#I think this feeling is more generalised than we think

[persephoneflouwers]

Hi! Since you have been taking a closer look at the lyrics I'd be keen to get your take on why louis refers to faith in the future as more hopeful than walls. However, half of his songs refer to hearbreak and loss of sth big. I can't get the connection really. Also looking at the last songs on Harry's house ( did you ever look into these lyrics moreclosely?) it really raises a few questions with me who Subject in these songs is as they seem to correspond with fitf

Your view would be greatly appreciated.!

Hello! 🌸

Mmh, I don’t really see much heartbreak and loss in fitf (except for Saturday which is about grief)… I mean he’s definitely talking about missing and nostalgia imo, but I think missing someone/something does not equal you lost it cause «maybe you don’t know what’s lost til you find it» right?

In general, to solve this controversy with these topics, I would say that if you perceive these huge elements in the album then maybe it makes even more sense for it to be about faith in the future? You need faith when you are at your lows, usually. That’s typical Louis attitude there: optimism, positivity, the “it is what it is but I hope it will be better, I know it will get better” state of mind. You mentioned Harry’s House… I haven’t spent much time on his lyrics except for Keep driving, Satellite and partially LOML, because I struggled a bit with it and really couldn’t relate to it, but I’m working on this slowly lol Anyway since you’ve mentioned it, both HsH and FITF give me lockdown vibes to me. Conceptually, Louis said it to, “faith in the future” felt like a motto in a moment where the world was sort of changing. I think he wanted to find his motto.

In summa, I lowkey agree with you. It’s a bit of an oxymoron, since the album cover, if you’d like. You look at the face, the chosen font, the entire aesthetic and you wonder what’s faithful in that lol but Walls to me was looking back, kinda reminiscing some aspects that could have been different. It’s about acknowledging things that happens and are now with him on his journey. He questions a lot of choices and fights a bit with the consequences of those. Faith in the future is about accepting some things sucks, they can or cannot change but in the grand scheme of things it makes no difference. I kinda see a development between the two albums: Walls has much insightful perspective, but with FITF he kinda zooms out and looks at things from above, from where your personal problems seem pretty small if compared with bigger things.

If you want to share, why would you see heartbreak and loss in it? And what about Harry’s House is giving you these thoughts?

[the-boy-branithar]

Surely at some point people will realise that trans men ALSO experience the phenomenon of suddenly being Fully and Having Always Been their gender when it allows someone to treat them like shit.

[acatinabox]

A collection of cultural and food suggestions related to Antiva

From an Italian amateur writer.

Big disclaimer: I am not trying to claim Antiva or his characters as Italian, if you want to see it more Spanish, be my guests. Things in the setting are ambiguous so let's make the most of this vagueness and make space for each others' headcanons.

That said, I'm Italian, and these are the things I can relate/speak about confidently, so I will. I do write Lucanis more Italian in my fanfiction because he was written as such in the Wigmaker Job and it was such a boon to feel represented in a piece of media I loved but I support fan creativity so do whatever you want.

Also these are generalisations. People are not a monolith, goes without saying.

Nobody asked for this, but I hope maybe it helps someone or is interesting.

With that out of the way, here's a collection of themes/suggestions that speak to me, and that might be useful if you want to write them in in your fanfiction and that aren't coffee or organised crime related.

The smell of soffritto at lunch time in the streets. People cook with their windows open when the weather allows it, and the smell of their food permeates the air. You can smell it from the street. Soffritto is the base of many Italian preparations and sauces, so it's a very familiar smell at lunch and dinner time. It's a mix of onion, celery and carrots minced and put in a pan to stir fry with olive oil. If you add a little bit of tomato sauce you make the most basic pasta sauce. Congratulations.

The smell of freshly made bread is fragrant and unique. Every region has its own type of bread and you can easily find a variety of them in most cities. Italian bread is fluffy and light and sometimes a bit dry. Potato bread is made in mountain areas. In the south, bread has a thick dark crust and an airy centre. We eat bread almost at every meal, it's just as iconic and pasta.

I can easily see Lucanis make his own pasta sauce and bread from scratch.

Speaking of bread, I can also see Lucanis make "scarpetta" after he finished eating, which means scraping the sauce from the plate with a bit of bread.

People make small talk in the streets or in the stores, sometimes with complete strangers. It's not a strict social rule but it happens quite often.

The Lucanis/Illario conversation in wigmaker job about not eating Antivan food abroad is the quintessential dynamic between the expat and the relative visiting who expects to not go out of their comfort zone. It happened to me more times than I can count.

Family functions can last all day, we can meet for lunch on a Sunday and spend the whole day together. If you get out of the table before 5PM on a holiday like Christmas or Easter frankly it means you failed as a host (harsh but true). More often than not you'll find yourself staying for a lighter dinner too.

The usual composition of a big meal is antipasto, first course, second course with a side, dessert, fruit, caffè ammazzacaffè. On normal days we only have a main, though.

Ammazzacaffè is the sacred ritual of the digestive after coffee (it literally means coffee killer). I mention it because it's mentioned in the game and in the short stories. It can be I think any strong liquor. We have it after a big lunch or in the evening, usually not at lunch on a working day. It kinda resets you, closes the meal.

Drinking wine has a big convivial function. Drinking alone is not something most people do often, we reserve it for social occasions and usually with a meal.

Dressing up is kind of expected in certain family functions and situations. Not in all families and not at all occasions but I can see it would be expected especially in high society.

Veneto, where RL Treviso is, is known for their creative swearing against god. I can absolutely picture Lucanis shout "by Ghil'an'ain's saggy boobs" or "by Elgar'nan's dried balls" when angry. Honestly go wild, please make up some insults for them and tell me about them (also sorry for the apostrophes, I don't know where they go).

We have a chocolate bonbon, Baci (means kisses), that have paper slips with sappy, romantic quotes in them. Some of Lucanis's phrases remind me of that. I think he'd be a fan and note down his favourite quotes. It's a dark chocolate bonbon with a soft heart and a hazelnut inside.

I said I wouldn't mention coffee but I lied. In some Italian cities there's the tradition of caffè appeso (hung coffee). Someone pays for coffee for themselves and for someone else they don't know that might want one and not be able to afford it. It's adorable and I can see Lucanis do it exaggeratedly all the time because he seems quite generous.

I think I'm done for now and maybe more people will jump up in the mentions or the replies to add their own useful things. I'll try to add some if they come to mind!

[grimst4rs]

“Today, we will be discussing werewolves. Can anyone tell me what werewolves are?”

Lily Evans’ hand instantly shot up. “They are XXXXX-classified beasts in The Ministry of Magic. A werewolf, also known as a lycanthrope, is a creature which normally resembles a human being but, upon the rising of the full moon, became an uncontrollable wolf.”

He wasn’t going to be listening to that, knowing that Peter and James were in the hospital wing, waiting for Remus to wake up.

Sirius’ hand, instinctively, shot up. “First of all, they should only be classified under the full moon, because during every other day of the month, they’re human. Second of all, The Ministry doesn’t know jackshit—”

“Mr. Black!”

“And they do not resemble a human being, because they are one. Third of all, lycanthropy is an infection, not something you’re born with.”

“Never said it is,” Evans said, turning her head to face him with a smile, but he could almost feel her teeth gritting, “but if you were to look in The Prophet at the attacks, there’s a few of them of werewolves, right?”

“That’s a generalisation, Evans. There are werewolves who live in the wilderness and werewolves who live among humans. And the werewolves who live on the outskirts of society were driven away by wix, who pointed at them and called them beasts and monsters.”

“Why so invested in the topic, Black? Are you a werewolf?” Snape drawled, barely looking up from his paper.

“Yeah,” Sirius replied, barely sparing him a glance, “next time you piss me off, I’ll come to the dorms and maul you in your sleep.”

Snape settled on scoffing at him and turning back to talking to his “mate.” Sirius focused his attention back on Lily.

“And let’s not forget the werewolf registry, who is cruel and, frankly, idiotic by itself. Who expects werewolves to go sign themselves up to be locked up? That must be one of the least thoughtful things they’ve done, which says a lot, all things considered. Nobody’s gonna go sign themselves up for something like that.”

“It would be a protection method. They’re safe—”

“They’re not exactly fucking comfortable, though, are they?”

“Mr. Black!”

“Well, no,” Evans replied, sounding slightly irritated. “Obviously not. But it would be better for those around them, too. Would you like to be ripped to shreds?”

“Mrs. Evans!”

“No, I would not, and no, it would not be, because it’s uncomfortable and the transformation is horrible enough as is. Maybe, for one, we should think about,” He air-quoted, “the lower creatures, and try finding options that benefit them especially, more than us. They’ve got as many rights as we have.”

The bell rang; a class dismissed.

“Meet me after class, Mr. Black.”

“Gladly, Professor.”

“Black! One second!” Evans said, as Sirius started packing his bags. He grinned to himself; bingo.

[huellitaa]

why people don't like you ₊˚⊹ 💬🎀

okay this is not as harsh as the title suggests but i wanted to put it literally bcuz this is a problem i've struggled with for the longest time. im gonna be brutally honest here. there are so many reasons why ur not of the social status you want to be or don't have as many friends as you like yadda yadda yadda. SO ,, here's my thoughts on why that's the case , and how to help! 🫶🏻🎀💬

──★ ˙ ̟🎀you're fake

whether its cuz ur trying to "fit in" or because you have a completely different personality stored in the back for everyone you meet, ur fake. its very simple. its not necessarily a bad thing, it just means ur insecure.

🧁𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

stop trying so hard girl. it's not that deep. there are 8 billion people on this earth and counting, u really think this person's gonna matter when ur living ur dreams and thriving even more than you ever imagined you could? no. move on. next please!

find out who the fuck you genuinely are. you're never gonna live your life if YOU aren't the one living it. once you get a start on finding who YOU are it's gonna make you more authentic -> more magnetic -> more attractive in every single way, including social.

u arent obligated to fit in. think about the type of people that you see in the street and you stare a while at, the type of people who stand out from a crowd for whatever reason, the people u look up to, ur idols who you could never imagine to meet in a thousand years; do you think they fit in? do you think merging with a crowd is what made them appeal to you so much? no. think abt that.

wake the fuck up and realise u deserve better. why are you neglecting yourself by hiding yourself from the world? would u do that to anyone else? would u get anyone else to change themselves just so they can fit in? girl get a hold of urself!!! you've been through so much and youve made it so far and yet you're still pretending to be someone you aren't?? you deserve SO much better. people who truly deserve you will always love you for you, no one else.

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur too awkward / anxious

i want to preface this by saying theres nothing wrong w this at all and i completely understand but ur gonna face some problems of people interacting with you. or you interacting w them. or both. i was diagnosed w generalised anxiety disorder when i was 11, so i understand how much this can impact ur life not just socially but in all areas.

⭐𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

first thing im gonna mention to preface is this can be a symptom of an underlying condition u may need to get checked out. if its impacting ur everyday life please seek therapy, i am not a professional and cannot help u w this, even if i'd like to. i love u ♡

find what is making u anxious. what about social interaction is scary to you, and why? why does interacting w others make u nervous? is there a specific thing ur worried about or u find nervewracking? always. find. the root!

have compassion and empathy and patience w yourself. its perfectly okay and normal to some extent to feel like this and of course we're all gonna feel like this sometimes but its important to treat urself with care, especially in these times.

treat urself as u would a child. i recommend treating urself like a friend a lot but when ur in a delicate and emotional state like this its better to treat urself like ur ur own child. take care of urself with the same love and attentiveness as you would your own children and give yourself time and take care of yourself to work through the issue. ♡

break things down and take it slow and simple. break it into steps and PUT. YOURSELF. FIRST until u feel able to go back out into the public again and be That Girl ♡

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur straight up mean

this can be anywhere from just being generally disinterested in people, being constantly negative all of the time to being just really shitty and rude. we all have the same potentials and possibilities but sometimes we can fall into the trap of negative patterns when interacting with others, which is okay. everyone messes up sometimes. but the important thing is is that we fall back out of that and become even better for it!

💬𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

try ur best to put ur ego aside and think about yourself from an outside perspective. would you wanna be friends with you? if you were another person, how would you think people feel around you?

(🗒🎀 note: if that's too difficult, create someone in ur head or mentally assign ur traits, the good and bad, to someone you dont really know, and think ab how youd feel around them. insecure? jealous? confident? excited? nervous? think about it.)

i know it sounds weird but literally just sit down and talk to people close to u when you get the chance or the opportunity comes up and ask if anything you do comes off rude or blunt or abrupt or any sort of negative trait you think might be the issue here. or just subtly (or directly, either one works) try and find out their opinions on you so u can figure out if that aligns w what and how u wanna be, and then how you can change that.

just be generally more sweet and polite. people are easily gonna like you more if ur not a total dick. stop being mean to people, say please and thank you, compliment strangers, smile at everyone, put ur ego aside cuz its really not that deep girl.

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 ur too nice / people pleaser

okay being nice is not a bad thing. there is a fine line between being THE nice girl and being A nice girl. there is a fine line between being kind and being a pushover. you don't have to sacrifice urself to be nice to people. being nice should go both ways!

🧁𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

first things first, like all things and like i've said a billion times before, you need to address the root of what is causing you to act like this. this should always be the first thing you do when addressing any problem, esp w urself. why are you acting like this? what is causing you to endlessly seek approval like this and sacrifice urself in the process? think.

start saying no to people, even to the littlest things. if you want to do it then sure, but start saying no so much more often. it gives you a sense of control and shows you only you have a choice in the things you do in ur life, no one else.

define kindness. is what ur getting in return to this unconditional self sacrifice genuine kindness, or friendship, or respect, or attention, or whatever else you assume you're receiving from all of this? only you can answer that. ask urself what the genuine meaning of all the things ur trying to gain from this are and then see if that aligns w what ur receiving. (🗒🎀 note: also read this post of mine for more on this! ♡)

again, therapy is gonna help a lot w this. if this is making an impact on ur life, social or otherwise, then i am not a professional and cannot help u w this (as much as id like to). ily and i believe in u ♡

──★ ˙ ̟🎀 you seem "unapproachable / intimidating"

people are threatened by talent. people are threatened by beauty. people are threatened by what they aren't. so, congrats! you've achieved your goal! 🩷💭

🫶🏻𓂃 ࣪˖ how do you deal with this?

i told my therapist once that people have told me i seem rude, unapproachable, intimidating, etc. and i felt really upset about it because i dont wanna come off that way. i wanna be nice and approachable and someone people can talk to. and she asked me what i would do if my favourite celebrity or famous person or whatever was my age and was walking through my school. i told her i'd think they were really cool and want to be friends with them, but wouldn't be sure how to go about it bcuz they'd be super intimidating. think about that.

🗒️🎀 note: but if you do find that people say this or act like this around you a lot, then you might need to do some introspection and ask urself if anything ur doing makes people feel like that rather than their own insecurities and mindset. ♡

i just want to quickly add that not everybody is going to like you. everyone feels a general sense of dislike from time to time and this post is what i mean by that, NOT how to make everyone like you bcuz that's literally impossible and something you shouldn't waste ur time and energy on. as harsh as i may have been in this post ur amazing and i love u no matter how much improvement you have to do ♡ i love you and am proud of you and you should be proud of yourself too!

all my love... 💬🎀🫶🏻💗

[reblogandlikes]

No allies UTM, Rhysand? None? (Ramble)

I genuinely want to know, but seriously, Rhysand didn't make one alliance with the other HL's or anyone during the years of Amarantha? Not a single side plan that would have me think, "Yeah, he's done fucked up things for her, but he's also been actively working against her the entire time with proven plans, proven things gone wrong and right. Proven anything but weak his say."

Not to mention, please don't make someone the most powerful mind reader if they won't capitalise on that power. A very useful power, yet criminally under utilised in this series. There would have been ample time to create an alliance, and for his own safety/self preservation, occasionally ensure they would not spill the plan or fuck them up before they ever could. That would then play into his grey morality for the betterment of everyone further down the line even if it means cutting people loose. Hard, but necessary. I mean, unless that forever unknown daemati made it hard. Though this unknown other figure couldn't have been that good when the other HL's rebelled. Yeah, they failed and died doing it, but they still made a plan and tried. Rhysand hasn't don't anything off the sort.

But, he must of had a hint of an alliance because why would he and Helion be so buddy buddy in the later books? He saw all that Rhysand had done during those years. Saw his "Mask" presented as "him" and yet Helion no qualms or think to be standoffish afterwards? Like, "Damn, you went a little hard core, don't you think?"

Unless his friendship curated with Helion was just a way for sjm to try to absolve Rhysand from receiving too much heat and generalised, consistent hate from everyone outside of Velaris. "See, look. This fun, cool HL guy loves Rhysand! He's also POC, Bi, sex positive, with progressive ideals. His judgment can't be wrong." It felt like sjm was using Helion as a tool to enforce Rhysand’s greatness than having built a genuine friendship we could read; so instead rely heavily on Helions traits when knowing Helion embodies a lot of the characteristics her target audience wants to see more in books, yet for me, made my guy Helion feel like a token. I don't like it. (Side note, I'm still pissed they stole from my sweetheart Tarquin when he was so open. They still have not apologised, either!)

Anywho, where was this so-called friendship UTM? A union between the solar courts, at least. Something!

50 years. He should have come with some receipts of his efforts. Anything on Hybern since he was already suspected of them making a move in the later books. To me, these books are the best example of just making shit up as you go along. SJM just writes, and we simply consume. Nah, mate. You can catch these critiques.

Crazy, you'd think acotar was her first series, not her second.

[pile-of-rats-in-a-trenchcoat]

I used to be kinda scared of bugs, the generalised hate that is shared generation to generation in the form of bug repellent and fly swatters. i also happen to have allergic reactions to mosquito and wasp stings so my feeling of distaste seemed to be approved of by my body.

However, existing in plenty of neurodivergent spaces around the internet has eventually led me to posts of people marveling over the beauty of some of the many species of critters we share space with.

Moths were my entry drug. I spent about a week researching the little guys and learning about their diets, reproduction, locations and appearance. They truly are beautiful creatures.

This love hasn't died down, my own neurodivergent brain encouraging the research and leading me to find out more about other critters.

I spent last night at a hotel and encountered a small moth, lightly coloured and no bigger than four or five centimeters. it was beautiful. it was a small animal in the bathroom, doing no harm. I looked at it with love.

that same small creature could've been reduced to a stain in the wall had I found it at a different time. but i didn't. and it survived the night.

i sometimes get caught up in the generational hate, struggling to believe that others will see me as more than what they've been taught I am. but i found kindness through understanding. and maybe my the kids at school could too. and maybe my uncle could too. maybe my parents could too.

because I think we are all just little bugs waiting to be understood.

[mechanical-sunchild]

I think there's a difference, generally but not always, between general alterhuman (and all such labels) joy/euphoria and species specifc joy/euphoria. I think sometimes there's an overlap and all kinds are valid and important.

A general alterhuman joy activity (here I am using alterhuman to mean all identities where one is not human in some way) might not match up with your species. It might include gear that doesn't match, doing quads even though your species wouldn't move like that, howling and barking even if your species doesn't, going into woods or parks even if that's not your habitat etc. All of this is just to feel more animal, or monster, or Other in general. It creates joy in this way.

More specific and 'accurate' activities will match your species and can be very dedicated and niche. Some general advice may apply, but you might have very specific things too. The idea is to feel more like yourself, to forge that denied connection and feel a bit more 'right'. Thus there is euphoria.

The overlap ofc comes with things that aren't necessarily to do with being more like your species in an accurate way but make you feel connected to it specifically (wearing a shirt with your species picture on it, engaging in fiction from your source, buying things that remind you of your species, posting about being your species, moodboards + similar etc).

I think it's important to distinguish between these two types of community joy because we can so easily get wrapped up in the 'illogical' things we might do to feel better and it's so quickly twisted to invalidate us. It's not illogical or inaccurate, it's just a more generalised euphoria! And also, critically, the generalised joy is something everyone of every identity can share more than others including -link and -hearted identities.

[thewadapan]

My pal @irlnautica has just shared her essay defining the Transformers version of the Doylist/Watsonian perspective dichotomy!

"Budianskian and Furmanist: A new model of storytelling analysis"

Bob Budiansky believed that the most interesting thing about the entire Transformers setup was that the Transformers were on Earth. The vast majority of his stories revolved around ideas of culture clash and worlds colliding; Bob’s Autobots would be perplexed and fascinated by human behaviours, from small-town life to professional wrestling. [...] Budianskian storytelling is concerned with looking at Cybertronians from an external perspective: exploring what sets them apart from you or I, showing how they interact with a world not their own, how and why they hide themselves as human vehicles to conduct their war. Budianskian storytelling is about the Transformers being robots in disguise. By contrast, Simon Furman was far less enamoured with humans and the ways the two species played off each other. [...] To be sure, his stories take advantage of the characters being robots, but rarely is it particularly concerned with them being vehicles. Furmanist storytelling looks at Cybertronians from an internal perspective; it’s concerned with how they interact with each other, and the lore and history and substance of their own world. The point of the robots as characters isn’t to contrast with the human experience, but to be a stand-in for them. Furmanist storytelling is about the Transformers being more than meets the eye.

If you enjoyed my essay on Transformers One, I guarantee you'll find stuff to like in Jo's writing too. Much of it is giving an overview of major examples of Transformers stories, but whenever it steps outside that specific context, you'll find it raises interesting questions about "the promise of the premise", what exactly it is that makes certain kinds of stories/themes/allegories better-suited to given properties/settings/concepts than others.

I feel strongly that these terms can be generalised to cover all forms of sci-fi—hell, any story where the premise involves a "break from everyday reality" in some form or another. Are we in that world, or are we outside it, looking in?

(I think, for most people not in Transformers fandom, the ethos behind Furmanism in this specific context is frankly baffling. What is the point of writing about these giant alien robots if you're really just writing about humans? Personally, it's the culture-clash stuff that continues to compel me as an adult. Nevertheless, this essay makes a valiant effort to justify the appeal of Furmanist stories as best it can!)

[orkbutch]

So, I'm not really in the weeds of Transgender Discourse on the internet (I have a life and also care about my mental health) but I've seen something discussed here about trans masculinity and I wanna talk about it.

I'm very masculine. I'm butch, I'm trans masc, I've always wanted to be masculine and I feel most comfortable when I'm presenting as such. Without much effort or any intention on my part I am read as a cis man day to day. Because I don't present more fem, in queer spaces I am read and recieved as a man, maybe trans, probably into other men. People do not even consider if I'm a butch lesbian unless there's Significant context indicating it. Because of this I'm viewed through 'Man Lens'; It feels a different if I say 'bitch', if I talk about my attraction to women. I don't get smiled at, people put physical distance between me and them as much as possible.

This is familiar for a lot of trans masculine people and trans men that aren't androgynous/fem leaning in their style, and it is an upsetting change to happen. It makes us feel judged or misunderstood to suddenly be causing this wariness in others; it feels prejudiced. I've seen people putting words to this like transmisandry. This is something they want to lessen in their communities, so they don't have to experience this anymore.

Now, here's my opinion part: That's not going to happen. You cannot tackle the "problem" of people responding to your masculinity with wariness. They aren't controlling the wariness, they can't. More importantly, their wariness toward masculinity and what registers in their brain as "man-like" is well founded. It's based in lifetimes of experiences and trauma that has told them men can be very unsafe to be around, and that is true. Most men are cis, and cis men are the most threatening thing in this world to non-cis men. They are usually* socially privileged above others, more likely to inflict violence, more likely to abuse and murder others, are typically physically more powerful than others. Everyone thats not a cis man DEEPLY internalises a very rational wariness of men, and masculine presentation as an extension. Especially men that are strangers. (*This is of course different when we consider intersections of race, colonialism, classism, ect. But globally this generalisation is still pretty accurate.)

Honestly, I don't think this wariness towards masculine presentation is something thats useful or realistic to challenge. Like many internalised processes it's probably a good idea to examine it and consider its usefulness, but I think it'd be easy to conclude that it is a useful wariness for people to have. Women have lots of reasons to be wary around men, including the unique threats of transmisogyny. Queer and gender deviant men have lots of reasons to be wary around men. This is The Reality of patriarchy.

Personally, the place I've come to with how women and queer people react to my masculinity (which is not entirely negative btw, the wariness is just one aspect) is that... I understand their wariness. I have it too, toward those my brain assumes are cis men. I cannot control how they feel or what they think about me. I can only be respectful to others and to myself and live my life. I flag my butchness where I can, I make my gender clear to those it matters to, and the rest I accept as largely beyond my influence. All of us have to do this in some places in our lives.

Even though my masculinity makes other queers wary, I have lots of friends! I've had no real trouble dating or finding intimacy. Initial wariness is just that. Once you understand each other, break the barrier, its usually settled. For anyone who finds my masculinity so offputting that we can't break the barrier, I'm glad neither of us put each other through that discomfort. I understand where a fear like that comes from. I will still hold community with them because that's what solidarity entails.

Anyway thats my ramble about masculinity in queer community, good bye until another. who knows how long

[bluespiritshonour]

Somethings I noticed:

Katara, Suki and Azula are the only ones who haven't ever expressed any sort of misogynistic sentiment.

Aang would come a close second with minor mishaps here and there.

First, the girls:

Ty Lee, while fighting the Kyoshi Warriors: you're not prettier than we are.

Girl, where did that come from?

Mai has several instances of this when she says the Kyoshi Warriors’ uniforms are too girly (I don't mind her not liking how colourful they are; that's totally different) and later lowkey slut-shaming Ty Lee. And while she's rightfully unimpressed with Zuko's seashell (she's right Zuko, step-up your game) she could easily have countered his “Don't girls like these stuff?” the way Suki did with Sokka’s ideas about gendered generalisation. Also, you must have noticed that Mai's feminine too. She's just dark feminine to Ty Lee's light feminine.

Toph: she has absorbed a lot of toxic masculinity that's for sure. She isn't feminine, she light-heartedly teases Katara for being feminine and Aang too. She does give off the “one of the guys” vibes. You know which ones I'm talking about. “Are we going to watch two little girls fighting?” and later mocking Aang for his passivity.

But it is to be noted that Toph manages to do this without being racist to Aang. She's the one who mocks him the most about his pacifist beliefs (which are cultural to him) and she's kinda misogynistic the way she goes about it. But she's never racist to him. (I guess she is in the comics but fuck the comics). Even when Aang was really really nasty to her when Appa was stolen and she had every right to be mad at him—she wasn't. Given her age and her sheltered upbringing Toph's surprisingly mature. But I digress. Among the comics, I love the Lost Adventures only—and I love the spa day Katara and Toph have both in those comics and in the show. It feels like Toph's healing from that internalised misogyny? My reading of it is that just like girls in real world, Toph derides femininity because it has always been a chain to her. Her parents forced her to confirm so she hates it. But being friends with Katara probably let her heal that part of her. She's still not as feminine as Katara and mind you, nor should she be—let some girls never want to be feminine—it’s fine. But she learns to not to act out of a place of hurt.

Sokka: Sokka's misogyny was literally a plot point and he overcomes it. Also he and Aang have actually done drag and not been mocked for it. It's rare to see in media. The only other example I can think of is Good Omens.

His misogyny also feels kinda surface level (as opposed to Zuko in whom it's less obvious but seems more deeply ingrained).

Also. Zuko never did drag. Shame on him.

Aang: is the least misogynistic of the boys. The only instances I can think of are either kinda vague: when he tells Sokka that “It's nice dress!” It's kinda ambiguous if his tone was mocking or complimentary but it upsets Sokka nonetheless. And when he's upset at being played by a woman in Ember Island Players. The first time I watched it I felt it was OOC. But he was also kind of justified as it was racism and misogyny combined on behalf of the Fire Nation in portraying him that way.

Phew. These were purely my own opinions simply by the virtue of gender expression meaning different things to different people. I might say Mai is actually quite feminine while Toph isn't... But what even is considered masculine or feminine?

I love Katara and Toph's spa day because Toph learns that being girly wouldn't kill her—but she also doesn't suddenly become Ty Lee levels of feminine either. Some women just don't wanna be feminine. Oftentimes it's because femininity is derided by society itself—and that's something that one needs to heal from, like Toph did with Katara’s friendship—but everytime I've seen a story like that, the girl, upon realising that femininity isn't a bad thing is suddenly hyper-feminine.

Like, can we have them heal from internalised misogyny and still not wanna be feminine—even though they don't consider it bad or embarassing or fickle anymore?

Toph and Katara’s spa days do it perfectly.

When those girls mock Toph and Katara tells her she's pretty, I can't tell you much I loved it. The same feelings toward Suki’s “I am a warrior, but I'm a girl too.”

[kirkwallguy]

group cutscenes kind of feel like when you run a mod that lets you have more companions than you're supposed to and everyone starts firing off on their similar comments like:

rook: elgar'nan and ghilan'nain should have been at the club

davrin: but they weren't. and that's what matters.

neve: yep. and the fact that they weren't at the club? that's what matters most

bellara: well. not EVERYONE likes the club!

harding: what matters is that they weren't AT the club, were they? um. not that everyone has to like the club!

taash: hmph. only losers don't like clubbing.

emmrich: you know, in my youth i enjoyed the 'club'... it seems significant that elgar'nan and ghilan'nain did not.

varric: rook. can you hear me? while it may be a generalising statement to say that all young people should be at the club, i think we can all agree that elgar'nan and ghilan'nain would have benefited from it-

manfred: manfred!

lucanis: (they forgot to give him a line for this one)

rook: well i'm glad we all know where we stand on this. let's get some rest while we work on some solutions

[daisys-reality]

Hello miss daisy, I just read something on your blog that mentions the fact that time isn't real. I just love this concept, I vividly remember reading similar stuff elsewhere, long ago. I'd love to read up on this concept more, could you please suggest resources, scientific, mythological, really anything. I am quite fascinated with the concepts of Time and Death.

Thank you,

Artyom.Dmitry

Time - Is it real or just an illusion? - It is both.

Hi artyom.dmitry, I can't think of any specific literature from the top of my head right now that tals about these topics AND is worth reading. I would have to do some research first (I might add some suggestions to this post at a later time).

I'm not sure where you're coming from (mentally) - whether you're a part of the shifting community or not - and what level of understanding you have of those topics but I want to clarify that I'm a shifter and have been active in the spiritual/esoteric community for many years. So, my opinions and perceptions of this world have been influenced and shaped by this (just to give you head ups). You might not agree or see the things I do but that's ok. No one is being forced here to accept anything as their beliefs because there is no 'one general truth'.

So, I think there are two things that we should talk about. First, the issue with the concept itself but it's realness in this reality. Second, the concept losing its meaning and importance in the face of manifestation and reality shifting and therefore just posing as an "illusion".

But let's start from the beginning and let's recall what the original usage of the concept of time and therefore its reason for existence is:

As we all know the concept of "time" is human made. It is something we decided on and categorised into units like: years, months, minutes, seconds to understand our existence on this earth. We based this on what we perceived to happen in our closest environment (sun/moon=day/night time, moon phases = months, repeated changes of the weather = season & year,...). With the creation of this concept we had the intention to use it as a tool. A tool to improve communication between other humans, to improve the ability to plan (when to hunt, when to meet up again, when to go to sleep, when to do xyz) and to improve our understanding of what is happening around us because our life was so closely linked with nature - understanding the nature/earth was detrimental to our surviving.

So, creating the concept of time actually improved the life of our ancestors. We gave our life a structure. And where there is a structure, improvements can be made. We humans are eager to understand and analyse things with the intention to improve. In that sense we're greedy beings - always striving for 'more' and 'better'.

I think that our ancestors had a better understanding & feeling of this concept "time" than we do now. Ex., in many cultures different types of calendars (much closer linked with nature's rhythm) were used but once humans were able to communicate & connect on a more global level - the idea of generalisation & standardisation were on the rise (as further tools to improve life). And of course, capitalism is thriving on this. (We are even selling "our time" for money now!! This is actually crazy the more you think about it. We have been brainwashed by our own society to normalize this!) Time nowadays is not really based on nature anymore as it has been in the past and it's messing with our own human life experience. As nature changes (naturally, but obviously also because of global warming) we should have actually started adapting our concepts of time as well. But we don't. And probably won't any time soon. Because time is something integrated in so many other concepts and human made systems (or it's even even the foundation of those) that changing the concept of time would mean having to adapt everything else. And we all know how those humans on top of our systems (I'm looking at u politicians -_-) love to keep outdated systems alive (even if they don't seem to be as effective anymore) instead of being more innovative... just because of money, reputation and personal comfort... the world we live in 😞...

The concept of time that we have right now is linked to our reality that we percieve here - therefore it is is very much real. HOWEVER, as other realities may have other laws of physics they may also have different concepts of time. With reality shifting (and manifesting as well) you transcend this concept during the act of shifting (/manifesting) therefore it loses its importance and meaning as a "conditioning" or "restrictive aspect of life" -> Time exists as an effective concept in this reality but you are not limited to this reality's concept of time! We thinking that we are limited by it is a (self made) illusion. One a side note, the fact that we're starting to explore further abilities of our consciousness can be considered a sign of evolution. - I hope all of that made sense!

[this-is-exorsexism]

Hey, since I saw you speak German (making that assumption based on the fact that you mentioned a exorsexist comment being German in a post. Sorry if that’s a wrong assumption) I really want to talk about instances of exorsexism that I see so often in the feminist German speaking circles and that I’m so so tired off.

The terms “female read” and “male read” to refer to people, both when talking about, you know, just everyday things they saw ex. “I like seeing female read people sporting body hair” (just say you like people who don’t shave their body hair. Cause it’s not just the demographic of people that society pushes to present as “women” that are pressured into body hair removal.) and in context of feminist discussions “Cat calling affects female read individuals more than male read people. And male read people are more often the perpetrator of cat calling”. (This one irkes me so so much, because it’s a sweeping generalisation in general, which is just not okay.)

Another example that also falls into every day things and is even more removed from any “political” statement: “I saw a female read person that reminded me of my mother.” (This quote came from a nonbinary person which made the unnecessary gendering feel even more uncomfortable. There was no forceful gendering of the person necessary. It could have just been “I saw a person that reminded me of my mother” the assumption that it must have been a woman already is a possibility by the association with mother. And you sadly can’t get rid of it. There is no necessity to state it like that.)

One last longer example that is partly feminism related again (that is a near direct translation): “A lot of women and female read people know the feeling of standing in front of the mirror and asking wether or not they want to wear this or if it’s too revealing. Because choice of clothing alone can suggest you want to provoke men.[…] Even if a female read person wears tight clothing, because [she/they] feel sexy in it, is that no reason to insult [her/them] as a slut.” (The “she” could have also been meant in a “they” sense, because this is a translation situation where it isn’t 100% clear. That’s why I wrote it like that.) (This quote is again making assumptions and putting experiences on people and forcefully gendering people who experience these feelings. When these experiences actually can’t be categorised like that. Like even perisex cis men can experience this. It is also very telling here that only the “female read” wording was used when making social commentary, not the “male read”, when men where mentioned.)

(These statements are not always necessarily word for word quotes. They are partly just things I remember seeing in the past. Each example is from a different person.)

The description “female read”/“male read” as you likely know is typically said to be used to “to be more inclusive. Since we don’t know how someone actually identifies and we shouldn’t assume”. Which to me is just very much a “I’m gonna categorise you into man or woman on sight, just as anyone else, but I’ll say ‘male read’/‘female read’ to make it inclusive and not feel bad in case I’m actually misgendering you.”.

The fact that people think it’s more inclusive and isn’t just basically another way to categories man and woman, while claiming to be inclusive, drives me up the wall if I think about it for to long. The idea to be categorised as “female read” is honestly more dysphoria inducing than simply being assumed to be a woman, because it feels even more like failing at being uncategorisable, because the people supposedly not clinging onto the binary are categorising me as something I’m not. And as I hinted at, at the beginning, these two categories virtually ignore any possibility of seeing people who your brain can’t sort into the man/woman categories immediately, and pushes them into one or the other. Which also can ultimately lead to erasure of intersex individuals who could be sorted differently than both their sex and gender. (I hope my wording here is okay and it’s clear what I mean. If not. Please let me know.) The categories of “female read”/“male read” to me are ultimately cissexist, exorsexist and intersexist. This whole concept is just forceful gendering of people wrapped up in a pretty package that says “feminism”.

A big personal pet peeve of mine is people praising people who categorise like that. I’ve recently seen it done by a cis woman, intersectional feminist, who was praising a speaker for using the terms.

There is also the not uncommon occurrence where it’s just not even hidden anymore that “female read” or “male read” is just put in instead of woman or man or used interchangeably.

I just truly deeply dislike how these terms have become a very common thing in feminist circles, even between trans*(= very much meaning nonbinary here as well, hence the trans*) educators, feminists and influencers. It feels like such a gut punch to see even them reinforcing the gender binary in such ways.

(If you disagree with this being exorsexism I’d be very curious as to how. Because to me personally it is a very clear example of exorsexism that I’ve been wishing to talk about since I first encountered it. Also sorry if this is worded a bit confusingly at times. I tried my best.)

this is definitely exorsexism.

i know exactly what you're talking about and i have spoken about the misuse of these terms at length on my personal social media too.

to be honest, i was about to defend ~some~ uses of these terms, but after reading everything you said, i think these terms need to be retired.

i think at least half the time people use "female-read" and "male-read" to just mean women and men, because i don't know, maybe they think nonbinary people think that men and women exist is somehow offensive? a woman is a woman and you can and should just call her a woman, a man is a man and you can and should just call him a man. calling a woman "female-read" is entirely unnecessary and quite disrespectful too, in my opinion. it basically strips her of her identity as a woman and reduces her to how society sees her. the same is true for men.

"male-read people are often the perpetrators of catcalling" is also an interesting one because it proves that "male-read" and "female-read" are just stand-ins for the gender binary and gender oppositionism: "male-read" people have (perisex cisgender) male privilege and the entitlement and attitudes that come with it. they can never be victims of patriarchal violence, only perpetrators. "female-read" people are always more marginalised than "male-read" people. if you want to talk about people who are most likely to catcall, you must talk about perisex cisgender men.

as you've said, this doesn't take into account transgender, nonbinary and intersex people as it doesn't only sort us into a new male-female gender binary but also into a binary of "perpetrator of the patriarchy" and "victim of the patriarchy" in very oversimplified ways. in its attempt at inclusivity, this language completely obscures the experiences of people whom society sees as men or women but aren't. being seen as male when you're nonbinary or female, being seen as female when you're nonbinary or male, i.e. having your gender assumed incorrectly can actually be really dangerous. it also once again reduces us to how society sees us and acts as if our actual genders don't contribute to our experience.

one of the strangest ways people use this language is when they say something like "i saw a male-read person at the shop today". like, what do you mean? you read this person as male. you projected your binary thinking onto this person. using passive voice for this is just a way to try to remove your responsibility in participating in this system of gender assumption. at this point, you might just say that you saw a man at the shop. in this context, they mean the exact same thing.

these terms also don't take into account that there are different ways of being perceived as male or female. some people are perceived as transgender male rather than cisgender male, which are two very different experiences. being seen as transgender female rather than cisgender female is also very much not the same.

people also ignore that a lot the people they're trying to be inclusive of by using this language aren't actually consistently read as either binary gender or are read as something else entirely. "male-read" and "female-read" are pretty much used to be permanent life-long states of being perceived, with the exception of people transitioning and then going from one to the other and will be read as that and only that for the rest of their life. in reality, this looks very different. some of us are called he one day and she another. sometimes it depends on our gender presentation. sometimes it depends on the person perceiving us. for many of us, we actually have no idea how someone's perceiving our gender until they indicate this. also, many of us aren't read as either male or female. a lot of us are just read as "what the fuck are you" or [insert slur here]. none of these experiences can be mapped onto the idea of male-read and female-read.

not to mention how they keep using these terms to refer to body parts. "female-read" is too often just code for "has boobs". it's especially funny when they use this language for internal organs. like, sure, the catcaller on the street totally perceives someone's uterus.

"male-read" and "female-read" are what "women and femmes" or the transmasc/transfem binary will become if we don't stop it. they can always be replaced with other more precise terms that don't reinforce exorsexism, cissexism, intersexism and gender oppositionism.

[dufferpuffer]

It is true that many characters demonstrated inherited prejudices towards werewolves and Snape wouldn’t be too different - but I do find it a bit disappointing for people to think that systematically stalking someone with the intention of ousting them is a knee-jerk reaction coming from a generalised societal prejudice. Maybe it’s trying to over justify and defend Snape’s actions, which to me were more motivated by his hatred of the Marauders, and later, fear and trauma of being exposed to a transformed werewolf?

We can bring up Molly, but we can also bring up people like Hermione, Harry, and Dean Thomas. Hermione worked out his secret and didn’t feel the need to freak out and expose him. Dean Thomas leaned later he had been taught by a werewolf and quickly and unprompted jumped to defend him in front of Umbridge. Harry immediately felt sympathy when confronted with the reality of Lupin’s condition, even when exposed to its scary and dangerous side. Even Ron, who had what I’d call a knee-jerk reaction, got over himself pretty quickly.

It’s just a bit wet to be like “well everyone was shit about it, so Snape is forgiven for being shit about it”. Not everyone was shit about it.

Does it make Snape look better to think that most students would be outraged to find out there’s a werewolf amongst them? I like to think some students, if they worked out, much like Harry and Hermione would see the person first and not get super weird about it.

I think you are severely underestimating the level of bigotry the Wizarding World has against werewolves - as well as the social climate at the time the Marauders were at school.

What you suggests breaks Remus' character in terms of the choices he makes, the sheer weight of his friends keeping his secret, Dumbledores actions to support him (and the implications of Severus' unwilling but dedicated silence for 18 years)... and are missing the point of why SPECIFICALLY Harry, Hermione and Dean are the ones most defensive and supportive of Remus.

It's not me trying to justify Severus' actions. I don't need to justify Severus, he can be a petty little ass. (Though the trust breaking of him finding out Dumbledore is protecting a werewolf makes the "fuck yall 'good guys' I'm going all in on rebuilding wizarding society" element of his character enriched.)

It's me spending WAY too long combing through the books to intricately understand REMUS' situation. It's for HIM - not Severus.

This is all SUPER fresh in my mind because I'm working on a part 7 of a massive, huge, too-big Lycanthropy meta, so uh... I went nuts:

+ Harry, Hermione and Dean were ALL raised by Muggles. No shit they are more accepting and sympathetic, especially when their first interaction with a werewolf is their lovely teacher. They have no cultural point of reference. It wasn't random to make Dean Thomas, of any side-character, stand up for Remus. Not Neville, not Seamus, not Lavender, not the Patil sisters.

Even then - + Hermione felt conflicted in keeping his secret but gave him the benefit of the doubt. Evidently, though, she had read how awful werewolves are and just didn't want to believe it. "he wants you dead too -- he's a werewolf!" "If I'd been a bit cleverer, I'd have told everyone what you are!"

+ Ron reacted with immediate revulsion towards Remus. "Get away from me, werewolf!" He didn't call him Professor, or Lupin, or even just leave it at 'get away from me'... he see's him as an animal. And he only got over it when Remus spent ages explaining himself, his past, his intentions - and proved his rat was a 33yr old man.

+ Harry is one of VERY FEW characters that actually treats Remus as a human being. Who else... Arthur, Albus, Tonks - possibly Dean... + Hermione directly compares his situation to that of House-Elves and says 'Wizards think themselves better than other creatures'. Remus is a Wizard, not a different Being, Beast or Part-Human - he is just disabled. She often accidentally does the exact things she wants to fight against: not listening to the voices of House-Elves and 'othering' werewolves as not-quite-human. “But you are normal!” said Harry fiercely. “You’ve just got a — a problem —” Even Remus' friends weren't as good as Harry is: + James is flippant with the fact Remus was a werewolf, even when Remus asked him to be careful - and his entire theme is that Harry is a better man than him. + Sirius treated Remus as a point of interest, wishing it was the Full Moon so he didn't have to be bored - regardless of how painful it is for Remus to endure - and at the first sign of there being a mole suspected Remus without proof. + Peter stood with James and Sirius in ignoring Remus' concerns, even when James and Sirius were more openly nasty to him.

+ "...out of bounds, at night, consorting with a werewolf and a murderer..." Snape says to the Minister of Magic, about equal weighting put on 'Murderer' and 'Werewolf'. Even though that 'Werewolf' was Harry's teacher, the fact Harry KEPT consorting with him after finding out he was a werewolf is whats damning. And the Minister just nods his head, agreeing.

+ "I’ve made her an outcast! ... You have only ever seen me amongst the Order, or under Dumbledore’s protection at Hogwarts! You don’t know how most of the Wizarding world sees creatures like me! When they know of my affliction, they can barely talk to me!" Remus wasn't being hyperbolic here. It's all true. Tonks IS an outcast now - she had to run from the Ministry. Wizarding society utterly detests werewolves.

+ Even as a little boy his parents had to move house every few months when their neighbours started to notice Remus not being allowed to play with other kids, getting ill on the Full Moons. There was no sympathy even for a 5yr old if he was a 5yr old werewolf. Remus grew up having to run away at the first sign of suspicion. It's sorta shocking how relentless it is in the books - I'm doing a meta on Lycanthropy, here's Part 2 where I go through how society seems to act and how Remus feels

'Does it make Snape look better to think that most students would be outraged to find out there’s a werewolf amongst them?' Better...? He is just correct. It makes him look NORMAL. It makes him look petty and irresponsible, really, that he didn't go to teachers first. But he was a 15/16yr old used to not getting any help. + Even LILY treated accusing Remus of Lycanthropy as a deathly serious accusation. It was terrible and ridiculous to even think of. "I know your theory,” said Lily, and she sounded cold.

Why do you think that more than a small handful of students would not act with prejudice if Remus was exposed as a werewolf...? Even if students and staff stood beside Remus, as they had known him for years - why that would matter in the face of Parents, General Society and Ministry persecution?

Especially during the dawn of the First Wizarding War???

Fenrir Greyback, the most savage werewolf alive, was biting CHILDREN to amass an army in the Death Eaters service. Death Eaters were on the rise, getting more violent. Secretive - nobody knew who they were, where they had infiltrated. Casting the Dark mark over peoples houses when they had killed their families. Getting Giants to kill more Muggles than in any point in history. Armies of inferi - dead family, friends and muggles they murdered being reanimated to fight the living... One of them, one of Greybacks children - is in HOGWARTS. One of the safest places in the Wizarding World is compromised. That's how it would be seen! That's essentially how it was seen even 13 years later - being outed to the public destroyed Remus.

...We, as readers, know more about werewolves than general Wizarding society does. Especially Wizarding children who only get some lessons on how dangerous they are and how to kill them.

+ If you listen to Pottermore, which fair enough if you don't - there are books published such as Prof. Emerett Picardy's 'Lupine Lawlessness: Why Lycanthropes Don't Deserve to Live', which state things such as 'werewolves permanently lack moral sense'. Misinformation is rampant. Murdering werewolves is acceptable. When werewolf-sympathetic books are published its done so with anonymous authors because they fear backlash.

You might 'like to think that students who found out wouldn't get super weirded out by it'. But I just don't think that's realistic. And even if there was a massive Hogwarts-wide cultural shift in the perception of werewolves just because Remus was 'a pretty nice lad' - it would mean little. We SEE it meaning little: Everyone likes Remus as a teacher and it meant jack shit. Werewolves were in a worse position socially, not a better one, after Remus was a teacher.

[sapphosremains]

Thoughts on Calvinism?

This is so interesting bc the majority of posts about Calvinism on here have focused on its beliefs about predestination, so I want to try and buck that. As with everything on this blog you'll get a weird mix of personal religion and academic theology, so do shout if you only wanted one or the other and I'll try again! Another disclaimer: I have no formal reading or research on Calvinism - denominational theology isn't really my area, so anything in here is personal opinion and from brief research, but no real academic reading. I'll get round to it, but it's not the top of my list right now!

Starting with the unified idea against the Real Presence, with Calvinism teaching that the Eucharist is simply a reminder of Christ's sacrifice, personally I just can't agree. I am still working out where I am on trans/consubstantiation, but I do completely believe in the idea of the Real Presence, and reject a memorialist theology. To me, it just doesn't work that the Eucharist can be a sacrament yet only a reminder and a memorial (although to be fair, Calvin's alternate view of what a sacrament is dodges this issue, but I can't agree with it so still personally doesn't work).

Now, from what I've read, Calvinism seems pretty on the side of sola scriptura, which again as an anglocatholic I am not. I think there's a reason why Revelation is addressed to the churches, and why Jesus devoted so much time to His disciples. Do I think that the Church is possibly more fallible than scripture? Yes, that's why I'm not RC, but I think the Church and community is of utmost importance, and understanding of Christianity and rule of faith is reliant on the Church. Furthermore, I think that again there's a reason why the Pope is the Pope and I'm not, and the Archbishop of Canterbury is and I'm not! Not that I would suggest that Calvinists reject this idea, just that I think there is a chain of authority and expertise in the Church for a reason, and their view ought to carry more weight than mine, despite us both reading the same scripture.

Carrying on with this Church idea, despite what I've just said, I'm not sure about the idea of God's only communication being through Christ. I'll come onto other reasons, but the first one that landed concretely with me was the idea that the preaching of ministers about God is the Word of God. Mmmm. Not sure. I think it's quite a vain idea to suggest that humans, ordained or not, let alone a massive group of them all preaching different things can all be speaking the word of God. Even just think of a minister you know who's said something slightly off, or a denomination that is far off every other, or not to generalise but if you've ever watched a mega-church service... can they all be the Word of God? Makes me feel a bit icky. The other stuff about Christ and salvation being the only two methods of God's self-revelation I feel like I don't know enough theology about to write about, but my instinct is against.

Covenant theology to me just felt like another framework, and I'm not keen on it. So far what I've read of Calvinism just seems to me like it tries to restrict a divine and infinite being into finite and defined ways of working with humans, and I'm not super keen.

Social trinitarianism? Nuh uh. I just, no. Not sure what to say, I'm just a Nicene creed girly.

Now, getting into the stuff we see more on here, starting with total depravity. This one makes me sad. There was a really good post on here which I've just been looking for (similar to this post by @hymnsofheresy) and I wish I could find it but essentially just a different view of original sin, seeing it more as meaning that we cannot be perfect, and to prevent us being perfectionists because we are in a world which cannot let us be perfect. I really like this view. The Calvinist idea of total depravity meaning that we are displeasing to God, 'defiled and polluted' in his sight, and makes us 'naturally hateful to God' is just like what? God loves us. Yes, He hates sin, and sin is irrevocably linked to the person, but I can't believe that He hates us and finds us displeasing, defiled, and polluted from the minute we are conceived.

Now, predestination. Similarly to the original sin, I just think this is such a nihilist theology. I think if I believed that there was a chance that before I had a chance to have faith, or do good works, I was condemned to hell, no matter what I did, I would struggle to have faith. Why would one want to believe in a God if you think that He could have condemned you to hell before your existence, based on no characteristic of your own?

On a more flippant note (ha), I couldn't be Calvinist because I love music, and as cool as a cappella is, it definitely couldn't be my whole liturgical life (also I'm an organist!).

Hope this was somewhat interesting, and I hope not horrifically uniformed. What are your thoughts?