#and idk they make a good argument too

[insanechayne]

~ ~ ~

[dykedvonte]

love seeing your takes on mouthwashing and how sane they are. everything's so black or white. I like how you acknowledge curlys abuse under jimmy (which I honestly didn't quite notice when I first watched a playthrough. should rewatch w this in mind) and how that very much doesn't "forgive" his inaction towards Anya and Her abuse under jimmy. I think what happens to him despite all his issues (bc he clearly wasn't OK 😊✌🏼) is very much karmic. I really did hurt huh

I hate the take that what happened to him is karmic as becoming disabled and being tortured is like not in any way an equal consequence for not taking more action against Jimmy. It is a consequence as is the whole game for everyone but it’s one that is very much established as being undeserved and extreme as everyone else’s but Jimmy’s fate.

Thank you for liking my takes but I also try to point out that this exact sort of framing of the events and what happened to Curly is bad especially if you are gonna factor in his own abuse into the equation of his inaction/ineffective acts. It’s like “saying yeah he deserved the abuse he was already going through to escalate because he didn’t do enough” which is like not a message the game tries to deliver at all. It’s like the game shows that abusers escalate

Karma and punishment are not concepts that I think should be directly tied to Curly’s fate especially since during the game and even in discussion he takes on too many consequences of someone else’s actions. Like this framing is the direct thing I describe taking the discussion away from Jimmy, P.E and the factors that created the environment in the first place.

[moongothic]

You know I was wondering if Crocodile ever did have any kind of involvement with the Revolutionary Army in secret (lest the Government finds out and revokes his Shichibukai status), what kind of involvement would that even have been

And now, with both the Vegapunk/Ohara flashback and Kuma's flashback, it's being made very clear to us that the Revolutionary Army was broke as hell 22 years ago. Like the fact that this has been brought up twice now in a relatively short span of time is interesting to me, that's usually a sign it's not an unimportant plotpoint

But you know who would have had money to help fund the Army

A funny little warlord who would eventually go and build a fucking casino to run for funsies. A warlord who had to give the Government some of his Pirating Income to keep his warlord-status

Like Crocodile hated the Government anyways so why not help fund the Revolutionary Army in secret, out of spite if for no other reason

Vaguely related, but I keep on remembering this scene (post-Enies Lobby), which at first glance just seems like a basic Lore Dump

But then there's the

"Yet..."

(Or "however", she says "no ni" in Japanese and you could translate that in many ways, I would probably have gone with "however" but that wouldn't have fit into the speechbubble)

Mind you, the conversation just kind of ends there, next we see Garp realize he probably shouldn't have mentioned Dragon infront of such a massive audience, so wherever that "yet" was going to lead to we will never find out, because Oda conveniently changed the subject before we got to it

And you know. Like yes, Robin could be just expressing her shock over finding out that the leader of the Revolutionary Army had a child with someone

But also, Robin was a part of an organization that was trying to overthrow one of the founding countries of the World Government in an explicit attempt to go against said Government (compared to like, Blackbeard, who currently wants to make Fullalead into a "pirate country" that's a part OF the World Government)

Like you don't have to be a genius to look at Crocodile's ultimate goals and compare that to what Dragon is doing and find a few similarities here and there maybe

(Also like, Crocodile's equivalent in Romancing SaGa 2 is meant to be Wagnas, the queer-coded leader of the Seven Heroes (whom the OG Shichibukai are based on) who "hoped to help the world". You know, an interesting detail and all.)

Not to mention, during the time Robin spent with Baroque Works, if Crocodile was ever in contact with the Revolutionary Army at all, considdering she has the ability to easily spy on people and that she didn't trust Crocodile one bit, it wouldn't be unsurprising if she ever spied on Crocodile and/or just overheard a phone call or knew about Crocodile having secret spending habits or something

(Mind you, I'm not saying "she knew" Crocodile was involved with the Revolutionaries, more that she might've been Suspecting Things, that "yet" being about her connecting the dots while unsure if her conclusion was right or not)

Of course Crocodile's plans can't have been Dragon Approved by any means, especially considdering the Army had been looking for Robin for over 10 years (pre-timeskip)

Four years of which were with Crocodile. Like if he was FULLY allied with the Army and KNEW they were looking for Robin, surely he would've called Dragon and been like "hey I found the kid from Ohara, wanna come hang out" or something. But no, he had bigger plans and kept Robin a secret from the Revolutionaries and the Government alike

Also like, I have seen people question why the Revolutionaries weren't involved with Alabasta's rebellion at all, and "Oda hadn't come up with the Revolutionaries yet at the time of writing" (/"OP was meant to end at Alabasta at one point so there would've been no reason to introduce the subplot at that point") aside Between Baroque Works being a secret organization working undercover (thus the Army might not have been aware of the civil war being manufactured), the framing of the King making him look bad and very much the type of monarch that deserved to be overthrown in the Army's eyes, and Crocodile maybe lying through his teeth about what was happening in the country... Yeah, the Army's lack of involvement with Alabasta suddenly makes sense

EDIT Minor addition: Just realized that because Crocodile was technically working for the Government, if the Revs ever did send forces to participate in Alabasta's civil army and taking down the throne, the Government could've easily ordered Crocodile to step in to stop the rebellion and take down the Revolutionaries, right? Because he was supposed to be on the Government's side, right? And surely the Army wouldn't have wanted to fight against Crocodile if they were secretly allied (Croc's secret betrayal aside), and if Crocodile refused to fight the Revs the Government could've seen that as a reason to revoke his Shichibukai rights (which wouldn't be great if they wanted to keep Crocodile in a position where he could fund the Army?). So it could've also been a case of it being for the best for everyone's sake to let this one play out "naturally"

But my point is

I'm just deeply intriqued by these little details and wonder if I'm Actually Masterfully Connecting The Dots Like a True Genius or just seeing a pattern where there's none. Like this is far from confirming the theory, I'm just saying, the pieces do kinda fit together do they not

[swinging-stars-from-satellites]

with a few minutes' reflection and a second conversation with my parents I have realized that I may have overblown things and overreacted a bit and also in some ways they're correct even if I think they're also harsh about it

[atopvisenyashill]

“why would elaena marry a dornishman when they’re nasty evil people who murdered her poor innocent brother daeron”

maybe because once elaena grew up she realized that there were better ways of bringing dorne into the realm than violent conquest, and that daeron got the death he deserved from not just a nobility that is valid for fearing subjugation from valyria but also a smallfolk sick and tired of these people showing up every few decades to set their principality on fire, and put aside any anti dornish sentiments she may or may not have harbored as a child to see the way her family had directly attributed to their suffering, eventually even falling in love with and marrying a dornish man??

also, considering daeron ii attempts a type of proto-reparations act in bringing dorne into the kingdom, it’s not out of the realm of possibility that someone as intelligent as elaena would recognize the inherent racism in the targaryen conquest of dorne and especially considering the very loud anti-dornish, deeply anti intellectual faction in the blackfyre rebellions, realized they wouldn’t be kind or understanding of an intelligent woman like herself and had no interest in herself or her daughters (of which she had four!!) getting shoved back into the maidenvault again?

like, daeron i is on some andrew jackson manifest destiny shit, and if it makes me an asshole for thinking “god i wish someone had merked jackson before he genocided & displaced my ancestors, good on the dornish for realizing you can’t negotiate with imperialists” than i am perfectly comfortable being considered an asshole right next to my girl elaena.

[flythesail]

Alright my nace people! I think we all just need to

[sp00kyvision]

Seeing it again after a long time, the "Gnomes" South Park episode feels so thematically conflicted it is starting to make my head hurt, which means I need to construct a "breadtube" style essay on what the fuck it is trying to say.

Tbh "thematically conflicted with what it is trying to say" can go for bunches of South Park episodes, but this one stands out in particular for me since it had such a cultural impact at the time.

Things in the episode that landed for me:

The critique on utilizing children for political centered messages. Not only is it often utilized in arguments to generate pathos, but it doesn't take into account the actual thoughts of the kids being involved. They are just a tool to generate sympathy without proper utilization of expressing a thought-out message. Not to mention when you involve kids in this kind of propaganda it is VERY structured upon a specific "script", and the children often have no clue what the hell they are even talking about. When Tweak's father makes the "joke" about selling his son to child slavery if he loses his coffee shop, it makes sense to his character in a dark way. He pretty much is already using children as free labor through having them be "spokesmen" against the satirical big corporation coffee shop totally not based on Starbucks. It's obviously not the kind of child slavery people usually imagine when they hear the term, but it is ideologically applicable in this circumstance.

The critique on the idea that small businesses are inherently moral by all standards. This should go without saying, but I think people do tend to get lost in the idea that just because someone owns a small business they are not above using tactical and manipulative maneuvers to stay on top. I enjoy the complication of the figure of a local business owner as a someone just as capable of making the same moves a corporate business does.

The whole underpant gnome thing with "Phase One: collect underpants -> Phase Two: ? -> Phase Three: profit" was pretty clever. It makes sense why it became a meme and subject that outlasted the episode. Very versatile logic that can be applied to a multitude of critical topics.

Now, with that out of the way, onto the parts of the episode that DIDN'T make sense to me:

The whole conclusion of the episode is unapologetically pro-capitalist and pro-corporate competition. Obviously, I don't subscribe to this ideology. The real thing that irritates me about it, though, is how it feels like it comes essentially out if nowhere. The episode spends its whole runtime depicting the owner of the 'totally not Starbucks' coffee shop in a bad light, only for them to kind of circumvent that at the end in a way that is hard to follow nor convincing. It really just has me wondering what is even trying to be claimed here. I feel like a stronger message would have been the ethics of utilizing children for sympathy in political messaging, but they decided lean into the topic of capitalism that just feels like a half-assed afterthought.

You could maybe argue that the ending is a joke not meant to be taken too seriously, which sure, but the framing doesn't really feel that way to me. It genuinely leaves the impression that you should accept corporations on the basis of supplying quality goods to people that lead to growth in revenue. Either I'm missing something, but that is the gist I got, and other people seem to share this sentiment since actual economic professors have praised the episode as a defense of capitalism. The praise is inherently surprising to me because the pro-capitalist message just comes off extremely lazy, and therefore an unconvincing defense by any means.

This highlights a problem I have with a good portion of South Park episodes. The writing tries so hard to define itself by its centrist perspective it ultimately ends up kicking itself in the ass. Genuinely, what am I supposed to get out of this episode? Why did it feel the need to shoe-horn corporate defense to an otherwise interesting and nuanced satirical critique on the ethics of pathos messaging? What was the actual goal here?

[vegley]

hi guys ^_^

[deus-ex-mona]

when the lip differs from the lip

[nukacourier]

i don't understand how all the fo4 companions are bi, they never call themselves bi and at least with the companions I've had, they never mention attraction to the same sex, only the opposite (when not referring to the player character). obviously that doesn't mean someone can't be bi, but this just seems more like lazy playersexual stuff instead of actual representation. if there were straight and gay and bi characters that'd be like actual representation but without anyone having a preference or mentioning anything about their sexuality it kind of falls flat in my view. it's not representation at that point, it's laziness/pandering. I'm not trying to be rude, (I understand that I probably am but I'm trying my best not to be) I just genuinely don't understand. is there canon material I've missed or something?

I hope my reply doesn't come across as rude, but I genuinely hate people using "playersexual" to downplay the inclusion of queer characters, it feels a lot like its bordering on mspec erasure when I hear this argument

The sole survivor is unfortunately* either a man or a woman in Bethesda's narrative, but the handful of romancable companions can fall for them as either gender anyways. It makes no sense not to acknowledge them as mspec when games only just recently started allowing queer romance options for the player

Like, literally one of my favorite games, Harvest Moon: Animal Parade is still strictly only allowed m/f options for the player and was released in 2008, which in hindsight isn't even that long ago. So I'd rather accept it as canon than not, being "lazily written" doesn't change the fact they're potentially attracted to the sole survivor regardless of their gender

*unfortunately as in it limits roleplaying as you're forced into a specific man/father/husband or woman/mother/wife narrative with Nate and Nora

[electric-friend]

i’ve got so many unfinished fics in my drive and maybe even one published one where someone calls stede strong and brave for maintaining his softness even when life pushes back.

recently i feel like stede made a choice ed and izzy have both made in the past that they’ve always wished they never did, and stede could have been spared from. at the very least i think it hurt ed to see the version of himself he hates in stede. he probably thinks stede wanted to become that man for reasons other than stede has been bullied his entire life for being inadequate and told a man a bit like blackbeard is a real man.

call me crazy or whatever but i actually think a major thing that should be communicated between ed and stede is something on stede’s end. his trauma and his feelings and his issues. as it stands now, i don’t think ed understands what’s going on with stede. i don’t think he understands the person stede really wants to be. i don’t think he understands stede’s own issues of self-doubt and stede’s insecurities. hell i don’t think ed even has that much of a grasp of how unpopular and disliked stede has always been his entire life. and i think maybe if stede explained himself better, ed would understand more of what was going on. that he wouldn’t be seeing stede as manifesting something he wants to escape from, he would see stede as someone he needs to help escape with him.

[gibbearish]

ik i talk abt high control groups kinda often but i do encourage anyone involved in discourse in any capacity to watch folding ideas' "this is financial advice" video, because a lot of what he says about the gamestop apes being a self-organizing high control group imo also explains the more toxic discourse tendencies, and i feel like most discussion around high-control groups on here focuses on the tradtional kind that has one or a few distinct leaders which makes it harder to draw parallels between the signs. so i think its important to point out that these kinds of groups can still create that same energy as a unit even if there isn't one specific person calling the shots

[starswallowingsea]

Sorry this is the most annoying type of niki fan ever. I saw this post 5 days ago and I'm still mad about it

[ame-to-ame]

public transit... *collapses to the floor*

[codecicle]

worlds teeniest tiniest vent but i think all transphobic lawmakers should get their balls put in a panini press and get run over by cars so perfectly that their pussies get roadburn actually. they don't deserve happiness or respect and i hope they all die <3 <3 <3 <3

[death-limes]

there’s no right answer. it’s not even “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” because what even is the “do?” there is no “do.” all of the options are some kind of “don’t.” there is no course of action that actually helps, and taking no course of action at all also actively causes harm. i thought 2016 was bad but this is just bleak. it doesn’t even matter what actually happens. anything that would actually be good news is only “~*~technically possible~*~” in the most laughably hopeless sense, like how winning the lottery and getting struck by lightning at the same time is “technically possible.” the fact that it’s even a hypothetical “possibility” just feels like a cosmic joke. the mirage of an oasis in the desert that you know isn’t real but goddamn it feels like it could be.

even the most cowardly instinct - to just run away - is difficult and complicated and not to mention expensive so even that requires its own kind of courage