#and her sense of justice which is her defining trait allows her to win in the end

[ookaookaooka]

Does anyone have any recommendations for (audio)books where the characters are nice to each other and the protagonists win in the end without being traumatized beyond recognition? The last four or five books I’ve listened to have been real downers and I need a palette cleanser. Don’t care what genre as long as it’s fiction, preferably aimed at adults

[ashesandhackles]

Deconstructing Harry: The boy we meet in Philosopher's Stone to the man in Deathly Hallows

I have often seen fans talk about how nebulous Harry is as a character, especially in the earlier books. They can't make sense of who he is as a character and other more colourful, more actualized personalities take over our attention from any traits Harry might display. Harry becomes more defined for a lot of people OOTP onwards where he displays traits that sometimes make him unbearable or unlikable.

Harry, as we are introduced in PS, has a very little sense of self. He is narratively self deprecating or plays down his presence or skills, not that he is aware he has any. He grew up without any presence of him displayed in the house - no photos, no idea about his parents or what they look like or what really happened to them and discouraged from asking questions. Harry as we meet him is neglected, rootless about his identity and longs for escape. For him, every day is a battle against Dudley, who bullies him or Vernon, thus setting a worldview that never truly goes away: him vs adults. But just because Harry doesn't attach traits or values to self, does not mean he does not have it.

It's an effective narrative tool though - for Harry to be our eyes of the world. Only in later re-readings can we get a grasp of the traits that become more pronounced as books go on. Also, it's not surprising that Harry develops a better sense of self when he is removed from an abusive home.

Let me begin with this:

1. Harry is a fighter

One of the things that struck me in later re-readings is that how much of a fighter Harry is, from the very beginning. He will not lie down and take abuse. The narrative presents it as no big deal, because Harry doesn't assign any importance to it - it's every day life for him.

-Verbal standing up-

See his reaction to Uncle Vernon and the letter fiasco. He stands up for himself, even if it falls on deaf ears. "I want my letter - as it is mine!". Later on, in the same book, a completely befuddled 11 year old Harry stands up to Snape too, but in a politer way: "I think Hermione knows the answer. Why don't you try her?". He gets less polite with Snape as books go on. Harry's humor is something he employs liberally with Dudley when standing up to him - "The poor toilet's never had anything as horrible as your head down it - it might be sick" and we see this trait manifest into the sass we all know and love.

- Fight or flight-

He is remarkably good at "fighting himself out of tight corners" as Snape put it. And although Snape attributes it to luck and more talented friends, he is onto something about Harry's ability to worm out of tight corners. He lives moment to moment in a dangerous situation - relying on his nerve, very fast reflexes and athleticism. He is also able to notice things in an environment that will get him out of a quick pinch. You see this clearly in Department of Mysteries in Book 5 where he comes up with the idea to smash shelves, the mad idea to escape on a dragon, the ministry escape where he manipulates Runcorn's image (as he noticed how people were reacting to him) to create chaos and get the Muggleborns and the trio out, Chamber of Secrets when he instinctively understood the diary is the source of power and stabbed it.

Where does the athleticism and ability to spot dangerous situation come from? This boy has spent a decade cheeking Dudley and running away from his gang, spotting when he needs to get out of the way as "long experience had told him to be out of Uncle Vernon's arms reach" or "ducking when Aunt Petunia aimed a frying pan at his head". The instinct to see a dangerous situation develops over the course of the books in his adventures - to the point Harry unconsciously brings out his wand in Tottenham road without thinking too much about it. He is almost always wary and less quick to lower his wand.

When hiding/ escaping is not an option, Harry is not above physical fighting - despite how small and skinny he is in Book 1. Both he and Dudley fight for a chance to listen at the door when letter first arrives for Harry. Dudley wins the fight. Later on, Harry jumps Uncle Vernon from behind and hangs on to his neck to get his letter. He even does the same thing to the troll in the same book. ( Then over the course of series, we see him beat up Sirius in Book 3, Malfoy in Book 5, strangle Mundungus in Book 6 - all of these are related to his fury over the dead, so different context. But still).

- Manipulation/ Cunning-

11 year old Harry even tries sneakily - waking up early to get his letter (unfortunately didn't work). The other sneaky methods he has employed throughout the series is - not telling Dursleys at end of PS that he is not allowed magic at home, threatens Dudley with it in COS, not telling them Sirius is innocent to play up the threat of a murderous godfather to keep them accountable, and also the smooth way he negotiates with Uncle Vernon for Hogsmeade letter. ("Well it will be hard work, pretending to aunt Marge that I go to St Whatsits" ,"Knocking the stuffing out of me won't make Aunt Marge forget what I could tell her"). He similarly displays his negotiation and playing to what he knows about people with Slughorn in Book 6, Pettigrew in Book 7.

The scene with Slughorn is disturbing, with Harry coercing a drunk Slughorn to give up his memory. You can argue that this is the influence of Felix Felicis, but I think the potion acted more as facilitation. The disturbing way Harry brings up his mother's murder to unnerve Slughorn is his own doing. ("Voldemort stepped over my father's body towards mum" "I forgot - you liked her, didn't you?"). Again, in a life threatening situation, Harry plays to Pettigrew's latent guilt: "You are going to kill me? After I saved your life? You owe me Wormtail!"

2. Relational justice over abstract justice

Harry's concept of justice is relational and based on his high empathy for the underdog. He notices power dynamic in a situation and empathises with the victim. This is in contrast to Hermione, who has more abstract, bigger picture view of justice. It's no wonder that Hermione is the one who is the most political of the three.

His high empathy for the underdog and needing to stand up for them is because he feels responsiblility that no one should go through what he went through. He stands up for Neville in PS and encourages him to stand up for himself. When he sees his father bullying Snape, it is not about an abstract "this is wrong behavior". Harry goes further: "Harry knew what it felt like to be taunted among a circle of onlookers" , Harry focuses on young Snape's mismatched clothes because he himself knows what it's like to wear clothes that are not yours or ones that make you look ridiculous. His empathy extends to Voldemort too - understanding why he may not want to go back to his orphanage and desire to be in Hogwarts, wondering why Merope wouldn't stay alive for her son, his fixation with Voldemort's maimed soul in King's Cross chapter and later asking Voldemort to feel remorse (" I have seen what you will become otherwise"). Even his reaction to Dobby in COS - "Can't anyone help you? Can't I?" when Dobby talks about his slavery. Hermione is usually seeing the bigger picture, Harry sees the individual.

3. Pathological mistrust of adults

He is less likely of the trio to take an adult at their words or be assured by them when they say they are taking care of things. He has learnt, from a very young age, that he is always expected to take care of himself. And the times he does take things to adult, they consistently disappoint him - by patronising him or acting like he is a child, neither of which he has tolerance for or appreciates. This is why he takes to Sirius and Lupin, who exhibit neither of these communication patterns. In some ways, Mr Weasley too.

Umbridge's abuse of him for him is framed as a battle of wills between her and him, as if he is an equal. And he loses if he complains - "not giving her a satisfaction of knowing she got to me". Harry's worldview has always been - adult vs him.

His inability to trust adults even extends to the ability of adults he likes to look after themselves. While Sirius is understandably a wreck in OOTP, he has by and large followed Dumbledore's orders. This doesn't register with Harry (Ron points it out: "Sirius listens to Dumbledore even though he doesn't like what he hears") and Harry's fears about Sirius, excaberated by Sirius's tendency for recklessness, comes to play.

He even showed similar distrust in Lupin's judgement in taking a potion from Snape in POA ("Harry felt the urge to knock the goblet out of Lupin's hands" and tries to hint at Lupin that Snape will "do anything" for DADA job). And he shows this once again with the most magically powerful wizard he knows - Dumbledore. ("if I tell you to abandon me and save yourself, you must do so". Dumbledore has to insist on this before Harry nods reluctantly. It's also Dumbledore's wording, but this is a wizard Harry feels safe with almost entirely because of his power - and yet Harry cannot obey an order like this without reluctance). It's not about Harry's own ability to take care of them - he just innately cannot leave people to it.

4. Humor as a value and coping mechanism

Harry has an established coping mechanism by the time we are introduced to him - quip in the face of danger/ dark humor. There are repeated instances of Harry amusing himself with snarky comments in his head when things are really bad for him. Like in PS, when they are in the hut, Harry wonders if the roof will fall in and then thought that if it did fall in, he might be warmer. In the earlier books (before his growth), he seems to value Ron over Hermione simply because he is more "fun". Harry enjoys being around funny people like Ron, Weasley twins, later Ginny simply because there is some dark stuff happening with him and he needs "fun" people for semblance of normalcy, escape. In fact, this desire is so strong, he attaches it to his romantic relationships: Ginny is a "blissful oblivion" and times with her are "something out of someone else's life". His relationship with Cho failed because her coping mechanism is discussing her trauma and Harry's is escaping it.

-dealing with conflict with people he likes, small digression-

A part of his growing up in later books includes valuing Hermione as much he values Ron and we see it in display in HBP, where he is more willing to stand up for her to Ron (something he kind of did more quietly before in POA - "can't you give her a break?" ) and also get confrontational with her instead of using Ron as a buffer between them to fend off her more boisterous/ bossy tendencies. ("let him make up his mind" "skip the lecture" "don't nag" - Ron took the heat in earlier books. In HBP, Harry is more willing to be irritable with her in a day-to-day interaction - "I hope you enjoy yourself" he tells Hermione when she states her intention to investigate Half Blood Prince. Or when she tests the book - "Finished? Or do you want to see if it does backflips?" "Do you have rub it in Hermione, how do you think I feel now?" at the end of HBP. ) In OOTP, his best method to deal with her when she bothers him was lying, avoiding her nagging and if that doesn't work, explode and treat her to display of his temper. There is more to explore here, of course - even with regard to how he deals with Mrs Weasley in Book 4, 5 and the difference of him hugging her in Book 7.

5. Fascination with the dead/ a passive death wish

Harry feels remarkably little sense of betrayal knowing that he was set up to die by Dumbledore. His self sacrificing streak is rooted in his love, yes, but I also think Harry is a little bit too fascinated by death, not surprising considering most people he loved are dead. Him wanting the resurrection stone in DH, him obsessively spending time at Mirror of Erised (to the point he feels feverish and Ron thinking he looks strange) until Dumbledore stops him, him almost wanting to fail to learn a Patronus because he wants to hear his parents voice, the hearing of whispering voices in the Veil in OOTP which only Luna could hear apart from him, the scene at the grave where he almost wishes he was "lying under the snow" with his parents, the possession scene in the book of OOTP has him wishing to die so he can be with Sirius. You can almost argue the Harry has, in many moments, shown raw desire of death. In fact, him choosing to let go of the stone and not go looking for it is a big character decision for him.

I also want to address Harry's temper and how that develops over course of series, the implications of understanding the people he loved and put on pedestal are flawed - but I am afraid this post is already way too long. So I will leave that for some time later.

[platypuskenny]

Can I get more f that Kenny’s physiology with his alter egos? I’m rlly interested in that

(assuming this means psychology, as a follow up to this post)

i’ve put it off cuz i’ve been busy with other stuff but i‘m really glad i got this ask cuz i love kenny and I love thinking about them in the context of their two alter egos!

CW: discussion of child abuse and neglect, including inexplicit discussion of child sexuality. also a lot of discussion of The Whole Kenny Death Thing. also spoilers for the stick of truth if you haven’t played it!

kenny’s been treated a lot more seriously in recent seasons, with a shift in character to be a lot more mature as well, and it’s a development that makes a lot of sense in the context of “the characters have undergone A Lot and it’s really shaped their personalities because they’re at a stage when their brain is still very soft and malleable and susceptible to trauma.”

the addition of karen in “the poor kid” seems to have shaken up the depiction of the mccormicks a lot. in earlier seasons, kenny was more passive about his home situation, or at least went out of his way to ignore them, (like in “best friends forever” when he plays on his PSP and leaves the house while his parents fight). there are early scenes where he does have some responsibility to his family (i.e. trying to win a can of food for them in “starvin marvin”) but usually he’s just depicted as a kid trying to live through a tough situation. though his “willing to do anything for money even if it’s deeply upsetting, depraved, or outright deadly” character trait from “fat camp” kind of tracks with this understanding that he prioritizes financial security over his personal well-being. 

however, ever since karen was added to the show, kenny’s been depicted as a much more responsible and often even tragic figure. his parents are too caught up in their own shit to address their children’s emotional needs, and kevin sadly gets caught up in their violence as well in “the poor kid” (he’s also vaguely implied to be developmentally disabled in the few scenes he speaks up but that’s mostly speculation). because of this, kenny ends up being karen’s main caretaker - holding her close when she’s distressed at losing her parents, buying her a doll, etc. 

kenny’s situation is a textbook example of parentification. he ends up taking care of karen, at least emotionally, because his parents and brother are unable to do so. he also becomes the breadwinner in “the city part of town” as soon as he gets the chance. this is a really unhealthy scenario that a lot of children in poverty, especially older siblings, see themselves in. it can result in the child not knowing their true place in a family that takes them for granted, and thus not considering their own needs and/or feeling shame if they need help because they’re so used to putting everybody before them. i think this tracks with kenny being “the quiet one” and rarely asking for anything. 

that’s not even getting into the constant death and the fact he spent so much of his life not even understanding why he was doomed to constantly die in horrible painful ways, and for nobody else to remember that he even died to begin with. (kind of symbolic of the neglected child, huh?) 

this brings us to mysterion and princess kenny. in both the superhero game and the fantasy game, you’ll notice kenny is the one who tends to get the most involved, with the only exception being possibly cartman, who could be the topic of a whole other essay on identity issues. mysterion is the one superhero with a real power who exists outside of their superhero game (besides the kewn, whose superhero persona is entirely self-motivated anyway), and princess kenny gets so defensive of her identity that she betrays her friends in both the trilogy and the game. kenny also talks about lady mccormick in the third person in the first black friday episode, and i don’t know if any other characters speak about their personas in that way. so kenny intentionally places more distance between his personas and himself than the other kids do with their personas. 

therefore, i see mysterion and princess kenny as how kenny copes with his deeply repressed psychological issues. it’s a way to compartmentalize his feelings towards his constant suffering and the burden his family inadvertently placed on him by developing these two identities. one embraces his role as caretaker to the degree of becoming a superhero, and the other rejects it in favor of being entirely doted upon. (some people have read the prominence of roles as signs of a dissociative disorder, and i can see that with this context, but i don’t know if it’s really a perfect fit for any specific disorder, especially when there’s little information on kenny’s consciousness when it comes to these personas.)

mysterion is more obviously a tool for kenny to express his discontent with his town. in his first appearance, he states, “i could no longer sit by and watch as my city became a cesspool of crime,” which tracks with his earlier characterization as reluctantly accepting his family’s poverty despite constantly suffering. (plus i’m pretty sure several of kenny’s deaths were the result of crimes.) he refuses to be unmasked because he “would stop being a symbol,” and only does so in order to quell the unrest that his mystery has provoked. that "symbol" wording suggests that mysterion is an extreme version of kenny's self-sacrificing lifestyle to the point where he defines himself as a symbol of justice and hope, not a person. kenny himself is also pretty quiet and secretive, but more because nobody cares about him and he’s kind of afraid of getting killed any second. mysterion’s secret persona is something bold, powerful, and masculine. he is physically adept in a way we don’t see kenny behave, and much more reasonable and cautious about what’s best for him and humanity. (a good visual of this to contrast with kenny is the “mysterion re-rising” animation in the fractured but whole, where he consciously rejects the chance to go to the heaven full of naked women that kenny loves because he has to return to battle.)

mysterion is also a way for kenny to reclaim his "curse” and use it for good. as mysterion, he uses death (albeit reluctantly) to get out of tough situations and save his friends. in video games like fractured but whole and phone destroyer, mysterion’s ability to exist as a ghost and revive himself is a gameplay mechanic. this self-sacrificial personality trait has shown up in earlier seasons, and he kills himself for the good of the community/world/etc in “cartman’s mom is still a dirty slut,” the movie, and “jewbilee.” but he’s not nearly as interested in world issues unless he’s under pressure to care. (for example: he does join the workers’ strike in “bike parade,” but he’s not very passionate about it and doesn’t even care about the issue until his dad takes him to a union meeting.) kenny’s good with solving short-term issues while mysterion worries about the deeper, long-term problems with the town. 

this brings us to mysterion and the mccormicks. when we see mysterion’s interactions with karen, we see how mysterion represents kenny’s responsibilities towards her. mysterion is able to offer karen elaborate, heartfelt emotional support, and guarantee that he’ll always be there for her. he also beats up a girl who bullies her and threatens anybody else who thinks about hurting her - more on that aggressive instinct down below. while mysterion’s identity is known to his friends and the rest of the town, it’s not known to karen, who sees him as a guardian angel. presumably, this is so mysterion can remain a symbol of hope to her, just like he is to the town, and so karen feels like there’s people in the world who care about her besides her brother. however, this does backfire in the fractured but whole DLC where she laments how her brother doesn’t seem to spend time with her, which embarrasses mysterion as he promises to tell him to be there for her more often. this implies that kenny gets so wrapped up in being mysterion that he forgets that he has a duty to karen as kenny as well, further indicating that mysterion is a way to cope with the tragic responsibility of caring for a sibling not much younger than he is.

during the superhero trilogy, kenny also uses mysterion to question his parents about their cult meetings, something that shook him so badly when he learned about it that he broke character. mysterion also told his parents to be nicer to the kids, not beat each other up, pay their kids allowances, and not smoke. it seems that mysterion is able to approach kenny’s parents about serious issues while kenny himself mostly stays out of their business - possibly out of fear? (kenny’s more confrontational in later seasons, though - flipping off his dad in “bike parade,” for example.)

on a similar note, mysterion is way more openly angry and violent than kenny is, especially when it comes to the death curse, which he openly complains about in a way kenny himself never did. compare kenny complaining about stan ignoring his deaths in “cherokee hair tampons,” which only gets further ignored, and mysterion complaining about it in graphic detail in “coon vs coon and friends,” even killing himself in front of his friends, and understandably scaring the shit out of them. mysterion also gets really protective of karen, violently so, as seen with the girl he beats up in “the poor kid” and his distrust when the vampires befriend her in the “from dusk til casa bonita” DLC. such a mysterion is way more passionate and loud about justice and direct action while kenny is more resigned, and most of his good deeds are unknown to the public. if kenny has embraced this caretaker role, it makes sense that he vents his repressed anger through mysterion, especially if you take it in the context of dissociation - kenny can’t handle dwelling on his shitty life all the time, so mysterion holds that anger and finds a way to cope with it by trying to fix everything around them, including kenny’s home life. 

princess kenny is very opposite mysterion in many ways. most obviously, she’s a girl. kenny’s relationship with gender is something i think about a lot in light of PK. “tweek vs craig” depicted him as the only boy in home ec, and he was thrilled because it was the safe alternative to the deadly shop class. i think that, regardless of your headcanon for kenny’s gender (i personally see them as feminine nonbinary - i’m mostly using “he” pronouns in this essay strictly for recognition’s sake and because i’m mostly talking about the show’s depiction of kenny), he sees femininity as safe and comforting, but nevertheless very powerful. (remember that his mother, while not super feminine, is a very outspoken and aggressive woman who calls stuart out on his shit constantly.) and what’s a better combination of femininity and power than a magical girl? 

also one thing i want to note real quick is that karen still refers to kenny as her sister in the stick of truth despite not being super involved in their game which i personally choose to read as Trans Rights Subtext

this is how we get lady mccormick / princess kenny, who is largely a passive character during the black friday trilogy, sitting upon her throne and cutely commenting on the surroundings while stan translates for her. then when sony takes her in, she becomes the star of her own show, a magical japanese princess who doesn’t take shit from cartman or his army and gets whatever she wants because she’s a cute little girl and now she gets to be protected and doted upon! also she speaks japanese and is not muffled in the slightest despite wearing her parka....symbolism? and really interestingly is that when she supposedly dies, she brushes herself off and immediately revives, declaring that she’s okay. in kenny’s feminine fantasy, she doesn’t suffer when she dies, and revives without any mess at all. princess kenny is always gonna be okay!

PK is also very flirty and overly sexual. it’s no secret that kenny is very interested in and knowledgeable of sex. he also absolutely worships women’s bodies, as seen with his views of heaven and that whole plot of “major boobage.” i don’t even read this as lust, because he’s ten, but sheer fascination with sex. maybe it plays into that whole “growing up too fast” concept where he tries to indulge in the “fun” parts of adulthood to make up for the exhaustion of caregiving, but this has been a thing since before kenny was depicted as a real caregiver so IDK. 

anyway, i think PK is also a way for kenny to experiment with flirting and sex, particularly with other boys. she uses her coyness and, in the games, her bare chest to entice boys. her cuteness also attracts grown men in “titties and dragons” which goes largely unremarked upon, which is a bit uncomfortable but still works with the idea that she’s the most “lovable” form of kenny. she also apparently thinks the new kid is “cute.” iit’s really funny to me how kenny is depicted as interested in strictly girls while princess kenny only focuses on boys, which could support the idea that PK is a separate entity from kenny, or that kenny just needs to figure himself out. either way, i imagine kenny finds some thrill in getting men to pay attention to them when their male friends often treat her as superfluous, and even then it often involves objectifying herself (this also tracks with their behavior in “fat camp”). it’s kind of sad if you think about it.

in the climax of the stick of truth, princess kenny has her own in-depth backstory, where she was an orc/elf rejected by both the elves and humans. i think this reflects kenny’s feeling of being “othered” as non-human (since this game chronologically comes after the superhero trilogy) and just generally not feeling welcome among their friends unless they need her. there may also be some parallels between her friends denying her the right to be a princess and kenny’s friends refusing to believe in his immortality. when she rebels against her friends choosing the stick over friendship, it’s another way for kenny to cope with their mixed-to-negative feelings about their friends. so while PK is a figure to be doted on, she’s still probably more gutsy than the kenny we usually know. 

however, PK is not entirely selfish or apathetic about the world around her. in the opening of “a song of ass and fire,” her inner monologue explains her choice to deflect to the PS4 side as the side she believes “is best for all.” she also laments that everybody, including her parents, will be fighting on black friday. it seems that PK dreads the mere idea of war, which contradicts mysterion’s tendency to use violence as a means to protect others. PK still uses her adorableness to help her team, and only asks that they accept her, which really isn’t much. it’s just when she, you know, becomes a nazi zombie and puts the world in danger because she’s so pissed about not being accepted for who she is. 

in my original post, i used the freudian personality theory to explain these three personas, which i regret because i fucking hate freud and he’s heavily responsible for modern consumerism and planned obsolescence. but the basic concepts of the id, ego, and superego do kind of illustrate what i’m getting at with these guys. i assigned princess kenny as the id, because she’s more about self-gratification and getting what she thinks she deserves as well as a tendency towards sexual gratification, and mysterion as the superego (hehe get it super) because of his strong inclination towards morality. however, this isn’t that black-and-white, as princess kenny has some moral considerations and mysterion has violent impulses (the “aggressive instinct”) that are more easily attributed to the id. nevertheless, it seems that kenny is still the balance between these exaggerated personas, and when he expresses attitudes similar to theirs, they are far more downplayed due to the necessities of his situation as a caretaker and an underappreciated friend. kind of makes you wonder if/how the attitudes of mysterion and princess kenny will manifest in him when he’s older.

[mirrinbelde-shitposts]

I think you’re mercury is in Capricorn?

It's *you're, but indeed I have a Capricorn Mercury.

Welcome to your reading. Please remember to send feedback.

First impressions when looking at your chart: even distribution of planets; lots of aspects; a grand trine

SUN IN LIBRA

The Sun has its fall in Libra. This is, therefore, the most difficult position for the Sun, theoretically speaking. Concretely, you may find it hard to know and express yourself or you may have trouble developing healthy self-esteem. You may achieve self-discovery through socializing and relationships, particularly romantic ones. Your indecisive personality may hinder your journey of self-knowledge, so beware of this. You have a big need for harmony in life and in relationships, but your partner should balance you, so a person who can take initiative and make decisions is ideal, someone who is dynamic and has a taste for adventure. You are quite sociable and loved by everyone. Venus lends you grace, elegance, good taste and a high sense of diplomacy, fairness and justice.

SUN IN THE 11TH HOUSE

Here, the Sun is in the house of Aquarius. Libra does well here, because the two signs share some traits: humanitarianism, great importance of friendships, fondness of socialization. With the Sun placed here, I think that your group of friends is absolutely crucial to you: you can blend in well and you're very much accepted and liked by them. You can lead without being dominating, which makes people naturally bend to your desires. The Libra and Aquarius mix make me think that you would do well as an activist, a spokesperson for an NPO or a civil rights lawyer. The discovery of your identity may be acquired whilst in one of these groups or associations. You place great importance on your social life and you work together in a team. However, you should take care not to become too much like those around you.

MOON IN SCORPIO

Once again, you have a planet in Fall. Scorpio is a sign known for its intensity, whilst the Moon is a sensitive, delicate luminary. This position probably means that your emotional life is intense and dramatic. Your relationships are quite deep when it comes to the bond, but they are also complex and you may struggle to maintain them. Nothing is ever good enough, you are always unsatisified. You can mess with other people's emotions, be it on purpose or not. This may be due to your high intuitiveness and ability to discern others' thoughts and secrets. I'd say people cannot be indifferent to you. You may attract a lot of bad wishes, but some desperately want to be you or be with you. You probably take a lot of time to trust someone, but when that happens, you become a deeply loyal and caring partner, revealing you inner fragility and insecurity. However, you strong façade can probably keep most people away. Changing your nature may be quite difficult, but an unexpected loss may cause you to rethink your approach to life.

MOON IN THE 1ST HOUSE

You embody some of the Moon's traits, for example, your highly accurate intuitiveness regarding other people's feelings. Also, a bit like Cancer Moon, you may become "infected" by the feelings of those around you. With the Moon placed here, you may feel more comfortable showing your emotions, which very much contrasts with your Scorpio Moon. This is even more so because your Moon conjuncts the Ascendant. The relationship with your mother could be extremely important to you, for the good or for the bad. This placement also gives you an almost motherly quality: you can be quite good at perceiving when and how people need emotional support.

MERCURY IN SCORPIO

In this sign, Mercury behaves in a controlled, secretive way. You may be very cautious with your words, preferring to listen and to think, rather than to speak. You are graced with a natural curiosity toward the secret and the hidden things. You may enjoy delving on the concealed intentions and thoughts of others. Being a fixed sign, you may fiercely defend your opinions, as well as have a hard time seeing the world though a different lens. I think this may be a good placement for someone who works with the human mind: a physcologist or a detective. Your mind is restless, always looking for answers as to how things happen. However, you can give off reserved and secretive vibes, which may not be the most welcoming. Nevertheless, your ability to discern what other people struggle to see may be a huge advantage for you.

MERCURY IN THE 12TH HOUSE

This is the most karmic house. Mercury placed here may cause difficulty in bridging your thoughts and your feelings. Nevertheless, as I mentioned in the section about Scorpio Mercury, you enjoy mental gifts that are out of the reach of most people. Your inner world is very important to you; a refuge, even. You often delve deep into the subconscious mind, attempting to find explanations for what happens in the real world. In your case, since it makes a lot of sqares and oppositions, this need of yours may cause you to get obsessed, paranoic, even, so be careful not to let the influence of the powerful 12th house overtake your mind. This placement may lead to thoughts that, in turn, cause problems. It is your mission in this lifetime to learn from past lives and use this energy to better know yourself and the world around you.

VENUS IN VIRGO

Venus falls in the sign of Virgo (3 planets Fall in your chart, are you ok?). Here, Venus is given the tools of Mercury, which differ so very much from her own. For one, you are way too logical and analytical in your relationships. Your emotions aren't felt that much; you prefer to rationalize them, perhaps because you don't know how to deal with them in the first place. You probably prefer platonic relationships over romantic ones, because the latter require those feelings of which you have little understanding, whilst the former can rely upon solely on the mind, your speciality. You are intelligent, determined, put together and goal-oriented. Acts of service is probably the way to win you. Nevetheless, you don't fall for just anyone. You have to think a lot before entering a relationship, weighing all the pros and cons. However, when you do commit, you are are quite loyal and cute with your partner.

VENUS IN THE 9TH HOUSE

This placement is one of the indicators of having a foreign spouse or someone from a different cultural background; perhaps you will meet them abroad. This is because of your desire to connect to people in your travels. You also wish for a relationship that will broaden your horizons and will bring lots of adventures. Additionally, your relationships may affect how you see the world. You have a thirst for adventure. This is also a good position for teachers because it allows them to connect their love (Venus) to their teachings (9H).

MARS IN SAGITTARIUS

Mars in this sign makes for a highly adventurous, spontaneous, fun-loving individual. You have that reckless optimism that defines Sagittarius so well. With Mars here, you act in a blunt way and you are not afraid to take risks. This placement also aids with that search for the truth that I mentioned in the two Mercury sections. Sagittarius is also quite concerned with the higher mysteries, so Mars here goes well with your Mercury. You may also take action through your ideals; Jupiter, which rules Sagittarius, is also an idealist planet. Morals are quite important to you. Also, like the other Fire Mars, this is an auspicious placement for people who do sports competitively.

MARS IN THE 2ND HOUSE

Here, Mars is tied in with the themes of Taurus. Since Taurus is a fixed sign, I'd say that you are very good at getting what you want because you are quite determined and perseverant. You may have a strong will to acquire material things that bring you comfort and security. In that sense, you may wish to have a high-paying job that allows you to buy the things that allow you to have that comfortable lifestyle. However, you may spend your money too generously, so beware of that. You are brave and dynamic, qualities that help you to achieve what you want.

JUPITER IN TAURUS

Jupiter here emphasizes the importance that your values and desires have to you: harmony, comfort, security are of utmost importance. Like I mentioned, if you feel safe, you will appreciate all of these things in life. Jupiter also grants you a high need for love and affection, which, if provided, will be more than enough to make you happy. However, if you do not feel that security, you may become possessive, be it with people or with material things. Also, you may lead a lifestyle too focused on your earthly possessions. Lastly, you may also be anxious about the future; you want to know what’s in store for you.

JUPITER IN THE 5TH HOUSE

This placement expands your creative abilities. As a means to find yourself (Libra Sun), you may make use of the arts to express your identity. This is a lighter placement, that may give you that fun-loving, extroverted, childlike outlook on life. Once again, a placement that favours sports. It may also be a good one to have in order to better bond with children. Take care not to get too vain, because, with Jupiter in the house of Leo, you may feel compelled to be the best at everything you do, to be the star. You probably have lots of hobbies and may like to be a little risky with them; perhaps gambling or something along those lines, something challenging.

SATURN IN TAURUS

Your insecurities are tied to your possessions. This placement is not a good one in terms of managing money; you could’ve had problems in this area in a past life. Your self-esteem is too connected to what you belong, instead of what you are. You are too attached, so you also fear losing those things you love. You’re also too afraid to change, perhaps because you are not one to take risks, preferring to choose what you know. You shouldn’t think this way. Change is a natural part of life, one you must accept. Your self-growth is achieved through the connection to your heart. Learn to feel, instead of owning. Learn how to connect to people.

SATURN IN THE 6TH HOUSE

You can feel responsible for other people, especially your coworkers, even if you struggle getting along with them. There’s a need to serve, to be of use to others; you may find it hard to relax. You are quite organized, so you’d do well to make use of it. You could also be the type to help others in the way to their goals. However, you should also understand that, sometimes, you should just let go and go with the flow. Not everything in life is about hard work, routines or responsibilities. Find something that excites you; try some meditation. There may also be some health issues, perhaps you had them in your childhood. ⬛

[things2mustdo]

As the example of Gomer, the Biblical story of Jezebel and her husband Ahab often bears applicability to the cultural state of modern feminist societies. Her cultural symbolism throughout the ages has been with false prophets, fallen women, paganism, apostasy, deception, manipulation, seduction—and, in modern times, with feminist women.

The spirit of Jezebel and her crimes

According to the Hebrew Book of Kings, Jezebel (a name with disputable multiple meanings: 1.”Not exalted,” or 2. “Where is the Prince?”, an allegorical ritual cry from pagan worship ceremonies in honor of the pagan deity Baal during periods of the year when he was considered to be in the underworld)— was a Phoenician princess, the daughter of Ethbaal, who was the king of Tyre, and a priest of Baal. Jezebel incited her husband Ahab, the king of North Israel, to abandon the worship of God and encourage worship of the false deities Baal and Ashtart (also called Ishtar) instead.

She is notable for her rebellion against God via promotion of witchcraft and idolatry and ruthless persecution of the Biblical prophets of her time through her husband. She is also guilty of deception, as seen in the fabrications of false evidence of blasphemy against an innocent landowner called Naboth who refused to sell his property to King Ahab, causing the landowner to be put to death. For these transgressions and crimes against God and people of Israel, Jezebel met a gruesome death as prophesized by the prophet Elijah. She was thrown out of a window by members of her own court retinue, and the flesh of her corpse eaten by stray dogs.

The article “Jezebel, in our society” aptly describes the spirit of Jezebel. Here is an excerpt:

“The Jezebel spirit is born of witchcraft and rebellion. This demon is one of the most common spirits in operation today, both in the church and in the world, and it is a powerful enemy of the body of Christ. She operates freely on sincere believers whose hearts are for God individually, and has also attained positions of power as powers and principalities within the Church. This spirit establishes its stronghold primarily in women; however, many men have been victimized by it as well, where it functions as a “controlling” spirit.

The spirit of Jezebel is behind the daughter of Democracy, i. e. Feminism.

The Spirit of Jezebel is basically a controlling spirit working through the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It has, in general, two aims:

To gain identity, glory, recognition, power, and satisfy the need for the “praises of men”. This is a consequence of the desire for love and self-worth focused on SELF.

Secondly the Jezebel spirit is a men hater and seeks to emasculate all men, and divest them of their authority and power over others. It fosters a distrust and hatred of men in general. The “Jezebel spirit” is in a constant agitation, terribly aggressive, very determined, callous, controlling, selfish, power-hungry, manipulative, unrepentant, deceitful spirit, an overwhelmingly evil spirit, and those are mostly only it’s good points! Indeed this spirit can be definitely named “Satan’s woman”.

There are two main types of the Jezebel spirit:

The high-profile type is generally gregarious, outspoken and highly visible. She is often seen as the “woman who wears the pants in the family”.

The low-profile type is soft-spoken, giving the illusion of being solicitous, motherly, protective, even appearing very submissive. The low-profile type may be the most dangerous, as she is the most difficult to discern. She relies heavily on manipulation for her power, in extremely subtle performances.”

The notable point to be noted in her death was her ostentatious decoration of herself, akin to prostitutes of those times, just before she was thrown to her death by her servants–which Isaac Asimov describes as a deliberate symbolism of her arrogant determination to go out of this life as a “queen.”

Jezebel’s religious beliefs, glorification and “humanization”  by modern society, and her modern day sisters

Jezebel promoted the ancient religion of the Canaanites which included Baal and Ashtart worship. Ashtart is a Semitic Goddess of Love and War and the Canaanite Great Goddess who is the cult partner of Ba’al (“the King”). Heterosexual orgies were associated with Ashtart whereas homosexual orgies were associated with Baal. The spring equinox (spring break) was associated with ritual sex orgies to honor Astart.

Drunken revelry and debauchery; modern day “pagan” spring equinox festivals of old?

Today, Jezebel is often glorified by apologetics (usually women) as an example of female power, domination, and strength who was victimized by the “misogynist” authors of the Bible, while often disregarding or underplaying the glaring crimes and atrocities she committed in her earthly life. Her refusal to submit even in her death (actually out of her pride), is apologetically portrayed in recent modern times, as feminist heroism and victimization by a patriarchal culture of those times.

Feminist apologetics even paint her humanely, as a “faithful” polytheist woman to her husband and her faith, while comparing Elijah as a villainous fundamentalist rabblerouser similar to a modern day religious extremist. They state that Jezebel’s harlotry was spiritual, and not literal—since polytheism was often referred to as harlotry—but what must be noted that the Baal and Ashtart worship Jezebel promoted was related to ritual sex and sacred prostitution. Since there is no “factual” information on Jezebel, such apologetic acquittals of her using “historical imagination” are just as likely to be correct or incorrect as any other.

One fact is common: Jezebel was a ruthless Godless tyrannical woman who defied human dignity, weaved outrageous lies,  shed innocent blood, spread corruption—all to satisfy her ego—and she deserves her bad reputation. Nevertheless, she remains a role model and heroine for feminists, with modern apologetic feminist versions of her story .

Feminists accuse that Jezebel’s vilification in the Bible was because of the “victorious” who wrote (distorted) Biblical history. Feminists are actually rewriting modern history by embodying Jezebel’s traits by deed due to the proliferation and dominance of feminism in modern societies, so it’s the case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Thus, the name Jezebel (from the Biblical example of Jezebel herself) itself has become synonymous with a scheming woman. The 1938 hit “Jezebel” was one of the earliest adaptations of a headstrong scheming woman whose actions cost her the man she loves, but later schemes to win him back as for her “the end justifies the means”—and who is told by her aunt that she reminds her aunt of “Jezebel, a woman who did evil in the sight of the Lord”.

Many men today deal with such scheming women in their day to day lives. Compare the Biblical Jezebel’s traits with feminism-bred, modern women you’d commonly see around you, which are explored below:

Rebelliousness – both moral and spiritual? Check.

Controlling tendencies over men (more so in partnerships)? Check.

Tyrannical , unfeminine behavior and cruelty over the weak? Check.

Narcissism? Check.

Hatred towards men (covert or open)? Check.

Extravagance, hustling and materialistic greed? Check.

Spiritual harlotry and skepticism or general disdain for patriarchal religion? Check.

Witchcraft and occult Sympathies? Check.

Deception, habitual lying and cunning manipulation? Check.

No sense of justice? Check.

Promotion of sexual profligacy to fellow women? Check.

Hubris and capriciousness? Check.

General refusal to accept mistakes, no conscience and shamelessness? Check.

The reason why Jezebelian traits are increasingly seen in modern feminist women is the same as what defined Jezebel herself: spiritual rebellion or disgust to patriarchal religion in modern feminist societies. With the rise of witchcraft (Jezebel’s faith) in modern societies, more women turn away from patriarchal religion. And religious and spiritual corruption then sets the tone for eventual moral corruption, as godless women will obviously act in godless ways.

The rising skepticism towards religion itself in the modern world further complicates the problem. As mentioned above, the influx of the Jezebelian spirit into religious institutions further poisons the very framework which could possibly have exorcised the roots of the Jezebelian spirit in the modern world.

Modern day Ahabs: Manginas and White Knights

Ahab represents the powerful yet identity-less, henpecked monogamous posturing beta—totally controlled by his mate Jezebel. He even committed gross injustices and crimes on the innocent as on Naboth, at her behest. Henpecked men, white knights, and manginas are thus common modern day examples of Ahab. The pussy-whipped meek husband is the unassuming version of Ahab, for he allows his domineering wife to not only take the decisions and steer him into whichever direction that she wishes, but also because he doesn’t take charge to either change her or himself to assume control.

Ahab’s life represents that of a resourceful and powerful man who had no identity of his own, and often depended on his woman to define his identity by allowing her to lead him. He was a mere tool in her hands, for her to achieve her aims.

But in the modern world, isn’t it common to see an educated, intelligent, successful man abandon his sane judgment, spiritual identity and dignity to be manipulated into unjust and godless behavior by the women he loves or desires—whether he may be married or single—very much like Ahab? And for what? Often simply for sake of sex and companionship with his partner.

Just like how Ahab killed Naboth at the behest of his wife, so do many modern men commonly commit crimes and injustices at the behest of their women. Throw into this picture greed, material success and sensual pleasure and the modern man will never detach himself from his Jezebelian mate. The addiction to earthly and material pleasures over spiritual and mental development is commonly seen in modern day Ahabs. In a modern world where materialism is the religion, modern day Ahabs will easily rationalize to themselves and to others the evil behavior instigated by their Jezebelian mates, as being ‘pragmatic’ and often ‘necessary’.

Conclusion

The story of Jezebel and Ahab shows the seeds of corruption of a society: weak godless influential men coupled with controlling corruptedgodless women. “Behind every successful man is a woman”: this is the lie propagated in modern feminist societies. But the real truth is that “behind every successful woman is a man”—as seen in Jezebel’s story. Her weak husband’s immense social power and influence, helped her to achieve her evil designs. She would’ve been nothing had she not married a powerful weakling like Ahab, to achieve her vile aims and promote her religious ideology. The same analogy can be applied to feminists and manginas. Without manginas and white knights, feminists (or for that matter feminism) would never have achieved prominence. Male complacency eventually leads to female tyranny.

Religious and spiritual decline are the first signs of the impending corruption of a society. The spiritual corruption commonly seen in modern feminist societies not only results in the moral decline of civilization, but will also eventually result in the proliferation of modern day Jezebels and Ahabs. It ‘s a serious problem, as every man (moreso red pill), irrespective of his religious beliefs, could or would suffer on account of these modern day Jezebels and Ahabs, like Naboth.

Feminism is the modern day religion which eventually produces and harbors them. And these signs look ominous for the future generations.

Read More: The Disturbing Relationship Between Feminism And The Occult

To begin with, I want to share a real-life experience of a friend who was in a “relationship” with an Eastern European girl who dabbled in the occult. To condense his long saga, his girl was your typical “traditional,” “feminine” girl who cooked for him and provided great on-demand sex (often with incapacitating post-orgasm hangovers). Everything seemed “perfect” between them for six months or so, but all along this time, little did he know that she was a closet “witch” who was casting “love” spells on him “to bind” him to her.

Succubus, witch, and “girlfriend”— all in one. He later discovered that he’d gotten more than what he had bargained for.

A spell gone horribly wrong

Gradually, things got predictable and boring as the relationship progressed and the passion faded. Her subtle, capricious demands soon became overt domination, which prompted him to seek an immediate closure to the relationship. This triggered the worst in her.

Hell hath no fury as a witch scorned

He then proceeded to have a harrowing time. He shared how he discovered she was stashing used condoms with his dried semen, shaved hair and pictures for her occult experiments to “bind” him before he finally kicked her out of his home. Not to mention she had even tried to “hex” his food to complete the binding on him.

Things then turned very ugly, with her first trying to stalk him (after he kicked her out), then psychologically intimidating him, and when all that failed—she tried to screw up his social and professional reputation however she could.

He was strong enough to resist her attacks, but his relationship was a compelling enough inspiration to learn about the occult, and to discover the common ideology it shares with feminism. Since readers may or may not believe in the paranormal, the point deduced from this story which will be primarily focused upon below is the surprising link between feminism and the occult.

The first revolt against patriarchy

The glorification of the female form, beginning with Lilith, the supposed first wife of Adam (who disobeyed him and is considered to be the first “feminist”) is an integral part of the occult, unlike in the patriarchal Abrahamic religions.

According to occult belief, Lilith was Adam’s first wife, the archetype feminist that every man marries and then divorces. She constantly argued with Adam and refused to lie under him during copulation by saying they were “equal.”A text of the “Story Of Lilith” can be read here. Her refusal to submit to Adam is said to be the first revolt against patriarchy.

Occult and feminism in the modern world

Feminism has its roots in the occult and witchcraft. A point well established by Mitch Horowitz, author of “Occult America” .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr5yweBE-8w

Modern progressive feminist society has in many ways become a covert, occult-driven society. Reverence for the “Goddess” or “Divine Feminine” (a concept common to witchcraft, feminism, liberalism), beginning with the rise of the “Goddess movement” in Anglo countries and coinciding with second-wave feminism in the 70’s, has become more prevalent in the present day. A resultant product of five decades of feminism and its associated spirituality (occult).

Today, we’re bombarded day in day out, everywhere by occult symbolism through media. Just type “occult symbolism” in any search engine on the web and see the results for yourself.

Blue-pill (beta) culture, which typically romanticizes the concept of an ideal, sentimentalized love, has all its roots in the occult, as seen with the recent increasing consumerism of romantic occult-themed cinema by modern societies, especially by the younger generation.

Most female occultists of the past and present held the belief of the psychological superiority of women as compared to that of men. Similarly, masquerading as a movement for women’s rights, feminism—as a cruel ruse—tells women their natural biological instincts are “socially constructed” to oppress them.

Feminism’s social engineering, designed to destroy gender identity by interchanging gender roles, is actually a movement for women to covertly promote a hatred for men, as well as indirectly serving as a driving force for the occult (or its concepts), for they both often share a common ideology.

Feminism’s mission to give any woman however worthless and undeserving she may be the power to lead men like bridled horses or yoked oxen whichever, whenever, and however she wants to is analogous to the witch who‘d supposedly “control” a man to do her bidding, through “magical” manipulation.

Connecting the lines from the dots

Is it a mere coincidence that the repeal of the Witchcraft Act in the UK in 1951, coupled with a revival of occult/witchcraft coincided with the rise of feminism? To illustrate this question further, an excerpt from an article which came out a few years back (you can read the article in full here):

“Why has witchcraft gained such a hold in our Christian-based society? Certainly there are several factors. Many witches are fervent feminists. This is probably the main contributing factor to the rapid growth of the movement. Following ancient rituals faithfully, the Wiccan religion is female-dominant—the high priestess leads the ritual ceremonies. The fertility goddess always receives the primary worship. Wicca is tailor-made for women who desire power and authority over men. True Christianity is solidly patriarchal. This fact grinds away at feminist philosophy. Feminists who have not been able to successfully change Christian teachings to their own liking have embraced Wicca.”

Another article that came out last year shows how witchcraft and the occult is actually growing at a rapid rate more than any other faith in the Anglo sphere. Considering these trends of revival of witchcraft in the West, the Anglo sphere seems more or less likely to be significantly paganized by the end of this century, especially with more and more feminism-bred women choosing it as a “spiritual” path.

Witchcraft around the world

After “registering” its first legal witch, Romania, the famed land of Dracula, became the first country to legalize (and tax) witchcraft as a profession in 2011 (a likely possibility sooner or later in the West, considering current trends).

In Russia and other parts of Slavic Europe (with a  long-etched history of witchcraft), occult-beliefs are still prevalent. A lot of modern, educated women still practice witchcraft (usually “love magic”) covertly—or if not, still believe in it.

The WHO estimated that there were more witches and sorcerers in Russia than practicing doctors in an article which was published four years ago. You could read about a visitor’s journey into the heart of occult in modern day Russia; another article about the revival of occult in modern Russia; and another interesting article about the occult roots of the Russian Revolution. However, Russia seems to be taking proactive action in recent times to crackdown on witchcraft while promoting a reversion to Orthodox Christianity and patriarchal values. Other parts of Europe have seen a recent rise in occult practices, possibly due to occult glorification through media, and these rising trends are also seen in some parts of Asia and Middle East.

In matriarchal societies in Africa, witchcraft has always been practiced since ancient times. Africa faces a similar problem as seen in Russia: more witch doctors than real doctors. A lot of women still use “love spells” and “potions” to bind or control their men, and a lot more people rely on witch doctors to physically heal themselves.

What does the future hold?

The conspicuous correlation is the one between feminism and the occult in places where both are on the rise. It’s often said that ignorance is bliss, but knowledge is power. It’s the power of this knowledge and awareness about the link between feminism and the occult that every man should arm himself with so that he stays away from those women who share occult sympathies. As my friend learned the hard way, the risk isn’t worth it.

Read More: The Tragedy Of Letting A Broken Woman Into Your Life

[atlanqueen]

all hail queen mera

❛ 𝘐 𝘈𝘔 𝘛𝘏𝘌 𝘚𝘌𝘈 & 𝘕𝘖𝘉𝘖𝘋𝘠 𝘖𝘞𝘕𝘚 𝘔𝘌. ❜

LINKS.

AESTHETIC SIDEBLOG     ∕    PLAYLIST    

BASICS.

Given / Birth Name : Y'Mera Xebella Challa Nickname / Preferred Name : Mera, My Queen Alias(es) : Aquawoman Birthdate / Age : 26 June / Thirty-six Place of Birth : Xebel / “Dimension Aqua” : an extradimensional penal colony of Atlantis Current Location : Amnesty Bay, Atlantis Gender Identity : CIS Female, DFAB Sexual / Romantic Orientation : Morosexual / Panromantic Ethnicity / Race / Cultural Heritage: Atlantean / Xebellian, no one is entirely sure where the bridge to Xebel exists and it is often confused with the Bermuda Triangle. While this one path towards it, the more frequently used ( and the one accessible to Mera ) is located in the Indian Ocean, where there is actually a deeper history of wrecks. Split between the two, her appearance evokes this. As such, Mera’s ancestors often influenced the religions of ancient civilizations due to association with electricity and water ( Ixazaluoh, Atabey, Varuna ).  Marital Status : Married Occupation : Queen of Atlantis / Crown Princess of Xebel Religious Beliefs : Polytheism is generally practiced among Atlantis / Xebel, Mera herself takes on a more “okay boomer” approach in regards to this, oftentimes bemoaning the clutter in the ocean caused by their dumbass relics. Essentially, Mera tends to believe in herself above most else and her devotion is to that as a ruler, or rather to the ocean she works in tandem with.  

CHARACTERISTICS.

Height : 5′2″ Weight : This bitch is dense. Body Type / Build : Ectomorph / slim & toned Eye Color : Dark green / sometimes blue or white ( when chatting with Her... the ocean ) Hair Color / Texture : Red. Though her hair appears full and voluminous, it is coarse to the touch, she really does just luck out that it dries like that.  Recognizable Features / Scars : She has tattoos up her hands / arms which look incredibly similar to henna, signifiers of her mastery of the various levels of Xebellian / Atlantean socerery ( they only appear when she is practicing. Additionally Mera has a few scars ( shoulder / abdomen / back ) from battles involving Tritan and Orm.  Speech Patterns / Accent : While on the surface, Mera tends to speak in proper english. There is a hint of an accent, though being that it is not of the world it can’t exactly be placed. Mera tends to speak on the slower side, as she is not one who likes repeating herself.  Languages Spoken : Her default is Atlantean or English, though she is capable of speaking all languages of the world ( it’s a whole thing ).  Powers / Skills / Abilities : Atlantean Physiology ( amphibian nature, enhanced vision, enhanced hearing ); superhuman durability / speed / reflexes / stamina / agility / strength; hydrokinesis / liquid construct creation; low-grade telepathy ( can’t read minds but can communicate / typically works best in water ); ocean sensory ( can feel disturbances in the ocean ); water sense ( knows / communicates with bodies of water ); master combatant; historiographer; leadership Overall Health : Peak physical health

RELATIONSHIPS.

Order of Birth : Eldest Number of Siblings : One Father’s Status + Relationship : Ryus ( father, alive ). Though Mera was deeply devoted to her father all throughout her childhood, the affection could not be considered mutual. Expectations of her to rule a kingdom she was taught to also be disgusted by, along with his eagerness to marry her off / train her to be a queen assassin ultimately showed her his true colors. That being said, he was the greatest influence on her in her most formative years and her skills as a warrior and sorceress. She has made attempts to be the bridge between Xebel and Atlantis, making some strides in the area however his resentment over loss of control in his weapon has caused a bit of friction.  Mother’s Status + Relationship : Circe ( mother, deceased ). Young enough when her mother died, Mera holds no memories of the world. She does, however, hold the sound of shells gifted to her upon coming of age as her most prized possession. Lammia ( paternal grandmother, deceased ). Mera’s maternal influence came from the Dowager Matriarch of Xebel. Mera held great affection for her grandmother and learned all skills as a politician through her.  Sibling Status + Relationship : Hila ( identical twin sister, alive ). Their relationship is complicated -- with Hila having a rebellious nature and tendency to kick up trouble wherever she goes, though ultimately they do love each other.  Loyalty / Affiliation : Atlantis, The Justice League.

PERSONALITY.

Astrological Sign: Cancer Sun, Capricorn Moon, Taurus Ascendant  MBTI : INTJ-A Hobbies : Playing instruments ( flute, harp, Arthur taught her how to play piano ), Crowned Queen of being able to drink Tom Curry under the table.  Bad Habits : Extremely picky eater, bickering as a love language Three Positive Traits : Dutiful, righteous, ambitious  Three Negative Traits : Short-tempered, stubborn, pretentious Moral Alignment : Neutral Good

ASSOCIATIONS.

One Song : She’s Always a Woman - Billy Joel.  One Quote / Piece of Art : Ocean Goddess - Jennylynn Fields. / “ She carries herself like a god. She is a composed ocean of waves that could become turbulent if you test her. ” One Fear : Losing the people she loves / incompetence   One Strength : Leadership One Object : Shell of sounds, from her mother.  One Place : Amnesty Bay Lighthouse One Food : Mango One Scent : Saltwater One Lucky Charm : Her engagement ring.

NOTES.

Born the Crown Princess of Xebel, a prison-kingdom known for active rebellion against Atlantis, it was banished to another dimension long before Mera was born. The people of Xebel are scavengers as a result ( it helps that the ‘bridge’ to this dimension lands in the Indian Ocean, whose warm waters have caused a lot of wrecks over the years ). 

Sticking with movie canon, Atlantis is on a more feudalistic set-up

Mera’s betrothal to the next King of Atlantis ( Orm ) had been set before her birth. This was an effort to alleviate tension / build a pathway back towards Xebel reclaiming some glory.

Her mother died shortly after childbirth, Mera was thus raised by her father with help from his chief taskmaster, Leron and her grandmother Lammia.

Luck of the draw would leave her, the elder of the twins, tasked with winning over a kingdom inclined to look at her as a Princess of Garbage while her own domain began to mistrust her for spending her time in Atlantis. While following the traditional route in studying the power of hydrokinesis, Mera would also frequent the kingdom she was set to rule. 

She was able to build a close relationship with Atlanna in this time, one of the few who ever accept Mera completely. And it is through this, as well, that her subsequent banishment became a defining moment in Mera’s life. 

Her training as a warrior came to head at her coming of age, to prove herself worthy of being a queen. Tasked with killing the only other claim to the throne, she was sent to the surface. 

It. Did. Not. Go. As. Planned. 

A confusing series of dates later, Mera began to soften to the cause of the surface world and become more disillusioned to her place among her own, while encouraging the rightful heir to accept his place in both. Mera became a key advisor, and eventually was unburdened with the task of marriage by way of diplomacy. 

Her placement in destroying the reign of a true Atlantean didn’t win her many friends in a kingdom whose nobles barely accept her, but she made due. 

( And would you look at that, she ended up marrying a King of Atlantis after all, regardless. )

After two back to back wars defending Atlantis, Mera was coronated to begin a long reign of monarchy on equal footing, something the kingdom had rarely seen. 

Though she does split her time between Atlantis and the surface, her priority is typically her kingdom. Mera takes her duty as a queen extremely seriously. 

She joined the Justice League not long after Arthur, having proven her loyalty to the safety of the world as opposed to being a figurehead for the wills of the elite in her own. 

As such, her identity is not publicly known ( disdain for being labelled as a mermaid abound ) and her stance on the Accords is to be in direct contradiction. Atlantis’ status as relatively unknown allows for certain anonymity while operating in these efforts.  

[failtoplan]

Future Imperfect - On Capitalism, Technology and Ideology

Looking out from the 31st floor balcony, it doesn’t seem high until you look down. Shenzhen stretches 80 kilometres east to west, but is only 10 deep, North-South. The city snakes laterally, littorally, between the hills of the Hong Kong border, along  Shenzhen Bay to the Pearl River delta, like a badly kept concrete lawn, with clumps of seventy and eighty story towers sprouting like steel weeds. The 115 story Ping An Tower, the worlds 4th largest, the town’s own tall poppy. When night falls, the entire town lights up like a circuit board, streaming with steel and light. The immaculately kept, perpetually swept, cycle path along the Dasha river is filled with office workers on dockless rental bikes, hired by the half hour, headed to one of the city’s many tech clusters, downstream, deeper into Nanshan district. They’ve phased out almost all the old taxis, replaced with a fully electric fleet. The same for the buses. Pretty much every transaction, from street-corner noodles to legal fees are carried out with QR codes and digital wallets. Cashless, silent, sleek.

This is not ‘The Future’, but it is ‘A Future’. Two days a week I commute from Shenzhen to Hong Kong. The journey takes around an hour and a half, but the time travelled is greater than the distance covered. After getting stamped out of Mainland China and into Hong Kong at the vast Shenzhen Bay checkpoint, coaches and cars spiral up onto the five-and-a-half-kilometre bay bridge to cross over to the New Territories. As we roll up the overpass onto the bridge, the plaiting of concrete weaves carriageways from right-to-left and left-to-right. The first sign that they do things differently here. At least for now.

Hong Kong, like Tokyo, represents a certain obsolete near-future in the collective imagination. Having had its image and form repeatedly appropriated by Hollywood as a stand-in for numerous dystopias, the familiarity can make it seem almost underwhelming. Hong Kong looks exactly like ‘Hong Kong’ - a trait it shares with New York. It also feels like yesterday’s vision of tomorrow. The stuttering neon signs and diesel-streaked streets, PoMo towers and marble-lined lobbies are a particularly sharp contrast with Shenzhen’s unironic modernity. From its peak in 1993, Hong Kong has declined from twenty-seven to less than three percent of China’s GDP. But beyond the numbers, it feels like a city in decline. Slowly, megaprojects such as the Hong Kong-Macao-Zhuhai bridge and the China High-speed Rail Link are stitching the territory together with the mainland, bringing Hong Kong’s greatest fear ever-closer, becoming just another mid-sized Chinese city. With the perceived erosion of its Rule of law, the Special Administrative Region has become a contested space. The acute confrontation over the ‘two systems’ principle, is also representative of a bigger conflict between two ideas. Two visions of what the future could be.

Words can be problematic; they are both the obstacle to articulating a thought and the best way to try. This clash of ideas, in which Hong Kong is just one front, isn’t easily reduced to opposing pairs as the Cold War once was. Capitalism’s ‘victory’ over Communism was always an artificial, lexigraphic binary that pitted an economic system against a total political, social and economic order. ‘Capitalism’ is synecdochic, an easy shorthand for ‘democratic capitalism’ and the free and limited, markets, open societies and shared small-L liberal consensus regarding the primacy of the individual. Democratic Capitalism is Limited Capitalism. And it was ‘Limited Capitalism’ that ‘won’. The front line crossed by the arcing span of the Shenzhen Bay Bridge is not the battle between capitalism and communism. Socialism with Chinese characteristics is Capitalism unencumbered by Democracy. It is the front  line between Total and Limited Capitalism.

Limited Capitalism was never an outright winner, but in its rhetoric, it strived to achieve the illusion of permanence. The rights of the individual – the societal sidekick to the economic superhero - has never been inevitable and maybe not even natural. Increasingly this relic of our post-Enlightenment experiments feels like a humanistic blip. In the face of Brexit and Trump, Bolsanaro and Orban, I have found myself increasingly having to defend the ‘pragmatism of the primacy of the individual’ to friends not just in Singapore and Shanghai, but Boston and Berlin. Yes, it is the freedom to screw up, but it is also the freedom not to be screwed with.

When measured in terms of human development Limited Capitalism has been a great success. But ‘Capitalist Democracy’ is a productive tension, not a synonymic pair. Capitalism privileges results, Democracy, the process. One is fast, the other is slow. The market is majoritarian, while the democratic enshrines the individual, not merely responsible to a simple majority. This makes elections, perversely, the least important aspect of a democracy. Limited Capitalism is an uneasy hybrid. You are free to consume, you are free to participate, but the between the two there is no equivalence. The human flourishing this has propagated cannot be measured by statistics alone. It is this tension that universalised the franchise, enshrined judicial independent and – aspirationally -declared Universal Human Rights. Less tangibly and more significantly it gives each of us a hope of genuine human dignity and all of us some faith in a societal-level trust. Maybe it was easier to win hearts and minds in the late 20th century with Right to Buy than the Rights of Man, but failing to promote the civil alongside the economic conflates consumption with participation, creating the opportunity for Total Capitalism.

-- Shenzhen’s subway tunnels are lined with motion-synced LED screens that animate adverts outside the carriage windows selling pizza and pet food station to station. My connected TV won’t switch on without first showing me a short film promoting the latest toilet paper or plastic surgery procedure. Pop-up ads and promotions are a pervasive part of every single product or service, physical or virtual that I use. Upsell, cross-sell, resell. The imperative to consume is everywhere, the Chinese Dream constantly reinforced as the route to individualisation and self-actualisation. Judged by the old Communist clichés of a “decadent West,” focussed on temerarious consumption, contemporary China is the most “western” place I have ever lived or been. One where I am no more and no less than the sum of my purchases. I buy therefore I am.

At the same time deep integration of seamless technology has evolved a new species of human as consumer, Homo Emptus. The local branch of KFC lets me buy a Family Bucket with nothing more than my face, using cameras linked directly to my virtual wallet which holds my credit cards and fictive cash. Recently I was walking through the precinct by my block, when a young woman ran up to me, apologising. Her cleaner’s phone had stopped receiving transfers and she didn’t have the cash to pay. Did I have any? Pulling a handful of 100 yuan notes out of my pocket, she pulled out her phone, scanned my wallet and transferred me the 300 kuai which I had in cash. In less than a minute I had become a human ATM. It was demeaning and thrilling at the same time, I imagine not dissimilar to the excitement felt by the freshly humiliated submissive.

Sometimes living here can feel like magic. But if you only immerse in the wonder, you miss the cost. Recently, a group of cyclists in Shanghai rode past a police officer, stopped by the side of the road, deep in an animated discussion with the driver they had just pulled over. The group, aware the policeman was otherwise occupied, slowly rolled through the red signal ahead, traffic light on a quiet Saturday morning. Fifteen minutes later by the time they had reached their café stop and pulled out their phones to pay, they had all been fined. Facial recognition cameras mounted on top of the police car had ID-ed them and then allowed the officer digitally ensure justice was done. When we are defined only by our consumption, this make complete sense, our economic life is simply ‘life’, giving the state unprecedented control in return for our convenience. Seamlessness may be fast, but to protect Limited Capitalism, we need seams.

The reality is though that our willingness to conflate commercial choice with civil freedoms has makes it easy for us to walk backwards into Total Capitalism. Using ‘Capitalism’ as a shorthand for so long has meant a lack of focus on the social and political dimensions that has allowing the market to perform as a poor stand-in for the whole. This has led to declining trust in the very institutions that underpin both our societal freedom and our consumer choice. The recent World Values Survey shows a minority in both Europe and the US of people born after 1970 believe it is ‘essential to live in a democracy.’ If this is the case then we have collectively failed to remind ourselves what ‘democracy’ really entails. It has also led to the bizarre inversion for many on the neoliberal right who see any democratic limit placed on the market as ‘undemocratic’

The rising indifference to the democratic can be seen in part as a consequence of Limited Capitalism’s success. Just as a fish does not know that it is wet, we take for granted the protections afforded the individual. We have collectively and systemically failed to remind ourselves of the importance of the water we all swim in. Political leaders and populist demagogues who owe their very existence to the small L liberalism that underpins Limited Capitalism have failed to give credit, choosing instead to pee in the pond for short term gain. Taking our collective socio-political foundations for granted has led to their erosion. Ignoring them has also reduced the success of a state to its economy alone. Whilst freedom of speech won’t feed my children, GDP won’t make them happier or more morally rich. This tyranny of the economic means that states which favour the fast and the outcome will be judged the best performing, outshining those that optimise for the slow, the process, the individual. By judging a state by its economy rather than their humanity, we set up a framework in which the Total Capitalism is not only increasingly easy to admire, but objectively ‘better’, with no way to quantify its glaring qualitative flaws. The fallacy that our economic lives are an adequate stand-in for our civic ones provides the ideological misdirection to pull the trick off. Only what is counted is valued.

Total Capitalism, by succeeding on these terms, promotes a worrying model of growth and unfreedom, chipping away at the old liberal consensus. As pervasive technologies allow ever-greater accumulation of information, we are reaching an inflection point, two divergent versions of how this data is used and its implications for how we live. Progress marches an there is a decision to be made, inaction is not possible. A battle that is waged by only one side, even one of ideas, is not without bloodshed; it is a massacre.

Unencumbered by the limits that the state apparatus of Limited Capitalism places on it, technology can quickly become dystopian. The Limited Capitalist model is not just a check on economic entities – as the EU has proved with its fines on Google and Microsoft - but also on governments. And it adds an implicit societal dimension to the economic role. When Apple refused to provide a back door to iPhone for the FBI, it was asserting its social responsibility, not just its economic function. It helped that these two impulses were congruent here, but the difference between that and the case of the Shanghai cyclists is stark. Tencent, makers of the ubiquitous WeChat Wallet in question, were doing nothing wrong by allowing the state to pick pockets; they were fulfilling their duty, legally obliged to do so in the People’s Republic. The FBI’s response to Apple’s refusal was that American lives might be lost, but people died enshrining the rights Apple was upholding. Do we still believe the defence of the individual is worth dying for?

It would be worth asking that question to the millions of minority Muslims constantly surveilled, or interred in camps in Xinjiang. Advanced monitoring technologies, sharpened to scalpel-like precision, have created an unprecedented digital panopticon. The whole region is monitored at a level of detail that previously would have taken vast armies of watchers and handlers. Now instead, the state has the ability to micromanage human life at a macroscale;  facial recognition, device tracking and digital monitoring turn an entire country-sized region into a prison colony. Xinjiang is not just a tragedy though; it is a testbed. China has rolled the same systems across the entirety of its domestic train network as well as at every airport, port and major public area. More disturbingly, it is a showroom for the implementation of its own particular strain of Total Capitalism. A sinister demonstration of how to unshackle the market from democracy, providing economic liberation whilst maintaining total control. For parts of the world that were previously faced with the choice between an all-inclusive version of modernity, open society and all, China offers an alluring alternative, a cake-and-eat-it model powered by pervasive technologies and financed by Belt and Road loans. And it is one that has succeeded by our own ‘Capitalist’ yardstick.

Total Capitalism is by no means inevitable, and its vision of the future not the only one. Technology is neutral and can be used co-opted for community as well as commerciality. The liberal limits within Liberal, Democratic, Limited Capitalism have allowed it to do both. But our willingness to collapse the social, political and economic into one big flat now have left us at a critical juncture. Hong Kong’s fight is an imperfect allegory for the decision that we need to make about what we should measure and what really matters, particularly in the developed world. We cannot take for granted what we already have. An era is only named after it has long passed. It is up to us to decide if we are to witness the end of this one.

[noplotnostory]

Food for Thought

Monster SOULs and Possible Traits: Part Two

This Food for Thought will be covering my personal theories on what monsters might have which primary SOUL traits. This is operating under the assumption that monster SOULs both have distinct primary traits and that they would be the same primary traits that human SOULs have--which I am by no means certain of--and will only cover the few specific monsters I feel fairly confident in my assessment of (SOUL-trait-wise, at least). More facts and theories concerning monster SOULs and their possible traits--including whether or not they even have primary traits the way human SOULs do--can be found in Part One.

Toriel - Integrity

If there’s one thing the entire UnderTale Fandom can agree on, it’s that Sans is a fairly observant individual who tends to know more about what’s going on around him than pretty much anyone else Underground. So when he says that someone “has an integrity you just can’t say ‘no’ to”, it‘s probably fair to consider that a hint. Especially when everything about that "someone"s history and interactions feels very Integrity-based.

I’ve seen people identify Toriel’s primary SOUL trait as Perseverance, Patience or Kindness a few times, but I don’t really think any of those work. Not as her primary trait, at least.

The thing is, Toriel left Asgore because of her personal moral standards. That’s...pretty much Integrity in a nutshell. Now her history after that point and behavior in the Ruins clearly show an aptitude for Perseverance and Patience as well...but if either of those were her primary trait, it seems more likely that she would stay and try to fix Asgore’s mess from inside the capitol.

Like Perseverance and Patience, Toriel’s Kindness is an undeniable facet of her character, one that we even know was actively demonstrated before she left Asgore as well as after. Toriel is a nurturing, protective and loving individual whose pie is the strongest healing item in the entire game (implying an aptitude for green magic, if the creation of magic food follows similar rules to the creation of magic attacks). And she is a brutally practical and efficient woman who was known for making the difficult decisions for her people as Queen (even firing Alphys after leaving the Ruins and hearing what the Royal Scientist had done) and has a tendency to hold grudges against people who she feels have neglected or abused their station. Specifically her ex-husband who she berates not only for killing children, but being too cowardly or soft-hearted to expedite the process for the sake of their people.

That’s...not Kindness. It doesn’t necessarily make her cruel, but it indisputably displays the unwavering convictions that truly defines Integrity above all else.

Undyne - Kindness

Undyne is a Determined and Brave monster with a battle theme titled “Spear of Justice”. All of these are assets that have undoubtedly served her well as the Captain of the Royal Guard. But, above all else, she’s Kind.

First things first, Determination...is not a SOUL trait.

Click the link.

Read the thing.

Got it?

Ok, moving on.

Bravery is a necessity for Undyne’s line of work. As a member of the Royal Guard, Undyne was tasked with maintaining order in the monster kingdom, capturing humans for the use of their SOULs and--presumably--being prepared to wage war against humankind upon the removal of the barrier. When humans fell and caused panic throughout the Underground, it was Undyne’s duty to put her own life on the line to preserve those of civilian monsters.

Yet, in her armorless “faux battle” after allowing the Fallen Human to live and being left to bond with them by an eager Papyrus, she actually has more DEF than in her real, to-the-death (as far as she knew) battle. Now, if DEF stands for DEsire to Fight (I swear, I read that theory somewhere long before starting this blog, but I can’t find a link or fic anywhere and I’d love it if someone could tell me where I saw this from!) then Undyne is more interested in the “faux battle” than the real one. It’s only one DEF point, but other monsters in the game definitely lose those when they decide that they don’t want to fight anymore, and considering the fact that Undyne is bearing the fate of the entire Underground on her shoulders during the actual battle (regardless of if the Fallen Human is Pacifist, Neutral or Genocidal at that point), she has a lot of reason to fight to win. And in a Genocide Route, she is Determined enough to keep fighting after losing all her HP because all of monsterkind is counting on her and she refuses to let them down. But she has more DEF in the “faux battle”. Which means, regardless of how much she wants to win, regardless of how much she wants to keep everyone safe, regardless of how much she wants to eliminate this proficient threat who has murdered her best friend and subordinates, she does not want to fight as much as she does in the “faux battle”. Her heart’s just not in it as much as it would be for a spar between friends. She feels that she needs to protect and avenge, but the key word is “need”. Not “want”.

There’s another moment that probably isn’t the strongest evidence, but I personally feel like it fits, so I’m going to add it anyways: Jumping off the cliff to save Monster Kid lowers Undyne’s HP. If HP stands for HOPE and has to do with a SOUL’s positive emotions as well as it’s ability to sustain damage (I actually do have a link for this one! :D I found this definition in Chapter 7 of somnivagrantTraviatus’s Sweeter than Honey on AO3!), then witnessing the Fallen Human either attack or abandon an actual child dealt a serious emotional blow. Especially since Undyne had admired humans so much after watching anime with Alphys and really had to work hard to convince herself that humans were the depraved and unrepentant enemy of all monsterkind...and that just made it a little easier (Toby Fox has mentioned wanting her armor to be cracked as well, but since intent is such an important part of how monsters take damage, I’m inclined to believe that whatever might have damaged Undyne’s armor would not have impacted her HP the same way).

As for Justice, while a lot of Undyne’s actions as the Captain of the Royal Guard can be interpreted as both Justice and Kindness, whenever she displays a preference for one over the other, Kindness wins. She’s hesitant to kill the human in front of Monster Kid and while explaining the quirks of her magic and how to combat it makes sense for a friendly spar, it’s not a particularly effective way to execute a possibly deadly and time-sensitive threat to the kingdom.

Also, I feel the need to point out that the song “Spear of Justice” does not play in Genocide Route battles. Since the name of the song is a clear homage to her icon--Gerson, the Hammer of Justice--who she claims had fought against humans in the War that led to monsterkind’s imprisonment, one would think that such a tribute would be fitting for a life-or-death battle against a human who had systematically exterminated every monster they’ve come across since falling into the Underground. But apparently Undyne doesn’t. Whatever it was about Gerson and his reputation that inspired Undyne to join the Royal Guard, apparently that’s not what she was thinking about when going toe-to-toe with a genocidal human. It wasn’t about punishment or serving Justice. It was about saving everyone that was left. A community that she has loved and served and known all her life and she was willing to die to protect them.

That’s...actually why my posts regarding her are tagged “Undyne the Unpredictable”. There’s a certain fluidity that comes with Kindness. Much like Asgore is a “big fluffy pushover” who also happens to be impulsive enough to make a very poorly-thought-out proclamation of war in the throes of grief, Undyne is the sort of person to guard you with her life after a cooking session or use her spears to make you a shish kebab for being a possible threat to monsterkind. It all depends on how she perceives the situation and the people involved.

(And no, I’m not saying that Asgore’s primary trait is Kindness. I’m only saying that he is emotionally-driven. I don’t have a confident conclusion on what his primary trait would be.)

Gerson - Justice

The Hammer of Justice.

Yeah.

He’s probably the easiest monster to assign a primary SOUL trait to despite never fighting the Fallen Human in-game, but let’s go ahead and look at some supporting evidence.

A prevalent retired hero to monsterkind, an apparent veteran of the War of Monsters and Humans and one of the major influences in Undyne’s life, Gerson doesn’t seem like the type to be excessively friendly with the species that trapped him and his people under Mt. Ebott. He claims to have distrusted Chara when the first Fallen Human was still alive and being raised by the royal family and was of the opinion that breaking the barrier and returning to the surface would result in the genocide of all monsters after how thoroughly humanity had defeated them.

Yet, he doesn’t appear to have any vendetta against the Fallen Human who explores the Underground in the events of UnderTale in any route other than Genocide. In Neutral and Pacifist Routes, he even shares information on monster iconography, gives tips on where to sell items, warns the Fallen Human that Undyne is looking for them and ends his conversations with a: “Be careful out there, kid!”

In the Genocide Route, Gerson claims that he was never a hero, but still attempts to stall the Fallen Human so that other monsters could evacuate. In a way, he warns the Fallen Human of Undyne in all routes, but in Genocide he is far more vague and acerbic about it, not mentioning her by name and sounding very certain that she would defeat the Fallen Human. He only laughs once in Genocide Route conversations, and the context implies that it’s not exactly a joyful or good-humored one, unlike in other routes.

I suppose other traits could be ascribed to these various instances and facts, but if you put it all together, it creates an image of someone who strives to protect others even in his old age, but makes a point of not mistreating or prejudging people who have not definitively earned his ire, regardless of past experiences with their species. Despite having every reason to be wary of humanity as a whole, he values Justice regardless of species.

[kai-keda]

YO!

We have a character analysis on Prussia based on Hetalia World Stars/character songs/the anime (as those are the only things I have full access to)

Full script under the "read more”

Clapping Nasty! Thot! Turbo! Virgin! Chaotic! Energy! Clapping

I was dared to say all those things first thing when starting this video. Except that last one. That last one was my own doing.

Anyways, let’s give a quick overview of how this analysis is gonna work. First, we need to discuss what may be considered the elephant in the room to people in the Hetalia fandom who know me on Discord.

Specifically the people in one particular RP server I’m in.

We need to talk about canon.

Now in the past I’ve made a point of the importance of canon when representing these characters. And I stand by everything I’ve said in the past, just not the way I said it. See, I don’t think the people I’ve talked to about it really understand what I meant and that may be my own fault.

When I tried to push the importance of keeping true to what we know about the characters, I got hit with comments like “well I like to add my own ‘glam’ to the character” or “there’s not much about my muse in canon so where does that leave me?” and so on and so forth.

What I really meant by ‘keeping true to canon’ in Hetalia is that we shouldn’t purposefully go against something we know for a fact is true. Even though it’s really easy when there’s not a lot of material for the character in question in the first place, I just can’t understand the appeal of doing something like that. To put it simply, I fell in love with the characters for who they are, not for who I believe they should be.

This issue came up again - unrelated to the first time it was brought up - on tumblr when someone made a popular post about people being told they’re wrong for representing the characters of Hetalia in certain ways outside of canon because they were from the area in question and wanted their character to be more accurate to their culture as they saw it.

Which is a really complicated, controversial and specific to Hetalia discussion, to be perfectly honest. It’s still a great discussion to be had, though!

Where do we draw the line between cultural/historical accuracy and canon characterization? How do we decide what’s more important? When do we let one side win out if we let it win out at all?

These are all great questions that should be saved to be answered another time on another video and/or tumblr post.

For now, let’s just talk about the meaning behind the title of this video and then I promise we’ll get into the character analysis.

If any of my Dragon Ball fans are here, you’ll probably recognize said title from “This is My Goku” and yes I did it on purpose. I’m sort of parodying my own video because that one was so serious and fueled by anger, spite and hatred that it turned out pretty comical in nature. And this one is one fueled by happiness, positive energy and genuine curiosity.

I’m not here to prove some sort of point, I’m here to see how in-line my personal idea of the character is with how he’s represented in the most recent version of “canon” in Hetalia. (i.e; How well does my headcanon fueled characterization fit with the Hetalia World Stars comic strips that HetaScanalations has so graciously shared with all of us?)

A LOT of what we know of Prussia cannot help but be based on personal headcanons and popular fanons alike. He’s frankly not in the series enough to do a full proper analysis of his character because we only really see him in passing in pretty insignificant strips.

So while I really wanted to call this video “Hetalia Prussia Dissection” I can’t do it. I really honestly either don’t have the skill level or really don’t have the material to do that concept justice. So today we’re going to go into what’s canon and what my own ‘glam’ added to the character really is. (See what I did there? I have nothing against combining headcanon with canon, I just don’t like letting headcanon completely and purposefully override canon but again, that’s a topic for another day.)

So with all that said and understood, let us begin our awesome journey.

Okay so here’s the dealio, Prussia is a narcissist and we’re gonna go into the psychology of that in depth and talk about what all that entails and see how much evidence we have to support that claim in canon.

According to PsychologyToday which, to my understanding, is a credible enough source for quick glances into the minds of people, while having a superiority complex does play a part in narcissism, it’s really a feeling of fear of showing vulnerability that leads it.To quote; “The narcissist fears that acknowledging any weakness will allow someone else the chance to take advantage of him or gain power over him.” And another quote: “Simply put, true narcissists have zero interest in introspection or self-improvement. Their guiding principle: Never, ever let your guard down.”

Now, none of the Hetalia World Stars comics, the Anime nor the character songs themselves actually show Prussia being afraid of being vulnerable explicitly stating, but if we look at the symptoms of narcissism and his history, we can see, in my honest opinion, where that comes into play.

The DSM 5th Editions symptoms for narcissistic personality disorder as described by Leon F. Seltzer, Ph.D. on psychologytoday.com are as follows:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance.

2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.

3. Believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions).

4. Requires excessive admiration [regularly fishes for compliments, and is highly susceptible to flattery].

5. Has a sense of entitlement.

6. Is interpersonally exploitative.

7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others.

8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her.

9. Shows arrogant, haughty [rude and abusive] behaviors or attitudes.

This particular author of this particular article goes on to add a few more traits and symptoms. Those being:

1. They are highly reactive to criticism

2. They have a low self-esteem

3. Can be inordinately self-righteous and defensive

4. React to contrary viewpoints with anger or rage

5. Project onto others qualities, traits and behaviors they can’t - or won’t - accept in themselves

6. Have poor interpersonal boundaries

This article began by stating that only five of these fifteen traits need to be met in order to be considered for having narcissistic personality disorder. So let’s take a I’m-discovering-writing-this-analysis-as-I-go dive into my notes of where all Prussia's appearances are with these symptoms in mind to see if we can name at least five instances.

Right off the bat in both cases with the first listed symptom and the first appearance of Prussia in Chapter 12 where he unifies Germany, Prussia considers himself the one that is destined to lead the newly formed nation of Germany as his older brother. This is the idea of self-importance. Basically he has the idea of “If I’m not the one to do it, then no one can do it properly.” hence his fighting with Austria (and I bet winning said fight didn’t help.)

So there’s one.

But wait! There’s more in this chapter!

That same instance of him believing he needs to be Germany’s older brother goes along with the symptom of entitlement. It MUST be him simply because it MUST be him.

So we’ve got two now.

“Is highly susceptible to flattery”. When I read that I knew exactly what chapter we were going to discuss. I literally wrote in my notes for chapter 294 “Prussia is weak to flattery” because in the beginning of 294 and the whole of 293, Prussia was arguing with his king Frederick I about how much focus should be put on clothing, but the INSTANT Frederick I mentions that Prussia would probably look cool in the flashy outfits, Prussia caves and goes to spy on France to see about getting said flashy outfits for himself.

That’s three~ Two more and we’ve got ourselves a narcissist.

Being ‘arrogant’ is defined as ‘having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities’ and if that doesn’t describe Prussia in literally all of his “I am awesome!” glory, I don’t know what does. It should be self-explanatory to any fan of this series that, yes, Prussia is very arrogant.

Four down, one to go!

Number two in our list of symptoms “Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.” I BELIEVE this includes having constant daydreams about past glories as well as bringing them up all the time or when discussing said past glories, only discusses how great and awesome they were at the time.

Cough-cough - Prussia’s diary in 339 where he openly admits that said diary is mostly him saying “You are awesome” 20 times over.

And there we go. Let me know if you think of anymore instances in ANY official material that fits into these symptoms. I’d love to hear about them.

So with those five understood, it’s safe to assume Prussia is in fact a narcissist which - I know - comes as a shock to literally NOBODY but I figured it was important to actually pull up evidence for as opposed to just stating it as a passing fact and moving on like a lot of us Hetalians tend to do.

Explaining understandings of characterization is the fun part of character analysis, after all.

So let’s backtrack a little. Remember how that first article said being a narcissist comes from having a fear of vulnerability? Well, let’s go into headcanon and fanon land for two seconds as we read between the lines to find these signs of vulnerability based on the assumption that Prussia does in fact have this disorder.

Constantly in his official character songs, like “Mein Gott” or the Bad Friends Trio’s song “Overflowing Passion”, Prussia can be heard singing about how ‘it’s great to be alone!’ I take this to be a sign that Prussia understands that everyone is aware of him being lonely but he takes that understanding and turns it into a sign of ‘awesomeness’ as opposed to a weakness. He’d rather turn something most of humanity recognizes as a negative into a positive than admit to his own sadness. It’s the last thing he wants.

Let’s continue down this headcanon rabbit hole and talk about the wonderful Law 46 that was signed in 1947 after WWII and before the Berlin Wall. This is the Law signed by the Allied Control Council (France, America, Britain and the USSR) that stated that Prussia’s excessive militarism combined with excessive nationalism was too dangerous for the world as it was to blame for “repeated German pestilence” as Churchill put it.

Basically, this is the moment Prussia lost his nation and, in popular fanon, became East Germany.

There is no way on God’s green Earth that ANYONE is going to convince me that losing his nation like this - not just losing it in general but losing it to a piece of paper instead of a glorious battle that wiped his resources out - didn’t hurt and still to this day hurts Prussia on a deep emotional level. But do we ever see him talk about it?

No. And why is that? Because that would be a vulnerability.

See, I interpret Prussia as being my favorite type of character. The character that smiles and laughs and puts on a show about how great life is even though deep down they’re suffering from some serious issues whether it be trauma, negative mental health or just bad memories.

I know, I know, that’s not exactly a rare character type but I really don’t care, it’s still my favorite. It’s also not something that’s hard to see in real life. People will often hide behind a mask. We see it all the time in celebrities that people will refuse to ask for help when they are suffering because they’d rather everyone believe everything is fine for this that and/or another reason.

(Honestly though, can’t relate, because when I’m sad I let everyone know but that’s just a personal aside)

Getting off the narcissism train, let’s talk about something significantly less serious.

Prussia likes cute things and is attuned to nature. He’s constantly making references to nature like saying that it’s a great sign that even rabbits will prostrate before him in 299, saying “it’s cool like a wild little bird” in 293 and also mentioning how cute a little chirping bird is in his songs “Mein Gott” and his “Marukaitte Chikyuu.” Not to mention his image for his character profile shows him with a little bird on his head and holding a stuffed bear.

This ties in to both wanting to keep young ones’ innocence in tact as well as how in real life history, the German people had the most respect for nature at a time.

I have a friend who has taken multiple art history classes tell me that in German art there are often scenes of humans being lesser than nature that show how vast, beautiful and truly terrifying nature is.

As for Prussia wanting to help younger people keep their innocence, there is a chapter (chapter 187) where Prussia is reading Grimm Brothers Fairy Tales to a dying Holy Roman Empire (a character still portrayed as a child) and when questions arise like “Why would the witch be mad about Rapunzel’s clothes not fitting her and why would she blame the prince? There was no evidence of the prince bringing in food for her to eat.” he literally throws the book out the window.

He’s later, in the same chapter, shown to be writing the Grimm brothers asking them to PLEASE make the stories more actually child friendly if they’re going to advertise them as being stories for children.

So while in headcanon I imagine Prussia as not-shy-at-all about such things around other adults, it’s another story around children and those he perceives to be innocent. He canonically wants to preserve that cute nature of theirs and will do what he can to do such.

Random fun fact about the Hetalia character of Prussia; he gets really whiny when he’s hungover in chapter 32. He begs Germany to make him food and do other things for him even while Germany himself is also hungover. Also he says “I can’t eat things with faces on them” which woooo boy I’d hate to see what our cute-little-bird loving fool would think of Peeps.

Anyways, I think that’s about all I’ve got and surprisingly, we actually did have a lot to talk about with Prussia using mainly the comics and only partially headcanon. And it’s not even including the original run of the webcomic and manga since I don’t have easy access to those. And we didn’t really discuss the anime too much (mainly because it was just more of what we were able to see in the World Stars serialization).

Please feel free to continue the discussion in the comments. I’d love to hear/read more about one of my three favorite characters and how he’s perceived by others.

[phaelosopher]

New Post has been published on http://www.phaelosopher.com/2018/04/29/does-the-government-own-you/

Does the Government 'Own' You?

Have you looked at the meaning of the word government lately?

Merriam-Webster’s top definition is: the act or process of governing; specifically : authoritative direction or control.

While some have danced around the question of whether the meaning, and by inference, purpose of government is authoritative control of the mind, I’d like to call attention to the question of authority itself.

By whose authority do those who “govern” do so?

I’m sure you have your own thoughts about this, as I certainly have mine. The salient question I’d like each to ask, is whether your idea of what our government is, or is supposed to be, is true.

In other words, is the system of government, as it is currently practiced, what you want? Sure, we can call it a democracy, but we could just as reasonably call it a mockery.

This isn’t (totally) because Donald Trump is president. Whether you like him or not, or agree with my assessment, the world is a far better place with Mr. Trump as POTUS than it would have been had his opponent ascended to the throne as she and the organizations that supported her had expected.

This is not to say that I think we’re in a good place with Mr. Trump. It doesn’t mean that I support his methods. It simply an indication of how deep the muck of the swamp has become.

And in his efforts to “drain it”, I wish Mr. Trump Godspeed.

But this is not about Mr. Trump.

How’s It Workin’ For You?

My question is whether government operates as you’d like it to? Is it effectively addressing your concerns? Are its representatives representing you?

Irrespective of where you sit on the political spectrum, or whether you choose to eschew sitting and prefer to stand, you have every right to expect that your government ~ city, state, and federal ~ will meet those criteria. This assumes that you respect the right of other citizens to have opinions that may not agree with yours, as they likewise respect you.

Societies are not monolithic in how they think. After all, people make societies what they are. People are like fingerprints and snowflakes; they are easy to recognize, but no two are the same.

A successful society must be mature enough to accommodate a wide range of thinking and behavior, and imaginative enough to nurture positive, healthy, constructive, involvement and interaction within and among its members.

It’s hard to achieve such social dynamics when bombasticism, bickering, blame dominate the discourse.

SOURCE: Illinois Review

Who ‘Represents’ Whom?

The premise of a government being “of the People, by the People, and for the People”, immortalized by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address (November 19, 1863), came with no caveats or riders that said as long as they agree with government policies.

To take Lincoln’s quote a step further, the full thought was as follows:

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate-we can not consecrate-we can not hallow-this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain-that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom-and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

I am no proponent of war, for there are no “winners” among the combatants. A very small group of people profit from war, but from where I sit, profiting and winning are two different things. The United States looked more “united” and “free” after the Civil War, but it was as divided as it had been.

And in far greater debt.

SOURCE: Wikipedia

War is an unsustainable activity, a malignant social tumor, as death and destruction are the ultimate aim of the war’s participants. Not only is it unsustainable, it is unnatural; unnatural enough to question the intelligence of anyone who would participate.

With all due respect, war mongering and profiteering, that involves sending People to kill, destroy, or be maimed, is not the path “glory” of any meaningful or everlasting kind. On the contrary, it sets all participants back on their Soul’s journey. We are eternal beings, so perhaps some might think a little war or the appearance of “death” doesn’t matter.

It matters because we think it does. We think we’re “good” and the other guy is “bad”. We think the people telling us what we can, and cannot do, are “superiors”, or “inferiors” we give our power to. We think we have no power to say “no” or “yes” when its appropriate.

As such, the traumas that we created or sustained, will themselves cause disturbances in places that our eyes cannot see and drugs won’t deaden, that only time and love will quiet.

People go into war and allow it thinking only of the glory of a patch or medal on a lapel, oblivious of the cost they will have paid to their entire Being.

SOURCE: Wikimedia

Allegiance is an admirable trait, if the principle or ideal that one feels allegiance to is itself honorable. However, allegiance is not intelligent if the principle or ideal is no longer as it purports to be, assuming that it ever was.

Can’t ‘Fix’ What Ain’t Broken

With all its apparent flaws, government as we know and have experienced it, is running perfectly as it is. It is not “broken”.

It is achieving the aims that the un-elected administrators, bureaucrats, and managers of the organizations have mandated. As such, the social order that we have pointed to with such pride, is also not what is purports to be.

While there are “free” and “brave” people in America, the phrase “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave”, known by all who have sung the Star Spangled Banner, has become an empty soundbyte.

It has become Land of the Fearful, Distracted, Clueless, and Unmotivated, and Home of the Indentured. For these and many more reasons, the situation looks “dim” indeed. People prepare for the worst.

I don’t care for the term “anarchist”, which is defined as one who believes in, or tries to bring about anarchy.

But what is anarchy or anarchism?

Ok… fat chance, eh?

This is the first image that comes to mind.

SOURCE: Prepper Journal

Here’s another definition for anarchy:

a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal

Note that the issue seems to center around the word “authority.”

Upon further study of its origins, anarchy translates into “without rulers” or “ruler-less”.

The molders of public opinion who publish dictionaries and other reference material, regarded the presence of an “authority“ with rulership, and gave the word anarchy ~ the absence of said ruler ~ an additional descriptor: disorder. As in chaos.

SOURCE: Orgtheory

This is not the way I’d like to affect change, but it’s no wonder that our mind goes to this extreme at the mere thought of anarchy.

Each must ask the question what is important… change, or how it looks?

Then you may realize that the extreme that you fear does not have to be how change goes down.

Is Justice Flipped, or is Injustice Normal?

SOURCE: Wikipedia

Our society today is a state of disorder of our own making or allowing.

We have an absence or nonrecognition of authority.

I’ll ask the question again, whose authority?

Here are two perspectives:

Which one of these perspectives, rings truest to you now? Is the will of the people the basis of the authority of government now, as Eleanor Roosevelt said?

Or does government representatives use coercion, force, and other means, to influence your action, as Eldridge Cleaver once said?

To say that government appears to not recognize that the People are its authority, and not the other way around, would be a gross understatement.

What if… (gasp!) They Are?

But maybe it’s me that isn’t getting it. Maybe government is supposed to be the People’s keeper?

Is that your understanding, or preference?

If government officials think it is they who must “keep” the People (e.g., under control, from panicking, in line, etc.), then many of their policies and practices begin to make sense.

Here are just a few:

We allow medical personal to give newborns (around 4 million born in the U.S. alone each year) entire rounds of disruptive, IQ-lowering chemical injections on the premise of “guarding against” possible future diseases. While there’s no scientific support or metabolic benefit for this practice. Other diseases that aren’t on their lists have increased, yet they have consistently pushed to increase dosages instead of decrease them.

Some state governments have even initiated legislation to eliminate parents’ rights to refuse vaccinations for their children.

As if a regimen of vaccines wasn’t enough, over 75% of male infants are subjected to painful and traumatic circumcision.

Infant births are recorded via a document referred to as a “birth certificate”, on bond paper as any financial instrument would be, with the mother referred to as “Informant”. This record of “livestock” is sent to New York.

We allow our children to expect to be subjected these insults and injuries at the beginning of life then send them to institutions of further indoctrination, where they are fed specific information and judged by their proclivity to comply (+) or question (-).

We are encouraged to see our value in being “workers” and “consumers”, having a job (not creating jobs) and a paycheck.

We act as though value is in our possessions or ability to acquire/possess “things”, above such human traits as character, respect, truthfulness.

Our education provides little support to prepare us to grow in emotional and mental maturity as the body matures. Indeed, we actually think that we are the body, and do not see our place in a larger matrix of life that is universal.

We feed ourselves de-nourished, chemically preserved foodstuffs, drink dehydrating water substitutes, spend large tracks of time in energy-disruptive work and home spaces in an ungrounded state. When the degenerative conditions come, “doctors” have no clue as to cause, offer a myriad of poisons that are worst than snake oil (and more expensive), approved by both their professional association and government authority.

We learn to help others only if “authorized” or “licensed”… and to give to others in need (assuming we have the means) only if we can get a tax deduction.

In spite of numerous reports by credible sources that go back decades and beyond, of direct interaction with intelligent beings from places other than Earth (i.e., WE ARE *NOT* ALONE), government and military have practiced a strict policy of denial, deception, or stonewalling.

In spite of being unable to afford its wars (placing the People on an escalating continent of indebtedness that they did not ask for or knowingly consent to), government and military make no attempt to initiate or make peace. In fact, they appear to be ripe for more war, which they expect sons and daughters, husbands and wives of the People to go prosecute, while they retire to their caves (or escape off planet in craft that the People don’t know exist) and “survive.”

I could go on, because this list is just a small sampling. What I find is that government demonstrates very little responsiveness to what its people have asked of it, while sticking its nose into the lives of people around the world affecting them negatively, sending millions daily to one country, as though we owe them, while restricting the economic affairs of others.

We are not the “wealthiest” nation on earth. We are the most indebted. What’s great about that?

Of course the government doesn’t own us. It doesn’t even own itself. The question is whether you think this small list of “liberties” and discourtesies is acceptable.

If not, what are you going to do about it?

Video Series: The Inward Journey Home

During my stay in Las Vegas, a period that lasted roughly 15 months, occasionally sought the solitude of a dry lake bed located south of town, where I could set up my camera and essentially say what was on my mind at the moment, to no one and everyone. I titled that collection of recordings, “Alone with My Thoughts”. The very first, titled, “No Donald or Hillary Party”, sprung from the realization that very little true representation of the people exists in American social and political systems as it presently operates.

We have the appearance of a “two-party” system that will always be at odds with each other, whose representatives hash and rehash the same problems and push “solutions” mandated by lobbyists for corporate and foreign interests. Instead of demanding better proposals or inviting people with new vision to step forward, the population has grown accustomed to accepting the Pablum that their familiar “hated” politicians serve them.

Having watched enough of these excursions into political futility, I simply said why this was no longer good enough for me… nor, in my opinion, the American People, or the world.

I made about twenty videos from that locations, or one like it, before relocating to the Pacific Northwest toward the end of 2017.

Now the scene has changed, but the discourses, which I now cal, “The Inward Journey Home,” have become, let us say, “juicier.”

Here’s an early example:

A quick count suggests that I’ve produced about seventy-six of these talks thus far.

I won’t try to push them all on you now. Just wanted you to know that they’re available and invite you to visit my YouTube channel and see if the “topics” and the take are your cup of tea.