#Religion isn't supposed to be hateful and controlling.

[hermes-helpol]

Sitting outside during a storm, watching, listening; enjoying the rain and the lightning and the thunder and thinking of Lord Zeus.

Thinking about his stories; what I know and how much I know I'm oblivious to. Wondering what I can learn from him. Reminding myself to research him later.

Thanking him for the storm. For every drop, every flash; every rumble.

Thunderstorms are something we have always adored both collectively with my system and together with our family/mother. But this one was truly magical because I got to experience it with Lord Zeus in mind.

I love religion 💜.

[sweaterkittensahoy]

Stop misappropriating the abuse and trauma cults use through purity culture for your stupid fucking shipping discourse? Holy fuck no wonder everyone hates this whole discourse.

Since when is "priests getting shuffled around after raping kids and kids being told they're sinful because they had bodily reactions to being SAd" comparable to "Bobo the clown said my ship was cringe"

I'm not gonna answer this with The Aristocrats, as a I threatened, because I want to make a very serious point to this anon:

Purity culture isn't just religious abuse. It is most widely connected to religious abuse. Including actions in the Catholic Church and all fundamentalist Christianity. It's entire existence is about terrifying and indoctrinating people into being fearful of their own actions and bodies so that they feel certain that moving out from the "umbrella of safety" (to use a fundamentalist term) will result in them being harmed in ways they can't imagine. This is generally happening at the same time as they are being harmed by those who are supposed to be keeping them safe from all those terrible, worldly evils. Like speaking up when you're being abused. Believing you are not responsible for the actions of a rapist, and many, many other things that any person with an ounce of self-worth and good sense (two things not allowed in fundamentalist circles) knows are true in abuse situations.

But the point of the purity culture as identity in the above-mentioned circles is to teach people from birth that they aren't to have their own feelings, ideas, or instincts. They are only to follow the feelings, ideas, and instincts on the approved list in order to stay within the structures they know and feel safe in even as they feel very unsafe.

That being said:

Purity culture can also exist WITHOUT a religious structure while still being about controlling the thoughts, feelings, and actions of everyone within it. In terms of fandom, purity culture is groups of people stating that if you write something uncomfortable or gross or immoral, then YOU must be uncomfortable or gross or immoral and therefore, not worthy of the safety and moral superiority of the group.

Purity culture without religion teaches black and white thinking, encourages thought policing, and shames anyone who steps outside of a very narrow definition of good and bad by turning an entire group of people against them for being "bad".

Just like in religious circles.

Just like in the cult of fundamentalism.

Purity culture is a term taken by fundamentalists and turned into a whole way of life because the goal of fundamentalism is to make people too scared to leave. Purity culture in fandom does the same thing. It uses fear and threats of abandonment/harassment to control the way people act because a group of people decided they didn't like something, so they must try and wipe it out rather than simply ignore it.

I am not mis-using the term because "Bobo the clown said my ship was cringe." My use of the term is intentional and precise because what is happening in fandom spaces now is non-religious purity culture cult thinking. My use of the term does not invalidate or water down the use of it in conversations about religious abuse and trauma. With or without religion, purity culture is a dangerous cult of "us vs them" that is built to demoralize and eradicate those deemed unworthy.

[incorrectmahabharatquotes]

i love the incorrect quotes, but i dont agree with your political views. if its not much, could you explain why ur so anti bjp?(thats what i assume anyway)

You know, I actually think that the memes and the quotes are sort of a natural extension of our political views. I'll explain but it might get a little long. Stay with me here.

Firstly, I want to say that I think this way of perceiving politics is so fundamentally wrong.

"Anti-BJP", "Pro-BJP", "Anti-Congress", "pro-congress" etc etc. This isn't a cricket match where you're rooting for your favourite team. Politicians, as a general rule, are a bunch of liars. They lie to gain power and control. It's OUR duty, as CITIZENS, to keep them accountable and in their lane so they actually do their goddamn jobs. That's how the democracy is supposed to work. If they don't do their job properly, you vote them out of the seat. They work for us, and not the other way around.

In India, we grow up with this idea of not questioning your elders. Papa ne keh diya, bas keh diya. As children our natural instinct of curiosity and inquisitiveness is stifled. We go to schools and the same pattern follows. Don't question the authority. Keep your head down and colour inside the lines. We internalise this lesson to colossal degrees. Is it any wonder that we all struggle with critical thinking? If you're spoonfed "the correct answer" your entire life, you never learn to find if what you were told is correct or not. This exact thing is used by all politicians across the entire political spectrum. They use our learned behaviour of deferring to authority and never questioning power against us. The leader of the country becomes the patriarch. Papa ne keh diya, bas keh diya.

I have various issues with various political parties in India, in fact. I have no love lost for any of them. I don't exactly believe in unconditional loyalty to politicians.

Since you brought up the BJP, let's talk about that. My biggest issue with them is their politics of communal hatred. All they keep yapping about is hindu-muslim this and hindu-muslim that. For what? They could spend their time talking about actual issues but the low-hanging fruit of stoking communal hatred is easier to grab onto. Remember when the British did the same thing? It was bad then and it's bad now. All this unrest just to get votes. Imagine fucking up the mind of an entire nation like this and then demanding to be praised for it.

Their foundational roots are from the RSS and that entire organisation's existence is just insane to me. It's even more insane that they managed to go from a fringe ideology to becoming mainstream. "Hindu rashtra", it seems. Who even wants that? WHY do they want that? Is it such a bad fate to live in peace and harmony with other religions? A lot of their talking points are about how much they hate the islamic nations and how those are horrible and then they want to turn around and do the same thing?!? Is the hypocrisy not clear? So what if other countries are religious states? Why can't we try to be different? Maybe I'M the stupid one for thinking all humans are the same that we should treat everyone the same. Who knows.

There are also a bunch of other issues that the BJP has racked up during their rule. The demonetisation disaster, mismanagement of government funds to create public infrastructure, letting the interests of billionaire business ruin PROTECTED FOREST AREAS for mining coal that they didn't even need, introducing and passing HORRIBLE bills through the parliament without any thought or discussion, literally ignoring the plight of people dying in riots, CORRUPTION, destroying the public sector and letting for-profit capitalists free reign in a country which has practically no proper labour laws, aiding in creating a historical record of INCOME INEQUALITY that is higher than it was during the fucking colonial era, fucking up the press even more somehow to the point where they control all of the media houses.

This is not even scratching the surface. I could keep going.

My issue is not whether people vote for the BJP or not. Even if you like the BJP, my issue is that people seem willing to turn a blind eye to all the issues with the government and not even hold them accountable for it.

Vote for whoever you want. My only request is to keep your government accountable. Keep the power in check. The politicians should be SCARED of the citizens fury if they do something wrong. They shouldn't be free to do whatever and get off scot free.

That's our political stance, really. It's Pro-Exercise-Your-Democratic-Rights-As-Citizen.

We will always encourage others to be wary of people with too much power.

Now coming back to why I said the memes reflect our political stance, it's because it's obvious to see why we happen to be willing to risk being a little critical of a literary text. You have to be a little transgressive, in a sense. Perfect obedience and perfect reverence stifles people from engaging with something to their full potential.

I'm sorry to say that if you enjoy the memes and the quotes, you are also being a little transgressive like us. You're also questioning the authority of a religion to an extent. Perhaps our political leanings aren't as different as you might believe.

-Mod S

[ceruleanwhore]

I know it's been a minute since Hazbin dropped and I'm late to the hate train but I have things I want to say, so I shall.

First off, the whole thing makes absolutely no fucking sense, conceptually. There is really no good way to execute this batshit idea of Lucifer having a daughter and that daughter deciding to start a fucking hotel in Hell to redeem sinners so they can go to Heaven. Also, the culling shit with the angels showing up to just kill already dead souls for no reason also makes no sense and there really isn't any way to make it make sense.

Secondly, when making yet another piece of media inspired by Christian canon, even if it is Christianity and you hate the religion, you absolutely have to know the source material before you go fucking with it. That's why, for example, Dogma is such a good movie but this series falls flat even though both are comedic critiques of Christianity - Dogma understands the subject well enough to criticize it intelligently whereas Hazbin feels like it was conceptualized and made by someone who only watched like two episodes of Veggie Tales and otherwise knows jack shit about the religion. Throwing Lilith in there is worse because she isn't even in Christianity and it has the same vibes as when CCD classes host a Passover Seder by and for a bunch of gentiles to 'teach' about what Jesus was up to when he was around. It's just so disrespectful. Actually, that's what it is - the creators learned everything they know about Christianity, Heaven, and Hell from Tumblr posts which is definitely why she's in there.

If they knew more about the thing they're trying to make a whole ass show about, Adam and Eve wouldn't have been angels, there would be no hotel because you could just have the creation of Purgatory instead or, at the very least, some take on the harrowing of Hell and salvation of the virtuous pagans in Limbo. Also, even if you don't want to touch the Bible because it's icky (and I mean yeah), all you had to do was read like Dante's Inferno and peep the Ars Goetia and then actually make a structured Hell with a hierarchy and everything. I think kinda like what Rachel Smythe did with the worldbuilding in Lore Olympus, they wanted to modernize Hell for some reason, so the turf war/mafia type shit was supposed to replace a stronger hierarchy of Hell with princes and dukes and presidents and such, but I fucking hate it and there's no goddamn structure.

More importantly, the worldbuilding of Hell itself completely misses the fucking point of Hell as a thing. Hell is there both to contain Satan and the fallen angels who joined him in that uprising thing that one time and also to serve as a place where sinners go when they die and are punished for their sins. We never see even once any sort of actual system for sorting all these souls and punishing them for their sins. On the contrary, characters like Angel Dust appear to get to do drugs for the rest of their immortal lives and, since they're dead, it's not like those are going to kill them so it really doesn't read like a punishment. The closest we get to actual punishments are when the sinners/demons have gone and made deals that give other residents of Hell control over them, like how Husk is under Alastor's control and then Alastor apparently also has some kind of deal screwing him over, and Angel's situation with shitty boa dude is pretty similar too. It feels like they did the extermination shit to replace punishment in Hell along with these deals we see here and there, which is utterly fucking ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense.

The other thing I'd add kind of going off that is that Heaven in this series also makes literally no fucking sense. It's actually also the biggest issue I have with Good Omens that it makes NO SENSE for the angels to have no clue what God's plan is or, in this case, how souls even get into Heaven. The whole fucking point is that there's an entire, nicely structured hierarchy for exactly this. Seraphim, cherubim, and thrones are all closest to God, so they can get the info from Them and pass it to the lower ranks. Hell, this could even be how you get problems, like you make it a bit of a gimmick that Heaven runs on a massive game of telephone. It also could've been a way to have some really cool variety in character design, so maybe some of the higher ranking angels look like the weird biblical shit with all the eyes and fire and they get progressively more normal as you go down the hierarchy. Instead, they picked like three recognizable names, made them into pretty people with wings and potentially also stupid Homestuck looking masks, and threw them in our face while just refusing to actually bother with worldbuilding or character design.

That brings me to the third thing which is that, when doing a series like this based on something like Christianity, you really have to sit down and figure out what kind of God your Christian God in your series is going to be, even if They never show up on screen. Is this God distant and neglectful and that's how all this shit is happening? Or do we have the wrathful God of the Israelites who regularly exterminates Hell out of pure sadistic rage? Or do we have a weak God on the verge of death who is barely present out of necessity while the angels take advantage of that absence and run amok? And it's not even just that determining what kind of God is supposed to be the God of this series would inform why stuff happens like it does, it would also help the writers to have a sense of direction and motive for what happens.

The writing in the show is all over the fucking place and figuring out what kind of God this God is meant to be is the very first question they should've asked themselves and it would've prevented most of the problems that currently exist in the show. If we had that, then maybe we wouldn't have weird shit with Lucifer where he very much does not feel like he's the devil at all and also Charlie is supposed to have daddy issues but then he shows up and is just a really adoring and supportive dad so that doesn't make sense. If we had that, then maybe Hell would have a fucking structure because we would actually have the motive behind Hell itself and why it exists. If we had that, then maybe we could get into the nitty gritty of the ethical/theological complexities of Hell and how, no matter how you slice it, it's really God's will at the end of the day so we could get a whole debate over if Lucifer is even evil or if God is just controlling and sadistic and all that. If we had that then maybe we could even have some reveal about how sin isn't even a concrete thing and the true nature of Hell is that it's a place people choose to go when they die because they don't feel worthy of salvation and they feel in their soul that they need to be punished. Anything, really.

Fourth is that it really, really shouldn't be a musical series. The pacing fucking sucks and they overexplain everything and I just feel like if you took all the time spent on shitty musical numbers and instead put it into showing, not telling, and also developing characters and relationships, it could be a lot better. If there was more time for shit, then maybe Charlie could not be a Mary Sue and Vaggie could have a personality and Angel could be an actual fucking character that isn't just an animated twink with trauma who gets off on violating people's boundaries. Also, I just really didn't like most of the songs in the series (outside the series they're fine) and I skipped a lot of those scenes.

Fifth and final is that it really just wasn't funny. A lot of the stuff that was supposed to be funny was just excessive swearing that felt completely unnatural, like that tiktok going around of that girl saying the n word. If you're bothering to do a whole series set in Hell that's ostensibly about Christianity, then why tf aren't you leaning more into biting criticism of Christianity for your humor? If they'd just gone full Dogma with this, it would've been so much better but no.

So yeah, it fucking sucked and so did the character design.

[thestrangestthing89]

There are thankfully only a handful of people who swear this is a conservative, Christian show but it's interesting to me considering how negatively the show depicts religion.

S1 - There aren't any direct references to religion but subtle hints. It's implied Hawkins is a typical middle class suburban neighborhood. It's 1983, Reagan was president, and there are hints of the towns Christianity through the bullies. When Will goes missing there are several comments that make it clear that the people in this town aren't surprised. The middle school bully makes a comment that he got "killed by some other queer" and says his father was talking about it. Parents in the town talk about Will being gay. We see Steve's friends - the high school bullies - also making homophobic comments about Jonathan and his brother. The bad guys are homophobic. They also all lose fights this season. The show takes an anti-bullying stance and you are supposed to feel for Will and his friends here. He's a child that's gone missing and the people in the town don't seem to care much or act surprised by it.

There are a few exceptions to this - Joyce mentions to Hopper that Lonnie called Will gay slurs because she is also worried he got killed because he's gay. Hopper takes this seriously during a time when absolutely no one would have criticized him for ignoring this situation. Plenty of people were ignoring gay people dying during this time. No one would have batted an eye at a cop acting like this didn't matter. But Hopper pays attention and puts together a search team. So there are a few people in town who do care - Scott Clarke being one of them. And obviously the rest of our main cast doesn't care what people say about Will because they help to look for him all season. The good guys aren't homophobic. The good guys care about Will. And this includes all of our main characters - the people the audience are supposed to root for go against homophobia and bullying.

(Edit: I forgot to include a conversation between Joyce and Lonnie. When Will's fake body is found Lonnie wants Joyce to see a pastor and Joyce says no. Lonnie is trying to convince her she is crazy. He's the bad guy, and the first thing he wants to do to "fix" the situation is to get Joyce to talk to a pastor. It's another negative association with religion. Joyce is right here. She isn't crazy. And Lonnie isn't being comforting when he says this. He's being controlling and dismissing her feelings. It's clear from what we see of Lonnie that he's an asshole. He abused Will and Jonathan (and likely Joyce as well), he tried to turn Jonathan against his mother when Will went missing, he exploited an opportunity for money. He's not a person we are supposed to be rooting for.)

S2 - This season has a more direct reference to Christianity and it's the Reagan signs on some of the front lawns in Hawkins. This isn't surprising considering again, it's a middle class suburb. Reagan was a popular president at the time and got elected by popular vote twice despite his mishandling of the AIDS crisis and a number of other issues. His name is synonymous with the Christian right. During his time in office, the pro-life movement started to take hold, and he cut back on welfare reform and disability rights to name a few of the problematic things he did. Basically, anyone who wasn't an able-bodied, straight, white, middle class Christian male was struggling and yet he won twice. These days, his name is often compared to Trumps - they openly hated the same groups of people.

This sets the stage in a subtle way for what's going on with the main characters. Because our characters are all outcasts - gay, black, disabled, poor, etc - they are struggling to fit in to mainstream society (which makes it so ironic this show is mainstream). Even Hopper who is your typical straight, white, leading man struggles to fit in - his daughter died and he is coping with depression and substance abuse issues. Things no one discussed openly at the time and were viewed as shameful.

So we have the Reagan sign on the Wheelers front lawn. This tells me that at least Ted is a Reagan supporter which makes sense given this is an upper middle class white family. I am skeptical of Karen (or anyone else in this family) being conservative but I will get to that in S3. Dustins house has a Mondale sign so they are democrats which makes sense - Dustin has a disability and his mother is a single parent. Reagans policies would have hurt them. We don't see the politics of the other boys families but I think it's a safe bet to assume they are democrats. Will's family is poor and his mother is also a single mother. Not to mention that there are hints both Joyce and Jonathan suspect he is gay and they love Will so much, there is no way they would have ever voted for someone like Reagan. And even though the Sinclair's are also an upper middle class family they are black and while no group of people votes in the exact same way, Reagans policies were incredibly racist. Lucas mentions struggles to fit into Hawkins because he's black in the book Lucas on the Line. His family wouldn't have fit into this town even though they are financially well off. It's a mostly white town and that would have absolutely resulted in them being on the receiving end of racism on a regular basis. So even though their family technically conforms, people would not have accepted them.

So we know that our main characters don't fit in and we know Reagan represents all things Christianity and conformity. One of the main themes of the show is "forced conformity is killing the kids" a line directly stated by Eddie in S3 so more on this in a bit.

Something else happens this season that isn't a direct reference to religion but an adjacent theme and it's the conversation Nancy and Jonathan have with Murray. They are trying to figure out how to take down Hawkins lab and get people to believe them. Nancy doesn't understand at first why presenting the evidence they have won't work. And Murray says - people don't want to see whats behind the curtain. It's comforting. They like the curtain. - So they water down the story so the town will understand it in a way that they won't resist. This, I believe, is essentially what the writers are doing with this show. They are watering down that this has been a show that is anti-conformity from the beginning and there are signs of it in S1. But they know if they come right out and say that a main storyline is a queer coming-of-age story, a lot of their mainstream audience isn't going to watch. So up until now anyway, they have been subtle about it. But the audience is starting to notice something is off, especially with Mike in S4 because things aren't adding up.

S3 - It is now the summer of '85 and while there aren't direct references to Christianity, we still get some hints of conservatism. The only reference to religion is a passing comment that Dustin's new girlfriend Suzie is a Mormon. There is also a passing comment made by Max in S2 that there were Mormons at the door when Billy questions her. It was Lucas and she is trying to hide him from her racist brother, so she lies and says she was talking to Mormons. These comments are pretty neutral even though Dustin mentions Suzie's father wouldn't approve of him because he isn't Mormon himself. At the time we are seeing this moment, it's hard to tell if Dustin is telling the truth (everyone thinks he's making up his girlfriend this season.) But we see more of this in S4.

And then there is the comment by Karen Wheeler about Margaret Thatcher. She's on the phone with someone and says "I don't know Cath, maybe if I was Margaret Thatcher that'd be an another story." (this is in episode 5 by the way). A lot of people take this comment to mean Karen is conservative but I feel like it's so vague. We have absolutely no idea what the context of this conversation is or even who she is talking to (presumably one of the mothers from the pool). It's unclear if she was saying something positive or negative. We don't know what she is talking about, all we hear is her say Thatcher's name. So I feel like it's a leap to assume it was a conservative statement she was making.

I have a hard time believing that Karen is conservative (or at least not ultra conservative like a lot of Reagan supporters) for a few reasons. One of which is the contempt she has for Ted. She is frequently rolling her eyes at him or annoyed in some way and we know in canon he is the guy who represents conformity. However, Karen doesn't. This season especially she is shown to not be happy with her life. She is supposed to be a conservative housewife, but she almost has an affair and makes a few interesting comments. One of which was during her conversation with Nancy about her job. Nancy is discussing her misogynistic bosses and Karen gives her helpful and supportive advice about not fitting in. It seems personal, and from what we know about her, this sticks out. Because she seems like she is a typical housewife. I always felt like there was more to her backstory, but she seems to relate personally to Nancy's story of being an outcast at her job.

There is also her relationship with Mike. In S1, we see her trying to connect with him emotionally and get him to talk about his feelings about Will going missing. Karen is clearly someone who her kids can talk to, even if they resist sometimes. And her kids don't exactly fit in or represent conformity. She has been shown to be worried about her their safety repeatedly, Mike in particular, and we never see her trying to force them to conform in any way. And this is a thing that someone in her position would have absolutely been teaching her kids - conservative, Christian values. But we don't see anything like this or any hint of this. So I don't buy the 'she's conservative' theory. I don't think we've seen enough evidence of that. And while the Wheelers are probably a family that goes to church on Sundays, I don't get the impression this is a major influence in their lives. There is no religious paraphernalia around the house and this would have been a very common thing for a family that was pro-Reagan to do. I feel like they are passively conservative. It's the popular, normal choice and Karen and Ted are the epitome of doing things because they think they are supposed to. But this hardly makes them die hard believers.

S4 - This is where religion becomes more direct. Eddie is reading a Newsweek article about the dangers of D&D. During this time Satanic Panic was spreading. People feared for the moral values of the US during a time of extreme conservatism. Eddie clearly thinks this article is a joke. He's mocking anyone who conforms and it's clear Dustin and Mike agree. They are outcasts and they know D&D isn't dangerous. Eddie makes them feel like being different is ok.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, we have Jason. He's your typical straight, white, christian male and fits in perfectly. He's the star of the basketball team and has the perfect cheerleader girlfriend (at least on the surface). He's the opposite of Eddie. And he is the villain in this story. THE GUY WHO CONFORMS PERFECTLY IS THE VILLAIN. He gets progressively more insane as the season progresses. He's charismatic and he quotes the Bible to rile the town up to hunt Eddie and Hellfire club down. They are all in a panic about the murders that are happening and the cops aren't doing a great job containing things (they also don't have all the information to be fair). But by the end of the season, Jason is completely unhinged and holds Lucas up at gunpoint. He's also part of the reason why Max ended up dying. It's Satanic Panic that drives this attitude forward. People are panicking over the loss of morals and blaming that for the reason why bad things are happening. Which I think will make for an interesting lead-in next season with regard to a more openly gay storyline.

On top of this display of religious fundamentalism, we see Suzie and her family. They are Mormons and we know her father is strict with regard to religion. However the family we see is chaotic. Suzie's sister Eden mocks Suzie for basically being a goody two shoes. Eden also has no hesitation about getting high and clearly is not abiding by Mormon values. Suzie doesn't always either. If there is a cause she believes in - like helping Dustin - she only has a little bit of guilt about going against her father and her religion. Her father is pretty much a joke. He's a fumbling idiot the kids need to outsmart in order to get the information they need. It's not exactly a positive representation of religion. Suzie shows that even though her religion is important to her, she is capable of thinking for herself. She hacks Dustins school computer and a government computer (although she doesn't know all the info about what she is doing here) with little hesitation. Her religious morals aren't exactly stopping her from doing something illegal or unethical. She's a hacker above all else.

At the end of the season we see Ted - the dude who represents all things common - reacting negatively to the news about what's going on in Hawkins. The guy who represents conformity is questioning the "propaganda" the news is coming out with to describe the situation in Hawkins. He is questioning the status quo. This is meant to show how even Ted is noticing something isn't adding up about the "normal" explanation of things. Something, at this point, that the audience should be questioning especially with regard to Mike. Because if even Ted can see something is going on here, then surely the audience can too.

The series has gotten progressively more direct about its anti-conformity theme which is why it makes no sense for them to suddenly forget this in S5. This show has always been about and for outcasts. The Wheeler family is a cautionary tale that Nancy said in season 1 was so depressing. She wants the opposite of this, which is why her and Steve and their 6 kids is never going to work (there are a lot of reasons why this is never going to work). And it's also why Mike and El aren't going to be endgame. Those relationships are there to represent conformity and none of the characters in those relationships are happy. They are the expected, normal relationships. If they wanted the audience to like these relationships they would have been written more positively.

So it's funny to me when people say the show is never going to go against the status quo because they have literally been doing this from the start. It's what the entire show is about. All of the characters are outcasts. All of them. So if people are claiming to like and support them, then they need to get behind the anti-conformity theme. And if they can't do that - this show is simply not for those people and it never was.

[del-stars]

"i could write an entire essay on how sirius internalises his failure to be a 'good heir' into thinking something is inherently wrong with him" - you cant say that and not give it to me !! give it to me. now. (please)

essay time essay time essay time !!!!!!!

okay, so. this is not a New Idea but i do feel like pureblood society/beliefs align very closely with religion, specifically catholicism (which is my personal frame of reference). not in the hierarchical way necessarily, but in the 'you're born into this and thus have to believe in it' sort of way (also the familial shaming and cutting off 'wayward' children who challenged the belief system).

there is such a deep sense of shame in leaving religion. even when you know it's the right thing to do, even when you're not sorry, even when you have no desire to go back to it. sirius, in the same way, feels like a failure. he couldn't be what he was supposed to be. it doesn't matter that he didn't want to - he couldn't. and your first instinct (generalizing here) when you find yourself unable to align with a belief system (for instance, growing up queer in a church that doesn't accept that) isn't to blame the system itself, but to blame yourself. there's something wrong with you, and that's why you're uncomfortable in the system, that's why you find yourself questioning, that's why you can't fit in like everyone else can: because you were born wrong.

sirius thinks he was born wrong. he thinks there is something wrong with him. he doesn't agree with blood purity and pretty much never has, he sticks out from his family, and he's a gryffindor - those things are wrong. he isn't supposed to be that way. he is missing out on what he has long been told is everything he could ever want: being the heir, controlling the family, having the money and influence and power - and (in his mind) he is choosing not to have it. he could let it all go and go back, except he can't, because it isn't really a choice. it's the way he is.

he is obviously a guilt-ridden, not at all well-adjusted teenager with a backpack full of trauma, so he doesn't respond the best to certain situations, and this reinforces this belief. the prank, his deep hatred for snape, his constantly getting in trouble, his general lack of emotional intelligence and control, the fact that his parents didn't love him or even seem to like him: all because he is inferior. he is worse than everyone else. this then pervades pretty much every aspect of his life: he thinks the potters don't want him around, he thinks his friends secretly hate him, he thinks mcgonagall believes he'll end up going nowhere in life. his response to this is to bury it under so much bravado that nobody could even think he actually feels this way, but that's another essay.

this is all worsened by being raised in an abusive household. walburga used to be obsessed with sirius, and then (because of her own instability) started abusing him. sirius blames himself for this - there must have been something he's done. except he can't think of anything, and so it must be something within him. there is something wrong with him that means his mother cannot love him, and if his own mother is incapable of loving him, then who ever could?

i think all this explains why in canon he didn't escape azkaban sooner, because he fully blamed himself for james and lily's deaths. sure, one could argue that he is a little bit, but the burden of that guilt should rest on peter. sirius assumes it fully, though, because he thinks everything he touches is destined to be destroyed.

[madamegemknight]

Okay I'm gonna finally. Ask about the MOTU playlist. Which is what I intended to do before all those other asks hit me like a train. Curious in particular about the inclusion of

GHOST - Honey I'm Home

sodikken - people eater

Brian David Gilbert - i wish that i could wear hats

(cracks knuckles) OH BOY HERE WE GO -

HONEY I'M HOME

Honey I'm Home revolves heavily around two ideas - religion and parenthood - both of which tie in very heavily to Teela and her storyline in CGI. Teela has numerous parental figures; Man-E-Faces, who adopted her and who she ran away from as a young child, Evelyn/Evil-Lyn, who took her in as an apprentice, and Eldress, who was explicitly described as being like family to Teela (despite them having like two conversations at that point :P).

The "father" is Man-E - distrusting the World Above (and, as we learn in Season 3, following Eldress' orders), he tried to keep Teela in the Lower Wards, where she stayed until she "landed a gig" with Evelyn.

The "moth" is then Evelyn, who is symbolically 'tied up' due to being just as much of a victim as Teela is, albeit from the opposite direction due to their role as Nemeses. Evelyn takes Teela in as part of a plan to use her, yes, but as the end of Season 3 and the few tie-in materials that discuss the Season 4 plans reveal, she's being used just as much when it comes to the battle between the Power of Grayskull and the Coming of Horokoth as Hordak's possible child. She's also tied up in the sense that she is irreversibly "tied" to Teela as her Nemesis.

This leaves Eldress as the "God", the figure who controls the entire thing from behind the scenes. At first glance, this might not seem like an appropriate role for Eldress to slot into - despite her numerous wrongdoings, she spends her time alive as a guardian serving under King Grayskull, and her time as a ghost as...well, a ghost, unable to do anything except watch from the castle. However, when looking at two of the tie-in books (specifically I, Skeletor and Into The Void), the reasoning for her being the "God" is clear: Eldress is canonically responsible for the entirety of the series happening in the first place. I, Skeletor establishes that Keldor was supposed to be the heir of Miro that took the throne (chosen to be by RANDOR, no less), only for Eldress to burst in, transfer the throne to Randor, and then refuse to explain why she chose to do so. Her line about how she "cannot see the threat" is a lie as well - Into The Void establishes that she was fully aware that Horokoth (and by extension, Hordak) were coming, and it's the reason she chose to come to Eternia in the first place. While she isn't a puppet-master by any means, her actions were carefully planned in order to make sure Adam was in a position to gain the Power of Grayskull, and in doing so caused the entire series to occur in the first place. And while I, Skeletor is told by Skeletor, who is naturally an unreliable narrator, the end of the book has Teela establish that for the most part, he was telling the truth about this specific moment.

The "there's so many things that you'll never understand" line is referring to how Eldress never explains any of this - she leaves everyone, but ESPECIALLY Teela, in the dark about critical aspects of not only her grand plan, but of their lives in general. In every other continuity where Sorceress hides her relationship to Teela, this makes sense as Sorceress can't tell Teela about their relationship without dooming Teela to her fate far earlier than she's prepared to deal with it - but here, it's so she can make sure Teela will "never go astray," as Into The Void establishes (via Teela meeting an alternate universe Eldress that's a bit more open about her past) that if Teela did know what Eldress had done, she would hate her.

The repetition of "Three voices" in the chorus, whether it be "from the gramophone" or "all alone" refers to how despite what the show tries to claim, the fusion of Teela and Eldress into Teela Na is incomplete and illogical - it's not Teela Na who we follow for the rest of Season 3, it's Teela (with Eldress' memories in her head) occasionally switching into Teela Na mode in extreme emergencies. Three voices, not one, despite the show's best attempts to present it as otherwise.

The "God devoured that of Father" line is one I don't take literally, but still fits in with the idea of Eldress enacting total control over everything, especially Teela. As I mentioned prior, she is the one who instructs Man-E-Faces to not only tell Teela nothing of her past, but to call her Teela in the first place, establishing a sense of control and regulating her destiny through Man-E. Eldress symbolically "devours" Man-E's role as foster parent by ensuring her regulations are still enforced through him.

Finally, there are the lines "A vivisection of me/Done by God, for all to see." This is representative of the moment where Eldress and Teela "merge" - despite the show's attempt to have this come across as a positive thing, playing inspiring music and ending on Teela triumphantly talking about how Eldress ~isn't really gone,~ at the end of the day Teela has still been ripped open and had an entirely new person shoved into her mind and body, said person talking the entire time about how Teela has never been any of the identities she chose for herself. Notably, vivisection refers specifically to the act of viewing the internal structures of a living being, and by fusing with Teela, Eldress becomes part of that internal structure.

tl;dr: Teela has religious trauma AND parental trauma, and they are the same person. and also 'her'. and this is treated as a good thing.

PEOPLE EATER

people eater is an interesting one - there are a few songs on the Teela side of the fanmix that are from Eldress' perspective, not Teela's. The goal of them was to come across as jarring compared to the others as a reflection on how even though the show presents Teela and Eldress as one unified being now, they're incredibly fractured and are in fact two completely separate people with two completely different sets of memories and opinions. people eater, along with Louise and Eat Your Heart, are about how Eldress ultimately views Teela as a means to an end and not as the family unit Teela perceives the two of them as.

Teela sacrifices so much for Eldress, to the point where she gets her memory wiped in Lost in The Void for figuring out too much in her attempts to save her. Despite that, Eldress never gives up anything for Teela - any moments of "reassuring" her, like encouraging her to tap into the powers of Sorceress, are ultimately just further steps on the path to making sure her perfect plan succeeds. Eldress will never take care of Teela's needs, no matter how much Teela takes care of Eldress'. Ultimately, this stems from the fact that their relationship is inherently an unequal one; Eldress can talk as much as she wants about the two of them being two halves of the same coin, or more than who they are combined, but at the end of the day Eldress needs Teela to be alive again, and Teela doesn't. It is impossible for Eldress to give up Teela, because without Teela Eldress looses her chances of living again.

And so Eldress lies. She lies about how Teela will be able to decide her own future and won't end up like Eldress. She lies about the extent of her involvement with the events that have permanently reshaped Adam's life and resulted in him having amnesia. She 'lies' to Ork-0 about the original Orko the Great lacking true heart (arguably this is true, considering Orko the Great worked with King Grayskull and was thus involved in the colonization of Leviathae, but in-universe it's revealed to be untrue so I'm counting it here). And what's notable is how whenever she lies, she isolates whoever she's lying to from the others, keeping them alone with her.

And ultimately, this ends with Eldress using Teela for a second chance to live, without her consent or even explaining what she plans on doing. The first time Teela is informed about this connection with Eldress is the same time that she is merged with her, seemingly permanently though given the cancellation of the show we'll never know for sure.

I WISH THAT I COULD WEAR HATS

i wish that i could wear hats is tied very critically to two aspects of Ork-0 that I find incredibly interesting, but that the show never addresses.

First, he never gets a costume change. When he goes from RK Unit 1983 to Ork-0, he dresses up in an outfit similar to what the actual Orko wore...and then never changes it. The kids have their Master forms, Cringer has his prosthetic claws, Adam has his formal outfit once he rejoins the royal family, Krass has her Dark Master form...and Ork-0 never changes out of the outfit mimicking Orko the Great's, even when he starts working to define himself outside of the Trollan's influence. It gets to the point where the rest of the RK Hivemind start wearing palette swapped versions of the exact same outfit - this is not Ork-0's costume, this is somebody else's costume, and it's obvious to everyone involved.

Second, he doesn't realize he's a robot until discovering that all the Trollans have left Eternia despite knowing that he's changed. He knows he's been out for a long time, he knows his body is different, and his bodily autonomy is stripped away from him by Kronis via Maker Override, something he remembers happening after the fact because it makes him even more insistent that he's a real magician. Combine this with the fact that the RK Hivemind instinctively do things like try to eat, and it becomes clear that Ork-0 has a massive disconnect between his actual body and how he perceives himself.

Even actually meeting Orko does nothing to help, because it just makes it clearer how the outfit Ork-0 wears is a crude imitation of Orko's. Furthermore, while Orko manages to resolve his issues in the exact same episode he debuts, disappearing from the plot forever after that, Ork-0 ends up regressing even further, going from "robot with Orko's memories who is learning to be his own person" to "robot copy of Orko who just had to learn to believe in himself 🙃"

The real tragedy of Ork-0 is that the show refuses to have him acknowledge anything about his robotic aspects and the clear trauma and body dysmorphia they cause him to go through, while increasing his ties to a figure that on a literal design level he is only meant to be an imitation of. Despite being created as an original character, he's reduced to nothing but "orko but robot" until the creator of the show himself seems to think that's all he is. His imitation costume has become his sole sense of identity.

[jetwhenitsmidnight]

Private Rites by Julia Armfield

Release date: 3 December 2024

Genre: adult literary/speculative/horror fiction

From the award-winning author of Our Wives Under the Sea, a speculative reimagining of King Lear, centering three sisters navigating queer love and loss in a drowning world

It’s been raining for a long time now, so long that the land has reshaped itself and arcane rituals and religions are creeping back into practice. Sisters Isla, Irene, and Agnes have not spoken in some time when their father dies. An architect as cruel as he was revered, his death offers an opportunity for the sisters to come together in a new way. In the grand glass house they grew up in, their father’s most famous creation, the sisters sort through the secrets and memories he left behind, until their fragile bond is shattered by a revelation in his will.

More estranged than ever, the sisters’ lives spin out of control: Irene’s relationship is straining at the seams; Isla’s ex-wife keeps calling; and cynical Agnes is falling in love for the first time. But something even more sinister might be unfolding, something related to their mother’s long-ago disappearance and the strangers who have always seemed unusually interested in the sisters’ lives. Soon, it becomes clear that the sisters have been chosen for a very particular purpose, one with shattering implications for their family and their imperiled world.

Content warnings: death, parental death, grief, child abuse, emotional/verbal, abandonment, violence, blood, suicide, lesbophobia, divorce, alcoholism, eating disorder, vomit, self harm, stalking, gaslighting

Disclaimer: I know nothing about King Lear, other than the fact that the guy has three daughters, so my review will be written without taking into consideration the source material.

Thank you to NetGalley for an ARC!

Not gonna lie, I sort of struggled with this one. This is a relatively short read, a little under 300 pages, but it took me nearly a week to complete this book. ( I typically finish 300 pages in 2 or 3 days.) I think the main reason for this is that the pacing is slow. Like, really slow. There's not a lot of plot going on, and for the most part, we follow our three main characters going about their day to day lives.

A large focus is on the relationship between the sisters and their parents (or lack thereof). I really resonated with the portrayal of their sibling relationship; there were moments that felt like the author had written down the exact thoughts and feelings I've had about my own siblings. (Although me and my siblings definitely get along better.) The trio's relationship with their parents is less focused upon, but impossible to ignore, especially with the tension caused by their father's death.

The speculative setting feels ever more timely; the city they live in is being gradually submerged by rising waters, which has become so normal that the constant rain and ferry rides is just another aspect of their lives. I loved the sections in between the main story entitled The City; it shows what is going on outside of the main characters and gives the story a different perspective.

This book really captures how boring it is living through the end times. (I hate that this is relatable.) There is a underlying tension caused by the ever-present rain and gradually increasing flooding, but the characters still have to go to work and do chores.

The story isn't entirely miserable; Agnes finds love amidst all the mundanity, and it is ordinary and extraordinary at the same time. In Everything Everywhere All At Once, Ke Huy Quan's character says "In another life, I would have loved doing laundry and taxes with you." I think this sentiment captures Agnes's relationship with Stephanie completely.

I sort of forgot that this is supposed to be a horror novel; aside from a few weird moments plus the overall creepy vibe, this book read more as lit fic than horror. Towards the end, however, the horror elements kick into full gear. There is a huge tonal shift that I am not sure I like? It felt out of place with the rest of the narrative. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't see how the ending fits in with the overall/rest of the book.

Other than the ending, this book as a whole is gorgeous and lyrical and relatable, and will definitely be staying with me for some time.

[sarcophagid]

hiii what do u think about morningstar visuals or lore

he's one of my favesss

visually it's a lot of fun, he looks good in all black! im a liiitle tired of them showing his face all the time but i do like the silly little golden face on the mask.

also think it's neat that one of the design sketches had feathers on it. i'm oscillating between bat/moth/bird as an ithaqua animal. but i see nathaniel as snake themed and i do like a good snake vs. bird symbolism.

lorewise, i think morningstar ithaqua was really a good parallel for his original story. although i wish they mentioned his mother since she's a major character his backstory. i do wonder if helel is supposed to be ithaqua if his motives were utterly devoid of love.

regardless, the way i saw it in the og, the norwell family (or at the very least magistrate norwell, although i doubt janet and nathaniel are ignorant enough to not know what they're doing.) likely didn't genuinely believe in demons or witchcraft. it was more of a means to manipulate the townspeople and gain social power, since cultivating a fear of accusation would benefit the judge. and this parallels how later on, ithaqua would use the same practice of leveraging fear and lies to manipulate the people and protect his mother.

and this is reflected in the way both nebuchadnezzar and helel used a false divine connection to claim their right as king. the line "new lies will be treated as the word of god." implying that nebu was also lying.

nebu posing as a vicarious voice of 'god' goes with how ithaqua calls the attackers "gods" due to the religious nature of their accusations. likewise, nebu condemns those below the tower as 'demons' similar to how ithaqua's mother was called a demon.

it's also neat that they used a fallen angel as inspo - as helel being nebu's twin, was originally a prince before his fake execution, like how og ithaqua was presumed dead and abandoned. (i do wonder why exactly nebu spared him. i know why for plot armour reasons but there's some interesting possibilities.)

and helel is a fun character! i liked the detail that people didn't obey helel that much out of loyalty or even fear but because they were mutually using each other. helel didn't gaf about being king and they didn't actually believe his claims of being the true king as long as everyone got what they wanted in the end.

"Yet they did not know that the new, sun-eating king was never interested in governing at all. He knew that the followers hated the corrupt royals from the kingdom that he fell, knew that a religion built on a foundation of lies would shatter easily at first touch. But that had nothing to do with him. His goal was always the king of the tower, Nebuchadnezzar, and this battle was all a selfish frenzy of revenge."

helel isn't power hungry, he's single mindedly focused on vengeance. i'll go as far as to say he's not truly an agent of just retribution, he's just willing to do anything if it helps him in his goal. it's like, almost funny how he just lets people take advantage of the political shift for their gain as long as nebuchadnezzar stays imprisoned. and helel's lack of moral inhibition when it comes to his goals is one of the key parts of ithaqua's character. i think that's one of the similarities between him and nebu, but nebu is the one who actually desires power and control, using violence to attain that, in an inversion of helel's motive+method.

speaking of similarities another thing i really liked was the "everything was turned upside down, yet everything still remained the same." line. despite how much he hates their sameness, helel has to become something of similar magnitude to the sun king to make any meaningful change, just as there are no bloodless ways for the nightwatch to command paranoia.

and i think the funniest bestest part of all this is that helel fails. his plan to indefinitely torture nebu gets cut short when one of his allies (based tracy) finds the supposedly dead king and makes good on the false claim by killing him for real. all of helel's concentrated effort and sacrifice was for nothing. and it does actually make sense when you think about it because nightwatch is present at the manor, and why would he leave his post to go there? despite killing nathaniel and creating the persona of 'ithaqua', his mother's still sick. and whatever happened afterwards, he had to leave. somewhere in ithaqua's story, he failed too.

anyways cool story yeah i like it a normal amount

[papermint-airplane]

Eleanor: Whoa whoa whoa, what do you mean 'who is Aiden'?! He's the Bachelor! You know, the whole reason we're competing in the first place?!

Angela: Surely you can't be serious!

Rose: I am serious! 🤭 And don't call me--

Viridia: IF YOU FINISH THAT SENTENCE, I WILL END YOU MYSELF.

Eleanor: Gaaaaaaah, I hate you people.

Angela: Then I guess I need you to explain a lot more than the murder attempt because if you aren't competing for Aiden's heart -- the alleged premise of the show -- what are you competing for?

Rose: I. keep. TELLING YOU! I want to WIN! 😠

Angela: Yes, but win what?!

Rose: Uggggh, you're so dense, it physically hurts. 😩

Viridia: STOP TALKING IN CIRCLES AND JUST EXPLAIN SOMETHING FOR ONCE!

Rose: Haven't you ever heard the expression 'winning isn't everything, it's the only thing'? 🙄

Angela: Yeah, I've heard toxic Little League coaches say that to crying seven year olds. And?

Rose: Seriously?! It's the principle I've based my entire life on! It's my mantra! My raison d'être! 👿

Viridia: WATCH OUT, SHE'S GOING FRENCH AGAIN.

Angel: So the whole reason you snuck back into the house, disguised yourself as a mime, sloppily painted your blue stripes purple, tried to kill Angela, and potentially scarred Aiden for life was...because of an expression everyone uses ironically?

Rose: It's not ironic to me, dammit! It's my sole purpose in life! Everyone knows that, even the Watcher! And she...she used it against me. 😓 She promised me that if I made the competition interesting for her, she'd let me back into the house.

Eleanor: Wait. What?! Say that again.

Rose: When I broke into her control room, she made me an offer: I'd get to come back and compete again as long as I did something to shake up the status quo. She was getting bored of you idiots. 🥱

Angel: I-I can't believe this.

Bailey: I know what you mean...

Angel: One of us got to meet the Watcher in person and it wasn't me.

Rose: Look, Angel, if it makes you feel any better, she's not what you think. She's...crazy. 😦

Bailey: High praise coming from you.

Rose: And not only that, she seriously doesn't know how 'Earth reality shows' as she calls them work because holy shit, this whole thing has been one clusterfuck from the beginning. 🙄 She says it's a Bachelor-type dating show but she's run the whole thing like a survival show with the challenges and eliminations. I mean half of us haven't even met this Arwin-or-whatever, let alone been on a date with him. What sense does that make?! 😵

Aiden: It's Aiden. I'm Aiden!

Eleanor: You're right. I thought this whole thing was shoddily arranged but I've never seen any reality dating shows. For all I knew, this is how they're supposed to be.

Rose: Well I've seen hundreds of them, and believe me, this is not how they're supposed to be. Arlo is supposed to spend time with all of us one-on-one, not be shoved into a pod by himself ninety percent of the time. 😣 I don't know how they do shows like this back on her planet but it's not how we do it on Earth. 👽

Eleanor: On...her...planet? The Watcher is an alien?

Rose: Well duh. 😑 You couldn't tell? Why do you think she abducted us all at the casting call? She had to get us on more familiar turf.

Angel: That doesn't make any sense. The Watcher can't be an alien. She's an eternal extra-dimensional being of pure benevolence.

Viridia: WILL YOU SHUT UP ABOUT YOUR RELIGION, ALREADY?! CLEARLY SOMETHING ELSE IS GOING ON.

Eleanor: I knew it, we really are in the Lunar Lakes moon settlement. I could tell from the trees. But...why are we the only Sims here?

Rose: I don't know and I don't care. 🤨

Wow. You really exposed me to everyone, huh, Rose?

Rose: You exposed yourself! You should have just let me win from the jump and I wouldn't have had to tell everyone what I knew. 😖

I guess it really is a good thing I didn't tell you the whole plan, then, huh? Otherwise you'd have run your mouth to Aiden.

Rose: Yeah yeah, Argyle or whoever-the-fuck. Well, I held up my end of the bargain. You're going to call this whole thing off and just announce me the winner, riiiiight? 🤤

Why would I do that?

Rose: Because...I made things interesting for you, like we agreed on. 😕

Then why am I still bored?

Rose: I-- 😶

You haven't won anything, Rose. You're still the same loser you were when you walked into this place on the first day. And that's all you'll ever be.

Rose: ...

Nothing to say to that?

Rose: I am going to kick. your. ass. 😡

[Beginning] [Previous] [Next]

[randomnameless]

What do you think about the take that there's no freedom of religion in Fodlan because there's a woman who worships a foreign deity in the abyss?

More or less the same thing than the take about Colonel Sanders being jailed in Garreg Mach because Rhea wants all those chicken tenders for herself.

More seriously,

Bar Claude speaking with his ass, and apparently Leonie being worried that the Church might be crossed with Claude mentionning he's not religious - even if in Leicester it's pretty much known far and wide that the nobles adopt a pious font for PR - I prefer believing the words of, you know, the CoS officials aka Rhea and Seteth on that matter, the CoS's doctrine - at least for the Central Church - doesn't forbid practice of other religions or faiths.

The Western Church being xenophobic most likely would be pissed at, say, random duscurian person worshiping Duscurian gods, but as for the central church? They, just, dgaf.

Now, in the Abyss, there's a pagan statue - from a Dagda deity per Shamir in Nopes! - and a woman praying there, who was apparently harassed for not following the Seiros faith.

But... if freedom of religion was banned :

1/how the fuck this 20 meters tall statue managed to be placed in Fodlan's Vatican's basement without anyone noticing

2/why Seteth and Rhea, when asked, said they don't impose the Seiros faith on people

3/why Leicesterians are allowed to be "pious for show" if religion was so important?

As always with Fodlan, we have some things told by several characters who are playable/talkable in the base game (tfw Seteth mentions how they don't force people to worship first in FEH, and then in Nopes, but nothing in FE16 + Cyril's supports that no one bothers to read because fig him I guess and ultimately they don't matter because Claude can't look like a clown in VW) and they are contradicted by either, flavor text, screening through various lines of hidden dialogue or, flat out, lines said in the gacha or the musou spin off.

Now, about that Dagdan woman, why was she in the Abyss, aka, a CoS shelter ?

Because she worships a different god and that's frowned upon by, uh, the very same church that shelters her? And this church gives her a place to worship her deity?

Or, if we take clues and connect dots from two astral planes, could it make more sense that this person ended up in the Abyss because she was Dagdan, and from Shamir's backstory we know Dagdans aren't that beloved by Fodlan people, after their multiple attempted invasions of Adrestia? Dagdan Woman must have looked for some shelter and found one - as for where or who put that statue here, I can't guess, but given how the Abyss is a place for people who cannot live at the surface without being picked on/harassed/threatened, I suppose the purpose of that statue being there was more in the lines of "as long as you're here if you want to worship your god you can do so" and less in the lines of "I'm so not tolerant at all that I will create a space in my holiest place where you can worship your god, because i hate other religions than my own".

If there is a general point to be made about "freedom of religion" in Fodlan, it's more about the lack of reliable (so, no Claude and his "I'll smash open the land and get rid of its backwards values unless I go to school") info about how tolerant the various countries that compose Fodlan are, and how some people from the CoS aren't on the same wavelength as Rhea and Seteth are.

Do they have some sort of responsability in this matter? Maybe in their hands-off approach to let the regional branches preach what they want or not adopt a stricter control on what is being taught but the game - and most likely that take - isn't bothered by all intricacies of how to conduct a faith/religion, otherwise I'd call a double standard over the CoS being BaD because they don't tell Father McRandom from Leicester to stop making randoms believe they can't have faith in other religion than the Seiros faith, but not calling out Ionius on not acting against Hanneman's brother in law when he fucked his wife so much that she died, or Lambert for Matthias keeping a kid as a hostage, or Claude's Uncle not frowning at Gloucester killing Raph's parents (the nopes retcon notwithstanding).

[tomboyjessie13-artblog]

This is something that I've been working on for the last few days, this drawing is supposed to be a depiction of Medea's "Seven Deadly Sins" which she had committed. 

The story here is that Joseph was curious about her Stand's [Seven Deadly Sins] ability and why it was given the name, Medea explains that the ability is named after the vices she committed a year prior to the events of "Stardust Crusaders", six of them while she was under DIO's rule.

Being raised in a Catholic household, Medea feels shame over what she did over the span of a year, while Joseph is just sitting there baffled by what he's hearing, realizing that her Stand's new ability is basically a vent post expressing her guilt.

Her sins(Clockwise from blue to purple):

Sloth - A vice that isn't exactly based on laziness, but more so spiritual apathy. Thanks to DIO being immune to religious items, she begins to doubt her religion's teachings, then becoming indifferent, then forgoes it in favor of doing things that usually isn't allowed, such as becoming high, which makes her "slothful".

Greed - A vice that made her feel like she's in control, when invited to play poker, she participated thinking that she won't lose much since she lost everything. But things changed when she won her first round and played more and became a rich addict, only to come crashing down when D'Arby Elder shows up.

Lust - A vice that she hates the most, as it involves her first affair with DIO. While it wasn't her fault as he used his Charisma to seduce her, she still sees it as a sin as she allowed him to take her purity before she had a chance to marry, which is seen as a taboo in Catholicism.

Wrath - The only vice that doesn't involve DIO or the agents, as this is the very first sin she committed and acted as the catalyst to the other sins. Namely: Snapping and beating her ex, Jason Lennon, to an inch of his life after she caught him cheating on her, this costed Medea her home, friends, and black belt.

Envy - A vice she's mostly embarrassed about and wants to forget, which involves her becoming envious of DIO seeing other people and dates Steely Dan out of jealousy and spite. She didn't even want to be with either Dan or DIO, but her fear of abandonment got the best of her.

Gluttony - A vice that also contributes to her apathy, except it's more harmful. At some point she became overwhelmed with her situation and started taking up drinking in order to cope with it to the point of excess and waste. Even worse she is underaged at the time and could put herself in danger.

Pride - A vice that she has mixed feelings about. She grew up being on the side of the law, but after becoming an Agent, she starts having a foul view of it after seeing how corrupt it can be. Thus, she begins acting as is she's above the law, even going as far to as to disrespect those serving to uphold it.

Medea King and Eris Raitt belong to me

[hero-israel]

In defense of anti-Israel people, it doesn't seem the fairest to consider any of their political art to be antisemitic for showing the Star of David in a negative light (such as censoring, breaking, being stabbed, etc) when that *is* the only symbol for the State (save for stripes, which I've seen represented too but less). How else are they supposed to criticize it visually? You can only use Netanyahu as a strawman so many times. The institutional and historical issues are more extensive than him or anyone like him. The recent branding with the Star of David of a Palestinian by an Israeli cop (assuming that's true, which looks like it as far as I can tell) shows the symbol can be used for evil. We should maybe make some exceptions to what we might otherwise consider antisemitic. I'm reminded of a graphic novel I read called "Dictatorship: It's Easier Than You Think", which mostly sarcastically criticized and compared various historical regimes. I felt it was a little too biased in a lot of ways, but it made one point I find relevant here. It said that populist ideologies create symbols that represent large swathes of marginalized people so if you criticize that ideology you can be framed for being prejudiced. It talked about how the communist/Soviet symbol was hammer and sickle, representing workers, so if you opposed communism/Soviet Union/etc., they could just say you were classist. (I personally have more sympathy for communism/Soviet Union so I somewhat disagree but I believe you said you're more anti-communist than I am so this might be more agreeable to you). To pull this back to my main point, maybe it isn't fair to have a historically violent nation be able to always have the ability to attribute criticism of it to one of the world's oldest bigotries? Don't get me wrong, I am a Zionist and I do think there's value in Israel asserting itself as Jewish and representing Jews. Enough Jews get associated with Israel by antisemites when they have no affiliation with it or even oppose it, so there's not much real value in trying to separate. And I do believe criticism of Israel and Zionism crosses over into antisemitism more than critics would like to admit. But I'm just making a point about iconography here. I half-wish that Israel went with one of the earlier flag designs of the Menorah or Lion so iconography could be more clear-cut. But maybe it shouldn't be.

A few thoughts on this:

The menorah would be functionally identical to the Magen David in terms of potentially causing confusion / inspiring hate from critique. The lion just isn't as good, though YMMV

It isn't hard for cartoonists to caricature political leaders like Netanyahu, it is in fact their job, if you can call it that.

if someone can draw a Magen David, they can draw it in blue and put in the stripes to remove all doubt that they mean the modern political entity and not the human ethnic group / religion

I don't recall seeing as much specifically blood- and killing-oriented imagery around Muslim crescents. The flag of Pakistan has the crescent on it, people making a cartoon criticizing Pakistan would hopefully not leap to showing the crescent as a knife beheading someone

All things are not equal and the political artists just have to cope with that and work a little harder. It does make a difference that Jews are a persecuted, frequently-genocided group controlling such a tiny land area. If the hammer-and-sickle was only used as the flag symbol of North Korea, which was the only Korean country, and most ethnic Koreans lived there after having been wiped out everywhere else, maybe people would have to be more careful with how they negatively portrayed that symbol.

to reiterate point 1 - it is good that artists and activists should be expected to work hard to avoid bigotry in their critiques

[raspberry-vinaigrette]

cracks open my mountain dew. sighs. hello chat. note that this pulls from personal experience and is not a judgement being passed on all christians -- it's just my personal anecdotal evidence from me and my friends.

my long and weird ass rant on why jack kennedy is a really interesting parallel to trauma resulting from christianity

SO. first and foremost a major facet of jack's character is that he's chained to this duty. this responsibility for something that he ultimately had very little if any control over. yeah in hindsight he could've watched over dee better and came back for her sooner, but hindsight is 20/20, and the promise that jack makes isn't even about dee in specific. it's about every single child hurt by fazbender's! jack is taking on the responsibility of someone else's sins and burdening himself with repenting for all of it. he outright calls it his last chance at redemption when he approaches the arcade machine in his workshop in dsaf3. to him, this is repentence for his misdeeds, but in actuality he had SO little culpability in anything before he died.

this parallels experiences in shitty christian groups quite a bit. effectively you are told that you alone are responsible for the sins of the entire human race and no matter what you do you will always be inherently flawed, but if you give yourself up to a religion and just conform to all these rules to prove yourself and never let yourself stray (lest you have to repent again), then you can be good again. you just have to promise. fittingly, jack is outright told when making the promise that it's gonna suck! it's going to suck so, so bad, and be painful, and he's going to constantly be seen as grotesque, but he still has to keep going. he has to save everyone. and he gets nothing from this besides the comfort he won't be guilty anymore.

and this comes into one of my main points! both religious trauma and jack's existance with the promise come with a sense of guilt basically built into your core. you feel shame for a lot of normal human desires and wants because you're not "supposed" to feel them, and the fact you do is "proof" that you're wicked and evil. this can lead to paranoia and a general sense of dread when it comes to just living your everyday life which i think can be seen in jack's behavior about the promise. he's constantly working towards the promise, and whenever he doesn't have work in some fashion, he literally just sits in bed -- in the marionn-ending when you skip work, jack comments that he plans just to sleep for 16 hours. he doesn't actually do this but he does very little the entire day so it's not unlikely he spent most of the day in bed regardless. plus, well... we know how devoted good ending jack is to fulfilling the promise, and hell -- he even feels responsible for saving people who aren't related to the promise, such as dave, peter, and steven!

there's a couple other major things, too. another thing with those who were really fucked up by the church is that they can sometimes go the complete opposite direction and basically do anything and everything that the church would hate to feel some sense of control. that then loops back into the guilt once the (literal or metaphorical) "high" is over with the need to compensate and rid themself of this sin. this causes a cycle of "do something 'sinful'" -> "feel immense guilt and shame and a need to repent" -> "do something equally self-destructive to compensate" -> spiral and repeat

i think a parallel can be drawn there with jack's actions, in particularly the evil routes. in defiance to the root intention of the promise, whether or not he plans on fulfilling it still, he chooses to kill with dave and shut down fazbender's that way. this is all fun and games and vegas is a great time, but especially near the end of dsaf2, we see jack is heavily haunted by his own actions and how he died and the circumstances of the promise, which eventually leads to him (depending on dialogue) literally asking blackjack to turn back time all to "repent" again. plus, in the 35 year gap between dsaf2 and dsaf3, judging by some various dialogue choices (the main ones coming to mind are during his neutral end rant, during a couple talks with the phoneys at the starts of the restaurant segments, and one where he mentions being shitfaced while working on the springlock suit training tapes), jack has become actively an alcoholic (+ a smoker, somewhat optionally) and living off of frozen dinners. as you can probably tell, he's pretty actively self-destructive, and in the soapy ending v3 he even brushes off an insane reaction to cocaine and inevitably being killed with "i always come back."

he doesn't care what happens to him. maybe, in a way, it feels like repentence. divine justice.

and looping back to the feeling of no control or a need for help making decisions, well... we see how easily jack slips into dave's plans and how he takes to henry's influence. jack is headstrong and stubborn when he wants to be, oftentimes when affirming things that feed into his self-loathing and isolation (i'll touch on that in a bit), but he falters very easily under pressure if he thinks it will bring him some kind of closure and safety and catharsis, be it closing down fazbender's, saving the kids, or something more. it's likely why henry can egg jack into killing dave in dsaf3's legacy route. the promise's guidelines dictate jack's actions just as much as a god might in religion.

last but not least, that self-loathing thing! a lack of self-worth in a big thing in religious trauma, since you're often told your worth is defined by how well you can fall into this mold that is, typically, impossibly and unrealistically perfect. when you fall short, you are told you are the thing that is inherently flawed, not the standard, and so you come to believe there is just something fundamentally wrong with YOU. jack also clearly has a super decreased sense of self-worth and confidence in his own identity for a similar reasoning! his entire sense of being depends on fitting the mold of this promise, and if he fails it or completes it -- whichever comes first -- he loses any reason to live. probably why in the evil endings, he hogs the drugs and alcohol. don't have to remember how little of a purpose you have if you're having such an adrenaline rush, eh? plus, dave is kind of the first person to not expect anything good out of jack and see jack as a person. even peter admits that jack is a monster and uses his scars as reasoning in the pure evil route, not just jack's terrible actions, while dave embraces this and doesn't seem to look down on jack. dave is only ever frightened by jack when jack acts wrong. acts like henry. it's interesting but that's another rant.

the point is that jack defines his own worth by how he completes this promise, and very clearly proclaims that he thinks of himself as a husk and a meatsack. his own soul calls him an abomination just pretending to be jack. for all jack has heart, for all that jack clearly cares and tries so, so hard, he fundamentally doesn't think he's worth anything beyond this obligation, and even when he does meet the bar... it's just what's expected for him to reach redemption. just like how someone with religious trauma believes that ripping themself apart is just what needs to be done to repent.

god is watching.

[birchbow]

I got a couple questions on clown church! So first, who does scutwork on a church ship? We've heard mention of kin in the kitchens, but who's taking out the trash, mopping floors, fixing gapers, etc? Is there a duty rota, or are there kin that see it as a holy calling? Secondly...what do the faithful picture the afterlife to be? A Dark Carnival, sure, but are they watching, laughing at the castes who laughed at them in life? Or do they get to perform if they did a good enough job in life?

I'm incapable of being brief so I'm just gonna readmore this for the sake of everybody's dashes! Sorry I ramble so much. U///U

RE: the dirty work, that is a great question and one I wish had occurred to me much earlier in the writing process tbh haha! Complete transparency: my first instinct is to say very beleagured midbloods and very disposable and unlucky lowbloods. If I'd thought about it sooner, I would have given that some setup! But it didn't occur to me, which does definitely make it seem like it's being done by the purplebloods on-ship. Shared dirty work is a nice thought, but also definitely doesn't seem very trollish.

Not a deal-breaker--possibly the church just isn't very trollish about this, like they aren't very trollish about the concept of community! But honestly, I feel like the more workable explanation is just the ignorance or lack of investment on the part of our POV characters. Church highbloods have a certain amount of kinship that's super alien to the other trolls, but they're not even universally cooperative with each other, let alone with other blood colors, and Gamzee is definitely not exempt from that now that he's socialized into a larger group of trolls.

All this to say; If I was a lowblood in charge of cleaning a ship full of murder clowns, I would have a LOT of incentive to fade into the background and only come out when I had to, and also to quickly avoid any sight or sound of any clowns who did happen to be up. And if I was Gamzee, who is now a sober trained soldier who's been much "better" socialized RE: his place in society, I would probably not take note of the coming and going of those lowbloods, unless they were dumb enough to somehow get right in front of me and interact. So I would say probably unlucky cleaning staff from warmer colors of blood. :T Someday maybe I'll go back and back-edit a dropped mention or two of them in there, we'll see.

-

RE: the Dark Carnival, that's not actually part of the religion I've given as much thought to, so I'll weave some fuckin story fabric here and now I suppose lol. normally I do this in my head with my hands on the keyboard staring into space so I'll try to trim the thought process down.

I guess my concept of it would be...any troll could be part of the carnival, but the goal for the faithful would be the audience, or for exemplary kin, as ringmasters and acts, but always in charge or control for the watchers' amusement. Whereas lowbloods and seadwellers would be paint and bloodsport and literal cannon fodder, etc. And selling the hotdogs and shit probably I guess lol. I haven't gone back to see what details, if any, I've put into the fic; there's definitely mention made of "your ticket" as a reference to like, your salvation, your way into the proverbial carnival.

Gamzee also says to one of the members of the CoF that they "took their ticket in their hands and tore" and curses UU essentially "i hope you're forgotten and your soul freezes alone forever in The Great Black Empty" so that all implies to me that I've implied to y'all that kin who had that implicit chance at salvation and did something blasphemous or heretical can lock themselves out of any kind of carnival at all, even as tortured circus acts, and are damned to just like, oblivion.

...Which makes sense to me, considering I also put in a mention that Gamzee would hate to be the last one of his faith left alive, because there would be nobody to commend his soul, with the implication that there wouldn't be any salvation or afterlife for him if they didn't. Which positions oblivion and forgottenness as the ultimate punishment. I dropped that in there as a reference to canon, the idea that he'd "run from death forever" if he was the last one left alive, but also it's an interesting data point theologically haha.

[serpentofslaanesh]

It's not worship and service as most people assume. I take your wider point about Chaos itself, but it's not a case of most interactions with Chaos being anything like religion or worship or faith. Yes, it's easy to convey in video games for people that don't know the setting. "These guys pray to evil gods, therefore they're the bad guys." And yes, in some novels written by writers less familiar with the setting or preferring its rawer edges, it's a common Chaos trope.   

And the Word Bearers? Yes. Other cases, absolutely. The majority, absolutely not. Chaos isn't a religion or a disease you catch. It's the everpresent threat of any malicious emotion allowing Something Old And Inhuman into your soul and brain from the reality behind reality. If a battlefield is bloody enough... Bloodletters will appear. If someone is completely decadent and lost in sensational pleasures... Slaanesh will pay attention to them. "Summoning" is the shallow, obvious end of the spectrum, keeping with the video game presentation we often see. It happens, of course, but it's also the obvious version of what happens. Not the only one. Look at Ahriman. He wants nothing to do with Chaos. He does horrible things, selfish things, murderous things, endlessly furthering the goals and presence of Chaos... entirely for himself. He believes he's using it and remains untouched by its control. Khârn didn't enter into any worship or agreement with Chaos. He was marked by it, and everything he does now furthers it. Abaddon doesn't pray to the Gods. He does his own thing and the Gods take heed. None of them worship the Gods. None of them willingly serve them, or would even recognise the idea of it was explained to them. Night Lords kill and kill and kill until daemons show up and swallow the planet. They don't worship Chaos or give a damn about the daemons; it's just an interesting way to commit Exterminatus for them. There's no prayer here, no worship, no service that they'd recognise.

Even if we, with the rulebooks, can say "Ultimately that action serves the Chaos Gods' agendas". Well, I like cheeseburgers. Ultimately that serves obesity and heart disease. I still do it.  I've said it on the forum a few times in much greater detail, but it's not a case of organised religion or many Chaos Marines thinking Chaos rocks on toast. They're motivated by their own deals; they hate, they want vengeance, they want recognition, they want to survive. That lets Chaos into their hearts. Add it to where they had to hide in order to survive after the Scouring, and it makes a lot of sense. They're not really praying to Chaos in cults and thinking comedy/useless mutations are super-awesome. The Gods are real, and they know that. They may hate that truth, but they acknowledge it. They may be indifferent to it, but they're aware of it. And they're aware that when it comes to battle, raising an icon of Khorne in the middle of a fight comes with a risk, but it also comes with undeniable benefits. The gains outweigh the risks tenfold, especially in the short term. 

Added to that, mutation isn't supposed to be "physically stupid". The point of it is that it's supposed to reflect your inner self and/or the whims of the gods, and it's supposed to make you better. It improves you, in whatever it is you focus on. It makes you better at killing, and harder to kill, which is literally all most Chaos Marines (and Space Marines...) care about. When mutation goes wrong or goes too far and loses its benefit, well, we call those Spawn. And while many Chaos Marines likely fear that fate, it doesn't happen to everyone - or even most of them - so it's not silly to see how most of them suspect they'll escape that fate. Most of them will.

Also, and this is crucial, we have the rulebooks. They don't. it's easy to say "But the Chaos Gods are laughing at them all and screwing them over", but in-universe is that really the case on the ground? The Chaos Marine who sees someone become Spawn: well, they were weak. He's not weak. He'll be more careful. He's more worthy. He won't be a slave, anyway! He's too independent. And he'll phrase his wishes very carefully so the Monkey's Paw doesn't make it all go wrong.

-- Aaron Dembski-Bowden