#And we all know some religious people do tend to force their religion on others.

[mariacallous]

Vanity Fair: The things we associate with freedom—free speech, religious liberty—have been co-opted by the Republican Party. Do you think you could walk me through how that happened historically and how Democrats could take that word back?

Timothy Snyder: Yeah. I think the way it happened historically is actually quite dark there. There’s an innocent way of talking about this, which is to say, “Oh, some people believe in negative freedom and some people believe in positive freedom—and negative freedom just means less government and positive freedom means more government.” And when you say it like that, it just sounds like a question of taste. And who knows who’s right?

Whereas historically speaking, to answer your question, the reason why people believe in negative freedom is that they’re enslaving other people, or they are oppressing women, or both. The reason why you say freedom is just keeping the government off my back is that the central government is the only force that’s ever going to enfranchise those slaves. It’s the only force which is ever going to give votes to those women. And so that’s where negative freedom comes from. I’m not saying that everybody who believes in negative freedom now owns slaves or oppresses women, but that’s the tradition. That’s the reason why you would think freedom is negative, which on its face is a totally implausible idea. I mean, the notion that you can just be free because there’s no government makes no sense, unless you’re a heavily drugged anarchist.

And so, as the Republican Party has also become the party of race in our country, it’s become the party of small government. Unfortunately, this idea of freedom then goes along for the ride, because freedom becomes freedom from government. And then the next step is freedom becomes freedom for the market. That seems like a small step, but it’s a huge step because if we believe in free markets, that means that we actually have duties to the market. And Americans have by and large accepted that, even pretty far into the center or into the left. If you say that term, “free market,” Americans pretty generally won’t stop you and say, “Oh, there’s something problematic about that.” But there really is: If the market is free, that means that you have a duty to the market, and the duty is to make sure the government doesn’t intervene in it. And once you make that step, you suddenly find yourself willing to accept that, well, everybody of course has a right to advertise, and I don’t have a right to be free of it. Or freedom of speech isn’t really for me; freedom of speech is for the internet.

And that’s, to a large measure, the world we live in.

You have a quote in the book about this that distills it well: “The countries where people tend to think of freedom as freedom to are doing better by our own measures, which tend to focus on freedom from.”

Yeah, thanks for pulling that out. Even I was a little bit struck by that one. Because if you’re American and you talk about freedom all the time and you also spend all your time judging other countries on freedom, and you decide what the measures are, then you should be close to the top of the list—but you’re not. And then you ask, “Why is that?” When you look at countries like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, France, Germany, or Ireland—that are way ahead of us—they’re having a different conversation about freedom. They don’t seem to talk about freedom as much as we do, but then when they do, they talk about it in terms of enabling people to do things.

And then you realize that an enabled population, a population that has health care and retirement and reliable schools, may be better at defending things like the right to vote and the right to freedom of religion and the right to freedom of speech—the things that we think are essential to freedom. And then you realize, Oh, wait, there can be a positive loop between freedom to and freedom from. And this is the big thing that Americans get a hundred percent wrong. We think there’s a tragic choice between freedom from and freedom to—that you’ve got to choose between negative freedom and positive freedom. And that’s entirely wrong.

What do you make of Kamala Harris’s attempt to redeem the word?

It makes me happy if it’s at the center of a political discussion. And by the way, going back to your first question, it’s interesting how the American right has actually retreated from freedom. It has been central for them for half a century, but they are now actually retreating from it, and they’ve left the ground open for the Democrats. So, politically, I’m glad they’re seizing it—not just because I want them to win, but also because I think on the center left or wherever she is, there’s more of a chance for the word to take on a fuller meaning. Because so long as the Republicans can control the word, it’s always going to mean negative freedom.

I can’t judge the politics that well, but I think it’s philosophically correct and I think we end up being truer to ourselves. Because my big underlying concern as an American is that we have this word which we’ve boxed into a corner and then beaten the pulp out of, and it really doesn’t mean anything anymore. And yet it’s the only imaginable central concept I can think of for American political theory or American political life.

Timothy Snyder Explains How Americans Might Adapt to Fascism Under Trump

[senkusphone]

Happy Stone Day, everyone!

On this day, when celebrating the onion man is what most people indulge on, let's also turn our eyes to the fascinating civilization that is Ishigami village, in this mini post (compared to what I usually do anyway).

Starting with the reason I am doing this in the first place, Stone Day. It is a celebration from Ishigami Village that takes place in January 4th, which happens to be Senku's birthday, likely an easter egg left by Byakuya in the hundred tales. Unfortunately we weren't shown anything regarding what this celebration involves.

As the manga itself points out, Stone day is significant in several ways, for one, 1/4 is i-shi in japanese, which also means Stone. It is Senku's birthday (and if you've been following me you'll know that the day Senku was born in, January 4th 2004, was the day that Nasa's Spirit rover landed on Mars).

Another tradition is of course the grand bout, which there isn't much left to say about since it was explained in detail in the series, even down to its specific rules

Rule 6 is the only one that wasn't relevant in the series as far as I can tell.

It's been also vaguely implied that there are other fighting tournaments that take place in the village, which makes sense, since why would you keep an open arena just to use it once very 20 years or so?

(Sideways to save vertical space, Suika will pray for your neck)

However it's never explained how this tradition started to begin with; did it exist in treasure island and disappeared after the Ishigami branched off, or did it start with them in the mainland?

The society structure of contemporary treasure island is substantially different, with a number of small villages that are all (at least in theory) managed by a centralized government composed of the master (or "head" much to our amusement) and the prime minister, where most power is held by the master, who also serves as the main religious figure, being the one who largely keeps the hundred tales, which are passed from generation to generation along his lineage.

In Ishigami village things kinda flipped and thus spawned a system that is at least half matriarchal so to speak. Now political power is split between the chief and the priestess, where the chief holds most executive authority while the priestess holds most of the religious power, and it is the lineage of the priestess that keeps the tales and that power in-family, with the chief being some allegedly suited rando from the village.

Even though it's the obligation of the priestess to marry the chief, she is rarely if ever shown as a subordinate to him and both can be seen directing the village, which I think it's very interesting. The anime went as far as expanding on this, by implying that it was Ruri who told Kokuyo to abdicate his position to Senku.

Sneakily she gets to keep being the priestess without having to be engaged, and we see her taking leading roles from then on.

Now I've talked about religious figures but what is their religion to begin with? Hard to tell, we know that they believe in multiple gods who control the forces of nature such as lightning. Similarly it's also been shown that prior to Senku's arrival, they believed themselves to be the only humans on earth, at least some of them believed the earth was flat, and most bizarrely, they believed the moon was something akin to a floating lake, owning to its small apparent size, however that works.

Perhaps they took note of how water tends to form spheres due to surface tension? This reminds me of how some scientist a few centuries ago (but idr who at this moment) believed the moon to be a solid mass of congealed air.

The last thing I want to bring up is the Ishigami village rope, reportedly made with a special technique that's unique to them.

It is also said that the rope reflects rank and profession somehow, but this is not reflected in any noticeable way on the series itself. Boichi probably hadn't been told about this when he designed all 40 known villagers in the span of one week.

The rope is worn somewhere around the body, and it contains a single red thread spun into it, serving as a symbol of kinship among them.

For now I'll leave it at that, as it's getting pretty late in the day, and pretty much all of this is written on the wiki article to begin with. Hope you enjoyed it, I'll see you all some other day.

[noodles-doodles01]

Women and HOTD Pt 1: Alicent

All the women in the series are very passive, and not in a good way. Everything in the show just happens to them and they have no autonomy no matter what. I will admit that yes, Westeros is not kind to women, however within every confine there is some space. Rhaenyra is a princess and soon to be heir to the throne, Alicent is Queen consort. They hold some semblance of power whether it be between themselves or toward other male characters. The show seems to take on this false idea that women would never go to war because they're not hot headed like the men around them, but they place this idea in the most inopportune moments where it makes them seem stupid.

Going into specifics, let's start with Alicent: In FnB, she is more of an evil stepmother rather than an ex best friend. I did not mind this change because the opportunities were there: Alicent was treated as an equal by Rhaenyra when they were friends, so despite Rhaenyra's class above Alicent in society, she did not feel it. Then, post marriage to the king, Alicent is alone, and forced to pump out babies for a man the age of her father and cannot complain about it. Moreover, Rhaenyra seems to take out her anger and frustration on her, not seeing the pressures she endures frm her own father. That kind of reaction shows the first aspect of Rhaenyra's privilege: She can tell her father off about being married away. In Alicent's eyes, Rhaenyra's living her best life, and the lack of understanding would rub anyone the wrong way.

Like Alicent dealing with Rhaenyra's anger would hold so much of the following:

I did not choose to marry your father

Do you truly think if this was what I wanted that I wouldn't tell you?

You act as though producing heirs is your greatest fear and a burden you pity women for, yet here I sit before you and all you give me is contempt

Add that to the religious trauma she's inducing but clings to it anyway bc its how she copes (as we know from Alicent explaining how praying is the closest she can get to her own mother).

So right then, the shift of perceived equality is there. Alicent is Queen Consort but a child bride, who watches as the princess waltzes around huffing and puffing as she actively lives out being a baby factory.

But Alicent is someone driven by principle, hence her clutching to religion. She is doing this for duty. For the sake of her father. She is being rewarded for her perserverance, and would be punished for sinning.

Until Rhaenyra sleeps with Daemon and Cole.

I don't think it's entirely the fact that Rhaenyra did it unmarried, but rather the fact that she is able to do it without any sense of consequence. Add this to the fact that she lies to Alicent's face, swearing upon her mother (as though that isn't a soft spot for Alicent), and it results in getting Otto taken away.

Where is the justice Alicent sticks by in that?

Rhaenyra sinned, she lied to her face, and instead of dealing with any consequence, she is stranded amongst people she doesn't know, whilst Rhaenyra gets hush hush tea.

The shift grows wider.

Alicent, realizing she is all alone and is unsupported on all sides, decides to wear the green dress. Which is iconic in itself; she realizes that in her marriage to Viserys, the man who is meant to protect her in this context, is leaving her out to dry whilst tending for his daughter. This act of the dress is the first form of wiggle room Alicent gets in her cage; she has tried being nice and forgiving and she ended up alone for it.

By the end of the wedding, Criston Cole as her protector is added to her confinement. Another bit of growth, and the shift grows wider.

I do wish the show depicted how Alicent tormented Rhaenyra more, because that would display how Rhaenyra had grown more tension with Alicent, showing how both sides are at fault to some degree for their falling out. Nonetheless, the years pass and Rhaenyra has bastard sons, and its obvious (ideally for me they would follow some semblance of similarity to the books but we do with what we got), and Viserys does.not.care.

At this point, I feel like Alicent's resentment for Rhaenyra would not be solely from comparing their lives, but also because of how much Viserys ignores Alicent, removing any sense of power she may hold, for the sake of catering to Rhaenyra. We see this in his ignorance to the bastards, we see this in his lack of care for his children with Alicent, and his overall cheery attitude no matter what happens for the sake of "family". In Alicent's eyes, Rhaenyra is still the spoiled child from back when they were children.

Wouldn't that fill her with utter rage? The concept that Alicent is QUEEN, yet is constantly upstaged by the princess and her sinful whims whilst Alicent's children suffer for it? Wouldn't Otto's words echo in her mind that her children would not be safe should Rhaenyra be queen?

And, being the religious woman she is, she would spread those complaints to her children. She would spread her ideas of Rhaenyra and her children to Aemond, Aegon and even Helaena. She tells them out of fear, that they need to know that Rhaenyra acts kind but will hurt others to protect herself. Those ideas will stick in her kids brains because of course it does. I will go into more detail about Alicent's kids in a separate post.

This all comes to a peak when Aemond loses his eye, which is a personal fave episode of mine because I had thought we would get some glimpse of book Alicent after this. Aemond is fatally injured, especially considering the time they live in. Westeros is not kind to those who are visibly different, and it was the resul of a children's spat. Of COURSE Alicent would assume that the boys attacked her own son; it's a projection of sorts, she spreads this hatred against Rhaenyra's kids to her own children, she would assume Rhaenyra does the same. And her son has paid the price for it.

Yet Viserys gives Rhaenyra a slap on the wrist, and instead berates Aegon and Aemond about a comment made, completely ignoring the fact that Aemond is MISSING AN EYE. Alicent is given full proof here and now that Rhaenyra will always get what she wants no matter the cost, and her "Thank you father" acts as a way to rub it in. So of course, she grabs the knife and attacks Rhaenyra, where is duty? Where is sacrifice?

THIS is when she show decides "lol and then she forgot all about that"

Because afterwards, Alicent becomes passive; the usurpation is based on a stupid misunderstanding, when it could have simply been Alicent pushing for Aegon to protect her children, because she can control her own action, she cannot control Rhaenyra's.

In S2, they shift even further with this idea of Alicent being someone who has things happen to them, not even done to them. BnC should have had Alicent present, because it is her first view of consequence she gets from the Dance. It is a foretelling of tragedy and she only suffers more for it. Instead, she is with Criston Cole.

I will always hate the pairing, because I would never believe that Alicent, who has suffered SA at the hands of men, would simply turn to another man once Viserys is dead, when that man is CRISTON COLE. Alicent is canonically weirded out by Cole's interest in Rhaenyra in the books, and it makes perfect sense for that to translate in the show with Alicent being younger. Why on earth would she get with him?

Worst of all, they have Alicent almost depending on the men in her life for protection? As though she wouldn't already know that they're useless from her experiences with Viserys and her father?

And the worst part of it is that the writers STILL could have gotten the "woe is me im a victim of the patriarchy" idea of Alicent in S2, because that is when Aegon and Aemond do take the wheel. Aemond murdered a child, and in return Jahaerys was taken. She could have been depicted having little to no control over the actions after, and how her family suffers for it, because it is literally canon that later in the story, when she loses everything in the war, she regrets ever wearing the green dress.

So could you imagine, Alicent, a woman who has pushed past her position given the small amount of room she had in power, slowly being taken out of the picture because the situation soon snowballs into a tragedy she can no longer control? And how at the end of it all, she loses everything she fought tooth and nail to protect.

Instead, we get a wishy washy character, who could have been executed PERFECTLY by Olivia Cooke if done right, wandering around the castle because the writers don't know what to do with her anymore.

[nootthereststop]

Pt. 3 pookies sorry it i cant spell even thoigh english is my first language my typing is AWFUL.

Falsettos commentary: Trina edition

So i think its really understated the impact of religion on all the characters not just jason?

I would like to preface this post by saying this isnt a post about the flaws of religion, i have no problem with religion and i believe that it can be a lovely thing to be religious in some form if one is so inclined, scincere apologies if i mischaracterize any aspects of judaisim in this post, ive tried to educate myself on the little i do cover in this but i understand it would likely not be accurate, if i have said anything that doesnt seem right please let me know so i can fix it!

We see (especially in act two) how the cast is not very enamoured by the idea of religion in lines like "this is so much crap, throw a simple party, religions just a trap to ensnare the weak and the dumb" "(days like this) we ALMOST believe in god ect"

Trina is in my opinion most affected by a jewish upbringing. We see that in the expectations placed on her by her mother and father "i was sure growing up i would live the life my mother assumed id live, very jewish, very middleclass, and very straight" and of course her father indirectly forcing her into her first marraige which ended in divorce. A major aspect of the show is highlighting the glaring flaws in everyday people; how we manipulate and lie, "we are manipulating people and we need to know our worst sides arent ignored" . We see one of trinas "flaws" to be what she frames as some level of sexual frustration/ dependency, as alot of im breaking down explores her (lack of an) intimite relationship and the strain this puts on her, as her mind consistently defaults for sexual refrences and innuendos, sometimes to the point of objectifying herself, (something that we also see alot consistently throughout the show) "whos lusty and requires a fling with a female thing" "me im just a freak who needs it maybe every other week". As im not personally jewish I am very uneducated on jewish practices and belief systems HOWEVER many religions tend to have a very negative standing on sexual intimacy for the express purpouse of pleasure. This appears to cause trina to objectify herself as well as conform to the societal roles assigned to her, despite not really seeming to enforce them on others "he decides the role to assume". We see the pressure to conform to religious practices when jason doesnt want a bar mitzfah "not with g-ns but k-ll your mother rather than humiliate her" despite not really seeming to visit a synagouge or encourage aspects of religion such as prayer onto jason. I think this shows how her eeligion is so deeply engrained these practices are no more than habit and how disconnected she truly is from that religion

[reijnders]

IPA and gloss under the cut, as well as explanation of the writing system for those not in the know.

In the modern day of the Starflight setting, the widespread culture commonly known by the dominant language of the region (twac̊in̊), or the name tewenic is considered to be shared across many hundreds of miles of land, and by various major ethnic groups on the continent of Șotuŧahtěnu. However, the coastal regions before the arrival of H̊lanueli people from the north is considered the birthplace of much of this culture; the general religious template, languages, staple foods, and much more all stem from this ancient scrubland. There, stories of the gods were revered, but not often recorded in verse. Exploration of art via wordcraft was often left to their western neighbors, or the southern desert nomads that eventually were assimilated into the sedentary settlements of the Tewenic. Their writing system is one of the few things that was adapted from outside cultures, coming from the exploring sailors that first brought H̊lanueli traders(along with their own of course) to the central coasts. Thus, not much can be found in terms of poet being a scholarly position until we get much closer to a time where connection across the world is readily available. Poems such as these, poems of a more personal nature are often all that can be found, with few exceptions for written versions of older prayers, which tended to be standardized for memorization.

The native religion is polytheistic, with a pantheon of 17(so far) gods that have to do with various forms of water. Sometimes this is as simple as gods for bodies of water that can be encountered across the continent, and gods that bring said waters down from the sky or mountains, and sometimes they are the embodiment of the fear of being at sea during a storm, or a god that protects children swimming in the shallows. While seen as having mythical, awesome powers, these gods are also regarded as beings closer to as nonchalant bystanders to the affairs of mortals, rather than active participants in the shaping of their world. The gods act because it is in their nature, not because they are inherently good or evil. Sanadec brings freshwater down from the rivers because that is what she does, and she is flighty and thoughtless because the rivers themselves wander and twist aimlessly through the forests. Han̊ brings earthquakes and tsunamis because she knows nothing else. Some gods are more popular(Le, Yin, Dalse in particular, representatives of fishing/fertility, storms/change, and dreams respectively in particular) and are prayed to more often, but overall, these prayers translate better as forceful commands. Prayer should be strong enough to turn the god’s head and convince them that your voice is not just another crash of the waves.

The sea itself is one of the most important objects in this religion, though reverence of it varies in interpretation. Focusing on the central coasts, where this poem originates, the sea is seen as a binding force. You are born from its waters, and when you die, you are returned to them. Basically, everything culturally significant happens centered around some type of water, but as a region very dependent on the ocean for primary trade routes, a source of seawater can be found communally in many residential areas. The sea is neither good nor bad, not a blessing or a place to be feared. It’s all of those things, but it also just Is. It’s a fact of existence, and one that everyone there owes their lives to, in a sense.

The poem, written by an unknown author in the northwestern peninsula of modern day Ac̊ah̊i, was found on a fragment of parchment in the storage section of a long-ruined temple, presumably because whoever had received it called those walls home. The most popular consensus is that the poem is a request to see each other, as lovers, which would tie in closely with the theory of the recipient being a temple dweller. Its possible that the author was originally from one of the more extant nomadic tribes from the desert that is central to the continent and wishes to view the ocean with their lover as a sort of religious pilgrimage. On the whole, most scholars agree that it has a very positive interpretation, a textual reminiscence of their marriage, and a promise of lighter days to come.

However, there are some that have a…less joyful interpretation of the text. For centuries, traditional burials along the coast have involved sea burials, where the body is brought out a distance from the shore, and practiced divers take turns excavating a pit for it to be buried beneath the waves. It’s an arduous process, and one not always afforded to  everyone. To be taken to the sea after death was, at some points in history, a rare privilege. These opposing scholars are of the belief that the poem was written on the author’s deathbed, and delivered after their passing, as a sort of last will and testament for their lover. This interpretation doesn’t hold up nearly as well as the former, but it is interesting to think about. The naming of the god Yin is the main cause of controversy among scholars of either school, due to the contradicting nature of the god itself. Where those who see the poem as a happier one, Yin is just used as a fanciful way of mentioning the windstorms known to that coastline, and perhaps as a tie-in to the recipient’s temple residence. Others believe that Yin was mentioned more for his association with change, with the writer’s death being the largest change the recipient must deal with, and anger as well, perhaps at an unjust death come too soon.

The grammar of this poem is of interest as well. Starting from the beginning, the pronouns caen̊ and ni (1S and 2S respectively) are both formal pronouns, specifically those used between individuals of similar perceived social class. In this case, it can be interpreted as two adults. Having the formality included with the future tense verb—indicated by the particle c-y—solidifies that this first line should be interpreted as a request, rather than a demand. In the third line, the pronoun acyi(3PL and formal) is an exclusive one, and rather than being directed at someone of similar rank, it is for someone perceived to be above the speaker, in this case deifying the waves and, of course, the god Yin. Technically, this pronoun clusivity distinction is not grammatically necessary, and instead is an artifact of the time. A taboo on associating oneself or mortal others with the being of the divine, even from a standpoint of simple words. To use a regular third person plural, even one that is still directed upwards socially—in this case cael—would be akin to bringing that which is divine down to the level of mortality, or worse still, uplifting the mundane to the status of godhood. In line four, we see the verb for ‘to do’ used as an indication that something was completed, further secured by the noun phrase nende nuyude, ‘long time’, where the word ‘ago’ is implied by nature of the sentence. Finally, the last line switches from the formal 1S caen̊, to the informal pronoun ca, indicating a more intimate closeness between writer and reader in the moments described.

WORD BANK

Șotuŧahtěnu /ɬɒtəθahtɛ˧˥nə/ - The Jěyotuy word for the planet's largest continent.

H̊lanueli /xlænweli/ - began as a name for the northern people, most likely a mixture of groups from Sallóxe-speaking villages that were traded scrubland vegetables for fish from the open ocean. Comes from the word h̊lanen, meaning ‘stew’, thus calling them stew-eaters; the relatively colder climate lent to more hot and hearty meals than the hurricane-prone south.

nende /nen:dʲe/ - Time, moment, or an "hour" in their timekeeping system, which equates to roughly 48 minutes in Earth time.

nuyu /n:uju/ - An adjective meaning long or extending.

GLOSS

The writing system for the Twac̊in̊ language is shared by several languages in the area and is referred to as the C̊iyahe alphabet (read more here). Its usage in modern forms of the language consists of four vowel glyphs(a, i, u, and e), three diphthongs(ae, ua, and ue), eleven consonants, and 9 consonant cluster glyphs. In the Latin alphabet, the clusters, diphthongs, and the letter tw are represented by digraphs, but this is not the case in the native alphabet. Below is a chart of all the characters, their romanization, and potential pronunciations in the standard modern dialect of spoken Twac̊in̊.

[rubberduckyrye]

Me: yay! I get to talk about my favourite oc of the bunch now!

My brain: hey what if I *forces me to hyperfixate on how I'm rewriting Angie instead*

So I'm talking about Angie instead, more specifically what steps I want to take to make her less.... problematic?(Best word I could think of) But for plot reasons I have to have some reference to what she's like in canon.

I mostly focused on Angie's religious side for the rewrite. She's no longer monotheistic and instead follows a polytheistic faith, specifically Hawaiian. Most of the time when she talks about her gods she specifies which one, like she'll say that "Lono will keep you in good fortune". I've also made it so that her whole "Kami-sama can't answer cause he's taking a nap" thing is just a light hearted joke she makes when people mixes up or gets her gods wrong.

Now the blood sacrifices-

They are not gone, instead I've made it so that Angie's community saw blood as the soul itself. So her island had simply had a tradition where they made a religious dish for weddings that the newly weds eat, the dish contains the blood of the couple and it represents their souls mixing and becoming one. They also tended to have a culture of solving spiritual problems (ex: depression, personality disorders, trauma) by having the person bleed out the damaged part of their soul.

There's definitely more to consider but I don't remember it and I don't know where to look. Criticism and advice from you or someone else reading this is welcome :P

Okay so.

I like your spirit, you're on the right track and going places, but. I would just remove the blood thing entirely. If you want to go the route of Headcanoning the problematic away that's one thing, but since you're changing the story up anyway, so you might as well throw out the entire suitcase.

I was actually having a discussion with my partner about the stereotypes Angie presents just last night, as was going to reblog my posts on her racists caricature elements with a slight amendment.

I was struggling to find resources that specifically talked about Native Pacific Islanders being stereotyped as wild savages, and I was complaining to celest on how no one was talking about it and I felt like I wasn't able to do research right anymore. She calmly explained to me why I was having those issues and why no one seems to talk about the "savage Pacific Islander" trope we had seen so many times in movies.

1. The term Pacific Islander is, itself, a problem--as well as terms like Native Hawaiian, and other terms that are just not really used much in discussions about media. That's why I was getting so little information when I was trying to research of my own.

2, and this is the kicker: The stereotype of "Savage Pacific Islander" actually IS talked about as a trope--it's just under the same category as when we talk about the "Savage Native" (Like Native American, or the savage Indian (Indian being used incorrectly to talk about Native tribes of America) the whole Damn time.

While this specific link talks about a slightly different iteration of it, the Savage Native (I refuse to call them Indians that is blatantly incorrect) also has ties to human sacrifices and blood sacrifices, all of which paint indigenous people and culture that in a bad light.

The traditional acts you described could be used in a real life culture somewhere in the world, idk, but I would advise against using it regardless. The use of blood in any kind of ritual is seen as savage or cult like, which with the Native Savage Stereotypes, you REALLY want to avoid if you're making up new shit. Even if you explain it away and make it more symbolic, the fact you're writing a new story means you really should not have the blood thing at all.

As for changing up her religion, I do quite like it! I myself wasn't sure if I should use the Atua or the Kupua as a replacement, and it's something I'm still on the dense about since I am making it blatant that she is Native Hawaiian. I was personally advised by Celest to keep it as the Atua for recognizability's sake, and it'll allow me to throw in some fun facts about actual Atua, but I still can't find anyone who will tell me if Atua and Kupua are interchangeable.

I suggest you do as MUCH research as you can about the culture of your choosing. Like for example: Native Hawaiians sometimes have names that mean disgusting or horrible things, not because their parents cursed them though--in fact it's the opposite. Ugly names are sometimes given to a child to protect them from evil spirits and bad omens if they get sick or hurt in some way. I HV that Angie actually has an ugly name that the Atua call her on her head, one that her mama gave her, and Angie is sort of a white Christian name that was probably forced onto her ngl.

Anyway.

Do research on bad tropes for Pacific Islanders, and especially more research on the "Native Savage" tropes and anything cult related to it. Do research on Hawaiian and native Hawaiian cultures and be respectful about them.

I hope this helps (and sorry if I sound abrasive or curt) xndjxjsjnxaj

[stormdragon23]

Top 5 memories 💖

Oof, this one might be a little personal, so I'm gonna hide it as much as possible zxlkvnsdd

Wonder how many people will read this >_>

1. Chatting with fren

You know who you are :3c I enjoyed making AUs and cute situations about our favorite couples and the fluffy moments our blorbos would have. I kept inserting angst, but I'm too soft for hurt/comfort alsdjfdsf Sorry about that

It's really nice to talk to someone who has a lot of the same views as me. Maybe that's a bit weird, but I enjoy us being weird together :3 I think we understand each other well, and being on the same level of weirdness makes wonderful moments for our favorite ships

And also ranting about how people ruin our blorbos xfjlsdjf They do deserve better <3

2. My old college dorm

After having two roommates for a couple of years, I spent my last year in a single dorm. While it was nice having roommates, my single dorm was very cozy to me. It was one of the bigger singles, and I got to arrange it the way I wanted it. It was also pretty quiet, and I set up some nice LED lights that made it even cozier. It was probably small for a bedroom, considering my desk and a few drawers were in my room, but I like small, almost crowded bedrooms personally

I kind of miss it

3. Religious group

I don't consider myself super religious, but I was a member of a religious group back when I was younger. While I wasn't too into the religious stuff (I follow the religion, but I'm not a devout follower), the people who were in the religious group were so kind and welcoming to me. I don't really have any close IRL friends, so being able to feel included in the group was very nice. I don't really keep in contact with them as I feel awkward, but I have very fond memories of them

I still think about them a lot

4. Getting to K-Pop

Funny story: I hated K-Pop when I was younger haha

To be fair, when you're an awkward middle school being forced to dance "Gangnam Style," you have certain feelings towards that music genre >_>

It didn't help that the only groups I knew was. Probably Twice? It was a super girly girl that doesn't personally vibe with me. And BTS. I didn't have anything against BTS at the time. It was the fans. The really. Hyper fans. You know what I mean

I only really got into K-Pop a few years ago because of Stray Kids. I think it was because I was starting to like rap music at the time, so that's also why. I used to dislike rap music too. Now I realize it's because the rap songs I came across had too many curse words in it or just didn't fit the vibe of the song that well as it was usually part of a song with a vocalist (American songs. K-Pop makes it sound better for some reason)

I have a very distinct memory of hearing SLUMP by Stray Kids for the first time. It's still my favorite song. Not only is the instrumental so good, but the vocals, raps, and emotion in the song really take my breath away. The lyrics are also very meaningful to me. The way there are 3 different versions of the song and how each one has their own unique appeal is also very nice. (I like the Korean version the most personally)

5. Getting messaged

This is probably just because I'm a lonely person, but I'm always really happy when people message me before I message them haha

I tend to have a lot of energy at times (and no energy at other times lkcxmvdks), so I'm usually the one who messages people first. I know I'm not (usually) bothering them, but it kind of feels that way at times haha

So getting messaged first always makes me happy because it means they were thinking of me and thought to message me :3 It's a nice feeling. I try to reciprocate the feeling but get embarrassed sometimes haha

Alright, let's hope no one reads all this >_> If you did though, here's a flower 🌸 Okay, bye- *runs away*

[utilitycaster]

Hi, first religion anon (NOT the same as the second religion anon). My main complaints are with TUC (mostly s1 but the ‘Jesus is real’ thing in s2 really bothered me) and the way that Laudna and a few other characters engage with the gods on CR. I have 0 complaints with Sam, I think his engagements with religion as both Scanlan and FCG are fascinating. I think things like ACOC and Kristen on D20 are done fine, but when they move outside of Christian allegories they tend to stumble. I know Brennan and Ally have philosophy backgrounds and Emily has a religious studies background, but frankly I’m not super confident in American universities’ ability to make people deconstruct Christian hegemony, and things like Emily using the phrase “Judeo-Christian” aren’t super encouraging to me.

thanks for clarifying, I was wondering about the second anon bc I was like "the first anon came in being fairly normal even if I don't agree and this feels...bad and also just a hunch but it feels like it's coming from a Cultural Christian who is not American. (also I did get your follow up question and I want to answer that one separately bc I think it's a good but separate point).

I know it's not terribly popular to say but being weird about the term "Judeo-Christian" feels like one of those things that Jumblr and other people in Jewish Millennial/Gen Z spaces online made a big deal about and I'm like "uhhhhh this was a thing my actual Jewish middle school teachers said sometimes; it's not the best term, no, but it was the go-to term in a lot of contexts until quite recently to the point that yeah, Emily going to school in the 2000s would probably hear it even from Jewish profs, and so it's not so much a red flag as a sign that she graduated before 2010."

I also honestly don't mind Jesus being real in TUC 2; at some point if you've decided all other mythology is real why not Christian religion. It feels, in a way, far more Christian-centric to treat Christianity as something that cannot be incorporated, as too real, as compared to say, Norse or Greek myths or Golems.

I will say that I agree that Ally and Marisha do tend to be a bit more limited in how they engage; I actually don't mind Laudna's frustrations with the gods from a "I think this comes from Marisha's personal feelings" perspective more so than a "could we...actually explore this as a throughline rather than a bunch of random-ass statements." I do think that Ally does tend to pull from their own experience; understandably so, but yes, it's very different than my experience as someone not raised Christian let alone strictly so.

I guess, and this might just be difficult to do as an anon ask thing, that I am looking at this very holistically. I am looking far more at what the GM is doing than an individual player, and I haven't had issues with Matt, Brennan, Murph, or Aabria's portrayal of divine forces. I find that Worlds Beyond Number has been explicitly very not Christian (and indeed, heavily influenced by Shintoism and pre-Christian Irish religion) in how the spirits are portrayed, and while I think Matt does tend to draw a lot from Catholic architecture and imagery and vibes, the way the gods engage with the players does not feel exclusively Christian (notably in Campaign 2; none of Fjord, Caduceus, Yasha, nor Jester's experience feel inherently cultural Christian beyond the fact that Travis mentions he doesn't feel like he can connect with the Luxon because 'it's a shape'). So it means I'm not looking to Ally for example for an exploration of religion that is as accessible to me, but I do find that actual play on the whole feels fine. I find a lot of the claims do feel like they get really hung up on specific details (eg: the Santa jokes in Chetney's backstory) instead of the overall feeling (eg: the fact that many of the deities have a very open, fluid, and at times intellectual form of engagement; the fact that the general message is that suffering is not purifying but rather simply sucks; Melora death domain traditions and especially Caduceus's philosophy which is very much outside American Protestantism; the polytheistic society of Vasselheim.)

[darksouls2-gendercoffin]

imo one of the more interesting things Elden Ring does is introduce the Dung-Eater in the opening cutscene with no context whatsoever, and then proceed to reveal what a fucking creep he is—and then proceed to reveal that he's even worse than you already thought he was.

in the opening cinematic he almost seems like he's being set up as some kind of martyr, the kind of character who's vilified by the Lands Between but actually found out something really important or had some really 'heretical' belief about accepting one of the Lands Between's various outgroups. people are throwing rocks at his body after he's been executed, which on top of the narrator flat-out calling him loathsome and saying he eats shit really conveys this idea of the worst pariah imaginable. I was fully expecting to find out he was the fall guy used to cover up some secret conspiracy or religious scandal, not... y'know, one of the worst people you'll meet in the whole game.

to clarify the reason I think he just flat-out fucking sucks, I need to talk about the reason reddit/twitter ER dudebros tend to treat him like a Did Nothing Wrong, Joker-style antihero: their tendency to misunderstand what he's doing with the Omen as subversive or misguidedly noble. I see a lot of people compare him to the villain Syndrome from The Incredibles, using some variation on Syndrome's "when everyone's super, no one will be" line to convey that the Dung-Eater's plan to curse everyone in the world to becoming Omen is going to end Omen-centric bigotry and hatred. they spin this fantasy where everyone will slowly give birth to and be reincarnated as Omen until their people are the only ones left, and then everybody will realize there's nobody to be prejudiced toward because they've all become what their culture and religion vilify.

look at the language the Dung-Eater uses, though. people's bodies are 'defiled' with Omen-ness, this status is a 'curse', one that he passes on to others. he doesn't see the Omen as an underprivileged social group who deserve equity or restorative justice, he sees this people group as a blight he can spread, and that's really fucking gross. he isn't even 'appropriating Omen culture' or anything because not once does he indicate that he sees the Omen as people, as anybody with any kind of worth. by all indications, he sees their existence as a curse in and of itself, someone being born an Omen the ultimate degradation and insult. knowing what we know now about the Hornsent, how they weren't a race of cursed monsters but instead a culture stuck in the same cycle of violence as the people of the Lands Between, I feel like the Dung-Eater's motives and ideals come off even more misguided and weird than ever before. he's not somebody who thinks that forcing the same lived experience onto everyone would cultivate universal empathy (which it wouldn't), he's like if a super edgy racist decided "I wanna magically curse everyone else in the world to be black, they'd HATE that because it's the worst thing anybody can possibly be".

[thecarnivorousmuffinmeta]

Ողջույն👋

Do you have any tips for writing Carlisle? For example, episodes from his work, human life, or something else?

General Writing Advice

Personally, I find writing scenes without purpose extremely difficult/not producing the best results. Obviously, everyone's unique, but if the characters don't have anything to do then they tend to just sit around not having anything to do.

Even something like a one-shot should have a point (reflection on an event, relationship, etc.).

So taking an episode from his work, human life, or anything else without asking the question "why am I showing this" or "what point am I trying to make" to me is the wrong way to approach it.

If you want the character to do something, he should have something to do.

Writing Characters in General

Once again we get into the weird realm of how I personally write the man versus how everyone else might. There's a lot of interpretations of Carlisle across fandom and even if I don't agree with all of them based on what we see in the text, none of them are wrong. Fandom's about having fun which means you can do whatever the fuck you want.

If movie Carlisle is your game, go for it, if fanon Carlisle's your man, go for it.

The trick with any character is to be consistent. You should have an understanding of them such that if X happens you know they'd respond with Y. This keeps the story from feeling contrived and as if they're being forced to react in whatever way the author wants them to.

If you keep it consistent and you write well then readers won't really care if it lines up with their exact interpretation of the character.

Tips on Writing Carlisle

A lot on Carlisle Cullen in here

However, I assume you came to my house for a reason and that you're asking specifically how to characterize Carlisle Cullen in the way that I and @therealvinelle do.

So, I'll give the general roundup characterization advice we've given for other characters in the past (thus far Aro and Lily Evans).

Carlisle is Religious

Carlisle is fundamentally a religious character. This is brought up in canon and is one of the first things you learn about him: he believes in God.

Now, this one is also very tricky as I've seen a lot of writers having no idea where to even start with this. Most writers I see... the only way I can describe it is they write a very Catholic, flagellating, God-fearing Carlisle Cullen. This is how writers in general write any religious character. That's fine, that is a way to interpret his character, but it's not what @therealvinelle and I go for.

Our thoughts are that Carlisle had to do a lot of philosophizing after becoming a vampire and essentially has his own doctrine. Because of this, out of the Cullens, he's one of the least haunted by what he is personally (a vampire) and is not necessarily married to interpretations of the bible we see in either the past or even the modern day. (The man canonically advocates abortion).

Regardless of how you choose to interpret him, you have to address the religion in some way or another.

Carlisle Thinks a Lot

We're talking about a guy who did the above section (rethink his religion) upon becoming a demon. He had large problems (such as trying not to eat people) and yet this is something he spends significant time and thought on.

We're talking about a very introspective guy then who is interested by abstract ideas and the way the world works. (As opposed to Emmett who would have no interest in such things).

This is probably not going to apply just to religion but to a lot of other facets including "should I turn dying people into vampires" (something he canonically confesses pondering to Bella), "what the fuck is up with Renesmee biologically" (less esoteric but still a very nerd topic with no real answers until Nahuel comes around).

Not to mention pre-canon his regard for the Volturi who were probably the most learned of the vampires he ever came across.

Carlisle is noted to have pursued several different fields before settling on becoming a doctor.

We're talking about someone very curious about the world, to the point where he's clearly not bored/moping after 350 years (as opposed to Edward who's only been doing this 100 years and is a brooding bored mess).

He's someone who wants to do things, learn things, and be a part of the world and keep up with it.

Carlisle's Way or the Highway

Canonically, Edward had to leave when he left the diet. Granted, Edward chose to do this of his own accord, but Carlisle didn't chase him down or try to negotiate with him.

You either try to do the diet to the best of your ability or you're out.

Edward was already a very close companion of Carlisle, Carlisle had broken down after three hundred years of loneliness, not to mention Edward was very distressed and very young: didn't matter.

What this says that is for better or worse Carlisle will stick to his principles even if those closest around him do not.

An important note on this is because of this Carlisle assumes that his family, those around him, share the exact same principles even if they do not (for all the Cullens think that they share them as well). It's unthinkable to him, even in canon where he sees evidence now and then, that they don't actually care that much for human life and more the Cullen lifestyle and moral superiority of it all.

He's Ridiculously Stubborn

We're talking about someone who crawled into rotting potatoes while dying, managing to stay silent, then crawling his way out of London without eating anyone and spending the next N days trying to kill himself until he crawled into the woods to starve painfully to death.

He discovers the animal diet, lives on cardboard for the rest of his life despite having a few morsels of blood here and there as he starts turning people, even when Aro's literally dropping corpses on the floor in front of him.

He then leaves Volterra despite having no idea where he's going, a good chance of getting killed, all for the chance that he might find someone on the diet or convince someone to do it.

He is unbelievably stubborn to the point where... Edward and Bella are close contenders but Carlisle's doing very well in the stubborn race himself.

The exception is that he compromises when it comes to his family/things that don't just affect him. In Twilight, he wants to move when it's clear Bella's Edward's singer and the van incident occurs. Nobody else wants to move though and Alice announces Edward's in love with Bella so... they stay... he guesses... In the Bella/Edward relationship, like everyone else, he lets Edward handle that one as it's not really his business.

He's Very Likeable

Everybody likes Carlisle. To a really weird extent actually, and by far he's the most outwardly charming of the Cullens.

Otherwise

You got anything else, @therealvinelle

[gffa]

Hi!  This is an interesting question because there has been a fair amount of Jedha lore being expanded on in The High Republic, but the era that's doing it is set 350 years before the prequels (382 BBY, so almost 400 years if you're going by when the Republic fell and the Empire rose) and it's really contained to a handful of sources.  I would say the main ones exploring it are: - The Battle of Jedha audiobook - The High Republic 2022 ongoing comic book (issue #6 came out just this week, it's still pretty new) That's really about it for that era and the other book I would suggest if you want to catch up on things yourself is Guardians of the Whills by Greg Rucka, which is set not too long before Rogue One and has Baze and Chirrut running missions on Jedha and showing them trying to protect the people of the city while the Empire encroaches on more and more of them. Which means there's not a ton about it yet, most of which is just setting the stage and introducing various religious groups and their basic dynamics--which is pretty much "the Jedi are still the big kids on the playground, some love them, some resent them, but generally they try to do their best to respect everyone and let people do their thing, it's just that by dint of being the strongest Force-users in the galaxy, they're always going to be in the position of being the big kids on the playground", while other groups tend to squabble a lot, sometimes with, sometimes against the Jedi, and none of them have really stood out yet. You've got the Church of the Force, but it's just one group among many and they're probably the second biggest group, but they haven't really done much yet. Then there's the Path of the Open Hand which were introduced in Path of Deceit (the opening novel for this era of the High Republic) but all you really need to know is that they're benevolent seeming and their mission is that the Force must be "free" (ie, no one can use it) because their belief is, if you use the Force to save a person here, then over there the Force kills someone else, to bring "balance".  So they reeeeeeeeeally hate the Jedi, who actively use the Force, and they're lead by the Mother who is being set up to be a villain, who we don't know her full motivations yet, but likely she wants to grow them as a cult and give her all the power.  In The Battle for Jedha, they stir up chaos and then go help people by creating an alms house to heal them, get people to "safety", etc.  So, they look like heroes, their members genuinely believe in their cause, they seem very nice, but ultimately no good is going to come from there. They've recently arrived on Jedha (in the High Republic ongoing comic) and are demanding a seat at the Convocation of the Force's table, to be part of their Council, but they've been denied so far and are making a big racket about how they're being shunned just for ~dissenting~. The other major players so far are the Guardians of the Whills, which seem to be in their prime here.  It's not super clear what they believe or how they operate, they don't seem to be able to use the Force much (other groups do have Force abilities, but don't seem especially strong, either) and are kind of more like guardian monks who keep order on Jedha and protect it. Sometime previous to the set-up of this era, the Jedi were fully in charge of Jedha, but no longer are.  Whether they chose to step down, were asked to step down, others stepped up, or what, I'm not sure if we know yet, only that the Jedi used to rule the place, but haven't in some time and some people are fine with it, some seem like they might resent it.  (Par for the course with the Jedi, some love them, some resent them.) Ultimately, the set up is "a bunch of Force religions create a council to facilitate interactions between the different groups and organize festivals for everyone to come to" and there's some squabbling, but also some good work being done, the Jedi can't help but be the biggest player (in part because this is Star Wars and they're our main characters, but also because of their sheer history and ability) even as they deliberately try to step back. There's a large gap of history between the High Republic era and what Jedha looked like by the time of the Empire rising, but my impression is that it had been falling out of favor for awhile, that the Rogue One visual dictionary still described it as a place of pilgrimage and holy to a lot of religions, it still had a bustling city, but it wasn't the same central hub of religious organizations in the galaxy and hadn't been for a long time. A lot of interesting stuff is happening on Jedha at this time period (and you could probably just Google for where to find the 2022/2023 High Republic comics, that should tell you almost everything you might want to know) or just scroll through the "Sites of Interest" section on Wookieepedia to see if any of them sound like places Ahsoka might want to mention--as a Jedi, I think she'd probably know of a lot of the places, you can decide if she'd have visited at some point (Jedi did take their initiates on field trips, after all), and might want to visit the Kyber Mirrors, which held a lot of significance for Force-sensitives, even if the Empire had probably mined it for kyber by then. But you'd also be fine just ignoring all of it, because most of this is from 400 years before and would be interesting history, more than a direct involvement!  I would say the Guardians of the Whills book tells you more about the status of the planet in that era, but you can basically guess, it's a lot of orphanages because a lot of parents are dead and everyone is poor and struggling to eat or get medicine, even the local orphanage struggles despite Baze and Chirrut's help, because the Empire sucks. Other than that, it's mostly introductory stuff so far, so a skim over Wookieepedia or some judicious Googling should cover it!

[asherlockstudy]

okay. i am asking anonymously because i enjoy rhink being with their wives and with each other. however, i have been reading some of your theories and thinking things.

as i listen more and a little closer, i wonder if they are still with their wives due to their upbringing. not a huge earbisuits listener, so i listened to that specific part you mentioned. 30 minute argument over WALKING? and Rhett was so determined to be right. and Link and Christy clearly have more problems than i thought if she retreats to the garage.

both relationships are clearly mostly still together due to their religious backgrounds. they just decided it would always work? which clearly means there are times they thought it wouldn't but they wouldn't let themselves. evangelicals do tend to be pretty big on not getting divorced.

i also wonder about that honeymoon night in the bathtub that i still dont know the full story. maybe the two really do love each other but, for as much as they've deconstructed, are not able to take this final leap and that makes me sad.

Unfortunately this mail came before the recent judgemental anon but I am answering it afterwards so... yeah... you and I might make someone mad... anyway. Perhaps I won't tag this,I hope you see it.

I think staying together due to the upbringing could be one of the reasons or it could have been a more significant reason in the past. But aren't they done being evangelicals at this point? I mean, don't they realise that by shedding the faith, they could also shed this belief for being tightly associated to the faith?

Then again it could be bigger than them, like you said. However, I think there is more. First of all, the marriage that downright seems forced to me is Link's. Sorry. I don't want it to be like that but for every good thing he mentions about his marriage, he mentions another 99 negative ones. I do think Link would like to end things. But Christy doesn't, both because she is the one sticking most to the faith still but also I think she is still into Link, despite Link getting on her nerves... basically all the time, as it seems.

Rhett's is so much harder to tell because he is always acting up so much. For all we know, it could be a great marriage or at least it could be good enough to not end up in a divorce or maybe they have an arrangement that makes it work in some way. Let's not forget that around 2018, Rhett talked ALL THE FREAKING TIME about that year being a milestone in his marriage because he and Jessie had a huge "talk" that kind of led to a new era in their relationship. And then one of those times Link let it slip (probably intentionally) that he was present in the "talk"! (However, granted, it seemed like there were other people there too.) This was the era before the shipper mass exit so almost everybody here concluded that Rhett meant he had opened his marriage. I don't know what it was (I doubt this would be decided in front of others) but in any case I do think the McLaughlins would reach some sort of non-traditional agreement to make things work out more readily than the Neals. Neither Link nor Christy would go for such solutions, they seem to be both raging monogamists. Which is why Link seems to suffer so much in his situation, especially if he also has feelings for Rhett.

Now, Rhett is a pretty sexual being. He's acting up about many things but not for this one. So for him to stay loyal and committed (aside from whatever might or might not be happening with Link) probably takes extra commitment and work from him than from anyone else in this story. This could make any relationship for him to start feeling tedious or oppressive after so many years. He is so focused on commitment that you might be right that it could be the religion holding him still. In any case, it is admirable how eager he is to stay committed. But let's be real, part of it is also how much Rhett fears that a divorce would make others and his relatives consider him a failure as a family man / husband.

BTW the 30 minute walking debate didn't seem that strange to me. Rhett loves to debate and win debates. Even Jessie at some point confirmed that she was done with Rhett always trying to be correct, so maybe she started being competitive just to get to him. I don't think that seemed serious. What seemed serious IMO in that segment was that Link's mouth got so downturned I thought he was fighting back tears..... Well, he certainly looked sad!

[kendrixtermina]

Gaza is NOT totalitarian

One thing you always hear from Zionists or even unaffiliated random westerners who know little about the conflict as a reason why the war is, if not completely justified, then at least tragically unavoidable, is that Gaza is a totalitarian regime & they’re either all indoctrinated to hate Israelis, or get portrayed as passive victims with no agency that need to be „liberated“

But over the last weeks we have seen a lot of scenes of life out of gaza and i have also read many books & watched documentaries to further educate myself and there is just no trace of that anywhere.

No big posters of leaders in classroom, no symbols & logos everywhere, no political phrases in people’s everyday speech, many of the people in videos seem totally a-political & lament that their family had nothing to do with the resistance or the war. They spend more time talking about friggin olive trees and embroidery than politics.

You could glean a bunch about their culture from the videos – extended families live together in big shared houses, they are very affectionate with children, they value community, the sport they tend to be obsessed about is Football…

Saudi arabia, for example, bans booze, art, music & forces everyone to wear burqas – that’s just not the case in Palestine. There are woman doctors & journalists, a wealth of poets & painters. You can buy booze grown in the west bank. You see the occasional lady without hijab, like Bisan often has her hair out, which tells me the ones that DO wear it do so because they want to, which is their good right. There were several Christian churches apparently operating just fine inside Gaza, until Israel bombed them.

I heard that 4th way esoterism was influenced by Sufism which is an off-shoot of Islam, & seeing the religious mantras people cited I could see the relationship - they said stuff like they should trust in God's destiny, that God alone is enough for them etc. it has that same "accept what is & surrender to the universe, real strength comes from contact with divinity & then you need nothing else" vibe - though of course the esoterists believe less in a personal god & more in a panentheist "Unity Of Being". Ppl used to make a lot of bogeyman talk out of Islam meaning "submission" but now I think it's probably meant in a "surrender to the universe & accept what is" kinda way & that ppl ended up projecting the authoritarian character of Christianity onto it. Islam is alot more de-central & everyone does their own thing, innit? I remember that when Muslims hit a certain percentage in Germany they thought of introducing Islam classes to school (in addition to the Catholic & Lutheran classes they have - atheists & ppl of other religions get "ethics" instead which is basically moral philosophy) but one problem they ran into is that there's no central authority to get a course plan from. There is no such thing as a muslim pope. There are extremists who ARE authoritarian, like Saudi arabia (as there are of all religions; They're all the same, rly, it's probably down to some flaw in human brains) but that doesn't mean everyone's like that. You might pt down the authoritarianism there to Saudi Arabia being an absolutist monarchy...

(Of course, a lot of less educated westerners don’t know that the kind of extremism seen in the Saudis & Taliban is actually a fairly recent movement that was able to take over due to the ME being destabilized in the cold war… the area was once stable, organized & well-educated.)

Some of the people covering the war like Bisan, Plestia, Saleh etc. were normal instagrammers before, doing normal instagram things, not a hint of politics to be found.

I also recall this post by a gay ude saying that yeah it’s not super welcoming but there’s not really systematic persecution – your family might kick you out or quietly tolerate it while wanting nothing to do with it… so just like the more religious parts of the USA basically.

Also, I’d like to note that even if gaza WERE totalitarian, people in totalitarian countries don’t cease to be human and their lives don’t become worthless. Not everyone is a True Believer, most are just scared out of their mind. You need to read „Jugend Ohne Gott“, you need to watch „Das Boot“, you need to listen to stories of people who escaped from North Korea. Maybe if it’s easier to epathize with a fictional depiction, read 1984 or The Handmaid’s tale.

So, I consider myself German because that’s where I grew up & the only culture I have any emotional attachment to, but my parents are Cuban. Cuba is a fairly „soft“ totalitarian state in that dissenters are „only“ beaten & their job prospects ruined, not outright killed like in North Korea or under the Nazis, but even so, my grandma still rips up all papers before throwing them away because spies would go through people’s trash, and my parents needed to be told several times by friends that it’s OK to criticize politicians in public before they would feel comfortable riffing on then.chancellor Kohl.

Note, however, that people DID mock the Castros in private, among trusted family members. There are tons of jokes mocking them. Heck, even mocked Hitler behind closed doors – they used to call them Flüsterwitze („whisper jokes“) because if you say them out loud they shoot you. Just to illustrate how people trapped in totalitarian states are human.

Even in the early 2000s when I was still pretty young, I didn’t buy that it’s OK to kill Iraqis just because there is a Dictator. The citizens are victims, and unlike the leadership they are poor & can’t flee. What if someone invaded Cuba and killed all my cousins just to punish the bad guy opressing them? That din’t seem fair. They said I’d understand when I’m older but all I understood is what utter bullshit that war was.

We’ve heard so many Palestinians talking about their plight and there is hardly anyone speaking of repression or totalitarianism, including peole who left the country. (In stark contrast to Cubans, North Koreans or people who fled the Nazis, who don’t shut up about how much it sucked) There is not zero repression (like an incident where Hamas got Fatah-affiliated workers fired), but the same can be said of Israel or even the west – McCarthyism or the current withhunt against pro-palestine ppl.

Meanwhile we have that creepy song of Israeli children calling for murder, and many videos by Israelis saying they were indoctrinated. One person mentioned being outright told that arabs were their „enemy“, while two arab boys were sitting in her class. I also hear that many Israelis go most of their lives without even interacting with a Palestinian outside of military service.

So, yeah, I think it’s pretty clear who the indoctrinated ones are.

[eldritchqueerture]

What's something you really wanna do?

How do you feel about katanas?

Do you think god exists and does the answer to that question matter to you or not?

1. I wanna go back to Sweden. I picked up Swedish the other day even! I can now kinda sorta order coffee and food, provided you dont ask me any follow up questions about it

2. SWAG. SEXY

3. I don't think god(s) exists, at least not in this personified way that most religions seem to portray them. I think there are some forces we do not understand, be it yet or that are never meant to be understood by us, whether higher dimensional being(s) or simply physics beyond our comprehension. I suppose it matters somewhat; not really the answer itself because we're never going to get that, but the consideration of this question itself. I know that belief in a higher power that cares about humanity had helped me recover when I was in a very bad place mentally, and spirituality seems to be very important to many people (not talking about organized religion, that is a whole separate can of worms). I think it's just human nature; we see pieces of ourselves in every animal we come across, to the point of domesticating some of them. We see pieces of ourselves in plants when assigning them names, we see pieces of humanity in inanimate objects when we talk to them. It seems only natural to me that, if we do that with things that are smaller than us (and by "smaller" i don't just mean size, but like. an amount of self-awareness? you know what i mean.), we would do the exact same thing with things that seem much bigger than us, that we don't understand. and of course, we hope those powers want to take care of us. thats what humans do, they take care of their young, of smaller, more vulnerable beings, so they project that onto these hypothetical powers in search of meaning and comfort at the feeling of. yeah, of what? lack of understanding of the world and how it works (see how the development of science resulted in more atheism? how people with higher education tend not to be religious?), powerlessness against fate and chance, lack of a sense of purpose and meaning in life, and probably most importantly the fear of death

but to me personally? there's a lot i would like to know and have answers to, but im also not one to settle for easy ones that don't fully explain the phenomena. so i have to grapple with the knowledge that we will never have all the answers, while recognizing that i dont actually *want* to know everything. there are some things we're not supposed to know and thats okay. if there was no sky to reach for, we would lose that sense of purpose that drives us forward

[softlyapocalytpic]

Thinking about religion in the vaults-

(Disclaimer: I'm not religious! I used to be but my perspective as more of someone effected by it than as a believer.)

I haven't seen a lot of canon material depicting it, but we know that Vault Chaplain is a job people can get:

(What Brotch has to say about getting this in the G.O.A.T)

But in the case of Vault 101, the ultimate authority isn't God, but the Overseer, so I don't believe that worship is actually highly encouraged. Unless Dictators are using faith to leverage their power and give themself divine authority, it can be disadvantageous to insinuate that there is a higher authority than them! In the case of Vault 101, there's a difference of regime between Alphonse Almodovar and the people who came before him. Before Alphonse, Vault 101 was open and seemed to have a "laxer" atmosphere compared to when came into power and started spouting a lot of xenophobic bullshit.

Dictators tend to either use God to support their authority or tear down religious institutions to assert that their will is more powerful than God. We know that Alphonse used his authority given to him by Vault-Tec, his own charisma, and the loyalty of Security to enforce his authority and he cares more about preserving the "purity" of the vault. He says 'God' once in all of his dialogue:

So, clearly there is some level of religious institutions in vaults because it's America and assumed Christianity is at play here as well as preserving the American ideal. However, it's in Vault-Tec's best interests to push the narrative that they and everyone affiliated with them are of highest authority so that they can keep people under their control.

I don't have things to cite for this one because I can't find a good source, but while the Enclave sponsored and was involved with Vault-Tec, Vault-Tec wasn't actually loyal to them. While the Enclave was supposed to have information sent to them about the vaults I do believe none of it actually went to them and we have repeated examples of the Enclave trying to force their way inside Vaults. If Vault-Tec wanted to let the Enclave in there would've been protocols for this for vault dwellers, but I personally haven't see anything of the like. Vault-Tec was committed to "preserving" America in name. In reality, we all know that they cared more about experimentation. Religion was most likely viewed as a tool to experiment on humanity, and if not made to be front and center, it took a backseat within vault functions.

Vault Boy replaces or accompanies religious figures and Vault-Tec propaganda either is tied into or replaces religious scripture. Obeying the Overseer is said before obeying God, to disobey the Overseer (Vault-Tec) would be to be a sinner. The USA already has such a strange relationship with religion and twisting it for it's own gain either in State or culturally and bastardizing their own beliefs. It's constant hypocrisy and I feel like the cherry-picking and bastardization is at an all-time high in vaults.

That, and anything other than Christianity is ridiculed and squashed unless being manipulated and abused in a vault experiment. Any of the beauty of religions is warped, twisted, and sanitized. Rather than there being someone benevolent watching over you and protecting you it's emphasized for surveillance. Community is emphasized to keep you from thinking individualistically because there is no upward movement to a society where everyone has their place. There's none of the religious ecstasy of worship, because you can't be dedicated to another higher power.

I have my own complex feelings on religion, but it's undeniable that there is beauty and good in it. That forcibly taking it away from people and bastardizing it is still fucked up, and I feel like the Vault would take all the good of religion and use it's most fucked up parts. Religious trauma squared. It's honestly very typically American ;;

[archivalofsins]

So, the thing about Amane's door reveal- I still think it's a courthouse given everything we know about her.

Plus, she's making a swinging motion as though she's about to slam down a gavel. The door to the building in this case Amane's mind is also reinforced, which goverment buildings tend to be. That and the implication she views her beliefs and understanding of things as the only correct one that outside forces must be scrutinized under if conflict arises is nothing new. We've seen her warn both Shidou and Mahiru this trial for not adhering to her rules through their behavior.

The architecture while having some aspects remniscent of temples isn't out of left field. Because older courthouses and government buildings almost everywhere have some features remniscent of that. However, Amane's door seems to mesh religion and law together to perfectly embody her ideals. Even though Amane cares about her religion she has been shown to value law and other beliefs to the extent that such things don't impose on hers.

Plus, during her first voice drama, she says,

"Hmm...a murderer." - "I did not. Me telling you that it is wrong to assume that I cannot kill someone because I'm twelve, and me being unhappy with being labeled a murderer are two separate things. After all, logic and emotion are not the same thing."

Showing that Amane can distinguish between critical thought and thoughts based on emotions. As well as separate the two. Meaning she can probably apply the same logic to her religious beliefs and the law as well. However, in the case of Shidou and Mahiru she is chosing not to this unlike with Futa who she has yet to reprimand for getting medical care.

The difference is that Mahiru and Shidou treat Amane like a child. Futa, on the other hand, may call her a brat, but he doesn't really overlook or ignore Amane's points based on her age. They are prone to having back and forth conversations as well that are more a clash of ideals than I'm treating you this way because you're a child, you silly kid you just don't understand yet. His behavior comes off less condescending overall. So, even though they have spoken sense the attacks, it's no surprise Amane had conveniently not given him a warning.

"Hmm... Talking about me having killed a person... That may be true, but I do not think that I did anything wrong."

"That's not up for you to decide. In Milgram, I make the decisions. If I say something was a mistake, it's a mistake."

"If you claim that what I did was a mistake, I believe you are the one in the wrong."

Then she says this,

"Hm, you may say it was wrong, but isn't what you are doing here a crime as well? Well, I do have something more important to me than general law. So, I will try not to judge you either."

From the beginning, Amane has understood what Milgram does is against the law. She gave Milgram the option to overlook her behavior, and in return, she'd overlook the facility's. Heck, maybe we could even work together if things went alright. However, Milgram sided against Amane. Don't fret though, Amane is a good girl she's not mad, just disappointed,

"Honestly…… I had high hopes for you, but you understand nothing."

She's nothing if not gracious. So, she'll give a warning,

"So you decided you don’t forgive me. If you don’t fix your way of thinking, we’ll never forgive you for all eternity."

She's even kind enough to reiterate her previous deal-

"What we think is right and wrong is evidently not the same as what Milgram thinks is right and wrong. Milgram is an incorrect world. But I’ll forgive you this once. We value thought. You should think hard about it."

Even though her thoughts haven't been valued in the same way. Her thoughts on her own actions have been chastised and belittled while people who don't know the full story continue to go by her age alone. Wrongfully assuming that since she's young, she can be taught out of it.

If we think really hard on it though Amane truly believes,

"I know you can do it."

However, if we think too little and come to the wrong answer,

"I will deny you a distorted vision needs to be purged! Let's strangle his throat thoroughly so he'll never talk back."

If Milgram is that sort of incorrect place Amane has no choice but to judge it by her higher more just laws. That's simply the righteous thing to do!

I'm happy that Amane is still the same as usual~

Milgram is going to be in her courtroom soon. I have high expectations for you kid and you've yet to disappoint.