#and just in general have autonomy removed

[mechanicalbowtye]

the narrative is just. constantly fucking over jade huh

[acridid-s]

Gonna have to unfollow. I can and will tolerate (sometimes even enjoy) funy G*hrman blogging but I draw the line at reblogging B*llr*ng*rm*l. Sorry dude, you're totally fine, but I don't want to see that person's content on my dash.

[starlightomatic]

I'm asking this in good faith, but also in an admitted lack of full understanding. If you don't have the energy to engage with this topic anymore please disregard it.

Someone on your post noted the comparison of Israel-Palestine to that of the Native Americans, but the way I read it it seemed like they were putting Palestinians in the role of the native Americans and Israel as the colonizing force, but historically wouldn't it be the Jewish people who are the Native Americans in that comparison? I ask because from what I know it would be the Jewish people in what is now Israel at the same time in history as the Natives in the Americas. Am I misinformed about that? I'm not trying to say Palestine would be the colonizing force in that comparison btw, just that if we're talking about natives to the land, it seems to me like it'd be the Jewish people.

tbh neither maps on exactly

the expulsion of jews from what is now israel/palestine started in 70 AD and then was a gradual process over the next few hundred years as people moved out due to oppression by various rulers, poverty, etc

palestinians, as far as i understand it, likely descend from a mix of some of the jews who were left behind and arabs who conquered the land. they've been there for hundreds of years, and some families have owned the same land for all of that time

the thing about indigeneity as it's been explained to me is that it's not about origin so much as relationship to colonization. and the founding of israel was colonization -- herzl actually used that word himself in his writings.

you know the jnf? the original purpose was to exploit a feature of ottoman land law. if you planted a tree on someone's land and they didn't remove it for a certain number of years, you could claim ownership of that land. this and other methods were used to steal parcels of land from palestinians.

"your ethnicity stole the land from our ethnicity, to whom the land belongs" is a fucked up framework that seems really akin to blood and soil (as does "our ethnicity has rightful ownership of this land from ancient times, so your ethnicity needs to clear out"), but genuinely wresting ownership from individuals owners really can be said to be stealing land.

also, the nakba was a series of massacres and fighting that led to a huge influx of palestinian refugees from many areas in israel/palestine, and israel seized control of the land and homes they vacated to hand over to jews. israel used the jnf, again, to cover the ruins of many palestinian villages with trees to obscure the fact that they were ever there. in general israel built over many palestinian villages and the mindset in israel is not to know and not to think about it.

personally i think the indigeneity debate is not useful. it feels sometimes that jews think that if we can prove we lived in israel in ancient times (we did, a lot of people insist we didn't because it is inconvenient), we can justify things like the above. my position is that it does not justify it, because it is not an excuse for causing human suffering.

however, many people use a framework that is not about human suffering, but about how invading foreign jews stole the land from the "rightful" ethnic group. i don't agree with that either. especially when it becomes an excuse to support ethnic cleansing in the other direction. that is to say: they locate the crime not in the invasion but in the foreignness. such people are motivated to deny the historical fact of jewish origins in israel, because their argument is based on jewish foreignness.

but anyway, the comparison to indigenous peoples in the americas refers to the way that palestinians experienced the establishment of the state of israel -- starting with small groups of settlers, involving violence early on and then massacres, and later ethnic cleansing and displacement. cities and towns destroyed. shoved into small areas with few resources. lack of power and autonomy.

in addition, the way the early zionist leaders conceptualized themselves as enlightened europeans colonizing land with disdain for the existing residents.

[peachesofteal]

I love me some angst and this baby trapped au is sustaining me!! But I gotta ask… what happens if darling just haves the baby then up and leaves in the middle of night?? Leaving Simon and Johnny to raise this baby they forced on her?? Or even worse (and forgive me for this) she dies in childbirth and then they finally have their baby but no darling…. They’re probably having some regrets about lying to her lol

This au has invaded my life and I can’t stop thinking about it. I’m hooked ❤️🪝

SEEK HELP. But don't, because I love you. And this.

Baby trap au / Darling left after discovering her tampered birth control 18+ Mature themes. Character death. Childbirth. Hurt absolutely no comfort.

It starts with the twinge in the lower part of your belly, off to the left side. You had woken up with it, on top of your usual sore back and stiff muscles, the everyday occurrences that seemed plague you consistently since the start of your third trimester. You were always hot, always tired, always crampy, grumpy, and generally... miserable.

You didn't mean to be, but being pregnant was a hardship in so many ways, and being pregnant with no one to help you, was even harder. It took its toll. Emotionally. Mentally. Physically. And now, by the ninth month... you were just so ready to be done with it.

You hadn't seen or talked to the guys since the day you walked out, the day you found that fucked up piece of foil, the day you realized what they did, and you left. You hated them for it. Hated them, for taking away your choice. Hated them, for trying to control your body. Hated them, for removing your autonomy.

At night, when you laid down to sleep, it was impossible not to feel other things, the longing, the loneliness, the love, that still lived in your heart for them, against all odds, the ache of missing them growing in your soul as your baby grew each month.

You were in an impossible situation. One you didn't know what do with it.

But today, you were preoccupied with the twinge. The twinge, that had bloomed into a full spasm of muscles across your belly, the twinge that had your boss insisting you go to hospital as soon as possible.

"Let us call an ambulance. I've had four kids! I know labor when I see it." She had hemmed and hawed while you told her it wasn't necessary, that you weren't even in active labor yet, and that you still felt totally okay.

"I'm fine." you had reassured her. "Walking is good for labor right? I'm just going to walk the three blocks and be fine."

Six hours later, you're in a bed with your legs in a pair of stirrups with a nurse by your side, holding your hand as your contractions get closer and closer, your body seizing and cramping with pain through each one, the sting getting worse and worse as the minutes tick on.

You're doing this. You're having a baby. Alone.

The realization shocks you, startles you into a moment of weird, zen like reflection, like everything is moving in slow motion around you, like nothing is progressing as you think about the fact that the guys aren't actually here, that you never did call them, that you never did tell them that you wanted to forgive them one day. That you wanted to talk to them. See them again.

That you wanted them to be here with you, for this, to see the birth of their daughter.

Another contraction rips through you and steals your breath, and you faintly hear the nurse telling you breathe while your body locks up in unmeasurable pain. Something prods between you legs, and then there's a voice saying you're fully dilated, and ready to push.

Ready? Now?

No. No... you can't. It's too fast. They're not here. They need to be here. You have to call them.

"Oh sweetheart, don't cry." The nurse speaks softly to you, but you can't help it. You want them. They were supposed to be here. They were supposed to be ones holding your hand, helping you, cutting the cord.

"We're going to push on the next contraction, okay?" Your doctor tells you, but you shake your head vehemently.

"No. I want my partners." you sob, and your nurse makes a sympathetic noise, while stroking some hair out of your face.

"You have to push." The nurse encourages, and pain streaks across your belly, sharp and insistent, forcing you to gasp for more air. "Ready? Push!" She tries to coach you, but you can't do it, can't even move, your body just writhing through the pain as your head spins and you pant. Your doctor says your name, kindly but somewhat stern after the contraction passes, and you moan.

"This baby is coming. You have to push." She says, and you know she's right, but you just can't get there in your mind, unable to consider the idea of her being born without Johnny or Simon being here.

"I want them." you sob, another spasm ripping through your body, forcing you to curl forward with an anguished shout. The nurse blots a cool, damp cloth against your head, while someone else on your other side adjusts your bed. There are people everywhere, all moving around in flurry, except for the doctor who's settling between your legs, eyes locking onto yours above your mask.

"There's no time dear." She says, and when you look up into your nurse's face, she seems sincere, encouraging and sweet, but you don't care. You want Johnny. You want Simon.

"P-please." You moan. "My phone- the passcode is 6669." The numbers come as a grunt when another contraction pulses through you. It's awful, burning, biting pain that shreds your belly, the muscles in your thighs, your back, everywhere, and you scream through it, while the two nurses on either side of you fold your legs back and the doctor coaches you to push.

"I can't!" You really can't. You can't do this without them. You don't even care about what they did anymore. You don't want to do this without them. They have to be here. "I can't, I ca-can't. Please, call Johnny. Or, or Simon." You pant, and eye the nervous looking aide that stands behind one of the nurses. "Call them!" You shout, and your sweet nurse gives him a nod, urging him into action as he fumbles with your phone and steps outside.

"Okay sweetheart. We're calling them, okay? But you have to push. Your body is ready." You shake your head, but you know she's right. You can feel your body bearing down, your muscles working inside of you, everything aligning so that you can have this baby.

It fills you with fear. Dread overcomes you, and when you feel the next contraction coming on, you begin to hyperventilate.

You can't have their baby without them.

"No... nonono-" You protest, like you're telling yourself, your own body, not to do what it was meant to do. It's useless however, because as your contraction peaks, your doctor is counting, and you can't help but push the way your body wants to, screaming your pain as loud as you can.

"Good job." She encourages once it passes, her eyes checking a tablet that's held in front of her face quickly, before returning her gaze back to you. "Okay, next one you're going to push for the full ten seconds okay? You can do it."

"I don't want to." You protest with a cry, and your nurse pats your hand sympathetically.

"I know, I know." She helps shift you forward, and then the next one is coming, and you feel like you're being torn apart, like your body is burning and being ripped in two as you push.

"I can see the head, you're almost there." Someone says, but you're not sure who it is, or if you care, your focus moving to one sole thing now, getting this baby out of your body as fast as you can. You breathe for maybe five seconds before the next wave begins, and then you're dropping your chin to your chest while you push with everything you have, voices in the room rising and falling, everything feeling too loud and too overwhelming, and then all of the sudden, there's a shifting inside of you, and then suddenly an overwhelming emptiness before-

a screaming, crying, shrieking baby is plopped onto your chest.

"There she is!" Your nurse calls, and you stare, slack jawed, unable to speak, unable to move while they cover her with a blanket and someone continues to work between your legs. "Congratulations mum!" The baby cries, and you lift a hand to cradle her closer while someone wipes around the top of her head.

"Hi, Bee... I'm your mom." you cry, and lower your lips to her head, placing a soft kiss on her skin while someone rubs her down. She cries, lungs healthy and full of power, and you laugh a little.

"Did you get a hold of them?" You ask him breathlessly, and he nods with a gulp.

"They're on their way." They're on their way. The words slam against your heart, and the feeling of relief is immense. They're coming. They're going to be here.

"Thank you." You hardly look at him, keeping your eyes on Bee, and her little angel face, perfect in every way.

The next few minutes pass in a blur. The doctor works on you, pressing on your stomach a few times in an awful way that hurts but is necessary, and then your bed is moved to a better position for sitting up. Bee is removed from your chest for measurements and a quick clean up, before she's placed back in your arms, freshly swaddled and soothed. You're mesmerized by her nose, her eyelashes, her tiny fingers that wrap around one of yours. Your baby, your daughter. The one you carried for nine months, the one that you went through so much heartache for, the one that you struggled so much for, was finally here. You wish they were here already, to see her, to see how precious she is, how amazing, and you sniffle through some tears when you realize you'll get to see the looks on both their faces when they see her for the first time, when they hold her.

You lift your hand to stroke the softness of her cheek, and frown, when it doesn't really cooperate... the limb feeling heavy and stiff, like it's not even really on your body. That's... weird. You try again, and again, with no success, and then you realize the room is kind of shifting, kind of spinning slightly, like you're dizzy.

"Uh-" You call out to the nurse who's on a laptop at the desk, her back partially turned towards you, and she glances over with a smile that quickly changes to a firm line when she rushes over. "I feel funny." You tell her, and she nods, the mechanics of the bed whirring while you're lowered completely flat. Bee cries, disrupted by the movement, and you want to shush her, soothe her, but the words don't come, and everything is very loud all of the sudden, bells, whistles, beeps and alarms going off at a frantic pace overtop the voices that have quickly filled the room.

"-ake the baby."

"too much-"

"hemmorage-"

The words come in clips, and your vision becomes filled with white dots as Bee is lifted off your chest, the arm that held her close to your body falling limply to your side. What's happening? You want to ask, want to scream it at them. Where are you taking her? She's crying in the nurse's arms, her distressed little face the last thing you see before your vision goes completely black, and you fade away.

"Drive fucking faster." Johnny shouts, and Simon squeezes his knee to try to calm him as best he can in this moment, even though the two of them are the farthest thing from being calm.

You were in labor, and you had actually called them. Simon's heart had soared when he answered the phone, telling the guy on the phone to tell you that they were on their way, that they'd be there soon while he and Johnny sprinted to the car. You had called them. You wanted them there.

"Tell her we love her!" He had huffed while fumbling with the keys. "We love her so much. We'll be there soon."

"Settle, Johnny." He's trying to keep Johnny calm, trying to keep himself calm, while also trying to drive as fast as possible to get to you.

"Aye, 'm sorry. I'm just... I can't wait to see her. I can't believe she called." Simon can't either. He can't believe that after eight months of being apart, eight months of wondering if they'd even ever see you again, it was them you were calling for when you needed someone, them that you wanted by your side.

It felt like a gift. It felt like a second chance.

"I hope she's okay." Johnny hedges, nervous tinge to his voice and Simon rubs his thigh to try to soothe him.

"I'm sure she's fine, babies are born all the time, yeah?"

"Yeah."

They rush the desk when they get there, both spitting out your name and the woman jerks backwards before adjusting, typing onto her keyboard to locate your record. A full minute passes, while the receptionist's brow furrows, and they both nearly explode.

"She should be here, we got a phone call." Johnny blurts.

"Should be in labor and delivery." Simon tries to provide, helpfully and they both stand there anxiously, while she taps away.

"Ah! Sorry, there she is. I've paged the L&D department, and someone will be down shortly. You can wait in those seats over there." She points to some arm chairs, and they both ignore the suggestion, opting to stand right in front of a set of doors.

"Mr. Riley? Mr MacTavish?" A female voice calls a few minutes later, and they nod, overeager as she approaches. A million questions bubble up in Simon's head, where are you, have you delivered yet, are you doing okay, how's the baby... but they all come to a screeching halt when the doctor gets close enough for him to read her face.

No.

"Can you come with me?"

"And there was just too much blood. Once the hemorrhaging started, it couldn't be controlled." Johnny hears what the doctor is saying. He can hear her, loud and clear. He copies her.

But he doesn't understand. His brain can't make the words fit, can't make them make sense. What does that mean? He glances at Simon, who doesn't look at him, just stares at the doctor, face stricken, pale as ash. Like he's seen a ghost. Like someone has died. But that can't be right.

"Alright." He says slowly. "But she's going to be okay?"

"Johnny." Simon croaks, and the doctor shakes her head.

"I'm so sorry, Mr. MacTavish. She's gone." Who's gone? Not you, obviously. What's going on here?

"No. No, no she can't be gone." Johnny protests. This doctor is clearly confused. "She just had someone call us. She's having... she's having a baby. Our baby. She's-" The doctor gives him a sad look, sympathetic and understanding. "No. She can't be gone, we just... we just got here. We-"

"Johnny." Simon says again and Johnny pivots on him.

"Tell her Si. Tell her, she's alright." Simon swings an arm forward, grabbing him by the collarbone, and holding on tight, pulling him close to his body.

It's only then, when Johnny looks up into Simon's face, and sees the tears there, sees those eyes, flooded, sees his cheeks, wet, his face full of turmoil and distress, that it really makes sense.

"No." He whispers. "No, she can't be." He shakes his head, and Simon tries to hold it still, tries to cradle his face in his palms. "Simon." He moans, word splitting into a cry, and then he's burying his face into Simon's neck, spilling hot tears onto his skin. Darling. Their Darling. Their Darling girl. Gone.

Because of them.

They did this.

Simon's body is shaking, shoulders trembling with his sobs, while he holds Johnny close, and Johnny screams into his chest, he screams and he screams until there's nothing left inside of him, every second ticking by bringing him farther and farther away from a time in his life when you still existed, when you were still in this world with them. And he wants it to stop, he wants it to stop so fucking bad but it won't, and he can't make it, he can't do anything, except stand here and scream, scream and beg and plead an unknown entity who's never given him anything good except for you and Simon.

They never got to tell you they still love you.

They didn't even get to say goodbye.

Hours later, they sit in a room with an empty bed, side by side, while a nurse stands in front of them with a tiny, sleeping baby wrapped in a blanket.

"This is your daughter." She tells them. "Her name is Bee."

"Bee." Johnny whispers, and she nods.

"Would you like to hold her?"

"Yes." Johnny says, but the word sounds flat, and he feels numb. The nurse places little Bee in his arms, while Simon watches, unblinking from where he sits right next to him. "Bee." He says again, looking down at her, truly looking at her for the first time. She looks so much like you, more like you than either of them, and he can't stop the tears that fall freely, while Simon reaches over and hesitantly strokes her cheek with a knuckle.

"She's beautiful." Simon whispers hoarsely, voice coarse with tears, and Johnny agrees. Johnny tries to stifle a sob, desperate not to wake Bee while she sleeps, but Simon can't stop himself, and he covers his face with his hand to try to smother his cry. "She looks just like her." Simon chokes, and Johnny's arms shake around where Bee is cradled. He leans to the side, into Simon, who wraps his arm around him immediately, holding Johnny while he holds their daughter, your daughter. They cannot stop their tears, their hearts cracking wide open in both of their chests as they stay down her, their only piece left of you in this world, the only thing they have left to cling to.

"You look just like your mum, baby Bee."

[laughhardrunfastbekindsblog]

Came across another debate about the "inhibitor chips vs. no chips" storyline for the clones. Saw the usual complaint that the inhibitor chips are a cop out to absolve the clones of any responsibility for their actions.

Thing is...

For a long time, practically none of the clones knew their actions during Order 66 were influenced by programming via implanted brain chips. Omega was the first clone who for sure knew the chips were even a thing; Tech figured it out and Rex finally understood and fully accepted Fives' claims during Order 66; the rest of Clone Force 99 eventually accepts the truth; and I'm sure Rex got through to the clones who became part of his network.

But that's a tiny fraction of the clones who make up the GAR. (We find out over a decade later in Rebels that apparently the story of the inhibitor chips had circulated, but we don't know to what extent the story spread or if it was ever validated to the general public as more than a rumor.)

So, during Order 66 and for years thereafter, the clones thought they were acting of their own accord.

We never see the clones using the chips as an excuse for their behavior, likely because most of the clones don't even know about them.

And frankly, I find it even more tragic that these loyal, honorable men thought they had freely chosen to turn on the Jedi and others who had been their allies, genuinely thought they were stopping a Jedi coup, when they really didn't have much of a choice at all, not even the option to stop and think about what they were doing before they did it.

And even those clones who DO know what's going on are too horrified by their behavior to even entertain the notion of excusing themselves.

Just look at Rex's face when he's about to shoot Ahsoka. He's conflicted, he's terrified. Rex later talks about the chip and tells the Bad Batch it's not something they can control if it activates; but even then he's sharing that to convince them to choose to remove the chips, not to give them an excuse for their behavior.

And can any of us mistake Wrecker's shame over his actions while the inhibitor chip was activated as him justifying himself? He describes what it felt like, and we know as well as he does that he literally had no control over himself, yet he still apologizes for what he did.

AND THEN we have Crosshair, Mr. "Does it really matter when I got my chip removed?" -

Crosshair knows about the chip, knows what it was supposed to do, had it removed, and still insists that he was in full control of himself and his decisions all along. Even later, when he admits to making mistakes and having regrets, he never blames the inhibitor chip for his actions.

Basically - I have no issue whatsoever with the inhibitor chip plotline. I actually prefer it. Not even taking into account the fact that it makes a ton of sense that Palpatine wouldn't leave anything regarding something as pivotal to his plans as Order 66 up to chance, the inhibitor chips add another layer of tragedy and complexity to the clones in that while we the audience know they have more of their autonomy stripped away from them, as far as the clones are aware the chips don't even exist and they are in full control of their own actions; and the clones who DO know about the chips tend to acknowledge their effects while still not using them to justify their behavior or refuse any responsibility.

[gothhabiba]

I understand what people mean by prison abolition, but what does it mean in practice to abolish the family? I've never quite got it - who is raising children? How does it work? I'm asking in good faith, I've just always been a bit embarrassed to ask anyone

Like positions that are “anti-work” or against “gender,” the thing being objected to is more detailed and specific than the range of meanings that can reasonably or semi-reasonably be assigned to the word in question (“work,” “gender,” “family”)—which is why these propositions and programmes can have a bit of a PR problem. And, as with all terms that position themselves against something (e.g. "anti-psychiatry"), the term "family abolition" can be taken up by people with a range of different positions who disagree amongst themselves on some issues. In general, though, no one objects to "people living together or being emotionally close to each other" or "children not being left to roam about at random and get eaten by wolves" or anything.

Rather, anti-capitalist objections to "the family" tend to hinge on objections to:

parental rights, or "the special legal powers of parents to control major aspects of their children’s lives," which function as "quasi-property interests" more than anything that is in the best interest of children (link explicitly relates to U.S. law). Parents legally control where their children live, whether and where they go to school, what information they have access to, what level of freedom of mobility they have, what medical care they receive and don't receive, and what they may do with their own bodies, and are legally allowed to physically assault their children.

relatedly, the lack of legal autonomy that children possess (this is also often discussed under the banner of "children's rights" or objections to "adultism").

the positioning of "the family" as the only economic or social "safety net" in an economy and a society which provide no other one (creating an artificial "structural scarcity" of care). In a society which is otherwise dominated by "economic competition between atomized individuals," the family must be relied on—and yet, for some people (whose families cannot or will not provide living space or financial support in an emergency; whose families are abusive and physically or psychically dangerous to be around or rely on; who will not receive help or emotional support from a spouse or family unit without making serious concessions on the level of their personhood being basically respected; Black working-class people in whose communities the nuclear family unit has been deliberately prevented from forming by government intervention), the family cannot be relied on.

the way that the positioning of "the family" as the only safety net therefore constitutes economic coercion that works to keep people (especially women and LGBT, disabled and/or transracially adopted people) in abusive or exploitative situations, and that works to create incentives for working-class women (whose employment is generally less secure) to make themselves erotically desirable to men & disincentives for doing anything else.

the idea that housework, gestational labour & childbirth, and childcare are tasks "naturally" falling to the "mother" ("mother" as a "natural category"), such that the social, political, and economic nature of these tasks, and the economic and political discourses that mobilise the creation of our concept of "motherhood," are obscured.

Thus the objection is to "the family" as a unit of social reproduction under capitalism—as a legal, political entity that structures inheritance, taxes, health insurance, "race" and ethnicity, &c., and therefore works as a sort of interface between the capitalist state and the individual.

So the programme of "family abolition" involves, firstly, the control of the means of production on the part of the proletariat (this is a communist programme—the point isn't to remove the safety net of the family while keeping capitalism in place, but rather the idea is that without capitalism this ultimately abusive safety net ought not to be needed); and then the abolition of marriage as a legal institution; the abolition of parental rights; the putting in place of measures for the elderly and disabled to be cared for regardless of whether they have family alive who are both able and willing to care for them; the forming of social networks at will; and, depending on who you ask, the communal raising of children (which involves ceasing to privilege "parent" as a legal title automatically conferred upon biologically creating a child).

Obviously, toddlers who do not yet understand things about the world including "causation" and "mortality" will need on occasion to be restrained from running blithely into the jaws of wolves &c. The argument is just that coercion of this sort should be legitimately in the best interests of the child; not performed by two people who need answer for their actions, up to and including battery of their children, in no way other than saying that they "plausibly believe this to be necessary to control, train or educate their child"; and walked back in measure as the child gains the ability to assert their own desires.

Probably no one has a perfect solution 100% worked out—life is messy, and we don't know what the future will look like—but having a perfect solution 100% worked out should not be a prerequisite for noticing that the current situation is abusive and untenable.

[delusinalandpassionate]

SUUUPER long ask sorry.

What I find so fascinating is that, everyone, whether dante or her family, display her as this “prideful,” and having this “self importance,” that puts her above everyone. But, every memory we get of her is undoubtedly soft or full of, usually, love. You could say this is because of her natural softness with Quixote, but, she’s shown to be this way with Bari, too! She’s shown to pity the bear and even Dante later on. Faust informs Dante her level of agression then was because of Cassetti’s taboo and not a general read of her character. Even in Barber’s and Priest’s narration, she does enforce them, yes, but it’s always never something “prideful,” whispering at Priest he missed a line, and apparently watching over Barber, which leans into OUR Don’s and Sancho’s habit of acting like she.. isn’t apart of the world. (Giving her Gubo makes so much sense, on several levels, but especially Dongbaek accusing Gubo of acting like they aren’t one of them. Dongrang’s “you don’t need to keep acting like a guest.”) The sinners affirming she never, ever talks about herself, much rather sharing and wanting to hear OTHER’S stories. She’s always felt distant from the sinners, even more so than those “emotionally closed off,” like Outis, and that’s because she doesn’t let anyone in. And it seems she’s always been that way. I mean, she was willing to completely erase who she was in efforts to live someone else’s story. Even meta wise— she isn’t even the protagonist! She’s the person who watches the hijinks occur. She does not own this identity or story, she’s manually removed all her agency and autonomy. Something she ultimately did because of loathe of herself and love of someone else. Dante doesn’t want Don to face herself because it means they’d have to face her. Despite, how frail she seems, how even warm I’d say Vergilius sounds making the deal with her, her talk about “watching over Hong Lu,” with the implication that to just be there and try, and how that’s being taken from her, even now, because no one can seem to accept her, but Quixote. She can’t even accept herself. She’s someone who longed for family and love, but the entire world seems sure on seeing her as something prideful, evil, terrifying— and even as a human she was a one dimensional annoyance at worst. I wonder if she truly loved her family, the sinners, but was still unable to convey that? Did they read her wrong? Was she always prideful and distant? Or was she scared of not being loved? Is she truly that terrifying or has she learned to harden herself up to keep things in order for her helpless master? Has she taken up the burden of being the “bad guy,” to ensure he gets all he wants on a silver platter? The dichotomy of love in their relationship and what is ultimately terrifying, a lack of autonomy to even live her own life, be his ideal instead, simply on pretense he’s the only person to ever love her. Someone she cannot deny, quite literally, all for him.

THANK YOU FOR LONG ASK, I'm glad to see people to be that passionate about Don!

And I like the idea of her being less prideful but rather distant, which creates a feeling of arrogance. And I agree that most of her memories are full of love, just I think all of her love reserved to Don Quixote.

About Bari, she seems rather suspicious about her and flashbacks and agrees to her company only because of Don Quixote. You could argue using last Sanson play, but we still don't have a confirmation about who we're spoken here yet.

About Bear...I don't think it was piety, more like pragmatism.

About Dante... yeah, she looked at them as they were pietful it makes me wonder why...

About Cassati...well, . She's honoring this taboo, but this taboo is rooted in hierarchy in which she is much higher than Cassati, and if she believes in importance of taboo, she should believe in the importance of her status. We can compare it's to Don Quixote, who is letting Sancho ignore lines between their statuses while she calls Cassatti all insults possible.

And when I made point about her correcting Barber and Priest, it was not about pride, but more about their discomfort around her.

But I adore the idea of Sancho being an observer and the idea that she does not fit in and that she's not even trying. I thought a lot about Gubo's identity as a traitor in this story and how it paints Don, but him being never "one of them" now makes a lot of sense.

And with that, I think Sancho's problem is not even with thinking that everyone is unimportant. It's more like there is no one as important as Don Quixote, and that includes herself.

In a way, Don Quixote made a great thing becoming her family, but at the same time, he became the center of life, even if by accident.

Maybe she became a "bad guy" to make sure his dream will happen. But it still centering one person and his happiness while ignoring pleas of others. Sancho may not be purposely cruel, but she was ruthless archiving whatever Don Quixote wanted.

And that's why I think that her life as "Don" gave her a new perspective. Or understanding. About Don Quxote and most important about herself. She had a chance to have a life that wasn't centered around one person(she just didn't remember it was), learn other kinds of joy, and create relationships.

It's interesting that Dulcinea said that Sancho's eyes once were bright and starry until cold disinterest settled in them. And that means that from the beginning, there was something in her that could be Don Quixote.

[cyazurai]

Anonymously Autonomous: an Autonomy Based Legacy Challenge

For The Sims 2, The Sims 3, and The Sims 4

Have you ever played an ISBI (I'm Surrounded by Idiots) legacy, or an asylum challenge? Was it something you enjoyed, but felt a little ick about the name, and the premise being that the sims you don't control are "insane," "crazy," "erratic," or just in some way just stupid? Well, you're not alone! The autonomy in these games isn't great, but can make for some really chaotic situations that you'd never get if you controlled every single sim most of the time, so it's fun to occasionally play a game where your sims are allowed to just be their little chaotic selves. And I want to help facilitate the chaos because maybe I'm a little bit of a Watcher of Mischief myself. If you're interested, keep reading!

Basic Concept

If you know the ISBI and Asylum challenges, you know the main premise: you can only control one sim in your household. In the ISBI Legacy, your founder will eventually "pass the torch" on to their heir, who will become the next sim you can control, and you will no longer be able to control your previous sim. It's very simple. There are other rules, and some versions even include the addition of points, but that's the basic idea.

For AAL (Anonymously Autonomous Legacy), at the bare bones, it's the same exact concept: one single sim you can control. But I decided to do something a little different with this, as well, because I didn't want this to be just a renaming of the ISBI. I want it to be its own thing. And what that thing is is:

Randomization.

The sim you can control will not necessarily be your founder or heir at all times. When you only control one sim, it will always be that sim you control, but once you have multiple sims in your household, after a set period of time you have to Spin a Wheel with all of your household's eligible sims on it to pick what sim you will control during the next set period of time. Sometimes, you will get the same sim multiple times in a row. Sometimes you might never even get to control your heir. It will all depend on the wheel (or dice roller, or number randomizer, whatever you wish).

Interested? Good!

General Rules (for Sims 2, 3, and 4)

Create a YA sim of your choice. If you are playing TS2, you may start either as a YA in university, or you may start as an adult to start their life right away. They can have any personality, likes/dislikes, turn ons/offs, whatever you want.

If you want to start off with randomization from the very beginning, give them a spouse, and spin the wheel to decide who you play as from the beginning.

Use whatever age span you want to for this. However, short might make this even more difficult that it already will be, so only use short if you want an extra challenge.

You may not use money cheats.

Move into a lot using whatever money your family has. You may not give them more money to build them a nice house.

Optional: Move them into the biggest lot in the game (whichever iteration you're playing), and do some lawn living. If they still have a lot of money, reduce their money in a way you see fit - remove it through cheats, or purchase a really expensive item that serves no practical purpose.

Next generation begins when the heir becomes a YA.

Non-heir children may stay in the family home however long you want.

Autonomy Randomization Rules

Once you have more than one sim in your household, you must decide on a specific timeframe in which to randomize who you will be allowed to control and how long you can control them.

An example of what I mean by this is if you have four sims in your household. Let's call them Matthew, Frankie, Shawn, and Sky. Matthew is the founder, Frankie his wife, Shawn a child, and Sky a toddler. You input their names in the wheel, and spin it. The wheel lands on Shawn's name, so for that entire week, he is the only one you are allowed to play.

When you have a sim chosen to be the only one you can control, that is the only sim you may select. You may not select other sims to check their inventory, to check their needs, etc. Their needs and everything are a mystery to you. If they genuinely seem to be stuck, you may reset them however your particular iteration allows you to do so.

You may use your own timeframe for selecting a random sim, but I have come up with my own in case you want to use one of mine.

Weekly Randomization: On Sunday at 8 am, spin the wheel. From that moment until the next Sunday at 8 am, you will control only that sim.

Seasonal Randomization: This is similar to the previous one, but if you play TS4 and play with 14 day or 28 day seasons or have some kind of mod or cheats to modify the length of your seasons. On the first day of the season at 8 am, spin the wheel. From that moment until the first day of the next season, you will control only that sim.

Yearly Randomization: If you want more time with a single sim, this one is for you. On the first day of Spring at 8 am, spin the wheel. From that moment through all of Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter, you will control only that sim. On the first day of the next Spring at 8 am, you will spin the wheel again.

Age Span Randomization: The next time your current sim ages up, spin the wheel. So if your founder starts as a YA, spin the wheel when they age up to adult. If the next sim is a child, you play them until they age up to teen, and so forth.

No Randomization: This is an option. If you only want to control your torch holders, you don't have to randomize who you control at all, you can just control your founder then heirs, as long as you only ever control one sim at a time.

Random Randomization: This one would be rather difficult to keep track of, but if you want to, you can use either a number randomizer, or a dicer roller, or some way, to pick how many days you will control your current sim. When you first start controlling a sim, you will roll to find out how many days you may control that sim. Once you move onto the next sim, roll once again to find out how long you will control that sim.

This is all of the timeframes I can come up with right now, but if you have any ideas feel free to message them to me!

Another rule about the randomization is that you may roll the same sim multiple times in a row. You may not remove your current sim from the wheel - whatever sim you get is the one you play.

The sim you control doesn't need to be related to your family. If they are a controllable sim in your household, you must put them on the wheel. If you move in your best friend? You may end up controlling them more often than your own sim.

Optional: If you are going to be posting your legacy on Simblr, or somewhere else, and want to really follow the "anonymous" part of this challenge, keep the sim you are controlling a secret from your viewers! See if they can guess which sim is being controlled, maybe have a poll every time before the next switch just for fun.

General and Iteration-Specific Rules

The first thing I'm going to talk about is what sims are eligible to be put on the wheel, depending on which game you are playing.

The Sims 2: The sims eligible for being the controllable sim are as follows: toddlers, children, teens, young adults (if you send them to university), adults, and elders. All occults/supernatural beings are also eligible, if they are in your household. If you use cheats to control babies or pets, you may also add them to the wheel.

The Sims 3: The sims eligible for being the controllable sim are as follows: babies, toddlers, children, teens, young adults, adults, elders, cats, dogs, and horses. All occults/supernatural beings are also eligible, if they are in your household.

The Sims 4: The sims eligible for being the controllable sim are as follows: infants, toddlers, children, teens, young adults, adults, and elders. All occults/supernatural beings are also eligible, if they are in your household. Also, if you use the mod that allows you to play pets, you may add them to the wheel as well.

You may play however you would normally play, except that you are only allowed to play one sim at a time.

Mods and CC are allowed. You may even use mods that improve autonomy if you so wish.

For any of the games, you may set things up to make life easier for you. For example, I suggest using the baby monitor in TS3 if you end up having to play as a baby - that way, you can use it to call attention to yourself if you are in need. For TS4, I suggest using MCCC to make more things autonomous, like gardening and repairing items. Things like that.

When controlling a sim, you may use their reward points to purchase things. Even if they are rewards that will help you greatly, nothing is off limits. Use whatever advantage you are given.

Nothing in the build/buy modes are off limits either. If you want sim death, feel free to build the horrors. If you want to keep as far away from death as you want, you don't even need an oven. It's up to your discretion.

Also, how do you choose an heir? You can choose an heir any way you choose. Whether you choose the one you like the most, have an heir poll, or use one of the Succession Laws from the official legacy challenge, any way you prefer is fine.

What is the Goal?

Your goal is to get to the 10th generation, and will end when the 10th generation's youngest child ages up to YA. You may play further than this if you please, but that is the main goal.

However, this is not as simple as you might thing, and that is why it is your only required goal.

Because you will (probably) be randomizing which sim you can control, it's not always going to easy to keep your heirs alive, or even find your heir a spouse/significant other to have children with. After all, if you can't control the heir, how can you find them someone to love?

You will have to use whatever sim you are allowed to play to your advantage. If you can't play your heir, use the sim you can play to bring eligible sims to the household to meet your heir.

Another reason that the goal is simple is because sims are not the brightest bulbs in the box, or the sharpest tool in the shed (I had to say it). Some of your unplayable sims might very well die to something silly, like eating too many jelly beans (TS3) or starving to death. Some babies, infants, toddlers, or children may be taken away by social services. Some pets might be taken away as well.

Optional: If you want a little extra challenge, you can add the generational goal that you have to try to complete your heir's LTW/aspiration before they die.

"What is the fail condition for this challenge?" You may be asking. There is exactly one fail condition: every sim related to your family in the household dies/is taken away. So, realistically, this challenge is very difficult to fail. If you only have one related sim left in the household but there are relatives out in the world and you want some insurance, feel free to bring the family back into the home. Whatever you can do to not fail? Do it.

And that's all I have for now! I haven't put together points or anything, or a score card, because I know people don't really play challenges for points anymore. But, if enough people want to play for points, I will add a scoresheet/scoring section.

If you have any questions, please message them to me or comment on this post, and I will answer your questions to the best of my ability!

If you decide to play this challenge, please tag it with #SimsAALC so that I can see it!

@ts4challengehub

[is-this-yuri]

have you been doomscrolling? feeling awful about it? do you feel out of control? does it seem your autonomy has been swallowed by the ever present beast that is the internet?

we live in the most overwhelmingly stimulating age of humanity ever seen, and it's only getting worse. our brains are sponges, soaking up whatever we smear them across, and it seems more and more difficult to find a clean surface to rest on. i'm no expert or professional, but ive been born and raised into the internet, and i'd like to hand out some wisdom regarding this.

the main issue: brain poison

since the brain absorbs whatever it's exposed to, media consumption is unsurprisingly going to effect it. the type of media, the amount of media, and the frequency of the media all play a factor.

it's not the internet itself that's bad here. it's the media on the internet, and the platforms designed to suck in our attention and keep it there until we're rotting inside our skulls.

we're never going to escape the internet. it's just a fact of life now, and a tool that can be used for wonderful things. so how do we learn to live with the internet and take advantage of its potential?

treat it like a dietary balance

staying aware of what goes in your brain is just as important as being aware of what you're eating. if you eat carelessly, don't listen to how your body feels after you eat certain things, and ignore any sickness that might result from rotten food, you're going to have a bad time and wreck your guts. the same goes for the brain.

you want to have a good mix of various types of media in the right amounts, or approximately so. if things are feeling bland, maybe diversify. if things are feeling stupid, try something more intellectual. if it's feeling too much, cut back on all of it

the following are three things you can do to maintain a sense of control and awareness over your media diet. this isnt a step by step and is in no particular order, theyre just ideas to carry forward in general any time it could be helpful.

1. digest

this is the process of thinking about and remembering what youve done throughout your time on the internet. it could apply to any period of time. so you might think, 'man, i've done nothing but watch tiktok all day.' or 'i've been scrolling twitter a lot more this past week.'

i feel like most people already do this to some extent, but it manifests as a fleeting sense of anxiety or shame that doesn't lead anywhere. analyze that feeling, and ask if it's really true or helpful.

ask if your media consumption is making you feel less focused, distracted, putting you into a brain fog, making you fall asleep when you don't want to, making you irritable and angry, drawing you into arguments, keeping you awake at night, or upsetting/disrupting you in any way.

digestion also means appreciating the good stuff and recognizing the good feelings you get too. so also ask if it's enriching you, helping you learn something new, giving you a new perspective, exposing you to something beautiful, passing the time, relaxing you, honing your focus, or generally lifting your mood.

2. cut

cut certain types of content from your life once you've decided they're not good for your media diet. block people. move on. tell youtube to stop reccomending that channel. block them. unfollow people. unfollow tags. block the tags. blacklist things. do it. forget the awful things that make your brain hurty. click the block button. uninstall the app. you know you want to

consider removing yourself entirely from websites that are designed to be attention predators. if you consistently feel like youre 'stuck' on a site and cant leave, it's probably best to just delete your account and get out of there. tiktok is NOTORIOUS for this.

i also tend to keep my following or subscribed count low. keeping the stream of content short forces me to find other things to do with my time. this goes hand in hand with things like turning off infinite scroll. it provides an 'end point' where the repetitive action of scrolling down stops bearing fruit, breaking the doomscrolling cycle. the internet is almost an infinite place, and its up to you to build walls around yourself so you arent lost in it forever.

its also important to get off the internet in general sometimes. i know this is obvious, but literally touch grass on occasion. doing anything with your physical body away from the screen will be more enriching than sitting there scrolling for hours. whether it's just a 5 minute walk around your house to stretch your legs or a 6 hour hike every weekend, part of cutting media will mean replacing it with real life. looking at some plants, doing a pushup, or working on a knitting project can be like rinsing your brain sponge under some cold, clean water.

3. curate

the flip side of cutting is curating. you'll want to be looking for media that makes you happy and feels productive or meaningful in some way. anything that not only doesnt make you feel like you wasted your time, but specifically makes you feel like you spent your time well, is a green flag.

keep in mind entertainment just for entertainment's sake is good for you too. you don't have to be watching university lectures and tutorials and stuff all day. finding high quality entertainment, such as personalities you enjoy, good production values, and inventive ideas can be really difficult. find the people who dont make you feel like a cocomelon baby and stick with them. from there you should be able to find similar content.

what's good for your soul is going to depend very much on you as an individual. this is also going to be an ongoing process as not only you but the internet both change and evolve. the important thing about this step is that you Make Decisions about what to consume. even bad decisions! it's all part of the process, and it's all about reclaiming your autonomy.

4. eat your junk food

this isn't a military drill or an exact science. i'm just a guy on tumblr with an intimate connection to his own brain and a LOT of time on the internet. that's my only credential. sometimes i want to turn that brain off and just mindlessly consume without putting any thought into what dirty dishwater is soaking into my sponge. sometimes adhd brain wants me to watch a shitty B movie in recap form so i dont have to commit to a full movie. sometimes i get stuck in the youtube shorts for like 3 hours.

that's fine. the most important part of any kind of self care is that a little bit is better than nothing. even just being aware that youre consuming something bad for you and knowing you arent ready to stop just yet is better than nothing.

thats it!!

now you should be prepared to take back some control over your media consumption. be gentle with yourself and take your time. eventually this stuff will become second nature, and you'll be effortlessly digesting, curating, and cutting media like it's just part of your personality. remember YOU have control over what the internet thinks you want to see. dont let it force feed you nasty slop anymore. let it be a reflection of your mind, not the other way around.

and good luck!

[kingshovelbug]

i think the thing that pissed me off the most about transphobes today is that i kept seeing shit about top surgery where they say “girls are being coerced into removing healthy breast tissue” but breast IMPLANTS are fine even though those pose risks to said healthy breast tissue.

or that top surgery is too easy to get and that women should be proud of their boobs and get rid of them as the last case scenario. but i can name quite a few reasons that women would get mastectomies or at least reductions?

back, shoulder and or rib pain? just the general theyre in the way during everyday life? i cant tell you how many girl friends of mine have said it hurts them just to go down the fucking stairs unless theyre holding their boobs. healthy but risk of breast cancer so they want preventative care?

my mom in fact has all of these and she still hasnt been approved to get a reduction even though it would improve her quality of life tremendously. why are we so focused on tits that were allowing that to cloud our judgment when it comes to this specific vein of body autonomy?

[identitty-dickruption]

if you have a recovering addict in your life. it is really really important that you make sure you’re not trying to remove their autonomy. this includes ASKING them what their needs are instead of just acting on assumptions

for example, I’d still like to be invited along to things where alcohol will be present + be given enough info to make an informed decision for myself. and it’s not fair to just stop inviting people along to things because you think that’s what’s in their best interests. but that’s just my preference! everyone is going to be different and in general it’s not fair to make any kind of assumptions about someone else’s needs and preferences

[etirabys]

What were the major factors for you in deciding whether to have kids?

Unwillingness to forego one of the most intense and unique human relationships possible: "The key to the sociobiology of mammals is milk. Because young animals depend on their mothers during a substantial part of their early development, the mother-offspring group is the universal nuclear unit of mammalian societies."

When I was younger, my major objection to having kids was that it would interfere with my career. I cared a lot about my career and looked forward to transitioning from a student who worked really hard and excelled in classes to a professional who worked really hard and excelled in the workplace and also earned a boatload of money. But then it turned out that I wasn't a hard worker, I just loved studying and taking exams. I don't have a career or the relationship to a career I envisioned, so that's the major obstacle removed.

Seven years ago, I went to a meetup hosted by an economist who liked historical reenactments. His three adult children were in SCA garb, served the guests food from a medieval Persian cookbook, and sat around arguing with him (and the rest of us) about economics. It was my first encounter with a family where the children shared interests with their parents and talked like peers. It fundamentally changed my mind on what families could look like.

Similar story: I visited my friend's family two years ago, and stayed in his teen daughter's room because there had been an in-house auction to determine whose room would go to the guest. She won and was monetarily compensated for it. In addition to having another example of a Relatable Family Where The Members Actually Like Each Other, I found my friend and his spouse's financial philosophy appealing and will be compensated for pregnancy and childcare by my spouse. 20% of my objection to having kids was objection to the financial arrangements of traditional marriage (which imo fucked over both of my parents when their relationship broke down... but more so my mom), so it shifted me on the kids issue to see & adopt a financial arrangement that to me feels more autonomy-preserving, egalitarian, and respectful of my labor and opportunity costs.

I knew I didn't want to be pregnant, didn't particularly like infants, didn't want to interact with toddlers for more than an hour (I like them but get very fatigued and have to go lie face down to recharge), which seemed like a good argument to not have kids. But I also simulated being 70 and childless and it felt distinctly bad. Among other reasons I noticed for the first time that I want a connection to the coming generations, which was startling.

It was hard not to notice that the giant would make an excellent dad, and also that we have complementary skill sets and preferences qua parents.

I read "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids" after I'd already decided to have kids, but when I was discussing the decision with friends, multiple of them brought the book up. Its basic argument is that we (I suppose I mean Americans and East Asians here) invest in our children well past the point where it matters, which increases the quality of life difference between parents and nonparents, which sucks because lots of people would enjoy raising kids if the unnecessary expectations were dropped. Once I actually read the book I found it suspect (I stopped reading when Caplan described a study and then drew an inference that didn't logically follow), but the conclusion seems true based on observation and common sense. My own parents and I had a lot of conflict over piano lessons because proficiency in an instrument was expected in their milieu. My mom regularly fought me to make me eat breakfast (to this day I don't eat in the morning, my body just isn't made for that) even though it would have been fine to send me off to school with a banana to tide me over until lunch. People trade away health and career points to breastfeed even though the evidence is shaky that it matters. My sister is pursuing a zero screen policy with her child and said this choice significantly increases work and emotional toll. Once I noticed I was the type to be an overworked neurotic parent and that I'd priced my own terrible personality in when simulating how hard childrearing would be, I also noticed I could (with effort) not be that person and have an easier time. So my expectations of parenting changed.

[gay-otlc]

To clear something up, when trans people say that transphobic systems (often) treat trans people as our agab, this doesn't mean we're treated the same as cis people of our agab. This doesn't mean trans women/trans people who were assigned male get treated as cis men and receive the privilege that comes with that, or that trans men/trans people who were assigned female get treated as cis women and therefore experience "just misogyny" instead of transphobia.

What it does mean is that transphobic systems often treat trans people as messed up, freakish versions of our assigned genders, when that treatment can be used to hurt us. For example, trans women being perceived as or called "predatory males invading women's spaces," or trans men being perceived as or called "stupid little girls who don't deserve bodily autonomy."

On the other hand, transphobic systems also treat trans people as messed up, freakish versions of their actual genders when that can be used to hurt us. For example, trans women being affirmed as women only to be catcalled or degraded by misogyny, or trans men being affirmed as men only to be denied medically necessary gynecological care. (This is a phenomenon that has been referred to as "malgendering.")

Malgendering very much is an aspect of transphobia that hurts a lot of people, but by no means is it the only aspect. A very significant aspect is also being seen as "men"/"women" except Wrong when doing so can be used to hurt us.

And even when it's not done maliciously, trans people can be assumed to be our assigned genders because we live in a society that assumes gender based on appearance. People generally aren't going to stop and ask pronouns before they catcall someone they perceive as a woman, or regard someone they see as a man to be a threat, so trans people very much can be treated negatively when they are incorrectly perceived as their assigned gender.

Not all trans people have the resources they need to be able to pass. Not all trans people want to pass. A lot of trans people are closeted, or are intentionally trying to be perceived as their assigned gender for safety. Not all trans people even realize they're trans yet! Believing that trans people are never seen by society as their assigned genders erases people who don't conform to a narrow idea of transness, or assumes everyone who sees a trans person can always tell.

I think a lot of people misunderstand "trans people are seen by transphobes/transphobic systems as their agab" to mean trans people are seen as "normal men/women" based on what we were assigned. This is understandably upsetting, as a lot of trans women/trans people who were assigned male are told they receive male privilege because society sees them as men, and trans men/trans people who were assigned female have their experiences with transphobia invalidated by being told it's "just misogyny," both of which are transphobic statements that people absolutely have every right to be upset by. But trans people aren't seen as cis or "normal" men/women based on what we were assigned; we're often seen as a kind of "men/women" that need to be removed from society, and that's a part of transphobia that does need to be acknowledged.

[wildpeachfarm]

Just saw a thumbnail for a commentary YouTuber commenting on the ‘dream vs Connor’ situation, and it was awful. The comments however seem to be proving that the greater internet is finally starting to see all these fake CCs for what they are, and also how horrid the treatment of Dream is. So I guess that’s nice, cause YouTube is where the core fanbase is for Dteam and seeing a majority of them on their side right now is amazing.

Irrelevant CCs continue to prove one thing. They’re irrelevant for a reason. Their entire content is based on shitting on someone els-which is fleeting, and adhering to a mob that will turn its back on them the second they make a mistake. And none of them can handle being in dreams shoes, cause they get just a teeniest taste and cave immediately.

They couldn’t make the drituation stick, and the gogcident seems to be more on George’s side now, everyone is airing out petty grievances against Dteam, and they’re all looking like fools. I could cry. We’ve waited for days like this. The Brighton bastards pissed off the commentary YouTubers, which is NOT something you want to do. I never thought I’d see the day. Twitter is still Twitter, but everywhere else is starting to realize things.

Caiti shot herself in the foot by taking this whole thing public, and her friends solidified the beginning of the end for her by doing what they did. George may have “lost” on Twitter, and some of his “friends” may have publicly turned on him, but her career is done. She lost her passion and outside of Twitter, no one really believes a word she says.

Who knew it’d take a misguided, reactionary 19 year old to catapult the general public opening their eyes to the vitriol Dteam has been facing for years? And her friends airing out their petty grievances was the nail in the coffin. I said continuously during my four years in this fandom that the tides will change for Dream, and people will be making exposés on how the internet treated him. I don’t think it’s quite that time yet, but we are getting close.

I feel for Caiti in the sense that losing your passion for something you once loved sucks. I’ve been there and it’s awful. But she brought it upon herself the second she removed her autonomy in the situation and didn’t even listen to George’s response. That is the bare minimum of what she should have done, and she didn’t, so she created her own end, albeit probably unintentionally.

To the anon doom posting about Sapnap leaving George, go back to Twitter or TikTok. That energy isn’t wanted here. If Sapnap and George didn’t leave Dream during the drituation, they’re not going to leave George when he makes a mistake. They’ve all clearly stated they love each other, and having known each other for over a decade, it would take a lot to lose a friendship that deep and with that kind of longevity. We were walking on eggshells for a bit, but that’s his brother. Take your doomposting elsewhere.

Sorry this is more of a ramble; had a lot to say and needed a place to go with it. Appreciate my morning tea, always.

One last thing.

It will never be Dteamover.

Proud dteamolo right here. (With the caveat of Sam cause he’s never wavered from those boys)

-L :)

always a pleasure to hear from you L!

And yeah I am surprised to hear that apparently youtube is taking Dream's side with the connor stuff (so far?) but I will take a win no nonetheless!

Crazy how much this has spiraled but at least people are giving dteam at least a TINY benefit of doubt now

[your-bigender-big-brother]

The Recontextualization and the Disidentification of Gender

(essay under the cut)

Maverinity is an autonomous gender quality that lies outside of masculine, feminine, neutral, and null - this makes it an outherine identity. While it is obvious that the intrinsic categories that maverinity falls into are autonomous and outherine (both at the same time), there are two very distinct features to this autonomy that are specific to the maverine experience: The recontextualization of gender and the disidentification of gender.

Autonomy starts with a separation from any governance, which is why maverique - a “maverick-like” gender - gets its name from being a maverick of sorts. It stands out, existing separately from any pre-established gender category. It isn't masculine, feminine, neutral, or null but is a distinct gendered feeling based on the “personal inner conviction” of one's gender. What this means is that our gender is defined by ourselves with none of the stringencies that come from conventional gender. Maverinity, the gender quality tied to being maverique, exists outside of the norm just the same.

When we recontextualize gender for ourselves, we reshape what it means to be a specific gender and shake up the expectations connected to it. If I were to use my own gender as an example, I would say that my malehood is of a maverine quality. While it may look like traditional malehood from someone else's perspective, its experience is far outside of the binary and is more comparable to abinarity. But it is the reshaping of my malehood that makes this gender experience an autonomous one, not simply an abinary or outherine one.

Maverinity is also the recontextualization of gender itself, rather than relying on existing genders as the context. Most people might think of gender as binary, nonbinary, multigender, neutral, and genderless (as very broad terms for several corresponding genders.) A maverine gender does not fit in with any of these terms, giving us a brand-new category for genders that doesn’t look like typical genderedness. This means that maverinity can recontextualize existing genders as well as gender as a whole: How this manifests will change from person to person depending on what maverinity means to them.

Disidentification is the other part of gender autonomy. It is the rejection of gendered expectations and of the rigidity that comes with being forced into a box. For example, one might have a gender that is not binary, but they may elect to not call themselves nonbinary or abinary either. Just because that person technically fits the definition of nonbinarity or abinarity doesn't mean they should feel obligated to use those terms - they are removed from the categories they would normally be forced into that would correspond with their gender. As for myself: I'm a transgender man but I reject “transmasculine” as an identifier. I am not transmasculine even though the general consensus supports that trans men automatically fall under that category. My transgender identity - my masculinity - is maverine-in-nature, which is why I call myself transmaverine instead.

Disidentification is what makes maverinity not feminine, not masculine, not neutral, and not genderless. It is defined, in this context, by what it is not. It establishes itself as a quality that cannot be forced into any one of these categories and is often not comparable to such. It is removed from specific identifying categories and is, instead, within its own category. Disidentification does not start and end with breaking expectations of specific genderedness, but extends to the idea that maverinity by default and on its own cannot be categorized using conventional means.

It's important to note that maverinity doesn’t just exist as a way to transform or transcend gender conventionality. It is very much outside of existing genders and of any comparison to such and because of this, it doesn't have to use midbinarity to establish itself nor does it need to even be compared to abinarity. When someone is maverine, that more than likely means they have an outherine identity with no proximity to the binary or binary-related concepts. There are plenty of singular maverine genders and specific maverine qualities that are simply based on one’s personal belief of their own gender that can’t be compared to any other gender. The variability of the maverine quality is why it works so well for so many people. Recontextualization and disidentification is only one fraction of how that quality presents itself.

[arson-09]

its very interesting to me how Tamlin is the character and High Lord that is heavily vilified (I would almost say even more than Beron strangely) when he is the only High Lord to have talked about d how he has gone about removing slavery within his court, protecting lower fae in general, and his court was open to immigration from other courts (i cant remember if its mentioned again in acomaf but in acotar fae from other courts are free to move to the spring court. example, Alis) and how overall he is a great leader. Especially when you compare him and Rhysand as High Lords.

The Court of Nightmares is well, a nightmare. Its existence is extremely strange and makes Rhysand look very odd. as well as its unclear how Rhysand gets his wealth. Velaris was a hidden city until acomaf-ish, which means it was locked (so no immigration or emigration which isn't bad per-say but does bring up how it works economically) and Rhysands inability or unwillingness to protect his citizens (not enforcing the wing clipping ban and allowing people to be abused in the CoN. and before anyone starts about him not being able to control the illyrians, why did he make it a law in the first place? It just makes him look bad) makes him look like a shitty ruler. His supposed "feminism" and friendship with the people of velaris doesnt answer these very important questions or justify the strange shit he does. Versus Tamlin, which you can refer to my opening statement for the comparison. Also to note, his rule only came into question and stability after Feyre broke into people minds (which I do feel is extremely gross and a huge violation of ones autonomy and privacy) and had to sabotage him. I won't comment how I feel about this in this post, but it says a lot that she had to go through such lengths to break him down. Especially after it was revealed he was in fact a double agent and never actually siding with Hybern.

The only time Tamlin is an arguably bad high lord is in acofas and acosf where he is in a severe mental crisis and not in a position to properly rule. But even then, it's not clear if this is actually causing harm to the land and people. It's probably not good because they don't have a proper leader but I can't believe it's a severe issue.

Its definitely a strange choice, isn't it? Cause I think anyone in their right mind would choose the anti-tyranny, anti-slavery leader who does his best for his people... and its somehow not our supposed 'hero'

"I once told you I would fight against tyranny, against that sort of evil. Did you think you were enough to turn me from that?"

Acowar, chapter 44