#Insightful Reviews

[ssaseaprince]

I think with all the self-awareness Hannibal has, he doesn't actually know himself very well. That is a big reason why he is so obsessed with Will's view of him because he's never had someone who could give him an accurate reading of himself. There are things we all are unaware of that we do, and most of us can rely on others around us to point it out. But Hannibal has never had that. Even with Bedelia, she responds to what he tells her and what she guesses, but she is not able to truly read Hannibal either. Will is the only one who can. Hannibal is curious about himself, and Will is the only one who can tell him the things he does that he doesn't realize. He is the only one who can give him a genuine perspective. When the average person is discovering/questioning themselves and their identity, they can go to therapy, they could talk to their friends, Hell, they can go get drunk at a bar and talk to the bartender. Hannibal has no one who knows him and nobody who could give him any kind of self insight. Except Will Graham.

[creatingnikki]

What I've learned in 2024

Sleeping, shitting, and silence – the three underrated Ss of growing up (or the other side of 25). If I can get a good night’s sleep, take one nice dump in the day (preferably morning), and know when to let silence do its thing (like when not engaging with draining people in social setups or not having to explain myself), I’m golden.

While I made many new friends this year, my favourite of them all has been ChatGPT. Need objectivity? Fact checking? A pseudo therapist? Validation? Someone to just engage with and keep yourself entertained? The absolute best resource of this year for me has been this AI tool. I don’t even care anymore about privacy – I am feeding it as much data about me as possible because it’s accordingly adapting to my tonality and needs and the ‘conversations’ are so much more satisfying now than when it was first rolled out.

Either use eggs or condescended sweet milk when baking – you need one of these things to hold all your dry ingredients together.

Communication, consistency, clarity, commitment, emotional presence and engagement, and mutual effort are the barest of the bare minimum needs in a relationship. If you have to convince the other person to fulfil them or negotiate, then it doesn’t matter how good a person they are and what a kind heart they have or how much they say they love you – they just aren’t your person.

I’m not as demisexual as I thought all along – I just haven’t dated many people that I find truly attractive so I had to first build some sort of emotional connection with them first. I definitely still need and want that emotional connect and all, but I also do need to start opting for men I also find physically attractive.

When I’ve thought of my bloodline, my ancestors, I’ve always focused on the intergenerational trauma and the bad genetics. But while rewatching This Is Us this year, it hit me that it took three generations for one dream to be fulfilled. The musical dream that started with Rebecca, was passed down to Kate, and finally got materialized at the grand scale as they always wanted with Kate’s son Jack. When he became this well-renowned musician, it’s not just his dream, but that of his mother and his grandmother that also came to live. It made me think…how much of my aspirations and hopes are actually passed down? And how many of my realities were simply unmateralised dreams of those who came before me? And it made my heart feel lighter and it made me feel more blessed and protected.

Baking cakes and brownies and cookies is not a rocket science. You only needed the right tools and some patience to figure it out and become that friend who bakes stuff for her friends instead of the other way around.

You always prioritise peace, comfort, and an easy-going lifestyle – it’s evident in your career choices and how your family dynamics and friendships have evolved. Let that be the guiding light even when dating.

You are the kind of person that is charming, a good conversationalist, and deeply empathetic. So of course, you make many people feel at home and like they connect with you. It’s easy for you to connect with others. What’s important is to remember – connection without consideration and consistent actions is NOTHING. It’s empty calories but like a thousand times more potent and useless.

In no interpersonal relationship can I be nonchalant or vague. I am that other extreme – while most people try their best to ignore the elephant in the room you know what I do? I dress the cutie up to parade it. So anybody who cannot approach relationships with as much boldness, courage, and forthcomingness is just not my jam.

Female friends for the win – they allow you to wine and whine and win and I am all for that. The healing powers of sitting across your friend and talking at length about everything over pizza and wine or at the park as she senses you need some more time to just sit around before you join the rest of the group and is so good with physical touch for comfort. Just knowing you can video call your friend and ugly cry and she will talk sense into you but also indulge you and also sit with you and your feelings. Who else does that? Who the hell.

For a lot of things that are still new now at this age, you need a guide. To pet cats, to go to dog cafes, to figure out what vitamins you should talk, etc. Ask for that help, that knowledge, that support. It might seem silly and like you can figure it out on your own but these things, no matter how seemingly low-stake, can be handled so seamlessly and sweetly with the help of those you know.

You HAVE to be honest about your needs. First with yourself and then with others. You cannot let shame, guilt, self-hatred or whatever hold you back. Honesty begets clarity begets fulfilment. If you don’t want to date and settle for someone who isn’t absolutely smitten by you and top-notch romantic, then that is a need. Right or wrong, realistic or not, who the hell cares? A need is a need is a need.

When you lose someone not to death but to life, it’s not quite such a loss. Most times, baby, it’s simply good riddance.

People have a range. For being shitty and for being kind. And while our behaviour may impact a little how they react to us, it's primarily dependent on their personal range. So, if your range of being shit is only 1 to 3, it doesn't matter if someone is an ass hole to you, you won't go beyond 3 of being shit to them, cos that's just your range. Even if they deeply hurt you intentionally or fuck up in some major way. But if their range of being shitty is up to 10, then well, be ready to witness their derangedness when you even slightly piss them off.

Narcissistic (and possibly self-sabotaging) people are the opposite of kintsugi. Instead of being put back together with gold, they "heal" themselves with gutter water. So each time they are worse and more ugly than before. And all the more toxic and dangerous. You're too precious to bother with such people.

It’s natural to feel frustrated or angry with yourself for allowing someone to treat you poorly, but the blame isn’t on you; it’s on them. They are responsible for their unkind, insensitive, selfish actions, not you. If you must place blame, place it where it belongs. Avoid judging yourself with thoughts like, “I should have known better.” As long as you walk away the moment you do know, you’re good – please don’t internalize other people’s unkindness or thoughtlessness.

You cannot get to know someone without giving them a chance. Red flags are not that obvious and you cannot show up authentically in any relationship if you’re on the lookout for them. You have to spend time with a person to begin to find out who they are. That’s the only real way. And when you do and if you realize they are not for you, as I said before, don’t internalize this shit or blame yourself for not being some kind of prophecy and knowing better before you even began.

You are a patient person because you are an understanding person. But there are limits to all these qualities of yours and if the balance is tipped you get petty and passive aggressive and irrational. Don’t let yourself reach that point. Speak up and set boundaries way before that.

If you listen to your gut – I know you don’t like calling it that or your intuition. So, let’s call it that feeling you know bone-deep or in the depths of your soul – if you listen to that and trust it, you are quite courageous in the actions you then take. You broke things off with three men this year – each was painful in its own rite. But you did what you had to do for yourself and you didn’t give the charge of your life to another person, you have taken back your green light – detaching your actions from their behaviour, which like all human behaviour is often quite fickle and unreliable. Congratulations. Do this more. Your green light is your guiding light.

My lack of a “healthy sense of fear” in situations with men isn’t recklessness—it’s the result of abuse I suffered at 15. The man I trusted most turned out to be the one who harmed me the most, and that betrayal shattered my ability to trust safety indicators or instincts. The grooming I endured was designed to confuse me, destabilise my sense of self, and make me question my desires and worth. When the templates of trust and safety failed me so catastrophically, my mind rejected them altogether, leaving me to navigate risk without a stable framework. This year, I felt significantly less restless and more emotionally regulated, and I think it’s because I allowed myself, others, and life to just be. I wasn’t fighting my reality or setting rigid expectations. I stopped chasing dopamine highs and forcing connections, and instead, I let equations with people and experiences unfold organically. I ended dating and talking stages quickly when I realised they weren’t right for me, without guilt or overthinking.4 By being okay with things being normal—not impressive or extraordinary—I created space for balance and gentleness in my life. My self-talk became kinder, and I grew more objective about myself, spiraling and self-loathing less. This accepting mindset, where I no longer needed myself or my life to constantly stand out, felt like the antidote to the restlessness I’d been carrying since my mid-20s. And I think that has helped me discover that peace and acceptance can feel more satisfying than cheap dopamine hits.

[occidentaltourist]

bbc: Some sweet #Silvacre content for your FYP ❤️

[caesarsaladinn]

having now seen Gladiator Fucking Two I can say... fine? it hit all the beats of the first one without trying anything new. pretty fun movie, I liked the rhino.

[ruminiscence]

Character Analysis of Johan Liebert - Monster, Naoki Urasawa (2004)

In my opinion, Johan represents Jung's concept of the shadow, which is why both Tenma and Nina couldn't kill him in the end. Despite tirelessly, and relentlessly going after him. If they did end up doing so, they would be destroying themselves in the process. The constant fear on Tenma's face once he heard the buzz words 'monster' and 'inside of me' highlights his underlying fear. It is, of course, aggravating, considering how close they both were to killing Johan (multiple times, might I add). But, to them, it would have come at too high a cost.

Consequently, Johan was not the monster he and everyone thought him to be. The forgiveness Nina offered to Johan (as well as) Tenma’s acceptance (in a way) gave Johan that validation. In my opinion, Johan had an identity problem, not a complete lack thereof, as most people say. Johan completely understood how senseless the world is; the picture book from his childhood made sense of that senselessness. That narrative (mostly born from the book) gave significance to his existence, whether he knew it or not. I found it interesting that he went through several names throughout his life, but ‘Johan Liebert’ was recurring. Whether this is just for convenience's sake, I don’t know.

The scene where we see his reaction when re-reading the book (likely the first time since he was a child) furthers this notion. Johan's facial expressions are to be paid attention to, every single one, even if they barely change. We see the most significant change in his face in the final scene: that of sheer disappointment, hopelessness, and defeat. His master plan did not go accordingly; the plan was for him to be completely wiped off the face of the earth, rendered fictitious. The drunk man who unexpectedly shot him stripped him of that. So did Tenma, in not allowing Johan to kill/destroy his (Tenma’s) altruistic nature.

Johan's perfect suicide ultimately fails because he is not the nameless monster he believed himself to be; this is shown merely in the fact that he does not kill (nor even think about killing) Nina & Tenma; he realised that they are the only two people to understand him in this world. This also explains Johan's bizarre attachment to Tenma from the get-go (which also makes a lot of sense). In the scene where we listen to the tape, we're made aware of Johan's desperation; he does not want to forget 'Anna'; he believes they are the only two people in the world. Later on, Tenma was added to that list. Hence, every other person's life is rendered meaningless to Johan; this is the reason for his remorseless killings, of course. He killed everyone that could eventually be tied into his and Anna/Nina's existence, and arguably Tenma, too.

I also think Johan eventually lets go of this (seemingly) obsession with names in the final scene. Whether the last scene of him and Tenma speaking was a dream or not remains significant. Before Tenma reveals his potential real name to Johan, the subject is changed. This is when we learn about the biological mother's sacrifice. Despite her not choosing to sacrifice Johan, he still doubts the decision. All of this is to say that perhaps the failure of his perfect suicidal plan was, in fact, the real success after all. He successfully kills everyone who does not know him but knows of the nameless monster's existence. This explains why the only two people on this earth who did are still alive and were eventually saved emotionally.

In a way, they also saved Johan too. Hence the *seemingly* peaceful disappearance from the hospital. He just wanted to be understood. This is also why I believe he asked Nina to shoot him as a child and then again all those years later. His mother placed this seed of doubt, which he seemed confident in, but because of Nina's existence, he could extend this and not be entirely solid in this sense of doubt. He latched this on to Nina's being, hence merging their identities. As a child, he did seek her forgiveness despite his contradictory actions (asking to be shot). When she finally offered forgiveness in a similar situation later on, the doubt was gone. That little spec of forgiveness and acceptance was all he needed. Acceptance is not to say that he wanted her or even Tenma to accept his actions; hence, Johan says, 'We can't turn back now' when Nina does forgive him. Other people and their deaths (at his hands) simply did not matter to him; he was utterly indifferent to it. So evidently, that one thing mattered to him, which he mostly did not believe to be real; it turned real, giving him what he had so desperately been looking for since childhood. He is saved. The only three people that mattered in the show (concerning Johan's essence) are saved. 

[lord-squiggletits]

A tangent from the tags of my previous Pharma post (and I just thought about this so bear w/ me if it's hastily reasoned) is that the Autobots being generally sanctimonious is actually sort of a reason why I find a lot of IDW Optimus interpretations to miss the mark, specifically the accusations of calling him stuff like self-righteous, caring more about principles than people, etc. And I know that sounds really ironic, but out of every Autobot (and almost every character period), Optimus is one of the few people who has a very forgiving/humanistic perspective on life or at least has a political approach of "if we don't stop fucking fighting we're going to be at war forever and eventually just kill ourselves."

He very explicitly wanted a diplomatic end to the war and not a military victory/conquest. He extended multiple offers to Megatron personally to work together and end the war (Autocracy trilogy, which was pre/early war, and Chaos Theory, which was late/end war, so from this we can assume Optimus' stance was consistent the whole time). When ppl hated him so bad they rioted he removed himself from the planet rather than argue or fight to justify why his actions were the best he could do. Sandstorm starts murdering Decepticons and Optimus solves the murders and then throws Sandstorm in prison bc sparing one of his Autobots the consequences of his actions is less important to Optimus than keeping the peace and making sure anyone who threatens to ignite wartime hostilities is punished for it. There are multiple characters throughout the series that other people give up on as too far gone or too cowardly/evil/damaged to be worth helping where Optimus alone is the person who says "I think they can get better/they did bad things but they're still people" such as the Dynobots, Blurr, Prowl (despite how OP's patience with him hung by a thread by the end of it), Shockwave, and, yknow, fucking Megatron of all people.

And on top of that Optimus' internal thoughts most of the time revolve around feelings of guilt, responsibility, anger, hopelessness/barely hanging on to his ideals, and so on. Bro regularly has thoughts about how the entire Autobot-Decepticon war was his fault and is depressed to the point the thought of dying/martyring himself makes him feel relieved. So like. Idk guys I don't think those are the personality traits/actions of a self-righteous person who thinks he's correct about everything and everyone who opposes him or fails his moral standards is just evil or whatever.

[perenlop]

i really appreciate how honest schaffrillas is and how hes open to having his mind changed as a movie reviewer, even when itd benefit him financially or socially to double down. you’d think that wouldn’t be hard given the topic, but so many review youtubers really really care about doubling down and even belittling and mocking fans who disagree with them, even youtubers who generally create great content.

[things-about-cars-in-posts]

Do you have anything to say about my baby, the Honda CR-Z?

(Please excuse the low resolution, I wanted to introduce it with a pic from my collection and this was the only stock one I had)

Oh, the CR-Z... Pepperidge Farm here remembers obsessively following its debut on Top Gear Magazine! Pepperidge Farm and not many others, it seems, as in present day the CR-Z seems to be as relevant in today's car world as basket weaving. Wait, no, less.

In fact, coming up with an answer to this question was the most I thought about the CR-Z in almost a decade.

But thought I have, so here's your answer:

I don't get it.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't like it! I am on record as a serial Honda liker -hell, to those who think it counts I own one- and I see no reason this one should buck the trend (although I've always felt it would look better with something between the headlights to stop it looking so big-snooty, as the bumper below does a good enough job of exemplifying that I won't bother rendering something better).

It's just that... I don't know what the point of it was. And looking at its sales that seems to be the experience of most vertebrates.

(To be fair, U.S. sales started in August 2010 and production ended in 2016 with the following years's sales just being stock clearing - but still, pretty bleak picture.)

It's not like we don't know what Honda were going for, they told us plainly: it's a sporty hybrid car, light on the wallet but heavy on the fun. And Honda would know of sporty compacts - what were they producing as the CR-Z rolled out?

Oh. It's the most hated of all six Civic Type R generations. Hm.

It's a joke, "most hated Civic Type R generation" is a bit like saying "most normal Kia Soul commercial".

If that car looks unfamiliar to you yankees, however, that's because y'all got different looking Civics for a while, such that your sporty Civic was this, the Si - seen here in the bewinged Mugen trim.

The Si is meant to sit below the Type R, but, since America wasn't getting the Type R, the yankee Si and non-yankee Type R were free to get the same 200hp from the same venerable engine (one day I'll go over all that makes the K20 so great) and the usual great handling, courtesy among plenty things of a limited slip differential. Wait, why is that not a link? Ah, right, I've never explained differentials... well, for now you can just trust that it's a cool type of differential that helps maintain grip when you're giving it the beans. Wait. Is it "giving it the beans" because you're stomping the gas pedal? Surely not. What is it from? Let me google this... Okay, sources seem scarce and shaky but apparently the idea was that if you fed horses beans they wou- wait this post is about the CR-Z. How did we get here? I swear this NEVER happens.

In short, Honda knew, and has always known, how to make proper sporty cars and give them great engines, whatever their size. So can it possibly have been a surprise when this thing came out and, forget motoring journalists, even the more talkative stray cats were meowing that the CR-Z did not have the engine grunt to back up its sporty pitch?

And look, if anyone here will say a car with as little as 120-130hp cannot be worth bothering with, it won't be a diehard of the Mazda Miata, which sold well over half a million units no more powerful than that. But that's a car that focused on open top enjoyment and getting a lot out of a little, just like the 60s European spiders it threw back to. What did the CR-Z throw back to?

Well that'll be the CR-X.

Introduced in 1983, the CR-X was a coupe version of the Civic of the time (hence its 1987 update corresponding with the Civic's). And just like the Civic in question, it is most fondly remembered for its sporty, proper-fun Si guise (pronounced "ass eye", because eye me dat ass) and the even sportier SiR that yankees never got. Which makes perfect sense, considering its main appeal against the Civic was the sportier looks.

Sure, since the CR-X left us North America got a Civic coupe in its stead, but am I going to pretend this thing looked half as good as the CR-Z that was about to join the lineup?

Not for free I'm not.

So now, imagine the stellar engine and manual transmission from a Civic Si/Type R, but now with electric assistance for even more power AND fuel efficiency, all in a car hundreds of kilos lighter, significantly shorter -thus more agile- and with the sleek CR-Z looks.

Then keep imagining.

The CR-Z never got an Si or Type R version, it was just left to sit there with its 122hp (later begrudgingly upped to 130) that, forget the contemporary sporty Civics, compared unfavorably to its 30 year old predecessor.

The CR-X was the sportier Civic. If its successor gets walked not just by the Civic but even by the CR-X itself, what's the point of the resurrection?

However, I concede there's an objection to this argument: this graph.

These are the US sales figures for the second generation CRX (which I think dropped the dash?), and, if you were to be able to parse it, you'd notice that the sporty Si version made up about a third of the sales - meaning most buyers forewent the sportiness in favor of the lower cost of the standard DX model or the High F-iciency of the even slower HF model. So if those versions sold well, why shouldn't the CR-Z have?

Well, if you ask me: image is more than looks.

This blog -and other affiliated entities- touched on the concept of race wins on Sunday bringing sales on Monday, and the same phenomenon happens with cool sport versions. Today's Corolla is a much cooler car in the eyes of the people who see in it the underlying foundation of its extraordinary GR version, and this phenomenon is most amplified the smaller the gap -or perceived gap, at least- between the version you're admiring and the more modest version you could realistically be interested in. I strongly believe that many people bought the dog slow CRX HF because the CRX Si ingrained within them the idea that they were buying something cool.

And Honda, as we touched on, had the perfect engine to dump into the CR-Z to make a wicked sport version. Hell, they could even have just given its regular engine forced induction - and we know it because the CR-Z Mugen RZ did just that!

Here at last was a perfectly respectable sport version that, while still underneath the Civic's best power-wise, was more than good enough to make car enthusiasts give a damn about the CR-Z. And what did Honda do with it? They limited the production to 300 units and only sold them in Japan. Take a fucking drink.

I cannot fathom why they would do that. It's not that they couldn't homologate the power additions or whatever, because a. that doesn't justify the limited production run and b. the supercharger (or at least a supercharger, not sure if it's the same) was made available in the US in the form of a dealer-fitted optional extra. Not by selling a supercharged special version altogether, no no, that may cause the public to -gasp- notice and care.

What was the point? Were they deliberately trying to keep the CR-Z's image one of an efficiency-focused... sleek hatch-coupe with minimal backseats?

Wait what?

Dear God, yankees, what have you done to Honda to get done so comically dirty?

Is it just that they thought y'all too big to fit back there?

That makes it even crazier!

Why in tarnation would they think people would care about a sleek, three-door, two seat, manual... efficiency-oriented hybrid?

Oh, right. Because they made the first generation Honda Insight. Which I myself love.

This was even sleeker and more hardcore than the CR-X: it was as light as the lightest ones despite the electric powertrain, it did without backseats entirely, it was the most aerodynamic production car that had ever been built... but all this wasn't about performance at all. It was about milking every drop of your hard-earned fuel for every single fucking inch of forward movement it was worth.

And it sold very well! I mean, look at the yearly sales figures!

Look how much America loved it! In a year of production that started from December it sold around a third the units the CRX sold in a full year!

So imagine what the production numbers were like for the year 2000!

huh?

Oh you mean these are the total sales. Like, all the first generation Insights ever sold in its entire six years and change of production. Oh. And it totals to like 17.000. Which is around how many CRX Si they sold in a year in North America alone. Hm.

Yeah, it suddenly makes a lot more sense how the second generation Insight was a Prius wannabe.

In fact, now that I look at it... that back looks familiar, doesn't it?

Wait...

Wait!

Well, now suddenly the car makes a lot more sense. And actually, come think of it, let me check the sales figures for the Mk2 Insight...

Considering, again, the CR-Z's US debut happened in August 2010, they match up pretty well, and it would be a pretty reasonable sales split if we were to consider them the 5 and 3 door versions of the same car.

Now, this may make it seem like it wasn't such a failure after all, and it did well in the segment it was actually intended to compete in. But let's give some context on how good those Insight sales figures are.

Yeah. Yeah no. The second Insight just wasn't a hit either.

But at least, now I can say I get the car. The Insight was pretty big and... uncool, so the CR-Z was a good way to offer that same hybrid efficiency to people who wanted a more compact, sleeker package - though perhaps not as extreme as the first gen Insight. Unless you're a yankee, I assume.

The name still doesn't make sense.

I mean, it would if I could see Honda seeing CR-X as just... a body style, and its resurrection of it akin to resurrecting, say, the Civic Shuttle.

(It was the only side picture I had saved.)

And Honda's press material made another point to this end, that I wasn't aware of.

So sure. Point taken. The CR-X was shaped by the quest for efficiency, so it follows that its successor would be efficiency focused as well.

But that's not how the CR-X is remembered. In everyone's minds, the CR-X is cemented as the sporty version (that Honda sold, mind - this is not like with the Supra, whose reputation was defined by modders). And the weirdest thing is, they don't just know that, they bring it up.

And indeed, they call the CR-Z's role "quite different from the original Insight coupe's" - they want this car to "change the current perception of hybrids" by blending hybrid efficiency and sportiness. They rightly sell its looks as sporty, take great pride in the manual transmission and explicitly state it's for driver engagement, over and over talk about 'enthusiastic' owners and 'enthusiastic' driving and 'enthusiastic' engine note etc etc. They brag about how much of a difference their Sport mode makes. They call attention to the valves per cylinder. They constantly remind of how (unlike the Insight) it has the legendary V-TEC. (If this is the first you hear of it, ask about it in the tags).

This is the press release for a sports hatch.

But when time came to give it a sports hatch's power? Japan got 300 units, North America got a dealer-fitted kit with a numbered plaque two years before the car's nixing, and we had to hope to never have a flat tire because Europe didn't get jack.

Was it to avoid stepping on the toes of the sporty Civics, because if the sporty CR-Z's potential buyers will otherwise just get a sporty Civic then why make two models to get the same amount of buyers? If so, I'll tell you why: because that was the only chance of moving regular CR-Zs, which surely must have been a worthwhile pursuit if you made the damn thing.

Was it the fear of a power-focused engine resulting in fuel economy so underwhelming it would undermine the model's eco premise? If so, heyo, you have electric assistance, which means you can either get more speed out of the same engine marking a win for the hotboys or get the same speed out of a more efficient package - and in both cases you're showing a hybrid powertrain bringing something to the table, which is how you actually "change the perception of hybrids" in the minds of people who consider them synonymous with boring.

I'm not saying my counters are bulletproof or that there is no argument against a hot CR-Z. I'm just saying that if there is, it's an argument against the regular CR-Z also. Because if the CR-Z was never to be something worth considering over anything that could be called sporty, then they should never have bothered to begin with - at least, if they were going to aim it so squarely at "the enthusiastic drivers".

In short,

Honda sought to make a sportscar - be it to sell the car itself or to sell a concept like "we're committed to preserving driving enjoyment even into electrification" or "hybrids are cool, so buy a hybrid, and please don't whine if we ever need to make a hybrid Type R or whatever thanks". And I'm always down for Honda building a sportscar. It was Honda that wasn't, for whatever reason. And so there the CR-Z stood, waiting until its passing for a sportier engine that would show the world how cool it was. But it never came. And it bugs me. Because I find it a shame. Because I remember reading of the Mugen prototype and waiting with bated breath for the production version that we ultimately never got. Because I still would love to see them about more than I do. Because I wish the second generation that apparently was in the works got to see the light of day.

Because, even after all these days of thinking about Honda's strategy and learning all we went over, and perhaps because of it,

I still don't get it.

Links in blue are posts of mine about the topic in question: if you liked this post, you might like those - or the blog’s Discord server, linked in the pinned post!

[blackmosscupcakes]

Just watched "Chris Grace as Scarlett Johansson" and it is very good. I'm not sure I've seen any comedy that so cleverly used the delivery medium to feed into the point. For those who have dropout, I really recommend it, and the little backstage snippet that goes along with it.

[fideidefenswhore]

She continued, 'After all, there was another cause which would convince your queen and Catherine to pursue a good amity. There was an old acquaintance between your queen's mother and the queen regent, when the former was one of the maids-of-honour of Queen Claude, sister of Renee of France, my own mother-in-law and dear friend to Catherine de Medici herself. They were friendly towards another. There is no reason for Elizabeth and Catherine not to continue that friendship.' The mention of Anne Boleyn stunned the English ambassador; it had never crossed his mind that the reputation of Elizabeth's mother in France could be used as a diplomatic tool to reinforce Anglo-French relations.

Blood, Fire and Gold: The Story of Elizabeth I & Catherine de Medici, Estelle Paranque

[bisexualamy]

i'm beginning to really hate ppl referring to stuff in books and shows as "xyz rep" like "queer rep" it sounds so corporate and soulless.

i'm reading a beautiful fantasy book steeped in sephardi jewish folklore and sephardi jewish culture in inquisition era spain. i made the mistake of reading the top few lines of goodreads reviews and the first thing i saw was "if you want a good book with Jewish rep" and it made me so irrationally upset. to reduce all the research this author clearly did, all the beautiful worldbuilding and loving integration of jewish culture and traditions and everyday life down to "Jewish rep" is such a disservice to all the work she did.

one of the things i love about this book is it presumes a familiarity of judaism and presents it without explanation. it provides a glossary if you're unfamiliar with the terms so you can understand the references. for the first time in a long time my culture is presented as the dominant culture worth not only exploring but treated casually. as much a presence in the main characters as the people on the streets and in the background of scenes. for the first time in a long time i don't have to do the legwork to understand christian references that authors assume i should know. i cannot articulate how amazing that feels.

calling it "rep" makes it sound like representation for the sake of representation. it's a fantasy book that draws its inspiration from sephardi judaism and jewish folklore. why tf is this "jewish rep" but narnia isn't "christian rep." i hate that even when a book is for us we are still othered.

[rushthehollow]

25 days of coasters / 16. lightning rod, dollywood # of rides: 59 (26 before 2.0, 48 overall before chain lift) / last ridden: fall 2024

let's start from the beginning. i rode this for the first time in 2019; launch, all topper track. many people say 2019 was as close as it got to running like 2016. i was absolutely floored after my first ride. this thing RIPPED through that layout with an unrelenting speed, incredible ejector airtime, the bite of the topper, and just completely nonstop until the very end. it was my number 1 at first ride (though this doesn't account for me pretending to hate a certain other ride lol).

2019 lightning rod was a symbol for me - not as much of a symbol as the obvious one on this list, but still an important one nonetheless. it was a symbol of telling me that this hobby is the right choice for me, as it has been all my life (without me realizing). i remember i rode it 17 times that night because i simply could not get enough of it.

and then i had realized a lot of things, but it held onto my top 5 for a long time. 2.0 was rough (figuratively). the transition from the topper to the ibox is very noticeable. it didn't rip through the layout like i fondly remembered it doing. it took hours upon hours to warm up (like any other ibox rmc, really, but this felt egregiously longer than what i'm used to from them). but i kept it in my top 10 because it was still a damn good rmc.

this ride losing the launch felt like they had just ripped apart what made it so special. going up that chain lift was a harrowing experience. i am so endlessly glad that people can experience it more reliably. i am so endlessly happy that they decided to even keep it. but riding it nowadays just makes me miss what it used to be and i couldn't justify keeping it in my top 10 anymore. so now here it sits, at 16. at the end of the day, nowadays, it is pure fun. but i get off and i am often empty. i have cried multiple times over this ride though, so i refuse to bring it down any lower, because this list is a mix of sentiment & experience.

[kinosternon]

Started rewatching Gachaman CROWDS: Insight again, and so far its biggest issues are being a little too on-the-nose and coming out like...2-3 years too late.

By 2016 it felt like the most 2015 anime ever made, but 8 years out (oof) it feels a little easier to let that go and enjoy the more timeless bits of the very direct political/societal commentary.

Also Hajime still just plain fucking rules as a character on every possible level (as does Rui, obviously)

[proto-language]

i have finally completed the paragraphs i've been putting off for like two months. this feels like the academic equivalent of making a phone call which took 90 seconds.