#I'm not sure if these characterizations help define them or if they're just generic

[daistea]

thrun is not the submissive one. He might bottom here and there, but that's a position, not a role. I also don't like this shit because I see it with basically every character I like. They're a bit feminine. Okay, sure. But then every edge on them is sanded off until they're disgusting smooth. It's like this gross contradiction of excess fragility. It skeeves me the hell out because it takes a lot of the cool traits and feminizes them totally and basically says "Hey! Being feminine isn't cool or complex or edgy. It's soft." Like. Hey. Hey. That is so fucked? Do you not realize that?

Feminization literally so often takes away what is so interesting and meaningful to a character for the sake of shipping and I've been dealing with it since L fucking Lawliet. And I'm tired. I don't care. Make the guy the bottom if you want. But when people get rid of traits and characterization and change the guy to do it, it's like... ???? I don't know.

Maybe just do it because you want to instead of making it some gender thing? It's weird when people go "femme = bottom". You are remaking gender roles! At that point, I dunno, why are we not writing straight sex?

And honestly, I have lots of thoughts about sexuality and dominance and I think there are so many interesting ways to play it out other than physical strength, which, by the way, if you're going off of that, it's Mithrun!

There's coercion. There's mental dominance. There are so many interesting ways to be dominated beyond pure strength that it seems silly that conquest would come down to only that. You've got this guy, knife-sharp, which is to say smart, and incredibly blunt. He's ruthless, relentless, single-minded. And you're making him the fucking submissive? Like. Okay. Sure. Maybe sometimes. But I also think he's impatient, actually. I think you push him too much when he wants and he decides it's his turn now, and God help you.

There are so many interesting ways to explore the dynamic and the feelings and him as a person. He's a stubborn menace. And it's so neat to make the dom a brat, too! Ugh. The bicker. The banter.

I agree with all u said, here’s a Yeah

I know a lot of it is just societal. We’re trained to assign roles, and when we do that our brains go okay here are the traits associated with those roles :)

I feel like a lot of modern fandom should’ve moved on from that by now, though?? And with dunmeshi especially, you’ve got bearded manly-looking men who cook and garden and sympathize/care for everyone he meets— traditionally feminine traits. You’ve got dwarf women who are stronger than the main character— Namari. Youve got a whole race of characters who look and dress generally feminine, but the main elf is ruthless, he disregards others’ feelings and lives, he’s blunt, he kills people and he does it in a skirt LOL

(I know it’s not technically a skirt but the concept remains ✌️)

Mithrun’s traits are traditionally associated with masculinity. (Women are like that too, though, and actually I want to see more women written like that!) Anyway, despite that, he still gestures in a feminine way sometimes. He’s like if a man and a woman had a baby. Mithrun isn’t necessarily defined by specific roles, which is a consequence of his backstory. That’s how he’s written. He has the capacity to both submit and to dominate— which uh, most real people do, I think. To an extent. I don’t mean sexually, I mean in a relationship. Most emotionally developed people sometimes submit, sometimes grow more dominant, depending on the situation. But what do I know? The world constantly surprises and corrects me.

If ya wanna make Mithrun the bottom in physical moments, go for it. But just because that is considered a traditionally feminine role does not mean he has to be feminine. His characterization/personality does not have to morph and change to fit what sex position you want him in.

Anyway sorry for the rambling, what I’m trying to say is that dungeon meshi has nuanced characters. And I feel like assigning gender roles + the traditional traits of those roles to these characters erases the many dimensions they were written with.

On a physical note, I believe it also subconsciously stems from who’s smaller— another societal norm. I like a good size difference, don’t get me wrong, but I don’t think size necessarily equals role. Just bc Mithrun is shorter and can be easily manhandled does not mean he’s an uwu sub softboy who needs coddling. (I think for him, specifically, it also plays into how his disabilities are subconsciously viewed. But that’s a whole other can of worms to snack on.)

If you insist on giving roles, I think it’s actually more fun to give the little guy the more dominant role!

And I do understand why some people gravitate towards dom/sub top/bottom roles. There’s nothing wrong with that. All I would like to see is some brain power behind the characterization and portrayal.

There’s a lot I can but will not say about shipping in fandom. I adore shipping, don’t get me wrong, but I’m just very funny about Mithrun.

In the end, creativity is about fulfillment and joy and expression! If you wanna use these characters to portray your fantasy/tastes then go ahead. But if you want to portray them in canon-accurate ways, with real relationship dynamics, then all I recommend is to not put as much importance/significance into roles. Look at the characters on their own. Canon is your reference, not fanon.

eepy

[johnny-chaos]

Gordon is notably characterized by his obnoxious and deeply uncool behavior but he's also defined by an incredible earnestness and desire for things to be taken seriously . And Benrey, on the other hand, is obnoxious too but for the exact opposite reasons-- devaluing things that, by Gordon's standards, should be taken seriously (such as murder) while playing up the absurdity and inconsistent application of rules in general (and also acting like a fucking third grader).

In that way the two of them have a lot in common, but with that one major caveat of seriousness . Really, they're both pretty earnest, and they both just wanna make jokes n have fun-- Gordon wants to be a justin.tv streamer and he talks to himself like an anime protagonist (GORDON SPRINT!!) and Benrey's whole thing is having his day ruined bc he couldn't play games with his friends . But Benrey also knows treating the game like it's real is idiotic, while Gordon can't help but treat it as if it were (and Scorpy Socpens n Wayne R. TV use this for some extremely good comedy).

In addition to THAT, you have Coomer, who, over the course of the webseries, realizes his life is a lie and his world is fake - subsequently becoming more lucid, serious, and aloof. His character arc brings up the question of What Does It Truly Mean, To Be Alive? (a tried and true story point !) They're all functioning on different understandings of their world-- they all understand nothing matters, but Coomer is just now realizing, and Benrey's always known it, and Gordon method acts so hard that he almost forgets it.

With that context HLVRAI becomes an argument on existential nihilism -- Coomer presents the question "nothing is real so is living this life valuable?" and Benry's response is essentially "no- if nothing matters then why care ? Do whatever you want forever ." And Gordon's is "of COURSE it's valuable, fuck you, this may not matter but I can care and try and hope and LIVE, BABY!!! leave me and my magmar plush OUTTA THIS!!" Quite a 4chan vs Tumblr argume(I am shot and killed)

But even though I describe Gordon as v earnest and sincere, it's not enitrely accurate, bc while he has a lot of Genuine Expressions of Emotion, he also seems to use anger to mask laughter ("if i had a knife i would gut you" said with an audible smile). Makes him seem less genuine and more like he's playing up the reactivity, but you still get a rly potent feeling that these are people he enjoys being around, and I'm sure that's also just Wayne R. TV playing gmod with his friends bleeding through .

Coomer's obviously the MOST sincere, he has literally the only lines that are SUPPOSED to be taken seriously. And Benrey may not be very sincere, but he IS (in Wayne R TV's words) the most sentimental, which is REALLY weird. He's constantly talking bullshit, but Scorpy Socpens still gives him these moments where it seems like he might actually care ("we should turn back.. we're going further . into HELL" and "why are we here? ..what happened to your arm?!") LIKE!! he and the others are all entertainers, they're all supposed to make you laugh (except for Dr. Coomer at one point), but Benrey especially, as he's this manifestation of insincerity and irony and absurdity--and yet?? some semblance of motivation??

If hlvrai is an argument on nihilism, then it's ALSO about how what makes life worth living is the people around you actually . Because of benrey's "nothing matters" mentality he gains Gordon's ire and subsequently becomes the antagonist as his stupid shenanigans are reframed as actively hindering the group (even though yeah EVERYONE gets in the way of everything all the time). Thus he becomes the Big Bad even though he's really just, not cut out for it . he knows his actions don't have meaningful consequences, but that sentimentality inevitably slips out, and yeah, his whole purpose is to be funny. you can't be funny to yourself now that's just embarrassing. he has the powers to shapeshift and time travel but he only does it when it's relevant to Gordon. i am constantly thinking about how he says "it replenishes your electronics" in this calm, mellow voice like he's got nothing to worry about and is just enjoying the moment . he just wants to play games with people, man!!!

and even though Gordon is so SO fucking uncool, he's allowed to be because he actually gives a shit!! even though they're both annoying, Benrey is the one who becomes the villain because of how detached he is. Gordon can stumble over his words and be clumsy as hell but he cares so deeply-- about the others, about putting on a show-- that his embarrassing attempts at being the hotshot hero of the story don't detract from his value. yeah this world isn't real but my friends are. yeah nothing matters but we can still try to help each other out. you are supposed to care!!! bitch

[gildeddlily]

why the abuse cycle is the best thing ever written (ok not the best but almost)

I wouldn't define myself an Akutagawa apologist, 'cause no I simply can't do something like that knowing what he did to Kyouka, but hating on him for that is the same as hating Dazai for it? not really.

"dazai should pay for what he has done-" uh he already did? like alright go on and forget the suicidal tendencies (and the almost canon sh) that definitely aren't sarcastic (even my bed knows that), the years he spent in the mafia as a teenager (if the word child is exaggerated for you)(at fourteen you're still a child yes), how he was around killing people at fifteen, how he learned ways to torture others at the same time, how he lived in a literal container far from everything else and how he was considered a demon by everyone to the point that he was sure of that by sixteen (how he was the ward of a canon pedophile (not saying he was s/a for sure, but it wouldn't make things better)), and an entire characterization for your "poor innocent akutagawa" act

like, I love Akutagawa, he's one of my favourite characters and of the best written ones, and despite my love for him I recognise the bad things he has done. naturally I'm not talking ab the killing, like who cares they're all kinda useless or not so important to me and everyone in general, but the "Abuse Cycle" thing, one of the best things Asagiri wrote for this plot. he just treated Jyouka like shit, and everyone has to admit it: he abused and manipulated her for a long time, badly influenced her and using her as a tool for the mafia. Dazai did the same, saving Akutagawa, "giving him a reason to live" if making him proud can be called this, and abusing and treating him probably the way he was treated under Mori's cares.

I remember when some years ago I said to a friend of mine (I was like thirteen and they were sixteen) that I didn't like Dazai for what he did to Akutagawa (my favourite boy when I had yet to read the manga) and they told me something like "but that's hypocrisy, Akutagawa did the same thing to Kyouka" yes and no, again.

chapter 49 is like the thing that make me says that even tho the things they both did were bad it still is not the same

I'm citing another post here on tumblr that I saved and lost cause I'm a genius, but the "eyes represent the way the see themselves" theory is perfect for this chapter, that is a whole "you're eyes are different". it's the cannibalism arc and Kyouka is ready to kill Higuchi to save the ADA and Fukuzawa cause they're the first real family she has had after her parents died, Akutagawa starts to fight her and after her attempt to kill him surprises him, she backs away and he sees her face clearly, specifically her eyes. Asagiri drew them like this for a reason.

Akutagawa's surprised eyes are wide open, iris grey (like his hair so they would be just pitch black) like the pupil in an almost blank look. they express nothing, and the only way we understand how he's feeling is the "eyes wide open" thing. they're just dull. Kyouka is determined, and in her eyes shines that determination to help her family. the sparkles are there for a reason like every other time, and they're open. filled with emotions and just human. her eyebrows are frowned, and she's so different from him it hurts. (Asagiri even put the little panel with his eyes next to her, he's screaming "look at how you'll suffer now")

this is a creepy expression our silly little guy makes at the idea of fighting someone as strong as kyouka, and the differences in their eyes is even more prominent (crazed look doesn't suit you bby)

and he sees that difference, even if kyouka probably ignores it. he admits that she's right: she's changed since she worked under him

he describes kyouka's eyes as "yearning for death/with no values for her life", and says that he knew someone with the same eyes as her, and at first it would look like he's talking about himself, but then there's a picture of sixteen/seventeen Dazai, that like her joined another organization and found a reason to live (Dazai definitely didn't found a reason to live, maybe a reason to don't die and survive but it's another matter). so he isn't talking ab himself, and he even sees the part of the flashback with himself like a little icon in the corner. Asagiri drew the way he remembered that day, not someone else's perception

so he doesn't think of himself as someone like Kyouka or Dazai. But both Asagiri and Bones did a good job making things clear (bones almost useful for the first time with the iconic parallels)

they're the same. they're identical, and maybe bones did akutagawa's part too evident, removing the "hidden truth" behind that panel, but the effect is perfect. they have the same eyes, but Akutagawa says that they're like Dazai's ones, who sure look like theirs in the "you're the witness to that fact" scene. he completely ignores the parallels between his past (and present) self and kyouka.

he says that he's glad about kyouka's (and dazai's) happiness and new-founded reason to live/stay alive. he's happy for them, cause he recognise that they're better like this, and he accepts the fact that they've found a place outside the mafia. (kyouka screams flabbergasted) so, basically, he also recognize how the time she spent with the mafia (and with him) was bad for her mental health and didn't help her wellbeing. I'm pretty sure t is the closest thing to an apology he could ever manage.

the "best" thing about the abuse cycle is the differences between them. Kyouka breaks the cycle and finds happiness. Akutagawa gets abused and abuses, he recognise it and "apologies", declaring himself glad that his and the mafia's influence weren't able to break Kyouka. Dazai gets abused and abuses, and we aren't sure of his feeling about what he did to Akutagawa. (mori is a good character but a bitch that I don't care ab)(his backstory would be gold but asagiri isn't that kind)

Kyouka recognize herself as a victim, and search/welcomes people who want her good. Akutagawa doesn't recognize himself as a victim, but says that Dazai and Kyouka are, thinks of himself as a weakling (and probably would react badly to anyone telling him that he was abused)(killing them maybe) Dazai doesn't recognize himself as a victim, 'cause he doesn't even thinks of himself as human to begin with, and there lies the difference between him and akutagawa

Dazai recognized that what he was doing to Akutagawa in Dark Era was bad, but didn't found in himself the "humanity" to be better, basically, saying that someone good like Oda would have done a better job. after Oda's last world he "became" a better person (he thinks he's acting all the time. like he really is unable to be human, when we know it isn't absolutely true), and started to "act" as "human". he truly sees himself as unable to be genuinely kind (like genuine kindness exists pfft), and it makes me feel bad cause it's horrible to live feeling like some empty shell of fake human traits. but it also is his excuse for his bad actions in the mafia. he doesn't recognise Mori's influence as the thing that made him who he is, that made him do what he did to Akutagawa, and doesn't think of himself human enough to be a decent guy, and decides to just be inhuman. I'm not saying he doesn't try, he for sure did back when he was younger, but I think at one point he simply choose not to anymore

(dazai "apologising" to akutagawa or thinking explicitly ab the bad he has done to him would be the apex of character's development)

so at the end Akutagawa recognizes (if I use this verb another time hit me with a spatula) what he has done to Kyouka but doesn't do the same with what Dazai has done to him Dazai probably doesn't fully recognizes what he has done to Akutagawa cause he does the same with what Mori has done to him, and if he did he still didn't find himself capable to be kind enough not to do bad (even tho he'll be with atushi ) (they need someone to make them understand) (someone hit them in the head please)

and nothing I should to study and I'll write the rest later cause I have too much things to say ab them

[kenobster]

7 and 10 for the opinions meme!

from the Choose Violence Ask Game, thank you for the ask!! ^_^

7. what character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because how how the fandom acts about them?

Hate is such a strong word lmao, and usually canon has already gotten me to hate a character before I even witness fandom behavior (i.e. Satine - though I really only hate her in the Obitine lens; otherwise, I like her or am neutral). So I've been really racking my brain for this one lol.

If we change it to "which character began to annoy you" .... there are a few. Hunter from TBB is one. I don't get why ppl like him so much. Fandom be like "he's a hot dad!!!" and I'm just like.... Rex exists. In fact a lot of clones have started to annoy me lately bc fandom apparently thinks they're hotter than Rex, so I think this is a me problem (or maybe a Rex problem, he needs to mind his own hotness).

Another one is actually Luke. Like I am pretty neutral on almost all OT content (unless it's Vader being abused by Palpatine, that's hot). But even then, I'm super neutral on Luke. But there's constant Luke discourse on my dash. Like "Luke's character is like this, not this" or "Luke wouldn't do that, he'd do this" and I'm like who is even saying what these posts claim ppl are saying? Also, most recently, I was reading a fic where I guess Anakin forgot he had twins or something bc he acted like Luke was his only child. So idk, it's definitely been pushing me the wrong way lately.

(These are all spicy takes lmao, so everyone please understand these are my personal interests, not actual analysis or even opinions I will stand by. But also all of you are wrong if you disagree with me. ;D)

10. worst part of fanon

I have so many things to complain about that I decided to narrow this down by defining fanon... For this post, fanon will refer to any popularly held headcanon that I see in fanfic that is generally innocent/harmless and does not regularly get brought up in discourse (I have to eliminate sand ppl things, etc. or we'll be here all day and I'll make so many enemies lol.)

So with that definition, the worst fanon imo is the characterization of Obi-Wan as a master to Anakin. Things like "Obi-Wan never told Anakin he loved him" or "Obi-Wan didn't tell Anakin he loved him enough" or "Obi-Wan never helped Anakin recover from slavery bc he didn't know how to handle such complex topics" (.... yes... surely that trait is how he became a Jedi Master on the Jedi Council, mmhmm) or "Obi-Wan didn't hug Anakin" (one of my BIGGEST pet peeves oh my god, why would he not hug a child????) or literally any variation of these themes. Whether Obi-Wan hugged Anakin or told him he loved him or actually asked him about his needs/wants/past, etc. - none of those subjects have been raised in well-known canon to my knowledge? And based on how Obi-Wan talks to Anakin as an adult in canon and how Obi-Wan treats other children (i.e. Numa) in canon, I'm pretty sure he did every single one of those things while raising Anakin. I have no idea where this fanon comes from (actually I think I do but I'm too tired to whine about how Jedi aren't emotionally repressed right now, esp bc it breaks my discourse rule), but it infuriates me. Anakin had a very good life with Obi-Wan, -glares at everyone on his hellsite-, alright?

Anyway, thank you again for the ask, I very much enjoy angrily spilling tea. lmao

[argentumcor]

Starting Phantom Liberty on replay. I was going to do it before the parade, but I felt it was a better fit if Johnny and V had done the Silverhand Farewell Tour. There's an understanding between them, and Johnny is more in line with his late game development, I think. Also I wanted to get to the party with a lot of side quests completed and Takemura alive after the parade (he was dead last time).

Songbird is definitely leaving things out to V from the start and she is desperately trying to gauge V from the start. I like to imagine Johnny is losing his shit the whole time she has him shut up, well aware of everything going on but unable to say anything about it. I wish that was played with a little bit more, because V would totally screw with him before it all goes nuts, knowing he can hear but not respond.

I talk a lot about Johnny, but V's characterization is excellent in general. The game really pushes for you to act like a decent person. Unlike a lot of action RPGs, V is in many ways a defined character. She is human, really just one of many scrambling in the dirt, not a chosen one of any kind (in a traditional sense). V has no illusions about being able to save the world. V likes nice cars. V is snarky and tells stupid jokes. V is capable but not hyper-capable. I know a lot of players- well, media, at least- were mad they didn't get this total blank slate of a character, but I think it's a strength.

Reed and Alex are great. The way they speak, move, how they handle situations...these are competent adults living in a world without clear-cut answers. I'd been sitting shotgun for my husband's playthrough of BG3 before playing PL the first time, and the quality of character writing in PL was such a shock compared to BG3's band of theater kids.

Johnny's angst is a nice use of him in this. I get it a lot being a veteran myself, though GWOT is a whole different flavor of issues for veterans than his (no matter what university activists like to yammer on about). The fact he's willing to bare this piece of himself to V is part of why I thought I needed to wait until they're closer. "I was fine with it until now"...right buddy. The way he curls around his cyberware shoulder at the tree...it's so unlike him and it speaks to the depth of what's going on in his mind. V still needles him in PL, even at that point, but she hits the target unlike the earlier insults. I'm really glad Johnny was not neglected in PL in favor of hanging out with Songbird the whole time.

What's particularly interesting to me- and another part of why I waited until after the Farewell Tour to do PL- is what the journal entries say about Johnny and V. Johnny by this point is being open about his sympathy towards people and knows V is just a good person who helps people out, and he likes that about her in his snarky way and also doesn't want her getting herself (and him, but he doesn't say us) killed.

Balls to the Wall:

Two BARGHEST pups're in way over their heads and, of course, who else but V to the rescue? I always had a soft spot for tragedies and this one's already got me hooked. You're taking this gig - end of discussion. Think you can pull them outta this shitshow? Got my fingers half-crossed.

No Easy Way Out (not finished this one yet):

Look, V. This Aaron choom is a big-handed bastard who knows how to handle himself in hot water. Sure, we gotta help each other out and all that, but watch your back. You're about to walk into the lion's den. I know you're all about helping lost souls and walking elderly ladies across the street, but please, PLEASE don't get killed assisting some lesser Dogtown boxer.

With Balls to the Wall, he does say "oh, V..." in that way of his when she takes the hallucinogen, which I think is more about the drugs then the helping given the journal entry, an interesting bit.

[icehot13]

Hi! I just love your Boba x Din fics (they're more Canon to me then the actual series it's crazy!) But now I want to write one myself. However I fear its just gonna be too similar to yours cause I am so in love (!) with the way you write them both! Not sure where I am going with this :,) but maybe you have any sort of advice for me? If not, just take this with you: You're an awesome writer and absolutely defined Din and Boba and their relationship for me! Thank you! <3

hi!! this is so wonderful, and i hope i do have some useful advice about it! i have a lot of feelings about fic-writing in general (i've been at it for fifteen years now!!)

You should absolutely write it! We may start with the same characterization, but no one can write it exactly the way you envision it. (If it's inspired by very specific elements or in the same verse, most people will link to the original inspiring fic, which i think is lovely) Here's how I would go about writing an inspired-by fic!

First - what do you like about the fic: for you, it sounds like the characterization! Is it how soft Din is towards Boba, is it Boba's disconnect from the mandalorians, etc etc etc. the more specific you can be, the more details you can free yourself up from and change to your liking! sometimes it's easier to break it down into many pieces so you can take fewer, and leave yourself more room to build on your own. so it's no longer 'this exact characterization of boba' but 'boba, who has panic attacks after the sarlacc and doesn't identify as a mandalorian - and now featuring wariness towards Din, a desire to be a mandalorian, a history where he once tried' etc etc etc.

Second - what's the opening where you see your fic: this is the point where you see a fic, in the spot that's open to a divergence from the original plot. like if you read The Way Home and said 'ok but what if boba hated Din for rescuing him.' it can be a tiny divergence - 'what if this scene went on for a little longer' - or very big - 'what if the vibe of this scene happened within an entirely different plot'. this is sort of how you figure out what you want to do with the characterization you like, and how to make it your own.

Third - what makes a fic feel like yours? it's useful to see what in your own style serves this characterization, and will help it feel more like your own. for me, this would be like... religious metaphors, or greek myth references, or being heavy on dialogue. in another fandom i'm in, there's this scene in an episode that EVERYONE wants to write fic about, but every fic feels different! One ended quite sadly, one had very explosive reactions between characters, one made it a poly relationship, one backed up to childhood, one was exceptionally accurate with the London descriptions, etc etc etc. mine made it an icarus reference. every fic felt different because of this even though they were all based on the exact same scene

I hope that helps you get started! I think it's amazing you want to write them with this dynamic, and i would love to see it when you post it!! <3

[loveshacks]

diego and soundman's accents

this one was a little harder since neither of them are given specific bithplaces in canon. i had to make a few assumptions in order to assign them an accent ^^' but somehow i feel like i got a more precise idea of their voices than gyro and johnny's?

Soundman: in canon, he's never given a more specific heritage than "native american" which, thank you. thanks. that helps. also for all my ~15 minutes of forum scouring i could not find anyone else who cared to try and figure out what tribe he might be. So I will do my best:

We know at least that they live somewhere in the desert, with their intro scene having a backdrop of mesas and cacti. we also know that they ride horses, which helps to narrow it down a little. based on that im guessing Apache, since Apache people are more well known for their horseback riding than their neighbors in the desert, the Puebloans. Some Apache people did live in tipis like Soundman's tribe seems to, but the Apache groups that lived in the desert (Lipan and Mescalero) generally lived in wikiups, which are similar, but less easily transportable. Like I said he doesn't seem to be based on any specific tribe, so the references to Native culture are all over the place.

But as if Apache is specific enough! Apache itself has two distinct languages within it (Eastern and Western) and at least four dialects within those. I'm going to assume Soundman is Mescalero Apache specifically, which would mean he speaks Mescalero-Chiricahua. Here is a sample of someone switching between english and Mescalero- altho that's a much more modern example, i think we can assume that's pretty close to how Soundman would speak!

My guess is that he learned english entirely from his books, since his tribe seems to be pretty anti-contact, so i believe his english would be pretty accented and probably become more adapted/smooth throughout the race. ok transcription time!

/ aj wɛl k'las͜ t̬ɛ k'an.t'ɛ.nɛnt wɛt maj fiːt ɛ'lõ: /

"eye well c(l)ass t'e cantenent wet my feet el-oan" (VERY roughly) here's the IPA reader , i recommend Ines for best results

reader friendly text: aj wɛl klas͜ t̬ɛ kantɛnɛnt wɛt maj fiːt ɛlõ:

the mescalero language does not have the [ð] (that, the), [ɹ] (red), or the [w] sounds, so i figure the "th" jumps to the next best thing, a flap [t̬ ] (butter, medal) and an [l] is slipped in in place of the [ɹ] as they are both pronounced in the same area of the mouth, assuming he doesn't just skip over the sound entirely. as for the [w] sounds, the neighboring languages, Western Apache and Navajo both include a [w] sound in their alphabet, so i don't think it's impossible for Soundman to say 'wet water is wet,' assuming he had contact with people outside his tribe.

The biggest difference is in the vowels. Mescalero does not have the [ɪ] (will, hit), [ə] (alone), [əʊ] (own, loan), or [ɒ] (cross, hot), and those are just the sounds i needed for this sentence ^^'. They do however have 4 different nasal vowels, which are kind of hard to imagine the sound of if you aren't familiar with them, but think of how the french say "jean" and you have a nasal 'a' right there. So I think Soundman would often slip back into nasal vowels, especially in place of a vowel/nasal consonant combo at the end of a word: the end of 'alone' slips to the soft palate, and he doesn't hit the 'n' sound on its own. Mescalero also doesn't have any diphthongs, most notably the [au] in sound. so his name probably sounds more like / sã: mã / assuming it's not a translation of some longer phrase.

The vowels would be the defining feature of his accent, since it seems a lot of english vowels don't translate into mescalero. Also, didn't get to mention this, but mescalero also has quite a few sounds that are more...lisp-y (i guess?), like [ɬ], [ɣ] and and [k'] idrk if i can write out an accurate pronunciation, check them out on this interactive chart. So i think he would end up using those sorts of sounds pretty often especially in place of tighter consonants, so like 'slip' might become 'shlip' and 'contact' might become "conta(cht) " with the ending "k" sound going towards the soft palate and being pretty closed off.

Diego: he's a poor british dude, so you'd think we could just pin him with a cockney accent and call it a day. Sadly it's just not that easy. And i like making things complicated. Cockney accents are found among lower class Londoners- aka city dwellers, and Diego was born and raised somewhere in the countryside. A few miles (or kilometers i guess, we're in the UK now) can really be a world of difference on an accent. so:

during his intro his parents take him "into the mountains" so that puts us up in the north of the country- and then he flows down a river and grows up on a farm. So I am pinning him with a Yorkshire accent, since it's an area of countryside directly next to the mountains, while newcastle seems a little too north (but imagine geordie diego lol) and scouse (liverpool) seems a little too far south/also on the other side of the mountains.

Here is the oldest example i can find of a yorkshire accent, someone born in 1912, and luckily it doesn't sound tooo different from the modern accent, at least not to my american ears :~). But, given his goal of 'climbing the ranks of society' it also makes sense for him make an effort to cover up his natural accent in order to sound more posh (aka upper received pronunciation). I'm thinking then that his speech would be characterized by a lot of dropped r's/ non-rhoticity (obv), glottal stops at the end of words (mostly to replace t's d's and k's), omitting h sounds from the beginning of words, as well as diphthong vowels and a majority of frontal vowels. he might even roll his 'r's if they're in the middle of a word, like 'brando' / bɾɑ:ndɔ /

if he's really minding himself though, he'll be sure to enunciate his t's & h's, follow the rises and falls of upper RP, and not roll his r's, since that would give him away as a...u know, / blʊ:dɛ kʰʊ:ntɾɛ: fʊ:k /

the vowels would be a little harder to mind, since upper rp vowels are generally formed nearer the front of the mouth, while yorkshire vowels are less restrained, more open (formed with a low tongue/open mouth), and not very subtle. yorkshire accents can also create diphthongs where there are none, so floor may be pronounced, flu-or.

/ a:bɛts kʰɑ:ntʰ be: fɛkst jʊs laɪʔ feɪtʰ /

" 'abets c(ah)n't b(eh) fex'd, joos lai' fate" (roughly) IPA reader i recommend Geraint or Amy to get the best results.

kinda weird sounding. i know. like i said, i think he would have trained himself to hit his t's (otherwise it would sound like, "abe's, ka' fae' " ) and some more posh sounding vowels like in can't (caaahn't) and be (beehh). And then there would be the bits of his natural accent that slip thru the cracks, like the dropped 'h' in habits, and the long 'u' sound in 'just.' (dkm he might sound sorta like louis tomlinson)

so there u have it ^_^ i might do valentine, steven steel and hot pants next

[scriptlgbt]

1/2 Hi! I'm writing a medieval fantasy/african mythology fusion novel. My main character is a lesbian who is basically the equivalent of a knight. I myself am an African Bi woman so I'm not too worried about most of the characterization however she has a crush on the princess that she is supposed to be guarding and spends a lot of time staring at her, thinking about her, etc while she's guarding her. There will also be several scenes where she checks out her fellow knights (they're all women)

2/2 and she thinks about them while she’s training etc. I just want to make sure that she’s not falling into the predatory lesbian trope. During the first half of the story most of her interactions with women are accompanied by thoughts about the her attraction to them but this is mostly because she is struggling with internalized homophobia and heteronormativity. She later meets another lesbian who helps her be more comfortable and in the end she is in a happy relationship with a bi woman

Predatory-ness is more or less, able to be defined as a crossing of boundaries. Having a crush on someone is generally something that doesn’t cross most people’s boundaries. It’s pretty common to check others out and as long as she isn’t like, staring at people who have no way of theoretically enforcing such a boundary, it should probably be fine. I’d be mindful of someone in the role of a protector who has easy access to someone vulnerable, but I don’t think you really have to worry about it too much judging just by what you’ve said. If you can convey that she cares first and foremost about making sure who she is protecting is truly protected and respected, that’s wonderful. You don’t really have to work hard to convey that either because so long as she’s not crossing any boundaries intentionally it should be implied, I’d say.

- mod nat

[dickssociation]

Hmm... there are some important concepts here and I'm taking specific interest in posts addressing overlap now because my partner is going through a confusing diagnostic process right now that takes into account traits of BPD, when NPD was previously suspected. They have cPTSD for sure, that's a known constant, but the rest gets a little dicey.

Also, as a note, Cluster B personality disorders are characterized by emotional & behavioral lability. They share expressions and symptoms with cPTSD, and are often comorbid, but still often exist without it. Pre-existing genetic components must be catalysted by trauma in order for Cluster B disorders to fully materialize, which has been most notably been observed for BPD.

I've had a tendency to gatekeep the experience of a FP complex in conversation with them, since what they describe sounds similar, but not exactly how the BPD community seems to describe it. But that's the thing. It's simply a description of a phenomena for which the community has coined a term. There's no real scientific definition for it, it doesn't appear in any medical research, and honestly, we're the only people to document it happening, so what a "Favorite Person" is to someone can only be anecdotal.

Since I've explained it to them, I don't think either of us would be cool with using that term for what they experience unless they get a diagnosis that they're fully behind from a psychologist who they fully trust. I still think you're right, that it typically is a BPD-exclusive thing that most other people wouldn't understand. However, it might be a little dangerous to tell people that if they've ever experienced something that's known to be a BPD thing, they must have BPD, and that no other disorder can cause something that looks the same. Those hard lines in the sand only serve to label and differentiate us, which, although sometimes very validating & helpful for treatment, still are... drawn in sand. And for features that don't even formally exist, it might do us well to remember what a soft, shifting science this is. Cluster B disorders especially are not entirely clear-cut with their differentiation, and meeting multiple criteria for multiple PDs, but not enough for any one in particular, can result in PDNOS. Given a defined middle-ground like that, I think it makes more sense to view psychopathy as a spectrum with imperfect metrics. When it gets down to it, everyone's experiences are individualized, and even those well within the BPD community experience BPD complexes vastly differently.

I think you're totally right to say that it's important to look at rule-out factors of disorders when considering specifically which disorder you might have, and that standard differences in attachment styles are present between disorders, often as defining factors. It also definitely isn't a good idea to decide that just because you experience something, that must make it a trait of whichever disorder you already know you have. We should keep open minds to these things, while also paying attention to patterns shown in the general population of people diagnosed with whatever disorder.

The most important thing will always be to do what works for you to manage your own symptoms. There's no cure or remission in sight for any PD. Same goes for cPTSD or autism or DID or anything else that's hardwired into us via genetics or trauma. All we can do is figure out how to live in a world that is not made for us. That means a lot of intentional learning, skillbuilding, and skillsharing. It means a lot of solidarity. Much more than is easily found. We have to support each other above all else.

so i keep seeing this misinformation going around and genuinely i dont understand why this is so complicated for people and why it keeps getting repeated all cluster b disorders share a core grouping of symptoms because they are all based in trauma. this is why they're considered a cluster, they all have cptsd as their core/base symptoms then, depending on both genetics and individual circumstance, they will branch out into different symptoms as they progress and the difference in those symptoms is how u differentiate between the different disorders

when in therapy and trying to get a diagnosis, it is actually often easier to focus on the symptoms that disorders Dont share and what u Arent experiencing in order to tell which of the 4 u most likely have this means that there are certain unique criteria that are not exhibited by the other disorders for each.

"favorite people" or fp's are a unique criteria to bpd. no other cluster b disorder experiences the very specific kind of disordered insecure attachment that is categorized as an "fp"

that doesnt mean the others don't experience disordered attachments at all, on the contrary, disordered attachments are part of the core cptsd symptoms and thus all cluster b's experience disordered attachments with others. it is the primary issue we all experience, that we struggle to form normal healthy bonds with others

but an fp is a very specific type of disordered attachment. so just like all oranges are fruit, but not all fruit are oranges, all fp's are disordered attachments, but not all disordered attachments are fp's

npd, aspd, and hpd do not experience the *specific type* of disordered attachment that is a favorite person, even though they do experience disordered attachments in general. but if u are trying to talk about npd and hpd having obsessive and insecure/anxious attachments, say that. if ur talking about aspd having avoidant and dismissive attachment styles, say that. those things are not the same as a favorite person

if u are experiencing having a favorite person specifically, and not just disordered attachments more generally, then u have bpd. it is literally that simple. and if u find urself saying "well i do experience having an fp but i have npd so clearly this means this is an npd symptom" i am begging u to understand that that isnt how diagnosis and disorders work. and if reconsidering ur diagnosis after receiving new information or understanding things better sends u into such a spiral that u cant even consider it, then u have a bigger problem happening that u need to address.