#and thats a major fundamental difference

[elflikesfrogs]

irks me when people say daredevil is the batman of marvel because there's one fundamental difference between them, and it's that daredevil is dirt poor and batman is a billionaire. their wealth gaps are absolutely integral to each of their characters. daredevil would not be who he is if he was a rich man and i will die on this hill

[lesboygamzee]

i dont even mind angsty art of tavroses abuse but the amount of people who make vriska so comically evil and malicious and everyone just accepts it as 100% canon is really weird . the tragedy of their situation is that vriska is acting out of her own hurt + jealousy ; i wouldnt even argue she hates tavros , i think she hates what tavros being happy means for her - that she is a product of abuse and a deeply flawed society , and that it isnt just ' natural ' for people to grow up cruel and defensive like her , she is seeing someone who grew up in similar circumstances ( on alternia , their individual situations are obviously pretty different ) and who is happy and who is peaceful and she refuses to come to terms with what that means . so she just says tavros is weak and this kind of grotesquely twists back around to vriska trying to make tavros Like Her - cruel and defensive ! so thats where the abuse comes in . its a very twisted result of vriska ' caring ' about tavros and her whole worldview of strength coming from abuse i mean hardship and refusal to accept the fact that she herself is a victim .

vriska isnt cruel to tavros out of any traditional idea of hatred , at least not to me , but because tavros existing the way she does contradicts her worldview and if she thinks about it for too long shell realise that she is a victim and that she didnt need to turn out like this in a circumstance that was in any way healthy . that the fact that she needed to do this to survive is a fundamental flaw of the world she grew up in , and that tavros being the way she is isnt a fault of tavroses , or a sign of weakness . but she is a thirteen year old girl who has been told to think like this her whole life .

when vriska kisses tavros and gets rejected , she feels pathetic for not responding by forcing reciprocation . when she eventually kills tavros , she feels pathetic for feeling guilty . she is the first one to acknowledge how fucked up she acted in the dream bubbles

stop watering down their relationship to ' vriska is evil and a bitch and tavros is good and a wimp ' . their whole relationship is built on vriskas own abuse and would not exist the way it does if she was more well adjusted . youre allowed to feel sorry for tavros , youre allowed to dislike vriska , but you are doing a major disservice to both of their characters by struggling to understand the nuance !!!

[smiling-stel]

Speaking ab the cover art from a Design pov *aside frm the comments that Cale looks out of character in the lore standpoint of vol. 2 art

(spoiler free, dw)

◇ TLDR; vol. 2 cover is beautiful, but it couldve had better color synergy. I can see why the artists did what they did, its just not my fav.

. man I'm just happy to have an official English print lmao, ill take what I can get

---

At first I didn't like the red shirt cause it was too much the same color as his hair. (Like if it was a darker or desaturated maroon, I feel it would've looked better, at least so he isn't matching with his own hair-)

. But now taking a step back n looking at vol. 2 again, zoomed out, I actually think his Face is the most jarring part [more on that later ◇]

◇ . The bright red of the shirt being lit by a yellower light, altho matching w his hair, actually isn't so jarring to me anymore cause I noticed two things

◇ 1) his pants are also tinted red (if my eyes aren't deceiving me) meaning compared to the background and the other two characters, Cale *in his entirety* is a red-toned silhouette -> this is a illustrative design strategy where the artist assigns a group of colors to a specific subject n *Restrictvely* uses the Hue Differences to their advantage. In my opinion, its a good choice in making him contrast and stand out. You can definitely Tell he's the main character with just the cover art.

. BUT it can also give off an Outlandish or alien feeling because (in this case) Cale is the ONLY red in the scene. Theres no balancing of red tones from his character to the background At All (e.g. the artists doesnt add Any red to the surroundings so his character can "fit in" with the scene- like as if you photoshopped a guy in sunny lighting into a dark room, the lighting differences is jarring n you can tell the guy is just slapped on top [not saying the artist did that at all, but the way they painted Cale to stand out feels jarring in that sense). While this does an insanely good job at putting him in the spotlight, it perhaps does Too great of a job, making him feel isolated or strange compared to the rest of the piece.

. (Then again, you can justify that that was the goal. To isolate Cale n show hes alien from a lore standpoint as he's "not from this world" as an isekai story)

◇ 2) but we're forgetting this is a COVER art. It's not Just an illustration to be pretty. To break my earlier point, altho Cale IS the only red in the *Illustration,* this art piece is - fundamentally - a Cover Art. It has the Title thats a part of its design <-<-<- And if we looksey at the title, what do we see? Red and warm tones. Like what other thing thats only reds? Cale Henituse himself!

. The Title IS the balance I said was missing in point 1). My theory is thats Also why the artist tinted the lighting on Cale to be warmer n more yellow, so as to use the yellow orange in the title (and the contrast of cools n warms from the focal points to the rest of the art) to their advantage. It helps add reds to the lower half of of the piece where the only warm tones are Choi Han's hand (the other character) and the fleeting window curtain; both of those details being at the edges of the piece and Both very small so they hardly have an influence on the overall design.

. So the title, taking up the majority of the lower half of the piece, draws the warmth down n assists in balancing the overall cover design.

So the reds have now been explained, but why are the whites so white now?--

◇ . Earlier I had said Cale's face was the most jarring part of the cover. And I still fully stand by that sentiment. Its the same idea where the reds do Too great a job isolating Cale; the whites do Too great a job contrasting w the background n the two other characters - who are black n cool tones - to the point where it Heavily draws the eye, practically in a violent manner.

. The extreme paleness is quite lore accurate for Cale's character, who hes isekaied as, but the extreme lighting Highlighting just his face compared to Choi Han's face is an extremely bold design decision (again, not a bad thing as he IS the main focal point, but adding onto the Isolating Spotlight trait going on)

◇ Ok then, but why's his jacket also so freakishly bright white? I heard from a fellow lcf fan (love discussing w you dawg <3) that they think the jacket is the worst part of his cover design.

N I agree. The reds standing out can be justified as a design strat, his face is the focal point so thats why that stands out, but why the jacket??

. Here i am on my artist apologist era <3

◇ . The jacket being blindly white is (probably) to Dampen the Harshness of his face being so bright.

. Altho the guy looks great in white ☆°• with how extreme the lighting is in this cover art, I think the artist wanted to balance the laser beam that is Cale's face paleness by spreading it out to his jacket, specifically that left collar fold ( i think that's called the lapel?)

. Basically by making the jacket's collar also intensely white, the artist gives their best attempt at trying to make Cale's skin less jarring so as to not make it so ridgedly highlighted. Like black ink spilt onto fresh paper, they tried to spread it out so its not so condensed in high contrast. ...But that only made the jacket join in on the uncanniness- TTvTT

---

(Posting the pic again so yall don't gotta scroll far o7)

Other notes I've noticed n wanted to just point out while I'm here looking through the Design Lense ☆°•

☆ The red of Cale's hair and the red of his shirt n neck scarf sandwiches his face, making it stand out even More. Ealier I said the contrast of the vibrant red to the paleness makes his face draw the eye, but thats also thanks to the *position* of the colors! Not just the colors themselves B) isn't that so cool (tell me yes even if you have to lie-)

☆ The lighting on Choi Han's cape, chest, to face -> the window arch -> to Cale's entire person being lit up + how he's wearing a long white jacket

. It all creates this general arch of light tones and highlighted features which surrounds and hugs the title! The artists really knows how to use their darks and lights !!

☆ Choi Han's entire person, Cale's pants, and our lovely Roan Miru (the dragon) are the only deepest dark black tones in the entire piece! The privilege of being the subjects <3

☆ cale looks crossed eyed lel

. Im glad I'm not the only one who struggles with eyes still

. Or maybe this artist did it right n I just don't know how to draw eyes- (very plausible tbh)

Man I love artists

---

All in all, Im not a fan of vol. 2 cover art but I can see why the artists did what they did

◇ . One of the most important things of commercial art is that its visually pleasing, regardless of design, lore, or even logic. The design choices are golden but putting them all together couldve been done better. Not that the art is ugly in any way. Its still gorgeous af, there just couldve been more balance or overall color synergy.

This is just my opinion anyways :D! No hate anywhere <33

[wildpeachfarm]

I think since the beginning ccs were in a more parasocial relationship with the dteam than the majority of fans were like actually. Whether they wanted to be them, be their "friends", or their envy and hatred.

There are countless examples I could give after yrs now of watching these play out and then these ccs realizing their expectations did not match up with reality and what dteam have with each other which will never happen truly happen with anyone else because they were incredible close years before content. K, q, and t tried and got close to it but at the end of it all what they really wanted them to be was streamer/content friends and envisioned them to be different. Most ccs get a few days of that "fifteen min game" then it's back to the usual with both sides (dranti/"friends").

Also I love dteam but they all have said many times and been very open about how they have a hard time keeping up with plans, "lazy", stubbornness, etc so many people were calling their house a content house but they just wanted to live together. They have no desire to be like "the roomies" or like 100T house. Like no they will not show up to every single birthday stream, etc how many times have we heard other ccs outside of the mcyt sphere think dsmp was an org and that dream was stupid for not doing so?

Even the most "kind" streamers/ccs think like this. The dteam will never be like a professional group of streamers like otv&friends that's not who they are, and it's part of their charm but it def sets unrealistic expectations that ccs around them might feel. They changed the game because they were having fun and then people took it too far (for ex *cough k cough* *cough q cough*)

Yeah I definitely think dteam are fundamentally misunderstood by a large portion of CCs throughout the internet. And I think that has to do with how "simple" they are in terms of content and audience appeal. That it really is just three best friends who want to play games with each other and goof off. They don't make content and friendships with people to climb some CC ladder or turn their bffs-home into a "content house" for views.

We saw this a lot during the face reveal era because so many CCs were like "why did he face reveal?? Thats so dumb for his branding" when in reality he just wanted to be with his best friend and go outside. Very simple compared to the grand schemes that other youtuber were theorizing about the face reveal.

[spottedskunkfa1ry]

Gaslit about covid? Me too. [RANT]

as you all can tell by my page im so new, but for context, im trying to find COVID-19 safe/conscious groups online. i started with Instagram and ive moved to here.

something thats on my mind recently is how i have been severely gaslit to just think covid isnt a thing we should worry for and that im a conspiracy theorist about covid just because i still use mitigation in my daily life and i give a shit about disabled/immunocompromised/chronically ill people in my community and in my life. i genuinely am so scared for whats happening and what will happen to our collective health.

like i had like a breakdown after all my roommates stopped masking last fall and it lead to me being triggered and disassociating for almost a whole year because i felt unsafe with people i previously felt safe with (feeling/being unsafe in my home is a major trigger for me). i was lost touch with reality, i have never felt so disconnected from my friends, mind, and body. it was so bad. And it took a lot of energy, effort, and practice to communicate my needs and boundaries with them only for them to be like "Cool you sound like you're living in fear and im not changing". in the end i decided to move to a different apartment because i coulndt deal with all of them being like that.

the past 4-5 years have made me feel a lot of things and i wrote a poem about the grief ive felt specifically around the pandemic and how it has drastically altered my late teenage and young adult years. maybe ill put it here one day lmao.

a silver lining in this is that all my way of life as i knew it is gone and dead. and that makes more room for me to find people who care for and value our lives at a basic fundamental level and furthermore are willing to act daily to show our love and care for one another. this new life makes more room for me to really question my consumerism [god forbid we stop eating indoors at restaurants and risk getting a deadly virus for shitty food] . it makes me question how i interact with the world with a COVID-safe/mindful lens. and most importantly put disability justice at the forefront of my activism.

I have grieved how life was and i have come out the other side accepting and wanting to do everything in my power to protect my community in the ongoing pandemic. i understand my responsibility and i have begun to see how disability justice connects all of our collective oppression and how disability justice/rights/activism is a key part to our collective liberation. i have seen how covid conscious or safe people [idk what to label it ive been going back and forth bc i think a lot of people have different definitions of these labels im sorry] are so kind, so caring, so compassionate, so giving, and so loving in a way that i dont see or truly feel in other activists/advocates groups. I personally feel the safest, most loved, and understood by my friends, family, and peers who are covid safe and practice community care.

much love to all of them it has made me love them in beautiful new ways. xx im so grateful to have them in my life. if u made it this far ur real asf. if u want share whatever covid related rants id like to read them or if you have thoughts on what i wrote let me know 🥺.

rn i just feel like im shouting into the tumblr void and its been cathartic.

[stagefoureddiediaz]

honestly maybe it's just me but buck is literally repeating the same steps as with natalia and taylor as with tommy. they meet, he has a crush, go on a date, it's awful and the date leaves, they then come back, then try for real. Like it sounds like even though Buck is off the hamster wheel in regards to his sexuality he very much is still on the hamster wheel when it comes to repetitive mistakes when it comes to his relationships.

Hey Nonnie

I woudn't say that at all. Yes of course there are some similarities - there always will be - between Buck dating Tommy and the Buck who dated Taylor or Natalia. But the reality is they are worlds apart.

For starters Tommy didn't leave because the date was awful, he left to give Buck some space to do a bit more figuring out - he said so himself that his what he was doing. He chose to leave the ball in Bucks court, understanding this was a big new thing for him and that it wouldn't be right to continue anything until Buck was ready. Buck then contacted him when he was and they met up and decided mutually to give things ago.

This is very different to both Taylor and Natalia - both of whom left after something big had happened in Bucks life (Eddie being shot and Kameron popping up out of seemingly nowhere) and then they were the ones to come back - to chase after Buck.

Look we can have whole conversations about the chasing being chased aspect of things but the long and short of it is That both Taylor and (to a lesser extent) Natalia, Ali and Abby chased Buck in one way or another and when it suited them. Tommy has never chased Buck - he shot his shot, sure, made his interest known, but he hasn't once chased Buck. Buck has always mistaken things for him doing the chasing (he is an very unreliable narrator) becuse he gets invested fast and so pursues things. His mistake is moving to fast - falling to quickly for people.

This is the major fundamental difference with Tommy, who is older and wiser and settled with who he is and what he wants. He also has the understanding of being queer and coming out later in life - of discovering that part of yourself that has been hidden and the fact it might take Buck a minute to figure out things.

The other big thing for me is the level of honest Buck is being here - this isn't something we've seen before in this way. He has been completely up front with Tommy when it has been important for him to be so (I would argue he did do the same for Natalia but that he was more forced into it by circumstance). That coffee they had was a very very clear example of that, he sat down, appologised and laid his cards out on the table. He's told the two most important people in his life that he's bi and interested in Tommy and yes maybe going to a wedding is a bit fast, but he also knows most of the people there so he's not walking in to a big unknown in t hat respect and he has a lot of goodwill with the firefam at this moment after flying them to the curise ship so they could rescue Athena and Bobby.

In all honesty I'm far more circumspect about Natalias behaviour as well - far more than a large portion of fandom was towards her. Did I like her as a character or for Buck, No I didn't, but she also didn't do all that much wrong in my eyes, her wanting to take a minute when presented with all that Bucks life is, to think things through before jumping into something is perfectly acceptable and healthy behaviour. The reality is that she was more interested in Bucks death than she was in his life and thats probably what brought her back - that itching need to know more about his death and what it was like.

But she came into his life when he was in a rough place mentally and it was never going to go well for that reason alone. All of Bucks girlfriends have that in common - they met him on the job and then come inot his life when he is having some form of internal crisis. Abby when he had just lost his first person on the job - making him emotionally vulnerable. Ali when he's accepted his relationship with Abby wasn't going anywhere a new guy had just started at work (yes they were getting on by this point but it is still new and an unknown) and his sister had just come back into his life after having had no contact for several years - and he knows she's in a fragile place. Taylor messes hm around but when she comes back into his life and wants to date him - Eddie has just been shot and he's looking after Christopher - he's massively emotionally compromised. None of these are good times to start a romantic relationship.

That isn't the case with Tommy - Bucks actually in a pretty decent place - yes the whole discovering he's queer could be argued as making him emotionally compromised, but he's being given the grace to do things at his own pace - in a healthy way - Tommy is letting Buck dictate the pace they go at.

We also have to remember that we are in a tv show - every single character who isn't a main (or to a certain extent a recurring) is there to act as a storytelling vehicle for one of the mains - their character traits are always going to be those which help get a main character from A to B, to move the story along and to make sure our mains learn something about themselves and their fellow mains along the way.

Abby was about getting Buck from being a bit of a clueless player into a long term (ish) relationship - about growing him out of his jock ways and getting him (and us) to recognise that he isn't a player that he wants real love and a long term relationship. Ali was about him getting over his first big disappointment - about getting hm to move on and about getting him his own place to exist. Taylor was about learning what love didn't look like, about how to treat others and showing him what he wasn't looking for and teaching him not to compromise on his morals. Natalia was all about Buck reconciling himself with his death and rebirth and as soon as he had done that, she was gone.

Tommy is about Buck discovering his queer identity, having a safe space to explore that and about getting him ready for Eddie - its why Tommy is soooo similar to Eddie - Buck will come out of this relationship (whatever form it takes) understanding who he is, and recognising what he wants is what he already almost has - Eddie.

Tommy is also about helping manoeuvre Eddie into questioning himself - another reason why he is so similar to Eddie - Eddie needed to see a gay version of himself - and with Buck to actually start thinking about himself and who he is and what he wants.

So all this to say that Nonnie - Buck has very much got off that hamster wheel and he is very much not making the same mistakes over again. I'm very excited to see how it continues to play out and I'm overjoyed with how the show is handling telling this story.

[figcookie01]

some queer and misc. analysis of trish una

im not sure if everyone saw my addition on this post here proposing the theory that bucciarati is a "parental" character in a non-traditional and queer sense, but i wanted to continue that discussion by talking about trish now.. since to me, she has what could be described as araki's first attempt at a true character arc for a female character, who simultaneously has elements that read like queer self-actualization that we watch unfold throughout the story.

for the purposes of this analysis, what is important to recognize about trish's introduction is how she is figuratively (team bucciaratis mission to protect her will get them closer to giorno/bucciaratis goals) and literally (his only known relative and identifiable factor at the start) linked to her father; she loses her mother (loving supportive family), is thrust into a horrifying world out to harm her for factors beyond her control, and is expected to blindly trust her father and by extension his men assigned to protect her. its no wonder she is so guarded, but my point here is how this establishes trish as starting off vulnerable and uncertain of the world she's inadvertently embroiled in beyond her safe upbringing with her mother.

nevertheless, trish is repeatedly described as having the willpower to figure these things out for her own sake, and a tenacity for these frightening events (la squadra's attacks) beyond that on the average person. both giorno and abbacchio mention it at different points (although abbacchios line is changed to narancias in the anime).

perhaps the most notable early example of her gumption is what she first says at the end of the grateful dead/beach boy fight. although bucciarati is not at liberty to answer her questions about both why she is being attacked, and also what the truth about these strange powers are.

however, id argue this is in line with what has been previously established for bucciarati's character to say; that it is up to trish herself to determine what these things mean, especially if they are related to her intrinsic identity.

this continues once they arrive in venice at the church, where we get to see trish's human vulnerability and fear. something i find particularly interesting is that, above all else, she is afraid of the uncertainty about what her father will be like and her personal fate.

this was one of the original things i wanted to talk about under a queer reading; for a queer person to come out to their family, there sometimes may be a concern about alienation of self. that is, coming out may, figuratively and literally, feel like you are revealing an entire side or life you live that they know nothing about. it may be about seeking approval from those who are, in many cases, a major part of life and your upbringing; she wants this week from hell to be over so she can return to some semblance of normalcy as herself, and her father is her only hope for this then.

something of particular note that bucciarati responds with is the probability that she will be given an entire new identity and forced to uproot even further, separated in even her most fundamental identity from the life she once led for the sake of her fathers comfort. even before the horrific reception her father gives her, trishs chances of being accepted as she is and loved are poor, a matter that might be incredibly common for people who try to express who they really are to unwelcoming families.

in trishs case, diavolo has literally never met her at all in any capacity, nor was he present in her upbringing; there is an extra factor of blind faith she must put into him. but he is the only biological "family" shes got; we will talk about nontraditional families and team bucciarati in a moment.

for this reason, bucciarati assures her (whether it is of his own doomed naivety or something else entirely) that a family will love you no matter what, because thats what they do. its a value that, up until that next moment, was something he himself had complete faith in.

as the rest of this arc shows though, that wasnt the case for trish, and never would be.

the events at san giorgio are the turning point for the entirety of vento aureo, with trish at the center of it all. and while this analysis is focused on trish, i wanted to include how it is also an earth-shattering moment for bucciarati, now faced with the culminating reality that the boss never gave a shit about family in the first place, and was only after his selfish desire to be unknowable. his attempted murder of his innocent civilian daughter invokes, to me, the needless cruelty some unaccepting families may have towards their children upon coming out or other realization that their child is both related to them, but not in a way they deem acceptable.

while it is laid out rather straightforwardly, this needless cruelty from biological family is relatable enough to change narancias mind and follow bucciarati after he betrays the gang; cementing once more that the only bonds of trust these characters have are with one another, since not even their biological families will care for them, let alone society.

at the restaurant in venice, narancia is still fearful about how trish will receive this absolute rejection, but her reception is surprisingly determined.

in the past, ive seen this scene used as the real point where trish as a female character finally comes into her own as a person, but as we previously established, she really had it in her all along, and it was only put to the test then (more on her innate courage in a moment).

trish, like the rest of team bucciarati, has no choice but to persist as she is, to exist as her own person even if all the odds are against her. not only this, but she tentatively decides to join in bucciaratis cause, a move that she explains as just to find her own origins or die trying. at this point, her motive might be concerned only with herself, but throughout the notorious BIG fight, that matter changes.

aboard the plane to sardinia, trish grapples with the willingness of team bucciarati to pursue diavolo, even after they no longer are required to protect her. i would say this is when she begins to feel comradery with the team and their cause to exist boldly in the face of someone all-powerful (diavolo) who wishes they were dead, rather than just being someone or something reduced to a secondary role (although how shes treated after this fight is another story...)

the moment trish realizes that she alone can save giorno (and therefore, the entirety of the team), she is struck with the final dilemma of whether or not she wants to get involved with all of these things on the front lines. she decides she does, without being fully conscious of it, because of the courage now awakened and manifested in-full as her stand, spice girl.

spice girl is unique as a stand for being one of the few that seems to have her own consciousness, although it really is a part of trishs consciousness that was always a part of her, now fully realized in literal, physical form.

the courage required for her stand to now fully manifest was in her all along, and under a queer lens this could be likened to a person now being able to live authentically as they are, the incongruity mostly solved now that she has grown as a person and has a (support) group/system of those who have had similar experiences.

notorious BIG concludes with trish delivering her own beatdown and saving all of the team, seeming to fully cement her as a force to be reckoned with within the jojo universe and her nuanced personhood that had been building this entire time.

all this in mind, this isnt to say that trish's character doesnt feel stunted by araki after this point, for no other reason than misogyny. her destruction rank-A level stand and fighting prowess is forgotten after they arrive in sardinia, and during the green day/oasis fight she is conveniently relegated to the caretaker position for narancia, even if giorno is the "healer" and her own stand stronger than his in combat. i would argue the biggest injustice towards trish as a fully fledged character was the enforcement of these stereotypically feminine roles on a character who, as weve just discussed, has learned to be confident, courageous, and unapologetically herself throughout the entirety of vento aureo.

when i first set out to write this post, i was concerned with talking about trish from an almost entirely queer angle. it evolved, then, into something much more full-bodied, with that being simply one lens you can apply to her character arc.

id love to discuss these things (and the stuff in my bucciarati analysis) at greater lengths, and also want to say that despite writing this over a period of time, i may have messed up my wording or made points that seem like reaches... none of this is meant to speak for the experiences of any real person, and are rather generalizations. i hope that regardless of these things, more people can see vento aureo for the narrative value i really think it has, especially to the queer fanbase who, including myself, may relate heavily to the subtextual experiences depicted.

special thanks to @fur-bee for going through this with me and giving me key insights and for my other friends to proofread and such :D

[mecachrome]

hello! i read you primer (which was lovely) and if you dont mind, what makes you think that lando has a high eq? not that i disagree with you but i feel like high intelligence of any kind is not something that is commonly associated with lando (i say this with affection of course) thats why it stood out for me :)

hey anon!!! first of all thank you so much :) and ofc i'd be more than happy to share my perspective although of course this is just my very random meta as a semi-uninformed oscar fan hahaha

ok not to go off on too much of a tangent but i think something i often encounter in real people fandom is this ig very restrictive perception of "intelligence" when it comes to examining celebrity upbringings and career choices? which i don't think necessarily comes from a malicious place, and i mean obviously a major factor & meaningful context behind lando specifically not finishing school is that he is extremely rich and had major financial security to pursue his dreams, and then on top of that he's definitely prone to saying many impulsive and objectively uninformed things, but...... just as a purely personal philosophy i try to avoid ascribing too much weight to "traditional" notions of intelligence or one's academic success. like i do find it endearing that oscar studied engineering subjects because i did too, but just as an example if you look at oscar it's really like, Well the difference between his education and lando's is frankly MUCH less pronounced than the difference between oscar's and lily's (read: a-level cs is not going to make you a software engineer...), even though people often act like lando is the dumbest person in the world and oscar is some engineering genius. and then furthermore when you examine the actual types of "intelligence" useful to someone becoming a successful racing driver aka the rote memory, technical knowledge, and sheer intuition required for honing race craft and maximizing pure pace around a circuit, lando is just as smart as any driver. or at least that's what i think!!!

let me put the rest below the cut........

also to some degree i really do believe it's smarter to know that you're wasting your time in school if you can be doing something else that will be more fulfilling and is accessible and achievable to you, because doesn't that just afford you extra time to practice and hone your craft and get further with your life? again with lando this was a decision that could only have been made with a massive safety net and undeniable amounts of privilege, Which I Recognize, but just like—idk. i think it's fine to not like school, and even though Lando Norris specifically certainly does not need his academic history defended i try to remain consistent in not moralizing the specific dimensions of someone's intellect.

but anyway!!! that doesn't really have anything to do with eq or your question HKLSDFH i just like overexplaining... in terms of eq, i think it kind of just inherently shows in how lando makes and maintains his friendships honestly, which all goes back to the idea of his empathy. and this is perhaps a bit of a fannish meta oversimplification and obviously everything i say is VibesTM at the end of the day but i do think he's someone who's just incredibly and stubbornly loyal, and that even though some of the things he says come off as callous to fans who examine his intent through the lens of their own ideologies, they're actually usually perfectly fine in the context of his relationships and the general culture of the f1 paddock. like he's been friends with maxf and co since he was a functional baby and is somehow still codependent with these people who aren't actually properly relevant to the sports bubble he occupies at all anymore, and yet that hasn't changed the fundamental makeup of the connections he's made because he just, like... values people.

like tps and mclaren personnel and pretty much every driver on the grid etc. all genuinely LOVE lando, and imo he's very self-aware of how he comes off to fans and does show a lot of grace despite............certain things. like he's not going to always Say The Right Thing in the moment, but he generally understands how people feel about him and why they react to the things he says, which is why he's so effective at both marketing himself and hiring people who can market him better (how many other drivers have built up a branding as strong as ln4 & quadrant before the age of 23!)

the way i see it is essentially that lando's "honesty" is part of his eq. because formula 1 is an entertainment product built off bullshit, but actually successful and healthy and sustainable outfits need honesty and accountability to thrive. and ultimately lando is, at least within a sporting context, a deeply accountable person. Also speaking again of different perspectives of intelligence: for ex mclaren works the way it does because zbrown understands his place, andrea understands his place, and lando and oscar both understand their places!!! like zak brown's savvy is in business so he handles the press conferences even though that's usually the tp's job, and andrea understood that key was ineffective in his role so he retooled the entire engineering triumvirate, and then lando and oscar... work as teammates because they have a productive and collaborative understanding of each other and what they're meant to deliver every week.

idk if that makes sense really. but i think lando takes on a lot of responsibility and clearly cares deeply about the team and is very vocal about that, regardless of whether "he's too scared to be max's teammate" doubters believe it alksdfhlkfdh, and i think this kind of... general refusal to entertain bullshit in a world of bullshit & the fact that he's still friends with daniel and close to maxv and all these people who he's apparently deeply wronged according to certain corners of the internet etc. etc. is a pretty solid reflection of that eq. he doesn't always know what to say but he usually means the right thing, most of the time..... and as much as oscar is clearly mature beyond his years i don't think lando has ever shown an inability to face the heat as the senior driver and team leader at mclaren? like if you watch any recent interviews where he answers technical questions or discusses where mclaren is developmentally or their place in the championship fight he always speaks very well and confidently and measuredly. like IDK. maybe i'm just crazy though. lmk if that makes no sense HDSLFKH sorry for this essay 😔

[loving-n0t-heyting]

Whence all these assurances in my circle [speaker] is a secular liberal democrat only by sheer happenstance of birth and education, obviously if they had been suckled on some other creed theyd go all in for it instead?

The overwhelming majority of ppl close to me have wound up adopting moral, political, religious, etc beliefs radically different from their birth parents, culture, school system, etc. Maybe some of them will protest that this is purely arational "values drift" if put on the spot about it but for the most part they describe and seem to have experienced it as the result of learning and reflection

Yours is the ideology whose point is it doesnt decide on big substantive differences of value and ultimate belief and severs ppl from all fundamental attachment to community, comrades, and cult! Thats liberalisms whole deal! Isnt it... weird to treat this pluralistic, universalist agnosticism as an arbitrary affliction of particular circumstance you will defend to the death for no other reason than that you were born to it?

[radiation]

I kind of want to hear your thoughts wrt how anya couldve been handled better. Do you think the pregnancy part shouldve just not been there in the first place? I cant think of any ending for her that is less gruesome that doesnt also change many aspects of all the later parts of the game. And also in general i just think you have interesting takes on the game and i wanna hear more

Good question and i will provide my thoughts under the cut. Listless unfiltered stuff tho Im so out of it right now but im chilling.

As a conclusion of all that precedes it I agree, the ending is properly gruesome and its hard to say it should've been done any other way. If we're being faithful to the story and her character as-is i'd say less so change the major events and moreso change the way they're delivered and slip in more respectful characterization of anya here and there through fleshing out her life and personal motivations, even if it's just hints of it

However unless they really really did a crazy good job i probably still wouldnt like it. But that's like, the unfortunate domino effect of writing a character like her, i feel that her character/place in the story is misogynistic on a pretty fundamental level and eliminating that would require restructuring things about her character/the story. But idk, who's to say they couldnt have.

Its complicated because theres all these different layers of narrative decisions being made that influence other shit and the more fundamental of a choice you change, the greater differences there will be down the road. Its butterfly effect shit. Like sometimes i think about this in my own projects. I think about like, what if while developing my own game, i'd made the 2 main characters completely different people? What if they were fucking like, Kevin and Trent, and id gone down the whole pipeline of fleshing out their characters and actually made them genuinely good. If thats what I made and thats what everyone was used to and then I randomly replaced them with Neal and Jack and the themes associated with them, people would be like. Thats wrong why the fuck did you do that. You ruined the themes bro. But the same is true of the other way around. You have to ask: is what's in front of me truly the best version it could have possibly been, or could it have been any number of things, and I'm just attached to what's right in front of me?

Its not to say you cant write about misogyny or sexual assault, or that there aren't people with experiences like Anya and you can't write about them. It's more asking like, out of all of the routes they couldve gone with wrt having any female characters whatsoever why did they choose this one specifically. If they had from the get-go written a bit of a different character with different themes and went down that whole road, no pregnancy or whatever but some other shit more impactful for what was there, they could have potentially written something equally or more powerful, just tackling a different vein of subject matters.

Like not saying at all this is what they should've written, I think its kind of lame, this is just a random ass example. But what if the conflict between Anya and Jimmy was them previously being like, rivals for the same position at their job, and likely due to misogyny in the system Jimmy ended up getting it instead of her. Anya is essentially in the same position of inferiority under Jimmy that Jimmy is under Curly and while Jimmy is obsessed with this narrative of him not getting what he deserves and lashes out, Anya is forced to grin and bear it, and their characters are meant to call attention to the gap in acceptable behaviors and entitlement that is created by patriarchal society. Idk. I think theres already hints of that and its way less emotionally impactful than whats there rn but the point is like, it still could've been well executed, and if thats what was there, people wouldnt be asking like "wow this sucks ass i really wish anya had gotten sexually assualted instead" LOL do you know wha ti mean.

I dont even know what my point is right now but idk I guess i dont have a good answer for what is the best thing they couldve done differently. I can only speak for my own preferences and honestly I dont write about this subject matter at all. Like ill be honest the specific subject of women being abused/assaulted makes me so upset i dont want to put even a fraction of an ounce of that into the world period, so i just dont write about it, my mind always goes to women dealing with other kinds of conflicts instead. And I generally tend to write more about things like microaggressions and the complexities of relationships rather than unbelievable injustices without relief. I lay a lot of respect on my characters, when horrible things happen to them I offset the events into the realm of neutrality by affording them things like privacy and moments of calm and monotony. I like writing like this and i think its good but its certainly somewhat informed by me living a privileged lifestyle. So yknow who am i to say what experiences you should write about.

Well i just looked it up and it seems like the main developers on the game are both men so im gonna say actually yeah Methinks they should've just straight up written something else. I mean i have no way of knkowing their experiences for sure but im gonna take a wild guess and say they dont have a lot of skin in this game. Also i just realized they also made how a fish is made that game looked pretentious as fuck sorry.

[urdreamgirls-dreamgirl]

i saw that review on letterboxd of all the rhetorical questions for barbie and like… the more i think abt it, the more i’m certain that the review’s author fundamentally misunderstood the film. barbie land is not a utopia in the way that adults would think abt a utopia, like the author seems to imply… barbie land is canonically shaped by little girls playing with their dolls. that’s why we see a supreme court. thats why there are nobel prizes and authors and lawyers (also because that’s how the toys are marketed… would there be a mermaid in ur utopia??? there would be in mine!). that’s why barbie and ken don’t necessarily know what a boyfriend and girlfriend are “meant” to do (not to mention that the author’s assumption that sex is fundamental to a romantic relationship is problematic at best). that’s why barbie is indifferent to ken (i personally had the life size barbie and my sister had the barbie dream house—we had the working woman barbie game, i had the genie barbie gameboy game, we had countless barbie dolls; we didn’t own a single ken doll lol). barbie land is a world created by and for little girls as they play with their dolls (she says in a comment on the original post “don’t little girls play with their dolls in a sexual way?” and yeah, sure, some do. but i didn’t and i’m sure there are others who didn’t… just like there are some girls who completely mutilated their own dolls and made them into horrifying creatures)… that’s why stereotypical barbie starts having an existential crisis—because a grown woman begins to play with her doll again and starts reshaping barbie land… we, as the audience, are meant to understand this as an outlier to how barbie land is canonically created. the author also calls ken “crass” and “slovenly”… maybe after he builds the patriarchy in barbie land he becomes “crass” but i wouldn’t call him slovenly at any point in the film (i suppose this is just semantics tho).

also, please stop saying that barbie land is a reversal of the real world. it isn’t, even if that may have been the filmmakers intentions. again, barbie is indifferent to ken. she does not abuse him, she does not treat him like he exists to service her by cooking or cleaning or providing other favors for her… barbie does not oppress ken in the way that men oppress women in the real world (we have no idea if he owns property or where he lives and she doesn’t seem to particularly care—extremely different from the fact that women couldn’t have their own bank accounts or credit cards, get a mortgage on their own or divorce their husbands through no fault divorce until the second half of the 20th century in the us… within a lot of our mothers and grandmothers lifetimes!!!!) and it is a complete disservice to conflate or equate the two. we actually see barbie drawing clear boundaries around her time and space in regards to ken—this is not a reversal of misogyny as women and girls experience it in the real world, by any stretch of the imagination.

is the film perfect or revolutionary or radical? of course not. it was produced by major studios and corporations in hollywood. of course the barbie movie is a fucking commercial for barbie, like… to expect anything different is just extremely dumb on your part if u saw the trailer, saw the marketing, saw the interviews, bought a ticket, and sat ur ass in the theater, like be fuckin serious. but don’t do women and girls a disservice by discrediting the world and thoughts and ideas it could open up for them by seeing themselves be taken seriously on screen in a major summer blockbuster with stupid fucking questions because u want to feel superior to everyone else because YOU and ONLY YOU see through the capitalist marketing of lipstick pop girlboss feminism (especially when juxtaposed with the way the female characters are treated in oppenheimer, which we cannot help but compare to the barbie film with the viral marketing of barbenheimer).

[mcclintcock]

in veep we have selina's party and then the opposition party, selinas party is represented with blue and they're pro abortions (kind of) and pro clean jobs etc etc and then the opposition party is blue and presumably against all this stuff, but then jonah runs as veep for the blues w/ his platform of being anti "muslim math" and shit, which leads me to believe that politics in veep dont have a democratic-republican binary as we understand it. technically they dont really talk about things being liberal or conservative in it either right? so that spectrum cannot really be used to categorize political stuff either.

anyways we know the broad strokes of history are the same, ww2 happened, ww1 happened, major figures like hitler buddha lincoln washington whatever they all existed

veep also takes place in the same universe as the thick of it and in the loop so thats something, there is also a primary party and then the opposition party in the thick of it so i will look into that

anyways there is something fundamentally different about the veep universe than our world even pre-canon and i intend to get to the bottom of it 🫡

[thetourguidebarbie]

i think the term judeochristian is sometimes used instead of abrahamic to stress the core 'the poor/humble/slave is good the rich/proud/slaver is bad/evil' rhetoric-philosophy that both religions share. It's something Nietzsche first kind of identified as stemming from judaism (and that was later passed on to christianity) and that found kind of lacking or present in a fundamentally different way in islam. Nietzsche hated this idea and went on with the whole übermensch shit philosophy which was adopted by the nazi party. This isn't meant to justify people using the word for their own political agenda, that goes without saying! But as a philosophy student it bugs me when people think it's just about the theological aspect of it just as it bugs me to see nietzsche quotes used randomly just cause they sound deep and intellectualoid (sorry about the vent, i really love ur blog it's just thats been a long week 😔)

What I'm hearing, and please tell me if I'm getting this wrong, is that in your experience, "judeochristian" is used as a shorthand for "jewish and christian, but not islam" and I think that endorsing the use of the term in that way fundamentally misses the point.

I'm not super familiar with Nietzsche's works, so I can't say whether or not I disagree with him lumping in christian and jewish values on this particular subject (though, from the context you've given me here, I probably do). However, from a cursory google, it seems that he's mostly talking about christianity, and my gut reaction here is to point out that the problem with using "judeochristian" to talk about values is that the vast majority of people who say "judeochristian" are either lumping judaism in with christianity in a way that deeply and offensively mischaracterizes jewish values (which is tbh my guess as to what the context of this is), or, and this doesn't seem to be the case in this particular example but is very common, uses the word to give credibility to something not just being christian and therefore not exclusive in whatever the context is, which is almost always, in my experience at least, a context that jewish people want no part in lol You can't separate the use of "judeochristian" from "the theological aspect" because the term "judeochristian" is fundamentally about misconstruing jewish theology.

And more importantly, even if I'm mischaracterizing Nietzsche's use of the term, if I don't know what you're talking about, and I'm relatively educated and well-read, I'd bet money that most other people don't either. In the orbit of a philosophy student, talking about Nietzsche's specific thoughts on religion makes sense, but to literally everyone else who says "judeochristian" in the year 2024, they are lumping jewish traditions and beliefs into values that are inherently christian to lend them credibility or fake diversity, and that's antisemitic.

I hope that makes sense, and I'm glad you like my blog 💖 It has also been a long week for me and I wrote this at 6am, so sorry if it's not super coherent.

*I also want to note that I do know that many people say that Nietzsche is an example of essentially an "anti-anti-semite" and like, thats fine, but it doesn't exempt him from lumping in jewish and christian values in ways that are harmful, if that is in fact what he is doing...

[springcatalyst]

2, 10, 18, 25 for the relationship asks with Diana and who ever you think would be most interesting for these questions!!!!

yesss thank you beloved im feelin like the pepe silvia scene from it's always sunny but im just pointing to a picture of diana. im in love with her

most of these will probably be her and julian because that's the one thats. how u say. complicated.

2: How long have these two characters known each other?

Diana and Julian have known each other long enough that it doesn't matter. Since childhood. Sure there must have been a time before they were friends, but it's like the period before your sibling is born- can you really say there was ever a point you 'met'? They lived in the same town, they gravitated towards each other in the way that queer people do even (especially) when nobody involved knows what queerness even means. It would be false to say they're both outsiders, because Diana is very good at Doing What She's Supposed To, but they share a sort of alienation and ill fit and dread (ha) that ties them to each other. It grows with time, but at the same time it's almost unsteady, because it's built on more negative than positive. Who would they be if they weren't just huddling together beneath the jaw of something, you know?

10: What is one major difference between them?

They are structured fundamentally different, even as it's spurred by very very similar circumstances. Diana keeps herself safe with compliant passivity- she is polite and pretty and knows what to say and when to say it. She is actually rather well liked through the town because of this. Of course, they don't really like her, rather a smoothed-out version of her that has buried most of the genuine personality, but it grants her the grace to float through her life causing as little stir as possible. 'Causing little stir' is her 'safe'.

Julian, on the other hand, even when he's younger and not nearly as problem-causing as later on, is never as easy as Diana. He's stubborn like all his family, he gets frustrated easily and when he is he gets snippy and rude- which means he is often snippy and rude. He doesn't compromise. He doesn't like being told what to do. Diana has learned to live with everything that pisses Julian off, because the consequences for her are more immediate, while the consequences for him are more long-term. They are both trying to avoid the same thing, but Diana is punished for acting out and so spends much more time trying to avoid that, while Julian is largely left to his own devices for everything but that long-term result, which means he does anything and everything to obviate it, causing as much of a fuss as he can.

I hesitate to call Diana passive, though, because it's only half true. She is not unfamiliar with anger, she's just unable to express it. That, and she has a messier, closer relationship with her family, and so simultaneously wants to do right by them, and rightfully feels wronged when she is mistreated. She is very close to her father, and he protects her as she simultaneously tries to protect him. Her siblings care very much for her, but are first and foremost getting their own lives in order. They implore her to do the same, not understanding the kink in that system. She feels an obligation to her mother independent of what their actual relationship looks like. Where Julian's family is more distant and so he can place blame on anyone he wants without guilt, Diana has some semblance of a functional, meaningful relationship with hers (positive and negative), and so can't just get angry. It drives more of a futile non-action in her, because she doesn't think of anything as being anyone's fault.

18: Do they view their relationship as temporary or permanent?

They would have both figured it permanent right up until it ended. Even then, ended is a strong word, because what really happened is someone just disappeared. It had been just them for so long, and then Julian disappeared and that word is not an exaggeration- nobody even knew if he was alive or dead. Some were firm in their belief of one or the other. Diana fluctuated between the two. Thinking he was alive was better, obviously, but if he was then that means that he left without her. Without even telling her. She would have gone with him, if he'd asked.

Suddenly, she was alone in a way that she hadn't really thought would ever happen, even as bad as anything would get, she'd always thought it'd be the two of them going through it together. And then it just wasn't.

And this isn't about Julian but even for him- he didn't plan it like that. He didn't plan at all, actually. The decision to leave was impulsive and sudden and he followed through with very little forethought because he knew it he didn't do it now then consequences and promises would catch up to him. He didn't even think about taking Diana with him. It didn't even cross his mind. I don't know if that makes it better or worse.

25: If a stranger saw them together, how would they describe their relationship?

Well it depends because crazy enough they do actually cross paths again, years and years later when lots has changed. When they're young, though, back in Ereform, they kind of just go together. They're a matched set, where one goes chances are you'll see the other. Not always, because they both have their own responsibilities to their houses, but often. People who didn't know them well kind of thought Diana was being nice to him? Like- I said already Diana is very likeable because she is just what people want or expect her to be. Julian is not- he's kind of jagged around the edges and offputting and just kind of odd. So people looking in can safely assume that kind, sweet Diana has befriended the weird Kil girl and put up with her bullshit to give her a friend. But if you know either of them much more it's obvious that it's not nearly that one-sided. They do both care very much about each other and Diana would be just as lost without him as he would without her.

Later on though. Aha. Well. They meet by chance or luck (good or bad depends on how you look at it) or perhaps fate, once again, in the harbor closest to Ereform. It is very messy. Then when Julian (and Liliana but she's not a part of this get your nose OUT of their business girl!!) end up stuck in Acrofin, and when Diana turns out to be a method to get where they're going (or more accurately, to get where they're going to come to them) it gets! Messier! But there is still an odd sort of friendship that happens under really weird circumstances that I can't really get into because it would not only be spoilers (as if i've ever cared about that before) but also just really long. But safe to say they make an even odder pair than before. Julian is all his brash, cruel, loud sharpness that he's ever had x100, and Diana is still much of the sweet, kind, quiet woman she always was, because funny enough that's really hard to leave behind, even if everything else goes. I'm gonna end on a funny note, because if I have to be so for real with you, people assume they're fucking. Because why the hell else would she be hanging around him?

OC Pair Ask Game! i will do more of these for any two please please please please

[lesbianrobin]

i understand ur post but i have a byler mutual saying almost the exact same thing about if they make mlvn endgame because to give will one sole love interest and put him through that much trauma and struggle to accept his sexuality only to have the guy reject him and end up with his sister is homophobic writing and u probably dont agree but i find it hysterical that st have managed to get themselves into such a conundrum that their only option is to introduce mikes secret twin of the opposite sexuality thats been there the whole time so they both get a happy ending. surely this is a perfect plan and there are no flaws whatsoever and everyone will be satisfied

SMCKSKXJSNKE i was literally just talking to sarah about how they've written themselves into a corner by reintroducing the stoncy love triangle in s4 because BEFORE they could have been like yeah steve is over her and now he's finding fulfillment outside of romance etc etc but now they've reignited stancy for some fuckin reason (my fingers are crossed for that theory that says since the upside down is stuck in 1983 it was making steve and nancy's 1983 feelings come back) and suddenly they'll be pissing off Some segment of the fanbase no matter what they do.

re: byler i think. well first of all i think that byler isn't even remotely on the radar of casual viewers as an actual possibility and i don't think it could happen in s5 bc the vast majority of viewers would be like where the fuck did that come from. second of all my el argument is partially a joke but also it's just fundamentally a very different situation where like. for will if byler doesn't happen nothing gets Worse for him shit just stays the same. for el if byler happens something Must get worse for her like she loses her boyfriend of 2-3 years. they're in different situations.

third of all i think it's very silly for people to act like will Needs for mike to like him back in order to be happy when like. it's not The Crush that's making will miserable it's being closeted in a small town in the 1980s and feeling like he can never have what he wants and be truly happy in life. mike liking him back would not fix the misery he feels at having to hide this part of himself from the world.

yknow in s3 robin is a sorta closed-off character who's snarky and prickly at times and she only really opens up in the russian torture scene + the bathroom scene. and in the bathroom scene she is Terrified to tell steve she likes girls but she confesses to having a crush on tammy thompson and... steve makes her feel okay about it. he makes fun of her crush and robin feels Normal and Safe and they laugh together and by the time s4 rolls around robin is a much more open and happy person than she was back before she'd come out to steve. she's more herself. and you know what never happened? tammy thompson never liked her back. robin didn't need a girlfriend. she needed love and support and validation from a good friend. she needed to find comfort with herself and her sexuality and all the other parts of her that she hid behind a tough exterior for protection.

as much as i hate watching will scenes bc noah schnapp can't act for shit, i am kinda looking forward to seeing him finally openly addressing his sexuality in s5 and maybe realizing that his childhood crush on his best friend not being reciprocated isn't the end of the world. i think if will could move on and let mike go (in the romantic sense not as a friend) it might also feel a bit like letting go of all his pain over the past few years and starting over with a clean slate. obviously idk what exactly's gonna happen in s5 we're all just making shit up right now but i guess that's kinda what i hope will happen with him.

it makes me sad kinda that will's most dedicated fans are more preoccupied with getting him a boyfriend than like... self-confidence and shit. but i'm not actually that sad bc i kinda don't give a fuck about will anyway

[txttletale]

normally im team fuck usa but this one is about the stupid imperialist bullshit of my country (russia) this time! dont say it like its so easy to exchange the lives of russian military for ukrainian children. you should do what you can to make my gov lose its stupid war understand?))) i dont care if its america helping ukraine as long as ukraine doesnt get wiped off the map, thats what matters right now to me. sry to be anon but its illegal to say all that here)))

i mean if you are russian then your focus should absolutely be on your own governments role in the war and what you can do to fight it! i agree and have never said otherwise. however there's a fundamental difference in what it means to fight russian imperialism if you're living in russia vs. as someone living in europe/the US--the former can be legitimate and powerful anti imperialist action, the latter will inevitably be channelled into strengthening US and NATO imperialism. since the vast majority of people on this site including me live in the imperial core, that's who i post for--but obviously there is no uniform communist position that can be taken by everyone everywhere, because political circumstances in different places are fundamentally different