#... oppressive beliefs

[tackykachowch]

Oh yeah I forgot that there's this opinion that Silco "was blindsided by power and wealth" and "lost his way" and "he only did what he did to benefit himself all along" etc etc. Uh. Where- where did you get that from? I'm not even being sarcastic or something, I'm genuinely curious how you can come to this conclusion.

He operates from a crappy office in The Last Drop and the only attributes of wealth he has are cigars and whiskey(?). My man had one pair of pants for 10+ years and only got a fancy coat to look more intimidating. Besides, when chembarons proposed to give back the gemstone to Piltover so their sales don't drop even harder Silco refused. Also he was ready to give up his power when Jayce made imprisoning Jinx a requirement for Zaun to gain independence. Sure, he IS motivated to keep his daughter safe, but it would also mean that his goal will finally be achieved, so there's nothing left for him to do. Both wealth and power are only means to achieve a goal to him. He also doesn't really display that he gets the kick out of it, unlike councilors in Piltover.

"Well yes he wants Zaun to be independent, but only as he personally sees it" when did he EVER say that??😭😭😭😭 Every time he speaks on the topic he only mentions how he wants Zaunites to have opportunities, respect, "more than (Piltover's) runoff". Like- that's literally everything he ever said about this. All that matters to him is independence, he couldn't care less about everything else.

As to "losing his way"...idk I think this can only be attributed to pre-drowning Silco. Because after it he pretty much decided to stick to what he now believed in forever, and at no point except the finale he went south from his beliefs.

Silco isn't "misguided" or "corrupt" or any other similar definition. He's a character who chose to become a monster to bring change to his people. And as s2 didn't do anything about resolving this conflict, he was never really proven wrong.

[thelilylav]

Reminder that real world politics will always, ALWAYS affect how you consume media. People aren’t demanding that Harry Potter become obsolete because they think it’s got a plot point or two that they disagree with, they’re saying that because it contains harmful stereotypes that reflect JKR’s VIEWS IRL!!! The same goes for people who analyze media. If you are in a fandom, inevitably your views will be reflected in how you analyze said media. It’s why people defend Caitlyn from Arcane’s actions despite her committing multiple war crimes against an impoverished population that her city profits off of because “she lost her mom so it’s ok.” And it’s why the (glaring heavily at the white side of) EAH fandom seems to refuse to discuss the real-world issues that the show covers and the implications this has for the characters despite poc in the fandom raising the topic over and over again. And demanding that people interact with you despite holding beliefs that justify genocide is just selfish.

[stardustwriting]

it always makes me so sad to see other people, especially other queer folk, shame a label for being “too specific”

A label is supposed to IDENTIFY, if it doesn’t properly do the job than that’s when it becomes “what’s the point?”

Plenty of people go unlabeled because they CANT find the right label

Plenty of people use a bunch of different labels because they can’t find the right label.

“why say your pansexual, bisexual works just fine” no it doesn’t if it doesn't properly describe the experience someone is having and wants to convey (being attracted to all genders without a preference)

“Why use omnisexual, pansexual works just fine” no it doesn’t if it doesn't properly describe the experience someone is having and wants to convey (being attracted to multiple genders with a preference)

“Why use gynesexual, pansexual works just fine” no it doesn’t if it doesn't properly describe the experience someone is having and wants to convey (being attracted to femininity regardless of gender)

All of what I listed goth under the umbrella term bisexual, which fit under the umbrella term queer which fits under the umbrella of “relationships with other humans”. Humans get more specific because they want to be able to describe their experience. Humans desire connection.

It may seem cringe to but these are people identities, these are peoples lives. People can go their whole lives feeling like their ignoring themselves and their identity because of a label they picked whether it be hyper specific or super vague. These labels are for no one but themselves and a means to convey identity to build a bridge to others. Two things can be true at once.

Not to mention the amount of neurodivergent and autistic people like myself out there feeling separated from humanity altogether and may pick a trans identity less than conventional.

Your experience is your own and not everyone’s like you. Be educated and try to understand where someone is coming from. And if you can’t bother, then don’t ruins someone’s day (and maybe even life) with your comments.

Its already a terrible life just learn to be tolerant of how people cope.

[sha-brytols]

the reason why i'm so endlessly obsessed with the dynamic between the magi warden and jowan is because of how. insane the PRIVILEGE you get from irving is. like they're both around the same-ish age (with jowan likely being just a couple years older), they both came to the circle at similar ages (jowan being there longest), they're both arguably very similar in their skill level (the part where the warden and jowan both have to open the door through magic i think can be used as proof of this!) and more than that, they're both so inseparable as a pair that jowan says he sees them as a younger sibling.

but even despite this jowan was literally constantly thrown under the bus by irving literally every chance he got. we know jowan's blood magic was almost definitely a symptom of irving enticing young apprentices towards the forbidden arts in order to weed out the "weak" willed mages, but the thing is, we also know that the only reason jowan turned to blood magic at all was because he was being denied his harrowing, and at a certain age if you haven't had your harrowing then you're essentially guaranteed to be made tranquil. so the insane dogging on jowan from irving was done even *before* he was put on irving's radar for practicing blood magic.

meanwhile the magi warden is irving's favorite student. his pride and joy. he constantly sticks his neck out for them (literally having to be told off by greagoir for essentially cheating during the warden's harrowing by telling them exactly what they will have to face in order to succeed), practically showers them in praise when introducing them to duncan, defends them after helping jowan escape EVEN IF if they were doing it directly under his nose, and all but verbally thanks duncan for rescuing them from the circle. it's very clear that irving sees the warden as almost his own child. but its also like. why did he choose them as an apprentice? you can play the warden as belligerently hostile towards the circle as possible and he still adores you.

meanwhile jowan was doing everything in his power to be as compliant as he could even despite his obvious resentment towards the system, but he was always just so replaceable. the kid literally never stood a chance and i'm almost certain at least part of it is because irving already chose his model student to groom and mentor into his successor, and it happened to be the magi warden.

the fact that one of the two magi wardens is a human noble from the free marches as well also adds a delicious layer to me too because then its like. now the problem seems way more systemic. your star pupil just Happens to be a young mage from a prestigious human family. and then its like. fuck why was amell even In kinloch hold to begin with? why werent they sent to the gallows? they're canonically the eldest of their siblings, so it couldnt have been to avoid having two relatives in the same circle at once. you know what i think though. i think they were only sent there because their family was influential enough to avoid having them locked away in what is essentially the most notoriously evil circle in all of thedas.

just very delicious to me how depending on your origin theres almost very clearly a class element at play. jowan was just a random village kid compared to amell. insane.

[idolbound]

I think the fandom's hate for DA2 often forgets that the devs were forced into a like, 15 month development cycle by EA. It was pretty clear in how the game's levels were designed and reused, and it couldn't be polished into something more. But, what we got was a micro-level scale story with macro-scale consequences to the overall story of the series; it was a personal journey of an everyday person and all of their friends living in a shitty city, enduring the impossible stories of grief and change, all while dealing with the overarching consequences of the conflicts caused by a religious-political institution in real time.

Also, DA2 gave us Meredith, who is, by and large, not a god or supernatural entity, but just a woman, who was allowed far too much power that went entirely unchecked during her reign. It's a reflection of real world politicians and military leaders, which therefore makes her the most realistic type of villain in the series (and that's long before they gave her the red lyrium idol to turn her into a Boss Fight™).

Ultimately the other aspects of the games in this series - the level design, the combat, music, etc. - are all going to be subjective, especially when in comparison to the other games / your own personal preferences, but to say that it's just "objectively bad" when the story in and of itself is a departure from the other games where you get put into the role of Designated Hero™, whereas Hawke, for the most part, is Just Some Guy (gender neutral) (and this is also why I enjoy Rook in a similar-ish kind of way, where you accidentally become important at work), is really missing the point of what they were trying to do. I fully stand by the point that if Kirkwall got the DAV environment treatment today, it would be way more popular than it is.

[malevolentconfessions]

Same oscar anon as before but while I'm here. I'd also like to share a pet peeve of mine when it comes to how some people write Oscar, which is when people make him disavow his religion in order for him to come to terms with his queerness. As a religious queer person, I just don't like the implication that the two can't co exist and it also feels very out of character to me? I think Oscar's issues come moreso with the institution of the church rather than the religion itself. I personally feel like his acceptance would rely more on the separation of the church and God and realising that while the church might have issues with who he is, his God probably doesn't care (ALSO, AGAIN HE TRIED TO COMMIT A MURDER AS A TEENAGER AND DOESN'T REGRET IT). I also just don't personally feel like he'd be the kind of person who's proud of sinning (or doing something he considers sinning). Idk how to word this but basically I think he'd be fine doing a lot of things that are technically 'blasphemy' to other people (like. Murder. And gay sex/hj) but only because he doesn't personally view them as blasphemous to God himself. I don't think he'd ever be proud to do something that he internally views as irredeemably blasphemous to God if that makes sense

That last paragraph was more personal interpretation and preference but I stand by what I mean. (Also, I'd argue that if people want a character who disavows Christianity, Arthur Lester, Charlie Dowd, Kayne Malevolent, probably Dennis Collins ARE ALL RIGHT THERE. Can we have one Christian queer please? I beg)

FUCKING LITERALLY!!!!! GOD ANON YOU GET ITTT

[lanadel-heyyy]

jennifer lawrence is a middle school drop out raised in the imperial core who always talked about the hunger games being about “one person standing up for what they believe in” which is….not what it was about ever at all. of course she has terrible politics. katniss would probably look at her with pity like a little dumb capitol pet.

[nyxi-pixie]

been thinking abt this a lot but the idea of 'pick me girls' has done alarming damage to nuanced discussion of certain characters

[hadesoftheladies]

everytime people rush to defend a male (usually accused of abuse) for the character and humanity they projected on him i just marvel at how many grown ass adults genuinely don't consider the fact that men can lie

like men can lie

[goatgoesmbe]

..i think one of awkward things about me ranting religion/culture is that yes, i usually never specify-

but people would assume it's about western.. stuff- meanwhile i was writing that thinking about.. you know.. Indonesian history..

[creature-wizard]

Whats your take on people who believe that the life they live is according to the choices they took before being birthed?

I don't believe in reincarnation, or some sort of pre birth plan, still I do enjoy to see others opinions on this sometimes. Some people have a reasonable idea on this, while others try to justify every bad thing is some sort of test that once passed will make them stronger.

For some this can be empowering and make them go further, while for others it can make them feel weak and give up because why would they pick that life.

Regardless of whether it empowers or discourages any specific individual, the belief that your present life is determined by past life choices ultimately serves to justify systemic inequality and oppression. It's another form of the just-world fallacy.

[cupcakegalaxia]

When 20 years ago atheists said that the decrease in religion (*cough* Christianity *cough*) would lead to a more enlightened society are suddenly concerned about the slow moving ball of Western Society collapsing, authoritarianism rising and political unrest on a level the world has not seen for a very long time.

sigh

[aspirant1598]

[t4tails]

you don't have to answer this at all, but i was just wondering from one of your last posts- what's wrong with being a radfem? obviously i know what's wrong with being a TERF, but are all radfems terfs? sorry, again you don't have to answer this at all, i'm just struggling to find an answer online because everywhere i look defines radical feminism differently and i was wondering if you had any thoughts

i dont have very in depth thoughts about it rn but the frank answer to "are all radfems terfs" is that in my experience even radfems who say theyre trans inclusive will still not account for trans women in their feminism, and always still be willingly chummy with outwardly transphobic and tranmisogynist ones, and often hold bioessentialist beliefs they have no urge to analyze or work through

[equalperson]

by the way, I would like to note that I immediately don't trust you if you agree with the statement that "idiocracy is a documentary/real/a prophecy/etc."

the entire premise is idiocracy is based in eugenics, specifically the idea that poor and disabled people reproducing will lead to the downfall of society, particularly if upper-class and abled people aren't having even more children to wash us out.

do you really think society's biggest issue is that poor/disabled people have too much power?

do you really believe that the people in power--or humanity as a whole--is mostly intellectually disabled, all while people with ID are still disproportionately likely to be abused, raped, and incarcerated, among many other outcomes that can only result from their total lack of systemic authority?

earlier, I came across a post on r/idiocracy of a developmentally disabled boy destructively stimming in public. almost all of the comments were saying he shouldn't be allowed outside and should be tased or otherwise harmed (note: he was also black) for his behavior. do you really think a black, severely disabled, 10-to-13-year-old is your oppressor, your "idiocracy?"

or are you just scapegoating disabled and otherwise marginalized people as the source of society's ills, simply using "intellectualism" and "anti-consumerism" as an excuse to encourage mass violence against us?

because of course the issue isn't the rich trying to get richer. it isn't bigotry. it isn't capitalism or any other oppressive system. it's too many damn disabled children burdening you with behavior you don't want to see, and too many disabled adults burdening you with criticism you don't want to hear.

[gunkbaby]

Waiting for the day when i see an anti-vegan claim that some animals actually want to be farmed and eaten you guys!!!!