#'i do not believe that in the year of our lord 2023 that i would be writing destiel fanfiction in greek'

[cyclogenesis]

Adventures in reading fanfic in Greek: "fix it fic" has been transliterated wholesale rather than just translating "fix it" straight to Greek (διορθώστε το) and now I am wondering how often this happens in other languages given that most fic-related terms must have originated in English. Tbh I find this deeply charming

[butchviking]

honest to god i forget so many ppl still think being trans is smthn innate to u n something u 'figure out' rather than a decision u actively make. thats so crazy wtf do they think is inside them

[theinfinitedivides]

'start that music / in the name of the Lord' exactly what is Bollywood coming to

[wereh0gz]

If I have to hear that being queer in any way is a sin one more time I'll show you an actual sin by beating your skull in with this brick I found 😊

[solarshadow]

I have started a new cross stitch.

[slaaverin]

I love that last ask, and your reply.

Just one thing I’ve wondered since the ending of the show myself…

So, I was thinking hypothetically, that even if it was the case that jikook didn't see each other for months, if they are ‘just friends', why on earth did they need to carve out time to travel together? They could have literally just hung out in Seoul when eventually free, had dinner, drinks, gone to a gig, (I mean they did, when they went to D-Day, they hung out with Yoongi as Jimin said), like they do with others, like Jimin going to an art gallery with Joon (who he also didn't see much of in 2023).

I mean seeing as how busy they were, especially as the schedule was fit into JK's already very busy schedule (and literal release of his first solo single) squeezed in, why would it matter?

Because if they are just friends, they are no more just friends than any of the other member, or any of their other friends?

I know they made it work, by having it filmed, and had to bc of MS, and that this was planned and executed by the company, and sold to Disney as we know. It was obviously part of their chapter 2, I think spearheaded by Jimin, but it is such a major thing to do.

But, again, if they were only friends, why?

I say this also because in a majorly loud way, it marks them as different to the others. The why of it all. Why they wanted/needed to do this with each other, and only them (as was intended). Jimin spent half of 2023 saying the only members he saw were Hobi and Yoongi - which in turn made other shippers think that they are finally ready to show the world their relationship (and I mean that literally, I saw a thread about it yesterday, that in 2023 Yoongi was fulfilling Jimin's words in 'Serendipity'). I digress… but he also supported Hobi at Lola and Yoongi in Newark.

If we think about it, in real time we did not know what they were doing in NYC, and we only got fan stalker pics, nothing from them. Nothing on social media, no live. Why? Jimin went live with Yoongi, and posted pics of them on Instagram, also with Joon when they went to the art gallery. Why didn't they post or go live even if it was just him supporting JK in NYC, like he did Yoongi, and Hobi. It makes no sense if they are 'just friends, as to me, again, it marks them as different?

I can’t wrap my head around it if they are just friends (I know they aren’t in my gut), because it hits different to me.

There was another thread going round on x about unpopular opinions on them. Ridiculous thread, some comments were downright ridiculous, homophobic ( coming from supposed supporters) and typical they broke up: have never been together: are just bros… blah blah. Again, from jikookers. However there were some good takes shouting back. Especially when it comes to MS.

The enlistment then hits harder. That is so damn loud. The only idols to ever use the buddy system. To me the whole laying low in 2023 makes sense in that context. We didn’t know about the show until after their enlistment had been secured. We saw them at Yoongis concert but that was fine bc he is a member, they were with Tae. They were in NY we didn’t know why, until we got that infamous back selca, we had nothing. Then boom, what followed a year ago in 10 days is something none of us saw coming. The fact they left everyone behind but each other, is loud. It’s so loud it’s hard tk believe it’s real. Again, to me in this scenario and with them being who they are, this was so meaningful. If they were ‘just friends’ why? There was no need. Especially seeing how again, from our perspective and the fandom at large they were distant in 23, didn’t see each other, then bam. They enlisted?

What in the world?

It should be lorded over, protected too, and shouted from the rooftops. But I know, like you said, it’s safer this way. For us who see it to protect them. To celebrate them quietly.

You see that's something that has always been striking to me.

The fact that Jimin or Jungkook have no trouble sharing some of their outings or interaction with other members but somehow when it comes to the two of them it's always a bit more "hush hush" meaning they don't really show it and we often have to learn it from other people.

Why the need for this kind of privacy if they are just friends? It's doesn't make sense.

It seems that their time together is something precious to them, something they cherish. You cherish the things you love.

So that's very telling.

Once again with enlistement it's everything we need to know.

To discuss that kind of commitment you have to see each other and communicate a lot, plan, think, talk. It's not a small things. So god knows how many times they have seen each other without anyone knowing.

The fact they don't really need us to know it shows it's not really about public image or their colleague realtionship. It was a deeply private and personal decision.

As I said before all of them are friends. They could have enlisted with anyone in the group, or alone, but they didn't.

It shows the strength and commitment to their relationship, which is obviously more deep that what's going on with the group and the public.

Honestly even if we were pretty sure about jikook since all these years for me there was still a bit of healthy skepticism you know like "maybe we're just...wrong?" 😂 but damn when the annoucement for enlistement came it just comfirmed everything in a very solid way. The way it all played out, it was clear that their feelings run deeper than simple friendship. It's way, way more. Because this is simply a huge decision to make.

And the way they talked about it in AYS "I'm not worried about us fighting" do you get the level of connexion to make a statement like this? Once again, huge.

Ah I simply have zero doubts in my mind. Like, they did everything, they told everything that show the amount of love and commitment they have for each other.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and take care 💜

[imagopirateversion]

It’s a Pirate Life for Me!

Why I am an adult who still believes in the pirate philosophy and is not willing to change.

An essay by: a person who really hopes future employers will never find this, but will still put their name at the end of it.

Painting credits: Pirate Boarding, Andrey Serebryakov

Can One Still Call Themselves A Pirate in the Twenty-First Century?

There are two answers to that question, and both of them are "yes".

Pirates do actually exist today: there were around 120 incidents of maritime piracy and armed robbery against ships reported in 2023 and around 115 in 2022 (source x). So yes, one can define themselves a pirate in the twenty-first century in a very literal sense; which is not what I'm trying to do here, of course.

While the world has changed and piracy has (almost) ceased to exist, thanks to stories, legends and media, the idea of piracy has become completely detached from the practice. This has led to a concept of "piracy" that has very little to do with sailing, stealing, and killing, and a lot more to do with what most things become over time: philosophy.

What no longer exists in practice in our era (and sometimes what never existed at all) has become a way of living: think about cowboys, goths, hippies, punks and so on. All these things are much more than aesthetics: each one has its own vision, its own practices, its own style, its own way of living; in other words, its own philosophy.

This text is about pirate philosophy and its origins.

First Things First: Why Did People Become Pirates?

Piracy did not appear out of nowhere in 1600; it's ancient and we have proofs of it existing as a practice since ancient Egypt (read more here). We automatically think of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries when we talk about piracy because that period is known as the Golden Age of Piracy. Precisely between 1650 and 1730, there were thousands of active pirates, some of them infamously notorious, as Henry Morgan, Captain Kidd, Calico Jack, Bartholomew Roberts and, of course, Blackbeard himself. But why did that happen? Well, the answer is complex but can be easily summed up in a single word: money. The world was changing, and as Lord Cutler Beckett explains so brilliantly in Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest: currency was becoming the currency of the country, especially in England. Ruthless landowners forced small farmers to leave their lands, while smaller tradesmen were challenged by larger businesses. Everyone wanted more, and those who couldn't adapt to the new world's rules became unemployed and were forced to move to urban areas to look for work or poor relief. The cities became overpopulated and soon there weren't funds left: distressed people had no hope of making a better life (source x). For this people, piracy was nothing more than a way out: it was either submit to the new society and starve to death, or rebel and survive. What would you have done?

What Kind of People Became Pirates?

Piracy soon became the best choice for many people. Not only for unemployed men who couldn't find a better way to survive, but also for those who, for various reasons, couldn't fit in. people who couldn't conform to societal norms weren't just discriminated against or isolated, they were often killed. That's why, even though piracy wasn't an easy life at all, many people preferred it. So, who were the pirates?

Sailors usually didn't make enough money to survive, and the discipline was extremely strict. Many of them ended up starving, getting sick, and dying. It's not surprising that many chose to become criminals and sail as pirates (source x).

Teenagers, often orphans with no money or future. Young men might have to endure seven-year apprenticeships before they could make an independent living, while piracy offered them a way to earn money quickly (source x).

Rebellious against the oppressive conditions imposed by their governments, specially from the Navy.

People discriminated because of their race. Black people in particular often had no social opportunities all, but could find acceptance within pirate crews, where camaraderie transcended racial or ethnic differences.

People with a religious belief that was considered heretical or nonconformist by the mainstream society could often find themselves persecuted. Pirate crews comprised members from diverse religious backgrounds and were generally more tolerant of religious differences.

People with a criminal background, who were offered an opportunity to start anew and be part of a community, two things that the civilized society couldn't give them.

Queer people, particularly homosexual men. Homosexuality was a crime at the time, often viewed as negatively as piracy, if not worse. Piracy was a male-dominated world; although for a long time media tried to portray pirates as "turning" gay due to the absence of women among them, the truth is that many gay men were pirates because they were gay. Homosexuality was so common among pirates that they had something very similar to same-sex marriage. It was called "matelotage": a legal civil union that bound two sailors together in an informal partnership, uniting one's fortune and future to the other's, and was respected by ship captains and pirate crews (source x).

Women. The majority of pirates were men, but not all of them. In a world that was not at all kind to young girls and women in general, it was not uncommon for them to disguise themselves as men or marry a pirate in order to become one. There have been notorious women pirates, some of them captains, such as Zheng Yi Sao or Huang Bamei (source x).

In short, outcasts. Individuals rejected by society, unable to find their place, and unwilling to conform to strict societal rules.

The Adventurers

There were a few people, a minority of course, who willingly chose piracy even though they had a normal, conforming, and even wealthy life. It's the case of Stede Bonnet, The Gentleman Pirate; he was born into a wealthy English family and inherited the family estate after his father's death in 1694. Despite his lack of sailing experience, Bonnet decided he should turn to piracy in the spring of 1717. He bought a sailing vessel, the Revenge, and travelled with his paid crew, capturing other vessels and burning other Barbadian ships. His story, apart from giving us one of the best pirate stories in the history of media, is significant because it provides evidence that piracy wasn't just about necessity; it was about identity. Piracy had become a way of life long before it was romanticized by the media.

The Pirate Life

What was it about pirate life that was so tempting for so many people? Life on a ship wasn't easy at all; the work was tough, the food was poor, and anyone could die at any moment, whether due to illness, sinking, or murder. Nevertheless, there was something that made it all worthwhile: freedom. People who have had no possibilities nor future in society found in piracy the opportunity to live by their own rules. Civilization's norms had no reason to exist in an uncivilized society; no master telling you what to do, no morality, no societal standards, no need to impress or perform. If you wanted something, you simply had to find a way to get it. That meant you could possibly starve to death, but it also meant that you had a chance of getting everything you had ever desired, and eating and drinking until you died, and in the civilized society you didn't have that chance. You could choose to sail and never touch land again; you could choose to marry or not to marry, to have a family or not to have one, to sleep with whomever you wanted to, to practice your religion. You could change your name and be who you wanted to be. Pirate life was the realization of that question most of us have asked ourselves at least once: 'What if I disappear tomorrow and start all over again somewhere else?'.

Piracy in the Modern World

In our eastern, civilized, technological, capitalist society, we don't need to be part of a crew and sail to be pirates. Piracy as a practice was defeated thanks to pirate hunting in the eighteenth century, but you can't kill an idea, can you? Ideas not only persist, they evolve and adapt to the changes they're forced to face. When we say "pirate" in today's world, we mean a lot of different things:

Sea Pirate: a person who attacks and robs ships at sea;

Software Pirate: a person who appropriates or reproduces the work of another for profit without permission, usually in contravention of patent or copyright;

In Italy, we have a way to describe people who ignore the Traffic Laws, 'pirata della strada', literally 'pirate of the street';

In sexual slang, the word 'pirate' is used to define someone who sleeps around, who constantly looks for casual sex.

The term 'ass pirate' has been used as a slur to describe homosexual men.

In short, the term in today's society is used to describe someone who breaks the rules, whether they are actual laws or societal standards.

If we consider everything piracy represents as a concept, as an idea, in modern society, and put it together, we can sum it up in three words:

Freedom, Anarchy, Resistance.

Freedom

'Freedom' is such an abstract concept it is almost impossible to define. It's widely discussed in philosophy, particularly the question: is it possible to be truly free? As soon as we built a society, in order to gain benefits, we had to partially sacrifice our freedom. We can't freely steal from our neighbors, but in doing so, we ensure our neighbors won't steal from us (at least, we hope). It's a simple concept. However, there's a line beyond which the benefits we gain aren't worth the sacrifices we make to obtain them. This has occurred repeatedly throughout history; it happened in the Golden Age of Piracy, and it was the reason why most of people chose to abandon civilization and sail as pirates, and it continues to happen every day. Whenever a social construct, or sometimes even a law, prevents you from simply existing as a person; whenever your future is dictated by your social status; whenever you're denied free time, enjoyment, rest, and happiness because you have to work ten hours a day just to be paid the minimum wage, if you're lucky enough to live in a country that has one. That isn't a freedom you willingly gave away to have a benefit. It's a freedom someone took from you before you were even born, before you could think and understand that just because everyone acts like it's the normal way of living, it doesn't mean it has to be that way.

Anarchy

It is true that, at least concerning crews, pirate society had a sort of hierarchy, in which the Captain of the ship was at the top. However, it is also true that this hierarchy could collapse at any given moment, considering the possibility of a mutiny, and that, in general, pirate society was anarchic. There has been research on the functioning of pirate society, particularly regarding its potential application in a hypothetical modern society where the value of human life and individual needs are more considered than they were during that era. Most of the work in that sense has been done by Peter Lamborn Wilson in his 1995 book 'Pirate Utopias: Moorish Corsairs & European Renegadoes'. He provides a definition of what he calls 'Pirate Utopias', that are described as "Early forms of autonomous proto-anarchist societies in that they operated beyond the reach of governments and embraced unrestricted freedom" (source x). I highly recommend reading his work and all the other research that followed it if you want to go into detail, because that's not what I'm going to do here (for now).

That being said, this is my personal take on the matter:

In our days, the discussion about Anarchy as a political belief is often ridiculed and reduced to a mere "if there were no rules, people would kill each other". That statement is true; people would. What is usually misunderstood and not taken into consideration is that people who profess to believe in Anarchy do not mean we should abolish every existing law overnight and see what happens. With 'Anarchy,' we mean a hypothetical society in which individuals are free to do as they please, and they willingly choose not to kill, steal, and hurt others because they have no interest in doing so. This hypothetical society is, of course, unachievable; it's what is called a utopia.

Most political beliefs are based on utopias (or dystopias, depending on your vision of them), because a society that strictly adheres to a pure political system is impossible to achieve. There cannot be a perfect socialist society, nor a perfect communist one, nor a perfect capitalist one, and of course, there cannot be a perfect anarchist society. What we can do, though, is aspire to one—or, to use a naval metaphor, we can set the course towards it. We can make decisions, take actions, and build societies around a specific vision.

The western society, for example, tends to a capitalistic system; in brief, money is what our society revolves around. The more money you possess, the more power you wield; your ultimate goal in life must be to gain money so that you can afford basic necessities: food, housing, healthcare and so on. Everything is privatized, leading to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, being exploited by people whose only purpose is to become even more rich. Consequently, you are forced to wake up every morning at 6 am to work ten-hour shifts for minimum wage. Don't like it? You're free not to live in the capitalist society. You'll probably starve to death, end up living on the street, be marginalized, isolated, persecuted, but still. You're "free" to do it. Of course, this is not a "perfect" capitalist society, it can't be; not until Democracy exists, not until Resistance exists. Still, our society tends towards it.

'Anarchy' doesn't mean we should live in a society with no rules; it simply means we should strive towards it and build a society that is as similar as possible to that utopia, prioritizing the freedom of the individual, but without causing collapse.

Resistance

Most pirates were hardly educated enough to even understand all of that as a concept, of course. They didn't fight for a political idea, most of them fought to survive. Even though it wasn't a utopian society, they still had a shared belief: dissent. Being an outcast means to be disillusioned in how 'mainstream' society works, and we know most of them were, considering their social background. Piracy was, in its own way, a movement of resistance.

Times have changed, and we don't have to engage in naval battles to resist. As society evolved, resistance as a practice evolved with it, and hence Western society has become less and less violent, as have the harmless but powerful acts of resistance.

Every time you protest, you are resisting. Every time you talk back, you expose a normalized injustice, you rebel towards an unfair authority, you say 'no', you go against what's expected from you, you are unapologetically yourself, you refuse to adapt, you decide to ignore or bypass a senseless law, you are resisting. Every time you prioritize your free time over money, you challenge beauty standards, you don't accept a 'that's how it was always done' as a justification. Even when you have fun harder than how you're supposed to, when you rejoice louder than how's considered appropriate, every time you dance like no one is watching you, you are, somehow, resisting.

Piracy in Media

Much of our perception of things we haven't directly experienced is filtered and conditioned by media. Even when we study historical periods like the Medieval Age or the Roman Empire, a part of our understanding will always be influenced by the media we've consumed about them. This is because media is often how we were introduced to these subjects: you can get very passionate about Indiana Jones, and so get interested in studying the pyramids and ancient Egypt, only to find out pyramids are nothing like it was portrayed in the movies. Nevertheless, you got interested in studying them in the first place because of Indiana Jones, so as much as you understand and accept that that isn't the truth behind ancient Egypt, you can also accept that Indiana Jones is part of your vision of it, and that cannot change. I know Pirates of the Caribbean isn't historically accurate, as much as Our Flag Means Death and Monkey Island aren't; still, I cannot deny that they have a role in creating a general vision of Pirate Philosophy in the modern world.

There are, in my opinion, three main aspects that come out from the combination of what we know about Piracy as a historical reality and as it's portrayed by media, and those are Hedonism, Nomadism and Camaraderie.

Hedonism

Hedonism is defined as 'the prioritization of pleasure in one's lifestyle, actions, or thoughts'. It's a recurring theme in the portrayal of pirate society; from songs, to movies where Tortuga is depicted as a place where people drink, eat, have sex and fight as they please, to legends that speak of treasures to be found so one can live a life of excess.

The reason for this is related to what we already know about the history of pirates, particularly the society they escaped from. The society of the seventeenth century was extremely strict, both morally and legislatively. Sex outside of marriage was out of the question, and many things that we consider normal today were seen as affronts to decency, often punishable. To be considered a respectable man or woman, one had to follow certain rules. Additionally, many pirates came from backgrounds of extreme poverty, making them prone to indulging in every kind of pleasure when they could.

Hedonism isn't just a perpetual search for pleasure; it's actually an ethical philosophy that is grounded in pleasure (defined as the avoidance of pain as much as possible) as the only intrinsic value and therefore the only reasonable expression of ethical good. This philosophy of life can be easily connected to the anarchist society that we described earlier; a society that doesn't have rules and in which you don't have a 'place' or need to 'contribute,' since your only purpose as an individual is to pursue pleasure.

I personally believe in Hedonism as an ethical philosophy, particularly Psychological Hedonism, as much as my research of pleasure doesn't prevail on someone else's.

Nomadism

One of the things that fascinated me the most about the Pirate Life as portrayed in media, was the idea of embarking on a journey that would never end. Our society is a stationary one, and I actually think there's nothing wrong with that. My perspective on this matter has nothing to do with morality, ideology, or politics. Being stationary is good; the human species would have never evolved if it didn't stop and build the world as we know it. This is simply a personal preference and stems from my absolute intolerance and repulsion at the idea of being born and dying in the same place. I've always yearned to explore, to see as much of the world as I could. The concept of 'borders' has always bothered me; I firmly believe in cultural exchanges and in learning about how other human beings live in different parts of the world. Of course, I acknowledge that without nations, traditions, and populations that are local and bound to their territories, there wouldn't even be cultures to discover or different societies to explore. So, this is about me, not a hypothetical, utopian society. I'm the one who always wanted to travel without ever stopping; I've never felt like I belonged in any one place or that there's a good enough reason to settle in a single nation and miss out on all that there is to see out there.

Camaraderie

Pirates encompassed men and women with all different kinds of backgrounds, nationalities, beliefs, ideologies and identities. While we speak in absolutes, in a society with no moral or legislative boundaries, factors such as who you were, where you came from, who you slept with, or what you believed in simply didn't matter. You were a pirate, and that was enough.

The official definition of camaraderie is:

"A feeling of friendliness towards people that you work or share an experience with".

In this case, we could even say "towards people that you share a lifestyle with". Being realistic, in a historically accurate pirate society, it's plausible that hate towards differences and minorities still existed, considering the strict and mentally bigoted society most pirates came from. However, we're talking about individuals who chose to leave that society, probably because of its strict and mentally bigoted nature. It's reasonable to assert that this particular kind of hate was at least less prevalent in the pirate society than outside of it.

Piracy in media undoubtedly plays a significant role in romanticizing the sense of brotherhood and companionship felt among pirates; we saw Pirate Codes, Brethren Courts, battles in the name of a common ideal, epic friendships and romances, songs that speak of a union strong enough to beat death itself and slogan such as "Long Live Piracy!".

What attracts me the most about it is that camaraderie as a concept exists in basically all societies or communities with a shared aim or belief. However, there are always rules that need to be followed, and the risk of being excluded and losing the privilege of deserving such camaraderie is always present. The idea of fidelity toward one's society, community, or even nation is essential for its survival, ensuring that those in power maintain control over their adherents, citizens, or believers. The pirate society is the only one I've stumbled across that doesn't need it. The feeling of brotherhood within these people doesn't need any kind of loyalty, proper rules or the fear of losing privileges to make sure that the community keeps existing. That's because the pirate society is made up of people who have already betrayed, renounced, and lost all of their privileges to be there. All they have is that sense of brotherhood and friendship. They exist in a reality in which none of them belongs anywhere and that, somehow, becomes a sense of belonging; one that doesn't need to be continuously shown or respected, simply because it's the only thing that keeps them there.

I believe that is the only reality in which camaraderie and freedom can coexist in a society, and I think it's one of the most beautiful and powerful concepts I've ever seen portrayed.

Conclusions

We finally arrived at the end of this... yeah, let's call it 'essay'. It was more than two weeks ago when I wrote the first word. It was meant to be brief and simply a way to put in words an intimate belief. I wasn't sure if I wanted to post it, mostly because I rarely share such deep thoughts with people around me; though, I'm trying to change that. As all human beings I strive to find belonging and as a true pirate, I never found anywhere to do so. So, to find but one person who reads this until the end and finds themselves to agree with my view, it would make me immeasurably happy.

Thank you if you made it this far, even if you don't agree with a single word I've written, because you dedicated part of your time to me, and I appreciate it.

If you find syntactic errors, please consider that english isn't my first language and also that grammar is a made up concept anyway.

Don't forget to be free, to resist, to pursue pleasure as much as you can, to explore and to show camaraderie not because you have to, but for the sake of it.

Fair winds t' ye!

Imago

[indigovigilance]

Sodom and Gomorrah: A Speculative Meta

on Ao3: Sodom and Gomorrah: A Speculative Meta

Sodom and Gomorrah is the story of a land so steeped in sin that many prayed to God for intercession, and God sent two angels to see for themselves if the rumors were true, and determine based on their testimony whether the cities should be destroyed.

In Season 1, we learn that Sandolphon was there, doing a lot of smiting and turning people into salt. The way that Aziraphale talks about it, we are led to believe that he was there too, bearing unhappy witness to the destruction, his plastered-on smile faltering as his vision fades into the middle distance:

In this meta I am taking an alternate stance to the wonderfully presented interpretation by @queerfables in my speculation of what happened in Sodom and its relevance to the GO story arc overall, if canonized. I hope that readers will consider the merits of both arguments in their own formulations of Aziraphale and Heaven in the GO universe.

TW: discussions of homophobia, sexual assault, death & destruction

Verses are taken from this translation of Genesis, chapters 18 and 19.

Genesis 18

20 Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous

21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”

(Notably, the allegations made against Sodom and Gomorrah are never discussed. It is simply left at “sin so grievous.” Though it seems like there may be more information in Genesis 12)

But God herself did not go down to Sodom, instead sending two angels. I, like queerfables, read this and quickly came to the conclusion that for GO narrative purposes, the two angels that God sent to Sodom were Aziraphale and Sandolphon, where the former is playing tour guide to the latter, who has the real authority in the situation.

Upon arrival, the angels are met by Lot; he invites them to stay with him. At first they refuse, saying they will stay in the square, but he insists.

Genesis 19

4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 

5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we may know [have sex with] them.”

There is a lot of baggage to unpack from these two lines, especially in the 2023 context of politics in the Western hemisphere. Same-sex marriage is nearly ubiquitous, a near turnaround from only twenty years ago, but so is homophobic rhetoric, and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is cited a lot for those purposes. Intersectional communities of faith have done a lot of work to try to reinterpret these two verses, insisting that what God finds so abhorrent about the actions of the men of Sodom is not that they are homosexual but rather that they are attempting to gang-rape two newly arrived strangers in their city.

For the real world, this is a very important discussion and a solid position to maintain, if one wishes to defend the concept of a benevolent God who made homosexual, bisexual, transgender, and every other flavor of human as lovingly and intentionally as was made every cisgender heterosexual person.

But we’re not talking about real-world God. We’re talking about the God in Good Omens. And She is not a very nice person. 

We have only to look at the contract that would allow the murder and then replacement of Job’s children, or the abject poverty under which Elspeth suffers that forces her to commit [apparent] atrocities, and ultimately drive her to attempt suicide. Whatever your feelings may be about the God of our shared meatspace, the God of Good Omens is not a character we are meant to admire, sympathize with, or make excuses for.

Returning to Sodom in the Good Omens universe.

I propose that it is thematically in keeping that the men of Sodom were not attempting to commit gangrape, but rather, they saw Sandolphon and fell in love on the spot. Because yes, Aziraphale is a fine scholarly-looking fellow, but it’s approximately 2000 B.C., the Bronze Age. Sodom and Gomorrah are most likely agrarian societies, and Sandolphon looks like he could throw a bale of hay like a javelin. He’s a whole lot of man, and the men of Sodom are into it. I mean, c'mon, Paul Chahidi in some biblical garb, is, uhh...

...not an eyesore, iykwim. [image source: imdb.com]

So they go to Lot’s house and ask if they can see this man, in hopes that they can ask him on a date. They are smitten by Sandolphon. Sure, the ultimate goal may be to have sex with them, but not right there on Lot’s doorstep, and the gross misquoting can be attributed to Sandolphon’s own libelous report of events, not to the Sodomites themselves. History is written by the victors, after all.

While we’re at it, let’s consider Lot’s response:

Genesis 19

6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 

7 and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. 

8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”

In the true spirit of Good Omens comedy, I can envision Lot walking out among these men, complaining that not one of them has asked permission to court or marry either of his daughters of maritable age, and perhaps rather than simping for his houseguest, perhaps they would consider dating one of them instead. Is it homophobic? Sure, but I’m not here to defend Lot; he doesn’t need it. Because standing next to Sandolphon, he’s an absolute poppet.

(The remaining stanzas regarding the Sodomites breaking into Lot’s house, I am going to selectively set aside and chalk that up to Sandolphon blowing some Sodomite choice statements about Lot being a homophobic asshole way out of proportion.)

Sandolphon, a True Believer, is not about to stand for this insult to his heavenly purity. Angels do not have relations with humans, and to insinuate that he would even consider it is blasphemy. He takes it as a personal insult that the Sodomites would propose such a thing. He finds this to be evidence enough that the Sodomites are truly corrupt and worthy of destruction.

I feel the need to emphasize here that while this contains some distinctly queer themes, Sandolphon is not angry because they are men; he is angry because they are human, a different species from himself (in the same way that angels are different species from demons), and furthermore that anything resembling love the way humans do it is disgusting and vile to him.

Aziraphale, meanwhile, is standing helplessly on the sidelines, desperately trying and failing to de-escalate the situation. But it’s no use, Sandolphon has already made up his mind. There’s nothing left for Aziraphale to do but to try to save as many people as he can, beginning with Lot and his family.

Genesis 19

12 The two [angels] said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 

13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”

Again, in the fashion that GO takes liberty with biblical narrative, I propose that it is Aziraphale alone who warns Lot that Sandolphon will destroy Sodom come sunrise, and sends him out into the night to gather his family and get them out as quickly as possible. I propose, additionally, that Aziraphale is the one who leads Lot and his daughters by the hand out of Sodom and then protects the village of Zoar from destruction so that they can take shelter there.

Genesis 19:

15 With the coming of dawn, the angels urged Lot, saying, “Hurry! Take your wife and your two daughters who are here, or you will be swept away when the city is punished.”

16 When he hesitated, the [angels] grasped his hand and the hands of his wife and of his two daughters and led them safely out of the city, for the Lord was merciful to them.

17 As soon as they had brought them out, one of them said, “Flee for your lives! Don’t look back, and don’t stop anywhere in the plain! Flee to the mountains or you will be swept away!”

18 But Lot said to them, “No, my lords,[or singular, lord] please! 

19 Your[singular] servant has found favor in your[singular] eyes, and you[singular] have shown great kindness to me in sparing my life. But I can’t flee to the mountains; this disaster will overtake me, and I’ll die. 

20 Look, here is a town near enough to run to, and it is small. Let me flee to it—it is very small, isn’t it? Then my life will be spared.”

21 He said to him, “Very well, I will grant this request too; I will not overthrow the town you speak of. 

22 But flee there quickly, because I cannot do anything until you reach it.” (That is why the town was called Zoar.[“small”])

While yes, this is a fictional interpretation of a biblical scripture, let’s take something from the fact that Lot is supposed to be addressing two angels, but the pronouns he uses to do so are all singular in the original Hebrew: that is to say, it seems like he is only talking to one angel. So in the victor-edited retrospective, the story is written to seem like two angels were rescuing him, but from the faithfully quoted words of his own mouth, it was only one. It seems like Sandolphon tried to write himself in as one of the good guys but couldn't bring himself to actually change the words that were coming from Lot's mouth. (Again, this is unnecessary work to do for the biblical narrative to be molded to a GO narrative, but it is an interesting feature of the original text nonetheless.)

At sunrise, the destruction begins: 

Genesis 19

23 By the time Lot reached Zoar, the sun had risen over the land.

24 Then the Lord rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah—from the Lord out of the heavens.

25 Thus [S]he overthrew those cities and the entire plain, destroying all those living in the cities—and also the vegetation in the land. 

26 But Lot’s wife looked back, and she became a pillar of salt.

So goes the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah: The cities are slandered before God, who sends Aziraphale and Sandolphon to investigate; Sandolphon is so incensed by human men flirting with him that he determines that the city shall be destroyed in the morning, and Aziraphale races against the clock to save as many as he can, knowing that he cannot save everyone. He bears witness as the men who resemble himself so much, who committed no greater crime than to seek out a forbidden love, perish in a rain of fire and brimstone. He must feign heavenly delight that a sinful blight was erased from the world, while mourning thousands of lost souls. He wonders if they have been sent to Hell. Even Lot’s wife, whose only crime was to question, to wonder what is behind her and perhaps regret leaving it behind, is turned to salt. He sees the vicious glee of Sandolphon exacting his revenge for the crime of impugning his celestial celibacy. He wonders what Sandolphon would do to him if he ever found out about the stirrings in his heart for a demon who, 500 years prior, had sat beside him on a rock, looking out over sea, comforting him as he nursed his wounded faith. He wonders just how far along with Heaven he can go, and what the consequences will be when he dares to say, “I will go no further.”

~~~

[image source: Wessex Archaeology]

For those who (like me) are interested, the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah seems to have been merged from two historical events, which was common in a period preserved primarily by oral history. The tale seems to resemble a volcanic event that occurred nearby and around that time, but Sodom and Gomorrah were most likely destroyed by an earthquake and a subsequent flood, since they were located in the Jordan Plain, the lowest dry land in the world, a full quarter of a mile below sea level at its lowest, and very near the Dead Sea. Additionally, the area is rich in bitumen, sulfur-rich near-surface petroleum deposits that, when disturbed by a major earthquake, may have sent hot tar flying into the air, which if it landed on anything flammable would give the impression that fire and brimstone were raining down.

✨ the more you know ✨

~~~

Blending together the biblical canon and archaeological speculation, I'm going to make a wild, unsubstantiated proposal that Crowley turns the people of Sodom into fish so that they survive the flood. Because one biblical flood was enough, and he'd heard around the water cooler that She had promised not to do that again (lying liar). This creates a tentative connection with the raining fish we see in the title credits of both seasons, and I'm also going to reference it in an upcoming meta.

[livingasaghost]

it's actually sooo annoying that there are now shows like our flag means death that are like so queer friendly and are literally built around queer identity and queer romance because the creators are mostly all queer or queer-adjacent and so those stories get told (mostly) the way they deserve, with real queer plots and payoff and it's a new phenomenon!!! like just by making a few heartstoppers or a couple good omens my brain has now started to believe that we can have queer media! and i seem to forget that for the early half of my life any and all queer shipping in media was delusional and unlikely and never going to happen. because there are shows like loki that are not made for queer people and it's actually the norm! it's always been like this! and yet the queer audience are the driving force behind the whole fucking show and it's like we've timetravelled back to 2011 when you could only HC a gay ship bc there's no way it would ever be real on screen. and it's like okay! i get it! you don't want two guys kissing on a disney show! but you're telling me you don't even kIND OF get some fruity vibes from those two guys??? like it's so insane to think that if another studio headed up the loki show or if they'd hired (more?) queer writers or they had the freedom and capacity to do it Less Disney it could have been something else? like god that's so sad and unfair and it's no wonder being queer was so hard and sad when i was growing up like even if you saw the Queerness in some piece of media, the creators would turn right around and gaslight you and tell you that you're insane to believe you see a glint in the eyes of two men and now in the year of our lorde 2023 i have to admit that i finally finally understand the johnlock shippers and oh my god guys you were so brave wtf

[suchagallabitch]

🫵weekly wednesday tag 🫵

omg I (simple old me?) have been bestowed upon the honour of coming up with these questions??? i would like to thank the academy for this most sacred honour 😋

1. if you could switch bodies with anybody for only one hour who would it be and what would you do? I think I gotta say taylor swift OBVI. first off im gonna dropping ME! acoustic version. Then I’m gonna hope lover deluxe is already recorded, drop that. If not i will make sure to text Jack and tell him that we need to record it so that i get it either way 😼. Then I would find out the definite truth of what happened between her and Karlie Kloss. I’d wire myself (as in me- me) a few million dollars, pet the cats and then post something really random on her instagram story. Literally want to make the public go absolutely bananas trying to figure out why taylor posted a random twitter meme. I have a lot of faith to believe this could all happen in an hour but I would try. SO hard.

2. whats your most trivial / dumbest hot take?I don’t think we should still be discovering animals. like what do you mean in the year of our lord 2023 we are STILL finding animals?? no they should all be discovered and if they havent been then i think they should stay undiscovered.

3. if you had to teach a college course what would it be in? I feel like we’re all expecting me to say something Taylor related but honestly I could teach a masterclass on the psychology of Ryan Murphy. I hate that man and i have so much to say about him and his productions

4. season 12 of shameless is suddenly happen and youve been put in charge! what plot point(s) are you gonna make happen? I cant think of anything substantial to actually contribute but i want Carl Gallagher to have a fruity little vape. I also want to see him quit the force and flourish in a new job!

5. who would be your godly parent? (can be any mythology). I’m gonna go with greeks as a Percy Jackson stan. I asked my bsf who is an expert in greek mythology. She said: “you’re a Aphrodite child cuz you’re a hopeless romantic and you appreciate beauty. You’re very particular in how you’re viewed and how everything you produce is viewed (what you write, how your feed looks like, etc.)” - I’m gonna have to agree with her on Aphrodite

6. what’s something you love about yourself? I think i’m so very very funny

7. describe your day in 5 emojis: 😴👁️👩‍💻✈️☕️

8. what shameless character do you think you could beat in a fight? Realistically i think the ONLY person i could beat in a fight is Liam and honest to god im not even sure i could.

9. tell us 2 truths and a lie, we’ll try to guess the lie!

- I’m double jointed

- I sleep on the left side of the bed

- I’ve never had pumpkin pie

10. do you have a pet(s). if so how did they get their name? I do! my son (cat) is named Chidi after the good place!

11. show us a meme (or picture) that captures your essence

self explanatory.

12. whats your typical coffee / tea / beverage order? see i gotta have a special lil drinky drink everyday and i mean my little drinky drinks are free so i am likw 80% gingerbread chai at any given time. Alternatively, an iced chestnut praline latte w/ praline cold foam.

13. use a song to describe the last 5 years of your life?

2019- its nice to have a friend- taylor swift

2020- ribs - lorde

2021- nothing new - taylor swift

2022- first love / late spring- mitski OR orlando- leith ross

2023- true blue - boygenuis OR now that we don’t talk - taylor swift.

Thank you friends thats all i got :)

I Tag: @deedala @darlingian @michellemisfit @mybrainismelted @too-schoolforcool @gallawitchxx @gardenerian @sam-loves-seb @thisdivorce @xninetiestrendx @scarcrosseduntouched @juliakayyy @y0itsbri @grumble-fish @grumpymickmilk @transmickey @surviving-maybe @metalheadmickey @heymrspatel @auds-and-evens @deathclassic @flamingbluepanda @crossmydna @sleepyfacetoughguy @vintagelacerosette @depressedstressedlemonzest @thepupperino @squidyyy23 @energievie 🫶🫶

[ashenprofessor]

Celebrating TOA and the people who contribute to make our group what it is.

Repost, don't reblog. Only fill in what you feel comfortable sharing!

Happy anniversary, TOA! Here's to many more years spent together.

Name: Rua

Pronouns: they/he

Birthday (no year): 02/10 (I share my birth with Kaze and am also a twin!)

Where are you from? What is your time zone? From UK, GMT

How long is your roleplay experience? however long Byleth has been in TOA

How were you introduced to roleplaying as a whole? tbh, I'm not even sure. Just found TOA somehow despite not really being a tumblr user and yeah... here I am.

How were you introduced to TOA? see above answer

Do you have any pets? Yes. A black void cat who's mine and family dog.

What is your favorite time of year and why?(Season, holiday, general period) Autumn because the temperatures mean can snuggle up with games/book/videos but not freeze your ass off. Plus autumn colour is so pretty.

What is your IRL occupation? Structural Engineer

Some interests and things you like/enjoy? I like fantasy and sci-fi books, playing boardgames and rock climbing.

What non-Fire Emblem games do you play? Kingdom hearts, Professor Layton, Persona, Yakuza (Like a dragon), Pokemon, Final Fantasy, lot's of games really 😅

Favorite Pokemon type & Pokemon: Dark type. Lycanrock (Duskform)

Tell us some funfacts and trivia about yourself! I'm a black belt in taekwondo, I like to crochet and I've just started learning drums.

How did you get into Fire Emblem? I bought Awakening after watching a top 10 3ds games video where it was described as 3d chess. Played a bit then got very invested in Fates as it was releasing. Bought my copy birthright with first ever paycheck.

What Fire Emblem games have you played? Engage, 3Houses and 3Hopes, Fates, Awakening, Echoes, Warriors (started), Fire Emblem Binding Blade (Currently playing)

First & Favorite Fire Emblem games: first was technically Awakening but I didn't finish it till 2023. First finished was 3 houses. My favourite? Either fates or 3 Houses.

List your 5 favorite Fire Emblem characters across the series! Byleth, Shez, Kaze, Dimitri, Xander

Who was the first character ever to make you go “ooh I like this one in particular” and why? Can be any context and reason! Dimitri for his story arc. And eyepatch. And later hairstyle.

Any Fire Emblem crushes?

If you’ve played (or are familiar with) the following games, who was your first S support? Who would you S support nowadays?- Awakening:- Fates:- Three Houses:- Engage:

Favorite Fire Emblem class?

If you were a Fire Emblem character, what would be your class and stats? Would you be playable? Ninja or tactician.

If you were a Three Houses character, what would be your affiliation? (Black Eagles, Blue Lions, Golden Deer, Church of Seiros, Those Who Slither in the Dark, unaffiliated civilian, other - for example Almyran) Blue Lions

If you were an Officers Academy student, what would be your boons, banes and potential budding talent? Boon: Reason Bane: Heavy Armour. Budding Talent: Gauntlets

If you were an Engage character, which nation would you originate from? (Firene, the Kingdom of Abundance; Brodia, the Kingdom of Might; Elusia, the Kingdom of Knowledge; Solm, the Queendom of Freedom; Lythos, the holy land of the Divine Dragon; Gradlon, the desolate land of the Fell Dragon)

How do you pronounce TOA? T-O-A

Current TOA muses: Byleth

Past TOA muses? Chrom, Shez, Dimitri

Who was your first TOA muse? If you no longer have them, can you see yourself picking them up again? Byleth. Don't think I could ever drop them.

Do you believe you have a type of character you gravitate towards writing? Mostly with MC as less anxiety of getting the portrayal or lore/canon wrong. I do like Lords too.

Do you have characters or types of characters you don’t think you can handle writing, but wish you could? I wish I could write a soft/tragic character which people would love/protect. Or a complete arsehole but I always feel bad being too mean.

What kind of scenes, situations etc do you believe you enjoy writing the most? I've really enjoyed writing pokemon AUs and word count challenges.

Do you have any scenario in mind for your muse(s) that gets you thinking “man I hope I get to write this one day”? Maybe some other type of AU which aligns with other interests like Persona/KH/ Camp Half-blood etc.

Favorite TOA-related memories? Just the love and support from everyone here and the fun we all have together hyping each other up. Plus Lore events. Especially Unscripted 2022 where Shez became a K-pop idol in dance offs while Byleth was in a apocalyptic future. The dichotomy was hilarious.

Present or past tense? Past tense is what I default to writing but my dyslexia means I can swap part way through sentence! Third person.

Normal size text, small text, no preference? Normal text as easier to read.

Got any potential muse delusions to share? If I could handle 2 muses I would love a Shez rerun

[springcrafter]

Man, the Antisemites are getting bold.

Friendly reminder that "from the river to the sea" is a chant calling for the extermination of half the world's Jewish populace. Like. I cannot believe that in the Year of the Lord 2023 I have to risk being targeted only so I can come out here and explain this.

And mind you I live in this shithole, I speak Hebrew, I get to see the worst of the worst that Jewish Israelis are saying. I'm not gonna repeat it because it could be triggering, but I'm also not gonna sit here and pretend everyone here is a peace-loving hippy. The difference being that vile attitudes are called out and made into outliers in broader society.

(Notably, I saw this when I was taking shelter from rockets on the stairwell - I live in a predominantly center-right area and when someone said something vile they were reminded that the Palestinians in Gaza aren't all Hamas, have no control of their fate, and also have it 100% worse than we ever will)

Thing is, Israelis are not a monolith and a sizable majority are unflinchingly critical of our government. Netanyahu put us in this position and he has so much blood on his hands it's not even a point worth making. By dividing and conquering and pretending that senseless violence is a show of strength, he has made us weaker. We're terrified and traumatized and he continues to perpetuate that fear and trauma to capitalize on it. He was right when he said this was our darkest hour, and he was the one who brought us here. All because he wants to stay in power and avoid going to jail. Over here we loathe him and criticize him more than anyone outside of Israel ever could.

I'm not behind him. I condemn his use of extreme violence and his disregard for Palestinian lives. I know the warmongers from either side don't care about their civilians and are happy to get rich from our suffering but he could at least pretend.

Listen. Call me a hippy, but I believe that everyone who calls this sliver of land their home should have a right to live here in peace. I believe in the right of the Palestinian people to independence and self-determination. Thing is, in my experience, "Free Palestine" is a slogan so vague that it can mean different things and I'm rather wary of it. Do you mean "free Palestine from the tyranny of its leaders and the Israeli occupation" or "free Palestine from all the Jews and kick them all to the sea"? It has become enough of a dogwhistle that I stopped trusting it and by extension, anyone who holds these views while conveniently ignoring the atrocities of October 7 and the frankly appalling reporting around the al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion.

(It's the same with Zionism, and why I don't affiliate myself with the movement. I believe in the right of Jewish people to self-determination and a home in their ancestral homeland, and I think the unabashed Antisemitism I've seen lately justifies that position, but I cannot approve of the atrocities that have been done to get here or people who support and justify them)

My point is, if the (otherwise legitimate) Free Palestine movement is going to harbor, shelter and encourage Antisemitism - all I can say from here is, I see you. And while I would love to go elsewhere, alas, I'm stuck here, so that's not going to change.

(ETA: Thank you to the person in my replies for proving my point)

[historia-vitae-magistras]

Mandatory Latina ask: do Matt feel American as in part of one of the Americas? Part of the New World? Mexico and Cuba would try and explain they are all American and Alfred feels The New World™ on a Manifest Destiny kind of philosophy but do Matt feels some kindship with his friend Cuba and Caribbean commonwealth brothers and Latinos and former or current French colonies nations?

This is a fascinating question because it's a D.) all of the above. Question if this was multiple choice.

I think, in the year of our lord 2023, he would probably call himself a North American and think of himself as a part of the New World, but usually, that definition for Canadians silently includes some of the South Pacific, so that doesn't make a whole lot of goddamn sense either. North Americans in a different way than the Americans but not as much the Pan-American sense of America. And that's very new. There's a small spurt of French Canadians considering themselves Latin Americans in the early 19th century with our revolt against the British and nationalism that corresponded with some participation of individuals in the wars of independence and other conflicts in South America. Matt had a moment before anglophone domination took over that he might have seen a future in that sort of Pan-American definition of American, but it was done by the 1830s.

After that, it was the British Empire. He defines himself by participating in that imperial system, not the French and not a sense of being North American until after WW1. And even then, it took until NAFTA in the early 90s for an actual large-scale cultural flow with the mainland. Cuba and the Caribbean are a little different because the trade relationship was there. Halifax was the main port for centuries, but it's still... it's an odd relationship. Suppose I look at the British Empire in Africa. In that case, it's easy to see how that would work because the Canadians played a small but very bluntly colonialist role in multiple conflicts. With the Caribbean, there's some exchange of people and trade. However, it's from an early enough date that Canada is still kind of too shitty and underdeveloped to have an oppressive relationship from the very get-go. Still, there is a lot of fuckery in there. I will say I think it's a bit easier than it might otherwise be as Black Canadians were politically organized in the late 19th and early 20th century, and that, amongst other forces, largely blunted our own want for a mini-empire in our sphere the way NZ and Australia did with island ports in their own neighbourhood. There's an alternate universe where Canada fought the Falklands War. So I think Matt gets along with them, but I'm not sure there's a sense of kinship so much as comradery in an 'oh fuck what'd the limeys/yanks/frogs/Spaniards/Portuguese do this time.'

Born a francophone, he has... it's a weird relationship he's got with the rest of the Francophonie. I don't think he feels a sense of kinship at all. Friendly, sure, increasingly interested in them, yes. But French Canadians, particularly the Quebecois, are pretty proud and tend to think of themselves as entirely different from France or Belgium. And despite what the Quebecois nationalists would say in the 1970s, we really cannot compare our history with, say, Algeria's or Vietnam's. And Matt is really aware of that. He was way more privileged under Arthur than practically anyone was under Francois.

He's not unique by any means. There's been middling anti-social sorts in every empire since the Akkadians, but he's just kinda everywhere and nowhere. He and Cuba have definitely had a relationship. Like, I don't believe it, but there's a reason there's a conspiracy that Justin Trudeau is Fidel Castro's son and not Pierre's lmao. If nothing else, Cucan has had some good sex. I think he gets along with Maria (my friend's Mexico) really well too. It doesn't help that he's not the most extroverted type either. He's such a weirdo I'm so sorry to whoever has to interact with him or us as a country lmao.

[bobbile-blog]

Arknights Lore Recap: End of 2023

Here I was, thinking my last post would be sufficient, but they keep on adding more gosh darn lore. Half a year has gone by since my last post, so I thought I'd update things and make another post of "where is everyone at the moment" to help keep all these plotlines straight. So, here's the sequel! More events, more organization since it's no longer a half-assed post I wrote on my phone in an hour, and you'd better believe we've got more lore to get through.

(Of course, spoilers for the current state of basically everything in Global, though they'll be the kind of "current events" spoilers to help you understand where we are at the moment)

Currently Active Plotlines:

Main Story act II: Main story chapters/ What the Firelight Casts, Amiya/ Siege/ Stainless/ Shining/ W/ Kal'tsit/ Doctor/ Closure/ etc.

Act 2 is in full swing, and oh boy do we have some politics to wade through. The general idea, minimizing spoilers, is that the Royal Court of the Sarkaz have taken over Londinum and intend to expand further using the catastrophe-creating superweapon The Shard. They're led by Theresis and the (mostly) united Sarkaz lords, and with a mercenary army they basically rule Victoria as an occupying power. Their power is concentrated in Londinum, the only city they really formally occupy, but as they control the seat of the country's power they effectively have the rest of the country at their mercy.

Opposing them are a number of factions. Firstly, the coalition of Victorian Nobles that have ruled the country (and that technically invited the Sarkaz to Victoria in the first place) want the throne again. There are a few specific nobles we deal with in ch12 but the implication is the politics will be elaborated on in the next chapter so we'll leave it there, the point is that they're the Victorian establishment trying to go back to old Victoria which means they suck. They're also working with Dublinn, who are collaborating with the Duke of Wellington(?) who is sympathetic to their causes. The Nobles have just recently gone to formal war with the Sarkaz, but they also all hate each other and will absolutely stab each other in the back whenever possible.

Besides them, there are also a couple of smaller underground resistance factions. The Londinum Self-salvation Corps, or Eartha, is a guarilla resistance movement who is currently getting their asses handed to them by the Sarkaz. They basically existed solely because the Sarkaz hadn't bothered to wipe them out yet, and have currently evacuated all of their surviving personnel out of the city. Additionally, there's a group of Victorian soldiers led by Commander Skamandros who have been sticking their noses into things. If I recall correctly, they're trying to evacuate Londinum as well.

Finally, we have Rhodes Island. We're here because of the classic D&D reason of "well all our plotlines seem to end up in this general area so I guess that's where we're going". Amiya and Kal'tsit feel somewhat responsible for not stopping Theresis and Amiya specifically is probably the only person with the right to challenge Theresis for the throne of the Sarkaz. Bagpipe and Reed (and Ch'en) are dealing with Dublinn things, so they have to be around here. Shining is a Confessarius and her evil wizard family is supporting Theresis so she's got stuff to do there. Siege is the last surviving member of the Victorian Royal family, so she's bound by blood and obligation to reclaim the throne, as well as just generally wanting to help the people of Victoria. Hoderer is currently in the employ of the Sarkaz and Innes is working in Londinum as a spy for Rhodes Island, so W wants to head there too. There's a lot going on, far too much to describe, so I'll leave things at "we have half a dozen personal plotlines to pursue there" so I can move on to the actual side events.

The Devil's Dragonball Fusion Dance: Ancient Forge(?)/ Who is Real/ Invitation to Wine/ Where Vernal Winds will Never Blow, Nian/ Dusk/ Ling/ Chong Yue/ Lava/ Kroos/ Lee/ Waai Fu/ Lin/ Zuo Le/Liang Xun

This one is updated pretty regularly as the CN new year event. The short lore overview is that Yan used to be populated by godlike beings called Feranmuts. Feranmuts fought a war with people, which concluded when a Feranmut named Sui betrayed his people because they wanted to be the only one with their kind of powers. After the war, the emperor of Yan (China analogue) split him into 12 fragments which eventually developed their own identities and personalities - these are the Sui siblings, i.e. Nian, Dusk, Ling, Chong Yue, etc. Once all twelve of these siblings meet again, they will reform back into Sui and they'll probably take over the world or whatever. We don't know exactly but it won't be good.

There are currently three parties interested in gathering the siblings, and one trying to prevent them. Firstly, the Second Brother (who is currently unnamed) is just a little crazy, and is currently working with the Yanese ministry of rites to revive Sui. We don't know a ton about him, but we know he's somehow split himself into fragments and scattered himself across the land. Secondly, Ya is another Feranmut that survived the old war and wants revenge on Yan and Sui. They want Sui revived so they can have a proper form of revenge on Them, and are currently in control of the Shanhaizhong bandits kinda just causing issues wherever They can. Finally, Nian and her siblings at Rhodes Island also want to gather the siblings, but not to re-form Sui. She has some sort of plan to bring the siblings together without losing themselves, and is working with Rhodes Island to accomplish it. Similarly, we don't know a lot about her plan, but they're generally the protagonists of the events. Finally, Zuo Le is an official in a Yanese organization called the Sui Regulator, whose job is to monitor and secure the remaining Feranmuts and the fragments of Sui. Zuo Le is doing his best, but he's a little out of his weight class, so most of what he does is follow the Sui fragments around and try to figure out what the hell is going on.

The Call of We Many: Grani and the Knight’s Treasure/ Under Tides/ Stultifera Navis/ Mizuki and Caerula Arbor (Integrated Strategies 3), Skadi/ Specter/ Gladiia/ Kal’tsit.

Was updated pretty frequently as an anniversary event, but they seem to have thrown us a big lore dump with Caerula Arbor and left it at that for the time being, which is understandable. The lore here is the Seaborn are a race decended from some early Feranmuts who are basically a constantly-evolving devouring swarm. They exist to consume and assimilate all of the life on the planet, and unless we are very very careful and work very very quickly they are going to do just that.

The state of the plot at the moment is a little odd. Because Mizuki and Caerula Arbor isn't canon, the plot is still at the end of Stultifera Navis. Specter has recovered her self, and the team of Abyssal hunters is delving deeper into the current state of the seaborn. Their former leader, Ulpanius, has shown up to warn them not to return to Aegir, and while the Stultifera Navis sank the lighthouse was recovered and some trinkets from the ship made it back. We aren't really sure where we're going from here, but it's not necessarily to Caerula Arbor. Basically, the canon lore of IS3 is that on a mission to the Iberian Coastline, the Doctor and Mizuki found a weird seaborn monument, and Mizuki used their connection to the Seaborn's minds to look into alternate timelines and show them to the Doctor. That means that while the events of the story are not canon, the Doctor may still know and reference the events in the story. I'm not going to go over all of IS3 because there's so much of it but you can find a rough summary here.

Fangs of the Signiori dei Lupi: Hinted earlier in the main story/ Il Siracusano, Texas/ Emperor/ Lapland/ Projekt Red/ Lunacub.

This is the newest of these plots, set up in Il Siracusano and presumably proceeding from there. The Feraerus are supernatural talking animals that we’ve encountered a couple of times throughout the story, like the High Priest or the Emperor. They are connected with the land and are almost akin to guardians of it. They don’t need Originium for their magic, and are tied to the setting in ways we don’t quite understand yet. More importantly to us, though, they’re involved in their own power struggles and contests among each other. This underscored the drama in Il Siracusano - the whole Bellone family was propped up by the wolf Feraerus Zarro as part of an ancient game in which the wolves pick champions, called Fangs, who fight each other in a Battle Royale to decide the pack’s next alpha a la the fake wolf study. We know a couple of the fangs - Lunacub is one and Bernardo was another before his death, but Projekt Red is also a Fang, as well as Crownslayer’s mentor, so we’ll probably be coming back to this conflict in the future. It's unclear how we'll approach it, though, as Bernardo and Lunacub's files seem to imply that the eventual goal will breaking free of this game.

Law and Otherwise: Guide Ahead, Fiametta/ Mostima/ Andoain/ Cecile/ Lemuen/ Pope Yvangelista XI/ Law/ Executor/ Enforcer

This one hasn't been super developed yet, but it's worth including with both Hortus de Escapismo and Zwillingstürme im Herbst coming up. Laterano, the city of the Sankta, is governed by immutable laws that are engraved onto the very bodies of the Sankta. In Guide Ahead, Andoain seeks to ask the Pope the question of why the Sankta do not help the people of the world. He learns that the laws that bind the Sankta are real, physical commandments enforced by Law, a robotic entity similar to the Preserver from Lonetrail, and the consequences and exceptions relating to the law are entirely at its discretion. The law is what it is because Law says so.

The Sami Icefields

This hasn’t technically gotten an event yet, besides that one story in Operational Intelligence, but I’m including it as an honorable mention because we’re going there for IS4. The Icefields are up north of Ursus, and they are terrifying. You remember the Emperor’s Blade, the one that kicks your ass in WD-8? Yeah we only see three of them in the game because the rest are busy fighting against the Eldritch demons constantly invading from the Sami Icefields. Let’s please never go there ever, thanks.

Finished Plotlines:

These two are complete plots, which I'm including for posterity and the worldstate. Spoilers for all of these events, but I'll try to keep things to the present so as to not spoil too much.

The Grand Knight Major: Maria Nearl/ Pinus Sylvestris/ Near Light/ Obscure Wanderer, Blemishine/ Zofia/ Nearl/ The Followers/ Flametail/ Ashlock/ Fartooth/ Wildmane/ Justice Knight my beloved/ Gravel/ Platinum/ Roy/ Monique/ Młynar.

Margaret Nearl won the 24th Major and became the Grand Knight, and has since stayed in Kazimierz to improve living conditions for the infected and push back against the General Chamber of Commerce. The Armorless Union has mostly been decapitated - the Platinum defected, the Lazurites have disappeared and taken on new identities, and the Darksteel has promised to stay away from Margaret and Rhodes Island. Pinus Sylvestris and most of the rest of the Nearls are now on the landship, working for Rhodes Island.

A New Age is Upon Us: Mansfield Break/ Dorothy’s Vision/ Lonetrail/ the second Records of Originium comic (which has an official translation that you should absolutely read it’s really good)/ the Friston-3 event whenever Yostar decides to get around to releasing it, Silence/ Ptilopsis/ Saria/ Ifrit/ Dorothy/ Mulesyse/ Ferdinand/ Rosemontis/ Ho’olheyak/ Kirsten.

After the events of Project Horizon, Terra has forever been changed. For just a fleeting moment, every living being in Terra looked up and saw the stars for the first time. The consequences of this aren't totally clear just yet, but it will almost have rippling effects across the world and marks a shift in the game's story as a whole. We also received confirmation of just who the Doctor truly is, and a look behind the curtain of Terra's history. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that nothing is the same after Lonetrail.

In more specific character terms, though, Saria is the new control of Rhine lab, with Silence as her assistant and ethics advisor. Ifrit is a big girl now, and practically a different character entirely from who she was at the start of the game - seriously, her character arc might be my favorite in the game. Rosemontis has also similarly faced her past and come out stronger, and not only Directors Dorothy and Mulesyse but also Maylander agent Ho'olheyak have come over to Rhodes Island in the chaos after Project Horizon. Finally, Rhodes Island has uncovered the real powers lying behind the scenes of Columbian Politics, but have in turn been noticed themselves. We are no longer in the shadows, and it would be wise to keep that in mind.

[hazel-of-sodor]

Day 12-Of Reds and Ones

Traintober 2023

Other Stories

Day 12-Something Borrowed

Of Reds and Ones

James was simmering contently at Crovan's Gate station, his fresh paint gleaming in the sunlight. One of the little engines of the Skarloey Railway was going about their day on the other side of the platform. He wasn't sure which one it was, as he only caught glimpses through the trucks and carriages.

 Claire was topping off his oil reservoirs when she suddenly laughed.

 James, who had just been dozing off, looked back. "What? Do I have mud on my wheels or something?" he grumbled.

Claire smirked at him, "You got your paint from the Skarloey engines didn't you?"

Before he could answer, someone else did. "That he did lass. Took one look while at the works and came out looking like he belonged to our little railway."

James looked over to see the engine he'd been catching glimpses of was Skarloey himself. James rolled his eyes, "They're hardly identical, but yes it is meant to resemble their livery."

"I always thought they had just flipped the normal livery. Red with blue stripes rather than Blue with red stripes.

James shook his head with a sigh. "no it was originally a tribute livery, much like Henry's was, but I've been wearing it for over seventy years now..."

"So everyone just thinks of it as your livery," Claire said.

"Even though we were wearing it seventy years before you did." Skarloey chuckled.

"Well, I can't help that I wear it better." James rolled his eyes, but Claire knew him well enough to know he actually didn't mind.

"You said Henry's livery was a tribute livery?" She asked.

James nodded, "That was before my time, but it was meant to represent the Sodor and Mainland Railway, one of the railways that were merged to become the North Western."

"Even though it's a completely different shade of green," Skarloey interjected.

James shrugged, "I wasn't there when they chose the shade, I actually wouldn't arrive for several more years. I only know what the others told me, although I doubt they explained it to them either."

"I believe the blue and red were also borrowed," Skarloey mused. "The original blue was that of the Wellsworth and Suddery, while the red stripes were the same color as the Tidmouth, Elsbridge, and Knapford engines."

James frowned, "I thought Thomas just painted those colors and the railway liked them."

"That too." Skarloey laughed, "The North Western lacked a number one and Thomas lacked a number. The way crews saw the opportunity to have the number one. They kept painting ones on him, which management would remove." Finally one night they painted him, blue from the Wellsworth and Suddery, the TEKR's Red for stripes, and a large golden number one line in red on his tanks.

Lord Harwick stepped onto the platform, looked at Thomas while taking a long draw of coffee, which had all the workmen worried they'd pushed too far. He finished his sip and told them they could keep the one if they painted the other engines as well."

James snorted, "I see very little has changed about Sodor crews then."

"Nothing important." Skarloey smiled.

Claire snorted, "Come on big red, you've got a train to pull." 

She climbed into the cab, "James whistling a farewell to Skarloey as he pulled off.

Skarloey whistled his reply and returned to his shunting with a snort. Big red indeed.

[bigfrood]

so this is about the hozier statement please help me understand why his statement was so bad both herw and om twitter people are dissapointed but like .?!?! Isnt his statement rational and well thought out and balanced given that life has been lost on both sides yes the isralie government has been awfully unfair with palestinians for years almost 75? I think but hammas killed children and civilians took them hostages isralie government bombed hospitals and schools and churches two wrongs dont make a right an immediate cease fire with diplomatic talks is a good way to go and to call for that is a good statement so i dont get why people are so up in arms about this ? Please help me understand youre take if is different

Please check out these videos, they are about 8 minutes long in total and they worded what I wanna say better than I could ever hope to word it:

https://twitter.com/Hakeemfederer/status/1714734864086261838?t=lJARc717B09mqwfZmtF9tg&s=19

https://twitter.com/_TheRockII/status/1713975193339605115?t=9gKHtgV1f5T_heX6Xto2Bg&s=19

(This one is an Irish person, like Hozier who should know better)

One of my main problems with Hozier's statement is that it IS balanced like you're saying, because here's the thing:

The situation in Palestine isn't balanced.

To be neutral in a situation where there is an oppressive party and an oppressed party is necessarily in favour of oppression.

I don't disagree with most of his statement, my main problem with his take is also my main problem with yours, except you're saying "Israel has been awfully unfair with Palestinians" and he used language that was slightly stronger but still doesn't begin to cover the situation.

There is no place for "both sides" in this narrative. It is not a war or a conflict, but an occupation, where the apartheid state that has been committing war crimes for decades is now also committing genocide in front of the whole world with video! evidence! And no one is stopping it, countries and individuals are actually supporting it, even!

I can't believe that in the year of our lord 2023 I have to bring up the point that genocide, apartheid and settler colonialism are a big deal, and aren't just Israel "being unfair".

But the fact that you're willing to ask and understand makes me think that you are a good person who's trying to do what's right, so that's why I'm responding.

It's not fair to describe what Hamas did as equal to what Israel did in any capacity, starting from the very root of the problem, I'm asking you this:

If Israel hadn't STOLEN and COLONISED Palestinian land and occupied Palestine, do you think there would even be Hamas??

In Arabic we have an addition to the famous "an eye for an eye" line: ".. and whoever started is more unjust".

It's true that Hamas killed civilians, but what exactly do you think Israel has been doing in Palestine for almost 8 decades?? Hamas was formed in the late 80s. It has existed for less than half the duration of the occupation, with a vast inequality in resources in favour of Israel, yet one is considered a terrorist organisation and the other a country!!

Also, Hamas isn't every Palestinian, but every Palestinian is suffering at the hands of Israel. Israel is using Hamas as an excuse for their crimes.

Even the human cost is unequal, so many more Palestinian lives were lost!

Like any human being I am deeply affected by the loss of lives, however, anyone who blames any party involved other than Israel and by extension any international force that has the ability to stop it but hasn't for killing Palestinians and putting Israeli "civilians" in harm's way is being awfully unfair. Uninformed at best, and malicious with an agenda at worst.

I don't think the Irish or the Algerians or us Egyptians or any people in history who has been occupied got their freedom through peace talks.

But I don't mind an immediate cease fire and diplomatic talks, anything that would stop this genocide, really.

To answer your question directly now that I've made the previous points: what he's suggesting should happen isn't what bothers me. It's how he's describing the current situation.

I can't agree with a statement that's condemning resistance for RESISTING while also not coming close to properly condemning the genocidal occupation that started it all and keeps the violence going.

I can't agree that he's calling this genocide a "response" when what's happening now has been happening decades before Hamas even existed. The situation did NOT start 2 weeks ago or when Hamas was formed, but it started with the occupation and will only end when that occupation is gone.

I can't possibly agree when he calls what's happening a cycle of violence implying that there is anyone to blame but Israel, when it's a cycle of violence in the sense that Israel commits war crimes regularly and quite often, doesn't face consequences from any international organisation, or anyone really, which allows it to continue committing even worse war crimes.

I hope this helps you understand, and I hope you do the right thing and stand with Palestine.