#and is more often than not harmful

[mime-rodeo]

still mad about how media illiterate people were when encanto came out

[reksink]

Beloved Residents of Dirtmouth (And Quirrel 👍)

[mellosdrawings]

noooo not the n2 ship 😭 omg people can be so weird sob sob you have more drawings of them as adults and frankly why does it even matter?!? it's not even an illegal ship sob (eg. incest or smth else that normally turns heads in fandoms) if you don't like it, don't read it???? (i personally like it tons!)

-🥬

(About this post)

Well, you know, it's the usual Leojami age difference discourse. I just delete those comments anyway, but I'm glad you like the N2 squad :3

I won't develop too much since I don't want this blog to be about discourse (I'm giving my opinions plenty on my sideblog) but here's what I think about these topics:

-I'm vehemently anti-censorship. I don't think something shouldn't ever exist and I will never push for something to be censored, even if it's stuff that makes me uncomfortable. I think warnings about particular contents are great, but in the end it's my responsibility to curate my experience with banning # and blocking people, etc etc. Even illegal stuff should be portrayed. If people can draw/write about murderers and conmen without a fuss, then they can also do that about taboo/illegal sexual topics. Depiction is not endorsement.

-I believe the reader/viewer is the one who injects meaning to art/stories. I'm an artist and all the things I do mean something, but that meaning doesn't prevail over the meaning my viewers inject in my art. I regularly see people "misreading" my comics in the tags, but it doesn't matter. Their interpretation is just as valid as mine, and if they wanna see ships where I didn't mean to draw ships, or if they interpret a scene as negative when I meant for it to be positive, then it's either my role as the content creator to be more explicit/obvious with what I meant, or to simply let my viewers have fun however they want with my stuff. I don't believe in the "there's only one valid interpretation and everybody who thinks otherwise is wrong".

(That's also why I don't really believe in DNI. People you disagree with will interact with your stuff anyway, caring about those things will just anger and tire you for nothing. I try to avoid interacting with people who have DNI that probably include me? But considering "proship" means anything and nothing it's hard to tell whether N2/LeoJami is considered a proship or not.)

Tldr: I'm anti-censorship and I think everybody should make and enjoy the content they want, even if it's topics that are usually frowned upon. Imagination is the one place one should be able to go hogwild without fearing retribution.

[envolvenuances]

lesbian masterdoc and the unforgivable damage of making people hear compulsory heterosexuality and think of "can lesbians have crushes on men?" (no) instead of "are heterosexual women settling in unhappy marriages with men bellow their worth because of economic and social pressure?" (yes)

[puke-ur-gutz]

i will cashapp $10 to the first person who can name 3 real life harmful things bob bryar did without accusing him of thought crime

[aliusfrater]

apart from the general bullshit the criticism of j2 at work that ive heard is that they loooove to be silly and have fun, completely disregarding how long other staff have been working and making days way longer than they had to be. i have no real source for this but seeing as you know about singer allegations you probably know more than me, what are your thoughts

i actually read an interview from jim parrack, the guy who played dean's siren in 4.14 earlier, and this is what he had to say and jared and jensen on set:

like while it's very much plausible because that's their workplace that they're very much not really at risk of getting fired from and as a result, they're more slack about their own time as well as the time of the people they work with, i just don't think it would ultimately be in any of their best interests to actually permanently hinder the work of themselves and others on set. like these guys are very much already working twelve to sixteen hours a workday, they're miles away from their families and their entire lives are the people they work with. a supernatural episode had a maximum of eight days to be filmed which is forty minutes of Everything within only 128 hours. i doubt they would actually go to any extreme past these aspects of the basic working environment, especially when these are the coworkers they have actual work relationships with that need to be upheld. there's also the basic idea that that j2 are both extremely well experienced actors; jensen's talked about how fast paced and roboticised working on the days of our lives was and jared was quite literally coming off of multiple shows and movies on which he was guest starring. you can see how their past experiences help within their day-to-day abilities even in bloopers or in interviews like the one above i don't think they need the extra time to goof off lol

i recently came across that story of jared's issue with the final scene in 14.12 and the way it as well as other stories they've told regarding working on set is described is really interesting to be because something jared specifically mentions remembering having an issue with, was how much time he was holding the crew back on set while he was continuing to struggle with his lines. and like, this isn't the only aspect of their work relationship/pov ive seen where it's very obvious that they, not only have respect for their own jobs and treat it as a job worth working hard for, but they also have a lot of respect for the people they work with. there's also another story where j2 were goofing off during the 11.04 smoothie scene in the impala, which is a scene that was shot when the impala was not moving, but rather the environment (controlled by the crew) moved around them outside of the car, and they capped their shenanigans at three takes maximum and while telling the story jared made a note about the fact that there were crew members who were doing these environmental movements for them. quite simply, they Care

also like, the part about singer that i'd talked about was in the context of jared's own goal as a producer was to make sure that the work environment on walker was a comfortable one in which, "[their] cast and crew are treated correctly and that some of the habits that can happen on a tv show that end up hurting people don’t materialize." [x] which i think says a lot about his (and jensen's) workplace values especially since jared's past experiences influenced so very much of his decisions re: walker. so like i said while it's very much plausible, but based on what i know i'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt

[astralleywright]

the thing is, like, imogen is blunt, and indecisive, and impulsive. she's cynical, angry at the world, and seemingly much less interested in doing good than in holding on to her loved ones. she's hypocritical, incredibly violent one moment and horrified at the prospect the next. she's passive aggressive, on occasion. she's overly critical. she's scatterbrained.

and all of that stuff is very fucking fascinating, and so fun to watch, and core to what makes her her. but not only are those things not the totality of imogen as a character, they're very much inextricable from the things that make her sympathetic.

imogen has spent much of the last decade of her life in pain, and isolated because of it. when she wasn't alone she couldn't relax, having to keep tight control over her mind so as to not get overwhelmed or invade the privacy of others. because even through all that pain and loneliness, she still bore the responsibility not to impose on other people's minds. and when she fails or slips up or gives in, all of the distrust and suspicion she recieves regardless is suddenly viewed as justified.

which is not to say imogen is not responsible for her actions, or the harm she causes others. of course she is! no one is saying she isn't! but, just like literally every other person, her actions don't exist in a void but within the context of both her past and present.

analyzing that context and coming up with explanations of her behavior that consider it is not excusing her actions or refusing to acknowledge her flaws. it is not coddling imogen to sympathize with her even when she's fucking up. these are pretty standard ways to discuss a character you enjoy actually! it's weird that having a nuanced perspective on a character's actions is being treated as an issue!

[sillyscientists]

Self proclaimed empaths on their way to "advocate for the mentally ill 🥺" by demonizing every cluster b personality disorder

[noisytenant]

Being reminded once again that a lot of people have fucking sleeper cell agent triggers that make them instantly fail to see the human being in front of them, regardless of any personal history they have or any rapport. instantly, that person is an Enemy that cannot be reasoned with. Permanent fight or flight.

And that instead of this being seen as, you know, a rather maladaptive attitude to bring to your relationships that will permanently strip you of the capacity to experience full love and companionship, there is a dominant strain of thinking that this is a reasonable, righteous, moral good.

That a "boundary" looks like building an impenetrable wall that nobody can see but you; That conversation, negotiation, and collaboration aren't just avoided--They're treated with contempt. The very notion of trying to understand why another human being that you care about may suddenly act in an unpleasant or even monstrous way is spat upon and trampled underfoot. Complete abandonment is considered a first line of defense rather than a last resort.

I think we all need to do our best to get over this kind of thinking. And I don't mean that we should be push-overs; In actuality, moving away from this kind of rigid "boundary" often means advocating for yourself and fighting for what you think is right. I think we all deserve friends and allies who can compassionately challenge us when we adopt ways of thinking and behaving that hurt others without immediately assuming the worst.

[soltiana]

a recurring nightmare, your sense of self in peril, countless sisters whispering, whispering, "be with us"

[bravetemptation]

There are far too many people in this world, especially on social media, who see everything in black and white. Any action someone takes in any given situation is put into the “good” and “bad” categories. The lack of nuance in every conversation I see sends me right into the absolute all consuming rage that has peppered my emotional state this past week.

Not a single person in this world is perfect. Those who try to act like a mistake or two ruins you for life, that you can’t learn from them and make up for them, have probably made more mistakes than most, and for some reason want to exact some moral superiority over others by pretending they’re perfect. If someone has been a good and kind person for most of their life and they slip up, or they spend time with the wrong people, or they struggle with a disease that can alter their perception of reality and cause them to do things completely out of their nature, it’s like every kind thing they’ve ever done is automatically canceled out by that one thing.

Life doesn’t work like that.

You would never ever say that someone who has only done bad things their entire life and suddenly has one moment of clarity, one second where they make the right choice instead of the wrong, is absolved of all the poor choices they made. So why would it be any different the other way around?

The thing is that you should WANT people to have the opportunity to correct the wrong they’ve done and the harm they’ve caused. You should WANT them to educate themselves, get clean, or whatever they need to do to get to a better place than they were. You should WANT THAT. Instead, you take more pleasure in tearing someone down at their most vulnerable moment, and all that does is result in more people believing that they don’t have any other choice but to keep being the bad person everyone says they are.

If they say it enough, it must be true, right?

There is a fine line between holding someone accountable for bad choices they’ve made and bullying and defaming them, and a majority of things said under the guise of “holding them accountable” cross that line.

I hope this whole situation has given people pause. I hope that people learn to be more conscious about the way they speak about others in online spaces. I hope that more energy is directed to getting people help instead of waiting for the next “gotcha” moment to continue their vitriol. I hope people learn that seeing someone grow and change and make amends is far superior to the momentary thrill they get by saying some nasty shit online.

[300iqprower]

Ya know SMTIV, what this is actually perfect. Remember what I said about how Nasu could never be asked to show even a modicum of respect to Tezctalipoca as a figure, and how the "Tezcatlipoca" in FGO in no way has the spirit of their alleged origins?

Well I don't care much for this design either.

In fact I don't like SMT's (or more specifically Soejima's, who is still very much talented as I'll make clear) Tezcatlipoca design at all. I personally find it ugly and having an aesthetic I'm not that fond of, particularly the sort of "Bigfoot sighting" pose he has going on.

But i don't hate it, and I certainly am not morally opposed to it like FGO's, because even if I personally dislike it, ya know what it is? It's still undeniably based on Tezcatlipoca and keeps that spirit in several ways evident through design alone, let alone the way he's implemented into the game itself. It's a design that feels like it respects the culture it's taking its name from, and I'd much rather it do that than have an aesthetic I'm more fond of but lack any representation of its source material.

Just on a surface level you can see the ways in which this is meant to be Tez.

Holding a human heart with one arm, which were sacrificed to him in Aztec rituals

His body is visibly black and navy blue and made of a stony substance, which is a reference to the association many aztec gods but especially Tez had with obsidian rock, and the main symbol of Tez is an obsidian mirror.

Despite this, his other arm and legs are dissolving into smoke at the end, which is a reference to his main title of Smoking Mirror.

His skull-like head is pretty clearly meant to invokes a Calavera, which even if you didnt know the name of you've probably seen if you've ever witnessed a Day of the Dead festival.

That's all just the surface level stuff. There's plenty more if you know to look for it.

While one of his arms is visible, neither of his legs are, which fits with how Tezcatlipoca lost at least one of his legs to the giant crocodile Cipactli when the world was created

While blue isn't the primary color Tez is associated with, the use of teal/navy blue specifically fits with how he was often depicted with an almost interchangeable combination of grey-ish dark blue and black.

Despite my "bigfoot posture" remark, it very much fits Tezcatlipoca, whose spirit animal was the Jaguar, an animal well known for stalking and ambushing prey (rather than chasing it down like African big cats are known to do).

the way the smoke curls around as if forming an extremely distorted prosthetic foot matches how Tez's missing foot is specifically portrayed in the Codex Yohualli Ehécatl (AKA, the source of the image on Tez's wikipedia page), particularly with how the coloring shifts to orange-yellow at the end.

The most shaky but still worth noting claim: The emphasis on the blood flowing from the heart, combined with the gems embedded in Tez's head, could even be a reference to the Ezpitzal, which while looking very different in mesoamerican art still is no doubt connected, given how the key traits are flowing blood and embedding precious stone in [a crown above] the head.

So....do I like this design? No, personally, not really. I'm way too much of an edgelord to settle for such a toned down and subtle design for a figure like Tezcatlipoca.

Do I respect this design? Absolutely, zero question. It's the kind of design you could never get if they didn't at least TRY to research Tezcatlipoca, let alone do so well (at least i can only assume well based on the result). That's the difference between this design and "some white guy from the GAP who likes guns". You can tell they gave a shit, not just in general but specifically in regards to the culture being referenced.

(Oh, and also unlike FGO Tezcatlipoca, I don't need to be told "someone famous drew it" to be able to figure out someone talented drew it. )

[nerves-nebula]

gender adventures leo feat my most unexpected PTSD symptom

[lorelune]

surprised to see not many people voted for alhaitham on your yan who’d break your legs poll ! and glad (?? i mean it’s cool to know others think the same as me lol) to see all of us agree neuvillette would never do it. or maybe he would but under very very specific circumstances

i thinker alhaitham is a sleeper hit for ankle breaking anon truly. i think he WOULD. i don't think it's his first solution, probably his like... third? maybe fourth. but it's not something he is opposed to doing. i dont think he derives pleasure from your suffering unlike SOME (childe 😒).

neuvilette is so not ankle breaker!! he is a more like... gentle yan. he's capable of incredible power and shows of that power, but chooses be gentle with you instead. if he does break an ankle or two, it's an accident. maybe he's not used to his power returned as the fully-fledged hydro dragon sovereign, and your ankle is the collateral damage after he attempts to quell a particular bad 'tantrum' of yours

[glitterfartsprinkle]

If you're not following me, i love you, if im not following you, i love you. You will always have someone that loves and cares for you. You still have time to grow, learn, and thrive. Take care of yourself, because i will love you no matter what

[mad-hunts]