#They are really indefensibly stupid

[irelyre]

Los Angeles Police Department officers narrowly avoided harm after one of their rifles was pulled into an MRI scanner during a failed raid on a local imaging center.

God I love exonerative tense. "Narrowly avoided harm" but just to the police officer, never mind all the extremely bad stuff that might have happened to people if the rifle had decided to fire while being sucked into the brain wiggler.

Weed is decriminalized in California now anyway. What the hell.

If you saw me agreeing with being annoyed about wasted helium in a fictional context and were like "I bet she has some more helium based anger in her life" good news LAPD fucked up a raid on a medical facility they thought was a pot farm and flat out ruined thousands of gallons of the stuff.

[todayisafridaynight]

extra thoughts but sawashiro hurts my heart so like. yeah we know his character is like sad and tragic but like. REALLY think about it and like let it set in i swear he makes me want to rip my hair out he was just a boy... wish him happiness w like. a Labrador or smthn i dont know dog breeds

i can't really. call sawashiro 100% innocent; the abuse he went through during his adolescence is definitely sad and undoubtedly contributes to his behavior now, but uhhh he still put a newborn baby in a locker LMAO?

sawashiro's agony is purely a product of his own actions. at the very least he's trying to rectify the damage he did, and that's definitely better than him not having any remorse at all

[still-searching-for-something]

What gets me is not that Donald Trump won. It's that he won the popular vote. It's that a majority of American voters said, "Yes, I want this guy as my president."

They deliberately, knowingly decided the fascist, felonious, antidemocratic candidate who'd organized a coup attempt and got away with it needed the presidency. No American voter doesn't know who Trump is. They have no excuse. They knew he stood for antidemocracy.

But he also stood for a stronger economy! Lower gas prices! Cheaper groceries! Lower taxes!

And most Americans decided those things were more important to them than democracy. They've, as a majority, decided democracy < convenience.

"But the real problem was voter turnout and apathy!"

Okay, so then most Americans--85.7 million--either voted for the fascist or couldn't be assed to lift a finger to save democracy, compared to 68 million. 55% of Americans either deliberately chose cheaper groceries over democracy or were too pathetically lazy to give a fuck either way. Much better. It's a human choice to make, to vote for their wallet than their grand abstract ideology, but it's one that hurts all of us, including them, including Ukraine and the EU (and Palestine, for the record!) and all future generations to come. It's a selfish, short-sighted decision that betrays a deep rot in our priorities.

I thought we understood that sometimes, we have to take a hit as a nation to preserve our democracy and our freedoms. Is the same nation that took rationing during the Second World War to defeat the Nazis and the Japanese Empire? That lost hundreds of thousands of men to put down an illegal, treasonous rebellion?

And today, we've decided our rights can be exchanged for cheaper eggs, milk, and butter?

"Oh, Harris ran a bad campaign. She tried to appease everyone which pleased no one. She didn't appeal to the right demographics on the right issues. She dodged questions, she was entitled, she was--"

Yeah, I don't care.

In fact, I agree with you, but frankly, the economic policies and foreign policies and immigration policies and social policies of either candidate are completely fucking irrelevant if one of them doesn't adhere to the basic democratic rule of accepting that democracy's validity and existence. If a vote for one candidate threatens the democratic health of that nation, and a vote for the other--regardless of what other consequences it may have--doesn't, then morally, you have to vote for democratic one.

Is that unreasonable? Maybe. Yeah, Democrats should have run a better campaign more focused on the bread and butter issues people care about. Like Clinton said, 'It's the economy, stupid!' Democrats had a responsibility to run the best campaign they could have, given the stakes.

But that still doesn't justify a vote for antidemocracy. Call me crazy, but I think a vote for authoritarianism is unreasonable. "They were a little patronizing and I want to shave a few bucks off my grocery bill, so I'll vote for the fascist!" is still an unhinged and indefensible conclusion to arrive at, regardless of how valid your claims of being hurt at the cash register or being patronized are.

I've lost any and all faith in Americans. I honestly thought we were better than this. I really did. And I don't know how or if a democracy can function if a majority of its electorate are willing to sacrifice democratic norms for short-term benefits.

Fuck Republicans and every single person who voted against democracy because their grocery bill was too high. May you get exactly the kind of government you deserve and voted for.

[thephantomcasebook]

I just saw a leaked clip of Rhaenyra telling Alicent to her face that Aegon has to die and Alicent just accepting it.

There are so many talented writers out there in the world and yet Ryan Condol had to be the one to adapt Fire & Blood and write HOTD. Fml

No ...

You gotta go back and rewatch this shit.

What actually happens is equally stupid.

So, Alicent betrays Aemond and Criston by telling Rhaenyra their battle plans. Then, Alicent offers Rhaenyra King's Landing uncontested and without bloodshed if she is allowed to take Helaena and Jaehaera out of the city to disappear. She tells Rhaenyra that Aegon is terribly wounded and a shadow of himself and that he'll bend the knee to Rhaenyra cause he still listens to Alicent.

Rhaenyra tells Alicent that its a stupid plan, because, she still has to execute Aegon, she must take his head to end his claim. Then she asks if Alicent is okay with this. Alicent pauses and doesn't say anything, showing that she is not.

Then, fucking stupid goes fulling fucking retard.

Rhaenyra gets enraged and frustrated that Alicent still defends Aegon. Like ... WHAT?!

Like, somehow, Rhaenyra just expected Alicent to be okay with her chopping her eldest son's head off, like they've unilaterally agreed that Aegon is not a person, or Alicent's child, and therefore he has to die and Alicent should be okay with this.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE EVEN TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW?!

WHAT IS HAPPENING?!

Are you fucking serious?!

Like that line and that reaction, boils my fucking blood - on a deeply personal level that media rarely can touch.

Rhaenyra just expects Alicent to accept that her sons are evil and that she has to kill them and is visibly offended and betrayed that Alicent isn't on her side about KILLING AEGON, HER SON. Fuck You, you crazy supremist cultist bitch! And fuck Alicent for even allowing her to have that reaction and let her believe that she's on her side about this. Ugh, I fucking can't stand this shit!

I'm seriously thinking about just closing the book on Alicent Hightower, and writing her off forever. What she did is really unforgivable and completely indefensible.

I mean she admitted to Rhaenyra that she loves Criston (wouldn't say his name in front of her) that she cares for children. But she still willing to betray all of them because ... SHE WENT ON A SWIM IN THE LAKE!

Sara Hess might be one of the worst writers in the fucking world.

[is-the-owl-video-cute]

since zionists are coming to whine in my dms that I’m so mean for supporting Palestinians who “had it coming for being terrorists” (yeah, zionists are definitely not racist, huh?), let me make this very simple.

Let’s say your great-great grandparents built a home on some land. They built it by hand, and your family has lived there for generations, fixing it up as old things needed renovations or just stopped working or they just wanted to make it compatible with new things like electricity when that came out. You grew up there, your parents grew up there, and your grandparents grew up there, and now you have children of your own starting to grow up there too.

You loved that house, it’s the only home you’ve ever known and years of loving care had made it beautiful, it even has a garden that your great grandparents planted olive trees in, and of course by now it’s a flourishing orchard. Your family are the only ones who had ever lived in that house, but your family had become quite diverse throughout the decades as children grew up and married, some new family members looked and lived quite like you, and some looked and lived differently, and you thought little of it because, why would you?

Then one day a stranger comes by with a feed to your family’s home, claiming the government had settled a deal that since this stranger’s great-great-great-great grandparents first owned that land and were forced off of it by people who looked a bit like you. The stranger gives you an ultimatum to leave the land immediately because they consider it to rightfully belong to them, or die. Some of your family flees, you don’t blame them, but you stand your ground as best as you can, but the stranger has guns, and strong friends to supply them. They kill your mother, blind your father, kidnap many of your siblings and cousins and so you take your children and anyone who’s left and flee to the far side of the property, on the half still allowed to them by the government’s ruling. For a time it’s fine, but the stranger wasn’t satisfied, and finds you again in the new home you were building. See, the way the stranger sees it, their ancestors had originally owned ALL of that property, so they figured that was what they were owed. You plead with them to let you stay, or even just to not hurt your family. Your pleas are denied.

This time they killed your children. They killed your cousins. They killed most of your siblings. Your family and your home, all gone in front of your eyes.

Do you think you would still care whether or not the stranger was right about who owned that plot of land first, or would you perhaps care more about what they just did to everything you held dear?

Zionists like to say “well hamas should have never ever taken hostages” and feign ignorance as to why hamas is gaining support at an exponential rate.

It’s not that complicated. If your options are stand there and get shot or get a gun and shoot back, are you really going to pretend to be confused by most people going with the second option?

No. You aren’t. You want to spin the narrative that people calling for a free Palestine are terrorists who want to see the death of all jews and some nebulous “scary muslim takeover”, but I know you’re not that dumb. I know you've seen videos posted by the IDF’s own beating, kidnapping, and killing civilians. I know you’re not stupid enough to honestly believe those are all terrorists, even the children. I know most of you aren’t even under the delusion hamas is just like ISIS.

This is deliberate. Genocide is easiest when the aggressor plays victim to try to say it’s self defense, but here’s the thing—

It doesn’t matter how many times you claim otherwise, hind did not deserve to die. If she was the ONLY child the IDF killed intentionally, that would be unforgivable, but given there are tens of thousands of children that have lost life or limb at the hands of the IDF, it’s indefensible. It’s murder. A child trapped in a car with her family’s bodies after the IDF attacked being used to lure out aid workers and kill them all at once is just evidence you have lost your humanity. I hate that I even have to only talk about the children because you think every adult in Palestine is secretly an evil terrorist, it’s a lot harder to say that about a child with an age in the single digits, but many of you still try to anyway.

Racism is a hell of a thing, and some of you are a little too drawn in by the idea of killing all the brown people in a region so you can build beach resorts and theme parks.

If Palestinian land is so sacred and divinely promised to the Israelis to the point the Israeli government considers all rain fall to be explicitly property of israel, why are you taunting it with the blood of the innocent and desperate?

I don’t know, I think if anyone but a Zionist tried to justify bombing hospitals and dressing as aid workers to kill as many of an ethnic group as possible, people may be a bit reasonably against that, but for some reason it’s fine as long as the group committing the genocide has enough oppression points stocked up from previous incidents.

[coraniaid]

OK, so, for context:

I don't like Agent Riley Finn, at all. He is one of my least favorite characters in Buffy, by quite some distance. I hated him even before the events of Season 5, and I only continued to hate him afterwards. I think the show would be significantly improved if his character had never been introduced. I think Whedon's idea that Buffy and Riley represent the show's one "happy and healthy relationship" is nonsensical.

I don't like As You Were. It's arguably Doug Petrie's worst episode (well, worst so far, anyway: let's not forgive him for his Season 7 episodes just yet).

I don't even really like Season 6 much (certainly not as much as so many people on Tumblr pretend to do). I think the concept of the season is very good but the execution is often decidedly lacking. It is not a season I often feel the urge to rewatch.

But, that being said, I'll confess it is somewhat bizarre to see so many people reblogging a post that says As You Were would have been improved if Riley showed up contrite and humble and openly ashamed of his [yes, unquestionably terrible and indefensible] actions in Season 5, or that the episode is one last attempt by the writers to force the audience to like him. To me, that is just ... obviously not true. I don't even see how it could be true.

As You Were is barely about Riley Finn at all. It's about Buffy. Specifically it's about what most of Season 6 is about: Buffy being miserable and depressed, struggling with bills and a soul-crushing mininum wage job, resenting her friends for having brought her back to life, romanticizing her past and (wrongly) convinced that she somehow 'came back wrong'. Riley is only in the episode to further that aim.

So, yes, the episode ignores all of Riley's [very real, very irritating, very hard to forgive] flaws and past failings and instead presents him as a dashing and attractive ex-boyfriend; as the perfect guy who somehow got away. Yes, it focuses on how much Buffy's own fortunes have declined since they broke up. Yes, Buffy is meant to find him attractive and be sad that he's married to somebody else already. Yes, the show deliberately sets up Riley as being competent and put together and high status while Buffy herself is none of these things. But this isn't because the writers are somehow trying to trick you into liking Riley (it would obviously be a very stupid and ineffective way to do that if it were! it demonstrably doesn't actually make anybody who didn't like Riley change their mind! why assume that it is trying to?). It is because this is how Buffy sees things herself.

The episode is about Buffy first, and Riley ..., not even third. He is a plot device. Just as in Season 3's Gingerbread (when Joyce is possessed and tries to burn Buffy at the stake as part of her campaign to cleanse Sunnydale of all things supernatural), or Helpless (when Giles puts his loyalty to the Council above Buffy's own safety and well-being), in As You Were Riley exists primarily to tell us something about Buffy. In Season 3, Buffy was afraid that being a Slayer would ruin her relationship with her mother and that Giles didn't really want to be the replacement father figure she clearly wanted him to be, and those episodes have her fears come true. Both Joyce and Giles act in pretty repellent (and arguably out-of-character) ways in their respective episodes, but those actions are justified in that they are consistent with Buffy's own view of the world. You could replace both of them with nightmare versions of their characters (like Hank Summers in Season 1's Nightmares) and both episodes would play out the same way (and have the same glaring lack of follow-up in later episodes).

So too in As You Were. The writers are probably more sympathetic to Riley than the average Tumblr user in 2024, but they don't particularly care if you like Riley or not. He's not been in the show for a year and after this he's never going to be in it again. This isn't about him. What is important is that Buffy herself misses Riley and her relationship with him: not necessarily because Riley was so great [again, he wasn't: Riley sucks] but because he's a part of her older life that she wishes she could go back to. A time when she had a 'normal' relationship and was still in college (and doing well academically!) and her mom was still alive and things seemed to be going well for her. Because she misses the version of Buffy that she used to be. (Who exactly are we supposed to think the 'you' of As You Were refers to? I don't think it's Agent Finn...)

Sure, I'd personally think better of Riley Finn as a person if he showed up looking sheepish and told Buffy he was sorry for how badly he behaved in Season 5 and he said he'd fund all her future bills and help her get back into college before dedicating the rest of his life to campaigning against both missionary work and US-backed (para)military actions in South and Central America. I'd think better of Joyce if she'd ignored the two demon kids only she could see and supported her real daughter better, too. Or of Giles if he hadn't ever gone along with the plan of hypnotizing and drugging a teenage girl he'd sworn to take care of and protect and who, less than a year earlier, he'd promised his unconditional "support and respect".

But Riley being a decent human being and making Buffy feel better about herself wouldn't make As You Were a "better" episode. It would make it a completely different episode, one that belonged in a completely different season. It would make it something that was utterly at odds, tonally and thematically, with the version of Season 6 that actually exists. This is not a season where nice things happen to Buffy, and if you think it should be I honestly don't think you like the story the season is trying to tell very much.

As You Were is not primarily "the episode where Riley comes back" (in which the writers then decided to talk about how great Riley was with the aim of making the fans like him while Buffy ends up feeling like shit and being embarrassed about how her own life is going as some sort of collateral damage). It is an episode where Buffy continues to feel like shit and be embarrased about how badly her life is going (and, in order to further Buffy's arc, this time Riley is there too to make her feel worse).

Do I think that it works to have Riley fill the role he does in this episode? Well, no, not really. Like I said at the top of this post, I don't like Riley and I don't enjoy seeing him on my television screen. Into The Woods' awful ending makes me pretty angry and it is a shame we never got any pushback on the idea that Buffy "letting Riley go" was a mistake. Riley wasn't ever the perfect boyfriend As You Were has Buffy remember him as. This isn't one of the better episodes of Season 6. But an improved version of the episode wouldn't have Riley act like a better person. That more palatable, more fan-friendly version of Riley just isn't compatible with the story the show is telling. An improved version of the episode that was still trying to tell the same fundamental story wouldn't have Riley Finn in it at all.

[zombolouge]

Self-rec time! What are your favorite five fics that you've written and why? After replying to this ask, pass on to five other writers to spread the love. 💗

THANK YOU, BABE KESLA.

Let's see, my fave fics that I've written...in order of least-to-most read lol

The Traveler, 92k word Dragon Age fic about what Solas was doing prior to waking up and starting all the Problems. Initially approached with the concept of Solas as a nod to Doctor Who, in which he is using a special eluvian to travel the fade and then he picks up companions to travel with along the way. By the end of it I've made everyone's canon my own canon through time shenanigans. This fic took a lot of blood, sweat, and tears to write because the prose is meant to mimic iambic/Shakespearian cadences throughout, so it was by far one of the most technically difficult things I've ever done. I really, REALLY wish the fandom gave it more love because I worked SO hard on it and am very proud of it, but alas. It will have to be one of the greatest things I've ever written that nobody has ever read lolol

Pieces of Us, 14k word Dragon Age oneshot. The story of how Morrigan gave birth to Kieran, juxtaposed with the time after they leave the Inquisition. The fic is split into two POVs at different points in the timeline, with Morrigan's POV being in the past and Kieran's POV being in the present day. lol I did a lot of research to try and get the pregnancy/birth portrayal right, and I'm proud of how it turned out.

Maximum Thrustitude, 43k words of absolute tomfoolery. One time in LA I got sun poisoning and accidentally met Brian Wecht but had no idea who he was, and in the car ride back from that vacation, I hallucinated the novelization of the song 6969 by Ninja Sex Party. A song which is, in itself, fanfiction of the Rush song 2112. This remains one of my favorite things I've ever written, it's so delightfully stupid and yet I still padded out the lore and the story beats so it's not without weight. Another "classic" of mine that nobody has read XD y'all missing out though, this is a 43k word dick joke that will make you have feelings at the end. ;)

No Star Falls Twice, 176k word Mass Effect fic. Technically I should be pointing to the whole series, bc I think it works best if you've followed the full buildup, but even without those little contexts, I think the ME3 fic can stand on it's own. I was really proud of the changes I made to canon and the way I tied it all together, and ending the trilogy of fics gutted me in the best way. Really poured my heart into this one.

Indefensible. 535k words of Ace Attorney fic in which I not only gave everyone in the main cast their own growth arcs, but meticulously plotted cases to solve throughout the fic that had narrative relevance and weight. When I started, I wasn't even sure I could write mystery, and by the time it was done I think I cemented mystery as one of my favorite things to write. I am so. fucking. proud of how it turned out and am profoundly grateful to everyone in the AA fandom that's taken a chance on reading it, because it took SO MUCH deep thinking and work. Balancing mystery plots alongside romance plots is no easy task, but it might be one of my fave tasks ;)

am gonna tag @outerspacejellyfish and @bickeringcrab and @earl-greater and @kmandergirl and @navigatorwrongway (check your inboxes shortly)

[thelordofgifs]

In Defence of the Sons of Fëanor

Wait, again? Yes, always. But not anything really bad! Kinslaying, I hope we can agree, is pretty indefensible. But an accusation I often see levelled against the younger sons - that they failed to rescue Maedhros from Angband out of cowardice/stupidity - is bugging me. So! Before I get a fandom reputation as "the Gil-galad poster", I thought I might write something about a character I actually care about - Maglor! Also his younger brothers, but Maglor is the one I’m particularly invested in defending.

In fic (particularly a lot of Russingon fic) the views I tend to see expressed by characters, and backed up by the narrative, go something like "The Fëanorions heartlessly refused Morgoth's offer to release Maedhros and left their brother to torture for thirty years! Dangling from a cliff in full view of their camp! But then heroic Fingon showed up and immediately rescued him with nothing more than a bow and a harp - he barely even stopped to eat first!"

Firstly, I obviously understand that views expressed by the characters are not that of the author. It is absolutely valid for Fingon to accuse the Fëanorions of cowardice, and completely in-character for Maglor to feel incredibly guilty about not rescuing Maedhros (and in fact a pretty essential part of their dynamic, in my opinion). My issue is with fics that very much imply that this view is the Only Correct One. There are a lot of things Maglor does wrong over the course of the Silm. This is not one of them.

Beginning with the refusal to surrender to Morgoth in exchange for Maedhros’ release - I hope nobody seriously considers this a bad decision? A crushing one, certainly. You can write really sad fic about this (I plan to). But the Noldor had just received an excellent lesson in why trusting Morgoth to parley was a bad idea. They had no reason to believe that Morgoth would actually release Maedhros if they surrendered - which is correct. He wouldn’t have. The published Silm adds, “and they were constrained also by their oath” - incidentally, a fairly compelling point of evidence in favour of the oath being binding in nature to some extent, but not the point here. The point here is that they couldn’t have surrendered to Morgoth, and shouldn’t have anyway.

So, with that out of the way, we can accept that what Maglor et al are being accused of is not refusing to parley with Morgoth, but failing to mount an independent rescue mission.

(Incidentally, it’s generally assumed that Maglor, the second-eldest brother, was the one in charge during Maedhros’ captivity. I usually subscribe to this myself, but I would also like to note that Maglor is not once named during the description of these events. It’s always “the sons of Fëanor”, as a unit. You could make a pretty strong case that they were deciding things together, or even that one of his younger brothers had usurped him somewhat - C&C have form in that area…)

Actually before I move on from Morgoth’s proposed deal, an important question: did Maedhros’ brothers know that he was alive? According to (I think) the Grey Annals, Maedhros was captured in YT 1497, and suspended from Thangorodrim in YT 1498 - presumably after his brothers had refused Morgoth’s offer. That’s potentially around 10 years in which they heard nothing, before Morgoth makes them the offer! Perhaps they reasoned that Morgoth wouldn’t have put such a valuable prisoner to death; perhaps not. It’s doubtful they were offered actual proof that Maedhros was alive, at any rate.

“Sure,” you might say, “but they definitely knew he was alive once they could see him suspended from Thangorodrim!” I can’t actually express how strongly I disagree with this common headcanon. The Fëanorions couldn’t see Maedhros on the cliff! Where did people get this idea from? I presume it’s because of Legolas’ various physics-defying feats of eyesight in LoTR. I would like to make the argument here that there’s no reason to assume Noldor accustomed to the light of the Trees could see as well in the starlight as a Silvan Elf of shadowed Mirkwood, but that’s not really necessary. There’s much stronger evidence pointing clearly to the fact that Maedhros wasn’t visible: Fingolfin’s host marches right up to the gates of Angband and nobody notices him. He even yells for help, and they don’t hear him! There is no way that anyone knew he was there (and the Sun had risen by this stage, too. If he was visible, they’d have seen him.) I’m allergic to geography, so don’t take my word on this, but my understanding is that Thangorodrim is a whole little mountain range or something, not like a single cliff. As additional support for this, Fingon gets lost on his eventual rescue mission (in which he’s trying to break into Angband itself, because that’s where he thinks Maedhros is) and only finds Maedhros when he hears him singing. The Fëanorions were absolutely not spending thirty years going “ooh look clear day today! Give Nelyo a wave!”

The next thing to tackle is the odd implication that rescuing Maedhros was really easy, actually, and his brothers were cowards for not even attempting it. Not only do I think this untrue, I don’t see why you’d want it to be true? Fingon’s rescue of Maedhros is one of the best parts of the silm. It’s moving because Fingon is so so brave, and he’s brave because what he attempted was impossible. There is seriously NO reason why that should have worked, and that’s what’s wonderful about it. Suggesting that Maedhros’ brothers held back from attempting a rescue because of cowardice or not caring about him, and not because it couldn’t be done, imo really devalues the magnitude of Fingon’s act of grace.

On a more practical level, nothing about the description of the rescue mission suggests it was easy and anyone could have done it? I genuinely hate to make this joke but… one does not simply walk into Angband. Fingon is specifically described as “aided by the very darkness that Morgoth had made” - a darkness which, you recall, he had made in response to the light of the new Sun. If you’d tried to walk up to Thangorodrim before Morgoth had made his smog, you’d have been caught! There were orcs there! And probably all manner of other fell beasties! Maedhros absolutely couldn’t have been rescued before the rising of the Sun, and specifically Morgoth’s response to it.

A final point - the somewhat common claim that Fingon immediately, the instant he learned what had befallen Maedhros, set out to rescue him, and didn’t even stop to like, brush his teeth first. This is a nice image! The Russingon feels are unparalleled! Unfortunately, I don’t think the text backs it up. The published silm states that Fingon went to Angband “resolved to heal the feud that divided the Noldor”. This rather strongly implies that Fingon only left on his mission some time after he arrived at Mithrim, since there was clearly time for tensions to arise between the two hosts. One of the Annals (Grey or of Beleriand? I get them mixed up - at any rate, the timeline on Tolkien Gateway) puts this in even starker terms, stating that Fingolfin’s host arrived at Mithrim in Year 2 of the Sun, and Fingon rescued Maedhros in Year 5. That’s three years of waiting around before he set out! Now, you could headcanon that maybe Maglor et al told Fingon that Maedhros was dead, and he only later learned that they meant “captured and we never found a body” - but it’s also possible that he knew Maedhros was a captive the entire time, and still didn’t do anything. Three years is obviously not the same as thirty, but I find this detail interesting even so. It rather muddies the dichotomy of “Maedhros’ brothers didn’t care enough to rescue him, Fingon immediately saved him” that I often see.

tl;dr the Fëanorions weren’t cowards who didn’t love their brother, they were sensible and it’s tragic.

Right I hope that was a fairly measured and reasonable post (it was supposed to be at any rate) so now I can very quickly say how DARE you imply that Maglor didn’t love Maedhros consider how close he settles to Himring consider how he’s the only one Maedhros brings with him to the Mereth Aderthad consider their last debate ie the most heartbreaking dialogue in the entire book consider how he’s right and yet he still follows Maedhros in stealing the Silmarils consider how he only finally breaks after Maedhros’ death you can pry that tender loving codependent relationship from my COLD DEAD HANDS ok I’m normal now :)

[smilesession]

A few years ago I was really staunchly “video games are NOT ART!!” and I tbh think that’s really stupid and indefensible now but I guess kudos to my 19 year old self for being willing to take an unpopular stand even when standing alone or whatever. I didn’t think there was no art involved in games or anything, more so that the product itself was not an art piece even if it does contain art in its constituent parts. Now I think video games can be and do usually constitute a work of art in themselves, but i think it’s a waste of time to deal with them academically at all in a way that positions them alongside film and literature studies. I can only really see the value in studying them more psychologically/sociologically in a similar way as to studying like, altered states of consciousness or gambling addiction. I’ll probably change my mind on this too eventually

[apenitentialprayer]

I was listening to a brief debate between a Protestant and a Catholic about Mary & whether or not she was sinless. I'm not Catholic myself, but I felt that the Catholic didn't represent his position well. The Protestant said that scripture had evidence of Mary sinning. He cited the passage of the Wedding at Cana in John 2, saying that Mary was wrong to ask Jesus to do a miracle when He did not intend to start his ministry yet. Then he cited Luke 1, talking about how Zachariah was punished for doubting the angel Gabriel when he told him he would have a sin. He argued that Mary sinned in the same way by doubting the angel when he told her she would conceive because she was a virgin. Again, I'm not a Catholic so my church doesn't try to argue scripture teaches Mary was sinless. But I didn't see the Protestant's citations as proof that Mary's sins were recorded in scripture. I think those verses show that Mary is human and not omniscient. What's your take.

Another thing mentioned in the debate was whether or not Mary needed to be conceived without sin in order to have Jesus. The Catholic said Mary could not carry Jesus in sin. The Protestant said that if Mary had to be sinless to conceive the sinless Jesus, then Mary's parents would have to be sinless in order to conceive her. When the Catholic said this didn't apply to Mary, the Protestant replied by saying that in that case, Mary was a greater "god" than Jesus because she could be born sinless from sinful parents. Have you come across this sort of argument in the past?

Hello! Going to answer this kind of quickly, because I would like to go to sleep soon.

I think using John 2 as an example of Mary sinning is an objectively stupid argument, especially in light of Jesus using the Parables of the Persistent Widow and Friend at Midnight in Luke 18 and Luke 11, respectively, in order to say something about the nature of justification and prayer, respectively. Mary continues to plead with her Son, and then tells the servants to "do whatever [God] tells you." If Mary is sinning in this verse, so is every Christian who ever persists in praying for an intention that isn't answered right away.

I think that using Luke 1 is a better potential argument, at least at first glance, because (at first glance) it does in fact seem that Mary is doing just what Zachariah did and was punished for. But, if they are qualitatively similar responses.... why is Zachariah punished, but Mary not? The Church Fathers make their opinion clear; in the words of Maximus of Turin, Zachariah is "unbelieving," and Mary "believing." Zachariah does not believe that it is possible for his wife to get pregnant, while Mary wonders how she will get pregnant when she has not touched a man. It's a difference of scoffing at the miracle vs. wondering how the miracle will be accomplished. This is a view also held by Saints Ambrose, Augustine, Bede, and Justin Martyr.

I think the Catholic commentator made a blunder by trying to defend the (indefensible) claim that Mary needed to be sinless to carry Christ in her womb; I really don't think that you can make an argument for necessity for the Immaculate Conception, but rather an argument for its fittingness. I have seen people argue for its necessity (something not even the Blessed Duns Scotus, champion of the Immaculate Conception belief, did), but I think that it is mostly an attempt to double-down on the doctrine and emphasize its importance rather than a well thought out argument for its truthfulness.

[todayisafridaynight]

I’m have a feeling people really hate Ryo…

and they are so right to do so he sucks

[tozettastone]

I think my ideal "Merlin is Banished" fic is actually Merlin and Gwaine and Lancelot ("You got banished from Camelot? Same hat!") having really stupid adventures defending the indefensible defenceless and drinking too much while Arthur dodges assassination attempts very sadly in Camelot.

[ghostofbambifanfiction]

a juicer EBTKS snippet because I feel bad for being AWOL from posting for months

"So you decided that the best course of action was to humiliate me too, yeah?"

"Yes, yes I did, and it was disgusting and indefensible and the biggest regret of my life," she immediately retorts, straight up and flat out, not a whiff of detectable bullshit anywhere. "But I did it and I can't take it back—I would if I could, I'd take it back in a heartbeat, but I can't—all I can do is tell you how endlessly fucking sorry I am, but you don't want to hear it."

He wants to scoff and crow and tell her he doesn't believe her.

But the thing is…

The thing is, it's just… well it's all so typically Lily of her, isn't it? Or the Lily she is now, at least. She doesn't mince her words or hide what she thinks or labour under manipulative pretences, she just says things, things that are scrubbed raw and forthright and stripped clean of motive and guile, things that hit him like a five knuckle punch to the throat.

James doesn't want to scoff and crow. He's never wanted to. Not really.

He just… god, but he'd do anything to kiss her.

He wants to kiss her like he's never wanted to kiss anyone before in his life, and he wants to kiss Lily every waking minute, but always in a passion that verges on rage, not the way he wants to kiss her now; not with languid, reverential tenderness, not with her face cradled in his hands or silky hair slipping through his fingers, not without first pressing his lips to her ear and telling her secrets of his own that are warm and true and as unafraid as she is, that those two weeks without her felt like falling from a height and being winded, that even at her worst she was the best part of his day, and how completely and utterly pathetically he loves that stupid nickname.

Because he does love that stupid fucking nickname.

The train rocks violently and he wobbles on a pair of shaking knees, inadvertently bumping his chest against hers, but Lily doesn't break the hold she has on him with her eyes. The reality of being so close to her, shut up here in this small space where no one else can reach them, is swirling all around him like fumes of deadly poison. She's gazing up at him as if every thought inside his head is something she can read, and doesn't altogether find distasteful.

"Do you want to hear it?" she asks, quietly.

[1425fivefive]

Sorry for idiots in your inbox, Max fans are chronically unable to shut up, their egos won’t allow it

it's so goofy to come into my inbox when i literally am not a fan of max or lando. like i'm a ferrari/lewis fan until my dying breath. zero dog in this fight! from a sporting point of view, i don't really care about either of those guys winning or losing, sorry!

i do care about combatting misinformation online, and i feel like so much lando hate is unjustified. like i will be the first to say lando's had some stupid, indefensible comments, but i feel like people wilfully misunderstand him a lot of the time just to fit a narrative they have about him in their heads. and, like, that's their right, but not in my inbox

[empyrean-thrones]

Do you think Rebecca was inspired by any real world cultures when she was writing about Poromiel? I was wondering if she was vaguely inspired by Central Asian or Indigenous cultures mostly because of the mounted archery culture and the Poromish exports of unique textiles and grain and gems.

Rebecca is pretty clueless and careless when it comes to respectfully representing real world cultures, we saw that with the way she used the Gaelic language in the books. Do you think there will ever be a point in the next few years where Rebecca might say “yes I was inspired by ____ culture when writing about Poromiel”? Or do you think she will avoid that conversation so she can avoid accountability if it becomes glaringly obvious that she is probably lazily misrepresenting yet another culture?

I don’t know how to feel about it if Rebecca is actually inspired by Central Asian or Indigenous culture. On one hand, Rebecca does not seem to be a very mindful and informed person when it comes to non ignorant representation, but on the other hand, I enjoy the Poromish characters and the concept of Poromiel and I would love to see more Central Asian and Indigenous representation in the media if Rebecca is coached through how to do it respectfully. Avatar the Last Airbender manages to represent real cultures in a fantasy world pretty respectfully. I do not think a respectful representation of real world cultures is impossible, both in the book and the tv show if it ever happens. What are your thoughts? Do you think it would be too bold and a bad idea for Rebecca to say that Poromiel is heavily inspired by Asian or Indigenous culture or something like that?

I would love it if she was at least vaguely inspired by Asian culture, but considering the way Poromiel is written makes me uneasy.

See how Tàirn and Vi react to Cordyn:

“See that sorry excuse for a fortress on the eastern side of the farthest peak?” [Tairn] asks…“You mean the palace that looks like it’s glowing?” The structure is a sprawling, glistening combination of white pillars and blue pools that cascade in five distinct terraces down the gentle slope of the hills above the beach. “It’s just the sun reflecting off the white marble,” he grumbles. “The entire thing is ridiculous and indefensible.” How… beautiful. What a luxury to build a place like this, designed purely for aesthetics. No high walls or portcullises. Tairn’s right. It’s utterly indefensible, and it will fall should venin choose to take it…” — Iron Flame, Chapter 40

My immediate thought upon reading that was: “oh, it’s probably just a vacation home. The Viscount’s real house is probably more fortified.” But Violet never really has similar thoughts so maybe I’m just smarter than her.

Why would she consider it a luxury to build a place designed for aesthetics when her country’s safely protected by a giant magic wall and should have tons of buildings made for aesthetics? You’d think she was raised poor but her mom’s the general of the army and it’s mentioned how riders get better pay/perks so like…? 🤨 I don’t mind Cordyn being beautiful looking; I think it’s much better than just describing Poromiel as simply a war torn country, but this excerpt makes it seem like their stupid for wanting to use their wealth to show off their artistry and culture.

They have their own gods but we never hear anything about them or what their names are. Poromiel has two geographical landmarks that are named after the Navarrian pantheon (Dunness River and Bay of Malek) which is really weird considering Navarre doesn’t seem to influence Poromish culture as far as I’m aware.

And then there’s the poor gryphons. Tàirn calls them inferior twice.

“The gryphon ahead of us dips into a sharp descent and Tairn follows suit, tucking his wings and getting just close enough to the gryphon to let him know he’s no match. “Stop intimidating them.” The last thing we need is an incident before we can even ask Tecarus for the luminary. “I can’t help their inferiority.” There’s a definite smile in his tone…” — IF, Chapter 40

This is in response to Syrena and Brennan telling the riders to show an ounce of sympathy for the fliers on the way up the Medaro Pass:

“I wouldn’t risk either of you.” “Of course you wouldn’t. Why would you, when I’m quite capable of carrying you all over the world?” I can feel [Tairn’s] eyes roll. “You did not bond the inferiority that are gryphons. You bonded dragons.” — IF, Chapter 43

The way they’re written is, quite frankly, rooted in stupidity. The magical creatures who are part bird can’t fly at high altitudes, don’t produce signets, and are slower fliers than dragons. But don’t worry! They can run really fast on the ground!

Okay. So they should have ostrich legs, right? They should be part ostrich instead of eagles if that’s the case since eagle legs aren’t designed for running long distances.

This one comment on YouTube said it best about the gryphon nonsense:

But to get back to Rebecca Yarros and Poromiel being based off Central Asia and Indigenous cultures, I don’t think she has the balls to admit she was inspired by them because of the backlash to her mispronounciation of Scots Gaelic words and her Instagram post on the current ongoing genocide. She hasn’t said a word regarding Palestine after that so I doubt she’ll say anything relating to the topic in the future unless absolutely necessary.

I’m hoping the tv series does Poromiel justice by actually exploring the culture and lore instead of brushing past it like the books do. Maybe in the next three books we’ll get more gryphon lore but my expectations are low rn.

[cosmicjoke]

what is your take about the alliance going against Eren? Because a lot of people called them traitors and hypocrites because they are trying to save the world that hated them, killed their own people, allied with the warriors that tried to kill them at first. Even the alliance realized that letting Eren win would benefit them at the end but still decided to go after him because people didn’t deserve what’s happening to them. Do you think they were right in their position to stop Eren? Would it be a good idea to let Paradis island the only nation alive in the world?

I’m asking this because I keep seeing people saying that Eren wasn’t left with any choice and that the world deserved to die because of their oppression to the eldians and that the alliance just kept the problem going by the saving the rest of world.

what do you think?

Anyone who defends what Eren did is a moral idiot, I don't know what else to say. They're literally defending genocide, which is utterly indefensible. They completely miss the entire point of the story, and prove themselves to be morally bankrupt to boot. I don't want to even hear from anyone stupid enough to defend Eren's actions, or anyone claiming that the alliance "kept the problem going" by stopping Eren. If they really believe that a nation filled with radicalized, fearmongering fanatics who felt no qualms about using violence and threats of death to make people comply with their rule wouldn't have eventually just torn each other apart, then they're complete morons. These themes are clear and demonstrated again and again throughout the story. How, exactly, do they think the Eldian Empire fell to begin with? It was because of a power struggle within the empire itself. The same thing would have happened on Paradis, even if the rest of the world had been destroyed. In fact, the same thing DID happen to Paradis. The island was wiped out because of their isolationist, fanatical militarism and nationalism. They became a warring nation, and so eventually were destroyed by war.

The people in the alliance didn't betray anything. The cause of the Survey Corps was always to save humanity. Not Paradis, or the people of Paradis, but humanity as a whole. The Yeagerists took that and perverted and betrayed that ideal completely when they decided that it was okay to wipe out the rest of the world to save themselves. They were the traitors, not the alliance.

So, yes, I don't think, I know the alliance took the right position. There's no defending genocide. People that come away from this story thinking otherwise, or who actually think that's what the story was saying are too dumb to live, I swear to god.