#and i think thats where it gets weird in social contexts

[the-racoon-over-your-stairs]

agree about the Ivan thing! I think too many people mistaken his physical closeness to Till as emotional closeness. It’s clear that the two left a lot unsaid and while Till felt he could seek comfort (according to the art book) and take his anger out on Ivan/air his grievances (like when he gets jealous that Ivan was playing with Mizi), we mainly see Ivan reciprocate violence or initiate it when it comes to feeling attraction (see: the weird blood licking thing and the non-con kiss). We only see him be honest with Sua and thats not so much as an expression of his emotions but because of the differences in their situations despite having similar approaches to love/similar attitudes. Even with Mizi who Ivan held no grudges against Ivan was still holding himself afar from her to the point that they have very different views of their relationship. People are only willing to explore this in context of romantic feelings but it’s very true for many other aspects of Ivan’s life. I think it’d be interesting if people connected this to how the guardians trust him, I think his character has a lot to speculated on since we aren’t fully aware of the social hierarchy in Anakt Garden

ANON YOU GET IT💔

I absolutely agree on the points you made. I think it also connects to something other people have already pointed out about Till actually looking at Ivan and clearly caring for him and Ivan somehow not noticing, and I personally think it's not so much Ivan not noticing, but more so "dismissing" those things and distancing himself (mentally) when Till shows affection or care.

Another thing that made me get this idea was also how(like you mentioned) Ivan mainly initiates or reciprocates violence when it comes to showing attraction and getting Till's attention. But later we see Ivan showing open care and affection and gentleness when Till isn't conscious. To me, that reads a lot a sort of inner conflict between wanting Till to look at him, wanting to be seen, but also a refusal to let Till truly see Ivan love him. He wants to be seen but he hides, he wants Till to love him but he literally avoids any chances of having Till see his feelings.

This stupid little blorbo keeps everyone and himself at a minimum of five emotional kilometers away.

Personally I love when in fanfics where Ivan and Till get saved, authors write Ivan "hiding" or avoiding Till (and Mizi) to avoid confronting what he did for Till, I feel it is a very realistic depiction of how he would act. Like, surviving wasn't even near part of the plan, and I think part of the reason we get the kiss in doubt 6, Ivan's soft smile and, in general, a sacrifice that screams "I love you" is exactly because Ivan could confess everything and then not have to deal with the consequences of it. Living and having to deal with a Till who knows about his feelings, and having to come to terms with the fact that yes, Till does love him, would be scary af for Ivan and the 8 meters tall wall he built around himself<3.

Ivan confirmed to be Kim "fourth wall" "let me die instead of telling people things" Dokja's child.

You mentioned Ivan's relationship with his guardians and aliens in general and it's something I'd also give a leg and kidney to see more of, including Ivan's life in the slums which I'm CONVINCED is a big reason why Ivan acts the way he does.

We know he was sold off through not very legal channels, and I wouldn't be surprised if he lived in an environment where a lot of other kids came and went very often, getting bought/caught and later being sold to highest bidder, so he probably didn't have any "stable" presence until Unsha bought him and even then certainly not a stable human presence until Anakt Garden. I feel in that situation, connecting with any of the other kids there was probably impossible not only because of the awful situation they were in, but because of literally not having the time to do so.

Okay this wasn't coherent in the slightest but anyway. THANK YOU FOR THIS ASK ANON I WISH YOU A PILLOW COLD ON BOTH SIDES AND KEYS THAT GO IN AT THE FIRST TRY (⁠人⁠ ⁠•͈⁠ᴗ⁠•͈⁠)

[system-of-a-feather]

Kind of a Journal? Blog? Life Update?

Hey yall, we haven't been too active online once again cause we've been doing some pretty good and busy stuff. Lots of things going on, mostly good, some neutral but interesting, but you know how it is.

I'm framing this somewhat like a "this is an update on my life / explanation for my absence" and while its *kind of* that, its honestly more so me just journaling and giving myself some space to organize myself and a few thoughts cause MAN things have been GOING

One long small journey I've been exploring the past few months is really re-exploring my relationship and options to have friends that I made IRL and in a more organic way than the one-sided caretaking dynamiced friendships I had in mid-to-late highschool and the safety and distance that online-to-long-distance friendships provide me with my schizoid-adjacent and avoidant attachment sort of way of being.

It's kept me stupid busy because I'm knowingly engaging in MORE than I want as a way of overshooting so I can really just observe, take in information, notice how it sits with me, what I like, what I don't and find what I actually want in my life and honestly, I don't think I plan to be too particularly more social, but I do think expanding a bit and building some roots and connections for the first time since I was six or seven is something I'd like to do a bit now

Secondly, I'm officially in the housing market to BUY a house which I was originally planning on slowly opening the door to and planning to actually buy around August or something as an accommodation to my fiance who likes to take things slower, but he seems in the game and so I'm riding that as someone who likes to Lock In

On that note though, this whole thing has really made me realize how insane I can 'lock in' and make sure I get everything done perfectly and plus some when I really need to and really want to. I've always known I had this, and I honestly used to REGULARLY operate in this almost regularly when we operated as dissociative parts - but for the last two or so years, we've explicitly decided to "retire" since we got to a stable place in life and got through "the hard part of life". Its only recently did we actually consider trying to balance the full sense of retirement we've been trying to foster for two years and going back to making advances on some long term goals and means of fostering a sense of thriving / long term security that we chose to try to use those skills in moderation

And good GOD do I realize - with the vision and insight that being a fused whole with minimal dissociation - that I think our DID has ironically masked what might genuinely be Bipolar II. Because its so visible and jarring as a fused watch our brain and notice what I'm pretty sure is not just "oh triggered hypervigilance that looks like hypomania cause its a trauma learned behavior" but just... dead ass straight up hypomania, and looking back, I really am realizing this is something thats been a chronic pattern - its just we literally had parts that were more likely to be out when we were hypomanic, and a lot of the symptoms of hypomania were just... 'quirky traits'

And honestly with that context, it kind of made us realize its almost occams razor for our weird relationship with NPD - where we have the tendency to have insanely high and grandiose and borderline delusional beliefs of grandeur / conceptual invulnerablity from times - without having the actual need for attention or praise signature to NPD. As dissociated parts, we didn't "experience hypomania" because most of the time we were hypomanic, it was just one of the parts that are already geared that way just kind of being 'in the flow' and it wasn't "that different from normal"; of course those parts only really having a clear reference of normal from their limited dissociative vision

But as a fused whole, I look at how we get and how we used to get knowing what "normal" is for us, and its absurd to say that now. So like, were going to bring it up with our psychiatrist, but for the past two or three months, we've been keeping an eye on it and what not so thats an interesting development

Oh and I MEANT to say this somewhere but its also just kind of insane how productive I can be when I "lock in" (saying that because I don't currently think I'm hypomanic and while its captialistically productive, I've had to thread the needle in it not being unhealthy and actually hypomanic which are two different but often overlapping things) cause I made $4000 in two weeks on nothing but my side gig because I was locked in on making a fat nest egg for when I move and buy a house

Its all interesting stuff and its currently not a huge concern as much as something to keep an eye out for, assuming you ignore how much the probably brain chemistry fuckery has thrown off my sleep schedule and sleep hygiene

And ALSO, we are finally getting our dog ears for our top surgery revised later this month which is fun and exciting honestly.

ANYWAYS, were doing really good, figuring shit out, making large movements in life, and just really kind of thriving in the chaos of everything.

I feel people would normally be more "oh no" about the whole probably-Bipolar-II concern, but honestly, I don't think it changes anything of how we've been living other than giving us more context and something to look into and be aware of. Its just kind of an interesting observation for us honestly. Just a saga to the Feathers lore and what not. I mean, as far as mental health relevations, DID has really desensitized me to them. Like once you go through finding out your deep traumas and finding out some of the peopel you trusted the most are actually some of the most harmful people in your lives, having a "oh actually you might have Bipolar II" is just such a "oh okay, we can handle that" moment

But anyways, hope yall are doing good all things considered. Feel free to chat and what not on this, I don't really mind

[the-scottish-costume-guy]

I meant if you want an excuse to go off on this, I'd be curious?

Oh god I always want to talk about my research but I'll try to be brief. Disclaimer - I'm still conducting data analysis, none of this has been peer reviewed yet its just my thoughts based on studying modern and historical (particularly queer) fashions. This is about my tags on a post wondering about why fashion is boring these days.

There are a few main factors I can find but they all boil down to "theres no safe/easy/cost effective way to experiment": 1) Economic/accessible - We're all poor right now. Finding a sense of unique fashion costs money in experimentation and its hard to get access to things we can try without committing to the cost. (Plus we are all a bit more aware of how detrimental clothing waste is). Its safer to buy something you know you like that isnt adventurous, and on top of that unique items (even ordinary clothes in brighter colours) tend to be more expensive, and difficult to find. 2) Social pressure and fear. When given an outlet that separates how people are perceived from what they are wearing/doing (E.g. performance contexts) they seem to be more likely to experiment - and will sometimes carry that experimentation into more 'every day' fashions. I dont think people want me to get into the thick of performativity as a topic here, but scholars like Judith Butler would argue we are all, always, performing. However, when we are doing that in a character other than ourselves (Acting, cosplaying, ect) it creates a weird social safety net where the clothes are not seen as 'genuine' or 'authentic' to the self and so people are more forgiving of any failure to live up to social norms. These outlets also give people access to either skills or people with the skills to make completely custom items. But we have to acknowledge thats not the norm for the majority of the population. With no way to try different fashions without feeling scrutinised by those around them, a lot of people just... wont experiment. Now I'm not a psychologist, and I can't get into the depths of why we all socially police each other - just that it happens. But I will say its a big big case for why we need more access to different performance outlets for people at large. That playing/pretending and self reflective work that happens as a result is important! Fashion is just an external manifestation of it.

[digiblueslush]

yall my health insurance wont stop MOCKING ME

for context, in june 2024, I had a pretty significant medical event for lack of better terms. I had a weird, almost stroke like thing happen, and i wasn't able to really walk properly for about 5 months (i still could walk but my gait and stride were VERY fucked up and i had so much pain in my knees) it wasn't actually a stroke so I played doctor ping pong and hoped someone would tell me anything more than "your just stressed". It ended up being a very easy but pretty rare vitamin deficiency but nobody tested me for that vitamin until i started having GI issues.

I had a lot of imaging done just making sure nothing was wrong brain neck spine wise, but 2 of my images were sent (without my knowledge) to a different clinic to have them interpreted. I wasn't informed that insurance didn't cover the costs until they went into collections.

We filed an appeal, they said you gotta have this this and this and denied the inital appeal, then we appealed again after THEY gave us access to some of the forms they needed. last week they sent my mom (i am under her insurance but I'm 19 so i am the guarantor i think thats the word) a letter about the appeal UNDER MY SISTERS NAME, DENYING THE CLAIM ON MY NAME BECAUSE WE TOOK TO LONG. LIKE GIRL YOU JUST CHARGED ME FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED WELL OVER A YEAR AGO, IT TAKES A WHOLE 8 HOUR WORK DAY TO GET "TRANSFERED" TO SOMEONE WHO JUST HANGS UP, 3 MONTHS FROM THE INITIAL FILE DAY IS FUCKING NOTHING.

anyways, heres the mockery if that wasn't enough. I have hypermobile ehlers danlos syndrome (among several other things), which causes me significant joint pain, but I can't get in to see someone who can actually diagnose it (even though its just a fucking checklist of things i've already had confirmed) meaning I can't get into management programs because "its not medically necessary" without the official diagnosis.

I got a PROMOTIONAL (how fucking sick is that in the bad way that is wrong on so many levels) THAT THEY COULD OFFER A $20 A WEEK 12 WEEK PODCAST FOR BACK AND JOINT PAIN. THAT MOSTLY CONSISTS OF DIETARY CHANGES (BAD FOR ME) AND TRADITIONAL EXCERCISE (ALSO USUALLY BAD FOR ME)

like why complain about me being dysfunctional in a society that won't allow me to be functional? I get systemic power, but what is the point of putting so many barriers to disabled people being able to manage their conditions better and just live life if you want more people working? you can't complain about disabled people wasting your tax money when A. theyre not and B. there would be a significant increase in how many disabled people work IF TREATMENT AND MANAGEMENT WASN'T A LUXURY THAT WE'RE PURPOSEFULLY LEFT TOO BROKE TOO AFFORD JUST FROM SOCIAL SECURITY

I am in quite the rambly mood today, so I'm sure theres a few parts where my words aren't accurate to what I mean but yeah. Fuck health insurance.

[typekiku]

TSUKIHIME FASHION REVIEW 3!!!

under the dark crimson moon, i write this newest entry of the much awaited much beloved tsukihime fashion review.

it's a duty i must carry out for the sake of the generations of lost sheep both before and after my time that have yet to truly appreciate the true depth of style that is contained within the single greatest visual novel known to mankind (according to me)

yet, i feel as if i am not doing my duty to its fullest... how can i possibly adequately sum the glory of todays fashionista? how can i dare attempt to sum that up?? no! i cannot waver in my faith in my incredibly lacking writing skills nor fear people figuring out this barely has anything to do with fashion... I WILL PERSEVERE!!

on with the show as the youth say!

(SPOILER ALERT: i should mention ill probably end up spoiling a shit ton of oghime and whatnot here so watch out)

so without further ado todays subject is:

drum roll

MORE DRUM ROLL

thanks uhh whatever you are from

MICHAEL ROA VALDAMJONG

yes the one and only roa

BROA

the legend himself, the Serpent of Akasha, Uroboros, the founder of the burial agency, the infinite reincarnatior, and professional Arcueid simp.

we have gathered here today to judge his design and uh fashion ig and whatever else i feel like ranting today about.

lets get right to it.

look at this dude all shirtless and shit like cmon so shameless... cover em up damn. seriously tho this man has a thing for showing off his (or should i say others) bodies like you will see soon.

i guess this comes down to him enjoying the freedom of being fully in control of whatever body he is currently occupying actually?

maybe this is some super deep look into the merits of semi nudism or whatever idk im not smart.

probably takeuchi just wanted an excuse to draw some seriously ripped abs actually i mean this might seriously be the most abby abs we ever see in any TM work. its fucking shredded and roa probably knew that. weirdo

on the flipside that majestic hair is simply incredible. DAMN thats some 10/10 hair. only other hair in this series that compares is my wife arcueid's long hair before her mean little (Older actually but idc) Altrouge got all mean and shit.

umm who is this? what happened to my incredible haired roa?? TAKEUCHI WHERE ARE YOU??? someone please give me back long haired roa... this isnt funny...

do you see what we lost? long gorgeous haired roa should've stayed and im genuinely upset we lost him to this admittingly much better dressed roa. im ashamed of you serpent of fraudkasha

fr tho where tf did he even get this rockstar ass drip anyways? we know SHIKI has been locked up in the outside house for awhile before released thanks to a certain maid... did he just drop by the local hot topic or whatever? did he manifest it through sheer willpower and arcueid simpery?

understandable tbh i too acheive things through arcueid simpery such as dirty stares and social exclusion!!

for reference, here is SHIKI

yea

i guess he just uhh changes him which in hindsight is really fucking sad to think about so lets not

uhh ANYWAYS

ok so ignoring ciel on the right elesia or should i say roa decides the very first thing hes gonna do in poor elesias body is to strip it naked

huh?

yea roa is definitely a weird one. no wonder the other ancestors hate him (besides nero because he is #HIM)

sick cape tho

why is he so hot here actually? what the hell? i underestimated his looks like damn

no really why is he so hot anyways he should look like an absolute freak like he actually is. i see you roa. i see you got that long braid wrapped around your neck like damn son... you may have fallen in love with a literal killing machine and never even got to speak to her till the very very end but i see you.

rizzless bastard.

well thats enough from me so ill drop this classic mahoyo line because i found it very funny without context.

ciao!

[theholidayslingerlikebadperfume]

no because genuinely though, i had NO IDEA people preferred to cook things over bake stuff until very recently in my life and it genuinely BOGGLES MY MIND that is a common mentality for people to have because i think it genuinely exposes how autistic i am actually am for real. i

know people hate when you make your entire personality related to your disability issues or whatever but autism has genuinely explained SO. FUCKING. MUCH. of who i am and i find new ways to link my personality traits to it every fucking day i live with the knowledge of having this disorder [i hate this phrasing but i cannot think of a better way to phrase it rn] and it's genuinely like.

yall seen that elyse meyers video that's like "getting diagnosed at 29-ish or whatever with autism is like wow this changes absolutely nothing and everything at the same time and for the rest of my life" that is exactly, EXACTLY how i feel about my own autism diagnosis.

it's something you cannot understand, i dont think, unless you were diagnosed with a personality disorder as well [i personally think autism could be called a personality disorder but thats my unscientific and probably terribly uninformed opinion do not take this beyond a grain of salt ok] later in life where you're just like wow. holy shit. it's been autism [or other disorder] this entire time? it was just autism? im not an evil bitch? im just autistic???? how much of it was autism. was it all autism. holy fuck, it was ALL autism.

i think what a lot of it is that i had no context for any of my life experiences until i learned about ASD and i started thinking of my life in that particular context and it was a light bulb moment for me personally.

like, oh, im fucking normal, yall bitches are just fucking rude and mean for no fucking reason. got it.

and its like how do u NOT make everything about your disability when your disability affects literally EVERYTHING.

i prefer to bake over cook because i find baking to be more rigid of a medium than cooking is and i like that rigidity. it's like, of course, a lot of it, i think stems from people misunderstanding what disorders are and what it means to be mentally ill. people view it as being another "species" of human altogether. they view it as having either "normal" human traits or "abnormal human traits" they DO NOT view it as having an INBALANCED approach to handling your specific human traits that appear in everyone but appear more frequently to the point of detriment socially in you specifically for some reason.

and when you grow up being viewed at as abnormal but without a reason why because nobody wants to call you a weird freak to your face, it's impossible i think to not recontextualize everything in your life through the new lens of perspective once you're finally validated and taken seriously in your experiences.

anyways this is getting so long and boring but like i just.... even my desire for baking man. even that is because of the autism, huh.

[joculatrixster]

thank you for replying! -i understand where youre coming from but i feel like some of the points you brought up about scott can't just be boiled down to homophobia if that makes sense- like people see scott as calculated because he calls making allies/friendships a 'social game' etc . and obviously grian and joel berating and teasing jimmy also isn't entirely fine but i think toxicity in the context of an alliance vs a canon-explicit marriage should be weighed differently, but ultimately im not sure that grian is actually necessarily "worse" than scott; while i think grian and joel and jimmy do have an unbalanced dynamic alot of the 'berating' between them is more like 'jimmy you idiot you died to xyz' whereas with scott in 3l it felt a bit more manipulative likewhen scott purposely placed something to scare jimmy and then made fun of him for being scared but. idk

also i think everyone understands that they're friends in real life and nothing ccjimmy is actually uncomfortable with would make it into a video but this is just to think about/interpret their characters within the context of the roleplay/storyline

again this isnt meant as an attack or anything at all - i just wanted to talk about why some people would have a different interpretation of fh!

thats fair, i read ur reply when i was busy i dont remember it well but honestly a fair take ^-^b i dont think it ALL is sorry i didnt make it clear i think the reason its POPULAR is bc scott fans r not rlly the ppl doing this its jimmy fans who dominate the fandom way more, but the fact irs happening to the gay guy IS weird and something to raise a brow to especially when there r more weird extreme fans who take it wayyy too far

it feels unbalanced to me bc it is, grian and joel have more fans in the life series rlly than scott bc most scott fans r just not life series postinfg, so when grian or joel does something mean to others in a similar vien its seen less in a negative light. im going off of memory so forgive me if i get a bit fuzzy w it

scott teases jimmy their friendship is kinda rivalry type thing its rlly just how they r, but ppl r not as used to it which is understandable too. idrc if ppl think scott is a bit manipulative hes just like. vilinized for it or seen as cold when he clearly still cares for his allies? he sacrificed SO much time in lil, he let ppl kill him in secret life, i wish i saw ppl rlly speak more on those better parts of him but also its just more normalized to intpret his actions more cold than it is for say grian who could be seen as cold for how easy he sheds alliances.

every intpretation is fine but w scott it genuinely goes into character bashing territory or just making him the stand in vilian jimmy needs to be saved from in fandom spaces which is agian fine if it happened to other characters who r similarly manipulative or calculating(martyn, scar, impulse even...) but deadass ive never seen anyone but scott put in such a position. which is weird. to me. especially when framed as him being bashed or vilinized for his straight friend who ppl hc he abuses like...ok. but where is the same energy for scar who is deadass evil af in 3rd life and limited life..? scar who destroys the ranch and kills his mother and doesnt apologize for either??? is it bc ppl just like him more so it makes more sense wven he does manipulative stuff??? martyn who is notoriously devisive for his ending and playstyle but in fics like its not great but he tends to not be as hated or put in the same level of bashing pll do for scott? hes prob the closest ive seen to the way scott is seen as an easy stand in vilian but i have not seen it as bad for him?

tho anon no not everyone understands there is a group of ppl who genuinely think scott in real life is an abusive person and actually that inspired my original post bc pll said w their whole chest they think scott is bad and makes jimmy uncomfortable

sorry if this is jumbled the other anon message is turning me into the joker...i get what u mean and i DO think its naunced but ppl REFUSE to acknowledge how weird it can feel for others to see and while i do think there r other factors...this fandom has leaned into homophobia for scott especially more frindge jimmy fans, sorry i think i mixed up a lot of things in my replys i was busy and also i genuinely dont care enough about tumblr anon posting to explain every naunce of an issue ie why i put pearl as a tag on bc the mysongy of all that is not for today thank u ^-^b

[listen-to-the-inner-walrus]

Oh so on the sour thing - there is a separate scale for acidity entirely. They are not actually considered opposites in this context. In fact there are 4 major factors considered by wine tasters: acid, tannin, alcohol and sweetness. And they all impact how each other are tasted but they can all be considered individually.

There's also a thing where one in ten wines that come from a bottle with a cork made of actual cork wood will be "corked" and taste all wrong - mum describes it as "musty". She has promised to let me try (I'm super curious!) if she finds one but my parents very rarely drink wine pretentious enough to have a real cork in the bottle - many wines don't these days - so I've never got to taste it myself. One of the reasons many companies are moving away from real cork even though nothing matches it for letting the wine develop is that they lose customers every time someone tries their wine and it's corked. Because instead of knowing this most people just think (understandably) "oh I don't like this wine, what the fuck was everyone who liked this on about. Must be some wine buff thing I'm not cultured enough to get I suppose" and then never buys it again. The pretentiousness of the wine community is its own downfall.

Fancy restaurants will give customers a taste of the wine before putting it on the table to check for this issue... Except most customers don't know this and many restaurants also just do it now because it's what you do, so they do it even with wines that weren't sealed with cork under the impression that you're testing to see if you like the wine not for this very specific issue. At a certain point I think that tradition has just become testing to see if you like the wine tbh but it was originally meant as a quality check. Also they would ALWAYS offer it to my dad because he's a man and he always gives it to mum because like. She's the person in the family who has an actual wine qualification (framed on our wall at home!). And just. Very funny. Every time. Back when corks were more common she had actually caught corked wine a few times. The whole extended family is suitably impressed by this.

Funny how growing up with someone who works with wine will give you a weirdly comprehensive knowledge of lots of wine-related things even though I DON'T DRINK WINE. I barely drink at all and wines give me a worse headache than other alcoholic drinks because they've got all sorts of weird and wonderful side-effects of the fermentation process in there (called secondary metabolites). I actually kind of like the flavours but it's not worth the suffering. Really looking forward to when someone invents a genuinely wine-like alcohol-free drink so I can drink something other than fruit juice at fancy social events. I have had some excellent mocktails and alcohol free beer is apparently really good but the food tech for wine just isn't there yet - alcohol free wines at the moment taste like very slightly more complicated grape juice at their best.

huh.

my entire experience with wine is whatever wine brand it was that my nan drank. i cannot remember any details except they sold it in morrisons and it was near a wine with yeti in the name on the shelf. so like, this is all new to me.

apart from the cork part which i had a vague idea about, from somewhere. it might be because i know a tiny bit about the fake vintage wine business where you can like test the cork to see if its age matches the supposed age of the wine.

the tasting at the table is so interesting to me. is it one of those tastings where you have to spit it out rather than swallowing? or could you like scam a restaurant and get yourself buzzed from tasting different bottles and then just end up ordering water instead?

...is that a thing people would do? my knowledge of drinking and alcohol culture is tinted through alcoholics georg tinted glasses so i dont know if thats a thing people would do with wine. i know wine can like get you drunk quicker or just have a more immediate effect on you? so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

also i have a mental image of a pub doing this with beer but with the tap. so you have to crane your head over the bar and drink a little bit from one of the various taps they have. and its a very funny mental image

[daenystheedreamer]

Are you RPF positive? How do you feel about ships like Gaylor or Phan or Larry? Phan actually turned out to be true LOL

short answer its funny and harmless long answer below the cut tldr its funny and feel free to be cringe but also everyone has a line they draw in the sand and even if you think you dont, you do. and me personally my line is further than others, nearer than some. if the rpf is fanfic where harry styles bottoms for louis tomlinson thats mostly just teenagers being silly and harmlessly cringe and if the rpf is AI deepfake of them its bad. also sometimes the rpf is real. and also phan is a can of worms im not touching with a ten foot pole. again long answer below the cut ^_^ rambling

ok so celebrities in general i roll my eyes at the thought of caring about them. everyone is just a regular human being who is kind of stupid and lame. everyone has positives and negatives etc. so to me when i see someone act parasocial about some youtuber/singer/actor etc im like thats just a guy. so already rpf is simply not for me.

secondly i think it is mostly harmless. if you are writing gay porn about frank iero and gerard way well that is between you and god and the ao3 staff. gets cringe and weird if you go up to jensen ackles at a con and say heh so which of you is the seme 😏 that is a socially insane thing to do sorry

thirdly it is super funny. gaylor is hilarious to me its like a bunch of generally progressive young girls who feel the need to morally justify why its okay to like taylor swift. Oh she dates weird men oh she has a bad carbon footprint Well actually she is a queer woman oppressed by her management and her conservative family. thats hilarious to me i love how there is no one on earth who isnt a little conspiratorily minded. tbc im not gaylorphobic i have gaylor friends.

fourthly i have seen the moral depravity of man. you can find genuinely deeply morally and ethically disgusting content about real life minors. 'its fiction its just writing they wont see it' grow up go talk to a therapist. AI deep fake porn is disgusting. its weird and socially inept to bother actual human beings about your kink. again fine to have that kink but dont go asking random people if theyre secretly in love with their friend.

hmmm fifthly and lastly i think often people just dont have a holistic view of the world they dont understand cultural/social context. there is a social barrier between you the audience and the people on your screen. also when you get into fandoms like kpop, you need to understand that its a product. these arent authentic human beings they are products they are actors they are selling you an idea. its yaoi in a way! its playing on homosocial/homoerotic tropes that female fans tend to enjoy. im sorry but seokjin and taehyung arent secretly boning they are coworkers. sorry.

that being said i think ben affleck IS in love with matt damon and i think theyve jerked off together or had sex by proxy via threesome. nothing will change my mind on this.

[tornad001]

i love complicated - the perfect symmetry of text and translation, maintaining original meaning in a way others don't. i always got the sense translating and analyzing these classical-era epics that there was something off about the idea of these as stories for entertainment. cuz they weren't entertaining, and some of that is catalogue of ships bullshit, plus cultural differences that i didn't really think to account for at the time. but most of it i think was in the style of storytelling, almost like an adult who's bad at it telling a kid a tale where they just kinda rotely describe the plot.

i guess at the time i didn't think to challenge the basic assumptions id made. i kinda accepted that the ancient greeks and romans just liked a less nuanced and, yes, complicated form of storytelling. despite all the limitations i knew about translation fundamentally and especially across time as well as space, i always trusted my translator to account for these for me. and this isn't necessarily even to knock some of those; Robert Fagles' Iliad translation is one of my favorites. I love his strong word choices and his sense of gravitas - his opening lines had me from the start.

but now i realize that his is one of my favorites because he doesn't try too hard to stay true to the source. he cares more about telling a good story thats comprehensible than about more esoteric things like faithfulness. but in so doing i think he takes liberties to the point where im not really engaging with a classical-era epic. and to be fair i imagine its actually quite difficult to engage with a classic epic as a classic epic cuz thats not a form of entertainment or style of storytelling that we really do anymore.

but come on, its not like we approach something like the Iliad or the Odyssey with the intention of it being a simple task. that bitch dense and deep, even if taking it from a more modern interpretive framework. id love to go back and translate it myself with this is mind. what new words would i use? would i go with complicated? what new ideas would jump out at me? can i really try to understand how it would've been engaged with natively?

there's a similar issue with a lot of the ancient greek plays i've read like the Oedipus cycle. like reading them is strange first off cuz reading plays is always strange, it's not their native medium, but also i just don't get a lot of it. there's so many things that strike me as weird or off just cuz i don't have the historical social context in which to understand these elements, like the chorus. and with all those incongruities i do notice i can't even imagine how many other things i miss just cuz its invisible from my interpretive lens.

idk it's all kinda an intractable problem. there's better and worse answers there's different lenses of analysis but ultimately its all an imperfect science. like i don't think the analysis i did was invalid or anything, it was just a more limited and comprehensible framework for approaching a... complicated text.

Throughout her translation of the “Odyssey,” Wilson has made small but, it turns out, radical changes to the way many key scenes of the epic are presented — “radical” in that, in 400 years of versions of the poem, no translator has made the kinds of alterations Wilson has, changes that go to truing a text that, as she says, has through translation accumulated distortions that affect the way even scholars who read Greek discuss the original. These changes seem, at each turn, to ask us to appreciate the gravity of the events that are unfolding, the human cost of differences of mind.

The first of these changes is in the very first line. You might be inclined to suppose that, over the course of nearly half a millennium, we must have reached a consensus on the English equivalent for an old Greek word, polytropos. But to consult Wilson’s 60 some predecessors, living and dead, is to find that consensus has been hard to come by…

Of the 60 or so answers to the polytropos question to date, the 36 given above [which I cut because there were a lot] couldn’t be less uniform (the two dozen I omit repeat, with minor variations, earlier solutions); what unites them is that their translators largely ignore the ambiguity built into the word they’re translating. Most opt for straightforward assertions of Odysseus’s nature, descriptions running from the positive (crafty, sagacious, versatile) to the negative (shifty, restless, cunning). Only Norgate (“of many a turn”) and Cook (“of many turns”) preserve the Greek roots as Wilson describes them — poly(“many”), tropos (“turn”) — answers that, if you produced them as a student of classics, much of whose education is spent translating Greek and Latin and being marked correct or incorrect based on your knowledge of the dictionary definitions, would earn you an A. But to the modern English reader who does not know Greek, does “a man of many turns” suggest the doubleness of the original word — a man who is either supremely in control of his life or who has lost control of it? Of the existing translations, it seems to me that none get across to a reader without Greek the open question that, in fact, is the opening question of the “Odyssey,” one embedded in the fifth word in its first line: What sort of man is Odysseus?

“I wanted there to be a sense,” Wilson told me, that “maybe there is something wrong with this guy. You want to have a sense of anxiety about this character, and that there are going to be layers we see unfolded. We don’t quite know what the layers are yet. So I wanted the reader to be told: be on the lookout for a text that’s not going to be interpretively straightforward.”

Here is how Wilson’s “Odyssey” begins. Her fifth word is also her solution to the Greek poem’s fifth word — to polytropos:

Tell me about a complicated man. Muse, tell me how he wandered and was lost when he had wrecked the holy town of Troy, and where he went, and who he met, the pain he suffered in the storms at sea, and how he worked to save his life and bring his men back home. He failed to keep them safe; poor fools, they ate the Sun God’s cattle, and the god kept them from home. Now goddess, child of Zeus, tell the old story for our modern times. Find the beginning.

When I first read these lines early this summer in The Paris Review, which published an excerpt, I was floored. I’d never read an “Odyssey” that sounded like this. It had such directness, the lines feeling not as if they were being fed into iambic pentameter because of some strategic decision but because the meter was a natural mode for its speaker. The subtle sewing through of the fittingly wavelike W-words in the first half (“wandered … wrecked … where … worked”) and the stormy S-words that knit together the second half, marrying the waves to the storm in which this man will suffer, made the terse injunctions to the muse that frame this prologue to the poem (“Tell me about …” and “Find the beginning”) seem as if they might actually answer the puzzle posed by Homer’s polytropos and Odysseus’s complicated nature.

Complicated: the brilliance of Wilson’s choice is, in part, its seeming straightforwardness. But no less than that of polytropos, the etymology of “complicated” is revealing. From the Latin verb complicare, it means “to fold together.” No, we don’t think of that root when we call someone complicated, but it’s what we mean: that they’re compound, several things folded into one, difficult to unravel, pull apart, understand.

“It feels,” I told Wilson, “with your choice of ‘complicated,’ that you planted a flag.”

“It is a flag,” she said.

“It says, ‘Guess what?’ — ”

“ ‘ — this is different.’ ”

The First Woman to Translate the Odyssey Into English, Wyatt Mason

[jeducationjj]

Lets Figure out Subject Pronouns

I (First Person Singular)

I am happy.

私は幸せです。(Desu - To be [Formal])

Watashi is typically used by women outside of formal settings.

私は幸せだ。(Da - To be [Casual])

(Watakushi) 私 [Even More Formal]

(Atashi) 私 (Feminine Pronunciation [Informal])

僕は幸せです。(Masculine [Informal])

Can be used in second person to address young boys.

Kind of like "Boy" or "Garçon"

俺は幸せだ。(Masculine [Rough / Very Informal])

うちは幸せです (Feminine [Informal])

Typically used among one's own family. There's also "Uchi" in reference to one's household as a collective. Commonly associated with Kansai Dialect and Young Girls.

自分 は 幸せです [Casual]

Important to note depending on the dialect Jibun may also mean "you" or work as a reflexive pronoun ("Myself"). Typically denotes a person of achievement, rank, or  athleticism within a team or group.

Final Note on First Person Singular: also Important to know "I" is less present in Japanese than it is in English, so its commonly ommitted when speaking naturally and casually.

-----------------------------------------

You (Second Person Singular)

mostly rude

You are Kind.

あなたは優しいですね。[General / Potentially Impolite]

{Marking speaker's feelings/own perspective}

Anata isn't used often when speaking and it is more polite to just use the person in questions name most the time. Sometimes a pronoun might not even be necessary.

君は優しいですね。[Rude / VERY informal]

Mostly used in fiction. Denotes someone you see as inferior. Same goes for Anta (貴方).

Proper Formula for Addressing Someone.

[Last Name] + [Appropriate Honorific]

Koga is kind.

古賀さんは優しいですね。

Honorifics

San - Friends, Strangers, Associates, and Equals.

Basically the standard honorific thats not too polite, but not too casual.

Sama - People of higher role, occupation, or respect.

This is typically used in professional business environments.

Kun - Younger Coworkers, Peers of lower status.

Commonly used between Teachers and students. Sometimes used for women and girls in place of the word "Chan".

Chan - Small Children (typically girls), Close Friends, and Partners.

Used in informal contexts where one wants to note another's youth, cuteness, or socially lower disposition.

Sensai - Masters, Teachers, Educators, Experts.

Used for people considerably experienced in specific fields of work or education. Commonly used to address someone you're learning under.

Senpai - Seniors & Higher status students, coworkers, and colleagues.

Used to address members within a group that institutionally rank higher or hold more experience than the speaker.

Senshu - Athlete / Sports Team Member

Used for professional athletes and team members participating in competitive activities. (just kinda added this one for fun :P)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

He, She, (Third Person Singular)

Both mainly used in writing. Also translate to Boyfriend and Girl Friend making them more tricky to use when speaking.

He is happy.

彼は幸せです。

She is happy.

彼女は幸せです。

A better trick when trying to point to a specific person is describing them with a descriptive noun that fits.

My friend is happy.

私の友達は幸せです。

That woman is happy.

その女性は幸せです。

The doctor is happy.

医者は幸せです。 (There is no "The" in Japanese)

There are also Demonstrative Pronouns:

This, That, These,

Kore, Sore, and Korera (and Are)

which can be used to help describe people whose names you don't know and where they are relative to you as the speaker,

But we'll get into those another time.

Usually if the context of a situation is clear or already understood as the topic, some pronouns, and particles are ommitted.

If you know the persons name you can also just use their name again. Being too repetitive with a name can come off weird though, so the majority of a conversation is typically context oriented.

In other words He and She aren't really utilized the way they are in English, so growing comfortable in thinking about Japanese sentence structure through a more contextual lens is important.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

They (Third Person Plural)

They are happy.

彼らは幸せです。

Again. Typically only used in writing. English plural conventions don't really work the same in Japanese, but there is the suffix -Tachi

[Persons Name] + [ -Tachi]

Nanami and Others

七海たち

Its important to understand that -Tachi isn't necessarily needed to make a statement about many of one thing.

The cats eat.

猫たちは食べます。and 猫は食べます。

Are both valid ways to say a group of cats are eating if the person I'm talking to can also see there is more than one cat.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

We (First Person Plural)

We are happy.

私たちは幸せです。

Just like the conventions for "they" or more accurately a "subject" with the plural suffix "Tachi" this follows the same formula, but with the start of a first person word.

[modularnra40]

I think maybe a slightly better way to conceive of it would be less 'technical rules players' vs 'social role players' and more like 'monolith' vs 'modular' players.

Like, I think this particular distinction*does* get discussed a lot (at least in contexts where people are discussing the meta of ttrpgs lol) buuuuut I think even with the best intentions to be evenhanded and fair and your-game-style-is-not-my-game-style-and-thats-ok it ... Still often comes across as kind of patronizing towards one group or the other -- see the classic roll-play vs role-play which tends to dismiss the creative drive of players who actually know all of the rules and want to use them, or as above where I think you unintentionally came across a little dismissive of the social players -- people dont play dnd on accident: if they wanted to hang out with their friends and free-form role-play.... They would do that. If they're deep enough in it to be looking for ways to mod the game they definitely get something out of the crunchy bits of the game, it's not a trivial aspect for them. BUT I do think you are right that there is some distinct gap between the camps you described - modularity.

Digression- I played DnD from itty bitty because my father was an old school nerd. I cut my teeth on 2nd edition, and never did you see a 12 year old so incredibly precious about ThAC0 as little me. But~ my father was an old school nerd so you know I was not playing DnD as strictly defined in the rules book! No! I was playing 2nd edition DnD + some 30 odd years of house rules lovingly conceptualized and play tested by my father and his various gaming groups starting decades before my birth and continuing to this day! At one point we tested out using rollmaster tables to determine the outcomes of successful hits! (Fun, but very clunky - the rolemaster aesthetic has a lot of baked in assumptions which didn't always mesh with our games tone)

And from that context, the main distinction I see is a somewhat philosophical difference in what a ttrpg rule book is -- ie something like a board game rule book where everything sort of must be taken as a comprehensive whole? Certainly most rulebooks assume that you will be using all of the pieces, and all of the given numbers and such are given in context to each other. But it's actually... Not that hard to take (many, not all) ttrpg rule book as 'modular' - ie I'm going to grab the physical melee system from DnD (roll a d20, add the attackers to hit modifier, compare to the defenders AC), but then use some fate like system for spell casting (there are meta 'aspect's attached to various things in the story which I can invoke to improve the chances of spellcasting success, with various mechanical ways of creating or adjusting these aspects) aaaand fuck it we're going to go with a home brewed super harsh but simple '3 strikes youre out' way of tracking damage, all hits are 1 strike no nuance.

Would this be "balanced"? That's an almost incomprehensible question, or alternatively the answer is 'absolutely not' but would it be fun to play? Maybe! If the group likes it. And if not, then whatever is not fun will get thrown out, or replaced, or mutated even further away from something that is found in any single rulebook. But it's also definitely NOT social game first lol - it's hella crunchy, just not super consistent - and weird corner cases are going to be handled on a case by case basis and reading a new player into the dynamic will be an absolute nightmare hahaha

There's also maybe something about like - how literally do you take the rules-- ie the difference between 'i want to create Naruto in a DnD game so I will go and find a magic ninjas rulebook so I can create Naruto the magic ninja who uses jutsu and kunai' vs 'I am rolling a warlock who is proficient in daggers, but for flavor reasons I will be referring to spells as jutsu and daggers as kunai and my DM has given me a feat which lets me replace all material component requirements with somatic component requirements'

I think I came across as like very pro this 'modular' approach I described, and it's definitely one of my first instincts when I come across friction at the table.... But also the best game I ever ran was one where we were playing by the book Blades in the Dark, given setting, no bells and whistles, accept no substitutes etc. Lots of bullshit house rules and weird frankengames can be super fun, and are fun to conceptualize but generally speaking your group has to be really familiar with each other for it not to just cause more problems then it is trying to solve, and it's absolutely not friendly for newer players -- ymmv lol

Seeing @thydungeongal constantly wrestling with people interpreting her posts about D&D in ways that seem completely alien to me has convinced me that there are actually multiple completely distinct activities both being referred to as "playing D&D" Before we begin, I want to stress that I'm not saying one of these groups is Playing The Game Wrong or anything, but there seems to be a lot of confusion and conflict caused by people not being aware of the distinction. In fact, either one works just fine if everyone's on the same page. So far, I think I've identified at least two main groups. And nobody seems to realize the distinction between these groups even exists. The first group of people think of "Playing D&D" as, well, more or less like any other board game. Players read the whole rulebook all the way through, all the players follow the instructions, and the gameplay experience is determined by what the rules tell each player to do. This group thinks of the mechanics as, not exactly the *whole* game, but certainly the fundamental skeleton that everything else is built on top of. People in the second group think of "Playing D&D" as referring to, hanging out with their friends, collaboratively telling a story inspired by some of the elements in the rulebooks, maybe rolling some dice to see what happens when they can't decide. This group thinks of the mechanics of the game as, like... a spice to sprinkle on top of the story to mix things up. (if you belong to this second group, and think I'm explaining it poorly, please let me know, because I'm kind of piecing things together from other people saying things I don't understand and trying to reverse engineer how they seem to be approaching things.) I think this confusion is exacerbated by the fact that Wizards of the Coast markets D&D as if these are the same thing. They emphatically are not. the specific rules laid out of the D&D rulebooks actually direct players to tell a very specific kind of story. You can tell other stories if you ignore those rules (which still counts as "playing D&D" under the second definition, but doesn't under the first)And I think people in both groups are getting mad because they assume that everyone is also using their definition. For example, there's a common argument that I've seen play out many times that goes something like this:

A: "How do I mod D&D to do [insert theme here]?" B: "D&D is really not built for that, you should play [other TTRPG] that's designed for it instead" A: "But I don't want to learn a whole new game system!" B: "It will be easier to just learn a whole new system than mod D&D to do that." A: "whatever, I'll just mod D&D on my own" And I think where this argument comes from is the two groups described above completely talking past each other. No one understands what the other person is trying to say. From A's perspective, as a person in the second group, it sounds like A: "Anyone have some fun inspirations for telling stories about [insert theme here]?" B: "You can't sit around a table with your friends and tell a story about that theme! That's illegal." A: "But we want to tell a story about this theme!" B: "It's literally impossible to do that and you're a dumb idiot baby for even thinking about it." A: "whatever, jerk, I'll figure it out on my own."

--- Whereas, from B's perspective, the conversation sounds like A: "How do I change the rules of poker to be chess, and not be poker?" B: "uhhh, just play chess?" A: "But I already know how to player poker! I want to play poker, but also have it be chess!" B: "what the hell are you talking about? What does that even mean. They're completely different games." A: "I'm going to frankenstein these rules together into some kind of unplayably complex monster and you can't stop me!" ---

So both people end up coming away from the conversation thinking the other person is an idiot. And really, depending on how you concieve of what it means to "play D&D" what is being asked changes considerably. If you're only planning to look through the books for cool story inspiration, maybe borrow a cool little self contained sub-system here or there, then yeah, it's very possible to steal inspiration for your collaborative story from basically anywhere. Maybe some genres are kind of an awkward fit together, but you can make anything work with a little creativity.

If, however, you are thinking of the question in terms of frankensteining two entire board games together, then it becomes a massively difficult or even outright nonsensical idea. For example, for skill checks, the game Shadowrun has players roll a pool of several d6 at once, then count up how many rolled above a target value to see how well a character succeeded at a task. The whole game is full of specific rules about adding or removing dice from the pool, effects happening if you roll doubles, rerolling only some of the dice, and all sorts of other things that simply do not translate to rolling a single d20 for skill checks. On a basic level, the rules of the games work very differently. Trying to make them compatible would be much harder than just learning a new game from scratch. Now, neither of these approaches is exactly *wrong*, I guess, but personally, I find the rules of TTRPGs to be fascinating and worth taking the time to engage with all the weird little nuances and seeing what shakes out. Also, the first group, "TTRPG as fancy board game" is definitely the older and more widespread one. I kind of get the impression that the second group largely got into D&D through actual play podcasts, but I don't have any actual data to back that up. So, if you're in the second group, who thinks of D&D as basically a context for collaborative storytelling first and a game second, please let me know if I'm wildly misunderstanding how you approach D&D. Because I'm pretty sure it would save us a whole lot of stupid misunderstandings.

[saturnniidae]

A lot of OS Ash's 'roasts' were just him being blunt. Like yeah sure, sometimes he was intentionally rude but a lot of them were just lack of social cue understanding.

There's two examples I see brought up a lot: when he asked Nurse Joy if she was the "oddball" in her family and when he said that Wartortle "doesn't look very smart". These clips get taken painfully out of context. The first one is from OS ep 30 "Sparks fly magnemite" where he was trying to get her to treat pikachu and she kept downplaying his concerns while yawning.

(he literally just saw her being weird and told her she was being weird. Sure it's not very polite but he probably just said the first thing that came to mind. It's not like,,, an "epic roast moment" or whatever)

And the second one was him responding to a Pokedex entry. In OS ep 60 "Beach Blank-Out Blastoise" again i doubt it was mean-spirited, just bluntness. Like he's 10 of course he's not gonna look at a turtle and think "wow thats peak intelligence".

[team-council-two]

So how is Spy a special case?

*is excited*

(for context, in a previous post, i added the tags " i could write an entire book on how unfamiliar french people in medias seem to actual french people, spy is an odd case; ask me about him")

aiight, you know what you signed up for, get ready for one hell of a presentation, ft terminal verbosis frenchosis ! this will be in three parts, of course, because three is a good number and the mere concept of having 3 parts should give you all a headache (look ray i didnt add a n this time)

wait shit im not even sure mistral is a spy, hold on,

aw fck thats for real ones

anyways femme fatale trope, next question

HA gotcha, you didnt think id let yall go with just one sentence huh ? so. our fella is french. our fella is a spy. our fella is a huge piece of shit. extremely common, alright ? outright overused archetype. eeeexcept that the combo's execution here REALLY stands out. how so ?

well, let me ask you a quick question. do you think the fact that he is french, and the fact that he is an evil bastard, and the fact that he is a spy are linked ?

well ill answer that for you. nope. valve treated these three traits remarkably separately. the way he speaks french in game is relatively polite, and the insults he throws around are, i checked, exclusively in english. he is surprisingly free of the usual way medias make "being evil" and "being french" be a hand in hand thing, and similarly free of the one that seems to indicate that Because you are french Of Course you are a spy. in other words, rather than being a walking glamour stereotype of sorts or an obnoxious asshole the likes of which we have seen hundreds of, this is a godawful guy that also happens to be a french snob, and that also happens to be a spy.

compare with, say, our lady mistral above who has a shitton of taunts in french, who embraces that whole sexy lady deal, deliberately plays on it and so on. difference is miles.

and now if you followed you did catch i said french snob rather than just french, there is a reason behind this, so allow me to get on part 2, which i promise will be WAY more verbose-

so

im not sure why but american medias love to have peppy rich french fashionistas in their shit. theyre cute, hyper, sheltered as fuck, and the entire deal is weird bc these people seem like aliens to actual french people who tend to care about fashion in pretty normal amounts and definitely do not have that many grands to bust into it. *yes* we pride ourselves in having a pretty neat fashion industry, but in a similar way as the american and the german boast about their cars. we are NOT obsessed with it okay. anyways, sometimes writers have the decency of making these characters cunts, but not always. but what doesnt vary is the trope seems to play out like ah yes, your average french- which is fucking baffling. and is the part taking us aback.

see, we HAVE the evil breed of those characters too in our shit. comedic shit, to be precise. a rundown of our humor is it often is situational humor - stupid outlandish situations with equally stupid archetypal characters, their personality equally pushed into the absurd, all of that more often than not thinly veiling some pretty heavy social commentary. in other words, you often laugh at the evil cop/rich factory/big restaurant owner/politician/etc getting karma'd in mind boggingly bizzare and hilarious ways, while clearly showing them as evil for mistreating subordinates (and often getting shit for it sooner or later) and as simpering cowards towards literally anyone who has any kind of superior position to them whatsoever.

in other words, context matters. where in american shit they are often allies or friends or comedic relief of sorts through being french/annoying or just villains, in french shit they more often than not are *targets* of some kind of events and shown to be ridiculous through other means than their obsession for fashion or whatever.

am i saying that valve did this ?

...yeah. thats a very bold statement, but yes. i mean, cmon,

see, i am overall basing this on the fact that ingame spy is so fucking similar to many, many, many of Louis de Funès' roles, and even his face, it outright had me searching around the wiki for some kind, any kind of claim of inspiration from valve-

he reads exactly as one of them ! rich cunt obsessed with money, constantly mocking people, constantly complaining about everything ever, fakely polite, not opposed to doing vile acts to have his way, extremely menacing face, *the same fucking laugh*, and the fact that characters played by this guy have remarkably often have what we call a couillon de fils, a dumbfuck of a loser ass son, if you will.

the only differences really are from comic spy, who reads far less like this. he's still well executed mind you, but he (especially @miss pauling) reads as far kinder than this dude's characters usually are, and he is a bit more... stretched, both physically and in behaviour, than the actor's goblin build and attitude, as game spy seems to be unable to stand straight whereas the comic one seems to have no difficulty with this, and the similar range of expressiveness that also ports 1:1 is game exclusive as well. and finally, comic spy also was not given the occasion to cuss people out, so.

anyways my point mostly amounts to, if you manage to make french people think of an emblematic actor beloved by many, rather than just make us go through the usual whiplash of "how is that a normal french person to american people ???", you are probably doing something right.

in addition to this wall of text, i am begging you all to watch this, it should help understand what i meant by our breed of humor, and what i mean by "spy could have been played by this dude no problem"

now, onto part 3,

well once you said he is a pathetic wet cat man you summed it up really.

for all the class he has, for all the money he has, for all the. everything ? he still is pathetic. he still is simply seen as a mean as fuck loser either trying to drown his failures as a father with expensive tastes, or simply amoral and unsympathetic because of his concerns being about money rather than about humans. he still is headcanoned as stinking by most of the fandom. nobody respects the fucken spy. he comes across as haughty and it only makes people want to shit on him some more.

really, it is pretty much everything I explained in the two points above. the patheticness helps with making it so he is not a stereotype, and it helps making it clear he is supposed to be representative of rich pretentious cunts rather than of french people.

so, he is a huge bitch, and ironically, this makes him a blorbo to us, bc who doesnt love a good ole flawed character ?

his whole french deal is not shown as eccentric or what makes him a loser but just a coincidence, in a sense. and you'd be surprised by how much of a breath of fresh air this is to french people. shitty in a realistic way rather than a made up clown, and in a way we can recognize in our own medias. it also is neat from the, err, fandom pov ? because you get to develop his frenchness and assholeness and spyness separately, since they are elements implemented for the sake of themselves rather than as a stereotypical whole. you get to have *fun* with him.

SO i think i ran out of things to blabber about. hope it makes sense tho. but i guess it really is about. not *quite* representation because we do not see ourselves in spy, of course, but way more about our culture not being bastardized and being turned into a joke about eccentrics at best, or hatred about seductive women and effeminate/homosexual men at worst, + having a fresh execution on tropes that else usually would get our eyes rolling.

alpha, over and out

[lerios]

BRAX/NARVIN BRAX/NARVIN BRAX/NARVIN

you're absolutely right that they're the most crackshippy (or certainly they're capable of being) and tbh thats part of the appeal. i love them because most of gallifrey is so serious. the politics is serious, the character development is serious, the relationships are sooooo serious—you can't really be too light-hearted about leela/romana (a genuine and beautiful yuri relationship in which nevertheless leela is often mistreated due to liberal racism) or leela/narvin (a relationship that redefines his world view and helps them free themselves from their fascist society) or brax/romana (a girl and her teacher/advisor who is deeply morally grey and has meddled with her mind in ways we're not privy to and has been grooming her (for power… probably) for god knows how long) or romana/narvin (GGGRRGGRRRRRR). like. all of it is so specific and so well done and so just real in a way that canon (and/or semi-canon, if that's how you prefer to think of them) fictional relationships often aren't to me.

and then there's brax/narvin, the most annoying combination of bastards you've ever seen, both of whom don't really deserve your sympathy nor consideration (depending on where you are in canon). feel free to put them in the pear wiggler. they deserve it. it might fix them actually, and if it doesn't it'll be funny. in a fandom where everything is so Much, it's nice to have a ship where you can write completely indiscriminate crack and smut and darkfic without having to worry too much, because no one really cares about them that much and they're both a little bit insane in very specific ways (torvin fulfils a similar role in some ways).

but, for the occasion that you do want to be more serious about it:

Brax puts so much effort into being perfect and exact and precise, socially and politically successful, polite and cultured and utterly unflappable. It is very rare that he interacts with anyone without having a Plan and a Purpose, even if those things are, as far as he believes, benign—like in the case of romana or benny. He means well (at first...) and it will probably work out well for them in the end, but he is still playing them and not really allowing them any input on the chess game he's playing with (or 'for') them. Brax's whole Thing in the long run is protecting people/art/culture, and the way that protectiveness and possessiveness blur together and become the same. The way he stops differentiating between people and belongings. The way he ignores other people's agency to do what's 'right' as far as protecting his own goes—including ignoring the agency of the people he conciders his own ('own' perhaps being a more relevant word here than might be comfortable). He slides from genuinely well intentioned but occasionally schemey into treating benny et al horrendously and committing genuine atrocties in the persuit of protecting the collection and everyone/everything on it. He just gradually loses any idea of actually asking for people's opinions or consent before he 'protects' them however he sees fit, and anyone or anything else is perfectly acceptable collaterol damage.

(I think it very telling that, when brax briefly gets a fiancée in the bennys, he puts a lot of emphasis on looking after her and protecting ~the brightest jewel In the braxiatel collection~, including putting secret cameras in her room and then pressuring her to agree that it was okay when she discovers them. I recommend "braxiatel in love" if you want some weird dark brax, you don't need other context) ((yessss i know there was sci-fi bullshit involved here, but shush. And even despite all that, the very last line of the episode is still him promising to keep her safe.))

Basically, brax fucking sucks in a lot of ways. He means well. He thinks he means well. He's pulling every string perfectly and betraying the web of time and the concept of morality to do it. He's absolutely determined to do what needs to be done, anyone else's opinions (and sometimes lives) be damned.

Narvin fucking sucks in a lot of ways. He means well. He thinks he means well. He's doing his absolute best to protect his people/culture/planet/faith and is willing to betray innocents and the concept of morality and practically anything to do it. He's absolutely determined to do what needs to be done, anyone else's opinions (and sometimes lives) be damned.

We like to make fun of him from being a shit spy but he's not a spy, he's a fascist and a bureaucrat, which are two things he is phenomenal at being, and evidently he was a good enough spy to survive all the backstabbing of the most fucked up organisation on the most fucked up planet in the seven systems for the decades or potentially centuries that it took him to become coordinator. He only comes off as funny because we see him almost exclusively when romana is around, and in that context he is a) deeply out of his element and b) pathetic. I maintain that if the events of the show didn't happen, narvin would still be skulking around disapearing planets and eventually take mantus' place by TW. You don't get to—or survive in—narvin's position without being terrifying and competent and fundamentally okay with doing awful, unthinkable things "for the greater good".

To me, brax/narvin is both of them getting a day off. Two thoroughly unpleasant men meeting their match in a situation where neither has anything to lose or gain. Brax having one (1) person with whom he doesn't have to do politics, and so he gets to play and tease and fucking chill for once. The stakes are so low they barely exist. The worst possible thing that could happen is pissing narvin off, and, realistically, the best possible thing that could happen is pissing narvin off (but. you know. playing 🥰😈). Narvin having one (1) person who is simultaneously no threat (because they're on the same team... probably), and is also his equal—romana is his commanding officer, leela is an alien, and anyone else is a possible player in the power struggle of gallifreyan politics. Brax, as duplicitous as he is, is probably the only person on the planet that narvin can trust to see him vulnerable, the only person on the planet who can laugh at him without it feeling like an threat to his position and a way to undermine him. Brax gets to pull his tail just to see him spit and snarl about it and police himself far less than he does around anyone else, and Narvin gets to be as uncomposed as he likes without fearing consequences. (Really, they both get that second thing, even if they are relatively hesitant to use it).

To me, brax/narvin is a containment zone. No one else should have to deal with either of these bastards. Romana (god willing) has more sense than to let brax touch her no matter how much 'groundwork' he's been laying since she was a fucking loomling. Leela shouldn't have to put up with being a recuperation centre for some crusty dog of empire who has only just recanted the most obscene half of his beliefs. If (when) either brax hurts narvin by pushing the teasing too far, it's not really going to matter and narvin won't admit that it hurt anyway, so who cares. If (when) narvin hurts brax by implying that he's a heartsless opportunist or by saying something a little too honest about the Way Brax Is about romana, it's not really going to matter and brax won't admit it that it hurt anyway, so who cares. If (when) one or both of them get verbally, emotionally, or physically rougher than they would allow themselves to be with anyone else, who cares; he's a bastard, he has it coming, he's done much worse and he's taken much worse.

To me, brax/narvin is my opportunity to play dolls with the awful haha funny bitches and not care if either or both of them end up getting left in the pond at the bottom of the garden. its only brax and narvin. its only a crackship. who cares.

An analysis post for the gallifrey crackships from this poll

(it's going under a cut because this got long)

Torvin: okay, so this is probably the easiest one (at least for me) to go on a rant about. so the basis of this is that narvin is so incredibly tied to his job, his whole life is the cia and gallifrey, so obviously he doesn't have the time (or interest) for a relationship outside of that. but that doesn't mean he can't have any kind of relationship, and however it first happens isn't relevant, but somehow he ends up in a relationship with his subordinate. and for a while it's good, it doesn't interfere with his job, but still gives him some semblance of a connection with another living being. then torvald regenerates and is acting a bit weird, but it was a traumatic regeneration, so narvin lets it slide as long as it doesn't affect his job and their relationship continues mostly as normal. but then he learns that he did have reason to worry, that the man he knew had been gone for months and he had put his trust in a stranger. and from andred's perspective, he's just died, taken a man's identity, and learned that said man was fucking his boss. all he wanted to do was fix some corruption in his society and he ended up losing everything, and it probably wasn't even a conscious choice, at least not at first, a regeneration that traumatic is going to scramble some things, so by the time he realizes that he is andred and not torvald it's too late, he's left behind the life he had, he left behind his wife, all he can do now is play the part. and through this he comes to realize that narvin may have actually cared for torvald, and well if he's torvald now at least it's some sort of connection in a now hostile world

Eris/Hallan: so on paper, this is absolutely the most crackship one of them all, these two haven't even met and hallan is presumably still frozen, but i can find a way to make this work. during the time war eris ends up with so much responsibility on his shoulders, he started out as just an agent, and is now practically running the resistance. this has got to be an incredibly stressful position in an incredibly stressful time, that isn't to say, however, that he isn't good at what he does, he is, but it really get's tiring having everyone look to him as a leader in a time where it's near impossible to actually know what's going on. and for hallan, let's assume someone manages to dig up whatever stasis pod he's in and maybe they shove it in a tardis and it makes its way to the resistance base, the details aren't terribly important, this is just me getting them in the same room. so now eris has to deal with this soldier who's last memory is all the way back in the civil war on top of everything else, he could very well pass on the responsibility of catching hallan up on everything that's happened, but it's something different and something potentially interesting, it's not a break, but it's close enough to one as you can get in the war. at first eris assumes this is going to be a hassle, but then it isn't, sure hallan is a bit scared and very confused at first, but once that passes it's actually not that bad, there's a lot of explaining to be done about the state of the universe and gallifrey and everything that happened between the civil war and the time war, and it means that eris gets a little less time to himself in all the chaos, but it doesn't take him long to realize that he actually enjoys talking to hallan. for the first time in a while, eris has someone to talk to who just sees him as another person, he's not the one with all the answers about what to do next, he's not expected to know the next move of the time lords or the daleks, he doesn't need to answer for where the next shipment of food or supplies or weapons is going to come from, he just has someone to have a somewhat normal conversation with. and for hallan everything is different, he went from one war into another with no idea what happened in between. the few people here who knew him before the war treat him oddly, because really how are you supposed to react to a victim of a plague in a long over war coming back, and those who didn't know him largely ignore him because there's a war on and they don't have time to bother with him, so eris taking the time to explain to him what's going on and what happened really stand out to him, and they end up becoming each other's one escape from the horrors that they're going through

Leela/Veklin: both leela and velkin are warriors, soldiers forced to fight in a war greater than either had probably thought possible. leela is trapped here, with no one who really sees her as the person she is, to the time lords there she's just an asset, and it's not exactly like veklin is much of a different situation, sure she has the advantage of being a time lord, so the others are more likely to see her as a person, but she's a soldier there to take orders, she's ollistra's guard dog, she isn't really her own person. they don't particularly like each other, but they are much more similar than either would be willing to admit out loud, so when the one needs to get out some energy it's only logical that they go to the other. this arrangement between them of course remains entirely secret, both would find it an embarrassment if this information were to ever get out, but still, it's kind of nice, for a short bit of time neither has to think about the war or their place within the war room, they just get to exist with no expectations, with no titles (and it doesn't really matter that both are thinking about someone else the whole time)

Brax/Narvin: I am sorry to report that I don't really see much for this one, like i'll be honest i have read and enjoyed brax/narvin fics, but idk this one is the most crackshippy to me, i don't really have a justification for it (@lerios i know you have some feelings about these guys, so feel free to add something if you want)

[paradoxspaces]

yes i am aware that lately this has just been back-and-forth protest/activism related posts and my chemical romance and that that is maybe a little jarring but, to be fair, it is a pretty good reflection of what my life is like these days