#and are living concepts and fundamental facets of living in the world

[shellem15]

One thing I’ve seen people talking about as a possible solution to the whole gods issue is turning the gods mortal—permanently.

Remove the throne entirely. Put gods and mortals on the same playing field. This option does have one obvious benefit: if the gods are like everybody else, then the damage they can inflict is severely reduced.

But I don’t think this is as clean an answer as people think it is, for multiple reasons. My first question would be “what happens to clerics and paladins?” Now, we know that divine magic exists outside the gods, but the vast majority of clerics and paladins (aka our primary healers) get their magic from gods. I imagine learning how to harness that magic outside the gods would be a pretty steep learning curve, so removing that source of power would cause a whole boatload of issues for healthcare in Exandria.

Another problem would be the mass amounts of social upheaval due to the loss of these divine figures. Wars would be fought, communities destroyed, massive power vacuums opened— thousands would die if the gods were destroyed (or made mortal.) Not to mention, the power vacuums and violence opened up on planes other than Exandria. Celestials and angels would be leaderless and directionless, demons would be free to wreak havoc on other planes. Devils are explicitly kept in line by the Lord of the Hells, without him to control them, what effect would the resulting power-struggle have on Exandria and the rest of the planes?

My third question would be how this change would effect their domains? I don’t think it would erase them entirely, the world is here and here to stay, but much like the social upheaval I think there would be much upheaval in how Exandria functions. The domains the gods rule over would be left on their own, with no one to guide or direct them. This, I imagine, would have its own set of benefits and drawbacks.

My fourth question is, would turning the current gods mortal prevent new gods from ascending? Or would it just leave the throne open, like Ashton said. Unless the concept of godhood was removed entirely, wouldn’t this problem just repeat itself? With no guarantee that those new gods will be at all merciful or tolerant towards mortals. Additionally, I have to ask what this would mean for near-godly entities. What about Archfey, Archdevils, Demon Lords, Archangels, and other Demi-powers? Where do they fit in this new order? They give spells, have worshippers, hold powers greater than mortals could imagine. How much power is too much power to have when it is fundamental to one’s nature?

I want to take a moment to talk about a scene from the Witch, the Wizard, and the Wild One, which is run by Bleem himself and has Lou Wilson, Erika Ishii, and Aabria Iyengar as players (which you should definitely check out it’s so good y’all). Heavy Spoilers for Arc 1 ahead:

In the city of Port Talon, our heroes learn that the wizards of the Citadel have imprisoned the great spirit of the ocean, Naram, underneath the barracks out in the harbor. Naram is a gentle spirit, and has been holding back from freeing himself, because he knows that in doing so he would destroy Port Talon. Naram’s wife, Orima of the Reaching Green, is not a gentle spirit, and has been encircling the city with deadly kudzu to try to free Naram. Eursulon, one of our heroes, frees Naram but gets trapped in his place. Naram stays to free Eursulon in turn, and has a moment of decision to make. Ame, the Witch of the World’s Heart, can influence this decision. Either Naram can sacrifice himself to free Eursulon, destroying himself but sparing Citadel forces. Or, he can choose to destroy the barracks, freeing Eursulon but damming the Citadel Wizards and their forces.

Ame and Naram chose violence, and the barracks are destroyed. The scene is truly horrifying, the destruction and death extraordinary even while Naram is being as precise as he can be. He is simply too vast a being to be delicate amongst humanity, despite all his efforts. He still loves Port Talon, still chooses mercy whenever he can. He is just on another playing field entirely.

I want to note, however, that the vastness of his being doesn’t make him evil. It doesn’t make Orima evil, despite her propensity for extreme violence and antagonism towards our heroes. They think a lot like humans, but aren’t human. Their morality is not the same as ours, and that informs their actions. Naram’s destruction would have, perhaps, reduced the net violence that occurred. But it also would have removed a source of great magic and wonder from the world, one that could never have been gotten back. Who are we to destroy or change a being simply because they do not play by our rules? Simply because they act in accordance to their nature and are greater than us?

(Spoilers over)

The last question I want to ask is one more about the personal ethics in turning the gods mortal. Because if you think about it for a minute, it’s really fucked up actually. This isn’t reappropriating wealth from a rich person, this is fundamentally changing the gods’ nature. Likely by force for a lot of them. And I’m sorry, there are so many ethical issues with that.

It’s important to keep in mind, while the gods are quite human-like, they aren’t human. The gods we see in downfall are a fraction of their true power and their true selves, filtered through a mortal lens. They are messy and emotional and have complex feeling and emotions but they are also greater concepts like nature and law and destruction. You cannot separate these two sides of them, you cannot separate the mortal from the divine. To do so would fundamentally change their beings, and that has absolutely horrifying implications.

I’m reminded of a scene from the Last Unicorn, where the unicorn wakes up in a human body. She is horrified, weeping and crying about what she has lost. She can feel her body is different, it’s wrong, it’s dying around her and she can do nothing to stop it. Her mind is human and her memory of her life before fades. She becomes a unicorn again by the end of the movie, but she is forever changed. Forever burdened by knowing love and loss and pain. Something she was never supposed to know.

What would happen if you removed Asha from the Wildmother? You are being that is one with the world and knows the roots of every plant, can hear the beating of every animal’s heart, are interwoven with the mountains and the forests and the rivers and the seas. And then, suddenly, all of that is gone. Suddenly you exist solely within a body of flesh and bone, one that ages and dies, one that forgets the life before. You cannot feel the roots, you cannot hear the heartbeats, the mountains and the forests and the rivers and the seas are no longer yours. Are no longer you. Would that be more or less horrifying than becoming real, do you think?

In some ways, you are capable of changing, now. You can be anything. But you are no longer eternal. You are limited in the scope of what is you. And isn’t that another horror?

Congratulations, the gods are mortal. You’re on the same playing field, but the world has lost a great source of magic and wonder. You have changed them. I hope it was worth it.

Maybe Tishar is right. We really do love destroying things we don’t understand.

In the end, I don’t think there are any clear or clean answers here. Everything is going to be messy, there’s always going to be someone left unsatisfied. I’m just laying out my thoughts on the matter, and why turning the gods human isn’t as clean a solution as people seem to think it is.

[lurkinginnernarrator]

You know, genuinely, the transmigration setting of svsss fascinates me. Shen Yuan adapts remarkably quickly (makes you want to explore exactly how attached he felt to his home in the first place? An interesting thought for another time.) but I have to wonder, how does his past shape his psyche?

I'm sure most people are familiar with nature vs nurture, and that the situation you were raised in shapes you fundamentally as a person (It doesn't define you though.) . Moreso, the culture you were raised in, and participated in, contributed to and perpetuated.

I think it can be easily argued that the world of 'PIDW' moves differently to Shen Yuan's modern day China. I think there is some bleed-through or carry-over, but the cultures are different. (Perhaps with Modern Day as the 'mother culture' to PIDW, seeing as Shang Qinghua may or mayn't be the creator of said world.)

If you take the same culture at different points in time even, the cultural mindset and cultural awareness ( I like to think of it like a portfolio lol), there will be a marked difference. You just have to wonder the difference of perspectives, not even from a character point of view, but culturally.

And! You have to marvel at the fact that Shen Yuan adapted as well as he did! He was speedrunning integrating into a new culture! I mean sure, he had foreknowledge of the world, but knowledge of, say a different country is not the same as learning to truly live there.

I can have knowledge of a foreign country, know it's stories and songs, it's celebrities, traditions and way of governance: the climate, the flowers and the pathways of its waters.

Yet, that would not make integrating into the culture any less eye-opening and educational. It would not make me any less of a student to that culture I'm learning.

This isn't even bringing up that there are multiple cultures in Shen Yuan's PIDW.

I won't argue that Shen Yuan could navigate all these cultures well or easily, but that he did at all is fascinating. Shang Qinghua does have a few legs up, being the author and getting a PIDW childhood.

Shen Yuan's different cultural perspective, I would like to posit, is another reason the Cang Qiong Peak Lords got suspicious. The difference in personality could only be highlighted by Shen Yuan's different cultural foundation. He's operating from an absolutely different place than Shen Jiu!

Anyway, this contrast and concept, this facet of svsss delights me and I enjoy rotating it in my mind.

It seems that this just turned into a SY appreciation post. But what can I say? The funky dude deserves it.

[shadowtraveled]

what TMA entities would you assign the dungeon lords, esp mithrun? was discussing this (bc marcille is sooo End) and consulting your Seminal Mithrun Meta when i remembered you also went here!

anon i want you to know i was thinking about this nonstop like two weeks ago oh my god. i’d love to hear your thoughts on this if you’re so inclined 👁‍🗨 (and wheeze thank you i don’t know about seminal but i’m glad it passed peer review)

putting a readmore here for spoilers

to preface this, i understand the fears aren’t really separate and it’s all just fear etc but they function as distinct in the way the demons do and in the sense that they each had to mark jon to come into the world. so. distinctive facets of a unified whole. anyway i have two criteria for assigning someone a tma entity: it has to be something they deeply fear, and it has to be something they choose anyway.

and with that being said, marcille is SO end-aligned in a very gentle and chill way i think fits the end so nicely… her intense fear of death is sort of a fear of loss, which would typically be considered the desolation’s domain, especially when coupled with her aptitude for explosion/fire magic and the part of her arc where she tries to expand the dungeon, but she wasn't choosing destruction or hopelessness in either of those cases—there’s something to be said for the carnage she was willing to leave in her wake, but at the end of the day she was trying to eliminate loss. she's fundamentally incompatible with the desolation because she continually rejects it, and the loss itself doesn't form the core of her fear. the inevitability of death, though, does, and she accepts it when she gives up the dungeon and lets falin go. absolutely the end.

i think thistle is another easy designation. he clings to control to the point it corrupts him, and he creates an environment that forbids death, but his desire is not for control and his fear is not of death or loss—those are delgal's. instead, his fear that he won't be able to measure up to the too-large too-heavy responsibility placed on his shoulders is what drives him, and because we know it drives him, we know that he takes it on anyway. he even brings melini underground. extremely the buried.

laios, meanwhile. is difficult for me to assign. his fears (rejection, ostracism, that he isn't able to connect with people, that he hates people) feel very lonely, and he does withdraw from people a fair amount, but he has connections he does not and would not choose to sever. you could make an argument for the hunt (he's drawn to not only monsters but the concept of the food chain itself and his place on it as a part of the natural world, and he ends the series with the object of his fascination out of his reach), but i don't think there's enough fear there. in laios' case, the lack of strict definition between fears and the idea that they're all just muddled subcategories of a singular thing is actually really helpful, because i think i'm assigning him to the vast. it was said at some point that the vast and the lonely aren't too dissimilar—you won't realize how alone you are without distance, and that sort of mental/emotional distance and disconnect is what has haunted laios his entire life. and i think that's, in part, what makes the cosmic insignificance of seeing yourself as just another part of your environment so comforting to him. his choices... definitely make him cosmically significant lmfao but even though he chooses to be the one to go up against Infinity Itself and its endless hunger and even though he chooses to be king, he fits himself right back into the position of being a single piece of a much larger puzzle. he became lord of the dungeon to become a part of the food chain that would stand a chance to preserve it (via eating the demon's hunger). he's king because there was a gap that needed to be filled. even then, he wants his body to be scattered after death, so that he can be devoured like any other living thing would be. god i love this manga. anyway, tentative but i think the vast is the only thing i can justify at this time. actually, accepting the hunger of the infinite could itself be seen as accepting the vast into himself…….

and finally, mithrun! surprising absolutely nobody given my take on his backstory, i'd give him to the lonely, with the caveat that he does eventually sever his connection to it. prior to becoming lord of a dungeon, we know he thought the worst of people (and again i think this was intentional of him), but we also know he put up a front that was undeniably kind. milsiril says that everyone loved him for the front, but its very existence acted as a barrier between himself and others: milsiril had no idea how miserable he was, and neither did anyone else. he'd already begun choosing isolation, and he chose it ultimately when he became lord of a dungeon, literally cutting himself off from everyone in a pocket dimension where he surrounded himself with facsimiles of people he loved until... they dwindled. and they did, until he was alone again, with only the demon and the unresponsive chimera construction of the person he considered to be the one he loved. after he was eaten, we see themes of emptiness typical of the lonely coupled with his disconnection from his team—in one of the extras it says they don't really know how to approach him, and i think it shows. so in a way, he ends up back where he started: surrounded by people who care about him and who he ostensibly cares about in return, but emotionally alone. as for fear, i think a lot of his are tied up in the concept of insignificance, but that insignificance isn't cosmic—it's personal. that's why watching himself be replaced was so unbearable for him and why the thought of being left unfinished was so horrific.

as an aside, i did also consider the corruption. the idea of leftovers abandoned carries the connotation of rot and i love the concept of 'the rot within you' etc. it gets me every time, and i think there's something to be said about that with regard to the way mithrun views the person he once was. furthermore, the... eating... scene... is framed as sexual and extremely invasive (and, as a result of the combination, is very evocative of disgust) in a way we see most often with the corruption (though imo tma would never see something like this as it toes the line of jonny's "no sexual trauma horror" rule too closely), and we have to remember that for all that it terrified mithrun, he was trying to get it to happen again. but i don't think disgust is enough of a factor for him. most of his disgust is aimed at himself, and while he doesn't shy away from it, he isn't really drawn to it either. rather, i think his dialogue in the extra comic in the complete edition of the adventurer's bible ("there's nothing so kind as a demon. suddenly losing that kind of love opens a hole in your heart[...]") goes a long way in terms of defining what being eaten meant to him. the corruption focuses on a feeling of belonging and community. mithrun wanted to disappear forever knowing that in the last moment he lived he was loved. ultimately, the fear of being abandoned coupled with his attraction to being unknown and eventually entirely gone read as lonely-aligned to me.

anyway i'd LOVE to hear where you're at with this please come chat literally whenever this is the most excited i’ve ever been about anything

[whispersosoftly]

In Defense of Hot Dog Fingers

There is something about EEAAO that makes it fundamentally impossible for me to condense into a manner I feel is concise-yet-informative enough to adequately state my opinion. The movie itself is addressing so many different-yet-important facets of the main character (Evelyn)’s life that to describe one requires the description of them all. This movie is a narrative about parenting, queerness, undiagnosed ADHD, broken families, generational trauma, marriage, failed marriage, and deep depression. It talks, in a very genuine manner, the sensation of being an immigrant, of being out of place both at home and afar. It talks of having to deal with the elder generation in a way that is respectful to the old and the new. Like all things in life, it is messy. It is sharp and brilliant and disorganized. And it is queer. 

The Hot Dog Fingers section of EEAAO is one of the most viscerally unnerving portions of fiction I’ve had the pleasure to experience in quite some time. We follow Evelyn’s romance with her IRS agent, Diedre, as they navigate their life together as a lesbian romance in a universe where human beings have hot dogs for fingers. We see a “sex” scene of Evelyn and Diedre ejaculating mustard and ketchup into one another’s mouths. Jamie Lee Curtis (or a body double) play the piano with their toes. It’s a distinct and intentional diversion from the other universes we see Evelyn inhabit, where she is a chef, a singer, a scientist. Here, Evelyn falls in love with a woman. Here, Evelyn has a normal life. Here, Evelyn learns what love means in a way that is alien to both her and the audience. 

The Hot Dog Fingers world is, in many ways, representative of Evelyn’s internalized homophobia and her lack of understanding of her daughter’s romance with her girlfriend, Becky. The concept of lesbianism– of lesbian sex, of lesbian romance, can only exist in Evelyn’s world in the same way that humans could evolve to have hot dogs for fingers. It’s a specific, marked moment in the narrative where Evelyn is forced to learn to recognize that love can be unrecognizable.

It can often be easy for parents or adults to assume that a particular perspective or lived experience is the way that things are done. Many times has ‘my parents did it to me, and I turned out fine’ been cited as an excuse for corporal punishment, for the restriction of privileges, or for the deliberate choice to not acknowledge a minor or younger person’s identity. In this narrative, Evelyn is allowed to experience love from outside her wheelhouse, in a manner that would never have been expected or made available to her. Hot Dog Fingers is the reason why Evelyn is able to approach Joy’s relationships with the confidence and knowledge that her daughter is pursuing her happiness, whatever that happiness may mean for her. 

The second portion of this essay will concern itself with the sections devoted to being a rock. I feel it has an importance to the narrative as a whole as well as to the cohesion of the film itself. I will approach the cohesion of the film first, as I think it will lend itself toward explaining the narrative. 

Some films, most notably to my mind Mad Max: Fury Road, rely on endless, thumping, writhing action. The entire film is set in a broad, open desert. The entire film is a chase sequence. There are no breaks. The rig cannot stop, or the heroes will be caught and likely die. They must reach the place where the mothers sleep. They must reach the end point. They must meet their goal. 

Halfway through the film, the illusion of a green sanctuary is shattered, and for about ten to fifteen minutes, there is stillness. The baking sun sets. The rig moves, but the story can breathe. People talk. There is a moment or five to resolve oneself toward the eventual rising action and climax.

This stillness in narrative allows the viewer a moment of rest. One hundred and twenty minutes of constant action is enough to numb a viewer to the spectacle of it all. Movies like the Fast & Furious franchise or Mission Impossible rely on these spectacles to draw in viewership, but without built in narrative pit stops, it’s just a fireworks display of meaningless lights and fire. 

The rock segments of EEAAO fulfill that narrative pitstop for the viewer. Almost all sound cease. Almost all movement ceases as well. There is no spoken dialogue, only subtitles that display in clear, large block lettering. EEAAO is relentless in the way that it introduces and supplements new visuals, and the two sections of rock are literal anchoring points that allow the viewer and the characters to breathe and to coalesce into their respective identities.

As a person with ADHD, I often find myself in a life that feels loud. Sounds, sights, sensations all clump and pile onto one another in ways that can be at times frustrating or obstructive. The actual, palpable relief I felt at the first rock sequence allowed me to think through all I’d seen and actually process the narrative. The silence was comforting to me. It literally felt like being put under a blanket and allowed to think during a busy day. 

In terms of narrative, this is as close to suicidal ideation as the story toes. Joy wants to stop. Life and everything hurts her! She receives no support from her parents despite being told that they love her. She wants to cease. To be inorganic matter, unable to be hurt. She wants to have a literal, immovable, inviolable distance between herself and her mother. It’s a visual representation of the shattered relationship she has with Evelyn, and of her own measure of despair at ever crossing that gap.

The second use of the rocks is different, because by this point in the narrative, Evelyn can see Joy. Evelyn can see Joy’s pain. Evelyn can see that Joy’s feelings of isolation and of abandonment, while real, are surmountable. Evelyn takes that step and rewrites the world for her daughter. Evelyn looks at all the misunderstanding and trauma heaped onto her by Gong Gong and she says no. I will not do this to my Joy. I will not allow my pain and disappointment to carry on through her. 

It feels as though every portion of EEAAO is a bit like a cotton boll, where I can tease and tug and pull at each individual fluff until my little narrative becomes a pile of interconnected thoughts, sensations, and experiences. Evelyn’s life and the multitudinous ways in which that life can be expressed cannot be covered in just these two scenes, but I feel the importance of those scenes vastly outweigh the jarring nature they may have to the viewer.

Thank you for reading. :)

[talonabraxas]

Nataraja ॐ

The symbolism of Nataraja, the Cosmic Dancer

The Cosmic Dancer The cosmic dance is the dance of life itself, including creation, preservation, destruction of the entire universe and spiritual grace to understand and go beyond to liberation.

In Hinduism, the objective of life is not to go to heaven but to attain liberation, which means to understand the true nature of ourselves beyond the ego-person that we are familiar with.

I have always wondered why dance was chosen as the art to represent this, not music, painting, poetry, sculpture or any other art. In my view, it may be because dance is the only art that cannot stand by itself without the artist.

One can observe and enjoy paintings, sculptures, poetry and even listen to music, but there is no dance without the dancer being present and visible in the moment. It is a powerful way of showing God is immanent in all of creation. The creator and creation are inseparable.

Ring of Fire

Shiva’s dance is set within a ring of cosmic fire, prabha mandala, which represents time (which destroys everything) and which is shown as a circle to symbolize the Hindu belief that time is cyclical and without end.

Within the cosmos represented by the ring of fire, the form of Nataraja is seen as comprised of five concepts:

Srishti, creation, evolution Sthiti, preservation, support Samhara, destruction, evolution Tirobhava, illusion Anugraha, release, emancipation, grace

Srishti His upper right hand holds a small hourglass shaped drum (damaru) that makes the primal sounds of creation Shrishti.

There is this interesting idea in Hinduism that creation originates as sound, as vibration. Fritjof Capra found echoes of quantum theory in this, where all matter is vibrating at the atomic level.

Here are a couple of extracts from Fritjof Capra’s The Tao of Physics:

“The Dance of Shiva symbolizes the basis of all existence. At the same time, Shiva reminds us that the manifold forms in the world are not fundamental, but illusory and ever-changing. Modern physics has shown that the rhythm of creation and destruction is not only manifest in the turn of the seasons and in the birth and death of all living creatures, but is also the very essence of inorganic matter.

“According to quantum field theory, the dance of creation and destruction is the basis of the very existence of matter. Modern physics has thus revealed that every subatomic particle not only performs an energy dance, but also is an energy dance; a pulsating process of creation and destruction. For the modern physicists then, Shiva’s dance is the dance of subatomic matter, the basis of all existence and of all natural phenomena.”

In recognition of this profound and seamless bridging of mythology, religion, science and the ever-changing universe, a large bronze Nataraja stands at CERN, Switzerland, home to the Large Hadron Collider and the main home of modern research into particle physics.

Sthiti His lower right hand makes the abhaya mudra. It is the gesture of fearlessness or protection for his devotees. It also indicates preservation/support for the cosmos

Samhara His upper left hand holds a blazing flame or agni, symbolizing his power of destruction.

The way both creation and destruction are held in the dance pose signifies the balance between the two.

There is another interesting aspect of balance as well, that’s not often discussed.

Nataraja has different earrings in each ear. On the right ear is an earring in the shape of a crocodile, usually worn by men. His left ear has a traditional circular earring worn by women. The divine can be seen as male, female, both, and neither, another facet of Hinduism.

Tirobhava His right foot is on a dwarf, personifying human ego, ignorance and spiritual illusion which he keeps under control. This is the act of tirobhava or veiling — that is, reality is veiled from our understanding.

The serpent around his neck represents both our evil tendencies but also the coiled kundalini shakti within us (those interested in yoga would likely have come across the term kundalini).

Anugraha Anugraha, grace and emancipation, is indicated by the combination of the lower left hand, which points toward his upraised foot, showing the way to moksha in surrendering to the lord.

The uplifted left leg is revealing grace, which releases the mature soul from bondage. Hindus touching the feet of their elders in respect is an echo of God’s feet being considered holy.

[lassieposting]

Chinhands

Okay so like, long post incoming, but here me out:

This isn’t my first post on Astarion & CPTSD – there’s this one here, about some of the more obvious symptoms he might end up dealing with during his healing journey; there’s also this one, about some ways his lover might use magic to help support him in a world without therapy; and then there’s this one, which is headcanons rather than meta, but has my thoughts on vampires as camouflage predators, and how Astarion might change physically as he goes from starving to well-fed. Those kinda tie into this so, linked for easy context.

But those posts all focus on the visible aspects of CPTSD – the symptoms everyone around you can pick up on. And. The thing is. A lot of the longterm effects of extensive trauma are actually not outwardly obvious. They're quiet. Insidious. Fundamental facets of your worldview become warped and twisted by your traumatic experiences. You look at the world - or at least, the parts of the world affectd by your trauma - through a goddamn funhouse mirror, and that's your normal. And part of the healing process - I'll pause here for us all to share a collective bitter laugh - is realising just how broken your idea of How The World Works is, and having to relearn from the ground up how things actually function outside of your trauma bubble.

So, y’all know what I think Astarion would struggle with without even realising it?

Disordered eating. A messy, complicated, love-hate relationship with food and how feeding makes him feel about himself.

Like. Most living things are hardwired to avoid certain negative experiences. A creature that has starved will often hoard food to ensure they won’t starve again. A creature that has fallen from a great height and experienced physical pain will be more careful to avoid other falls in future. A social creature that has experienced humiliation or disgrace will be distressed by those feelings, and adjust their behaviour to try and avoid feeling them again. The more bad experiences we have with a specific stimulus – drinking blood, in Astarion's case - the more we associate that stimulus with the negative physical or emotional consequences we will suffer, and the more avoidant we are likely to become.

As a real life example: an autistic child who talks enthusiastically about her special interest and is met with mockery and social rejection by her classmates will learn to hide her authentic self from the world to try and fit in: the pain of the bullying motivates her to distance herself from her own autistic tendencies, which are an essential component of how her brain works. She ends up trapped between her deep desire to engage with her special interest, and the training she has received from her peers that to do so is bad, unacceptable, social suicide. She learns to hate her autistic behaviours for causing her to be bullied, but she still feels the need to engage in them.

Astarion is in the same boat. He craves blood anyway as a vampire, and the hunger is made all the more intense because he is starving. But for the first 200-ish years of his undeath, we know that feeding has been a deeply unpleasant experience for him, and that will have left a deep imprint on how he sees the act of feeding, how it makes him feel. To eat is one of the most basic instincts of every single living (and, in this case, undead) creature, a fundamental source of positive emotions (satisfaction, fullness, satiety, enjoyment, happy taste buds etc) with a massive impact on a creature's quality of life - and Cazador has gleefully warped and twisted the very concept into an attack on his spawns' personhood. He uses it to dehumanize and humiliate them, and that's all they've ever known. So they will have learned to associate feeding with deeply negative emotions - humiliation, shame, disgust, fear and pain. For example:

STARVATION

Astarion tells us that Cazador fed him just barely enough to keep him functioning. Starvation is a trauma that, on its own, is likely to cause disordered coping behaviours in the victim. We actually see some of these in-game:

Astarion keeps a sizeable stash of bottled blood in his tent. This is an example of resource hoarding – he’s afraid of starving again, and he’s stockpiling food as a safeguard.

Individuals who have suffered starvation (or who have been forced to follow a restrictive diet by a parent as adolescents) often find that they struggle to impose healthy limits on their own food intake once food is plentiful lor they age out of the parent’s dietary control). We see this in Astarion during the bite scene: he can kill the player character if they fail a roll to convince or force him to stop feeding before he drains them dry.

We know that Astarion's feeding time is late at night – he tells the player that he’ll come to them for a meal once they’re in their bedroll and everyone is asleep. This seems like a strange choice, considering Astarion's tenuous self-control, but my personal headcanon is that he feeds so late because, like many starved creatures, he’s food-aggressive. Cazador absolutely seems the type to throw an insufficient number of rats to his starving spawn for them to fight over: Astarion is likely used to having to viciously defend his paltry meal, or one of his siblings will take it from him. So the player starts out offering him breakfast along with everyone else – but they’re interrupted, Gale nearly loses a hand when Astarion snaps at him, and the decision is made to feed him separately, so he doesn’t feel threatened.

SENSORY DISTRESS

Astarion talks about being compelled to choke down the blood of bugs and putrid rat corpses - at one point idly remarking that, "I've eaten things that would disgust most vultures." - so we know that a lot of what Cazador was feeding him was a) already dead and b) actively going off, and that offers up so many potential sensory triggers.

After death, blood begins to coagulate, clotting and curdling into a semisolid - that could be a texture issue.

Rotting corpses smell vile - that could be a scent issue.

We know putrid corpse blood doesn't taste good to vampires - iirc he calls it sewer water or dirty ditch-water, in comparison to "plonk" (woodland animal blood) and "fine wine" (the player character's blood).

Corpses often also come with the lovely bonus of maggots, which are a hardcoded signal to humans (and presumably elves) that food is no longer fit for consumption. The disgust response is instinctive, to make us avoid eating the rotten item. But Astarion would’ve had to choke it down anyway – probably wanting to hurl all the while.

NEGATIVE ASSOCIATIONS

Astarion tells us at one point that if he refused the disgusting carcasses Cazador gave him, his alternative was being flayed alive. That makes the disgusting food a choice, and one he doesn't really have any choice but to make. He would also need to be fed after his torture sessions in the kennels, to give him enough blood to heal himself before being sent out after more victims. This would eventually build a link in his mind between being fed and being hurt.  

There's also a dialogue where Astarion explicitly tells us that Cazador would suggest they dine together after Astarion brought someone home for his master to feed on. The alternative, as above, is getting flayed. So that makes a horrible three-way feedback loop of negative emotions: being forced to prostitute himself -> being forced to feed -> being tortured -> being forced to feed again -> and round and round again.

BODY IMAGE

This one is more headcanon than theory and ties into my other post about vampire biology, but it's still a point worth mentioning imo. Astarion's life has essentially revolved around sex, however unwilling, for 200 years, and that's become intrinsically linked with his identity - the way he sees himself, the way he interacts with the world. He makes several comments that all but explicitly state that he views himself as a prostitute, and his entire survival strategy in the outside world hinges on his ability to essentially leverage his attractiveness and his bedroom skills to snag himself a smitten protector. Iirc, there's a point in one of the breakup dialogue trees where he'll bitterly refer to sex as his only talent and say that he knows what people think he's good for. He is putting on an act almost constantly, always thinking about how best to portray himself to get the outcome he wants, how to make use of his target's desire for him.

And? This man has, for 200 years, been taught that people like him starving. He knows that the dehydrated-muscle, prominent-collarbone, deathly-pale hungry-eyed vampire look works for him. He's been found consistently desirable even though he doesn't look anything like a healthy, well-fed vampire should, and for someone who's so reliant on being hot, that's going to be hard to let go of. At this point, it may well make him anxious to be so well-fed that his body functions start coming back online, that he can fill out a little to how he looked when Cazador first turned him, that his unshakeable seducer act can be disrupted by things like blushing for flattery. After 200 years of seeing your body starving and thinking that that is how you are at your most attractive, being able to far better imitate a living elf could well be quite distressing for him.

So. At this point, as the game begins, Astarion most likely mostly hates feeding. It makes him feel terrible – degraded, humiliated, disgusted – and has almost no redeeming features. The blood he’s getting doesn’t even taste good, let alone sate his hunger. Feeding him is, essentially, just another torture technique of Cazador's. And yet, he still craves it desperately – debases himself begging for it, feels pathetically grateful for the tiniest scrap he’s given, finds his mouth watering at the sight of vermin. That’s already a horrible, mixed-up place to be emotionally.

And now it's going to get more confusing for him. Enter the player character.

Astarion gets to feed on a thinking creature for the first time, and with it, an array of positive emotions and sensations he's never gotten to experience before, in all the time he’s been a vampire. For example:

SOCIAL SUPPORT

When the PC calls Astarion out for trying to sneakily bite them in their sleep, he explains that he usually feeds on animals, but he's currently too weak and slow to bring any down. This is interesting, because in his Origin, it's a nightmare about Cazador that prompts him to bite a companion. But...I don't think it's a lie. We see multiple times throughout the game that Astarion doesn't cope well with being put on the spot - he gets flustered and kind of starts rambling - but this line comes off without hesitation. It is, if not the truth, still a truth. And the PC doesn't take advantage of that admission - he's vulnerable, but the PC doesn't hurt him or try to make him pay them with sex. Instead they just...feed him.

PHYSICAL STRENGTH & MENTAL CLARITY

He explicitly tells you that he feels strong after drinking from you – and he goes straight out hunting, backing that up – and he has a surprised exclamation that his mind is “finally clear”. He’s been living with hunger-induced brain fog for centuries. He must feel like you’ve given him his brain back.

JOY

He’s sated. He just had a meal that tasted good. He's getting all those positive food feelings for the first time - a massive rush of endorphins to a brain starved of happy chemicals for two hundred years. How many things have made this man happy since he died? It would be overwhelming.

CONNECTION

Held up against how Astarion is used to being treated, this gesture from the PC is an overwhelming show of kindness and generosity. They choose to trust him - even though, as he'll admit in the graveyard, that's an objectively stupid thing to do - and they offer freely something that makes him feel good. Him, a man who's usually forced to degrade himself for "rewards" that make him feel terrible. And as if that's not enough, they accept him for what he is, continue to give him the protection of a group, and they defend him to the others in the morning. He's feeling grateful and giddy and warm for the first time in centuries, and he knows it's all thanks to you.

But

That's going to give him a lot of complicated feelings, because he still has all those negative emotions related to feeding too. And they're not going to go away just because he's found out thinking creature blood is actually nice. They're going to clash against that new enjoyment and make him feel all confused and weird and mixed up. He might still feel shame, even though he enjoyed the meal. He might still find himself wrestling with pointless dread, because he associates feeding with torture and abuse, even though he knows Cazador is miles and miles away. It's a small step towards seeing feeding in a less negative light, but that’s all. And like, up to this point he hasn’t even realised that he might be able to enjoy drinking blood, because to him, Cazador's horrors are normal. That’s all he’s ever known – the only experience of food he’s ever had as a vampire. Feeding Is Horrible And Degrading is a fundamental fact of life that he’s just starting to realise...may not actually be true. That’s like...having a rug yanked out from under his feet. Scary. Distressing. Out of control. Which could make him lean more towards avoiding feeding for a while, to get that control back.

So how do the scales start to tip more towards really enjoying feeding?

I think it would be the introduction of the social aspect. As just this once becomes regular feeding arrangement, he's going to realise that he gets the high of all those positive emotions every time he feeds from the PC, and he's going to start associating that giddy, happy feeling with them specifically. Because we know that while animal blood is Fine He Guesses, and he does get merry on bear blood at one point, it's nothing remotely close to person blood. Woodland creatures still make up a decent chunk of his diet, but he doesn't get the same emotional kick out of them.

And like. He likes feeling good like that. It's addictive. So he'll keep wanting to go back for more – making excuses to spend more time with them, with feeding being a very convenient excuse. He's creating a positive feedback loop for himself of happy chemicals and like, crush feelings, and every time he indulges, he’s unwittingly handing over tiny little fragments of trust and affection in exchange. It's difficult not to start liking someone who makes you feel good, especially if you're so unfamiliar with the feeling. He finds himself that little bit less tense around his willing midnight snack. He laughs more easily around them, finds he's more inclined to indulge do-gooder tendencies, realises he's starting to enjoy spending time with them. He doesn't necessarily realise it, but feeding is no longer just about quenching his blood thirst. It's become a bonding activity. He’s like a semiferal rescue animal, building an emotional connection with you as protector and provider. He’s learning that you’re trustworthy.

And then, as your relationship with him develops and deepens, sex gets involved, and he plays himself.

In one of the dialogues where Astarion offers the PC sex, he explicitly calls it a reward for feeding him, and flirtatiously brings up PC's biting kink - that he can tell they enjoy it when he drinks their blood. This always lowkey makes me laugh because like. Up to this point, Astarion has had no reason to ever connect feeding with sex. Cazador doesn't let him drink from thinking creatures, and since Astarion talks about his prey being "dragged away" to be fed on, it seems like Cazador generally took his meals privately, so mixing the two isn't something Astarion got from watching him. This is something he's picked up from you.

Anyway. I'm not sure which way around they happen, but during his first sex scene, Tav gets the option to encourage him to bite them again, and he will. Obviously, he's not going to turn down "vintage wine", but this also makes strategic sense from the perspective of his plan to get Tav to protect him - he's probably thinking that he's locked them down because they can't scratch this particular itch elsewhere. They now need him. Except - whoops, he actually likes sleeping with them, and he's starting to catch feelings. And because he's come to associate biting Tav with all those good feelings anyway, making it A Sex Thing just shifts his perspective a little, makes him realise that he’s getting something out of these interactions that he gets hooked on.

Feeding has become a source of emotional intimacy. He's beginning to feel loved, cared for, valued. Close to the PC. And that, to someone so utterly love-deprived, is potentially enough to make it feel more positive than negative over time.

(As a side note, I quite like the idea that it'll become a sort of self-soothing strategy for him for a while. If he's stressed or afraid or hurting, he'll nibble on the PC to remind and reassure himself that he can - that he's safe and loved and no longer starving. He'll nip at them to deliberately induce those positive feelings of emotional closeness in himself, if he thinks they'll outweigh the bad ones that come with.)

But even so, those bad associations will probably never fully go away or stop affecting him. He’ll probably still always hear Cazador's belittling laughter if someone walks in on him feeding – look at you, boy, not so proud now, are you? Crawling on the floor for vermin, how utterly pathetic. He’ll probably always wrestle with feelings of stress and anxiety after feeding for no obvious reason, because his primitive lizard brain still treats it like a traumatic experience sometimes even when he's feeding on his living, trusted lover. It’s going to take him such a long time to wrap his head around just how fucked up all the reactions Cazador trained into him are, how different from his new experiences as a free vampire.

Anyway. Idk how well I explained all these thoughts but. Yeah. Astarion + disordered eating issues.

[thestartarot]

Aquarius North Node / Leo South Node analysis

My own observations, take what resonates.

18 y/o and over due to sensitive topic nature. Thank you.

Trailblazers, we are entering age of Aquarius.

Soul color: blue

Destiny point: to build a society that allows your liberty to be upheld and keeps the people around you safe. To overcome societal norms by being their authentic self. Find middle ground in all manners of life. Discover creativity. Discover equality. Acceptance despite differences.

How to overcome: Be your own self and live in your own truth. Be Aquarius, don’t reject it. Don’t repress who you are and anything that is associated with inauthenticity like lying, cheating, or overtly objectifying yourself and others. Love yourself and people for the facets of who they are. Society brings structure and hope. Build your own moral code that points you in a direction of good. Use your thoughts as modes of creative expression instead of internalizing them and feeling jaded.

Full disclosure: this really is a wild turkey placement. Childhood will vary dramatically. There are certain threads that are shared in different generations of this placement. I will discuss those. I have frequently said this is also a polarizing placement and mental health needs to be a top priority. I’m going to discuss the polarity associated with Aquarians. In a simple way to demonstrate a complexity, imagine the concept of Aquarius as a line. On one side, there’s one extreme it falls to when depressed or under developed, on the other side, we see the Aquarian at its best living its truest self. It’s important to pay attention to how you are feeling and learn ways to self soothe (hot bath, go get a coffee, put on a skincare mask)

Isolation, Stoic,

Unemotional,

Deeply traumatized

Society and people

Become means of control

And a source of pain &

Pleasure

<——————————————————————————>

Unhealthy mindset A true libertine

When developed, Aquarians want people to embrace themselves, want a society where one can be accepted. In private, loves to enjoy themselves. Society and people are objects to be understood and admired. Fairness.

So the Aquarian already living in a very polarizing existence all the time and very inwardly (unlike Gemini who demonstrates polarizing mentalities outwardly.) Honestly, it’s an air sign thing. Y’all think so much you create different modes of thought all running at the same time and frequency and sometimes these modes aren’t too grounded in reality.

My moon is in Aquarius, and it squares off with some very important planets which is why I take my own mental health seriously, there are many ways I relate. - I struggle in social situations and sometimes I feel like I’m in a constant state of being misunderstood or disenfranchised by the people around me. It’s okay, to feel disconnected from society, but there are slippery slopes to that and particularly this placement (edit: 08/10/24)

Childhood: really varies for everyone with this placement. The most common thread I see is a hunt for the innermost & sometimes primal need for success & fulfillment in whatever that looks like for the individual. Success can be happiness, it can be owning a house of their own with a beautiful partner, being great at one’s job. However, success happens when working collectively and this placement may have felt indifferent socially. Childhood may have been stressful because of a lot of inner repression. Possibly conflicting beliefs or attitudes with family members. A lot of outer resentment towards the world because of coming into a world in active war time. The Leo South Node feels discouraged and disconnected because something is stealing the torch (war, politics, social inequalities, fundamental rights but society not granting those.) So the Aquarius in this placement at birth is a gift but also was born under uncertainty making society feel quite scary and uncomfortable. Parents or parental figures (lots of extended family dynamics, unusual or drifter upbringing) were just trying to get by too and they wanted you to fit in but they couldn’t always concentrate on you and when you weren’t perfect upon random inspection, you may have been punished (grounding, abuse). They need good teachers. Aspecting planets or houses may change this but at some point may have had more fascinations of death in the general sense of the word. There will be many hurdles to overcome in childhood and adulthood. You may feel lost. Always feeling like you are in a crowd. Or never seen. The Leo south node in this placement daydreams of fame and not having responsibility. The battle of finding one’s place in society, feeling misunderstood, and isolated can lead to substance abuse disorder / dissociations very young. The polarity in this placement will need lots of love and care because despite the mental framework, the Aquarian wants to succeed and thinks a lot about how to be the best. So, I stress mental health and great teachers. This placement often gets the “tough luck” approach.

Possibly experienced one too many early passings of childhood friends.

Adulthood: Aquarius is one of the most dominant signs in my personal opinion because I see the sign so heavily pronounced in culture and eras of time making it an undeniable Renegade. An Artist. A visionary. The inspiration in the stars. A moody and rebellious lost soul forced to live in the world alone. I have a theory that the innate liberty of Aquarius inspires the Leo to move towards the collective instead of the controlling. An Aquarian can manipulate the environment around you and the environment can manipulate the Aquarian into feeding their delusions. The Aquarian sign here can feel so detached from reality because they are so focused on the social framework around them and how to navigate it, they might not develop their natural talents that Leo south node came bursting in with. The most important thing stressed here is Aquarius is such a fixed sign that the intensity of your presence can cause people to go through changes. It’s not your fault, you are very statuesque and people are moved in emotion by you. Take it in stride. Don’t take it as an attack. The only way you are going to move forward is to be vulnerable and not feel shame. In this vulnerability is where you will shine and find your creative light.

Early and perhaps untimely deaths are associated with this placement and it may be because death does seem to follow them in the shadows. & usually at their own hand, drugs, or someone else’s. Y’all be safe you agents of change! The 27 club has presence here.

10 celebrities to unalive young with NN in Aquarius

Kurt Cobain

Heath Ledger

Janis Joplin

Jimi Hendrix

Brittany Murphy

Bruce Lee

Brandon Lee

James Dean

Aaliyah

River Phoenix (List credited to ChatGPT)

How to overcome: be your authentic self, don’t let society determine who you are and who you can’t be. Let the bare bones of truth be your armor. In healthy ways, be involved in society. Watch out for the polarity you have to deal with and don’t let the Leo south node be too consuming and too angry, use the creativity that comes with Leo to express your emotions. Take caution of those around you, people often like to dominate the Aquarius because the intensity in their presence can come off as a threat.

If I had three tarot cards to throw at this placement, it would be Death, The Star, and Judgement. Don’t let being an outsider turn you astray, be creative and use that philosophical and fantastical mind to good use. You’re great!!!

I stress mental health (journaling specifically, take note of song ^^) and to further emphasize the polarity and repression in this placement, here are five serial killers with a North Node in Aquarius:

Ted Bundy

Jeffrey Dahmer

Edmund Kemper

John Wayne Gacy

Richard Ramirez (List Credit to ChatGPT)

***all of these trash piles are aspected by Saturn in an earth sign.

So we have Kurt Cobain and John Wayne Gacy in the same sign, both experiencing tragic death. Kurt uplifted so many people while the other was pure trash. The reason is, Kurt Cobain was more successful at expressing his truth, rip forever. Placements should not use substances. Therapy advised if feeling disenfranchised, would look into counseling.

Final thoughts, Aquarius is a beautiful sign that wants to be happy and free. Leo wants Aquarius to bloom. What is dished out to this sign will be dished back out out 10 fold. But, the struggle will be, does one embrace the collective society or does one let society consume them and act cynical and cruel? When Aquarian placements learn how to love in a healthy manner, they are great lovers.

Also, keep in mind that everything I’m writing is opinion and not fact and this placement and your Saturn placement could be beneficial and make all of this irrelevant. That’s why I said it’s a wild turkey &&& also nothing takes precedence over experience and faith.

— Casper

Copyright © 2024 thestartarot | All rights reserved.

[azzayofchaos]

your worldbuilding for your dreamingverse au is so good i wish i knew everything about the world you're making. i genuinely could read about it for HOURS

Oh that is so sweet! @solar-cycle And who am I to deny your curiosity (I certainly am happy to rant about Dreamingverse)!

MINECRAFT SPECULATIVE LORE?

(Sorry about the lack of image, I was too excited to post and didn’t have any ideas jump out at me for what to draw… next post maybe lol)

Here’s the fundamentals of the Dreamingverse au:

There was, once, two universes. The first, the one you might be able to imagine, was made of matter, of time and space, and was inhabited by advanced civilizations. The other was pure sapience, a sprawling neuronic network that dreamed in its own pathways. They call it the End Before the Beginning, the cataclysmic collision of universes that split and fragmented and recrystallized into a single many faceted prism. And in the wake of this cataclysm, the civilizations of before collapsed. It wasn’t an immediate thing, though, but a slow implosion driven out of fear and competition over resources. How were people not meant to be afraid, when the dead were suddenly granted a second waking and the world they knew was ripped apart at the seams? When being born of pure thought, the manifestations of death, destruction, and oblivion were made to walk among them? Humanity downfall was eventually to war and its own nuclear power, and thus began the era of oblivion.

The era of oblivion was marked by the absence of life and the settling of the earth. The newly reborn [universe] was irradiated and barren, made of fractured pockets of tribes and civilizations relearning how to live in their world and hanging on to their lives with white knuckles. If nothing else, this extreme of living incentivized the rapid evolution of genetics, leading to offshoot species in the descendant of humanity, Piglins, Witches, Endr, and more, among them. These offshoots are widely known as “Hybrids” granted by the universe the qualities of species better suited to their extreme environments.

It is then the Era of Growth and Decay. The plants, as with the undead, are given a sentience of their own, mutated and lively, they are the first to begin recovering from the End, and with them, the deities of these concepts too. Among these plants, Creepers, long, slow-moving creatures of explosive spores, Sculk, Mycelium, Glares, and the Nylium of the Neth.

And in the wake of the plants, the Era of Beasts follow, where animals and their corresponding deities begin to grow bold and awake.

Following at last is the rebirth of civilization. It’s the Neath that takes off first, the early bastions of the Piglin gathering culture and resource in order to begin exploring and inventing, the overworld soon following. And here also, is where the Creators truly emerge. They had existed before in some capacity, sapient beings woven more deeply into the fabric of the universe, able to catch the flitting dreams of the universe and spin it into their own make. Beings with the ability to Construct and Destroy at a scale no Animate could match even with a lifetime of magical and alchemic training. They were revered and despised in often equal measures.

—

Which brings us to the basics of Sapient classifications. To be clear, these lines are not hard or certain, but rather a general categorization.

There are the Animates of course: NPCs essentially (though that feels dismissive) the bulk of the population, living limited lifespans and with little access to magics.

These rest are Creators, broadly speaking:

…

The so called “Players,” generally the children of other Creators, of Animates, or Animates themselves given the powers of Construction and Destruction later in life in one way or another. They tend to be more humanoid, and generally include undead Creators. For along time, they were really the only group of Creator easily accepted by the general population as they were less other.

Then there are the Fae, objects, plants, or animals that are given the gifts of the universe and higher consciousness alongside it.

And then the Constructs; Places awakened and given thought and the capacity to change and move. Often considered god-like in their own right.

And the Deities. Gods sometimes. Beings made of pure thought, concepts personified.

—

Civilization marched onwards, and Creators did not often die. Empires rose, fell, rose again, and over the course of many great wars and eras of peace —from the War With Heaven, to the Rapture of Empires, to Antarctic’s Conquest— the Universe slowly settled into its Dream and its people into their own.

Ask me about:

- the structure of the universe and the layout of its dimensions…

- Mechanics, this may be bundled in with the structural stuff…

- Character, lore, and series head-cannons (I may or may not have them yet!)

- The Deities

- The Remnants 0.0

- Anything really, maybe I’ll do some art :3

[sonnenreich]

continuation of (☀️) ⸻ @ashbalfour

The smell of musty books, old wood and cedar has always harboured the cornerstones of familiarity for Zeev. A potpourri of history and cosy feelings. The expensive perfume of his host reinforced the impression of professional experience in dealing with antiques, as well as the shared ambivalence of old and new. Asher's words resonated with a part of him that sought its equal and he recognised, perhaps not a confidant, but a kindred spirit. Zeev's family lived much more in the past than in the present. Isolated from the echoes of incomprehension that still resonated in a world that prided itself on progress, yet turned a blind eye to what had brought them this far in the first place. History, in particular, offered countless conclusions that could expand awareness and increase knowledge. Only those who understood and respected the past could recognise the patterns of the future and act accordingly. However, the witcher had always stayed away from political matters and judgements, so he would not start drawing up equations now. 

Instead, he smiled at the broad-shouldered and tall man, whose demeanour could have been intimidating had the circumstances been different. He exuded an English elegance that Zeev could only declare commendable. “That's the problem,” the blond began, scrutinising a glass case containing an elongated walking cane, the silver head almost unbeatable in its richness of detail. “Some things are not made to be controlled. Have you ever tried to influence the wind? Prevented nature from growing? This may work in some parts, and yet a flower also blossoms in the grey wasteland of a concrete-locked city. The step of understanding is skipped because it is less lucrative for one's own interests. Yet knowledge is just as valuable as possessions. If not more.” He strolled calmly around the exhibits, which Zeev knew were only a fraction of what was really in the Balfour collection. 

Zeev didn't know much about the Briton's family business, though he was aware of the influence they harboured. Preserving supposedly cursed relics, however, sounded noble enough to his ears not to be suspicious of what purpose they served for someone like Asher, if not the desire to protect history. Someone would always come into possession, someone who knew the dangers and acted accordingly was preferable to him than haughtily dealing with things the person didn't understand - and causing harm as a result. This way, the world's view of the inexplicable would never change. A wish that Zeev knew would never come true. But a man was allowed to dream. 

As Zeev continued to survey the room, interested and invested in the other's work, he heard the cosy tingling of magical presences. They were not fundamentally malevolent, as it always was with magic. A fire was not evil, it was not even aware of this concept, yet it could destroy livelihoods and raze countries to the ground. It was a natural occurrence and another facet of the world in which they moved. The actions of an individual did not infer the intentions of the whole, even if it fit better into the narrative of humanity. 

Zeev smirked contentedly at Asher, asking his favourite question when confronted with antiques and obscurities: “Show me your favourite relic and tell me why so.” It was a request, but the witcher did not press him.

[dragonomatopoeia]

gonna ramble a bit because i've been reading a lot of play theory recently and i have to get thoughts out before i can develop and build on them properly

i appreciate that brian sutton-smith makes a point of rejecting the romanticization of play even while asserting that it is necessary or fundamental to living. like a key facet of play is boundary-setting with concepts like the magic circle. everyone involved has to agree on the limitations and rules of play. there's a shared understanding that things within the circle are not Real, and they do not have Real consequences.

Until! there are consequences. someone can be chosen last again and again. someone can be knocked over and twist their ankle. someone can be less interested in the chosen game than everyone else and have less stake in the outcome, which can shift the vibe considerably. these are perhaps not Grave consequences, but they are ways in which the manufactured space of the Game affects the world outside of it

play is not fully removed from reality, just as performance or art are not fully removed from the contexts that inform or are informed by them. they are not Sacred so much as they are forms of communication with oneself and others

i've also been thinking of sartre's note on play in his essay on antisemitism, with the idea of 'liberty to play' and its evaluation of stakes. when someone has the 'liberty to play' , the liberty to speak and act as if there are no consequences to be had while faced with someone who is defending their very existence, then 'play' becomes a way of communicating status and power. the person who is free to act without consequence can play all they like, because they are in a consequence-free setting. the world has become their magic circle. those who have to contend with the consequences, however, are firmly situated in Reality, where consequences are omnipresent

[haggishlyhagging]

[Vera Brittain’s] rage and fury, and bitterness, although controlled, make their presence felt in every paragraph, as she argues that every facet of society has been arranged by men to provide their sex with the maximum advantages so that they can then compare themselves to women and find themselves superior. Vera Brittain argues that men demand that women make their resources available to others, that men help themselves liberally to such resources, and then blame women because they have so few left for themselves. Brittain saw time, and will, and intelligence as part of those resources men had taken from women.

Because, as with so many of the ideas women wish to put forward, there are so few established concepts and words available to name them (another by-product of what is not experienced by men does not exist), Brittain makes use of analogy to map out what it is that she means, and begins with the illustration of Charlotte Brontë who at one stage had determined to use her resources for herself, to run her own life, and write, but whose plan for independence crumbled in the face of the demands of her family. Duty, modesty, gentleness, womanliness all decreed that she should abandon her plans for autonomy and stay 'at home to care for a sick father, a drunken brother, a sister whose proud independence of soul approached very nearly to something which at the present day we should probably describe as obstinate stupidity. She sacrificed herself,' says Brittain; and for what?

‘For, in the end, her years of uneasy martyrdom at Haworth could save neither her father from sorrow, her brother from sin, nor herself and her sisters from premature death. One wonders whether a calm and resolute refusal to remain in the dark house on the edge of the churchyard for the sake of an invalid might not have had the effect of removing both her family and herself to a healthier sphere, and thus saving the lives of them all. But,’ adds Brittain, ‘in the days of Charlotte Brontë not resolution but submission was the whole duty of woman’ (ibid., p. 217). Brittain did not think much had changed since the days of Brontë; I do not think much has changed since the days of Brittain.

To me this represents a fundamental dilemma, as it did to Brittain: it is because it has suited men to have women's emotional, psychological, intellectual resources available to them (and their children) that they have allocated a nurturing role to women. Our nurturance is not ‘biological’, not an inherent ‘deficiency’, as Margaret Mead (1950) and many more demonstrated with cross-cultural studies which show women in semi-non-nurturing roles. But despite the fact that we have had no choice in the matter, that nurturance has been assigned to us, we have become skilled at it and have come to appreciate its value. We want to assert that it is in the interest of society for all its members (not just half) to be nurturant, for we believe this to be a more sensible and productive basis for organising the world. But we find ourselves in the position of being the nurturing sex in an exploitative society; our nurturance is taken and used by men. We must confront the problem of how to make ourselves nurturantly unavailable for exploitation - and oppression - without repudiating nurturing itself.

Annie Cornbleet (1982) has suggested that it is our very nurturance as mothers, wives, teachers, nurses, social workers, secretaries, etc., that allows the exploitative society to continue functioning, and that by making our emotional energy and our time available to these ends we are colluding, helping to maintain patriarchy (and leaving ourselves little time and energy to construct our own alternative). But any suggestions that we should stop playing our nurturing role - that Charlotte Brontë should have left her family and gone off to London, that Vera Brittain should have left her husband and her children (periodically) to pursue her own work, that women should choose to be 'child-free' (Robyn Rowland, forthcoming) - are often accompanied by accusations of 'selfishness' and condemnation as ‘hard’ (and I speculate on the origins of this label and its significance), with such women sometimes being dismissed as ‘behaving just like a man.’ We construct an immense burden of guilt for women who elect to make their emotional resources unavailable. Because men are not required to conform to the expectations of nurturing it is a guilt which they do not experience when they do not conform to its demands.

-Dale Spender, Women of Ideas and What Men Have Done to Them

[medeina-physis]

The human instinct to dehumanize

A warning to all of the insidious nature of bigotry and its path beginning with dehumanization

Now, I’m sure nearly all people have come across bigotry or discrimination of some form in their lives. Regardless of group, class, identity, or race, all have seen and experienced this facet of the human experience in some way or another. My question to you is: Do you think you are above it?

Let us see. Do you consider Terfs, for example, to be human? Probably. Have you ever said that TERFS are brainless, dumb, have but a single brain cell, or something else of a similar vain? I’d bet the answer is yes. If not, there is probably another group you can think of that you have. When you said or thought this, did you think this to be a fact? Did you feel that your statement could be applied to all who exist under that label. If I told you that it is perfectly possible for a TERF or similar to be an otherwise stand-up member of their society that regularly helps at homeless shelters or volunteers at an orphanage, would you be able to believe me?

See, there comes a point when we make sweeping generalizations of a group, any group, where we can either take these generalizations to be true, even subconsciously, or we can actively remind ourselves that they are inherently false. The fact of the matter is, we as a species have, to my knowledge, never uncovered any fundamental truths. All human knowledge, regardless of apparent complexity or simplicity, is inherently a model we have constructed atop the natural world. And a model, by its nature, is an imperfect reflection of reality. A reasonably good example is the hydrodynamics model of electricity. In it, we pretend that wires are pipes that electricity flows through, and we use this analogy to calculate the pressure and velocity of flow in certain areas, as well as other things. In any case, this model is just that, a model. It is wrong. Electricity does not flow through wires. It flows in the electromagnetic waves surrounding the wire, and are guided by the wires in a process I am not educated enough to attempt to explain. 

The point above is this, anytime you put a label on a group, be it that politicians are greedy, CEOs are monsters, Americans love cars, children aren’t responsible, young people are inexperienced, etc. you are ultimately creating a sweeping generalization that is wrong. Does this mean that such generalizations should not be used? Not necessarily. Generalizations, or models if that helps, can be useful as a means to help wrap your head around a concept. This is true both in STEM and with people. The important part is remembering that it is a generalization, a model, and that it is, inherently, flawed.

I’ll be the first to admit that I have been known to call republics morons or inhuman monsters both in my own mind and aloud. But the key is that I will then follow it up with a recognition that they are humans, they can changed, and that there are systems at play that I may not understand that lead them to make the decisions and statements that they do. I can still vehemently disagree with their policy, but I understand that they are humans, if heavily misguided. This is critical as it allows me flexibility if/when I run into someone in real life that holds an opinion that I would otherwise hold to be inhuman. For those of you reading, that person could be a parent or friend who, after you come out, turns out to be a TERF. All before then, they had been a good person, but this one thing is making them completely disassociate from you. If you try to deal with this with the assumption that, as a TERF, they are somehow naturally mentally deficient and thus incapable of understanding rational thought, then you will never be able to repair your relationship. If you instead recognize that they are a real human who can change, then you can talk to them and figure out what things in their lives have led to them coming to the false conclusion that you are some degenerate monster.

I suppose to sum up, be careful how you try to compartmentalize the actions of those you don’t understand, particularly for people whose actions are hurtful or dehumanizing. I’m not saying not to assign the labels, I am more than aware of how helpful they can be to cope with a stressful situation, I am saying to add a little sticky note to the wall you raise in your mind to remind you that, while useful, the wall is but a veneer, a helpful lie to get you through difficult times, but a lie all the same. This should allow you to, if not entirely transcend bigotry, at least be far more ready to accept when you’ve fallen into it, and then subsequently escape it. The worst thing you can do to yourself is convince yourself that you know the absolute truth about anything. There will always be something you don’t know, and that is okay.

And to be clear, the second you lose sight of this idea, and fall into believing that some group is truly described by the label you gave them, you have become bigoted. You have become the very thing you claim to despise. You have become the problem. Don’t allow yourself to do this. There is no group of humans on earth, no matter how they may appear, who are anything less than human. Everyone, I mean everyone, is worthy of compassion and respect in so far as, at the very least, the bare minimum acceptance that their feelings are real, and their needs are real. This may make you feel uncomfortable, this may make you feel icky, but it is nonetheless the right thing. Because the second you refuse to listen, the second you believe yourself a better authority on a person than the person themself, you have practiced discrimination. Do not invalidate another person’s experiences, they are every bit as real as yours.

So I ask you, do you truly believe that you are above bigotry? Are there any groups that you jump to conclusions about before hearing their side of the story? Are there any groups that you assign personality traits to with complete disregard for their individuality? Please consider these questions deeply, and reflect.

Tldr: Discrimination is the result of blanket generalizations of a group without recognizing the inherent lie in such generalizations. Generalizations such as those are dehumanizing, and the core of what allows for bigotry. Reflect and consider, are you secretly a bigot? If so, rise above it—become better!

[anishmary]

From Zero to Hero: Mastering Data Analytics for Transformation

The concept of "data" has enormous significance in the modern digital world. The enormous amount of information produced every day has revolutionized the way we view the world and move through it. The data analytics industry is one of the major players in this revolution. Let's set out on an adventure to discover the fundamentals of data analytics, consider their importance, and understand how they affect different facets of our lives.

Understanding Data Analytics Analyzing massive data sets to find hidden patterns, correlations, trends, and insights is at the heart of data analytics. It's like sorting through a gold mine of knowledge to find the gold nuggets that will help you make decisions and solve problems. Data analytics isn't just about statistics and figures; it's about turning raw data into compelling narratives that encourage informed decisions.

Why Data Analysis Is Important

The capacity to make sense of all the data in the globe has changed the game. Data analytics enables companies, groups, and people to comprehend their operations, clients, and environments more thoroughly. Here are a few main arguments in favor of data analytics:

Making Informed Decisions: Data-driven insights allow for more precise and knowledgeable decision-making. Companies might modify their tactics in light of current developments and customer preferences.

Enhanced Efficiency: Data analytics uncovers bottlenecks and inefficiencies in processes and operations, allowing for focused changes.

Predictive Skills: By analyzing past data, predictive models can predict future patterns and aid organizations in becoming ready for the future.

Customer insights: Data analytics reveals the preferences and habits of customers, enabling more individualized interactions and higher levels of customer satisfaction.

Risk Management: Identifying potential risks and fraud patterns is made easier with data analytics, reducing vulnerabilities and losses.

Scientific Discoveries: In fields like healthcare and research, data analytics aids in uncovering groundbreaking insights and advancements.

The Data Analytics Process

Data analytics involves a systematic approach that follows several key steps:

Defining Objectives: Clearly state the objectives and issues you hope to resolve through data analysis.

Data Collection: Collect pertinent data from a variety of sources, making sure it is reliable and representative. Data Cleaning: Involves altering it to ensure accurate analysis.

Exploratory Analysis: Investigate the data in depth to find patterns, trends, and early insights.

Modeling: Building statistical models or algorithms to forecast outcomes or comprehend correlations in the data is known as modeling.

Interpretation: Draw conclusions from your analysis's findings and connect them to your original goals.

Visualization: To make your findings easier to understand, present them using visual tools like charts, graphs, and dashboards.

Action: Implement the learnings from data analysis to inspire positive changes and actions.

Data analytics has become an effective means for turning data into useful insights. By bridging the gap between information overload and useful knowledge, it facilitates decision-making, ignites innovation, and opens doors. A fascinating and fruitful trip may be had by anyone interested in learning more about data analytics, whether they are a business owner, researcher, or just curious. So, take part in uncovering the secrets of the data and grasp the power of data analytics to transform. If you need help implementing data analytics in your organization or if you want to learn more, you should consult professionals or sign up for specialized courses. For instance, the ACTE Institute offers comprehensive data analytics training courses that can provide you the knowledge and skills you need.

[kichimiangra]

Am yammering. I've grown to resent the morality tales where good things happen to you as a result of your good deeds. I understand their purpose, "enlightened self interest" is a more difficult concept to teach than the extremely simplified version of karma, I just find it disappointing and dishonest.

There are always results for your actions. It's just not that they're necessarily the results that you want, regardless of doing what is morally correct. You work hard at your job, and you may get taken advantage of by your boss or coworkers. You can save someone's life and they are completely ungrateful. You can save your money in a most frugal manner and then have to spend it on a minor crisis rather than the nice thing that you wanted.

Of course, unfairness happens all the time. It is a fundamental facet of our lives. Just having an unfair result isn't satisfying.

No, I'm after outcomes that are not particularly "bad", just something that is a direct result of moral actions. The hero heals a minor minion, now the minion is trying to usurp their boss to catch the heroine's heart. You do the main character thing where you solve everyone's problems and now you have a cult of worshippers who are convinced that you are better than a god. You help out a miserable yokai and get blessed with something you didn't want as a result. Just an endless series of "wait, hang on now, let's discuss this" and being met with "no. Your kindness has consequences."

I savor that shit.

I have to agree that a karma based story

-----

My finger hit 'post'. Standby.

-----

I have to agree that a karma based story is, to a general audience, often the most satisfying route of a story, as for most of us we like to see the Heroes get everything that they worked for as well as see the Villians get their comeuppance for the crimes. In a way the Karma system of storytelling is a story with a world that is 'Just' and a world that is Just comforts people.

As someone who grew up suckling the tit of karmic retribution in story telling though I feel it can often instill this expectation in the reader that the world itself should be Karmic, as media has doubled down into it hard with barely any alternative or questioning. Then when a story arrives that does not conform to the rules of "good things happen to good people; bad things to bad; not all endings are happily ever after OR tragedies" the author can be treated like they are a whore for a tragic ending simply because the Hero wasn't granted everything they ever wanted by the final page.

[mpenvs3000w23]

Risk versus reward in interpretation

Privilege is the absence of socially constructed barriers to access different social, economic, and  environmental services. Examples of privilege include being able-bodied, white, heterosexual, cisgender, wealthy, and being neurotypical. In essence, privilege is not the result of anything individuals have accomplished to improve their lives, but instead is the absence of barriers that impede the experience of marginalized and minority groups (Black & Stone, 2005). Privilege is present in all facets of life around us including in nature interpretation programming. For example, there can be inaccessible hiking trails for people with mobility disabilities or requiring a wheelchair, nature educational programmes are not necessarily designed for people with ASD, ADHD, or other neuro-divergences, costs associated with accessing nature-based programming include car access to remote locations (and as such may exclude people with financial constraints), programmes may exclude the voices and representation of minority and Indigenous groups, and there may be fear of discrimination based on gender or sexuality that can be faced in these settings (Beck et al., 2018).

Privilege is often a difficult topic to discuss since people who have a lot of privilege are often unable to relate to and cannot fully understand the experiences of minority groups. Since privilege is ‘inherited’ (based on predetermined components of our lives slated  from birth), those experiencing a lot of privilege do not always realize the barriers others face that they are not subject to. 

The biosphere itself is not responsible for notions of privilege and contrary to Aristotle does not have a ‘divine’ hierarchy of beings. Privilege is a socially constructed inequity across humans that is rooted in racism, ableism, ageism, homophobia, transphobia, colonialism, xenophobia, and ignorance to the experiences of ‘the other’ (Black & Stone, 2005). Therefore, it is our job as nature interpreters to deconstruct these socially constructed barriers and unlearn the ignorance and intolerance we have been conditioned with. Only by doing so can we create accessible and empowering nature-based programming for all people to benefit from (Beck et al., 2018). 

At our very essence, human beings of all demographics fundamentally must breathe in oxygen from the air, expel carbon dioxide, and repeat until death. Plants will absorb this carbon dioxide and perform photosynthesis, releasing oxygen as a byproduct, then us humans once again inhale the oxygen. No factor of demography can ever change this relationship. Trees do not have an interest in sorting through air molecules for who expelled the carbon dioxide, and they release oxygen into the air for all aerobic organisms to breathe in. There is no basis of colour, size, shape, or belief system for your validity in nature. Our ability to struggle and survive is a direct consequence of our environment, and for some sad reason, humans have created a lot of barriers that favour the white man.

Literature cited

Beck, L., Cable, T. T., & Knudson, D. M. (2018). Interpreting cultural and natural heritage: For A Better World. SAGAMORE Publishing.

Black, L. L., & Stone, D. (2005, October). Expanding the definition of privilege: the concept of social privilege. Gale Academic Onefile. Retrieved January 24, 2023, from https://go-gale-com.subzero.lib.uoguelph.ca/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=guel77241&id=GALE%7CA138057509&v=2.1&it=r.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

>I've said it before, and I'll say it again: one of the most successful alt-right psyops 4chan ever pulled was sealioning leftists in general and feminist women in particular to such a degree that, in response, we started reacting to every polite, 101-level question about feminism or leftist politics from men with anger and hostility, thereby driving said men directly towards the sympathetic arms of the alt-right, which was the entire fucking point of conditioning us to do that.

The concept and predominant use of the term "sealioning" is "it's wrong to politely ask me extremely basic questions about my publicly stated beliefs if they make me uncomfy".

Feminists have had hostile reactions to questioning and disagreement - from men or women - for a very long time. Just ask Erin Pizzey. She opened the first women's shelter in the UK and the world.

And then when she realized lots of men were being abused by women, she tried to get support for them too. The era's feminists harassed her, her family, and her publisher, up to and including death threats.

Not to mention the countless posts I've seen from feminists who say women owe feminism their support because of what it did in the past, even if those women have issues with what it's doing now.

This was not some sort of double reverse backflip gambit. The call was coming from inside the house.

All 4chan did, if anything, was get feminists to expose their own flaws.

And 4chan weren't responsible for the 2013 protests by feminists at the U of Toronto, when people tried to talk about men's issues.

Or the time they falsely blamed MRAs for a "misogynist" mass murderer named Elliot Rodger.

He had nothing to do with MRAs, and feminists erased the fact that he hated, killed, and injured twice as many men as women.

Just the existence of the term "mansplaining" is ironic (and sexist), considering feminists condescendingly tell men what men's lives are supposedly like, all the time.

Even when obvious evidence shows they're wrong.

>which is where the role of radfem/terf shit in furthering the same gender essentialism espoused by the alt-right really needs to be acknowledged:

I love how so many progressives and leftists are determined to ignore that TERFs, by definition, are just further along the same line as regular feminists. The biggest difference is that they openly hate men, directly.

And TERFs just consider trans women men.

>: because as necessary and overdue as #metoo was on a cultural level, the framing of so many subsequent discussions as Yes All Men is radfem brainrot, not because patriarchy doesn't exist (it does!), but because patriarchy is an institutional and sociocultural problem rather than some inherent, indelible facet of masculinity, and that distinction matters, because you cannot solve the problem of patriarchy by treating it as fundamentally unsolvable.

Minor issue with that. #NotAllMen predates #MeToo by several years.

"Stop negatively stereotyping men" is the single most common criticism of feminism.

Also, "patriarchy" just means "rule by patriarchs". Feminists were the ones who associated it, indelibly, with sexism and misogyny.

Heck, you're still implying that it's somehow inherently wrong. Which is, um, not so different from the people you think you're criticizing.

You're almost there, but you're still refusing to admit that some of this was, and always has been, feminism's fault.

I couldn't have said it better myself.