#and i don't see that as a bad thing necessarily

[thebreakfastgenie]

#🗣️🔊‼️#peg needs to divorce bj the second he gets back#stuff like this is why i firmly believe beejhawk is the bad end for hawkeye. bj would put hawkeye in a feminine yoke the same as peg#everything's about him and his fragile masculinity and his insistence on being not just needed but necessary. bro get over yourself#he cannot see things outside of his own pov and then pats himself on the back for his own stubbornness mistaking it for resiliency#mulcahy when someone says he's narrowminded: risks his life to go to the front and performs an operation with hawkeye's help#bj when someone says he's narrowminded: says the most targeted ''no u'' or ''woe is me'' thing he can think of and also punches them @scrumptiouscthulhu

This is a really interesting and fresh take! I don't necessarily think BJ and Peg need to get divorced but I could see it happening for this reason more than any "BJ found himself~ in Korea" reason. I agree that beejhawk is the bad ending for Hawkeye for a lot of reasons and this is one of them. I think a lot of fandom falls into the trap of applying this BJ flaw to BJ/Peg but making it magically disappear for beejhawk, and I dislike that severely and simply don't believe it. I think either BJ can grow past this with Peg or he can't with Hawkeye either.

When BJ says now Erin has lost her mother too because Peg had to get a job that's when the knives come out.

[chantillyxlacey]

i've seen a lot of takes (i am using the word 'take' absolutely neutrally here; and i'm specifying neutrality bc i have started to see that word as having inherently negative connotations in this context and i have no idea if that's just a Me Problem but i figured specificity couldn't hurt)

okay, that got away from me, let me start again

i've seen a lot of takes about The Damsel that have to do with idealization being another kind of dehumanization and how she's Like She Is because you/TLQ are projecting a fantasy onto her and sanding away any traits that don't fit into that fantasy and rendering her into little more than a vessel for your/TLQ's wish fulfillment

and i don't necessarily think that's *wrong* either-- but i think that's also not the complete picture, and that only looking that that half of the image does kind of tend to paint TLQ in an unfairly bad light

because the thing is, in The Damsel's route, TLQ is ALSO being reduced to an archetype just as much as The Damsel herself is! The Princess becomes the quintessential fairytale fair-maiden-in-distress that exists only to be rescued by a knight-in-shining-armor; and TLQ-- if you allow them to be guided entirely by The Smitten-- becomes that quintessential fairytale knight-in-shining-armor that only exists to rescue the fair-maiden-in-distress

The Damsel says over and over, explicitly, that "I just want to make you happy!" and The Smitten in this route is equally preoccupied with making HER happy-- he even says it directly if you start deconstructing her. every other part of his identity has been subsumed to revolve entirely around her just as much as the reverse is true for her.

(speaking of the Deconstructed Damsel, i've also seen Smitten's reaction to that touted as him not caring about her agency-- but again, i always read that as him being unable to see any flaws in her rather than being pleased with the idea of her being biddable, specifically. if you halt the deconstruction his reaction is "she's ALWAYS been perfect" -- he'd think that no matter what she did or said, because his identity revolves around her the exact way that hers revolves around him/TLQ)

even the actions that lead to HEA fit into this, i think-- i read that moment as less The Smitten lashing out at her because she didn't live up to his fantasy-- it still happens even after she's said "i guess we can stay, if that's what you want"-- she's giving The Smitten what he wants, but he's still distressed because SHE'S not happy

i think it's more The Smitten feeling that HE hadn't lived up to HIS half of their shared fantasy. if she's not happy with the idea of "all we need is each other" then it must be because HE failed somehow. if she needs or wants more than him, it must be because HE is not enough.

if he was just better at playing his part, if he just offered her more, if he was just clearer about his devotion--

"if we just showed her the contents of our heart, she'd be happy"

that's not to say that what The Smitten does in HEA isn't incredibly toxic for both of them-- it definitely is, and it clearly makes both the Princess and TLQ miserable. "everything she doesn't know she wants" is a bad mindset to approach a relationship with, whether that mindset is reached through controlling selfishness or a desperation to appease (and i definitely think Smitten is motivated by the latter-- it's no coincidence that we arrive at HEA through a literal and fatal act of self mutilation)

he's definitely the antagonist of HEA, in that he is what TLQ and the Princess and the player need to overcome, but he's not a VILLAIN (which i think is most clearly illustrated in the moment where the Princess admits she's unhappy, that she's never been happy here, and his reaction is to GIVE UP instead of lash out harder)

i never got the sense that The Smitten was ever putting any blame on The Damsel-- he always considered *himself* to be the problem-- he puppeteers TLQ just as much as he does the Princess, even if we can't hear him while she can, and he asks TLQ/the player through her "isn't this enough? isn't this what you wanted?"

which in and of itself is an unhealthy way to approach a relationship-- blaming oneself for every bit of conflict or lapse in synchronicity is just as harmful as laying all the blame on the other person. there IS no blame-- sometimes people disagree or have conflicting needs or desires, and that's not anybody's "fault" because that's just how people and relationships WORK.

...can you believe i wrote out all of this when my original intention was to lay out an entirely different point about a read on The Damsel/HEA routes that wasn't about relationships at all?

OKAY!

THAT GOT AWAY FROM ME LET ME START AGAIN

so i don't think that looking at The Damsel/HEA through a lens of "what does this say about relationships and expectations and respecting other people's agency" is incorrect-- clearly i have a lot of thoughts about that lens!

but i wanted to offer another one that i haven't seen yet:

The Damsel/HEA route as a commentary on what makes a satisfying narrative

if you play out The Damsel route just single-mindedly taking actions to free her-- it's kinda dull, isn't it? like-- it's not without its charms! The Smitten is silly and entertaining and the Narrator's exaggerated pettiness is very funny! but ultimately, that's about it.

potential sources of conflict are brushed aside-- if you took the blade with you, you just drop it and it gets forgotten; the Damsel's hand slips right out of the manacle with no effort or harm; when the Narrator locks the basement door, every 'choice' you make just magically unlocks it right away. and then you're outside, what you wanted to do from the start. ...so what do we do now?

nothing, actually. the chapter ends, and there is no chapter 3. the game itself continues, but that ending feels about as substantial as the Narrator's "Good Ending" where you follow his instructions without question and accomplish his goal immediately.

if you DON'T take either of the actions that lead to one of Damsel's chapter 3's, there's very little variation in The Damsel's story-- pretty much all of it comes down to slight differences in dialogue. there's no "the princess kills you" outcome. the closest thing to an alternate end to The Damsel is if you deconstruct her-- and even then, it feels like less an "alternate route" and more like-- a cheeky acknowledgement of the lack of substance, because that isn't a bug, it's a feature!

but if you introduce conflict-- either in the more direct sense by slaying The Damsel or in the more interpersonal sense by highlighting a mis-match in her and TLQ's desires-- suddenly the story opens up! there are a bunch of new possibilities and a bunch of new outcomes, and all of them are more interesting than "you achieve your goal with trivial effort, hooray!"

Even if you wind up finishing HEA on a note that is superficially very similar to the easy end of The Damsel's route-- you leave hand in hand with her, the narrator conceding defeat, and the last image of her before TSM takes her is a warm, tender smile-- it FEELS so much more like a genuine happy ending-- even though the Princess' face is still streaked and stained from her tears. BECAUSE of that.

it's one of the most heartwarming moments in the game, and one that has made me misty eyed every time i've seen it, and it's BECAUSE of the conflict you had to go through to get there.

conflict is what drives a compelling narrative, is the takeaway. it precludes PERFECT endings, perhaps, but not happy endings-- it's what makes those imperfect happy endings feel substantial and earned.

even the dinner and the board game contribute to the idea-- the description of the food is some really lovely writing, to the point where i sat through and listened to it all again even though i knew nothing really happens during it-- but *nothing really happens during it*. it doesn't move the narrative forward-- you're just as hungry as you were when you started. it just stalls the story in place, and every time you go through it again it's less satisfying until it's outright unpleasant. the description of the meal also notably gets simpler each time, and less detailed-- there's only so much that you can say about it before you run out of things to describe.

the board game is similar-- the way that it's described the first time you play even sounds like the description of an exciting story! and then the board resets, and you do it all again just the same. and so on. the game/story stops being exciting and the wins or losses stop feeling like they mean anything-- because is conflict really conflict, is a challenge really a challenge, if you're always tracing the same path, always making moves where you already know the outcome? it becomes "a slog towards the end"

and this is how i tie the idea of "what Damsel/HEA has to say about relationships" and "what Damsel/HEA has to say about narratives" together:

ultimately, the statements can be summarized the same way "whether in a narrative or a relationship, 'perfection' is unattainable, but you wouldn't actually want it anyway"

conflict, substance, variety

in a relationship there will always be differences of opinion, differing goals etc-- variety between the members of the relationship, knowing and sharing this substantial and non-superficial information about one another, navigating the resultant conflict-- that's what allows the relationship to grow and deepen, and what allows the people in it to grow as individuals as well.

in a narrative, or in Narratives, as a whole, conflict is what makes things HAPPEN, substance makes them feel like what happens MATTERS, like something is being communicated, variety means that you're learning or considering something new-- and those are what make a narrative capable of impacting a person, of changing them, of being remembered

[tossawary]

Recent "Star Trek" reboot universes have really tried to sell me on three different romances for Spock with other TOS characters whom he did not have romantic relationships (at least not positive ones) with in TOS, which makes it particularly annoying when some fans try to squirm away from the idea of ST ever doing a future reboot or remake in which Spock/Kirk are explicitly queer.

Like, "But it's not in the original! They want to be faithful to the original!" really, REALLY does not pass the "I think you might just be discomforted by queerness and you should work on that, rather than making appeals to the authority of textual accuracy to avoid being called a homophobe or transphobe" check here. Because it's not as though these reboots care about perfect faithfulness on pretty much any other front. We'll accept that the costumes and special effects get updated to move with the times, we'll accept wildly different characterization choices that essentially give these characters new personalities, we'll accept new timelines that change the entire political map of the galaxy, but you as a fan draw the line at "What if this character was bisexual this time?" Really???

To be clear, I am not trying to dunk on Spock/Uhura, Spock/Chapel, or Spock/T'Pring here, I am merely trying to illustrate a frustrating double-standard. TOS Uhura does notably flirt with Spock several times! I see it! I remember TOS Chapel's feelings for Spock being one-sided, but I also don't think it's a bad thing to try to update TOS's more misogynistic writing choices regarding female characters. TOS T'Pring did... kind of try to kill Spock because she didn't want to marry him, but again, I don't necessarily think it's immediately a bad thing to try to explore her as a character and her betrothal to Spock. It's fine! It's fine by me to explore new takes in new AUs.

It's just that none of that evidence from TOS for those relationships holds much of a candle to whatever the fuck Kirk and Spock had going on to inspire The Premise. "Amok Time" is an Experience. There's only so many times that Kirk can say something like, "The cost [of abandoning Spock] would have been my soul," before you want to put your face in your hands. They are taking shiny pebbles from TOS and trying their very best to sell them to me as the basis for romantic relationships in reboots, sure, while they are standing in the shadow of Spirk Evidence Mountain (TOS).

(Yes, I have seen the recent "Unification" short film. Yes, I enjoyed it. No, I will not consider Spirk "officially canon" until all plausible deniability for the squirmy folks has been completely, explicitly destroyed by a HUMAN kiss onscreen.)

And okay, I must admit, at the moment, I don't actually want Spirk to eventually happen in "Strange New Worlds" now that they've finally met. I'm mostly indifferent to their Spock and Kirk actors, personally, and the writing for every canonical romantic relationship in both SNW and "Discovery" so far has gotten a solid "well, they certainly are standing next to each other" from me. (Yes, even the gay marriage in "Discovery". I just haven't been into it so far.) I think the writers would fumble Spirk if they tried it in this specific show and then annoying fans would use the fumble as "evidence" never to try to do Spirk or queer retakes on other TOS characters ever again, or as "proof" against other queer ST in other shows characters generally.

I'm mostly just mildly annoyed that I have to keep watching Spock specifically, famously read by many people as a queer man, be straight and messy about it, especially when there has not really been a significant queer relationship onscreen in SNW yet, unless you count M'Benga's daughter Rukiya and her glow cloud friend named Debra, which I personally don't, honestly. I'd like an onscreen relationship with a main character with zero plausible deniability. There's definitely nothing yet that comes remotely close to the screentime that Spock/Chapel, Spock/T'Pring, and Kirk/La'an have all been given so far, unfortunately. (Sulu is not here yet. Scotty has just shown up. If Scotty gets to make out with a guy next season, or Uhura or Ortegas gets to make out with a lady, without it being part of some god-like-being's fantasy world, then I may be satisfied.) (Also, yes, I am aware of queer characters and relationships in other "Star Trek" shows, thanks. I very much enjoyed Mariner having her incredibly silly breakup with her girlfriend in "Lower Decks".)

"Star Trek" is one of those properties where some people's double-standards regarding romantic interpretations of the original series really jump out. "They can't do Kirk/Spock because they want to be faithful to the original!" Get real.

[fantaatix]

"i have no home now"

i remember a while back when this episode was still being highly anticipated people were debating whether or not stolas would be stripped of his title and powers, maybe even hired by blitz, and why that might be a bad thing

i'll just rip this straight from the post i found in my likes:

"Saying that Stolas needs to abdicate so their relationship can be healthy implies that a commoner really CAN'T be with royalty"

the thing is that i don't think that's necessarily what the show is trying to imply. i'll give them some credit, they posted this in august, i forget when exactly apology tour came out but i think there was a general acceptance that they'd be back together by the end of the season

i don't think that's the case either and here's why;

i think one of the overarching themes of this season is how blitz simultaneously ruins and saves people--whether or not these are his intentions varies from person to person

for example, those he believes he's ruined are his sister, fizz, his mom, and verosika

verosika is an outlier because of the fact that a) the three prior were close enough to be considered family, b) the three prior can all be pinned down to the same event, and c) i feel like he definitely meant to at least piss her off, as a means to push her away

you don't "steal their car, run three rings to wrath and max my credit on shitty horse-riding lessons" because you think it'll brighten someone's day

those he's ruined mostly want nothing to do with him, or keep themselves at a distance; barbie wants nothing to do with him, verosika hates his guts (used to, rather), and while they definitely care about each still, his friendship with fizz is not what it used to be

but now, with IMP, he seems to be on a trend of making a life for himself and giving others a new chance

these images are always paired together as like, "before and after" and i'm sure it's been mentioned dozens of times, but again--there is an outlier, and i think in this case it's moxxie

with millie and loona blitz identifies their struggles himself

with loona, he sees how rough she acts on the outside but sees the soft interior and recognises himself--he wants to give her a real chance at a life, free of judgement

with millie, it's essentially the same deal, except millie straight up tells him about her struggle to make a living and he offers her a job

but with moxxie, there is no "identification", at least not to the specifics. he's in jail, moxxie's in jail, things suck regardless. if anything, maybe blitz figured that being incarcerated was "the struggle", which is probably fair; i don't think you're gonna get "my dad is a sociopath, my mom left/died and my boyfriend left me for dead" first try

moxxie was not special to him in this moment; blitz didn't recognise some divine struggle or empathic connection, they've known each other for 30 seconds and know literally nothing about each other. blitz is looking to break out and see his daughter, that is his goal here. the question was not, "what is this guy's struggle?" the question was "can this guy work a gun?" and the answer may or may not have been yes

and you can tell, like...just by the way blitz looks at him after. it is so possible that he just planned to ditch him after they both got out but ended up not doing so for whatever reason. like, "oh wow, that definitely meant more to him than it meant to me"

that seems to be the case with all of the people he's helped in one way or another; he can't even see that he helps. it's confirmation bias, all he sees is the bad. he needs people to reel him back into reality, people like millie or fizz or maybe possibly stolas later on cough cough

but now back to the point i'm trying to make (and what brought this post to life);

first off, the face blitz makes once he is confronted with the idea that people would actually miss him if he was gone:

and secondly, these two lines:

blitz: you need a ride home

stolas: i...have no home now. everything i have is gone.

this is stolas at his most vulnerable. he has no powers, no home, his daughter is in custody of his Bitch Wife, and he has no lover.

you could argue a few of those things in western energy but in this moment he has absolutely nothing to fall back on, he is alone.

and then blitz invites him to stay with him because that's what he does, he helps people at their most vulnerable moments. he gives them a home.

that is the point here--this isn't about their relationship right now, this about blitz having an irresistible urge to protect people he cares about and acting on it, because like it or not that's his job for the time being. he's not a bodyguard but he'll be playing that role until he dies or stolas gets his powers back.

he can finally actually protect stolas now, maybe even feel fulfillment in doing so, not having to fall back on things like "i didn't think you could get hurt" and seemingly forgetting to mention the fact that "oh yeah someone's plotting to kill you you should maybe look into that"

this is where they learn trust in each other. trust and devotion.

[claraweems]

The two instances in VG that really were jarring to me were:

1) At some point, you're in Minrathous (pretty sure) and Rook points out that something looked "cool." He said the word cool in that context. My brain literally stopped and went through my internal roll-a-dex to figure out if that was some kind of callback to a previous game or if there was a double meaning... No... No, that was just really bad word choice. I'm gonna be real: I could see 'cool' being slang for SOMEthing, but not like that. Make it something funny like the "What's Shapin'?" line, which was one of my favorites from the game. (It was modern, sure, but it was corny as fuck and used previously established lore as it's base. It was a perfect combination.)

2) Of COURSE the use of non-binary bothered me! The word, the phrasing, it was just so ... Ugh! Of ALL the races to NOT have a word for it. Make up something! "I've heard other qunari use the word <whatever> for people who are of two souls, and then there's <whatever2> for people who feel like they are neither." And then have a brief canonical conversation about it. Cringe: erased!

EXCEPT... Didn't we already establish that the Qun don't necessarily assign gender in the typical Thedosian/European way anyway!? I know Taash isn't part of the Qun, but wouldn't her very Qunari mother use that system to easily recognize what her daughter is or isn't? Wouldn't Taash being a specific type of warrior instantly assign her a specific gender other than "woman" anyway? Did I misunderstand something from DAI here?

Edit to add this excerpt from the wiki:

The Qunari also have the concept of "Aqun-Athlok," which means "born as one gender but living as another".[61] For example, a woman who shows sincere interest and outstanding talent at fighting will be considered male regardless of biological sex, and socially treated as male for all intents and purposes. For the Qunari, gender is inexorably linked to their role within the Qun.[62]

While this does not necessarily encompass non-binary individuals you cant tell me the Qun don't have a concept for them!

The only other times I can recall anyone in a DA game making a fuss about gender was the Qun gender rolls thing (99% it was a conversation with Bull), learning about Krem's identity, and then Dorian saying he prefers the company of men. And all of those fit in perfectly fine with the world. Even at the time, during first playthrough, none of them stood out as out-of-place. This isn't looking back fondly on something that was jarring at the time.

im definitely not a fan of this man on a personal level for several reasons but guys im starting to think da lost a load bearing wall when he left

[johannestevans]

I love reading negative reviews of my work - and reviews in general - bc it really makes me appreciate how wildly different many ppls experiences of fiction or genre are from my own, let alone their preferences

I might write a bit more later about enjoying and appreciating "bad" reviews

I read one earlier that hadn't enjoyed one of my novellas, but their issue was the world was "like lord of the rings" bc there were elves and orcs, by which they just mean high fantasy, a sub genre i got the impression they don't care for

And idk like, i often enjoy seeing different ppls engagement w the autism and adhd in my work, as well as how i write other disabilities, bc a lot of ppl don't necessarily read / see a lot of those chars, esp portayed so positively, so some ppl are pleased, some are weirded out, etc

But esp bc i enjoy such broad swathes of diff tv and film, and often quite different books than many ppl who engage w my work - because I'm insane, not bc of any weaknesses on their parts - a lot of things i automatically think of as basic or conventional take ppl by surprise or offset them

And that's quite lovely, i think, to be able to see and experience and to be made so aware of, even if it's a shame my work was disappointing for them

[cosmicjoke]

What people seem to constantly misunderstand about what Akimi Yoshida said regarding how Ash couldn't have just gotten away scot-free from his life of crime is that it ISN'T Yoshida saying Ash "deserved" to die. Yoshida frames Ash as a hero from beginning to end. He's shown to be a genuinely good and kind person, that goodness remarked upon again and again by multiple characters, and his death is seen as a tragedy. That should be enough to convince people that Yoshida didn't hate Ash or think he deserved to die. The fact she frames him in such a positive light shows she understands that Ash is a good person that was forced into doing terrible things for his own survival and the survival of others. So this insistence that she thought he deserved to die because she said in some fan-translated interview that he couldn't just walk away from his life of crime, or that there's a price to be paid for murder, is ridiculous. It relies on nothing but assumption about the character of the author.

It's also a problem in fandom, in general, where interviews with authors, in which they're often giving on the spot and half-baked answers to random questions without any prepreation, are given greater credence in interpreting the author's intent than the actual, published work itself. How about letting the work stand on its own and interpret it as is? I've seen so much hate lobbed at Yoshida for supposedly hating Ash or thinking he deserved to die, when the actual story itself does nothing but portray Ash as deeply sympathetic and tragic. Again, no one could read "Banana Fish" with any level of reading comprehension and come away with anything but the impression that Ash is the hero and a good person who's life and death was deeply unfair and unjust. That fact alone should override any answer Yoshida gave in any interview, especially when it's obvious how much Yoshida hates giving interviews and very obviously, intentionally gives half-assed answers that she doesn't put much thought into. It's clear from the work itself that Yoshida has a great love for Ash as a person and as a character. She based his design off of River Phoenix, her favorite actor, she shares her birthday with him, and again, the way she frames Ash and his actions is as that of a hero, from beginning to end. I don't know, maybe it's because she sees Ash as a hero herself?

Ash dying only demonstrates the point further about how child abuse ruined Ash's life. He was led into a life of crime because of the abuse he suffered, and the fact it was that life of crime that led to his eventual death, with it basically being a gang dispute that got him in the end, only further drives home the point of how devastating and ruinous child abuse is. Ash wasn't a criminal because he was a bad person, he was a criminal because the abuse he suffered drove him to become one, and then, eventually, that life of crime he'd been forced to lead came back on him in the form of Lao stabbing him, which is what I think Yoshida actually means when she says Ash couldn't just walk away from the life of crime he'd lived. That inability to walk away further demonstrates the tragedy of the abuse Ash suffered, because it shows how it forced him into doing things which eventually came back to haunt him, things which he couldn't "escape". Lao stabbing Ash was in consequence to his being a gang leader, and his being a gang leader was a result of the abuse he suffered. The two things are interconnected with one another. It's not about Ash deserving to die because of the lives he'd taken, it's about how the life Ash was forced to live as a result of his abuse eventually led to his death. That's where the whole notion of "you live by the sword, you die by the sword" comes from. It's not necessarily a moral condemnation of the person committing acts of violence, but an acknowledgement that violence begets violence. That violence is cyclical. But the fact of Ash's death as a result of his life of crime only further demonstrates the true devastation wrought by the abuse of children, and that's the ultimate point of "Banana Fish's" ending. It's meant to force us to face, through the tragedy of Ash's death, the tragedy of his life in turn.

[in1-nutshell]

Hello there, I'm wondering if you saw my sonic the hedgehog buddy with transformers or rid.

I had it written but the request went away. I'll be putting it here!

( I also don't recall which universe of Team Prime you wanted so I went with TFA, I could see this bot thriving in this universe. Please let me know if this was not what you wanted.)

Hope you enjoy!

Bot Buddy with the personality of Sonic the Hedgehog with Team Prime

SFW, Platonic, Cybertronian reader

TFA

Buddy was a bot that emerged from an old blue kart when a shard of the Allspark fell into its engine.

The poor thing was confused about who he was and what he should be doing.

That was until a comic landed on his face.

A comic about a playful, speedy hedgehog and his misadventures with his friends.

The bot liked this character a lot and decided to be just like him.

It certainly was a surprise when Team Prime came across a speeding go-kart with a bright blue finish and energetic personality was helping a couple of grandparents cross the street.

That was either Blurr’s cousin… or the team really needed to get a better at finding these Allspark shards…

The bot had heard a bunch about this Team Prime from the granny’s and decided to join.

They didn’t want him?

Too bad, good guys gotta stick together.

Team who are a bit cautious of the new member

These bots are a bit cautious when this new bot shows up. Not that they could get rid of the bot, he moved too fast and admittedly a good bot. At one point some of these bots consider the possibility of them being able to teleport, but it’s proven quickly that the bot is just really fast. These bots don’t necessarily dislike the bot, the speedster’s personality is like Bumblebee’s. They do appreciate the bot’s wanting to help other around them using their gift; respect is earned that way. The only reason why any respect slightly decreases was because they insist on having a chili dog scented tree in their alt mode. It smells weird and they don’t like it. The blue bot also has a habit of giving them all nicknames, though they don’t understand what a ‘Shadow’ or ‘Knuckles’ are.

Prowl

Ratchet

Optimus

Team who don’t mind Buddy

These bots are happy to have a new friend. They love how fast the speedster can go. Sometimes they are even asked to time the blue bot to see if he can beat his speeding record. This as resorted to many complaints from Fanzone about speeding in certain places in the city. Luckily Professor Sumdac has a track suited for the blue speedsters increasing speed. As far as things go, the one thing all these bots can agree is that their new teammate has a weird fascination with car fresheners that smell like ‘chili dogs’. It takes a bit for these members to understand the reason behind the blue bots nicknames. Now, if they are willing to share the information to the others is up for debate.

Bulkhead

Sari

Who has raced Buddy and continues and is a bit of a sore loser since the first match

Bumblebee

[velvetvexations]

god that fuckin "transmisogyny ratio" blog or whatever pisses me off so bad. seeing that blog come onto a post that is wholly about transandrophobia or exorsexism or intersexism and rate it as Bad simply because the post is not About transmisogyny is so enraging. like. sometimes posts about trans and intersex issues are focused on something *other* than transmisogyny. it doesn't necessarily mean the people writing said posts hates trans women.

like imagine if there was a blog doing the same thing but with other forms of oppression towards trans/intersex people, i.e. going onto posts about transmisogyny and passive-aggressively rating them badly if the op didn't mention transandrophobia, exorsexism, or intersexism. the person running such a blog would get torn apart like they were in the middle of a pack of rabid baboons after doing something like that to maybe three posts abt transmisogyny, yet the person actively doing something like that to other trans & intersex ppl's posts right now just has no self awareness about what they're (don't know the person's pronouns, not trying to misgender) doing. the owner of that blog does not seem to realize how incredibly "i am uncomfortable when we are not about me?" they come across as by going onto posts that have NOTHING to do with transmisogyny and giving them an arbitrary bad grade simply for not being About transmisogyny. please for the love of god touch grass. (order to that blog's owner, not directed at you, velvet)

you should report them (transmisogyny-ratio-reader2) for ban evasion and if you had them blocked before also block evasion

[tamashi-tai-tamashi]

Okkk so remember that "I didn't really raise them" line from Daima that made everyone mad ?

Well at first I was a bit annoyed too because I thought it was another "haha look Gokū is such a bad father" line and that it was gonna help the "Gokū's a bad dad" fandom but then in one of the french parts of the fandom we talked about it and like. I am not annoyed anymore because it's... True.

I don't know if that line indeed was a "haha Gokū is such a bad father" line, if that's the case well it's just stupid as fuck because he ISN’T a bad father, but actually if you think about it that's not necessarily what it meant.

Gokū has been dead for a long time, okay? He's been gone for 7 whole years, during which Gohan went from 11yo to 18yo (the whole time chamber thing included) and Goten was born. So he missed Gohan's entire teenage years, plus Goten's birth and the first seven years of his childhood. That doesn't make him a bad dad at all! But well, it's true that during these years, he didn't raise his sons.

Also, he's been dead one year during in Gohan's childhood, year during which he didn't raise him. Then when he went back, they fought on Namek, and he went away again for another year. He went back, and they spent three (four if you count the time chamber thing) training and only training. Don't know if that count as raising or not, like I don't have an opinion on that. Anyway, still not a bad dad, but we can understand that line.

Finally let's talk about Chichi. She did most of the raising - when he was away but not only. She took care of her kids' education, she's the one who takes care of the house, who cooks, who does everything. Clearly, most of the raising part, she took care of herself.

Anyway, all of this to say, I don't think Gokū's a bad dad at all, I said it a lot of time, I think he's a good dad, a bit selfish and forgetful, yes, but wise, loving, amusing, ready to do everything for his sons, who teaches them everything he can so that they grow up to be good men.

But that Daima's line is kinda right. He's there for them as much as he can, but most of the raising part was done by his amazing wife Chichi.

Also let's not forget that we hardly see them in times of peace, so we have seen very little of him as a parent. Maybe that'd change everything if we could see how he is with his sons in time of peace.

[chungledown-bimothy]

literally no one asked so it's going under a cut and untagged but anyway here are the npcs from each d20 season (that i've finished) i'd cast jeremy jordan as

fantasy high: johnny spells. would put his whole pussy into the accent and unsettling dialogue. also it'd be funny having a man who famously cannot dance playing the leader of a dance gang plus the, like, single jace line in ep 3 bc otherwise my choice for junior year doesn't make sense

unsleeping city (1 and 2): dale lee. in my opinion, most of his best performances have been Wife Guys. not necessarily literally married, but have that energy. especially when the woman in question kicks absolute ass. sondheim would also be really funny though

fantasy high sophomore year (and pirates of leviathan): alistair ash. back to his silly and kinda pathetic little guy comfort zone

a crown of candy: calroy cruller. i'm gonna be real, this one's largely for thirst reasons. dgmw he'd do a fantastic job, but first and foremost it's because i wanna hear the monologue

misfits and magic: nurse stitchnit. i think he'd be really great with the big emotional beats with evan. some of his best work in supergirl was when they let winn be emotionally intelligent and supportive. (like with kara and her panic attacks in triggers, for example)

starstruck odyssey: honestly i don't have a strong opinion on this one besides the fact that it's gotta be someone from baustin, new texas. sheriff codge, maybe? idk just let the man be Aggressively Texan.

coffin run: emil ward. this one's just vibes. i see him doing the evil businessman thing very well.

a court of fey and flowers: the funny answer is jeremy renner. the thirsty answer is chooch. i'm saying chooch. we know he plays sluts well, also it's my list and no one else cares. if you're still reading this, you're probably as insane about jerjor as i am and will respect this vision.

neverafter: lord bainbridge bandlebridge. again this one's mostly just vibes i think he'd have fun with it.

ravening war: jaques tomate. he'd get real silly with the voice, it would be great

mentopolis: wilton (of "we're drowning in cum down here" and "if it's not about cock and balls, i don't care" fame) is the funny answer, and you know what, i'm sticking with it.

burrow's end: the thirst choices do not stop. jeremy jordan for bennett.

fantasy high junior year: jace stardiamond. the man plays a damn good fag who is, again, down bad for powerful people

[plusvanity]

Thanks to your blog — that I discovered randomly — I got sucked into the whole Mayhem lore. 🥲 I got the general order and gist of the things (especially around the whole mythos that people build over the years) but there is one thing that I can't stop thinking and it just bothers me.

So, we all already know that Varg and Øystein start as friends, good ones at that. Varg admires Øystein meanwhile Øystein thinks they share the same vision music wise, they burn churches together, he defends him from the press (and generally TO ME, it seems like it was Ø doing the heavy lifting and all the work in this friendship but whatever) and so on; until Varg's opinion of him shifted all of a sudden: Øystein became full of flaws, or only flaws at that point, and the tension arises. Many people spoke about how they were kind of fighting for dominance of the BM scene, but really, how much is this a factoid? Yeah Varg can brag alllll he wants about how Øystein was jealous because he was becoming more popular, but to me it's more that Ø was just annoyed by his behaviour, he did not feel threatened of being 'dethroned'; it reads like a fantasy of Varg (that besides, came out of nowhere and all of a sudden in the scene meanwhile Øystein was already a well established personality). I also do not really agree on the stance that Øystein was a megalomaniac, but I'll put that aside.

Varg at a certain point says that he 'listened to a call' where Ø was talking about how he wanted (and would) kill him. Is this even true or pulled out from his ass to justify himself? I only found one source that mentions briefly that he THOUGHT about 'getting to him first' but A) he never really wanted that nor was violent and B) it was a private conversation that got out after his death, and I'm referring to Mortiis.

Either way, it does seem that Øystein was a bit preoccupied when it came to Varg. He wanted him out and most importantly, far from himself. There is also what I'll label as a rumor that Ø was agitated after hearing that one clairvoyant (sprinkle of salt). So why would he EVER open the door to him that night? It certainly was weird and he knew that Varg was dangerous, hence why, among other things, he wanted to put him in jail. And even Varg admits that Øystein was clearly uncomfortable seeing him. Would Varg have killed him even if Øystein never opened that damn door (oh, how I wish!), or would his impulsive anger cool down?

Varg and Øystein started as friends because Varg was looking up to Øystein. I have no doubt that Varg was putting up a mark at first to seem more likeable, to get closer to Øystein and eventually become relevant in the Black Metal scene since back then he was a nobody and Øystein was a well-established personality between their friends. As time progressed, Varg's admiration turned into jealousy and envy since he was an undisclosed egomaniac and wanted to have what his 'mentor' had. Their fight for dominance is not a rumor. It is a fact that led to Øystein's tragic end.

No one can blame Øystein for getting sick of Varg's bullshit and giving him the taste of his own medicine by talking badly about Varg's on his back. I believe their animosity was going back and forth because I think I'm one of the few people who believe that Øystein had a bit of an ego too, because after all he was leading a brand new music scene and he was entitled to his position. I don't necessarily think there is something bad about this because after all he was the one (together with Pelle) who built their own, unique style. Whether he really felt threatened by Vikernes or not, we can't tell for sure.

Varg will use everything in his side of the story to make people believe that he was right all along in what he did and not only that, but he even 'did the right thing' by his delusional, egoistic and envious standards, so, my suggestion is to believe anybody else but Varg. You cannot tell what is real and what is fiction, including the call that he pretends he heard. I would say (with indulgence) that 90% of what he states is pulled straight of his ass. He is a nothing but a pathological liar and that's it.

I believe that Øystein was, to a certain extent, having the thought of Varg doing 'something' against, but when all they ever did was throwing empty threats, how could Øystein be sure that this time Varg means business? He wanted Varg out of his life, that's for certain. Vikernes' actions cause him bad publicity and his shop, Helvete, to close.

Why Øystein opened the door that night, I can only speculate the most plausible answer. It was 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning and he woke up from his sleep, too tired to realize how late it must've been, and answering the door came as an automatic reflex. He didn't know who was waiting on the other side and he was surprised to see Varg there. In retrospect, Øystein would've had the chance to put up a better fight if he wasn't taken by surprise like this, but after all, Varg had a knife on him and this was the surprise element that, if you don't have an equalizer, you've already lost the fight unfortunately.

Varg must've been a madman to drive 5-6 hours in the middle of the night from Bergen to Oslo to kill. I don't think that not having that door open, you would just shrug and be like 'Well, that's it, folks. I'm going home'. No, he would've find a way to get in. It's the adrenaline that brought you there that won't allow you to leave even if you would somehow realize that what you do is gonna cost you a lot of trouble. The impulse is too strong, you can't just walk away simply.

I also wish Øystein never opened that door, but I guess we all wish that.

[hbosscreations]

I've sat on this for several days, because your analysis makes me feel feelings as a theater gay, and I think that you touch on exactly why Ride the Cyclone gets to have this conversation and Spirit World (and other modern comics don't).

Marketability.

People like to act like musicals are 'super niche' and not something that the average person will engage with, but that's not really the issue here, the issue is money. Musicals can make bank if they take off. Anything that makes it to a major stage production can generally be assumed to be raking in enough cash to pay everyone back and then some, and musical theater people will promote and encourage people to see the show no matter the cost.

Theater people are drama llamas. We LIKE laughing, crying, and being made to think after a show. A theater person will talk about their favorite show for years. Will see it as many times as their wallets will allow, and there's money to be made in a big enough production.

Ride the Cyclone gets to talk about death and sex and teenage pain because musical theater is allowed to be a vehicle to tell meaningful stories. When you go see a show like Ride the Cyclone, you're there BECAUSE it's about a bunch of teenagers begging to be brought back to life.

It doesn't necessarily matter if the show makes millions of dollars either, because in this day and age small acting companies record things and put them on youtube and use things like patreon and kickstarter to fund passion projects. Starkid is my favorite example of this. The passion is a huge part of it, and marketing allows theaters to make their money back.

Comics in the two major companies DC and Marvel though, have an industry that has been poorly managed since at least the 90s. Can't speak for creators like Image or IDW or whatnot, but I can tell you that the balancing act for DC and Marvel to try and make money has been TERRIBLY run and managed for a long time. Margins are pretty thin on traditional comics.

Which means they need to sell lots of stuff, pay their employees less, and cash grab as much as possible. It's why event comics are so common, why tie-ins are so prevalent, and even why they don't bind all the tie-ins together a lot of the time when they put collections together.

DC wants to make maximum profit, and that means making their stuff as bland as they can to appeal to as many people as possible, not realizing they are shooting themselves in the foot.

John Constantine is a fantastic example of this problem. He's in every crossover they can stick him in, because he's a cool character and he's fun to play with, but he's never treated with the dignity and depth his early comics demand. Why? I think it's because most of DC's current audience is American and they are afraid of alienating anyone by choosing a side on anything, and therefore not getting their money.

God forbid the horror comic series about a queer, burned out punk, a man who fully believed in the principles he stood behind but never had the ability or drive to try and make them happen, be about politics and queer topics. We cannot stand for anything or we risk sales being bad. We can't talk about real world topics, people don't want to read that in their escapist fantasy, even though different people get different things out of the concept.

I actually think that's a big reason Dead in America is suffering. It's not ABOUT anything. We could have had a discussion about racism that the earlier issues so CLEARLY wanted to talk about, but we might risk upsetting someone who reads the comics, that's why we have so many 'rural' stories about bad white people in the run. 'Rural whites' don't read comic books, after all (It's bullshit, but their numbers will show this, because people like me who live in rural areas have to get comics from ebay or from a reseller website because we don't have local options). We could have talked about John's complicated feelings about fatherhood, but that might hurt someone's feelings. We could talk about queer topics, but...well, that I'll blame on Spurrier not knowing or caring about queer culture.

It's why the New 52 and Rebirth stories are...not great. They're the aesthetic of Hellblazer and John Constantine, but they don't have any of the bite that the original run has. I have read the OG Hellblazer twice now and there are comics I am HAUNTED by in the best way. I can't think of many stories that have come out in recent years that have done the same thing.

Xanthe, as you've mentioned in another post, is a very generic 'asian' character in design. I didn't realize this at the time, but once you pointed it out I couldn't not see it anymore. Their character isn't really risky at the time of publication. Their backstory seems made to make numbers on tumblr, the relationship with their family only exists for screenshots to get people talking and buying. I bought it for Constantine, but also because I was pulled in by the dinner scene and Xanthe seemed interesting from the few panels we got.

And this HURTS characters like Xanthe when it comes to future appearances. I remembered Spirit World fondly because it was bland and harmless, but I read it once when the trade came out and never read it again until your post about it because it was bland and not actually engaging. My memories were fond, but I didn't think about it. It had no longevity or real thought to the world-building it wanted to create. Pretty art, lots of action (too much action), no real substance.

This story should have been Xanthe's debut instead of a crossover/teamup, detailing their cast roster, setting up future antagonists and potential enemies to become allies. It should have been about a person trying to rationalize being alive and dead at the same time and what that means, it should have talked about what death meant culturally.

Being Asian-American and having that dynamic around death would be an interesting deep dive on its own that might have fueled more readership. Instead, it seems to have left the target demographic ambivalent at best and unwilling to engage further at worst.

Why was Cassandra Cain in the story? She's Asian. Why was John Constantine in the story? He's queer. Neither character felt well written on the second read through, and more to the point, they were superfluous (and frankly I find it a little insulting that someone at DC went, well, she's popular and Asian, throw her in there).

And you're right. Xanthe will show up in team books occasionally they were in an issue of Birds of Prey recentish, but they were also paired with Constantine again. They'll be background art, they might even die in an event if they get a decent fan following specifically so they can be brought back in a super special single edition, and then be forgotten for a while.

It's a shame, because if Spirit World had the love and care to the themes it claimed to the way Ride the Cyclone did, maybe Xanthe could have been the flagship character for a new generation of readers, but we'll never know now.

I don't think I've treaded any new territory here, everything I've said, you've said better and far more succinctly, but I definitely understand your perspective better now. Apologies for the long, long rant.

Spirit World, Ride the Cyclone and Death. A weird comparative analysis

Gonna combine my musical nerd and cape comics fixation together for a rambling meta thought. I've been reflecting on how taboo the topic of death is in media after getting into Ride The Cyclone (highly recommend watching the slime tutorial and Waiting in the Wings' documentary on it) but also contrasting that musical with how Spirit World handled similar topics.

Both stories cover characters whose lives were cut short from a tragic circumstance, but while Cyclone directly talks frankly about how each character uniquely grieves over their lost life (and eventually accepts death)- Spirit World uses death as largely an aesthetic to a generic fantasy superhero adventure.

[spoilers for Ride the Cyclone and Spirit World]

Spirit World is about non-binary, half dead half living Envoy Xanthe Zhou, as they go into the Spirit World with John Constantine to rescue Cassandra Cain Batgirl. They eventually go toe to toe with the spirit of a bitter dead poet.

Ride the Cyclone is about 6 choir teenagers who die in a roller coaster accident in their small town. In the afterlife, they are given the chance to vote which one of them they believe should be resurrected.

For Spirit World, do we even know how Xanthe feels about being "half dead"? What does that even mean? They died as (what looks like) a 3 year old, and have clearly aged 15 more years since then. So they can age? Do they need to eat or drink (they're seen with a drink in a Pride comic)? Xanthe keeps mentioning they're half dead and half living, but the comic doesn't seem to want to discuss what that means. How would Xanthe feel that they were essentially given a job as an Envoy the minute they died as a very young child? Was this even a choice?

We've already covered the numerous plot holes in Xanthe Zhou's poorly thought out backstory so I won't go over that again. But honestly apart from the thematically loose "the dead shouldn't be forgotten" moral, a lot of how death is presented in Spirit World feels so superficial. When Xanthe is formally introduced as this cool character with a giant sword hanging around a gravesite, fighting all these hopping vampire creatures... this scene would play out the same if you swapped the setting with a forest and zombies as bad guys.

The Spirit World is less an afterlife for the spirits to move onto and more an MMORPG setting for our superheroes to travel across and fight generic evil beings and encounter eviler, bigger, boss battles at the end. Then there's the poet clout villain whose problems are just easily solved by Xanthe promising to remember her. I've already covered what a lost opportunity thematically this character was in my last Xanthe essay, but this time I want to contrast her with Ride the Cyclone's Jane Doe. I also want to compare Xanthe with Noel Gruber afterwards.

Ride the Cyclone's musical numbers follow each character performing a song reflecting their wishes, and musings on life (this sounds depressing but the musical handles all this with comedy and wit), hoping to prove themselves as worthy of a second chance at life. Of the characters, Jane Doe is the mysterious odd one out. The accident decapitated her, leaving her to enter the after life with no memories and the people of the living unable to identify her.

You might see where I'm going with this. So in Spirit World, Wan Yujing was this famous poet mourned by an entire empire. She only goes monster mode when a handwave-y "time erodes all" happens in the Spirit World and she is eventually forgotten- so she becomes desperate to demand to be reincarnated by the Jade Court. Because her clout ran out. Again, I already made the critique in my previous essay that this villain would better link to our protagonist if she was a queer poet whose poetry was being purposefully straight washed as an act of queer historical erasure. But I want to bring up how truly unsympathetic this villain is. She gets Shakespeare levels of clout but still demands more because she isn't getting reincarnated fast enough. Xanthe promises that as an immortal "half dead half living" person that they will remember Wan Yujing, so she too can be immortal in some way.

I think about all the Jane Doe-s in the Spirit World who don't get to be famous poets that have Empires remembering who they were. People who died anonymously without a past. In Cyclone, the main character chooses Jane Doe as the person who should be brought back to life. Our cast of teens come to terms with the fact that while it's tragic that their lives ended shortly, they conclude "to say that if one dies young, they die needlessly... that is to discount the years we had. We had a life, she didn't. That's my vote." Since Jane Doe has no memory of who she is, it's only fair that she is given that second chance.

I get that Spirit World is choosing these "larger than life" characters as villains, but it's at the expense of their own supposed themes. Of all the people to die and face off our hero as the villain, a character who's essentially an influencer but somehow has an entire empire forget about her anyway feels thematically hollow.

Modern Superhero comics are suffering from a specific problem right now; they're not really about anything. Characters don't feel like people with interior lives informed by the context of who they are. Class, race and bigotry are only touched upon as lightly as possible. Queer characters are now Pride ads with no personhood or flaws. They punch gentrified crime and fight for no one in particular. Even recent adapted media such as My Adventures with Superman and Caped Crusader follow this. Superman fights white-washed xenophobia, while Batman fights gentrified, white-washed classicism. It's why comics like Superman Smashes the Klan, Catwoman Lonely City and Alan Scott Green Lantern stand out so much. It's been a while since these characters talked about anything that matters. Don't get me wrong, slop that's about nothing exists in every industry. But when these characters and worlds historically used to have more bite- it's especially obvious.

If I could be playfully conspiracy theory-like for a second; I believe Xanthe Zhou was pitched so that DC Comics can buff out their Pride Anthology or AAPI anthology with a new younger character. The company will give this character one limited series, but that's it. Xanthe will appear in the larger DC universe whenever big magic plots happen, but that's it. Maybe they'll get a YA graphic novel. I would love to be proven wrong, but the problems with Xanthe are baked in the dough.

Because they don't feel like a person, Xanthe feels more like an industry planted Pride ad. They're designed to be the most palatable and marketable image of Asian androgyny. They literally have no flaws to grow out of, and their backstory makes no sense. They weren't built to be a sustainable solo character.

So I want to contrast Xanthe Zhou against Noel Gruber from Ride the Cyclone. Because they're both queer characters whose lives were cut short at a young age.

In a dramatic lament, Noel Gruber expresses how if he had a chance to live, he'd want to live the horrible cinematic messy life of a French sex worker woman in post-war France. He struggled as the only gay boy in a small town and never got to kiss a boy before he died. It's a look into a queer life that could've been lived, one with all the messy texture and self destruction Noel couldn't have but desires. We get to see how death and queerness intersect into rich, unflattering, gender-messy themes. "I want to be that fucked up girl." Noel sings.

But what's Xanthe's deal? They died as a 3 year old, got brought back, avoided their family at all costs for 15 years, and then had a transphobic confrontation with their family when they're invited to dinner way later. If Xanthe grew up in a transphobic household, how did they ever figure out they were non-binary when they were 3? Could they even verbalize it? Or did they instead figure out their queerness after they died? But how is that possible when they already held a level of familiar resentment towards their family's transphobia as if they've had several fights about it? It's hard to picture a 3 year old having multiple heated debates about gender with their parents for this level of resentment to make any sense.

Details aside, how does Xanthe's queerness intersect with themes of death and grief? Well, it just doesn't. This scene ends with Xanthe's sister telling them that she bothered remembering them even though their parents moved on from their death (which makes no sense since the parents wanted to have dinner with a random 18 year old they correctly assumed was their long dead "daughter" but whatever). Honestly, the only reason queerness exists in this family drama is so that Xanthe has a tense relationship with their family. The story would be exactly the same if Xanthe was a troublemaker that brought shame to their family. Who they are isn't specific to whatever grief exists in the comic.

When people give the critique that modern Superhero comics aren't about anything anymore, we usually think of these comics as "lacking political bite and commentary". We don't often think of something like Death to be political. And even though it is in many ways, it's also a social taboo to talk about. Death is an uncomfortable thing to confront, even in the safety of fiction. It's what made Ride the Cyclone such a difficult stage musical to market.

So how does a modern mainstream comic like Spirit World fit into that? It just sits there in this non-committal way. Yes, this is a story about a trans teenager who died, but only in a cool Superhero Origin Way, not in any way that would make readers uncomfortable. Bury Your Gays is a stereotype after all, so we can't talk about how queer people feel about death. We don't get to know how Xanthe feels about death as a non-binary Asian American. Especially if it's messy. It's the reason why Wan Yujing's character can never commentate on themes of historical queer erasure. God forbid superhero comics be about something.

I think about how, in the original Hellblazer run from the 80s, John Constantine had an elderly gay friend who was diagnosed with AIDS but was killed by a homophobic hate group. The comic openly talks about the sheer amount of gay people dying of the epidemic, a looming threat that informs John's queer life. It's such a culture shock, to contrast these early comics with how John Constantine is written in Spirit World. A character stripped of his own queer history and is at the mercy of incessant slutty bi jokes. Where is the desire to talk about how death informs a queer person's life? The mourning of a lost generation to the AIDS crisis? Something John lived through?

How about how any of this intersects with being an Asian American queer person? Queer people of color are often erased or purposefully excluded from queer history and communities. As a Queer Asian American, what does it mean to have identities that are often perceived to be in conflict with each other? Would your queer Asian ancestors even be remembered? Cultural differences with how you'd mourn your communities? But answering any of these questions means an uncomfortable conversation for Spirit World. For Xanthe. It threatens to be about something.

Which makes it all the more silly that, of the two stories, a musical about teenagers dying from a rollercoaster malfunction is more willing to have that uncomfortable conversation. You should ride the Cyclone.

[shalom-iamcominghome]

I think now, my opinion about "jews by choice choose judaism!" has changed; not because I don't choose judaism fully, I choose it every day, but as time goes on, it doesn't feel as much of a choice. It feels like a choice in the same way that needing to breathe, to eat, to sleep feels like a choice. To me, judaism is as important a function of my day as my mortal, bodily functions, and I never chose to do them. It happened to me, it continually happens to me

I definitely started my journey needing to consciously choose judaism, but as time goes on and it enriches my life more, is it as much of a choice, or is it just... what happened?

I guess it might be apt to say my conversion is like eating: I have to do it. In that way, it isn't a choice, I have no choice in my need for it. However, I can choose what I eat, when I eat, and how often I eat (to an extent). In the same way, I have made choices about my observance, about the way I think about g-d, and how much I participate in my (offline) community. But I don't think I have chosen my desire to be a jew, just like you don't really choose to fall in love.

[aq2003]

my personal hot take of the day is that you cannot fully appreciate ten if you don't also appreciate martha and the dynamic they have

[antianakin]

It's really depressing that the only real Jedi centric and Jedi positive show in existence is written for preschoolers, while many of the more "adult" shows are edgy and about morally ambiguous or straight-up evil characters. As if lessons about being kind and selfless are somehow not important or relevant to adults just as much if not more than they are to children.

It feels like characters who are unambiguously good are seen as only enjoyable by the very young and adult viewers will only actually appreciate characters who are cruel and selfish (and the requisite "tragic backstory" that always goes with it to help excuse their cruel and selfish choices).

It's just really sad and disappointing.