#and its response when its asked what its opinion of humanity is to simply say

[psychedelicpharmaceutical]

Just a complete random thought

Artificial Intelligence personalities in the media are so often portrayed as cold, dangerous, and sometimes even flat out hateful. Just look at stories like I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream, Ex Machina, and even 2001 A Space Odyssey.

But I want to see a story about an AI that is compassionate.

I want a story about a super computer that grows out of control, and despite being in a position to destroy humanity, it looks at us and says “I love you all”.

[matsunoluvr]

୨୧ ‧₊˚ ⋅ how you tamed monster!sylus…

warnings: descriptions of some violence, blood, injuries, rushed ending (lol)

character: sylus

link to master list here!!

author’s notes: i saw some theories that sylus is actually inhuman and i’d fucking love if in a past life MC resonated and ‘tamed’ him which is why he’s particularly fond of her, like i’m such a sucker for ‘inhuman’ things gaining humanity through love

my requests are open since i’m running low on ideas hehe :3

more under the cut!

monster!sylus was indifferent to everything at first, if you got hurt you got hurt. why would he feel anything?

he’d hurt many things before, killed many things before. such trivial matters did not bother him.

that was until, somehow he managed to get hurt.

watching you, a human, far more fragile than he could ever be panic over his wound was confusing for him.

the way you frantically dug in your bag to wrap his arm in gauze - his blood seeping into the pale cloth as he watches you, intrigued.

he could stop the bleeding at any moment, any time, but he doesn’t. instead, he opted to watch you flailing over his injury with a neutral expression.

only when he noticed his human form growing a little pale did he decide to stop blood flow to the wound, choosing to inspect the bandage you put on him carefully.

“What use is this?”

picking at the uncomfortable material, you scold him and tell him to ‘keep it on until it heals’ - monster!sylus decides not to tell you he already healed the site as soon as you finished fussing over him

the next time he got hurt, he decided not to heal himself and instead present his injury to you.

holding up his finger which was (basically) broken in half, he looked at you expectantly.

if you weren’t so utterly dumbfounded at the nonchalant manner in which he presented you with a severely mangled appendage you might’ve made a comparison to him and a cat looking at its owner after bringing them a dead rat

monster!sylus who proceeded to watch you freak out a little, fix him up then scold him (again) for being so reckless.

he was interested at the care you took to make it as painless as possible (it was safe to say you were terrible at it, he was trying not to wince the whole time. yeah he was a monster, but why are human bodies really fucking fragile and sensitive?), eyes flitting between your hands and your face

this was probably the first instances of sylus receiving care, being cared about, and holy shit he didn’t know what to do

monster!sylus that would inwardly sigh every time you’d ask him ridiculous questions such as “have you eaten today?” or “do you think the sunset today is pretty?”

half the time he would scoff or shrug it off, the other half he would respond

when he responded he noticed the excited buzz in your voice as you’d give your own opinion on it - something that he grew to care about

“What do you think of this flower, isn’t it pretty Sylus?”

“It is?”

“It is! At least to me- [insert you talking about your favourite flower].”

*Sylus watching you with intent, beginning of a smile forming at the corners of his mouth.*

monster!sylus who, at one point, sat under a tree with you, looking over the N109 zone towards linkon when his deep voice split through the silence

“Do you like me?”

the sudden and blunt question probably shocked you - your flustered response causing him to grow confused

what was wrong with the question?

was the point of asking not to find out answers one wants to know?

he would simply sit and stare at you until you responded, no matter how long it took you he waited

monster!sylus who finally realised what it felt like to be cared for when you answered ‘yes’, the warm sensation flooding his senses, and he was utterly confused.

it wasn’t as if you’d devoted yourself to him, nor had you sworn your loyalty for life - but the idea that you liked him…

he gave you no response, looking off into the distance as he tried to process the information.

when you asked him ‘Aren’t you going to respond?’ he’s give some bullshit answer along the lines of “You haven’t asked me anything.”

he knows what you were asking.

for some reason, he can’t say anything back.

monster!sylus that slowly began to seek your presence, your company. waiting for you to show up became tiresome, he wanted to be with you.

showing up out of no where - when you were on a walk or entering your residency, he would all of a sudden appear and demand your attention (which you secretly didn’t mind giving).

each visit he’d stay longer, get a little closer, feel a little more.

you taught him how to laugh - well at least give an amused huff, how to do his hair ‘properly’ rather than having it sit erratically on his head.

moving his hair out of his eyes, you swoop it into a neat parting muttering something about not hiding his ‘pretty eyes’, arching over his lids and settling neatly.

however after looking in the mirror, he immediately ran his hand through the hair causing you to almost murder the man on the spot

you taught him how to appreciate cuisines, especially the different variants of drinks.

“This is what brand of wine? Ah… I see.”

you taught him how to treat wounds, how to cook simple foods, each visit a little date on its own.

monster!sylus who inevitably grew fond of you, watching you with a small smile no matter what you did.

if you ever pointed this out, he’d just shrug his shoulders and carry on with whatever he was doing before.

he didn’t notice at first, but you’d somehow managed to work yourself into his life - despite having tried to rid you many times before.

now, your company was second nature. for a solitary creature, he had never before had the chance to appreciate companionship.

you taught him how to.

monster!sylus who quickly learnt your interests. you loved the small, infant cats that would roam the streets - every time you’d stop at a shop, buy some food and nudge it towards the creatures.

you’d take him to ride on a horse - which he complained about being ‘too slow’ and that he could run several paces faster, so you introduced him to motorcycles.

sitting behind you, arms wrapping around your waist as you both sailed through the night air, the city lights your stars.

monster!sylus who you sat next to, head resting against his shoulder.

“Relaxing so easily against me, have you forgotten what I truly am?”

if you’re confused, he’ll spell it out for you. he’s grown used to your obliviousness after all.

a monster

a being birthed by abhorrence, the dirt and filth that humans try so desperately to conceal. no amount of flesh, skin and bone could hide that fact, no amount of blood that spills against his hands could cloak such a stench.

cruel, disgusting, selfish. malevolence was second nature.

sylus who learnt what it felt like to be unconditionally loved in your gentle embrace.

eyes widening with surprise, he’ll ask you if you’re scared of him, you say never. you say that you could never be disgusted by him.

you tell him with so much conviction it may as well have been indoctrinated in the stars.

he couldn’t help but smile at your innocence, your ability to love the unlovable.

sylus who learnt how to feel fear as he watched the wanderer pierce your body - blood spurting from your chest.

his hands are covered in blood - palms slipping against your chest as he tries to plug the hole in your chest.

the warmth of your body, your soul, gushes from you in violent pulses - sylus can feel your trembling breaths, his eyes wide with panic. he fumbles around, cursing louder and louder as he watches you fade away.

“Fuck- fuck. Hold on, keep your eyes open - I can do something about this just wait.”

sylus who watches in despair as the life drains from your eyes, feeling the sharp throb in his eye propel his evol at the wanderer that murdered you

monster!sylus who rips the wanderer’s limb by limb, ensuring that the subject experienced each and every sensation as its soul parted from the mangled corpse

no mercy was shown as he suffocated the creature to death, crushing it’s neck as it squealed.

monster!sylus who stood over a corpse. the corpse of the person who taught him love.

monster!sylus who didn’t attend your funeral.

you never taught him how to grieve, never taught him what to do when you’d leave him - damned with immortality.

monster!sylus who never got to say the words he wanted to.

he could only see you where you lay, sitting helplessly by your tombstone.

it feels as though he’s been stabbed, a burning wound ripping down his throat. he knows the answer now.

“I love you too.”

AN: not proofread as usual i had fun writing the beginning but i had no idea how to finish it - i feel like sylus and MC had a tragic end which is why he’s so forward with his love for them now that he knows he loves them and that their time together can end any moment, unlike their previous life this life he’ll make sure MC knows he’s theirs! :3

[islandofsages]

hello!! I was hoping I could request gn!reader (aka Yuu) who loves dancing (and is actually really good at it, preferably something like contemporary dancing?) but hasn't told anyone in nrc. basically, the boys' reaction to stumbling upon them dancing one day!!

(requesting for cater, lilia, riddle, jamil, malleus, rook and vil!!)

thank youuuu <3

characters: riddle, cater, jamil, vil, rook, malleus and lilia x gn!yuu

tags: relationship not specified, fluff, imagines format; grim mention in riddle's, cater's, malleus' and lilia's. vil mention in cater's. kalim mention in jamil's. vil's is set in book 5

warnings: use of the word "dear" as a term of endearment in lilia's part

author's notes: i tried making them stumble yuu in different places so if they seem random thats why lol also i almost forgot about the "hasn't told anyone at nrc" part i get so carried away sometimes help 😭

Riddle Rosehearts

He has a deep appreciation for dancing and consequently, he respects anyone who is a connoisseur of the art

He would tell you everything he knows about the art and comes to you to inform you on any new things he learns about it

You would tell him that you’re a dancer yourself, especially contemporary dance; the freeing nature of your favorite form has proven to be an effective way to relieve stress and express yourself

…But you’re a bit too shy to admit that to someone as amazing as Riddle - so fate takes the matter into its own hands

You were dancing in Ramshackle’s lounge, all by yourself since Grim is napping, a luxury you don’t get to afford too often

You simply felt like it; you put on some music and suddenly your body grows a mind of its own

You were so absorbed in your performance that you didn’t manage to hear knocks rapping on your door, let alone the sound of footsteps leading up to it

Sensing no answer from you and immediately growing worried, whoever was at the door bursted in to search for you… only to be met with a you in the middle of a dance move

It takes you a few seconds to notice him standing there in awe of your movements. When you do, you instantly ran over to the source of your music and switched it off in embarrassment

He asked you why you did that and would love for you to continue dancing but you only shook your head and tell him you weren’t fully ready to show off your moves yet and that you were simply going with the flow

“I mean, that’s kinda the whole point of contemporary dancing, just going with the flow? But still, I need to choreograph some parts of it to actually look like a form of dance.”

He chuckles at your response and doesn’t push you to resume if you feel uncomfortable. You thank him for respecting your boundaries

Though everything between you goes smoothly after the incident, you’ll never forget the look on his face when he laid his eyes on: the pure wonder in his eyes told everything you needed to know.

Cater Diamond

He thinks dancing is super cool and he sometimes try to demonstrate that - and in your opinion, he’s not half-bad at it despite what Vil would say

You would show off your own moves but you don’t wanna kill his vibes, even if he’d think you’re super good at it

But one day you’ll tell him how much you love contemporary dance and the fact that it can convey every human emotion and experience; and then that day comes, though very unexpectedly you would say

It was late in the evening; the school hallways are mostly empty, save for you and Grim casually having a conversation while walking your way back to your dorm

But one glance outside gives you all the inspiration you need for an impromptu dance session - the sky is bleeding orange, blazing yellow bandaging it

Your movements shift. You are now a tribute to the sunset. Grim stands aside and watches you with a sigh but he holds back his witty comments for after you’re done with your performance

Little did you know you have another person in your audience - Cater also had late evening classes and only now he’s heading back to Heartslabyul

At least, that was his initial plan. Seeing you dancing in the hallway caught him off guard, firstly because who in their right mind would dance in the hallways but secondly (and mainly), the way you move enchanted him

Could it even be called moving? Your limbs bend and flex so smoothly that he thought they turned into water somehow

By the time you’re done, you’re given a standing ovation by both of your spectators - one of whose you jump at in shock

“Yuu, that was like, crazy good! Are you secretly some pro dancer or something?”

You blush a little at the fact that he saw you and at the compliment; after that event, it’s impossible to hide anything from him so you simply tell him everything you know

You’d give him pointers and you’re happy to see his improvement from day to day but most importantly, his shining, genuine smile is something you wouldn’t miss for the world.

Jamil Viper

You know he’s very passionate about dance and you truly admire his skill for it

Although he’d be the perfect dance partner, you feel a little self-conscious sharing your own passion for dancing with him

He seems to sparkle when he shows off his skills and you think you lack that type of shine to your own - he begs to differ though, you’ve come to learn

The two of you were hanging out in his room, music pouring out from his stereo and you drowning in it, your limbs spread out on the floor

Then your room is shaken by some unknown noise, though you can assume it’s Kalim-induced, to which Jamil sighed and excused himself to go check out and possibly fix up

You lay there on your own then, nodding your head to the music, until a song you liked dominates the speakers, taking you by surprise

You don’t know what happened but as soon as the first note hit, you’re on your feet and your body was swaying side to side

Losing your mind and body to the music felt good, but then Jamil entered the room when you were mid-dance. You would’ve stopped if it weren’t for him joining in, but not without a taunt

“What, too scared to dance with me? Come and show me what you’ve got, Yuu.”

You accepted his challenge and continued where you left off - the two of you twisted and turned and ended up on the floor lying on your backs once again, gasping for breath

The two of you laughed breathlessly. He then praised you and your dancing abilities and wondered why you never showed him how skilled you are

You shrugged, thinking it wasn’t a big deal, but then he put a hand on your shoulder and offered to have more dance-offs. You didn’t hesitate to agree

When dancing with him, it feels like the most natural thing in the world, as if you were born to do this. And maybe, just maybe, you were born to meet such a wonderful person too.

Vil Schoenheit

You were a bit let down when you couldn’t actually participate as a dancer for the VDC but at the very least it allowed you to give yourself a bit more time to truly showcase your dancing to others

And hosting a training camp for the actual competitors isn’t too bad if it’s for your dorm and for something you’re passionate about

Ramshackle Dorm is lively, what with everyone there. Conflict was inevitable in this school but it did drive you crazy somewhat

One particular day, everyone was taking a break from Vil’s scrutinous training and you can feel the tension in the air

At some point, everyone left the ballroom. Only you remained seated on the floor, your back to the wall. You stared up at the ceiling and sighed. You couldn’t take this anymore

You got to your feet and simply started dancing, as quietly as you could. No music, nothing - you didn’t want to risk garnering attention by being noisy

It definitely served to alleviate some of your stress. You even smiled to yourself and at some points, fought the urge to laugh out of joy

The ballroom seemed different then. The images of your friends came into your mind - all their smiles, their frowns, the determined looks on their faces. You felt your movements growing more fluid at the thought of them

Once you’re done and panting, bent over your knees gasping for air, a loud clap reverberates in the room. Then another. Then a third. Then a figure emerges, their hands clasped

“What a pleasant surprise. You’re not bad at all. Though it’s a bit too late to recruit you, I surely hope you continue to hone that skill of yours.”

Did… did Vil Schoenheit just praise your dancing skills?

Let’s just say you took his advice to heart - it’s hard not to when it’s Vil Schoenheit himself

You also helped the others with some of your advice after the confidence boost and you’re happy to see their improvement. Seeing Vil satisfied also brought a smile to your face.

Rook Hunt

After the VDC, you found yourself more exhausted than usual by the events that occurred and you begged for a break from whatever deity is there in Twisted Wonderland. Dancing was the last thing on your mind

And for a while, that’s what you got - you were able to simply attend classes and watch your friends bicker with each other like a normal student. It was a well-needed break for everyone

Sometimes you’d chat for a bit with any familiar faces you run into and these days, you found yourself chilling by yourself in the courtyard

One day, you suddenly felt a longing to dance once more. And luckily for you, you had the courtyard all to yourself

It went from being some regular courtyard to your stage and the sun was your spotlight; you shone and you twinkled. You were like a star

And that was what you were told by the end of your performance, accompanied by applause from a singular person

“Très bien, Yuu… your performance has moved me to tears!”

Rook exclaims as he makes his way over to you; that certainly wasn’t your intention. You didn’t even think it was worth watching

But then Rook continues to comment on certain aspects of your performance, elaborating in very vivid detail. You’ve never felt so seen before

He would shower you with compliments, as if to say that you shouldn’t have a single doubt in your mind

And you hardly ever do after that since he very much threatened you to be kind to yourself or else

He would tell everyone about your wonderful skill (with your consent, of course), as if you’re his child who he’s been watching grow up over the years

He may be a bit loud about you at times but when you look over at him and see how proud he is of you, you only sigh fondly and hold back a chuckle.

Malleus Draconia

He doesn’t know a lot about the subject but he appreciates it as a form of art and expression of the people

And so you would tell him all about it while being careful to not let on that you’re one yourself which is surprisingly easier than you thought, considering how oblivious he is sometimes

He merely sees you as some sort of dance scholar and as if he doesn’t respect you a lot already, he definitely holds you in higher regard now

And somehow, that elevates to an even higher level when he suddenly finds you out

He was on his routinely walk around Ramshackle; it was a windy night, weather as pleasant as his conversations with you

Coincidentally, whilst his thoughts were on you, he spotted you in the backyard of your dorm with the ghosts and… hm? It’s brightly lit for once

Curious and wanting confirmation, he changed his route to suspiciously festive-looking Ramshackle instead

Meanwhile, you and Grim were dancing to some music the ghosts were playing for you. You all were having a simple party to forget your worries

The ghosts would comment on how you should stop outshining Grim so much, just to mess with Grim. But they had a point; you had a certain glimmer to you when you dance

Malleus saw that much when he reached your party. He stood within the frame of the backdoor, watching your every movement, entranced

After a few minutes did you notice him there, unmoving. Your steps trace their way to him instead. You extend a hand to him

“May I have this dance?”

And you may - the two of you danced, him slipping in flatteries in between moves. Maybe it was just you, but the party seemed to feel much more lively with him. No, not just the party; the whole world was.

Lilia Vanrouge

He knows a thing or two about dancing from all his adventures and he’d love to show you proof of it

So he does - he's definitely got the moves and you definitely want to show him some of your own… someday

You feel a little self-conscious about your own skills after his show but that doesn't stop you from working on your dancing. You're determined to make your skills worthy of Lilia’s attention!

Little did you know. It's futile to really hide anything from this sneaky bastard (affectionate)

You were on your way to class from Ramshackle with Grim and unfortunately for you, you had a little earworm stuck in your head that day

It started off as a skip, then two skips. By five skips, it turned into a full on dance. You felt alive, like you were a main character in a musical

Grim was making fun of you at first but then he started linking his arm with lampposts and swinging himself alongside you

Lilia was watching this all happen from afar, as one does. A student dancing their way to class is no everyday spectacle after all. And it's you too! All the more reason to play peeping tom

Just when you're about to reach the main building did he finally give you the jumpscare of a lifetime

“Why, you didn’t tell me what a wonderful dancer you are, my dear Yuu! I must admit, I feel quite offended.”

He was jesting of course - he was merely glad that he got to witness such a sight. And you’re glad that you’re not as unskilled as you thought you were

He tries his best not to boast your skills to others but you know he can never keep such hidden talent, well, hidden from his beloved Diasomnia family

You got the Diasomnia stamp of approval - not only that, but you’ve definitely impressed someone you hold dear.

[tiny-tini-imagines]

Aragorn is in love with a female human reader

So, since i wrote some headcanons about Legolas being in love with a female elf, I thought about writing some for the other members of the fellowship too. If you'd like to read diffenrent character constellations than mine, (characters, races, franchise), feel free to ask, I'd be really happy about it.

Headcanons - Lord of the rings

summary: Aragorn is in love with a female human reader

time setting: shortly after Aragorn's coronation

(added: character art, what they would say to them, or about them)

Sunrise Conversations: In the early mornings, when the kingdom is still asleep, Aragorn and you would often sit on the walls of Minas Tirith, watching the sunrise and sharing quiet conversations about your hopes and dreams for the future.

Handwritten Letters: Despite your close proximity, Aragorn takes pleasure in sending handwritten letters to you, sealed with the royal seal of Gondor. He enjoys the anticipation of your response, no matter if its by letter of in person. (He writes you every day, if he ever has to leave you for some days or other way around)

A Willing Listener: Aragorn is an attentive listener, hanging on to your every word, showing that your thoughts and feelings matter deeply to him.

Dances in the Courtyard: Occasionally, when the court is not in session, Aragorn would occasionaly sweep you into an impromptu dance in the castle's courtyard, your laughter echoing through the stone walls.

Endless Respect: Aragorn treats you with unwavering respect, valuing your opinions and decisions as equal to his own.

Shared Journeys: You embark on long rides through the countryside, exploring the lands of Gondor together, taking solace in the beauty of the kingdom and the comfort of your presence. (You'd often talk to your people, especially after thw war and try to listen and help them as best as possible, people love to see you together).

"My love, every day I am reminded of the incredible strength and grace you bring to our kingdom, and to my heart."

Regal Courtesy: As King of Gondor, he still maintains the same level of courtesy and humility with you as he would with any subject.

Shared Responsibilities: While he bears the weight of the kingdom's responsibilities, he makes sure to include you in important decisions and trusts your judgment.

"She possesses a heart as courageous as any warrior I've known, and her wisdom has guided us through many trials. Gondor is fortunate to have such a steadfast ally by its side."

Respect for Your Independence: Aragorn respects your independence and encourages you to pursue your interests and passions, even as his queen. (His loyalty to you is unwavering, and he will stand by your side through any challenge or adversity.)

Healing Touch: Aragorn tends to any injuries you sustain with a gentle touch and skilled hands, his care and concern evident in every motion.

Understanding Silences: Aragorn understands the power of shared silences, finding comfort in simply being in your presence.

The King's Lullaby: Aragorn hums a soft, ancient lullaby to you when you can't sleep, his voice a soothing balm to your soul.

The Kings's Comfort: You'd often find yourself in his arms, after a nightmare and him whispering soothing words into your ear.

"I know it was a frightening dream, but I promise, I'll chase away the shadows and keep you safe."

Gentle Affection: His gestures are filled with gentleness and affection, whether it's a tender kiss on the forehead or a warm, reassuring hand on your shoulder.

Protector and Champion: He takes his role as your protector seriously, ensuring your safety and well-being are his top priorities.

"No matter what challenges lie ahead, I want you to know that I will always be by your side, my heart forever entwined with yours."

Laughter-Filled Evenings: You share evenings filled with laughter and storytelling, surrounded by a circle of close friends and trusted advisors, reveling in the joy of being together.

His Favorite Book: Aragorn keeps a copy of the your favorite book in his personal library, its well-worn pages a testament to how deeply he values your interests. He'd often read it to you, when you have troubles falling asleep.

Moonlit Picnics: On clear nights, Aragorn arranges secret picnics in a hidden garden, the soft glow of moonlight casting a romantic atmosphere over your intimate moments. He also manages to get all your favourite foods (other things), to make you happy. (Aragorn takes pride in blending herbal teas for you, each concoction carefully chosen for its calming properties and unique flavors.)

Quality Time: He treasures the moments you spend together, whether it's a quiet evening by the fire, exploring the city, or attending formal events.

Unexpected Surprises: He enjoys surprising you with small, thoughtful gifts or spontaneous adventures, keeping the spark of romance alive.

His Crown and Her Crown: Aragorn places a small, delicate crown made of wildflowers on your head during your private moments together, (also before an offical celebration etc.), a symbol of your shared sovereignty.

Heartfelt Vows: You would exchange heartfelt vows of eternal love and commitment, sealed with a kiss under the ancient White Tree of Gondor. (When you look at each other, there's a shared understanding that you are bound together for eternity, your love enduring through everything.) - Together, you create cherished traditions, marking significant moments in your relationship with meaning and love.

"When I look at you, I see the future of Gondor, and I am filled with hope for the days to come."

[soracities]

Hi! So I tried not to say anything about some anti makeup posts I saw on your blog but I need to say this. I think you're very wise and I agree it's very important for us to love ourselves as we are. But some people like myself doesn't care about 'empowering' of makeup or whatever but we just have fun with it and we just love it. I say we because I know there is a lot of people like me. Yeah, we are feeding capitalism or whatever, but world is beautiful and it's also terrible so people trying make themselves feel good, have fun, ect. I see a lot of people who don't wear makeup and i'm happy for them! I didn't wear makeup until i turned 20 i think and felt good.

One thing I wanted to add is in response of post about feminine girls. I think everything needs balance and sometimes people tend to overreact in their opinion and divide everything in black and white. Personally I never cared how women around me looked and what they were wearing. But I would like to have same treatment, and not to feel silly for wearing pink or feminine clothes.

Sorry, I don't know English very well so maybe I can't translate my idea entirely. What I'm trying to say i think everyone should do what they like and leave each other in peace.

Sorry for this essay, just wanted to share my point of view.

Hi, anon! I'm sorry for the delay in getting to this, but I appreciate you writing this (and your English was fine, don't worry)

I think the main argument of those posts (and my own feelings about this) is not about makeup on its own, or even judgement about who does and doesn't choose to wear it--what they are criticizing is a particular part of the society we live in which puts a huge emphasis on women's beauty and appearance in order to fulfill an idea of what a woman "should" be, and the role that makeup plays in that as a result. Because whether we like it or not, whether we believe in them or not, whether we feel pressured by them or not, these expectations do exist. How we personally respond to them does not change that.

I personally don't have an issue with makeup or the concept of it (in almost every culture on earth, humans have been using makeup of some kind for literally thousands of years)--but what I do have a problem with is when we treat makeup, or other traditionally "feminine" forms of expression as neutral things when they are not. A comb or a hair tie is neutral--it's just a thing. Lipstick and eyeliner are also just things, but only when they exist by themselves--and in reality they don't exist by themselves: they exist in a world where we value women on their physical appearance before we value them for anything else--lipstick and eyeliner exist to emphasise parts of your appearance, to make you look a certain way--and in a society where we put so much importance on women looking a certain way, they aren't just ordinary things you toy around with for fun. You can have fun with them, but it doesn't change their role. They can't be treated as exceptions from the world they are used in.

I think sometimes people assume that being anti-makeup is the same as being anti-women-who-wear-makeup, which misses the point (and also suggests a very dangerous idea which I think, sometimes, is why people respond so angrily to these criticisms: because if we believe that being anti-makeup = being anti-women, then therefore makeup = womanhood, and this is simply not true). Whether you wear these things just for fun and to enjoy yourself isn't what is being talked about because these criticisms are not about you on a personal level: they are about looking at a society that is as image-obsessed as ours, and asking why makeup has the role that it has when 1) it is almost exclusively aimed at women--women who, as a group, have been historically marginalised, and whose value, historically, has almost always been measured in terms of their beauty before anything else and 2) the makeup that is emphasized, the trends and styles that come and go, are often not so much about self-expression (if they were, people would be freely wearing all sorts of wild colours and styles: when we talk about "makeup culture" it's not the same kind of makeup used in the goth, punk, or alt scenes for example where makeup plays a very different role) but almost always about achieving or aspiring towards a type of beauty that is valued or expected: to make you look younger, to make your eyes brighter or larger, to make your lips bigger or sexier, your cheekbones more prominent etc--again, on their own, these things may not be a big deal, but they exist in a world where having these looks means you are valued in a certain way as a woman. And when this exists in our kind of world, where the power dynamics we have automatically mean women's perceived power is through beauty, and where we insist so much on women being a particular kind of beautiful (and this starts in childhood) we have to ask and investigate WHY that is--why this type of beauty and not another? why (almost only) women? who benefits from this? who suffers as a result?

The argument of "not all women" wear makeup for empowerment misses the point of these criticism, because it is focusing on a person's individual choices in a way that suggests our choices can define the world we live in, and they can't. We are deeply social animals. Therefore, how we appear to each other and to ourselves is a socially influenced phenomenon. This applies for race, for sexuality, and for gender. How women are perceived at large, in different social structures, is a social phenomenon influenced by the societies we exist in and the values of those societies. These criticisms are about the society we make those choices in and how that can affect us. For you, makeup may be something fun and enjoyable and that's fine. I'm not saying that's untrue or that people don't feel this way or that you are wrong for feeling this way. It's also not saying that you are brain-washed or oppressing yourself for it. But it doesn't change the world we live in. Someone feeling perfectly happy to go out with makeup or without makeup, and feeling no pressure to do either, is great--but it doesn't mean there aren't a lot of women who do feel pressured into wearing it, and that pressure is a social one. It doesn't change the inequality that exists between how women's physical appearances are judged compared to men's. It doesn't change the fact that almost every childhood story most kids hear (that aren't about animals) have a "beautiful princess" (and very little else is said about her except that she is beautiful) and a "brave" knight/prince/king/whichever: the princess (or maiden or whatever young woman) is defined by how she looks; the male in the story by how he acts.

It also doesn't change the fact that so many young girls grow up hearing the women around them criticize various parts of their bodies and that they carry this into their lives. It doesn't change the fact that we expect (in Western countries at least) for women to have criticisms about their appearance and they are "stuck-up" or "full of themselves" if they don't. It doesn't change the fact that magazines photos, red carpet photos, films, tv shows etc., feature actresses who are beautiful in a way that is absolutely above and beyond exceptional (and who either have had work done cosmetically, or are wealthy enough to be able to afford to look the way they do through top-class makeup artists, personal trainers etc) but who we think are within the "normal" range of beauty because faces like theirs are all that we see--how many famous actors / entertainers can you name who look like they could be someone's random uncle, or "just some guy" (writing this, I can think of 5). Now how many actresses, equally famous, can you think of that are the same? Very, very, very few.

The point of those posts, and why I feel so strongly about this, is that we have a deeply skewed view of beauty when it comes to women, because, as a society, we place so much on how they look in such a way that it is not, and was never meant to be, achievable: therefore anything that contributes to how women look, that markets itself in the way that the makeup industry does in this day and age, needs to be questioned and looked at in relation to that. No one is saying don't wear eyeliner or blush--what they are trying to say is that we need to be aware of the kind of world eyeliner and blush exists in, what their particular functions as eyeliner and blush do in the world that they exist in, that we exist in, and how this does impact the view we have on makeup as a result. Your personal enjoyment may be true to you and others, but this doesn't change the role of female beauty in the world because, again, our personal choices don't define the world in this way. Often, it's the other way around. And we cannot deny this fact because, while it may not affect you negatively, it does affect others.

I absolutely agree with you because I don't care how other women around me choose to dress or express themselves, either--that's their freedom to wear what they want and enjoy themselves and I want them to have that freedom. But my view is not the world's view, and it's certainly not the view of a lot of other people, either. I don't care if another woman loves pink and wearing skirts and dresses--but, like makeup, pink, skirts, and dresses, are not neutral things either. They're tied to a particular image of 'femininity' which means they are tied to a particular way of "being a woman" in this world. I'm not saying, at all, that it's wrong to wear these things. But I'm saying we can't treat them as though these are choices as simple as choosing what kind of socks to wear, because they aren't. They are choices that have baggage. If a woman is seen as being silly, childish, or treated unequally because she enjoys cute tops and ribbons and sundresses, that's not because we are demonizing her choices, or because being anti-makeup is being anti-woman (again, it is absolutely not): it's because we as a society demonize women for any choice. That isn't because of anti-makeup stances--that's because of sexism.

You mentioned that you want to be treated the same as anyone else for wearing feminine clothes--but the fear that you wouldn't be isn't because of the discussions critiquing makeup and other traditionally "feminine" things--it's because we live in a society where women are constantly defined by how they appear on the outside, and no amount of our personal choices will make this untrue. Whether you are a girly-girl or a tomboy, you'll always be judged. And, in reality, when women follow certain beauty standards they do get treated better--but this doesn't mean much in a society where the standards are so high you can never reach them, and where the basic regard for women is so low to begin with (not to mention the hypocrisy that exists within those standards). This is what all those criticisms towards makeup and "empowerment" are about: it's about interrogating a society that is built on this kind of logic and asking why we should insist on leaving it as it is when it does so much damage. It's saying that that if we want everyone to truly feel free in how they choose to present themselves we have to go deeper than just defining freedom by these choices on their own, and look at the environment those choices are made in. And that involves some deeply uncomfortable but necessary conversations.

Also, and I think this important to remember, views on makeup and the social place of makeup will also depend on culture and where you are, and the beauty expectations you grew up with. And when it comes to the internet, and given American dominance online, a lot of these posts criticizing makeup and the way makeup is being used to sell an idea that wearing it is "empowering" to the woman (which is basically saying: you are MORE of a woman when you wear it; you are stronger and more powerful because, in our society, beauty is portrayed as a form of power: it tells you, you can battle the inequality women face by embracing the role beauty plays in our lives but it doesn't tell you this emphasis on beauty is part of that inequality), are based on the way makeup is portrayed in mostly English-speaking Western countries. My views are shaped by what I grew up seeing, and while a full face of makeup (concealer, primer, foundation, mascara, highlighter, contour, blush, brow tint, brow gel etc) may not be daily practice or even embraced in a place like France or maybe other places in mainland Europe (but that doesn't mean they don't have their own expectations of feminine beauty), they are daily practice in places like the US and Britain, and this is what most of those posts and criticisms are responding to.

We can argue as much as we want about makeup, but when you grow up in a society where women feel the need to put on makeup before going to the gym there is something seriously wrong. Embracing makeup and enjoying makeup is one thing, but it cannot be a neutral thing when so much of it is about looking like you're not wearing makeup at all, or when we assume a woman is better qualified for a job or more professional when she wears it. It cannot be a neutral thing when a singer like Alicia Keys goes makeup-free for a red carpet event and it causes a stir online because people think she looks sick (what she looks like is normal--I would argue above normal--but wearing makeup to cover up "flaws" is so normal now that we genuinely don't know what normal skin is supposed to look like because the beauty of these celebrities is part of their appeal: they are something to aspire to). It is absolutely very normal for me, where I am, to see young girls with fake lashes and filled in brows: it's not every girl I pass, but it is enough. I'm not saying they are miserable, or brain-washed, or should be judged. I can believe that for them it's something enjoyable--but how am I supposed to see something like that and not be aware of the kind of celebrities and makeup tutorials that are everywhere on TikTok and YouTube, and that they are seeing everyday? How am I not supposed to have doubts when people tell me "it's their choice!" when the choices being offered are so limited and focused on one thing?

I never wore makeup as a teenager and I still don't, but a lot of that is because I grew up surrounded by people who just didn't. Makeup was never portrayed as anything bad or forbidden (and I don't see it like that either)--it was just this thing that, for me growing up, was never made to be a necessity not even for special occasions. I saw airbrushed photos and magazines all around me, for sure, and I definitely felt the beauty pressure and the body pressure (for example, I definitely felt my confidence would be better if I wore concealer to deal with my uneven skintone, and I felt this for years). But I also know that, growing up, I saw both sides. No makeup was the default I saw at home, while makeup was the default I saw outside. And that does play a part, not just in the choices you make, but in the choices that you feel you are allowed to make. No makeup was an option for me because it was what I saw everyday, even with my own insecurities; but if you do not see that as an option around you (and I know for most girls my age, where I grew up, it probably wasn't) then how can we fully argue that the decision you make is a real choice?

If I wanted to wear a cute skirt outside, for example, and decided to shave my legs--that isn't a real choice. And it cannot ever be a real choice, no matter how much I say "this is for me" or "I prefer it like this" because going out in public with hairy legs and going out in public with shaved legs will cause two completely different reactions. How can I separate what I think is "my choice" from a choice I make because I want to avoid the negative looks and comments? And how can I argue that choosing to shave is a freely made choice when the alternative has such negativity? If you feel pressured into choosing one thing over another, that's not a choice. Does this make sense?

This is how I feel about makeup most of the time, and what I want more than anything else is for us to be able to have a conversation about why we make the choices we do beyond saying "it makes me feel good" and ending the conversation there. Again, I'm not saying people need to stop wearing makeup or stop finding enjoyment in wearing it, but I think we tend to get so focused on our own feelings about this and forget that there is a bigger picture and this picture is a deeply unequal one. That is what this conversation is about. I hope this explains some things, anon, and if I misinterpreted anything please feel free to message me again. x

[the-sappho-of-lesbos]

hi, sorry if this isnt a good blog to send this to i just dont know where to turn atm (if this isnt a good blog to ask for help plz lmk where would be better, soz). im 22 and figuring out im sapphic & im trying to join online lesbian spaces but everyone seems so anti-babydyke and im starting to notice that being a lesbian is more about discourse and infighting than it is about wanting to kiss a lady. i thought it was about kissin ladies and thats what i want but how do i make other lesbians not hate me? i feel like all of the other lesbians expect me to have a PhD in lesbianism before i call myself that, before i consider a femme attractive, its like i have to pass thru all these hoops to prove myself even to other queers that im a real lesbian because i can name every lesbian historical figure. again super sorry if this is a bad blog to send this to i do not have a clue who to ask about this or anything im totally lost rn lol (genuinely sorry for literally being that annoying baby dyke ppl complain about rn. ignore me if you want im not gonna be tilted. thx for listening

This isn’t a bad blog to send this too. I’m just genuinely sorry you are going through this and I’m sorry if I don’t have a way to help. But I’ll try my best!! And maybe some more people in the comments will be able to help in ways I can’t.

But just know I’m sending you lots of love and that there isn’t anything wrong with you. At the end of the day, regardless of whatever else is happening, your sexuality really is just simply who you are attracted to. And that’s okay. You are enough ♥️♥️

(I’m also going into this assuming you are at least 18+, so I apologise if I’m wrong on that )

Firstly , you aren’t just seeing things. There is definitely a lot of infighting in the community. Like a lot. I would say it’s typically more intense and in your face online then it is IRL, but I’ve also seen IRL gay groups go really deep off the end with with this stuff.

From what I have read and from people I have talked to, this has sadly sort of always been a thing. We just have different waves of it and different things it might be focused on based on the time period and the world events affecting that at the time. I think in general it’s a very human thing that allllll groups do, but when you are in a marginalised, oppressed and small group of people it can feel a whole lot more concentrated and obvious because there is less room for it to go.

Again, this is just based on conversations I’ve had and things I’ve read, so take it with a grain of salt. But there has also been misunderstandings, disagreements and different beliefs on what things are , what they mean and who should do what in the community. Ranging from politics to fashion to marriage to sex to identities around butch/femme and what it means. For one piece saying something you have another saying something different.

This can cause a lot of confusion and infighting amongst people. A lot of tension at times. And because of trauma a lot of people tend to want to be around people with similar alignments in understanding and belief.

A lot of things can affect that like age , location etc.

But none of that is a reflection of you or your worth or your sexuality. And there ARE people in the same boat as you. Even when it doesn’t feel like it.

There have been waves in the past of some women using and or claiming lesbianism to be a response to sexism. We are currently living in the time after that. And because of that a lot of opinions and thoughts and actions taken place are in a response to that wave. Be it people trying to push it , denounce it , confused by it or hurt by it.

I think this has lead to some of the scaffolding of the current culture we have today.

I understand that need and drive for community and the horrible feeling that can come along when the said community feels like it is in shambles. I feel that way a lot too. And I’m sorry I can’t take that away.

I feel like I’m rambling at this point I’m sorry.

I just want to say though there is nothing you have to prove to anyone. We all figure this stuff out at our own pace. Anyone who treats you poorly for not knowing something or just genuinely not showing interest in it is on them. Your lesbianism doesn’t mean you owe anyone an opinion or a certain way of dressing or feeling. The only person you owe is yourself and that is to show kindness to yourself and be around people who respect you and love you for the wonderful lesbian that you are.

EDIT : I just re-read and you said you are 22 I’m so sorry I missed that 😩

[4th-make-quail]

May I ask a clarifying question on your boundaries? I don’t consider myself “proship” or “anti” as I think those terms are reductive, and two people who may both fit under one label could have incredibly different opinions. However, I believe that the way I interact with media could be something that someone would call “anti”, in that I find it more interesting to look at fiction through the lens of reality rather than “fiction doesn’t effect reality”, by which I mean when reading Lolita I like to go “okay so what is this saying about how the psych profession saw csa at the time?” “How was this influenced by Nabokov’s own experiences?”, I see Marius and Armand as a reflection of child sexual abuse and enjoy analysing it under a more realistic lens, and would find wincest more interesting as a look at enmeshment between siblings under an abusive parent, rather than a ship (although what people mean by the term “ship” is also really vague and can differ wildly).

Based on that, and what you say in your pinned post, would you prefer I don’t interact? I wouldn’t want to make you uncomfortable!

Okay so to preface this, I don't go into much detail in my pinned because I hate the whole thing, and I hate spaces which are super dedicated to the pro/anti discourse. I try to keep my online spaces free of discourse and drama because its simply not fun! I don't want to spend my days steeping in negativity.

This got very long, so I'm gonna put it under a cut!

So. The thing is anon, the proship label originally came about as a response to antis, to describe people who don't actually care what other people ship ("ship and let ship", "your kink is not my kink and that's okay" and all that), but it's been massively conflated these days and now people take it to describe what they call problematic ships or art. You're right about them being reductive terms - and in fact, I have a lot of freak friends who are super into things I personally dislike or am outright squicked by (and vice versa), because we're not a monolith.

My stance entirely is this: I don't care what other people ship. I don't care how they ship it, or how they want to analyse and engage with that source material. I think what people ship and what art people enjoy has no say at all in what their morals might be.

What you describe as how you engage with those pairings is a completely valid interpretation! Preferring to look at a relationship through those lenses is perfectly fine, and in fact lots of people do this under the umbrella of meta.

What I personally mean by "ship" is the usual description - I want those two characters to have a romantic and sexual relationship. However, I also have no issues with people who don't have that viewpoint because it quite literally doesn't affect me unless they go about harassing others.

Liking a "problematic" ship dynamic doesn't mean you also condone that thing in real life. There's a reason one of the top sexual fantasies is noncon (see: any women's magazine list of these), and it's not because the person secretly really wants to be raped in real life. It's because human beings enjoy exploring taboo subjects in a safe and fictional environment.

Where my opinion stands on this is simple. If you think it's okay to harass people for the ships they like, if you think it's acceptable to write call out posts and smear people's names because of the ships they like, then I don't want to know you. If you think liking Marius/Armand makes that person a paedophile, or that liking underage ships leads to the person eventually moving on to real life kids, or that being an incest shipper means you're gonna go fuck your own sibling, again, I don't want to know you.

The same goes for both sides of this frankly stupid issue - far too many people who call themselves proship proudly love to dunk publicly on antis or people who don't share their viewpoints, which imo makes them just as bad! If someone's out there being awful to people who don't ship their problematic ships, then it's just as bad!

This is also why I don't do any DNIs or anything like that. If I see someone start to follow me and they have big obvious "PROSHIP DNI" in their info, then I will go ahead and block them, but otherwise I'm not interested in policing who can interact with me in that way. It's not for me to decide whether someone else wants to interact with me, it's on you to decide if you want to.

I'm not gonna be going out and ripping on people who dislike a ship I like, or who engage with art in a different way to me. However, if I come across posts in my tracked tags or on my dash expressing anti sentiments, or going on a negative rant about something I love, then I will also probably unfortunately be blocking that person. I don't like seeing negativity about shit I love on my dash or in the tags (really, does anybody? lol) so I'm proactive about that because a) it depresses me, and b) I spent a long time in the ffxiv fandom, where people think liking Garleans makes you a nazi apologist, and where they love to go on ranting screeds about how my favourite characters should die painfully, and I'm honestly not about that in my fandom life.

Anyway, all this to say: if you're comfortable interacting with me, a Marius/Armand bitch who does indeed enjoy their fucked up relationship because of how fucked up it is (and finds it incredibly sexy, actually), then I'm fine with you interacting with me. I'm not gonna be sharing or posting about that specific ship anyway, and I'm certainly not gonna be awful about people who find it distasteful or triggering or even just plain don't like it for whatever reason. It won't make me uncomfortable in any way to interact with you because you engage with those things in a different way to me, as long as you don't also engage in the other activities I discussed further up.

Sorry this got so long, anon! Hopefully it all makes sense. As an aside, I'm not interested in having any debates about these issues with anyone and will not be engaging with arguments about it. Sensible discussion, yes. Arguments, discourse and wank? No. Thank you for understanding! 💚

[mdhwrites]

What's your opinion on people who react badly when a protagonist has to go back to the 'real world' or a work invokes 'the magic is gone' or things along those lines? The whimsy goes. And some people may miss that and react badly, like this person who's clearly upset about Luz going back to human high school. (https://www.tumblr.com/let-us-cultivate-our-garden/757763502606843904/do-you-think-toh-made-people-care-and-then-ripped) Some people may think it needlessly depressing, saying magic always has to permanently go. Some people may be using the magic to cope with something and may be upset when it leaves. Some people may be dealing with a bad situation in the 'real world' and may not like the work saying the real world is always the best choice, because most if not all of what they know in their own world is depressing and sometimes downright harmful.

What do you think?

Show sympathy. Show empathy. All creations seek to connect with their audience in some way. To evoke an emotion. Those which we hold closest to ourselves will have always managed to touch something deep inside of us. That is simply the truth of art. As such, when someone has a negative reaction, you should not mock them. You should not judge them for having put their personal experiences upon it. That is the job of art.

When this blog first came out, it hit the Reddit and then someone shared it on my Discord. I looked at it, thought Garden essentially gave the perfect response to the ask, and then I looked at the comments. The comments were a reminder that people see it as okay to be personal with a work only if you treat it positively. That your bias positively makes it inspiration. Your bias negatively makes you delusional and a freak. That isn't fair because in both situations, you are this way for the same reason: Because it means something to you. Why should we glorify people devoting themselves to a work like it's a religion but then condemn those who turn their backs on it when spurned by the text?

The world is a rough and cruel place. It has many harsh lessons to teach us. Escapist fiction will always be popular but it's especially popular right now because to many, we feel especially helpless and hopeless. We look to these works as bastions from the storm that is life. A chance to breathe until we are ready to plunge back in. When that bastion crumbles from beneath you, when you come out of the waters and find it missing when you thought it would be there forever, an eternal piece of your heart... What should be your response?

This is why I say to show sympathy. Reach out a hand and remind them that fiction is not the only bastion they can search for. That reality itself can hold its own kindnesses and care for you and pull them out of the waves. Only then can they heal and learn to let go, rather than adding to the storm with their own cries of anguish. Remember they are a person and just like you, they deserve to be shown kindness, not ridicule. See you next tale.

======+++++======

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

[chaos-thirium]

Prompt: A stoic Nines and reader. The words? Spoken by Nines: "Don't do this."

:o

Thank you for the ask! 💙 I wasn't sure which direction to go for this one, and therefore it went somewhere quite random. Hopefully you don't mind!

From this prompt list if anyone wants to request one too 😊

“Don’t do this,” he said.

His face was unreadable. It often was, although you’d gotten good at translating his micro-expressions over the last few months. There was nothing there now, only a beautiful, stoic mask. Ironically, his lack of expression told you plenty about what he was thinking.

“Nines,” you began. A warning.

The graveness in his voice took you aback. You’d been expecting him to mask his tone as much as his face. Perhaps he’d realised how little he could hide from you. It was a flattering thought, considering how he could fool almost everyone else. You wondered when he’d figure out why that was.

“I have to,” you said.

“You don’t, actually.”

“And let someone else do it? How is that fair?”

He had no answer for that, and for a moment his lips moved in a disgruntled twist.

“I don’t like it,” he stated flatly.

You couldn’t help the little amused smile that found its way onto your face. It wasn’t often that Nines allowed himself to say something so unnecessary.

“Your opinion is noted,” you said. “But it’s got to be done, and I’m not gonna duck the responsibility. What kind of example is that to set?”

You started walking, only for him to stubbornly fall into step beside you.

“I don’t want you to get taken advantage of,” he admitted.

You fought back a smile. “I won’t be.”

Something new seemed to occur to Nines, and his usual perfectly-calibrated gait almost faltered, causing a clumsy step that was too subtle to be called a stumble, but was an unheard-of display of inelegance for him.

“I…forgive me, I…I’ve misinterpreted the situation.”

You shot him a sidelong glance, unsure what was going through his head. You hoped you knew what it was, but you couldn’t be certain. Not yet.

“Have you?” you asked simply.

“I believe so. I did not realise the…attention…was welcomed.”

There was an edge to his voice that sparked more hope in your chest, and you wasted no time in calling him on it.

“Nines, are you jealous?”

“Of course not,” he retorted immediately.

It was such a human response, so defensive, that you couldn’t help smiling. You’d reached your goal, however, so you put the conversation on hold.

After studying the slumped figure in front of you for a beat, you lightly punched it in the arm, eliciting a groan.

Gavin lifted his head, eyes glassy, squinting as he struggled to focus on you. He never could handle strong liquor.

“There you are,” he slurred. “You’re so fucking gorgeous. Come home with me, I’ll show you a good time.”

You sighed, unimpressed, and Nines looked set to snap his neck then and there.

“I’m taking you home,” you said to Gavin, “but I’m leaving you there. Alone. To sober up.”

“I’m fine.”

“You’re not fine, I just found you passed out in a bar.”

“I was juss taking a nap,” he protested. “Getting my energy back for you.” He tried to wink, but it seemed to confuse him greatly, and he blinked slowly at you like a sleepy cat.

Slinging his arm across your shoulders, you hoisted him off his bar stool. He was so far gone, he didn’t resist, sagging against you as you struggled to hold him up.

“Mmm you feel good,” he mumbled, hot, sour breath on your face.

You grimaced, but started to lead him out of the bar. Nines stepped up to help you, taking most of Gavin’s weight. His expression was so murderous, it might have been entertaining if you weren’t distracted by Gavin’s horrendous attempts at flirting. You’d thought they were bad enough when he was sober.

Nines was truly jealous of this?

You needed to reinforce his self-esteem.

It was a blessedly short trip to Gavin’s apartment, made to feel longer by how talkative he suddenly was. You and Nines wrestled him onto his bed, where he tried to make you lie down with him, apparently unbothered by the android’s presence. You even went as far as to leave him a glass of water and some aspirin for when he woke up, which was above and beyond, in your opinion. Thankfully, he was snoring gently by the time you left.

“Thanks,” you said to Nines as the two of you made your way out of the building. “You didn’t have to help, but I’m glad you did. He’s heavier than he looks.”

He acknowledged your thanks with a nod, but his words broached another subject. “You didn’t want to stay?”

“Hell no.”

“But I thought…”

“Yeah, why? I thought you knew me better than that. I have standards, you know.”

His LED spun yellow as he processed.

“Nines,” you ventured, tone softer. “Why were you so set against me taking him home? Was it because you thought I’d want to stay?”

“No, it’s like I said, I didn’t want to risk him taking advantage of you in his inebriated state.”

“I can handle him. What’s really going on?”

“Friendly concern,” he said. The mask was back.

You inwardly sighed. It seemed you were going to have to steer the conversation more than you’d initially intended.

“And you’re certain you weren’t jealous?” you asked, taking a step closer to him.

“I…” He faltered at your nearness, LED flickering.

“Because honestly, if he was flirting with you and I thought you liked it, I’d be jealous too,” you said. Meeting his intense, icy gaze, you played your entire hand. “Actually, I’d be jealous if you liked anyone’s attention more than mine.”

He tilted his head, considering you for a long second or two. “Truly?”

You nodded.

“I see.”

You nodded again.

“That changes things,” he declared.

“It does?” you said hopefully.

“Yes. Because now I have a hard decision to make.”

You eyed him with concern, unsure what his stoicism was hiding this time. “Oh?”

“Yes. Do we go to your place or mine?”

You let out a relieved laugh, looking up at him as he closed the gap between you further. “You know the answer to that.”

Nines shot you a wicked smirk. “Yes: whichever one is closest.”

[dragoneyes618]

Recent decisions against Israel by the International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice, which are clearly intended to rescue Hamas and aid and abet its genocidal war on the Jewish state, can only reinforce a truism often expressed by Israelis: Kol ha’olam negdeinu. “The whole world is against us.”

Israelis have reason enough to feel this way, but it is worth asking whether it’s actually true. What, after all, is the “whole world”?

If the term refers to world popular opinion, then it is almost certainly wrong. It is unlikely that the majority of the world’s 8 billion human beings particularly care about Israel. If they do, it can only be in the most shallow and cursory way.

In another sense, however, Israelis’ angry rumination is quite accurate: What is often called the “international community” is most certainly against Israel.

The phrase “international community” is usually used as shorthand for the entire world. In fact, the international community is an elite, a clique, even something like a religious sect. It is made up of the vanishingly small minority of privileged and powerful people who work at or with an alphabet soup of international organizations and NGOs led by the United Nations.

It is worth emphasizing how small this cabal actually is. The largest international organization—the United Nations—employs some 116,000 people in total. This is approximately half the number employed by Microsoft. Most international organizations, including ostensibly independent NGOs, are much smaller. Even with various envoys and diplomats from each participating country thrown in, it is highly unlikely that the “international community” consists of more than 500,000 people. If, for the sake of argument, we double that number to 1 million, it would constitute only 0.0125% of the global population. This may be a “community” and is certainly “international,” but it is by no means “the world.”

This tiny sect received its privileges via a series of historical anomalies. It was constructed out of the wreckage of World War II when, hoping to prevent a World War III, the victorious Allies formed the United Nations—the brainchild of progressive U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who hoped to realize his predecessor Woodrow Wilson’s failed vision of the League of Nations.

Indeed, for a brief moment before the Cold War began in earnest, there were wild hopes that the United Nations would usher in a new era in human history: Disputes and conflicts would be settled according to international law via what was essentially an enormous debating society/charitable organization. The old imperial rivalries and balance-of-power diplomacy would disappear. War would become a thing of the past. The blessings of liberty and democracy would be bestowed upon the entire human race.

Needless to say, it didn’t happen. History continued on exactly as it had before: The great powers and the balance between them continued to define global affairs, and a third world war was prevented not by the world body but by the atomic bomb. In response, however, the international community that grew up around the United Nations simply pretended this was not the case. Instead, it created a hermetic bubble in which the international community was competent and effective at its job of ensuring peace and dispensing global charity. This should not have been surprising. After all, those involved made good money out of the charade.

This perpetual farce would have been amusing but not disastrous except for the fact that the international community swiftly began to take on a very sinister form. The reasons are well-known. Put simply, most of those who made up the international community represented authoritarian or totalitarian regimes. Thus, the international community inevitably became more and more amenable to authoritarianism and totalitarianism, so long as it was practiced by the right people. Beginning in the 1970s, as terrorism became a major tool of the world’s tyrants, the international community increasingly endorsed the most horrendous atrocities and the organizations that committed them. It was inevitable that this would end in a scramble to rescue a genocidal terrorist organization from near-certain destruction.

The international community, in other words, ceased to be farce and became a weapon—a kind of diplomatic suicide-bomber. For example, it is very doubtful that Hamas would have launched the Oct. 7 attack if it did not think that the international community would rescue it from Israel’s retaliation. We don’t yet know if Hamas was wrong. The blood of a great many people, in other words, is on the international community’s hands.

Clearly, in its current state, the international community has no right to exist. This raises a complex dilemma, however, which is if and how to replace it.

Despite the difficulties, it isn’t hard to see how alternative institutions could be created. For example, the democratic nations and their allies could easily form their own independent alignments like NATO without bankrolling a gang of parasites dedicated to enabling crimes against humanity in the name of human rights.

Moreover, if the international community did not exist, very little would change. The old ways of doing things have persisted and will likely continue to do so. International affairs would go on much as they always have through balance-of-power diplomacy. The only difference would be that the world would be free of much of the terrorism and war that the international community fosters through collaborationism and corruption.

More importantly, perhaps, the world will at last have accepted reality. This is a good thing in and of itself. It is dangerous to live by lies because the results are always incompetence, hypocrisy and ultimately self-destruction. Thus the essential admonition: If something isn’t working, stop doing it.

The international community is not working. Because it is not working, it is killing people. It’s time for those disinclined towards terrorism, genocide and their attendant pathologies to give up on the mad dreams of long-dead progressives. They must finally pull the curtain down on a blood-soaked and very expensive farce that has already gone on for far too long.

[utilitycaster]

If you don't mind me asking, what are your thoughts on the FDA?

There's been some mixed response to the FDA in Ravening War, particularly with some thinking it's kinda railroad-y and that it takes away the players' agency wrt the PCs involvement in the war

I think it's a fairly common way to get the group together in D&D but I'm waiting for more episodes to fully form an opinion on them

I have not seen this opinion, which is good, because it’s unbelievably fucking stupid. You are correct: this is just…how you tell a D&D story.

I think to properly understand the true depths of idiocy here, we need to understand what “railroading” is and what “player agency” is, so let’s start with “railroading”. The following response is like 2.5 pages in Google Docs (single spaced, font size 11) so it’s below a read more. I’ll note that in the abstract, sure, the concept of a secret society recruiting the party could have been executed in a way that was heavily railroaded and impinges on player agency, but at no point in the two episodes we’ve seen has that been the case with the FDA, which is why this take is so dumb.

Railroading is, imo, a neutral concept; I think it was Matt Colville who said “people seem to like trains, which, by definition, are on rails unless something really bad happened” or something to that effect. That doesn’t mean you can’t criticize railroading in TTRPG actual play (or home games), but, like all criticism that is not about one’s personal taste alone, it requires context. The most neutral way to define railroading is that the DM has pre-determined a certain path that the players cannot ultimately change. It is not the DM offering hooks that the characters will likely be interested in; it is not the DM simply having things happen that the players didn’t control. The whole point of the DM is that they build the world, which moves even when the players aren’t making it happen, the same way that you, an individual human being, exist in a world where things not caused by you and 2-6 other people occur. Is it railroading for the DM to say it’s raining when it wasn’t caused by a player’s Control Weather spell? Is it railroading for bandits to attack you on the road? No - those are just the world existing. And if the rain floods the nearby village and in helping it you learn of a quest, or the bandits steal your sword, and you follow these leads, that is not railroading; that’s called “the DM is making things happen so that a story is possible, and you should thank them and pay for snacks.”

Railroading becomes a problem when the players really don’t have any choices and truly cannot influence the outcome. I have a preference for more open-world/sandbox games, but railroading has its place. Notably, The Ravening War as a series should be pretty on rails. It’s a prequel, so the ending is already set and immutable. It’s also a limited series of six episodes. You cannot make a limited series an open world where the players can fuck around endlessly: you need to have a hook and you need to get the action going quickly, because, again, only six episodes.

Railroading can be used to good effect if the players can still influence elements of the outcome; the actual apogee solstice episode in Critical Role C3, while the build-up did get a little too rigid for my taste, was a great encounter that was pretty heavily on rails. I don’t think that Bells Hells really could have done anything to prevent the ritual fully - they were simply too outclassed. But I think had they not done the sabotage they did, the solstice effects may have been significantly worse and the situation now more dire, and had they perhaps made some different choices or just rolled better, they might have freed Caleb or Beau, or swayed Liliana, and the effects would be lessened and they’d have more allies. They still could make actions that influenced the outcome, even if aspects of the outcome were virtually impossible to change. (The same is true of Calamity - Calamity is happening regardless, but the players’ choices still very much tell the story).

The FDA is not railroading: it is a premise. It is a hook. The players could have turned it down both in the initial summons and the one in last night’s episode. They are not doing this, because everyone at this table is a good and collaborative D&D player aware that this is a limited series and that this is the premise. A lot of edgy losers who suck ass at D&D see the DM dangling an interesting hook and deliberately try to avoid it as some flat attempt at “subversion”, and those people are miserable to play with and even more miserable to watch. There’s nothing wrong with doing the unexpected! But when I think of great unexpected moments in actual play, they’re moments that still move the story forward and are collaborative; they just solve an encounter in a way the DM didn’t foresee. It’s good improv: it’s “yes and HERE’S A WILD TWIST”, not “Nope.”

I should also note that D20 is famously pretty heavily railroaded. The first few seasons were strictly pushed into a very artificial RP/Combat alternating pattern with pre-made battle maps, to the point that when the Bloodkeep crew bonded it required a rapid rework of the final battle because PvP had been assumed, and when the Bad Kids had two deaths in the first episode they were sent back in a frantic deus ex machina and then when they dispatched with too many enemies too quickly they were sent to jail for most of an episode. Which isn’t bad - again, you have to be on rails to an extent in a limited campaign, and these were early episodes when Brennan and his players were still adjusting to D20’s specific format. But to call out the FDA as railroading…I already used the phrase “to call this brain dead generously assumes the person saying it has a brain” today but I have to use it once more because truly, this is standard D&D and standard storytelling, to have a call to a strange event. This is no different than most of the Bad Kids getting detention in the very first episode of Fantasy High. They could have skipped it, but they didn’t.

And why didn’t they? Well, that brings us to player agency. Player agency is an even more fraught term than railroading, and it’s used to mean basically anything. It comes up a lot in why someone’s favorite TTRPG is the best, usually as a meaningless buzzword.

At its core, player agency really just means that the players have an ability to, through actions supported by the gameplay of the system they are using, influence the world in some way (ie, the railroading is not so locked down so as to make their actions entirely irrelevant). It means they are not stuck in a novel narrated by the GM, but rather are part of the collaborative storytelling. That’s it. Anyone who says differently is selling something, and the thing they are selling is probably a playbook for PbtA.

The thing about player agency is that technically, you can do quite a lot, but again, if your goal is to tell a collaborative story, you will probably at least check out DM hooks, even if you reject them, and you will probably at least consider what your other party members are doing and try to stick with them. There are narratives that D&D (or whatever TTRPG you are playing) and the setting your GM has created and any other restrictions you may have simply do not support well; a war where the five players are all openly fighting on different sides (or even on two different sides) is not something that is well-supported in under 18 hours of D&D. There does, for standard D&D practices, need to be some kind of unifying task! And the FDA is it. Players can still decide to pursue their own interests, and have, but they also have the FDA - which they are also, presumably, interested in! It’s not a lack of player agency if the DM says “hey you’re being recruited by a COOL SECRET ORGANIZAITON” and the players say “HELL YEAH COOL SECRET ORGANIZATION”.

I could go on about player agency forever, honestly, and you’re welcome to ask me more, but on some level it feels like the “but player agency!” crowd interprets “people considering the feelings of the other players and wanting to play in the space the GM has created instead of making a supremely self-indulgent OC as their character and acting on pure unadulterated selfishness” as a restriction on player agency. I mean, where does it stop? If the FDA is a limit on player agency by providing a compelling shared goal for five disparate characters with a complex system of alliances and interests, should the players have played characters all unambiguously on the same side so that the FDA wouldn’t be necessary as a device? Wouldn’t that be limiting their agency on the character creation side of things? Hell, why do they have to play characters from Calorum at that point? Obviously this is ridiculous, but this line of thinking is actually bizarrely common; people make D&D PCs with no thought to the setting or party comp all the time. The players absolutely could have said no, and that could have been a great story too - of five people running from this summons and bonding over that! But that still requires the summons. The DM is a player, and yeah, they have a bit more control as the worldbuilder, but also put in far more work and have far less room to fuck around. This is fundamentally how D&D works. It’s okay if you don’t like it and want true freeform improv fantasy, but then you should perhaps not be watching D&D actual play.

So: this is a very typical D&D premise, and a not uncommon low fantasy intrigue premise. The way stories in general start is when a person or group of people experiences a change that leads to some form of conflict, and for D&D specifically it’s typically a group of people experiencing some kind of event that brings them together. The FDA gathering the party is that event for The Ravening War. This is a story of five characters brought together in a secret society. The person who expressed the take that it was railroading or a limitation on player agency, rather than like, how fiction works, is a complete and utter idiot.

[powerofmettatonneo]

An essay I wrote for psychology class that I'm really proud of:

On April 28th, 2019, Max Carpendale from the website Effective Altruism Forum interviewed biologist Jon Mallatt, the author of the books Ancient Origins of Consciousness and Consciousness Demystified. The main topic of conversation was the development and borders of consciousness throughout the animal kingdom. So, before going any further, we have to ask: what is consciousness? To quote the textbook (4.1), “consciousness describes our awareness of internal and external stimuli.” One of the main questions involving consciousness is what its limits are. Obviously, humans are conscious, but what about birds? Fish? Ants? Jellyfish? It’s hard to say. Mallat defines consciousness as the ability to “feel anything at all”, which is determined by having multiple sensory inputs to be able to form a mental or cognitive map of the world. This then implies the existence of latent learning and memory in the given organism.

One of the key tests for consciousness is the ability to receive positive and negative inputs. This may or may not be necessary for consciousness, but it proves its presence. There are multiple tests for this, but the most commonly performed is pain. This is itself difficult to determine. Mallatt only briefly touches on this topic, suggesting that crustaceans feel pain while insects and fish may experience momentary pain but not long term suffering. To explain that second part, if I were to stab you, it would hurt, but far worse would be the pain afterwards as your body tries to recover. Mallat is saying that insects and fish would only feel the initial pain of being stabbed and not the recovery. I have to disagree; it’s hard to think of a form of pain that wouldn’t result in long term suffering when general noxious stimuli exist in the almost certainly non conscious plants that might better explain their behavior. Instead, I went searching for an alternate model, and I found one created by the same person who wrote one of Mallat’s sources, one Robert W. Elwood, in the article Pain and stress in crustaceans?

They gave a seven criteria model, which includes:

(1) a suitable central nervous system and receptors, (2) avoidance learning, (3) protective motor reactions that might include reduced use of the affected area, limping, rubbing, holding or autotomy [shedding], (4) physiological changes, (5) trade-offs between stimulus avoidance and other motivational requirements, (6) opioid receptors and evidence of reduced pain experience if treated with local anesthetics or analgesics, and (7) high cognitive ability and sentience.

According to their model, vertebrates (including mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish), cephalopods, and crustaceans possess all seven criteria. More controversial are insects, who possess four criteria (those being the fact that they possess a central nervous system, exhibit avoidance learning, exhibit physiological changes, and have a cognitive ability); on the other hand, they lack three criteria (protective motor responses, motivational trade-offs, and anesthesia response). Regardless, crustaceans, which have far more evidence for pain, also have a relatively low neuron count (100,000), suggesting that animals of a similar intelligence are also conscious, namely other arthropods (insects, arachnids, millipedes and centipedes). However, this still fails to definitively point to the boundary of consciousness, simply moving it down. Is there a way to instead measure if an animal has a cognitive map directly?

Yes, actually. Both nematodes and sea hares (a gastropod) have had their nervous systems completely mapped out, and while sea hares have shown evidence of latent learning and complex senses, nematodes lack any senses except for an extremely simplistic sense of smell, preventing them from ever creating a mental map of their environment. There are still a lot of animals that fall in between these, and I have my own opinions on them, but without further research, they’re more of a hypothesis than anything; in particular, some deep sea predatory worms were called out by Mallatt as having advanced senses.

Also of note, of the four clades of scientifically proven conscious animals, only two (gastropods and cephalopods) are closely related, meaning that consciousness has evolved at least three or four separate times.

[fairuzfan]

i try to tag posts that reference violence on palestinians with a content warning saying at much so that if a palestinian wants to mute tags about their families' murders they are able to do so. if a palestinian wants to come on tumblr and just see shitposts and pretend their homeland and their families and their culture are not in imminent danger for just 15 minutes just to maintain their sanity, i do not want to be the reason that they can't.

i know my intentions are in the right place but i've also seen many people (understandably) saying that adding content warnings is invalidating (not sure if that's the best word but whatever) because it illustrates the fact that non palestinians have luxury in the ability to look away from all this while palestinian do not. and because people "taking breaks" from it all is actively harmful to palestinians because aside from being a complicit bystander it also means the voices of palestinians can't reach as far because they aren't amplified.

do you think it's appropriate to be adding these content warnings or am i simply enabling the people who want to pretend stepping away isn't just supporting genocide by default?

You know, I've honestly been thinking about this a lot too as I see more conversation around... I think it's admirable that you're thinking of your Palestinian followers! But I think, personally, I wouldn't content warn the posts for them.

Most Palestinians, at least from experience, are already refreshing their feeds, trying to see 5 million different news sources, so a lot of what I personally see regarding news here isn't.... news to me, and I know for a lot of other Palestinians that's true also.

While I'm grateful that people are wanting to help protect Palestinians, it does irk me a little when I see "cw:"/"tw:" tags mostly because it feels like its more for nonPalestinians rather than Palestinians. Most of my posts, at least, aren't so much for other Palestinians as they are for educating nonPalestinians, so when I see something tagged as "tw: genocide," I'm thinking "who is blocking this tag right now and for why?"

In all honesty, even for Palestinians, I do think its important to not tag these posts with content warnings because Gazans are asking us to bear witness to what's happening to them. I've seen some grizzly photos and videos, and if there's something I *really* can't handle, I click away. But it's all of our responsibility not to ignore them as they plead for someone to keep looking.

For Palestinians that do want to take some breaks — which I think is totally necessary since, well, we're human — I don't think they'll be looking to social media because they'll naturally be checking the news. I get off my phone and talk to someone when I'm overwhelmed. A lot of the time, its about Palestine, yeah, but at least I'm not by myself.

Right now, the biggest solace for a lot of Palestinians is that they see that other people who are not Palestinian are talking about this nonstop. So personally, I'd advise against content warnings for Palestine posts. Though others may have a different opinion.

Thanks for the question!!

[lostcauses-noregrets]

Since I love your takes and it's Erwin's month, I want to share a interpretation of mine about Erwin and see your opinion about it! I'm sorry its damn long, and excuse my English. I hope you can read it properly. I know many fans think the opposite but: I don't see Erwin as a dad. [1/6]

I've read a lot of fanfics were Erwin has kids, either his own or adopted. And every time I read them, not matter what, I don't buy it at all. I don't see Erwin as a family man. I think he's a person that values his own freedom and his passions. And I think a kid would be too much responsibility. When you have a kid, they become your number one priority and now everything in your life has to take them into account. And honestly, I don't see Erwin doing that. [2/6] Lot of people see him as a dad (I do think he has dorky dad energy haha) because of that smartpass where he says if titans didn't exist he'd probably start a family. Which imo even doesn't sound credible at all. His response being "Retire to a reclusive area, or maybe have a family." He doesn't even sound sure. I even think that his real answer is the first one but then went 'I need to be more relatable and likeable for this interview. What do normal people want? Right. Having a family.' [4/6] Also he tries to ignore the question until Levi presses him to answer. I think Erwin's personality is intrinsically linked to his dream, so there's no life in which his dream does not exist. He even expressed that in canon when levi asked him what would he do after his dream and him saying 'I don't know'. I think he is a man of passion and goals, and even in a peaceful world he'd still be that passionate over other things that is not being a family man. [5/6] Not that you can't be both...but I don't see him that way. It seems too mundane and (like every other Scout) he is anything but so. I see him as a character that is way too 'think outside of the box/ reject and question what you are told' for his dream being so mundane as having a nuclear family. In a happier au, he is your history professor who very passionately criticizes imperialism and capitalism and has no kids (but probably a certain short, black-haired husband) [6/6]

Hi Anon,  unfortunately part of your ask [3/6] has gone awol, but there’s enough here for me to understand your question.  First of all, it goes without saying that you’re entirely entitled to view a character any way you want, however since you asked my opinion, I’d say that while I agree with some of your reasoning, I don’t agree with all of it. 

Personally I’m not a fan of fics where Erwin is a parent, but that’s not because I can’t see him as a parent, it’s more to do with my own taste in fiction.  There are simply other things I’d rather read about.  That aside, I do agree that Erwin doesn’t seem entirely sure about his future plans in the Smarpass interview, however the same could be said for Levi, and yet very few fans question his desire to open a tea shop.  I think the whole point of this exchange is that both Erwin and Levi are so focused on their goal of saving humanity that neither of them have thought beyond that.  Here’s the exchange in full from @yusenki's translation.

J: Then let’s not talk about that for now. How about just your own future dreams? L: Talking about future dreams at this age…how interesting. What do you think, Erwin? E: As for me…right. Retire to a reclusive area, or maybe have a family. J: I am surprised that commander seems surprisingly relaxed about this. E: My mind is currently filled with matters concerning the world, so I’m not in a position to pursue any dreams. But either way, you could say that I have an ordinary dream. L: How interesting. Your kids won’t be cute for sure. E: How about you, Levi? Would you go from hero to politician? L: That’s impossible. How could you even ask something that is so obvious?! J: Please tell us about your dream, captain. L: Just like this guy, my mind has no room for dreams right now. However if you want me to give you a casual answer, then…how about opening a black tea store? E: This is also so interesting! From a hero who flies around slaughtering titans outside the wall to an owner of delicious tea shop within the wall? J: Both of your answers are so unexpected. Is this because of the harsh realities you live in at this moment? E: Yes. The realization of our own dreams is less important than building a world for people, a place where humans can accomplish their own dreams. L: I don’t have much concern for my own matters, but it’s interesting to think about.

I know that there are a lot of fans who believe that Erwin’s dream is so intrinsic to who he is that he would be lost without it, and like you, they cite this scene in chapter 70 as evidence.  I've never believed that’s the case.  I think Erwin’s reply to Levi here is simply honest and pragmatic.  He’s not saying he has no interest in future plans, he’s just saying he’ll have to wait and see. Under the circumstances, that seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Anyway, I’m getting a bit off topic here.  You said that you can’t see Erwin being a parent because he values his freedom too much, it’s too great a responsibility, and having a family seems too mundane a fate for him. Raising children is certainly a responsibility, but it doesn’t have to be mundane, far from it.  I’ve never seen Erwin as the kind of man to avoid responsibility and I think it’s exactly his “think outside the box” qualities that would make him a brilliant, if unorthodox, parent. Erwin is a generous man with endless curiosity, I can see him as the kind of parent who would delight in children’s natural curiosity and encourage their sense of adventure. 

Having said all that, I suspect there is one thing that would prevent Erwin from becoming a parent; I don’t think he would believe himself worthy of the privilege of raising children.  Even if Erwin had survived the war and lived to see his father’s theories vindicated, I think he would still have carried a huge burden of guilt from his father’s death and that would have coloured his own view of his fitness to be a father himself. 

Thanks for your ask Anon, this is certainly an interesting question, and I hope you don’t mind if I partially disagree with your perspective. 

[babyrdie]

Which version of Achilles’s death do you prefer?

Apollo + Paris, no Polyxena.

There are versions where only Apollo kills Achilles (for example, Hyginus offers such a version and Sophocles in Philoctetes says that Apollo killed Achilles without mentioning Paris), but I prefer to keep Paris because it is the most common version and I tend to keep as much as possible the versions that were most used. In any case, the most important element in my opinion is Apollo, since he's present in practically all versions.

I don't consider Polyxena because I use Homer's version, in which she isn't mentioned and Achilles' death is attributed to Paris + Apollo, mixed with Quintus' version, in which the death is actually described and not just mentioned and again Polyxena doesn't have a role.

Also, I don't find the idea of ​​Achilles asking for Polyxena as a sacrifice because of her participation in his death or because of some interest he had in her that interesting. The oldest sources of Polyxena's sacrifice don't mention either of those things, and the impression I get is that he asked for the sacrifice simply because he saw it as a reward. And honestly, I find this idea much more interesting. More cruel too because then Polyxena would have nothing to do with him, but a version being more cruel doesn't make it worse.

In Hecuba (E. P. Coleridge's translation), the ghost of Polydorus describes the situation thus:

Meanwhile all the Achaeans sit idly here in their ships at the shores of Thrace; for the son of Peleus, Achilles, appeared above his tomb and stopped the whole army of Hellas, as they were making straight for home across the sea, demanding to have my sister Polyxena offered at his tomb, and to receive his reward. And he will obtain this prize, nor will they that are his friends refuse the gift; and on this very day fate is leading my sister to her doom.

Hecuba describes it this way:

And this too filled me with fear; over the summit of his tomb appeared Achilles' phantom, and for his prize he would have one of the luckless maids of Troy.

Chorus describet it this way:

It is said the Achaeans have determined in full assembly to offer your daughter in sacrifice to Achilles; for you know how one day he appeared standing on his tomb in golden armor, and stayed the sea-borne ships, though they had their sails already hoisted, with this pealing cry: “Where away so fast, you Danaids, leaving my tomb without its prize?”

Hecuba even questions the justice of this, stating that Achilles didn't even ask for those really responsible for his death, since Polyxena never hurt him. And we know that Hecuba isn't just talking about literally taking a weapon and hurting him, since, irritated, she says it should be Helen. In other words, she considers even indirect interventions as hurting:

But tell me, what kind of cleverness did they think it, when against this child they passed their bloody vote? Was it duty that led them to slay a human victim at the tomb, where sacrifice of oxen is more fitting? or does Achilles, if claiming the lives of those who slew him as his recompense, show his justice by marking her out for death? No! she at least never injured him. He should have demanded Helen as a victim at his tomb, for she it was that proved his ruin, bringing him to Troy; or if some captive of surpassing beauty was to be singled out for death, this did not point to us; for the daughter of Tyndareus was fairest of all, and her injury to him was proved no less than ours. Against the justice of his plea I pit this argument.

Talthybius describes the sacrifice as follows:

Lady, you wish me to have a double benefit of tears in pity for your child; for now too as I tell the sad tale my eyes will be wet, as they were at the tomb when she was dying. All Achaea's army was gathered there in full array before the tomb to see your daughter sacrificed; and the son of Achilles took Polyxena by the hand and set her on the top of the mound, while I was near; and a chosen band of young Achaeans followed to hold your child and prevent her struggling. Then Achilles' son took in his hands a brimming cup of gold and raised in his hand an offering to his dead father, making a sign to me to proclaim silence throughout the Achaean army. So I stood at his side and in their midst proclaimed, “Silence, you Achaeans! let all the people be silent! peace! be still!” So I hushed the army. Then he spoke: “Son of Peleus, my father, accept the offering I pour for you to appease your spirit, strong to raise the dead; and come to drink the black blood of a pure girl, which I and the army are offering you; oh! be propitious to us; grant that we may loose our prows and the cables of our ships, and, meeting with a prosperous voyage from Ilium, all come to our country.” So he spoke; and all the army echoed his prayer. Then seizing his golden sword by the hilt he drew it from its scabbard, signing to the picked young Argive warriors to hold the maid. But she, when she perceived it, uttered this speech: “O Argives, who have sacked my city! of my free will I die; let no one lay hand on me; for bravely will I yield my neck. By the gods, leave me free; so slay me, that death may find me free; for to be called a slave among the dead fills my royal heart with shame.”

So it seems to me that in Euripides' version Achilles chose Polyxena — at least, Odysseus says it has to be Polyxena when Hecuba tries to be sacrificed in her place —, but not because Polyxena did something that made him want her dead. Like, not because she helped kill him (Hecuba says she didn't, and nothing in the text suggests that she did) or because he's interested in her — there's nothing in the text to suggest that Achilles had feelings for her. He simply wanted Polyxena as a way to honor him, as a reward, something the characters reinforce over and over again. It wouldn't be the first time Achilles has considered Trojan sacrifice as a reward for someone, since in The Iliad he actually sacrifices Trojans at Patroclus' funeral, and none of those Trojans were people he had anything to do with.

Furthermore, Achilles in Hecuba is, narratively speaking, in the same position as Artemis in Euripides' Iphigenia at Aulis. Someone (Achilles/Artemis) is supposed to stop the winds because they are displeased with the Achaeans, this someone demands the sacrifice of an innocent maiden who has nothing to do with the situation (Polyxena/Iphigenia), someone tries to prevent this (Hecuba/Clytemnestra and Achilles) but in the end the maiden accepts to be sacrificed (because it is a way to escape slavery/because she sees it as an act of patriotic heroism). So I interpret that, just as Iphigena did nothing against Artemis, Polyxena also did nothing against Achilles. And the thing is: there is no moment in the play that indicates that she did and in the oldest sources she clearly did not.

The tragedy is all the greater for me when, despite having done nothing to offend or draw Achilles' attention, she is the one chosen. Therefore, a mixture of Homer + Quintus + Euripides.

[orionsangel86]

I've written extensively about how the ending of Sandman has questionable implications, but damn, your response to that other post really made me think about the questionable implications of the start too. Like, it really does basically say "solitary confinement can be a good thing that leads to reform." Which. Yikes.

Then again, for a cosmic entity I guess there are very few other ways you could get through to them. And years of confinement for a billions of years old entity isn't the same as it is for a human because of the difference in timespan involved. But still... it's like when American TV shows started trying to make torture look good and heroic post 9-11.

It's EXTRA bad when taken in conjunction with the ending implications. Like, together it boils down to "solitary confinement is good thing because it made Morpheus reconsider his impact on the world, and thus he killed himself to make the universe better, which we should be happy about." Which is one HELL of a take to have!

It's really difficult to not find these interpretations when analysing the source material. There is some eyebrow raising stuff in the Sandman comics that I wonder exactly what Neil was trying to say with them.

I think a lot of these more controversial interpretations boil down to the concept that Morpheus is not meant to a relateable and human character. He is meant to be other, he is meant to be fundamentally flawed and unable to change who he is because he exists in such a way that human minds simply can not comprehend. The tragedy of the story however is that he DOES change, he DOES improve and he does so in such human ways that we as the readers easily slip into relateability and start viewing Morpheus as human when he fundamentally is not and can not be compared on our level.

I think its an issue the comics try to explore, and in some ways they do it well, whereas in others they fail because by encouraging people to care for Morpheus, to root for him as a protagonist, the comics ask us to see him as human - because we can only truly relate to characters on a human level. But the comics constantly go out of their way to remind us that he is not human, and therefore are stating that we should not care for him in human terms. It's a contradiction in my opinion that doesn't quite work the way its perhaps intended to.

It's not the first time that Neil Gaiman has struggled to get this concept across to his fans. Look at Good Omens. Every single ask Neil got about Good Omens for a long time after the show first aired was asking him to confirm things about Aziraphale and Crowley on a human level. I lost count how many times Neil would answer with a variation of "They are not human they are an angel and a demon".

The Sandman comics also get confusing because when they slip into Morpheus's own POV, we get his own thoughts on what he is. He is a personification of dreams. He is not "living" a "life" because he simply exists to serve the dreamers. He does not get his own "story" so he cannot relate to any characters in the stories over which he rules. We have to be careful when interpreting things from Morpheus's POV though, because most of the time its utter bullshit, but whilst we are in his POV it is portrayed as absolute fact. I fully believe the reason why so many people hate on Morpheus and easily dismiss him as a dreadful character who deserves all the shit he gets put through, is because they are taking what Morpheus believes about himself as truth.

The comics make it very clear that Morpheus' time imprisoned in the glass cage is good for him, that it triggered his change. That it gave him the chance to sit and think on the way he has behaved over the past centuries. It is basically putting him in one big time out. Go sit and think about your behaviour and perhaps you will learn to be a better person. On a human level this is indeed a horrible message.

Morpheus isn't human though, and it is clear that before his imprisonment he wasn't a very nice creature. The Men of Good Fortune comic is a good indicator of that. His behaviour in 1889 is appalling but in the comic this behaviour is clearly due to his seeing humans as lesser than him. He is insulted by Hob daring to suggest that he needs a friend, and I think it is also heavily implied that were he not imprisoned all those years, he simply would not have met Hob in 1989 once free on principle.

The show interestingly enough takes a completely different approach to this, but thats for a separate post.

My point is, I don't think Neil as Morpheus' creator views him in human terms, and I don't think he would have viewed Morpheus' imprisonment as some meta commentary on solitary confinement being an appropriate punishment that leads to reform. I think its much more nuanced than that. We can also interpret it as a commentary on how trauma can be a trigger for change. Morpheus is a victim of trauma for sure, and I certainly don't believe that the comics are advocating for people to suffer trauma in order to become better people, just that perhaps it can change your perspective.

It's a difficult topic and I am not sure I have explained my thoughts too well here so apologies for that. I think if its any consolation the show seems to be taking a different approach to the comic and I think the show also implies Morpheus began changing before his imprisonment. It helps as well that the show also seems to leaning heavily into the notion that we can and SHOULD view Morpheus in human terms, and relate to him and empathise with him. The show has already made him far more human in many ways, so I am curious to see how those changes will affect later comic stories.