#Also very jewish way of thinking IMO but well I am. Jewish.

[noisytenant]

I like challenging the idea of hope as fragile but I don’t connect with the idea of hope as some kind of gritty fighter.

I think hope is more like the sun: A force of life that is always present, but not always visible.

Despite the clouds and rain, night and winter, the sun is the central source of energy on earth, and evidence of its presence is always there in our continued existence.

Even when we’re layering jackets in the coldest night of the new moon, the promise of unconditional warmth and light fuels us to seek it out where we are.

And in this way I think the reason hope comes across as fragile is because our grasp on it is fickle; In its rawest form it can be overwhelming and even painful to the point that we can’t hold it in our gaze. We have to experience it at a distance, filtered, through proxies to sense it at all, and so often lose sight of it, and approach it cautiously.

But I think it is worth fighting for. As living beings we are motivated by hope but complicated by context, and the challenge is to believe in hope while recognizing the struggles we undertake to bask in its warmth, including the times we turn away from it.

In essence, I don’t think hope fights for us, but we fight for it ☀️

[carchariascarcharodon]

fuck it ellen headcanons that no one asked for let's Go (under the cut because i'm shy. and it's longer than i meant it to be.)

^^ this is backed up a little by the scrapped scene of michael's birthday party in one screenplay, where she asks (mr? mrs? unclear) taft if at the very least sean would be considered an islander had he been born there (the answer is no, by the way). she wants to belong; if she can't have that, then maybe the boys can.

ellen grew up in a small town. i know this i can feel it in my bones. she left after graduating high school. moved to a city for... college? general adult life? i'm not sure yet. probably nyc though, given... *waves hand*. like the line "but when do i get to become an islander?" reads to me as a desperation to have that small-town connection again, in spite of how othered the brodys are by amity. i like to think that ellen would have assumed she'd be right at home again with amity's relatively tiny population, but gets totally thrown off when neighbours refuse to acknowledge her as an islander.

i do think that the brodys' decision to move there would have been a mutual one - they respect each other too much to allow for any other possibility, imo - but i think adjusting would have been harder for ellen than martin. she would feel so simultaneously both at home, being from a small community similar to amity's, and totally alienated. it would be hard.

she's jewish! lorraine gary speaks briefly in the making of jaws doc about how her being a jewish mother contributed to her characterization of ellen's guilt, so that's where that comes from! (if hooper can be jewish by way of dreyfuss, then so can ellen . basically). to what extent she's a practicing jew, though........ Shrugs

ellen can't drive. martin drives her to work in the blue police truck in jaws 2 - and that + the original yellow truck are all we see them using, as far as i can recall - so i figure them as a single car household. she never got around to learning as a teenager, never needed to drive in new york.

she's a bookworm :> i cannot remember for the life of me who it was, but i know someone's mentioned ellen being really into reading alongside brody. i think she'd also be a sucker for cute romcoms and melodramas.

^ speaking of other peoples' ideas, i know ellen getting along with quint after a while is another headcanon that bounces around sometimes. i think it's cute.

martin's anxiety is much worse than hers, ESPECIALLY post-orca, but i think she has a bit of a nervous streak too.

it's not a constant/permanent headcanon for me, but i am *exceedingly* fond of transfem ellen. t4t ellen/martin 👍👍

still haven't seen jaws 4 oops lol but she's probably close with mrs kintner after martin & sean die, given that kintner shows up at her house to console her. assuming we actually accept that film as canon to begin with

the book does also (iirc) describe ben gardner's wife distraught after he's killed, so if there's a mrs gardner within the film's universe i think they would get along as well. amity support group for people whose family members keep getting eaten by big fucking sharks

[matan4il]

hey, are you Israeli/do you speak Hebrew? what is Israeli media saying about how Netanyahu has handled relations with the US? or at least his decision to cancel the DC trip after the UN vote?

Hi Nonnie!

I am, and I do. But I'm not sure how well I can reply to you. You know that joke about how, if you ask 2 Jews about something, you'll get at least 3 opinions? Yeah, so imagine the range of opinions, many of them contradicting each other, in a state full of Jews. Add to that the opinions of non-Jewish Israelis, which also have a variety of view points. Now imagine the opinions expressed by those who end up working in the media, meaning the most opinionated and outspoken ones. IDK that I can condense it all into one coherent reply.

But basically, any opinion you can imagine, someone expressed it. I will say that most did seem more upset with the US, for allowing what's seen as an anti-Israeli resolution to pass at the UN unvetoed, because the harm from that is real, massive, and could affect us for years, maybe even in ways we can't yet foresee. So keeping in mind that the UN resolution is harmful to Israel, and that the US was absolutely making a political point by allowing it to pass, most understand Netanyahu's reaction in that context.

That said, even with that context in mind, there were a lot of different opinions and reactions on whether it was the right move.

Personally, I do not like Netanyahu and have never voted for him. I used to dislike him because I thought he was anti-peace. It took me time, but I realize that actually, the biggest issue with him is that more than anything else, he wants to stay in power. He doesn't actually have (IMO) an ideological spine. At the same time, I won't demonize him, either. I very much hold him to be the person responsible for a lot of terrible things that have happened to Israel, to a great degree because he chooses to believe that if something didn't go wrong so far despite him not doing anything about it, then it will continue that way and he can go on ignoring it, but I don't believe that he would actually willingly sacrifice masses of Israeli civilians just for his own sake. In other words, I do think he is guilty of neglecting many things until they get to the point where people pay with their lives (while convincing himself it won't get to that), but I don't think he's an unfeeling monster who will intentionally get people killed.

So... let's put it this way. I was not surprised he canceled the trip, and I was not surprised that he re-instated it about a week later.

The trip had to happen, because a total break in communications is against Israel's interests, and becuase Israeli and American officials sitting together in person to talk about the Rafah operation is the best way to figure out an action plan that fits both. It was therefore in Netanyahu's interest for the trip to happen, but also in his interest to take some stand, and show the White House that their UN move is very upsetting to Israelis, enough for even him not to ignore.

I hope this kind of helps! xoxox

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

[creekfiend]

Wow I just caught up on the "culturally christian" "discourse" due to being the type of jew who is allergic to being Part Of Jumblr and uh

Confused

I would be more than willing to have some good faith discussions w non-Jewish atheists about their feelings about the imprecise use of this term; with people who have Christianity Trauma who politely request to not be Called Christians even if that is part of their cultural background or upbringing (I am happy to not do this & always try to say ppl from culturally christian backgrounds because like... identity and Christianity are complex and I know and love a lot of people who have been horribly hurt by Christianity and I don't think it is productive or kind to insist to those people that they be aligned in some way identitywise with the institutions that have hurt them! As a jew I understand trauma very well and a lot of interacting with people and groups who have a lot of trauma is meeting them where they are, imo. I think it's important to do that.

But (you knew the but was coming)

I am UTTERLY BEWILDERED that even the people who are on the side of "this term is useless and you are stupid for using it" who seem to have like, interesting philosophical perspectives and mostly seem to not be engaged in outright antisemitism themselves ARE NEVERTHELESS happily rubbing shoulders w people who call jews and anyone who believes in anything "unscientific" 'fairytale cultists' and who happily assert that the very act of believing stuff that cannot be Obejctively Proven is like, oppressive and harmful

And if ppl are on your post saying antisemitic things and you do not block them or go "hey whoa uhhh let's not do that" then I don't trust you!

And like also

A lot of the jews participating in this discussion are getting violent anons calling them kikes and saying they should die in horrible ways!

WOW. THIS IS WILD AND UM. KIND OF DEEPLY ALARMING. TO ME. HI. WHAT THE FUCK.

[theambitiouswoman]

Do you believe in or practice any religion? How did you know that that particular religion is a fit for you? What practices are a part of your daily religious sentiments - like rituals …

Thanks in advance for answering it!

I am a spiritual person but I do not practice any specific religion. I was raised evangelistic (Christian) and have read the Bible, in full- several times- I was in Bible study growing up from Tuesday to Sunday as well- and studied its full history in terms of the origination of that religion. I know about Catholicism (who frequently call themselves Christians- but to Christian’s they are not the same) I’ve also studied some religions in depth like Hinduism (first/oldest actual religion), Zoroastrianism (also one of first/ oldest) (also where a lot of religions originated from) and the Torah as well as Jewish History, and love to learn about different religions and their origins, beliefs, views etc. Recently I purchase a few books about Greek Mythology, I’m currently obsessed with anything history but haven’t gotten to those books yet. I am very receptive to everyone’s spiritual beliefs because all In all everyone believes in some sort of higher power.

I believe in God. I believe in spirituality(and spirits), I believe in prayer, faith. I believe in good values and morals. I practice this daily. Those things are important for ME and my life. I think a personal relationship with God(s) or any persons view of who God is based on their views, is important. If you don’t believe in God, that’s your journey and absolutely okay too. And all that’s very different IMO from the concept of religion for many of todays religions. I also believe everyone’s views on this or no views, should be respected.

In my opinion, I think a religion would be a good fit for you if your personal values align with it. If you start learning about religions and feel some sort of spiritual connection to it or brings you peace. Then it’s maybe something you should lean in to. I think faith outside of ourselves is important. Even if you are someone who believes not in God (or any God) but energy as a powerful life force. I noticed that a lot of people try to twist religion and words from the Bible to fit their specific narrative. And it shouldn’t be that way. Religion is about spirituality as much as it is about our personal values and how we decide to live our lives. It’s how religion started to begin with. All in all, it’s personal and you should decide what feels right to you. Not your family, friends, what the current trend is etc.

[dykefever]

ooh you’re watching mrs maisel? i would love ur thoughts on it :))

i literally just finished the final episode and i would Love to give my thoughts!! just a bit of disclaimer i know the show has been criticised for stereotypical depictions of jewish people and i don't want to discount that. i can't really comment on whether this makes the show something that shouldn't be watched but i am aware when watching it. to me it does depict a breadth of jewishness with lots of different characters but ofc welcome to hearing what people have to say on this. and with that --

overall i think it's a pretty hilarious and at times brilliant show! i have a lot of fondness for it because i watched s1-3 with my family at christmas as they came out but to me s1 and 2 are pretty impeccable in terms of comedy, character, midge's growth and journey! s3 definitely a bit slower but the sets, direction and possibility of midge's big break make it one i still enjoy a lot. also introduces some great changes in terms of abe and rose and becoming more aware of the world around them (never entirely though haha). i watched s4 like three days ago and i don't even know what happened. literally nothing happened. lenny's speech in the last episode saved it in a huge way but the way it took eight episodes to get there..girl. s5 overall very solid and im really happy with the way it ended!! i enjoyed the flash forwards and midge's final big break performance had me laughing, it was very much her!

just general thoughts: abe is the funniest character on the show imo and the actor is fucking brilliant - rose too, the palladino's have always been great at colourful side characters and this is no exception, rachel brosnahan is hilarious, stunning (the outfits midge wears fuck me!!!!) and she does the comedy sets very well esp considering she's not actually a comedian.

the show falls victim to some classic palladino weaknesses -- overlong unnecessary musical numbers, female protagonists never quite having to reckon with being wrong despite consequences (they are somehow always the Victim), dialogue that becomes so absurd it's annoying to watch (their greatest strength that can quickly become their worst weakness), piggybacking off that overlong bits that have no reason to exist other than absurdity (thinking s4e1 ferris wheel conversation. i was already dreading the season after that.)

but finally. susie and midge should have fucked.

[underestimated-heroine]

re-evaluated myself and agree with you in retrospect, i am sorry i was an asshole about it. thanks for catching me and standing your ground even though it was unpleasant and I was not receptive.

Hello again. Sorry for the delay in response...I was honestly deliberating how to answer/post your ask. Ultimately decided to handle it how I did your previous one--posting it but making it unrebloggable--because I felt that was most fair (hopefully? please lmk if not). Plus I took some time to articulate my response:

I truly appreciate you re-evaluating yourself and saying this, and accept your apology (insofar as I'm the one to do so). Like I said, I have not been perfect, either. Not too long after October 7th, a mutual of mine was kind enough to DM me & gently call me out on a very harmfully inaccurate post I had not only reblogged, but linked in my pinned post. Subsequently, I went through all the I/P stuff I'd reblogged/posted and realized I needed to do way better. Since then, that's what I've been fumbling to try and to do, though I am well aware I still have a long way to go.

Plenty don't want to hear it (and that's beyond fair imo, because whether or not this is our fault, it's our responsibility) but I think it's inaccurate to deny that avoiding antisemitism in fighting for Palestine has been genuinely difficult for a lot of gentiles throughout this conflict. When white supremacy isn't straight up hijacking the conversation (ex. *cough* J@ckson H*nkle* *cough*) and tricking leftists into amplifying it, it's permeating the groundwater, fundamentally warping the conversation.

The problem is that for the victims of systemic abuse and oppression, the only indicator for trust and safety they have is peoples' actions - and I think you and I can agree that includes reblogging and posting even if some act like that's silly. It's not fair or right to ask people to assume the best intentions from us when we've made mistakes, especially when antisemitism's been a growing problem in our country for the past several years.

idk. I am not trying to lecture or something, just to present my thoughts a bit more clearly, maybe? I struggle with social cues and articulation at times, so I worried about how I came off especially in my first response to you. I am also truly sorry if I was condescending or it seemed like I was attacking you. Emotions have run high through all this, and it's been hard to keep a level head through all the horror, fear, and anger.

I just truly think one of the most impactful, meaningful things we can do in our day-to-day lives to help (yes, even & maybe especially Palestinians) is to make our Jewish neighbors--and Jewish people in general--more safe, which obviously and honestly needed to happen long before October 7th.

Anyways, thanks again for saying this. It gives me comfort and motivation to see another person whose perspective I relate to, admire, and understand making the effort to take accountability and accept nuance like I am. May we both find a way to navigate through this which our future selves can be proud of, and more importantly which does the most good possible for those who are suffering.

[supercantaloupe]

alright operablr might hate me for this one but i...was not wild about don carlo, tbh. i think it's kind of a mess. before i elaborate i want to stress that a lot of my opinions are taste based and i am not saying that the opera or anyone who likes it are Bad or Wrong, i just don't think it's quite For Me. adding a cut so you can ignore all this if you want

anyway after having seen both nabucco and don carlo within a week of each other (thereby doubling my previous experience with verdi of traviata and otello), i'm starting to feel like, stylistically, early/mid verdi is much more my speed than late verdi. i remember coming away from otello thinking "that was alright" whereas with nabucco and traviata i was thinking "wow that was great!"...after finishing don carlo last night i was just...confused. i feel like i'm missing something.

actually, i definitely am; i've seen people posting about recurring motifs and beautiful arias etc in the music and i definitely missed those. again, late verdi (along with a lot of late romantic music tbh) just Is Not My Thing, i think. and considering how late don carlo is in verdi's output i'm not surprised (very much a post-wagner composition, don carlo is. same with otello). i'm planning on writing a separate post about this so i won't go into much detail here but the music really lacked a lasting memorable-ness for me; what was there was nice, yes, but it didn't feel like anything stood out much. i mean, numbers like the brindisi and amami alfredo in traviata, va pensiero in nabucco, and la donna e mobile in rigoletto -- these all Stand Out, even after only a single listen, but i am not even 12 hours off watching don carlo and i don't think i could hum for you one of its melodies. again, this has a lot to do with personal taste; in general i tend to prefer 18th and early 19th century music styles, and i plan on going into more detail about memorable music in theater in a different post.

and man, the plot is a mess. also, not to apply too modern a lens of story criticism here, but the pacing is all over the place: act ii is, like, twice the length of act i, and act iv is no quick jaunt either, then v is pretty short again. (and really who am i to complain about a 3.5 hour runtime, as a giulio cesare fan, an opera which bumps up against 4? well, at least giulio cesare has a consistent if slow pace...)

it is all over the place. one moment it's a typical operatic romance, then a political intrigue, another it's a gay psychodrama, and then it's about the catholic church. i think this is a feature rather than a bug for some people but it really did not work for me. like it's all well and good watching rodrigo and carlo swearing their loyalty for one another in the most totally heterosexual way possible or making plans to save flanders or deal with carlo's embarrassing crush on his stepmom or whatever, but when the very next scene (with no real warning) is a public parade of heretics for shaming and burning...bit of a tonal whiplash there, i think!

again, taste is a factor here. known sexy oklahoma enjoyer sasha supercantaloupe is no stranger or opponent of tonal whiplash in theater, but when it comes to "no one expects the spanish inquisition!" i think there's a difference between guys with silly outfits and silly accents popping out from behind a corner and a crowd of people dressed in friar habits carrying crosses and torches around onstage...especially to a jewish viewer like me. the plot very much feels like something someone who doesn't like opera would make up to belittle the art form imo: it's like four different things at once all thrown together in a very long, kind of jumbled mess. (i mean, what does eboli even do other than show up, make things Even More Complicated, and then disappear within two acts?)

and...i get the sense that verdi/contemporary audiences might've thought this, too. obviously the fact that it got so many productions that it HAS so many different versions at all shows that people liked it enough to keep performing it -- but there being so many different versions of the opera (disregarding translations), four acts versus five, cut or revised arias, etc, i think also indicates that something about the opera was not working quite right that they kept trying to fix. now i've only seen one version (granted it came highly recommended to me by mutuals, but only one nonetheless) and can't comment on other versions of the opera; maybe another version works better for me, idk. on its own i actually think it's really interesting that there are so many different revisions out there to study -- a real lucky glimpse into the dramaturgical process that you don't normally get to see from shows of the era or earlier. (ask me about hadestown if you want to know more of my thoughts on changes made over the course of a show's development being for better or worse.) but the finished version of the opera (at least the version i saw) is a bit of a mess imo. i definitely think it has its high moments, but i don't think they completely overshadow its lows. comparing it again to otello, which was a much more consistent product in tone and pacing etc. to me, although a bit less interesting overall too.

i feel like i might be disappointing some people by saying all this lol but i have to be honest. don carlo was just not my thing. suffice to say that i think late verdi has absorbed too much wagnerism for my taste, musically and dramatically. maybe i'll rewatch it at some point -- i'd be curious to check it out in french this time -- but i don't expect to be doing that anytime soon, unless a friend or something is watching and really wants me to join (and i can spare four hours...). i can see why y'all like it (well, some of why y'all like it) and i do admit there's some good stuff in there to like. namely the carlo & rodrigo shit. i understand now lol. the opera definitely feels like it's ripe for shitpost/meme content and i am here for that. but i can't say this one is going at the top of my fave shows list. sorry everybody!

[seefasters]

Hello again! Anon who started watching mash cus of ur regina spektor amv. currently midway thru season 5. Margaret's development is so satisying to watch :'>). Shes currently in her hating on frank burns era, which is just so fucking good after seasons of being w him. And shes starting to loosen up w the nurses and stuff which i am soooo here for<3. Shocked that i love radar as much as i do. That bit where he cries seeing footage of his family made *me* cry. BJ hunnicut has already replaced trapper in my heart (srry trap). I dig the outwardly cleancut and easygoing vibe in tandem with his internal mischeviousness and stress. Love that hawkeyes starting to crack up a bit also. Other notes: a lot of the racial and sexual politics are pretty dodgy, but also its a lot more progressive than i thought it would be, wrt to margaret and some of the asian side characters as well as its antiamerican exceptionalism stuff (though nothing can wash the taste of that moose episode out of my mouth. No fucking excuse for that shit.) And its rlly good with the klinger stuff to, i was shocked at that. also as a jewish person i was rlly pleasantly surprised to see how the show interacts with jewishness and jewish characters, tho i suppose i shouldnt be surprised given that the showrunner was jewish. Father mulcahy is such an appealing, inclusive presence and i like how respectful and enthusiastic he is with all religions. That bit w/ the bris rlly got me too :,>).And hawkeye uses so much yiddish in his dialogue, his name and the way he navigates the world seems very gentile but his vibe tells me he hung out with jewish folks a lot growing up or in college if hes using those terms all the time. Having a lot of fun with this series and im so curious how its gonna develop in future. Thanks for introducing me to the series, im rlly digging it!

OMG ANON i really didnt expect to see you here again this is so lovely <333 i'm glad youre enjoying the show and i'm so happy we have another beejgirl (gender neutral) in our ranks

and yeah the treatment of women and margaret's development specifically gets only better from here on out imo, esp once loretta swit got involved. i can't wait for you to see "inga" lmao. and margaret in her frank hater era is so fun. some ppl say they feel bad for frank but tbh fuck him

yea the moose episode is absolutely the peak of mash's white saviourism and cultural insensitivity. its..... confused to say the least. they do get a bit better as the show goes along (as in, start using actual korean words and cultural elements lol) but overall it still aged poorly. i think the best they ever did was in "in love and war" so look forward to that

a lot of ppl hc hawkeye as jewish! i'm not jewish myself so i can't say anything for or against that but there's a bunch of really good posts on jewish hawkeye in the mash tag if u ever want to read them after ur done

again, i'm sooo glad youre enjoying the show and the characters <33 its so nice to see someone new discovering mash

i can't wait for u to meet charles lol. very curious to see what your thoughts on him will be

[dreamytfw]

Just to be clear I'm not trying to defend him. Or woobyfyi him. And I know when he talked about the genocide it did cause harm. But I'm trying to see it from a perspective who does have an emotional stake on it and u think more than anything that's the main influence. So I don't see the maliciousness of it. What he said was wrong especially with genocide but I also think him not filtering out or deleting ppl replies calling him out on genocide (specifically on the article) that he did see that he was wrong and IMO that should also mean something as well.

Palestine deserves to be free, be seen as humans, deserve their land. I have boycotted brands that are working with isreal and i am against isreal. I do understand the seriousness and there needs call for action that need to protect the Palestinian ppl.

Yeah, I just answered this in another anon, but I don't think he said the things he did to be intentionally malicious. He just kind of demonstrated how he's never really taken a critical look at America's legacy of colonial white supremacy, how he fits into that legacy, and how that legacy maps on pretty neatly to what Israel is doing to Palestine (only in their case I'm not really sure if you can call it white supremacy so much as a type of theocratic supremacy. Take that with a grain of salt though as I'm not Israeli nor am I Jewish and very much understand the ethnicity of Judaism is extremely complicated and that complexity very much is not helped by Netanyahu's fascist ideals and the way he tries to tie all Judaism to Israel). Him not taking that critical look is a problem, but it's not a knowingly malicious act or anything. I just... REALLY wish he'd taken the time to educate himself on the history of Israel as we know it today and Netanyahu in particular before ignoring the people who said he shouldn't publicly weigh in and stumbling ass-backwards into genocide denialism.

[textingaboutprometheus]

This is the last I am going to talk about this subject because this is not the best space for this level of discussion. I would like you to publicize this, but I will shut up after it. I’m very tired.

There are people who believe Israel is 100% right and never did anything wrong. They are a minority and on the right. Ben Shapiro, Meghan McCain, etc. There are people who believe Palestine is 100% right and never did anything wrong. They are more than the 1st group and are all on the left. These groups don’t matter to me.

The biggest group, and the one Crooked belongs to, believes the situation in the Middle East is complicated, it’s nuanced, it’s not black and right. So, what happens when Israel military attacks Gaza, and kills civilians? What is the reaction from this group, from the LEFT (I don’t care about right wing bigots)? Is there a discussion about context? Explanations to why Israel did the attack? Again, I’m interested only on the LEFT and what they say. Any examples?

No, there’s no context discussion. Israel IS criticized by the LEFT all the time when it attacks Gaza. It doesn’t matter if it’s a reaction to a previous attack, the fact that civilians are killed during these military attacks as collateral is never accepted by anyone on the LEFT. And it’s OK if you (a general you) think this is how it should be done. Many Israelis feel the same way. I feel the same way.

But this is the thing. When a TERRORIST ATTACK 100% focused on killing civilians, kidnapping, torturing, rape, etc happens… well, nobody can be found to just say the words “this is wrong”. There’s always an ‘explanation’ on how things got so bad. People in GAZA are celebrating? There is context to that. Extremist Jews celebrate when Palestinians die? They are bigots and should be jailed. There’s always context when Jews are being hurt.

So, to end this. It says something about our society that every time something horrible happens to Jews, and only specifically against Jews, even people supposedly on our side believe they have to explain “how” and “why” it go to that point. And Jewish people see that. Lovett was super diplomatic and polite and very timidly explained this, the refusal that the LEFT has in simply saying what happened was bad and FUCKING NOTHING ELSE. Start a new thread, a new Twitter to discuss the history of the conflict, but your first reaction should be to just acknowledge the terror that happened against civilians without dancing around “both-sides”.

I know exactly how Lovett is felling, not only in regards to what happened in Israel but also with the reaction happening among people who he/we thought were on our side. A LOT of people showed their true colours, how they really feel about Jews, Israel, etc. I will never forget and forgive this. And Lovett? Well, he is his own person and will deal with it the way he decides. But imo he was hurt.

This is for me, I won’t respond to this anymore because I AM TIRED.

I don't know what to say. I am grateful for you taking the time to come and say this. I hope you're OK.

I must admit, I don't know how to process this. It's a fault of mine. I haven't yet come to terms with it. My brain short-circuits everytime I try.

I wish you well. Please find some comfort and peace today. I am trying to find a way through and I hope everyone can.

I offer you love and friendship if you need it.

[thistle-and-thorn]

Do you have any headcanons about religious/cultural practices and beliefs in Westeros? How do you think they vary between Dorne, the rest of the South and the North?

I talk to Lilium-convallium (who I know is lurking on this blog 👀 love u darling 🥰) talk about this ALL THE TIME. I need to re read the books because I don’t remember a lot of canon detail honestly so this will not be a meta post, just Vibes.

But how I imagine it when I write about it when I write fic is classical mythology in the form of the Catholic Church. Ancient Valyrian has a very traditional and recognizable mythology that is Greek, Roman or its predecessors/contemporaries like Sumerian or even Egyptian etc. like I picture elaborate burial rituals, Parthenon-like structures, etc. I think when the Targaryens invaded there was some marriage between religious beliefs.

I always imagine the literature of the Seven’s religion to take on much more of the mythologized story/poems/hymns of Ancient Greece, with that strange sort of circular and concurrent timeline, rather than the sort of linear arc that Jewish and Christian texts often seem to be (like, I don’t think, first there was Westerosi Adam and Eve, then Cain and Abel, the Noah, then Abraham, then Isaac and Ishmael, etc. or the idea of a House of David that eventually leads to Jesus, etc within Westerosi religion). It’s not a chronicle. There also appears to be no Savior figure, not in the Christian conception of a deity come to Earth. We have Azor Azhai but that is more reminiscent of Arthur—an extraordinary man with magical friends and strength of character rather than a literal God—and has the vagueness of many prophesies that appear in Greek or Roman mythology.

A lot of Southron Westeros is very Italian/Roman to me. The Lannisters are blatantly copied from the Borgias imo (side note: Tyrion’s storyline is literally about GRRM’s journey to atheism you cannot change my mind), the High Sparrow storyline is literally just Savonarola fanfic (the way the tale of Baelor the Blessed contains elements of George III fanfic). So the form that religion takes in Westeros is Catholic and thus really tactile as opposed to the more academic Protestant religions. Even though we have maesters, I think a lot of the social programming is provided by septons and septas. We also have, however, the sept taking indulgences, lots of man-created liturgies, cult sites, pilgrim tokens and relic tours—all the hallmarks of medieval Catholicism. Can you imagine how sexy Westerosi sainthood could be?!?! They don’t mention it like that but like—I love this idea!

I think it would be interesting to lean into that—are there different varieties of septon, the way there are Cistercians and Benedictines and Franciscans? (I literally am obsessed with monasticism don’t mind me) I think it would also be interesting to consider potential schisms—Like Eastern Orthodoxy and the Western Churches. To me, the schism would clearly occur in Dorne. Do the Dornish practice the Seven? I don’t remember tbh but any form of the Seven would be distinct in Dorne from the rest of Westeros.

The North reminds me of Christianized Scandanavia where many of the indigenous mythologies were re-adapted to folklore and superstitions and occurred alongside the practice of Christianity. The Northern religion is fascinating to me—there is no pantheon. I like to envision its stories as being Celtic or Norse but I think this would take the form of the non-god related stories: giants, fae, brownies, Tolkien-style dwarves. I think there’s something apocalyptic about Northern mythologies—celestial battles, etc. Their traditions are oral, often sung—later developing into troubadours—and stories of heroes similar to Beowulf, Fionn mac Cumhaill, etc. would be popular as well as fabled histories similar to the Aeneid, Arthur, or the Iliad. I don’t think they would have fondness for trickster characters like Loki or Odysseus and would instead focus on the moral or chivalric meanings of the myths.

The Red Priests and Priestesses are Zoroastrians. And I think that’s cool because Zoroastrians are cool.

Anyway, those are my initial thoughts. More will bubble up—this is my literal favorite topic. What about your head canons?

[koheletgirl]

hi shira happy monday shira<3 what are your thoughts on the cw’s crazy ex girlfriend?

hi vic oh well you see that post was a joke because i really do want to talk about it at all times but also i am incapable of. doing that.

so what i am going to do is write down my negative thoughts on the cw's crazy ex girlfriend. bc this blog is a very cxg-positive space and so i never really talk about the things i didnt like. and also bc i literally cant express how much this show means to me and how much i love it, so we'll talk about that instead. and also bc im a hater

so i think it's way too long. i think dividing the story into 4 seasons was a right choice, but whoever decided on the format (40 minutes per episode, at least 13 episodes a season) was wrong. i just noticed s1 and s4 are both 18 episodes each and s2+s3 are 13 episodes each, which. lovely, from a jewish perspective. but they did not need to have that many episodes.

Especially season 1. season 4 has some fillers (and some bad fillers. cats episode comes to mind), but at least it was at a point where rebecca was in a better place so they were a little less painful to watch. season 1 should have been the shortest imo, bc the main theme of it is denial, and you do not need 18 40 minutes episodes to talk about denial. and just in general, the whole pacing is off; if youre like me and you see yourself in rebecca and in the story (and you really love the songs), then sitting through the whole show will be worth it. but if youre not, and you don't, it could be an unnecessarily painful watch even if you do think the story all in all is beautiful and worth telling.

another thing i want to touch on really quickly is something shosh put into words for me - this show was very obviously written by straight women. and it does have some very very good queer rep (specifically, it has some of the best bi rep ive ever seen); but it also misses, especially when it comes to the female characters in the main cast (like, rebecca's "1.8 on the kinsey scale" comment. what is that). also yeah im a heather/valencia truther and the writers were dumb for not seeing that.

anyway.

[hajime-isayama-official]

One main arguments I’ve seen from non Jewish and poc snk Stan’s and that will have that one token Jewish person or friend who says they are not offended and snk isn’t anti Semitic or Nazi propaganda. Or say well isayama isn’t a anti Korean racist or Japanese imperialist that’s all been proven fake blah blah blah. Even if it’s fake the series is still problematic stop using that one Jewish person who isn’t offended they don’t speak for all Jewish people obviously-part 1

Part 2 he also named miksasa after a imperial Japanese battle ship and dot pixels is based off of a Nazi Japanese imperialist I think? Same for Erwin I might be wrong that’s what I looked up. I’m personally not comfortable supporting the series anymore for valid reasons but it’s honestly so hard to find blogs like you who criticize the series and author I’ve only found a small amount of blogs who acknowledge the problematic aspects in both manga and anime unfortunately :(

Oh Anon, you get me going here.

Yes, Mikasa is named after a very successful battleship (it’s supposedly certain success if your manga has a character named after a battleship). 

Pixis was inspired by a Japanese imperial general. He died before WW2 tho. Anyway that sparked huge controversy with the Japanese fans, leading to hate messages towards Yams for years. 

German SNK Wiki claims Erwin was inspired by Erwin Rommel, a general in WW1 and WW2 who later turned against Hitler (it’s fine cause he wasn’t REALLY a Nazi, right? no.). Erwin’s Birthday is the death day of Erwin Rommel. However, since I can’t find a source I’d take that one with a grain of salt. The main Inspiration for Erwin as a character is Ozymandias from Watchmen. So only fictional mass murder for Erwin here lol

These points are already kinda icky, but can be ignored I guess. Of course SNK searches inspiration in military. It’s a series about literal Child Soldiers (which somehow is never a critic point on any anime/manga?!). However it’s also full of dogwhistles and even more uncomfortable references. 

My main points are the portrayal of grey-morality on the case of genocide and the way Isayama clearly draws inspiration from Nazi Germany when he portrays Marley. The latter is not per say problematic. Fullmetal Alchemist is also inspired by The Third Reich and carries a strong anti-imperalist and anti-nazi message. SNK however falls short on that till now. I am not Jewish myself, so I can obviously not determine what is antisemitic and only point out the obvious. Plus my knowledge of things is obviously limited so feel free to correct or join in. 

Isayama pretty much paints the Eldians as the Jews of this “mirror world” World War we witness since the time skip. This is clear by the imagery of the Ghettos he shows, the armbands the Eldians have to wear and much more (Short images search should do the job here). The coding of the Eldians as Jewish equivalent is complete with the Marleyan myth of Eldians ruling the world if no one does anything to hold them in control (aka every antisemitic conspiracy ever). But it doesn’t end there. We know from the manga that Paradis island is basically Madagaskar. 

The Nazis planned to deport about 4 million Polish Jews to Madagaskar in the 1940′s. That plan was shortlived and obviously never put into action for various reasons. So in SNK we have the scenario that the Eldians fled to Paradis in order to get an advantage over the Marleyans. The Eldians who are not on Paradis live in Ghettos on the mainland. That’s a weird coincidence, considering how many islands our big blue planet has. 

What I think is pretty bizarre is that Isayama distorts this by pairing this imo pretty obvious real live inspiration with references to Norse mythology. This is fucked up in so far that Norse mythology is so heavily appropriated by the Nazis that many runes are outlawed in Germany till today and showing interest in Norse mythology is still often associated with white supremacy (have a look at Neo-Nazi signs and see the pattern). Like, this combination of Norse and early 20th century German imagery isn’t even a dogwhistle anymore, it’s yelling “I SUCK NAZI DICK AND I LIKE IT”.  The references he uses are  especially Ymir and the paths, that can then be seen as the world tree Yggdrasil:

The tree connects the Eldians and the nine titans which share their number with the nine realms that Yggdrasil holds. There’s some more, tiny stuff, like Erwin being easily interpreted as a reference to the God Tyr (God of battle, who loses his right arm in the mouth of a beast) and Hanji to the God Odin (Losing an eye in a well in the pursuit of gaining knowledge and wisdom). Both of these Gods are probably the most appropriated by white supremacists. When Ymir first turns into a titan it is at castle Utgard. In Norse mythology Utgard is a place in Jotunheim, the realm of the Jotun who the giant Ymir is the first ancestor of.

In general the pairing of clear WW2 imagery and references to Norse mythology is a mixture that is VERY sketchy and should always make you suspicious. Especially since these two are not going together (as in Marley using references to Norse mythology), but against each other. So we have both sides (Marley and Eldia) associated with white supremacy. Another thing that I will never be over is that Zeke and Eren are obviously named in reference to the German words Sieg und Ehre (Victory and Honor) referencing white supremacist buzzwords. 

Then we have the issue that the main conflict is not with the Marley people, who are basically our mirrorworld Nazis. The conflict is AMONG the Eldians. Liberating the Eldians form the Marleyans is not even a thing, because we’re busy keeping two Eldians from practicing genocide/euthanasia on their own kind. So in this aspect Eldians are painted basically just as bad as Marleyans (and we have that “everyone is wrong in a war” Issue again). 

I think in the end Eren’s will to kill everyone will lead to Eldians and Marley people accepting their differences or whatever and leading to unision in the shared enemy (kind of already happens in the manga) and while I think that’s a possibly interesting way to go it’s imo not when one of those parties has been subjected to centuries of genocide by the other. Assistant says a good closure to the Norse Mythology theme would be the manga going for Ragnarök, so everyone, Marleyan and Eldian, dies, except for two people who start the world anew. After all anisemitism or in this case anti-eldian sentiment doesn’t just stop after a world war. I don’t really fuck with this bullshit we got in one of the recent chapters where this one Marley general was like “Oh no, they were only people after all”. Bro, your whole society is built on them not being people and all of that is gone in one day of crisis? *doubt.png* 

There’s obviously more to it than that and especially my understanding of the manga might be a bit off, since I don’t read it as attentively as I used to anymore. At this point I’m so fucking suspicious of this manga tbh. I doubt that we can come out of this with an anti-imperialist or anti-fascist message. 

This does of course not mean no one should read or watch the manga or anime. I read/watch it too as you see. But it’s always good to be critical of the media you consume and take concerns from others serious, when it comes to stuff like this. 

[onewomancitadel]

What are your thoughts on the claim that Knightfall is a dangerous portrayal to men women? imo this is a buncha bullshit but a lot of people I see calling it a "crack ship" are also saying that if it ever happened it would be toxic and harmful. Some say the idea of having a man save a woman is wrong and others say having Jaune date a killer would ruin his character. How do you deal with stupidity on this level?

Lol it's bullshit. Of course it's bullshit. It's not even worth debating because it's such a waste of time and such a reductive opinion grounded in bad media analysis and bad philosophy. If you hear the word 'toxic' you need to stage exit the conversation, it's a red flag.

Sure, women consuming the wrong fiction will make them get into abusive relationships, I love the victim blaming here. Or attributing abuse in real life relationships being a result of fiction? Yeah, I am sure that is going to fly in sincere debates surrounding intimate partner violence (IPV). I can guaratee you if you read any surrounding literature about IPV or DV, the focus is not going to be on who likes Kylo Ren too much or reads the wrong type of romance.

Even then, I don't think Knightfall is a) a crackship - it most certainly isn't, thank you, it's very narratively justified, and one of Jaune's biggest moments in the show, well two of them, are with her, or b) something bad or toxic at all, in fact thematically motivating the relationship (in canon) would be healing, forgiveness, and compassion, and fundamentally uplifting the notion of nonviolence. So Knightfall isn't even anything textually 'problematic'.

If it were textually problematic I would still dismiss the notion it would have a serious impact on real-life relationships - though trying to draw some type of actual casual impact is extremely difficult, because the kinds of things influencing real life harm is actually multi-modal. If you care about that thing, sincerely and truly, which to be quite frank people obsessed with toxicity in fiction don't care. Motivating a lot of this is just cloaked ship wars, or 'me not like this and it hurts my fee-fees'. Or deep, profound resentment for the art and structure of narrative and metaphor.

The reality is that tonally R/WBY is fantastical and it is romantic. A character like Cinder Fall killing Pyrrha Nikos isn't just flatly about killing, it's also conveying lots of different ideas:

the inevitability of change and growth (ooh! Autumnal theming!), the violence of change, the complete unseating she symbolically represents in the story [for the characters to grow], the death of childhood, the complicated morality of an expanding worldview as you come to see adults as people/the world beyond black and white/understand what made Cinder do it

and if you flatly define that as 'Cinder Fall big bad meanie who need dieeeeee' then your analysis bad too. But the irony here is that people who say ships like Knightfall are toxic are people fundamentally not interested in a) metaphor and the relationship we have to stories emotionally, b) actual compassion and transformation and healing, c) actual harm in the real world, especially when they go out of their way to hurt real people over fiction. You don't know the shit I've seen in the Reylo fandom (and yes, Reylo is a feminine-driven narrative, Rey was on the Heroine's Journey (most prominently in TLJ), though Reylo and Knightfall aren't necessarily tonally 1:1). I mean it was really shocking and so bad I don't want to talk about it, and people used Reylo as a cover to harass Jewish Reylo fans - calling them N*zi apologists!, Black Reylo fans, female and trans fans, and I saw some really shocking stuff. Again and again and again. By the time we hit the pressure point of TROS I saw one of the most offensive opinions about Kylo Ren expressed and retweeted on Twitter, which I advise you to skip the rest of this paragraph if you are in a sensitive space mentally: a user suggested that actually, if Kylo Ren's evil is analogous to mental illness, sometimes mentally ill people really do need to kill themselves because they're beyond help. Tell me: how is Kylo Ren being naughty worse than that? It fucked me up and still fucks me up, not just because of that but because of other things I have experienced.

So just ignore their framework and their approach. It's not about harm and it's not about protecting people or caring about what sort of relationships ought to be depicted in media. It's using false concern to load their argument and make it impossible to debate because you might concede territory to the idea that toxicity is okay. It's literally impossible to ever hold a conversation and I can guarantee you that 99% of people I've encountered with that opinion are 100% disinterested in hearing anything to challenge the notion of 'toxicity' because it's not about that - it's about ship and story taste. And nihilistic storytelling. Because stories are stupid and metaphors are also stupid.

Some say the idea of having a man save a woman is wrong

Lol this isn't even what it would be, but they're automatically trying to say it will be because they can't conceive of Cinder as an active character in the story because a) big mean baddie and b) stupid woman, really showing their hand there about how they conceive of female characters. Jaune helping Cinder, when everybody else has completely failed her, is profoundly meaningful, and Cinder being able to act on her own terms is profoundly empowering considering her enslavement.

But anybody trying to convince you that community is weak and we shouldn't help each other and we can't be uplifted through connection either has an ulterior motive or is somebody who has bought into deeply cynical thinking, which is probably more hurtful than anything Cinder could do.

and others say having Jaune date a killer would ruin his character.

Ruin his character how? Because he's their self-insert and it disrupts their projection? Because Jaune shouldn't do something important and transformative and he's better off left to the side? Because his Semblance shouldn't have a serious impact on the story? Lol

Yeah, would be so much better if Jaune killed Cinder. I've heard that story before, it's tragic and I don't like it. The whole point of Cinder's redemption is it would redeem the tragedy of Pyrrha's death. It's narrative patterns babey

How do you deal with stupidity on this level?

For some context, I am a TFA-era Reylo. I have seen it all. People who say Knightfall is toxic etc. (which I honestly haven't even seen because I know how to curate my fandom experience - just avoid stuff you don't like if you dislike Knightfall) are like little babies. Watch this

The way I personally deal with it is actually just to recognise you're never really having the argument you think that you're having. If you're somebody who takes IPV and the depiction of women in media really seriously, and you are interested in the way we resonate with narrative and want to discuss what it means for people to identify with villains, and if you enjoy discussing things seriously and trying to hear the other side out, you are having the wrong conversation and your 'ummmm this ship is toxic!!!' interlocutor does not care.

Yes, I'll allow there's probably some actual anxiety and projection into 'problematic media' that is actually about earnest concern - that displacement isn't controversial. But I would say that this doesn't make up the majority of the crowd. They're not interested in peer-reviewed sources, they're not interested in the kinds of 'problematic' stories which have been a part of storytelling for all of human history - and they deny humanist universalism and connection through stories as well, for dealing with complicated experiences, they're not interested in seriously debating the topic. It is the fandom age-old story of ship wars, and what kind of story someone is expecting, and this is especially apparent now with the rise of corporate storytelling. An easy story with cynical self-awareness, good vs. bad, kill bad guy. Make sure to insert a joke in there just in case you are getting too emotionally sincere.

But that doesn't matter. It doesn't mean anything to those people. Don't bother. Find your bliss instead. That goes for people who don't like Knightfall: maybe stop trying to destroy things and ask for other people to do the dirty work of making 'pure' media, and try to create things yourself.

You know why those 'pure' fandoms scare off creators and pretty much have dead fandoms? Because this kind of anodyne narrative analysis is actually creatively deadening. It's boring. Once you overthink your story this way it's impossible to write for. It's much more freeing to work in service to narrative, not in service to perceived political good... which for that matter, is a total separate tin of worms, which once you open up is extremely dangerous. If a story must be 'politically good' in order to allow to be told, I can guarantee you it will be used by the powers that be, not to tell empowering stories.

None of this is to say that I don't seriously think about the way social attitudes imprint themselves on fiction. The argument here is that social attitudes imprinted on fiction are as harmful, or as concerning as harm in real life, and must be wholly avoided. I am very comfortable reading stories which contain misogyny; I can recognise it's wrong, and part of my critical analysis enables me to use my groan up girl brain to identify whether it's something being used by the story to further its themes or whether the author is a fuckwit. I like to think that many others are just the same.

But Knightfall's not even like that lol. If anything it's empowering. To me I find the story of the deeply wounded villainess who comes into her own feminine power and redeems it through someone reaching out to her with uncompromising and literally magical compassion like, um, very compelling. Narratively the only person who can forgive Cinder is Jaune. That's why it's fun. It's not about fighting what you hate, but saving what you love.

Also, if the deep wound of the story is Ozlem, Jaune and Cinder - two characters in an ensemble cast, yes - coming together and proving you could work back from Ozlem as enemies back to lovers is... everything. That's not just emotionally moving, that's actually seriously saying something.

Although to me, the idea that you can still come back from something, and fix it, and you're not too far gone, and you can change, and you can open your heart, and you could decide not to choose violence today, and you could have a home, and you could be free, and you could take on responsibility you're prepared for, is very moving. See? It's not about toxicity. In my opinion, it's a resistance to vulnerability. Bad characters who change and recognise badness in themselves are scary.

Thanks for your ask anon. I may have got a bit impassioned there... sorrey...

[imperiuswrecked]

To me, it doesn’t make sense to make Magneto the main villain because it has been done so much before and it would connect it so much to the Fox Films. Also I think there is a GREAT laziness in writing Magneto especially in films. He generally didn’t want to kill all humans, subjugate them yes because he doesn’t trust them. Which isn’t a ‘good guy’ move in itself and he slips in and out of.

He legit murdered genocide I think when he was going to kill all humans. Like no.

I also think that the average cinema goer likes Magneto too much… or maybe that is me. It would also require them to recast the most famous faces of the franchises?

Like is anyone going to care if they recast Jean, Scott, Iceman, Rogue, Kitty, Beast even Mystique but Magneto? I don’t know. I have long been a fan of an actual Jewish actor playing Magneto but following Ian McKellan would be difficult for the casual fans to accept. I don’t think Fassbender left such an amazing impression.

Even my most average MCU fans friends (and god they love the MCU 😤 but I see past it) still talk about how much they want to see a Magneto solo film.

To me I would put the focus on their reveal and sentinels. Then again I thought they’ll go through Krakoa stuff. Like it turns out the mutants have been living on this Island etc

With the ‘simpler times’ comment I have to for the sake of my sanity have to think that it was because Pietro knew where he was. Things were clear to him, as much as it hurt he had his sister. The following trauma had not occurred. Again I don’t think this is true but I am trying to reason bad writing. He didn’t doubt his morality but was indebted and controlled. Shitty actions were out of his control.

I don’t read Avengers so I didn’t know he was shelved for so long.

I think the Trial of Magneto is trying to ride on the coattails of Wandavision because even though she’s not a mutant a lot of the internet was wanting Magneto to show up. So what is the best way to get those fans who wanted to see that? Set up a family comic book where they establish the family again because I guess the MCU fans heard they’ve changed their background and themselves didn’t like it.

I see the Trial of Magneto as something poorly thought out as they saw what the audience was interested in. The timeline kind of clashes uncomfortably with Inferno. Which makes me think it was wedged in there to ride the Wandavision train and undo the retcon on the side of the main storyline.

Thank you for reading my essay/rant

Ok so I'm going to first say you have a lot of great thoughts and great on picking up the whole forced feeling. You are right, it does feel wedged in there and it does feel forced because that's exactly what Marvel did.

The Trial of Magneto was supposed to be an X-Factor plot, it was Leah Williams next arc, here's an article link talking about her podcast: link (yes I know it's bleeding cool but I don't have time to listen to the podcast)

Leah Williams tells us that X-Factor was canceled because Leah's pitch for the Magneto/Wanda story for X-Factor, now called Trial Of Magneto, became such a popular pitch at Marvel but they thought the reader numbers for X-Factor wasn't big enough for this story, so they wanted it as a separate comic. And canceled X-Factor #10 rather than seeing it run as originally planned, with the Trial beginning in X-Factor #15. Williams says she only learned about the cancellation of X-Factor when she was writing #9, so as she had to finish the series quickly, squeezing six issues worth of story into those last two issues, calling it "cramped and rushed".

So I'm not a fan of Leah but the way Marvel treats it's writers has always been terrible so this cancellation doesn't surprise me. Could this be about W*ndaVision? It's likely, but it's more likely this has to do with Hickman bowing out. It's no secret literally everyone hated the retcon and I always knew it would be undone but I didn't think it would take 6 years but here we are.

Hickman leaving is a bigger thing, he stated in an interview ( link ) that he had planned Krakoa and X-Men to be a 3 arc story, and he wasn't allowed to move onto the 2nd arc because the clowns at Marvel liked the idea of Krakoa too much and I'm so mad because that's exactly the kinda behavior that annoys me with the fans, them thinking Krakoa is just a fun playground for the mutants to mess around with.

"Oh, plans have changed entirely," Hickman says. "When I pitched the X-Men story I wanted to do, I pitched a very big, very broad, three-act, three-event narrative, the first of which was House of X. And while this loosely worked as a three-year plan, I told Marvel upfront that I honestly had no idea how long the first part would last because there were a lot of interesting ideas that I had seeded that other creators would want to play with, and so, we left this rather open-ended. I was also pretty clear with all the writers that came into the office what the initial, three-act plan was so no one would be surprised when it was time for the line to pivot." Hickman continues, "However, I also knew that I was cooking with dynamite, and it was very possible that what I had written in House of X, and the ideas contained within, was not actually the first act of a three-act story, but something that resonated more deeply and worked more like Giant-Size X-Men, where it would represent a paradigm shift in the entire X-Men line for a prolonged period of time. So, during the pandemic, when the time came for me to start pointing things toward writing the second-act event, I asked everyone if they were ready for me to do that, and to a man, everyone wanted to stay in the first act. It was really interesting, because I appreciated that House of X resonated with them to the extent that they didn't want it to end, but the reality was that I knew I would be leaving the line early."

I'm so MAD because the thing I was predicting, that Hickman would have it come crashing down and everything would be revealed to be terrible and Mutant Death Sex Cult Island wasn't a paradise is never going to happen because the fucking CLOWNS at Marvel don't want him to move past it. I may have my personal gripes about some of Hickman's writing but we can't deny the man wrote one of the best if only the best Marvel Event with Fantastic Four/Avengers/Secret War.

As for the simpler times comment, like I have my theories that I wrote out here, and that's what I think is most likely but I do think Pietro's life has never been easy or simple once his adoptive parents died. Pietro could be drinking to a time before the Brotherhood.

I would love for a Jewish actor to play Magneto and any other characters who are Jewish. I would love for a Jewish writer to be able to write them too. However Ian's performance literally set him in the minds of the people as Magneto, not even Fassbender's bleh one note Magneto could compare. Imo the only reason people liked the younger Magneto was because he was young, handsome (? ig idk i dont simp for him) and they could ship him with young professor X (cowards. where is the old man ship???) But I feel like a new actor could definitely fill the role if they are Jewish and the writing was good.

Magneto's writing in comics... well I just wish we could have a Jewish writer for him. There's some great stuff for him but I feel like characters like him and Doom could be written better by non white/american writers.

Although by today's standards the og X-Men trilogy doesn't hold up I will defend the first two movies with my life simply because after Blade these movies opened up the idea that a good serious, non campy version where characters called Magneto and Cyclops were taken seriously. X2 in my mind was the definitive X-Men movie. Was it totally comic accurate? No, but it doesn't do what the MCU does, it doesn't treat the watcher like they need to have their hand held through all the military propaganda and "hints to the comics". Also side note; the reason no one cared about any of the other X-Men being recast is because all through most of the X-Men movies the focal story point has been Professor X vs Magneto. If they really want people to care about those characters/actors then we would need stories that focused on them. Not like how Storm barely had any character growth or plot in the og X-Men and even young Ororo got mishandled by the script. This is why I feel we should have "origin movies" for the X-Men that don't do what Wolverine Origins did and try to make a whole new cast but instead should use the stories as they are. If it was Kurt's story then we would see him join the X-Men, and have the other actors revolve around that. Same with each of the others, the X-Men work best when they are working off each other and each given enough screen/page time to shine. Unfortunately we all have our favorites, even movies and writers, so those are who are going to be pushed for fans to love.

Thank you for your long rant and sorry for my own long rant/reply.