been a few years since I've watched \W/estworld at this point (shame on me), so I probably won't be pulling out many quotes, if any... but here we go.

So, as I've begun to examine my own life and what I am currently dealing with to fix my own mental health, is that I began to disappear into my own little fantasy world. This game is called State of Survival, it's a zombie mmo mobile game, where you join an alliance, make friends and fight other alliances. There are different ranks in each alliance, R1-R5. R5 being the leader. I'm an R4, so I'm basically an "official helper" of the alliance of about 100 people. What this means is that I am responsible in organizing events, helping with conflicts between alliances, being a mediator between players... and well you get the picture.

As I've said a few times before... I haven't had a good past couple of years and my coping mechanism has been this game. I disappeared into a different reality where I felt "more important", like I was capable of helping people, and it started feeling like State of Survival was a real world and like the problems in it were real, too, the makers of this game has made it that way on purpose, to get you addicted to it.

So what happens when you're depressed about the real world and you find a world more meaningful than the real world? You want to disappear into it. But that is unhealthy, because the fantasy world can start becoming better for you than the real world and why would you want to deal with your problems in the real world when you can sit it on the back burner and just disappear into a more idealized world?

I hope you all can see where I'm going with this? William was the same way from the moment he stepped foot into the park. He resisted it at first but the more he became immersed in the game... the more the real world seemed fake, because it was horrible. He was a book nerd (which he disappeared into those stories too), who got into fights, was probably bullied, his father was a drunk, who blamed him for all of his problems... and this was all before Incite came along and started deciding people's lives for them.

Here in the game William could become a more idealized version of himself. A version of himself that was confident, strong and someone who was not a doormat. He clung to this version of himself that he created because it was easier for him to accept this, what he perceived to be, stronger more confident version of himself that was capable of getting what he wanted... that he couldn't have before this new found confidence. His anger at how his life had turned out was freely released in the park... especially after Juliet died. It was a wakeup call for him that something was wrong but he didn't know exactly what... so he had to go searching for it... for some meaning behind everything...

In this sense, his life, as Emily had put it, he himself was a lie. Because he was good at pretending to be someone he wasn't. In multiple aspects of his life. He became fractured into multiple versions of himself (which we see in season 3), because he lived many lies. Some better and some worse than others. Young William was the best part of himself... but also a lie... and so that's why he sort of flipped out and killed all of the past versions of himself in that scene... I think we know which one I'm talking about.

But the problem with the park is there were no consequences for actions taken within the park. Which made this fantasy world fall flat for William. In real life, there's consequences for your actions... not so much in the park. Right? And so he spends all of this time in the park following the maze, the game, and getting lost in trying to find some deeper meaning.

And sometimes when you get so lost in a game, you forget that it's not the real world... and this leads to escapism, deepening depression, derealization, depersonalization, and just in general... you forget how to deal with real people.

For those who doesn't know what derealization and depersonalization is, because I didn't until yesterday, I'll post the definitions below:

Derealization is a mental state where you feel detached from your surroundings. People and objects around you may seem unreal. Even so, you're aware that this altered state isn't normal. More than half of all people may have this disconnection from reality once in their lifetime. Depersonalization-derealization disorder occurs when you always or often feel that you're seeing yourself from outside your body or you sense that things around you are not real — or both. Feelings of depersonalization and derealization can be very disturbing. You may feel like you're living in a dream.

And this began to happen to William. Everything was a part of a game, nothing was real, people were out to get him (which Ford knew about and played around with and messed with William even more). And this... is where what happens to Emily comes in.

William shot her because he thought she was part of the game. That she wasn't real. That she was a host. He lost sight of reality... and shooting her was like his wake up call... How could it not be?

You see my disconnect with William between S2 and how he changed in season 3... is that I didn't quite understand how he could go from seemingly wanting to help the Hosts and wanting to "set them free", to someone who hates Hosts and wants to destroy them all and wipe them off the planet. I had people telling me that it was a pretty big and understandable shock. He killed his daughter. And I get that...

But I didn't fundamentally understand that shift until recently. He was deep in the game and he didn't realize it. So deep he didn't even realize his real daughter was really standing right there in front of him. And so this shift in William comes from... William having this wakeup call that the park wasn't real. It was a game that Ford created and messed with him in. The game had caused his daughter to die. The Hosts were a part of this game. A game. Not real. And so his mentality had to shift to... what is real and what isn't? If he had killed a Host? So what? A Host could be brought back... but this was real life... reality wasn't so fixable. There was no bringing Emily back the way Hosts could be brought back... and there was a certain anger there... much like Hank from D:BH, when he lost his son on the operating table to an Android. Hank absolutely detested Androids... because when he lost his son... a human doctor might have lost sleep, cried a little, felt like a failure to save a child... an android didn't feel anything. They could die over and over again and be brought back. The android would lose no sleep over his son dying...

But getting off track a little here. William's wake up call meant that he had to put a hardline between himself and the game. The Hosts. Everything that he got wrapped up in that led up to the moment where he killed his daughter. That meant that William went from seeing Hosts as potential to be real, alive and free... to something that wasn't real and never could be.

And I know it seems weird to go from one extreme to another and that's where I got caught off guard with his character too... but William got a wakeup call from hell... and every bit of it was his responsibility. He was the one who got lost in the fantasy world when he was younger, that led to him buying the park, that led up to him getting so lost in his delusions that he became a fractured lie, he could no longer tell fiction from reality... and he woke up. As if he woke up from a dream. A really bad one... and he had to accept the reality outside of the park as being the only one that really existed after this wakeup call.

Anyways... in conclusion. My boy is a mess, but I think that I understand him a little better as I start to realize that State of Survival, like the park, is not the real world and I have been trying to sit the game down more often and deal with the real world more often. A fantasy world can warp your sense of reality and it's something we don't think about as we get to know the Hosts and their perspective of things. We even start feeling bad for them. I love the Hosts myself, don't get me wrong... but when you start seeing a game effecting your reality... It's a sign that something unhealthy is going on and you may need to back away from that for a bit.

[joemuggs]

Dance Your Way Home

This is my WIRE magazine review of Emma Warren's book from earlier this year....

👇🏻

Appropriately enough, this book is in constant movement. Its framework is simultaneously memoir, history and exploration of the human mind and body, and it oscillates between these modes, shifting perspective and location endlessly. In any page you’ll find multiple voices, the action flipping from Orpington to Rwanda and Stoke-on-Trent to Chicago in a moment, a zooming in and out from broad historical sweep to images of moving crowds to micro personal detail or insight. 

But for all that, it keeps returning to one place: the dancefloor. And even more specifically, to long-established journalist Emma Warren’s own feet, on specific dancefloors, and to what they were doing: how her feet moved, what shoes she was wearing, what those floors were made of, how it felt. It’s hard to think of a better, or more literal, way that a complex narrative could be grounded. This book dances around, but is also firmly rooted in, the very experience of dancing.

It draws us from Warren’s parents’ youth on the English south coast, through her own childhood in Kent, student days in Manchester, working for Jockey Slut and The Face, parenthood, community organising and on. Each time we get a sense of where dance was in her life, from infant school tap and ballet, through youth club discos, funk and soul clubs, acid house, 90s superclubs, drum’n’bass, dubstep, UK funky and into the myriad of jazz-adjacent fusions of the past decade.

But every step of the way it fires off backwards in time and across continents, digging into the roots of specific dance moves and styles, the functions of dancing for social groups and movements, it’s effects on the human brain. First and second hand sources are quoted constantly – from those Warren shares specific memories with through keystone musicians and promoters to academics and scientists with insight into the dance. 

In this way, it feels very similar to Jude Rogers’s The Sound of Being Human from last year, which also used memoir as a springboard to examine the science and social function of music. But where Rogers was looking the echoes and abstractions of memory, Warren keeps the focus tightly on physicality – of experiences and the building blocks of culture passed from hand to hand, body to body. And her language has a deeply satisfying physicality to match, as in “Our gestural polyphony changed the temperature, too, heating venues up with human-generated humidity.” 

Despite its omnidirectional approach, this core keeps its momentum like a groove running throughout, and it really works on all its intended levels – and simply as a polemic in favour of dancing, whether in clubs, at home or professionally. Looking at subcultural evolution through the dancer’s lens – reminding us, for example that some of the most crucial dance musicians like A Guy Called Gerald and Shut Up & Dance were trained, even professional dancers – provides endless vital insights. And Warren’s phrase making provides plenty of pithy reminders of her fierce sense of purpose. “Culture matters when everything else falls away,” she says. “You can’t eat culture and it doesn’t pay the rent, but it does provide pride and history, which are useful starting points for recovery.” 

[lizzzzll]

Narratives and Ideology

In this entry, I will analyze how this artifact uses narrative elements (scene, character, set up of events, time, etc.) to promote a certain ideology and/or constitute people in a narrative around socialism in Vietnam under the government of President Ho Chi Minh? [Give specific examples/quotes from the rhetorical artifact.] What is (ethically) productive and/or limiting about this depiction, and is it more productive or limiting?

To investigate these questions, I examined the ‘Declaration of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam’ by President Ho Chi Minh as my rhetorical artifact. The artifact shares a narrative with (North) Vietnamese citizens at the time the determination to protect the independence and freedom of the nation, which is ultimately a productive narrative as it exposes the crimes of the French colonialists then declares national independence and the birth of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

Ho Chi Minh (1890-1969), né Nguyen Sinh Cung, was a revolutionary activist, born into a Confucian family in Nghe An province, Vietnam. In 1911, he left Vietnam and traveled around the world in search of revolutionary ideals. From there, he was exposed to the Communist ideology of Marx and Lenin in the Soviet Union, became one of the founders of the French communist party, and eventually returned to Vietnam and established the Viet Minh army in the northern mountains. North Vietnam. In August 1945, the August Revolution was led by the Viet Minh army against the Japanese empire. After that event led to the declaration of independence and the establishment of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. On September 2, 1945, Ho Chi Minh read the Declaration of Independence at Ba Dinh Square, Hanoi, which was drafted by him and commented on by a few others, with reference to the United States Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of Human Rights. civil rights law. Vietnam's Declaration of Independence had very important meanings for the Vietnamese state at that time, including ending feudalism, being the premise for the first general election in which Ho Chi Minh was elected to be the Prime Minister, and affirming the sovereignty and human rights of Vietnamese citizens.

Palczewski, Ice, and Fritch (2012) explain that narratives are “an important way to understand the world in which people reside.” The above statement can be understood to mean that narratives can control the way of thinking of a community in which that narrative is popular. This when applied to politics means that the story or ideal that a politician tells to his or her supporters shapes political views in which narratives serve as essential supporting information to build up those views. Political views are the foundation for people's faith in any party. This shows that narrative is closely linked to ideology because according to ... the main component of ideology is "beliefs about which there are possible alternative judgments." As long as the same rhetorical story is being told, the audience's subsequent reactions will have similarities and they will choose the most similar one to connect with each other.

Socialism in Ho Chi Minh’s narrative sparks out in multiple parts of the artifact. First of all, Ho Chi Minh stated at the very beginning that “All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” In this sentence, we can clearly see that the rhetor’s purpose is to show that the rhetor is taking the persona of a "man". Every human being is born equal, Ho Chi Minh put this sentence first to emphasize to all his audiences that the Creator does not create anyone better than others, including him. , the person speaking on the square or the soldiers, workers, farmers, or even the French and Japanese who invaded the Vietnamese people. Claiming that he is like everyone else right from the start helps the rhetor not only relate to his listeners but also helps the words he would deliver next feel like they are the listeners themselves. are also conveying their own thoughts. People who have been in war all wish for freedom, equality, and happiness. Ho Chi Minh, in the persona of a Vietnamese “man”, correctly spoke out the wishes of the Vietnamese people at the time after they had just expelled the Japanese imperial army, and all were in the mood to build a new life under a peaceful country.

The next thing that Ho Chi Minh did in this artifact to express his narrative was citing the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America and The Declaration of the French Revolution as supporting materials. In the above passage explains how Ho Chi Minh used the words of America's founding fathers to express the view that freedom and equality are the basic rights of humans since they are born. This also shows Ho Chi Minh's political viewpoint that people are equal in all aspects, implicitly affirming that socialism is the right path because there are people, old and young, male and female, rich and poor. should be treated the same. Besides, the rhetor quoted "All men are born free and with equal rights, and must always remain free and have equal rights." of The Declaration of the French Revolution. This quote from Ho Chi Minh is like a painful slap to the French, showing the contradiction between what the French said in their declaration of independence and what the French had colonized and exploited the Vietnamese people. male for 80 years. Ho Chi Minh's use of evidence from the declarations of independence of two great powers at that time was a clever way for him to express his political views on Vietnam's freedom and democracy to the world.

Throughout the Declaration of Independence, Ho Chi Minh used the pronouns "we, our country, our people" and "they" many times to express the visual opposition between the Vietnamese people on the one hand and the Vietnamese people on the other. On the other side are countries that have or intend to invade and plunder Vietnam. Besides using sentences with the structure "they + verb" to condemn what the colonialists did, the rhetor had a firm statement: "A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more." than eight years, a person who has fought side by side with the Allies against the Fascists during these last years, such a person must be free and independent.” The content of this statement is aimed at the audience, the Vietnamese people at that time. "A people" is every Vietnamese person who participated in the fight against the French and Japanese. "A people" is every Vietnamese person who bravely dared to stand up for his country, for his family, and for his village. Each audience member at that time could feel like they were being praised and appreciated. Therefore, it can be affirmed that Ho Chi Minh did very well in his rhetoric, once again reinforcing his ideology of socialism to the Vietnamese people.

This narrative would not have been successful if Ho Chi Minh had not used the persona of a "man", evidenced by the full use of the French and American Declarations of Independence, as well as understanding his audience group. grandfather. Of course, that must mean that Ho Chi Minh really understood and put himself in the shoes of his people, his authentic self that he expressed made what he said really work.

Throughout the artifact I am examining, it can be seen that narrative played an important part in how the Ho Chi Minh rhetor conveyed his ideology of socialism. This is also shown and clarified in Lejano, Nero and Chua's article "Ideology as Narrative" (2020): “The most convenient representation of ideology is as a narrative specically, a system-constituting narrative.” Narrative can be seen as a method to effectively convey ideology between people, the best use of narrative brings great rhetorical benefits to the speaker. Not only can it help them make sense to their audiences what they are conveying but also convince listeners so that they gradually trust in the speaker's beliefs.

Overall, the artifact declaration of independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam shows how Ho Chi Minh succeeded in using narative to express his ideology of socialism. Moreover, it also shows the views of the Vietnamese people in September 1945 who wanted to assert their sovereignty and national freedom against those who invaded them and the whole world.

Foss, Sonja. “Ideology Criticism.”, 2009.

Ho, Minh Chi. “Declaration of Independence of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.” Ho Chi Minh, Selected Works Vol. 3, (Hanoi: Foreign Languages Publishing House, 1960–62), 17–21.

Lejano, Raul, et al. “Ideology as Narrative.” ResearchGate, 7 December 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346348808_Ideology_as_Narrative. Accessed 1 October 2023.

Palczewski, C. H., Ice, R., Fritch, J. (2012). Narratives. In Rhetoric in civic life (pp. 117-146). State College, PA: Strata Publishing, Inc.

[fives-lover]

Chapter 4: Clean-up on Aisle Five

Masterlist | Previous | Next

It's been a while guys. Hope you're doing better than me 😁😭

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Several days passed before the Separatists retreated, leaving the Republic forces to do the cleanup in the aftermath. The remaining wounded were transported back to the Resolute. 

Rasha stayed behind tending to injuries, translating, communicating future plans, and helping the villagers who had evacuated return to what was left of their homes. She was keeping herself busy; anything to keep her mind off what happened. She jumped when the silence surrounding her was broken by a loud sigh followed by a deep chuckle. She turned around almost defensively to see who was behind her, she hadn’t heard anyone approach.

“You just scared the bantha fodder out of me, Fives!” She dropped what she was doing and glared at him.

“It wasn’t on purpose. I promise.” He held his hands up, “Rex was right the other night though.”

“About what?” She stopped glaring at him as he stepped closer.

“About you not knowing when to stop and just rest. You look like crap. When’s the last time you ate anyway?”

“Thanks..." She glared at him more, "Oh, I don’t know. Maybe this morning? I’m not entirely sure.” She reached behind him to grab the hand he kept hidden, pulling the ration bar from his grasp, and shoved his chest playfully. “Why do you care, I thought you were cleaning up some spare droid parts and looking for a bunch of loose wires to fix whatever’s going on up here.” She joked through a mouthful of food, pointing at her head.

“Oh, ha, ha. Very funny. I don’t think I’m the one that needs rewiring up there. You’re the one that keeps talking in their sleep, not me. Or… at least I don’t think I do.” He shrugged as he chuckled and started walking away.

She grabbed his shoulder, stopping him. “Wait a second… I don’t talk in my-”

They were interrupted by their comms chirping. Captain Rex was on the other end.

“We’re ready to get back up there. Hurry up so we can get off this kriffing planet already,” he ordered grumpily. 

Rasha waited to say anything until she knew that call was finished. “What’s up with him?”

“I don’t know. I think some of the locals have been trying to get him to stay. Maybe it’s the blond hair? I think it's probably the death glare that really turns the ladies on really.” He laughed as they made their way back to the gunship.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Rex, Rasha, come here!” Anakin called from across the hangar. “Lieutenant Ari has been making everyone go to the medbay immediately upon arrival or earliest availability. She had me and Ahsoka do it too. So, it’s not just troopers,” he sighed, “she wanted me to make sure I get you four up there, she even said to ��use my Jedi mind magic or whatever’ on you if you didn’t go.” He made little air quotes as he chuckled and turned to start escorting them to the lift. 

Of course, she’d pull rank to double-check everyone is alright. She just loves to make extra work for herself, doesn’t she?

“I’m gonna need you guys to stand in here,” Ari gestured to a small room just inside the main examination room, “No running away. I’ll have someone track you down.” She gave Rasha a pointed look

It was packed. Ari was making quick work of going through each and every trooper, looking at everything that had a possibility of being injured on each. Some with blaster marks on their armor were forced to have a closer examination, being ushered behind a curtain. Droids were doing what they were ordered, mostly checking vitals or applying bacta patches. Ari wanted her and her team to examine everyone without a droid interfering as much as possible.

“Alright, come on out. There’s room now.” Ari came around the corner, making sure no one had run off, after a few hours.

The four of them filed out of the room, immediately being squeezed into a tight, uncomfortable group hug. Her arms couldn’t make it past Fives’ and Echo’s waists, but she somehow managed to pull them into a group. 

She was trying to keep her tears at bay. “I’m so glad you guys are okay. I don’t know how I would be doing right now if you weren’t.” She released them finally, much to their relief. “I’m glad you kept your part of that promise Echo. Thank you.”

He smiled and nodded before she pulled his arm, made him remove his armor, and began taking his vitals.

“Well, if you wanted to get me alone to take my shirt off, all you had to do was ask.”

“Gross. Get a room, guys!” Fives shoved him in the shoulder, receiving an eye roll from Ari and a small glare from Echo.

Ari checked the rest of the men, applying bacta patches where needed, finally making her way to Rasha.

“Are you gonna have her take her shirt off in front of us? We all had to, now it’s her turn!” Fives joked.

“Oh, shut up already.” Rex groaned, failing in his attempts to act unamused by Fives’ constant joking.

Rasha stuck her tongue out at the group just before Ari pulled the curtain. She checked her vitals and examined almost every inch of her body. Once she concluded her friend was okay, other than a long gash on her upper arm and a few bruises, she immediately jumped on her, squeezing as tightly as she could, avoiding the injured arm.

“Gee Ari, you saw I was still standing! I’m alright! Let go! Or at least loosen up a little before you bust a rib or something too!”

“Sorry. You just hadn’t made it back up here for a long time. I couldn’t help but fear the worst. I can’t lose you.” She shyly backed away, turning her attention back to Rasha’s arm. She gingerly applied the bacta before wrapping the wound. “This isn’t too tight, is it?”

“No, it’s alright. I’m not going to be going anywhere. I needed to be one of the last cause I had to tell the locals what was going on. You know that.” She stood up and wrapped her good arm around Ari’s shoulders after she put her shirt back on, ushering her out from behind the curtain, receiving three goofy smiles and more joking as they made their way out of the medbay. 

Let me know if you want to be added to a tag list for future posts!

@moon-haunted