#<- will continue not addressing this

[oncillabrigade]

Finally read Robins!

I have a lot of thoughts, but I just want to say this panel is the funniest thing I've ever seen:

[vigilskept]

i don’t even know if i have the energy to get into it but it truly does fucking grind my gears that criticism over how characters/worldstates were handled gets conflated with criticism of how genuinely fucking atrocious the politics of this game are.

like yeah ok. the dev cycle was a fucking nightmare. no one’s really happy with the game they put out. sure, we can extend empathy to those involved. and yeah, there are labour issues within the gaming industry at play here.

the labour issues are not what made this game deeply fucking racist.

[balis77]

Honestly, the funniest thing DC could do right now is have a crossover episode between My Adventures With Superman and Batman: Caped Crusader with the explanation of "Oh, Caped Crusader isn't set in the 40s/50s or anything. Gotham is just Like That."

[wigglebox]

Destiel Pride - Day 5; Cursed or not

[starwarsanthropology]

Canon genders the clones, both individually and collectively, pretty aggressively. They're men, brothers, boys, sirs. Omega is notable for being the "female" clone, to the point where she's not recognized as a clone in a meaningful way.

But the clones grew up without gendered social groups! Despite how clones are gendered by external factors, gender is functionally a nonentity in their lives until they meet civilians, and civilians do a load of other weird shit anyway.

So why do they still use gendered language?

My argument is that feminine language isn't used as a gendered form of address, but as a form of address that reflects a specific kind of power dynamic and relationship between parties.

Given the structure of the clone army, the only people a vast majority of young clones interact with who could insist on being called ma'am are exclusively kaminoans.

The kaminoans view clones not as autonomous subjects, but as property. They have and expect complete control over their lives and actions. Incidentally, the female kaminoans we see (such as Nala Se) tend to demonstrate an even more proprietary perspectives on the clones.

You can question a sir, like your superiors or trainers, at your discretion, but you can't question a ma'am. A sir is someone who has power over you, but is somewhat responsible for you. The have personal accountability to you in some way. Sirs are responsible for men under them. A ma'am is someone whose power over you is absolute, an authority without accountability, who is not beholden to you but that you must obey. You are tool or a number to a ma'am.

And when you bring clones out into the wider galaxy, I'm not sure anyone would figure it out that quickly.

Say you're a new jedi general. You meet your men, and they address you as "ma'am". Maybe you correct and move on, figuring that they've grown up surrounded by thousands of identical men and aren't great at guessing genders based on social and appearance cues. Scuttlebutt has your forms of address spread through the men by the end of the day, and you don't think about it again.

The clones, on the other hand, take this correction as he/him jedi stating that they want to work with them and suppourt them despite having so much power over them, which fits with both what they know of the jedi and, most often, their leadership style.

She/her jedi (see Shaak Ti especially!), clones maybe treat a little more as absolute authorities. This gendered divide in behavior gets met with, "hm, maybe they're just not used to women." For many jedi, they eventually switch to calling them sir as well, especially as they build rapport.

For Shaak Ti specifically, she is an absolute authority as the representative of the Jedi on Kamino, not just as a figurehead but as a decision maker and educator. Even as the clones grow to trust and love her, she's a relatively distant and all-powered figure. She has near total authority over them, and clones might ask for help or suppourt, but there's no social obligation for those requests to be met, she's just kind. It's compassion, not duty.

Senators, there's a good mix of different factors that make it confusing. "Senator" is always an acceptable form of address if you're not sure how'd they react, even if they should be ma'ams by default, but they're either trying to build rapport for some reason or genuinely want to work with you when they say to call them sir, regardless of the actual power dynamic at play. The she/her senators that respect the clones are in the same boat as Shaak Ti: Padme Amidala may care about clone rights, but I am still just one of hundreds to her and she has no personal accountability to me. Her position is such that she should not and cannot owe me anything. Same with Riyo Chuchi, Mon Mothma, etc. etc.

And a civilian that insists on being called ma'am or sir is going to be an asshole either way, and they technically have power over clones without personal accountability or responsibility for them. It works.

Finally, Palpatine.

He's a slimy rat fuck who pretends to be affable and kind, so of course he's going to laugh and say, "Oh, no, call me Sir!" when you call him ma'am. He is not personally accountable to you, and he does not care about you, but it helps his image and it helps him manipulate people to pretend, so of course he's making you use sir to build false intimacy despite the fact that he's the ma'am of ma'ams, both in power gaps and lack of accountability for his treatment of clones.

So having clones using sir vs ma'am not as a reflection of gender but as a reflection of power? Yeah, I think it works.

[wavesoutbeingtossed]

I don’t love the TTPD shoot because I feel like it misrepresents the standard album. She lowkey told the story of a manic episode, and no part of the shoot showcased that.

You are certainly entitled to your preferences! Different strokes for different folks.

However, I don't personally agree. I also absolutely adore the photoshoot and think it represents the album beautifully.

The standard album encapsulates *everything* first of all, from the sorrow that led to the mania that led to the depressive episode after. The mania didn’t exist in a vacuum, and moreover, I suspect some of the ways in which it presented for her absolutely do show up in the mood conveyed.

The photoshoot to me absolutely *does* represent so many of the themes on the album. I'm not sure how you think a manic episode should be represented visually, but I think the larger themes of the standard album (as well as the album at large) are absolutely represented: loneliness, worry, depression, despair, grief, sex/sensuality, marriage, yearning, reflection, etc.

(all photos can be found here)

Here are some examples to me:

Emotional turmoil

I’m using this in a loose, broad term to denote feelings of unease, worry, restlessness, sleeplessness, depression, etc. that filter their way through so many of the songs.

To me, these photos are excellent examples of inner conflict and battling demons. She looks like she's tortured. She looks pained. She looks withdrawn and like she's withdrawing. Throughout it all, she looks incredibly vulnerable.

This is the person who sat in the dark and wondered if it's time, and is now finds her mornings stuck Mondays stuck in endless Februaries like the narrator in Fortnight. It's the who's thinking "once I fix me, he's gonna miss me" (that first photo in this set feels especially that to me) in My Boy Only Breaks His Favorite Toys. It's the person down bad crying in the gym or waking up in blood in Down Bad. It's the entirety of So Long London. It's the person abandoned in loml and left ashamed in The Manuscript. I could go on, but you get the point.

Sensuality/Sex

This is a huge theme on the entire album, very much so in the standard, because of the ways in which it is used to tell the story.

The way the lack of intimacy with one partner leads her to fantasize about a new lover in Guilty as Sin? — and the conflicted feelings that brings up. (Am I bad? Or mad? Or wise? Turns out all three.) The way she feels experimented on after being used for it then abandoned in Down Bad and Smallest Man and The Manuscript. The way she yearned for the connection she once had with her partner (including sexual intimacy) that is now dead and feels the weight of her wasted youth in So Long London. To me, these ALL are reflected in the standard album cover:

As Jaime I believe coined it, it’s giving “icky sex.” It’s sensual, but it’s also vulnerable and even pained.

These photos too also feel like they’re in that same wheelhouse: there’s an intimacy to them, but also an unease:

There’s also the way in which sex is seen as a tool for power, a way to keep men, but realizing it comes at great personal cost, which is seen in songs like I Can Fix Him and Fresh out the Slammer and Clara Bow and The Manuscript, and to me the set of photos this one is from is very much in that vein:

(beauty is a beast that roars…)

It’s sexy and seductive and vulnerable (we rarely saw Taylor in lingerie before this), but there’s also a deep undercurrent of unease and pensiveness. It’s “I'll show you heaven if you'll be an angel all night” and “you’ve got edge, she never did” and “he said that if the sex was half as good as the conversation was soon they’d be pushing strollers, but soon it was over” and “once your queen had come, you treat her like an also-ran” and so on.

Marriage/Commitment

This one is a little more... esoteric. I've actually written about this in the visuals before, both about the wedding dress imagery and the ring imagery.

I know there's no way of knowing for sure, and this is all a guessing game, but imo, the rings are deliberate and meaningful, because they feature so prominently in nearly all the visuals. Everyone knows what gold bands typically imply, and the fact that she switches hands to make sure they are noticeable across the board to me is no accident, and I don't think it's just to add visual interest to the composition, especially now that we know the events she's depicting on the album.

(Yes, I know there are some photos that show three or four rings, so I'm not saying this is a slam dunk. But I am saying it's noteworthy to me that many, if not most of the photos choose to mainly display bands on two fingers.)

So across the board, you see a pair of matching/complementary gold bands in the visuals in all the various settings. When she's lost in thought, when she's in bed, when she's fresh-faced in a sundress or donning a funerary black gown. And that's because the question of marriage looms all over TTPD. (Need more proof? Here is a collection of lyrics about marriage and children on the album.)

The rings are a pair, but they never land on the fingers they're meant to. It's the abandoned wife in Fortnight ready to give it all up. It's the tantalizing ring ready to be moved from the middle finger to the ring finger in little TTPD. It's being sacrificed at the altar after giving away her youth in So Long, London. It's the imaginary rings in the park in Fresh Out the Slammer. It's the shit-talking about rings and cradles in loml. It's the wondering if this is what's actually "holy" in GAS?. It's "he said he'd love me for all time/all his life" in I Can Do It With A Broken Heart. It's "soon they'd be pushing strollers, but soon it was over" in The Manuscript.

(I actually love the series of photos of her touching her throat with the rings on full display-- because they're very sensual, yes, but also to me there's an air of almost like, this is suffocating me, too.)

In brief, like in the album, it's symbolic of the unfulfilled promise of marriage or commitment, this thing she kept holding onto but never sliding into place.

And following that theme, this set also speaks very loudly to me:

Because yes, I know it's just a simple sundress. (Also, that last photo is one of my favourites.) But to me, it's also giving youth and innocence and yes, wedding. It's the girl from But Daddy I Love Him who's waiting to dance in the sun at the wedding you're not invited to, because her family finally loves Him. (And how this contrasts from the other white dress visuals I mentioned in the referenced post above.)

Which brings me to...

Grief

Grief is all over TTPD. Again, if you need a primer on loss in the album, here's a selection of lyrics. And this image, to me, is a stark contrast to the lightness and wistfulness of the white sundress photo:

Where the other look is youthful, light, breezy, this one to me denotes the passage of time-- which is one of the many things she mourns on the album. It's formal, it's grown-up, it's somber. It's the woman who waited for the sailor who never came home from sea, the woman who gave up her youth to the man who abandoned her at the house by the Heath in So Long, London. It's the woman who was supposed to be sent away but was left alone in Fortnight. It's the woman who's seen the field of dreams go up in fire and will grieve it until she dies in loml. It's the woman who finally understands what the agony she's felt since she was a girl was for in The Manuscript.

This one doesn't necessarily fit the theme, but I love it and she's dressed in black so I'm adding it here anyway:

it's kind of like the dark side of the white dress earlier, idk. (it's just an excuse to post it because it's one of my favourites.)

Rumination and retreat

I love love love the composition in this one, because it says so much to me:

Staring herself down in the mirror, it feels like she's confronting something. Herself, her demons, her intrusive thoughts, they're all staring right back at her. (It's actually kind of giving Anti-Hero and Midnights to me tbh.)

It's being stuck wondering about the neighbour in Fortnight. It's wondering if she's the guilty one in GAS?, but also wondering if she's allowed to cry. It's wondering if she's going to die in Down Bad. It's being barricaded in the bathroom with a bottle of wine in Florida!!! It's "is it a wonder I broke?" in Who's Afraid of Little Old Me.

It's staring yourself down and wondering if you can stand the person staring back. Which is aaaaaaaaall part of the entire album. And yes, to me, also includes the parts that drive you mad. Or manic, if you will. Because staring down all these things at once: grief for your wasted youth you won't get back, grief for your relationship that has imploded, grief over the very real life you've lost in multiple ways, coping mechanisms that are no longer available to you or working, cratering mental health dovetailing with conflicting messages about your desirability and worth and ability to love across all facets of your life, all while on the biggest stage of your life? It leads to a very internal struggle that ends up manifesting in a whole host of thoughts and behaviours. Again, I'm not sure what "manic" is supposed to look like in photos, but she certainly captured the events and the headspace that leads to it.

So, yes, I absolutely do think the key art matches the album. In fact, it may be one of the closest matches to do so. Add in the fact that everything is grey scale or sepia, and it perfectly encapsulates the story before she gets the colour back into her face in The Alchemy. TTPD is a deeply bare and at times barren album, one that cuts Taylor to her core, and the very sparse setting in decor highlights how this is just her. All her of her vices and her struggles and her pain and her dreams. And it's why it speaks to me so loudly.

[venusiinfurss]

i truly think sunny is going to end with either macdennis kiss or macdennis full penetration (no in-between) and then dennis has an existential crisis walks outside gets hit by a car and dies. cut to black end of series

[pansyfemme]

mmm but. i miss pansyfemme as a url already. but im lowkey really tired of people sending me asks questioning terminology i have explained dozens of times in the past so ive been. stepping away a bit from the term femme- not because i dont identify with it anymore. just that this blog’s gotten a bit of attention lately, and while a lot of the circles ive always run in tend to know the history of the term femme is not one exclusive to one gender or identity, people seeing my posts on my dash send me a lot of asks about it in heavily varying levels of politeness. and while i have explained it with sources and everything in the past,, i kind of. hate doing that all the time and despite having a faq people still. dont read it. so i kinda. uh. more so just. dont feel like justifying myself ten times a day and i also. dont like ignoring the asks so.. it will be definitly a term i will still use but kind of dont want in my username anymore. does that make any sense.

[marzipanandminutiae]

Sometimes I'll be having a perfectly normal day and then get blindsided out of nowhere by the "Louisa May Alcott was definitely 100% a binary trans man and if you call her a woman or use she/her pronouns for her, you're transphobic" Hot Take

why couldn't that asshole have just stuck to writing racist South Park (yes, really; this person even filed the serial numbers off one story and got it published) fanfiction and left queer/trans history to the people who have an ounce of nuanced thinking or interest in the broader context of what they read

[sammywolfgirl]

I for one am okay with my pre corruption shadow milk design being probably non cannon anymore but I like to propose a compromise for those who are still attached to their own pre corruption shadow milk designs (and this might have evidence???)

The beasts style/look changed before they fell.

Ie- the closer shadow milk got to falling the more jester elements he added. Or at least changed up his look.

So the new costume? Cannon look, the design seen in the gacha? Also cannon. Shadow milk maybe was the most obvious about it since he shapeshifts and I can see even pre corruption shadow milk playing around with his look (but maybe he got way more intense about it closer to falling)

But also the evidence(??) I have is via burning spice. In the reveal trailer the silhouette of burning spice pre corruption looks different than the herald of change (I forgot the exact wording) we see in the cutscene.

Two reasons for this. 1) devs just did a soft recon of the design between the production of that reveal trailer and the cutscene

2) the beasts look changed the closer they got to falling, and as we see the moment burning spice breaks in that cutscene, I’m willing to bet on this idea.

But hey that’s just my two cents.

[iwritenarrativesandstuff]

See, I think Charles’ annoyance and frustration with the Cat King really was just pure protectiveness and not any kind of jealousy - it’s understandable, because Edwin is not telling him what happened even though something clearly did, which is not typical for them. Edwin doesn’t usually hide things like this! Of course he’s worried!

Charles’ reaction to Monty, on the other hand, is difficult to explain in a way that isn’t jealousy. You could say he’s being protective again, but Charles shows no sign of distrust in Monty, and had no idea of who Monty was or that he might betray them - he was actually very chill with him, except in a select few specific scenes. You could say he just doesn’t like him because he got brushed off during their first meeting, but not only does that not seem like Charles at all, it also doesn’t make sense, since, again, in most instances, Charles is genuinely friendly and is happy when Monty compliments him and seems to have come around to liking him (it completely flies over his head that this is a petty jab at Edwin on Monty’s part but oh well hahaha). You could say it changes up their status quo a bit and that bothers Charles. I do think this bothers him a bit, but I think, unlike Edwin, Charles’ fear and frustration here is directed more at situations (the Cat King whisking him away for several hours, as an example) than others. He’s sociable and likes being able to talk to new people. There’s absolutely no way he’d begrudge Edwin doing the same - and he doesn’t… with Niko. Edwin and Niko hit it off and become very close and that never bothers Charles at all. He’s incredibly endeared to her, just like the rest, and for the most part, he’s chill with Monty too, and smiles pretty knowingly when Edwin confesses to him having awakened some feelings. The only exceptions, where he shows definite annoyance, are when Monty first shows up and gets really in Edwin’s personal space to show him the astrology chart he made, and when Edwin is so sucked into the book Monty gave him that he doesn’t hear that Charles is talking to him, to which he annoyedly says that they seem to have been “spending a lot of time together”.

You could say he’s unused to having anyone get in Edwin’s personal space like that, but, again, Niko. She’s very tactile with him and he doesn’t seem to mind all that much; they spend time together watching things. If it was just someone getting close with Edwin in general, not only would that be weirdly possessive for the character, but it would also mean he would show discomfort with anyone getting close, I think. Does Charles see Monty as more of a potential threat than Niko, seeing as he knows her and her personality and doesn’t know Monty? Well, maybe, but again, Charles shows no sign of distrusting Monty at all.

Monty is a boy. Okay. So something about seeing Edwin so close to a boy that is not him, getting lost in thought over something this boy gave him, really rubs Charles the wrong way. Charles appears to catch on just as quickly as anyone else that there is something (or it looks like something) between Edwin and Monty. He is not surprised when Edwin comes out to him in episode 6, and in fact, seems to have just been waiting for him to verbalize it. He smiles and is not bothered at all by Edwin showing (what he thinks is) a romantic interest in Monty - he just doesn’t like it when Monty clearly shows a romantic interest in Edwin. Um. Well. Well.

Charles is jealous. I really don’t know what else to say.

Look, when I first watched this show, I actually didn’t want them to end up together romantically - I love the idea of one having fallen in love with another who does not reciprocate and the two of them still loving each other just as much. That Edwin’s confession made them closer instead of making things awkward is such a beautiful outcome to this build up and I absolutely love it. However. On my two rewatches, I caught a lot more little details, and I think it would be very strange if the show did not follow up on this. That, plus the deliberate quality of these “jealousy” moments where the camera focuses on him, Charles’ Orpheus coding throughout the show, the fact that Edwin’s arc was far more about realizing his feelings for Charles specifically than just coming to terms with his sexuality, and that even the actors admit that Charles’ response to the confession kind of left things open, it really seems to me like the path leads to a romantic endgame for them, or at the very least, that this possibility will be explored in more depth.

**This is just my reading of it. Please do not use this post as a gotcha for anyone who loves them as a platonic duo or people who really love Crystal and Charles together (because let’s face it, they’re super cute too). I’m just doing my rambles. As per usual.

[velvetwyrme]

Noooooooo is that the case Starscream can’t have babies with his future shuttle bug Skyfire

Unless it’s maybe more pg like when he IS egg bound maybe when they are fertilized they stick it into still something living but like plants instead (cause meats seem like something too heavy for flying type bugs) so maybe if you know your lil screamer bug has been getting naughty and he seems pretty protective of a fruit in a tree/pot or a very plump potted plant like a succulent or cactus (for the extra protection to his babies)

That’s a good sign to not eat the fruit or touch the plant cause babies be in there.

shfkfhdkfbrk i mean ive briefly mentioned fig wasps before (in relation to waspinator lol) but im happy to leave this particular part of their life cycle ambiguous for now lolol

i do like those options though!! i actually think that seekers protectiveness of their kids would probably depend on individual subspecies/type, do you might have some that are more protective over their offspring and others that just kinda. leave them to fend for themselves (smth smth. drawing parallels to cold construction/MTOs from IDW)

[age-of-moonknight]

“Reborn,” Moon Knight: Fist of Khonshu (Vol. 2/2024), #2.

Writer: Jed MacKay; Penciler and Inker: Alessandro Cappuccio; Colorist: Rachelle Rosenberg; Letterer: Cory Petit

[real-fire-emblem-takes]

nobody talks about how peri leads an anger management support group enough

.

[qoldenskies]

“Did something happen around our fifteenth birthday?”

*sweating intensifies*

Oh dear me…. (Rubbing my hands together deviously, this is great…..not for them though)

sorry i took so long to get to this ask but i think its funnier knowing donnie is about to get flashbanged just as hard in the next part. cc!leo knows some shit he SHOULD NOT

[cosmicjoke]

I guess I should make my own post on this, since it's been brought to my attention, again. All I do is post cat pictures and videos all day, and this clown continues to have a meltdown over me saying eruri isn't canon, lol.

@tsuki-no-ura is accusing me of plagiarizing her posts, lol, which, okay. And her "proof" of this is picking out single sentences from long analyses posts I've written regarding Levi's vow to kill the Beast Titan which use similar words to some of her own posts, like "personal feelings" and "vow", and this, apparently, is concrete evidence that I've based all of my own thoughts and feelings regarding this aspect of Levi's character and story on her analyses. I can't say I'm surprised, though, given tsuki's entire MO is taking quotes and words out of context and presenting them in a vacuum to push a specific narrative and agenda. She does it with Isayama and his interviews, and even the canon material itself, so why not do the same with me and anyone else who disagrees with her?

Like the idea that Levi's choice to let Erwin die and give Armin the serum was rooted in personal feelings is an original idea that belongs only to tsuki and which has no other originating source, lol. As if, while discussing the same material, there isn't going to be some overlap in the ideas and themes discussed. And for what reason is she picking out that specific wording from my posts? Is she trying to prove that I used to agree with her and changed my mind or something? That I'm being hypocritical by acknowledging that Levi's choice was based on personal feeling while also saying that Levi didn't actively decide to choose Erwin over humanity? Like both things can't be true at the same time? As I've stated over and over, Levi made the choice he believed was morally right, both for Erwin's personal well-being and for humanity, and yes, that was a choice based on his personal feelings, because as Levi himself acknowledges, that's all anyone can ever do, is make the choice they feel is best. I've made entire posts talking about how all of Levi's choices are rooted in personal feeling. That's what his entire philosophy of no regrets is about. About making the choice you feel, in your heart, is right, whether you know it to be true or not. I've also written countless posts about one of the reasons Levi's so admired Erwin was because he believed Erwin was capable of completely removing himself and his personal feelings from the choices he made, and Levi admired that in Erwin because Levi himself has always struggled with doing the same. He thought it made Erwin a superior man to himself, that he could make decisions without letting emotion interfere. I've also made posts discussing how, in actuality, we see demonstrated through Levi this theme in AoT of how it's actually those who make choices based on compassion and emotion that can be seen as superior, because it's those who cast aside their humanity for the so-called "greater good" who actually end up destroying everything. That's a clear theme presented in AoT, and nowhere is it more clearly demonstrated than through Levi and Erwin, with Levi eventually being revealed as the superior and stronger man, not in spite of his compassion, but because of it.

But you know, tsuki ignores all of this, and all of this context, and instead highlights two or three, partial sentences from these 1500, 2000, 3000 word meta posts of mine as "proof" that I'm plagiarizing her. Keep it up tuski, you only continue to prove to all and sundry what a disingenuous, manipulative, lying clown you are, by exposing exactly how you operate. By taking single sentences, presenting them completely out of context, and using that as your evidence for whatever hair-brained theory you're presenting this time.

The stupidity is never-ending from this one, and her moronic followers are just the same. Have fun patting each other on the back for what I'm sure you've convinced yourself is a win, but only makes more obvious what a bunch of delusional, crybaby, professional victims you all are.

By the way, tsuki, everyone knows the real reason you have an issue with me is because of this post I made, what was it, more than two years ago now: https://www.tumblr.com/cosmicjoke/711701886703747072/the-problem-with-levi-and-shipping?source=share

You came onto my post to argue with me, acting as though my post was some sort of personal attack on you (shocking, given your raging victim complex, I know), when all it was was a general statement about certain trends I was seeing from the shipping communities overall, and I replied in a very cordial manner to your response, saying we mostly agreed, to which you never bothered responding, and ever since then, you've been vague posting about me on your blog, targeting every single thing I say about Levi, or Erwin, or any other aspect or character of AoT, having to contradict it, to the point of you willingly positing the most ridiculous and illogical conclusions, all in some pathological attempt to discredit me and my opinions. You're just that threatened by me, I guess, that you have to set yourself in opposition to every single opinion I have about AoT and its characters, all because I once said eruri isn't canon and anyone who analyzes AoT through a shipping lens, when nothing that happens in the story is on any level informed by fandom ships, is necessarily going to come away with a skewed understanding of the events of the story. You can't accept your own biases, and you can't accept anyone thinking differently from you, and so instead of owning up to your own failings as a person, you accuse everyone else of the most ridiculous shit imaginable, like plagiarism and Nazism, lol.

You're truly pathetic.