#and these are the people who claim to be able to see nuance

[mickeym4ndy]

just saw the most disgusting Mickey take it actually made my stomach turn oh my god

[allinllachuteruteru]

Duolingo is NOT what it used to be.

“Duolingo is ‘sunsetting the development of the Welsh course’ (and many others)”.

I’ve used Duolingo since 2013. It used to be about genuinely learning languages and preserving endangered ones. It used to have a vibrant community and forum where users were listened to. It used to have volunteers that dedicated countless hours and even years to making the best courses they could while also trying to explain extremely nuanced and complex grammar in simple terms.

In the past two years it feels like Von Ahn let the money talk instead of focusing on the original goal.

No one truly had a humongous problem with the subscription tier for SuperDuolingo. We understood it: if you can afford to pay, help keep Duolingo free for those who couldn’t.

It started when the company went public. Volunteers were leaving courses they created because they warned of differing longterm goals compared to Duolingo’s as a company; not long after it was announced that the incubator (how volunteers were able to make courses in the first place) would be shut down. A year goes by and the forums—the voice of the users and the way people were able to share tips and explanations—is discontinued. A year or two later, Duolingo gets a completely new makeover—the Tree is gone and you don’t control what lesson you start with. With the disappearance of the Tree, all grammar notes and explanations for courses not in the Big 8 (consisting of the courses made before the incubator like Spanish/French/German/etc. and of the most popular courses like Japanese/Korean/Chinese/etc.) are removed with it. Were you learning Vietnamese and have no idea how honorifics work without the grammar notes? Shit outta luck bud. Were you learning Polish and have absolutely no clue how one of the declensions newly thrown at you functions? Suck it up. In a Reddit AMA, Von Ahn claims that the new design resulted in more users utilizing the app/site. How he claims that statistic? By counting how many people log into their Duolingo account, as if an entire app renovation wouldn’t cause an uptick in numbers to even see what the fuck just happened to the courses.

Von Ahn announces next in a Reddit AMA that no more language courses will be added from what there already is available. His reasoning? No one uses the unpopular language courses — along with how Duolingo will now be doing upkeep with the courses already in place. And here I am, currently looking on the Duolingo website how there are 1.8 million active learners for Irish, 284 thousand active learners for Navajo, and even 934 thousand active learners for fucking High Valyrian. But yea, no one uses them. Not like the entire Navajo Nation population is 399k members or anything, or like 1.8 million people isn’t 36% of the entire population of Ireland or anything.

And now this. What happened to the upkeep of current courses? Oh, Von Ahn only meant the popular ones that already have infinite resources. Got it. Duolingo used to be a serious foundational resource for languages with little resources while also adding the relief of gamification.

It pisses me off. It really does. This was not what Duolingo started out as. And yea, maybe I shouldn’t get invested in a dingy little app. But as someone who spent most of her adolescence immersed in language learning to the point where it was literally keeping me alive at one point, to the point where languages felt like my only friend as a tween, and to the point where friendships on the Duolingo forums with likeminded individuals my age and other enthusiasts who even sent me books in other languages for free because they wanted people to learn it, the evolution of Duolingo hits a bitter nerve within me.

~End rant.

[disco-troy]

I don't feel like people have a nuanced enough view of Kory what she thinks about killing. She's not blindly wanting to murder criminals, nor is she delighted by the actions of murder. She sees murder as a necessity because of her upbringing in the middle of an existential war, and also as a way to regain autonomy on her life. Autonomy is a key theme in many of the people Kory chooses to kill.

The idea of autonomy over the body and her life is extremely important to Kory. This makes sense, Kory spends six years in slavery, her life not her own, and grew up knowing her planet could lose its own autonomy and freedom at any time.

When she was a slave, the few times that she was able to control her life in those times. Her first kill was her kill of what would become her last master, starting the chain of domino that would result in her freedom.

Note her words: "His very touch sickened me". It wasn't just about her imprisonment or her anger, but about her body, her autonomy. She couldn't handle being touched like that anymore, and killed knowing that it would solve nothing, knowing that it would lead to more punishment for her later down the line.

Her next kill allowed her to escape, securing her freedom and her own autonomy.

To escape she must pretend Kory has completely given in to her captors. That she is fine, even happy with the Gordonian touching her. But by doing this she is bringing him close, giving him the illusion of control over herself to secure her own freedom.

She is pretending to be a slave, while affirming to herself that she is still a soldier.

In this way we can see a dichotomy that has ruled Kory's life until now. On one side, you have succumbing to subjugation, which involved a loss of bodily autonomy. On the other side you had her claiming her freedom and her autonomy which comes with the need to kill or be destroyed.

In addition to this, you need to think of the context of Kory's upbringing. Of course Kory is used to killing her enemies. She grew up in a climate of fear in which there was a real possibility of total annihilation. Millions of her people died in the war that eventually lead her to being sold as a slave.

She grew up during a society that could have been destroyed in war, where everyday killing was not a questions but an existential threat. Killing and war was literally the only way for her people to conserve their autonomy.

This disconnect between Dick/Donna and Kory is not because Kory is an alien, but because the Titans are living in a world where they are superheroes and Kory is living in a world where she is a solider. Would a Kory that didn't kill even been able to come out alive from war? From her enslavement? To her its about her autonomy and her independence, she doesn't have the luxury of morals, of thought, of choice.

Later we see Kory not change, but shift. She realizes that killing will never be easier for her again.

This makes sense! her interpretation of killing has changed a lot because she's been exposed to a new environment. On earth she is not facing a literal war, she has real power, she has backup, she doesn't have to fight every second for her freedom and autonomy.

I think this is demonstrated in an incredibly narrative compelling way in Titans (1999) when Kory kills to give another character autonomy over her own body; Adaline Kane. Adaline is about to die, but her blood can still be harvested for Vandal Savage's experiments. She begs for death, instead of living that fate.

Kory gives it to her.

(much like Slade gave Joey in Titans Hunt but this post only has the space for one parallel right now)

When it comes to protecting the greater good, and especially when it comes to bodily autonomy Kory is not only willing to kill, but sees it as her duty.

She's never stopped being a soldier, she's never stopped being the Tamaranian who was forced to kill and see her people die to preserve her home, but more than that, she never stopped being the little girl for whom killing was her only way of reclaiming her autonomy.

[tommycorriander]

Hazbin Hotel, Helluva Boss, And Disability

I am disabled. This is something I've talked about a handful of times on this blog and on my Twitter, and anyone who knows me knows I am a disabled man. As a result, while I do enjoy dissecting media and politics, the need to be an advocate for disability issues would have fallen on me to some extent regardless. Disabled folks are often left out of conversations regarding diversity in media, in a continued oversight from able bodied peers.

What does this have to do with the Hellaverse?

Both shows contain at least some small amount of disability representation; specifically, they both have characters that are physically disabled. In Hazbin Hotel this is Vaggie, as she is missing an eye and prior to the finale had lost her wings. In Helluva Boss, the characters would be Fizzarolli, a quad amputee, and the unnamed deaf child in the special. The only character I ever see talked about in regards to their disability by the wider fanbase is the unnamed child, and on a smaller scale in critical spaces I occasionally see remarks on Fizzarolli's disability.

This is a problem.

For as much as fans of one or both shows would love to claim diversity in their shows, the lack of disability representation and the lackluster portrayal of the minimal representation is poor. And I haven't seen any of my fellow critics discuss this, which I feel is an oversight, though I don't fault them for this as there are many problems with both shows and they tend to have their hands full. However, this angle of viewing the shows has been overlooked, which is why I wish to discuss it today.

Firstly, I'd like to specify what I mean when I discuss disability. While the conversation regarding the Hellaverse is primarily centered around physical disability as this is the only form of disability portrayed in the shows, coded or otherwise, disability comes in many different forms. Intellectual disabilities and mental disabilities are just as important for representation in the media as physical disabilities. Among physical disabilities, there's also a difference in visible and invisible disabilities, the latter of which is hardly ever shown in media compared to the former. Ideally all forms of disability would be portrayed equally and with respect, but unfortunately this isn't the case. I also don't expect every show to tackle every demographic at once; this isn't a reasonable request, and to be very clear, my issue with the representation in HH/HB does not come from every single unique experience with disability not being covered, but rather with the narrative the creatives behind the show and the show's fans continue to push: that both shows are diverse and are, in some way, more progressive than other shows.

This isn't the case for many reasons. Fellow critics have gone into depth about the show's lack of representation of women in nuanced roles, the lack of queer women, the racist ways in which the very few characters of colour are presented, the lack of trans representation, and even the way sex and sexuality is presented being rather conservative at times. That isn't the focus of this essay, but I would implore anyone who is reading this who is somehow unaware of the previous issues to seek out essays that talk about those points; Cassidy Whiskey on YouTube has a three-part series that covers a multitude of topics, not just issues of representation, and I would have recommended helluvareceipts on Twitter, but her account has sadly been deactivated. I'm sure there are others, but I'll lose focus if I try to name every single person to go to. If you're willing to trawl through general pettiness in the critical tag (which, let's be real, that is probably how you found this post) you'll find well-worded critiques as well.

Back to the topic at hand. The lack of representation of people with disabilities is already frustrating, but there isn't a complete drought: Vaggie, Fizzarolli, and the unnamed imp child do exist, after all. However, their representation is not just flawed, but even exploitative in some ways.

First we have Vaggie. Aside from the visual of her missing eye and seeing the incident in which she lost that eye, nothing comes of it. She never has to contend with the difficulties that come with impaired sight, and it's never brought up by other characters. In the training scene between her and Carmilla, it's not a factor: instead, her greater flaw in the physical realm when it comes to combat is having longer hair. This is an extreme oversight, which I believe shows that Vivienne and the various writers for the show never actually take into consideration what should be a major element of a character, that being her impaired vision. Furthermore, the loss of her wings isn't even considered at all, with her somehow gaining them back at the end of her training montage with Carmilla. This could have been an excellent vector to discuss physical disability in a coded form, with her wings being a stand in for more traditional forms of limb loss. Still not ideal, as I believe it's better to have forthright depictions of disability over metaphors, but it would have been something. Instead, it's never a factor, and worse, it's effectively cured. As far as representation goes, Vaggie might as well not even count.

That's all that exists for Hazbin Hotel. In Helluva Boss, we have two characters, and I will save the unnamed child for last, because that is where the real issue with the representation is on full display.

So, Fizzarolli. He is a quad amputee and potentially hearing impaired, though the latter is speculated on due to a single scene which I discuss later. Since that scene is the only time it ever comes up, I will focus on his amputee status. He lost his limbs in a fire, something we see on screen. I will disagree with some of my fellow critics in that this scene should have been more detailed; I feel that had the scene shown more of the damage dealt to Fizz's body it would have come across in poor taste, and focusing on the tragic aspect of disability usually ends up feeling like trauma porn in the hands of poor writers, which Vivienne most certainly is. I do not trust her to handle a more detailed scene with grace, especially given her track record (more on that later). It is ultimately for the best that the scene is mostly brushed over, even if it would have been better in the hands of someone with the maturity and sensitivity to cover such a topic for more to be shown in regards to his injuries.

Otherwise, Fizzarolli is mostly fine. He's shown not just surviving but thriving, he has a loving partner (criticisms of the portrayal of said relationship not withstanding) and generally sees success in his life while still having to grapple with the realities of his disability when it comes to his prosthetics being prone to damage and potentially shutting down. I would, in the hands of anyone else, like to see more of this character and what his daily routine looks like as a disabled man.

Unfortunately all the good will built with Fizz comes crashing down when we get to the unnamed imp child in the Fizzarolli special episode. This child is the poster child for virtue signalling. Frankly, it's disgusting how a majority of the fandom seemed to ignore how fetishistic this portrayal was. This is where the real meat of the essay comes in to play.

This unnamed child is given a single scene, and is then promptly forgotten about and never mentioned again. They are introduced as being a fan of Fizz here to view the competition, there is a brief exchange between the two, and then we all move on. And yet this scene was championed as somehow revolutionary or a sign of the top-tier diversity and progressiveness in Helluva, when in reality this type of scene has been done to death. This is tokenism.

One major stumbling block many of the people championing this scene seem to get tripped up on is a very simple question: why was this child a child to begin with? Really, this seems like a simple question, it shouldn't have much thought. Sometimes characters are kids. But within the episode it's clearly shown through multiple different avenues that this is an adult show. The performances are dripping with sexuality, several of the fans of Fizzarolli are there because Mammon sells sex robots of the guy, there is no mistaking that this is something no child should be at, let alone by themselves.

So why was this child a child? Simple: brownie points.

It's a lot more difficult for people to share clips of a wholesome moment from your show if the person Fizz was interacting with was an adult. People are ableist, this is pretty par for the course; as a disabled person I find it generally safer to assume people are ableist before proven otherwise. I can guarantee if this scene were to be between Fizzarolli and a deaf adult fan as opposed to a young child, it would not have been championed as this amazing representation by mostly able bodied fans. And that is by design: if Vivienne genuinely cared about representation, if she truly wanted to show something meaningful to her adult fans in her adult show, she would have had the interaction be with an adult. But that doesn't get her clip shared around on social media. That doesn't get her brownie points for inclusion. It's safe, it's palatable, it's sickeningly wholesome, and it's insulting for that. This is a show for adults, something Vivienne and company is adamant on, and yet they treat their audience like children. As a fan, you should be insulted to have this key-jingling one minute clip presented to you. You should demand more, demand better.

Unfortunately I do not see ever getting better from Vivienne. She has made it very clear she truly does not care about creating art, she really only stumbled into being championed as a paragon for animation because her majority white and able bodied fans saw the inclusion of primarily gay men and thought that was good enough. She does not give a damn about disabled people, and she never will. To expect good disabled representation from her is like expecting good queer representation from a Marvel movie; she is in it for the money, and it just so happens that the inclusion of that scene makes money.

Addendum thoughts that were too long to put into the tags: I would like to make it clear that disability, because it presents very differently, is experienced very differently by many different people. If you felt seen or represented by the disability representation in either show, that's fine, and I don't want you to feel bad for feeling seen. Ultimately disabled people are largely given scraps; I have not once seen someone with my particular physical disability portrayed in media. Sometimes we latch onto things that are subpar or lacking; my criticism of reception to this scene is targeted primarily at able bodied audience members who may be lacking in this perspective and to also champion fellow disabled people to rightfully demand and expect better. Thank you for your time.

[bonefall]

Bones Bones Bonesss wc Star full book spoilers already out in the wild (forums)......... Looking forward to your thoughts when it officially comes out (or whenever!) cause. I will not say. But ohhhhhh it sure was a book............ :33

You know I'll also be doing a full read when I get my grubby paws on a copy, but I do have some strong feelings assuming that the leaks are totally accurate!

The no-spoiler version of my opinion; BOY this ending is a stinker. This arc truly was a blundering mess of lost potential and wasted time. As someone who still feels the first few books were STRONG setups, from 3 onwards I feel like I've been watching a train run out of track and derail in a slow, pitiful fashion.

It's not even a FAST trainwreck. The ending was predictable insofar as they clearly had no good climax or message in mind. Infact it's kind of a marvel how utterly bloodless this arc was, and how any violence they DID show came out of left field because they failed to build up to it.

HOWEVER. I am not just a reader, I'm a scavenger. This stuff is GREAT for BB. The ending gave me the most important pieces I need, and now I know how BB!ASC is going to rework it.

But I'll not get ahead of myself; quickly, I'll just talk raw first impressions of the spoilers.

(As always, take this with a grain of salt and the knowledge that the spoilers may be incorrect. Opinions may change once I read the book myself.)

Splashstar is a garbage villain. He is absolutely bottom-tier for me.

His "amorality" comes out of nowhere and quite frankly he reads like a Chick Tract Evil Atheist.

I don't get how people can accept the way the characters call him "manipulative" when his plots are utterly brainless.

He is the type of naunceless evil that makes me want to hurl. Splash reads like a writer trying to "repeat" the evil of Tigerstar without any of the intelligence of early TPB.

Tigerstar was a RESPECTED warrior. He leveraged his standing in the Clan to secretly carry out his assassinations and forge alliances. He was established strong to begin with.

Splash is like cat-18 and able to kill-no-miss strong warriors with his Evil Jump, and then keeps the Clan in line by holding his siblings hostage.

It makes me not understand how he has ANY followers, because he has no consistent ideology or rhetoric.

Anything they did use (like claiming he'd make the Clans strong and saying tigerheartstar wanted to take over the whole forest or whatever) isn't consistent because they failed to establish these over the SIX BOOKS THEY HAD.

It feels like he was only a legitimate threat for like 2 out of 6 books

And then he's dead in chapter 13. Halfway through the story. Incredibly lame.

I want to reserve my judgement on the Frostpaw vs Splashstar battle, but it's absurd on its face. Harelight went down in 1 hit but Frostpaw musters all her strength to use his move and overcome him?

I have to see it first before I conclude if it's something I want to salvage though. Sometimes fights just come across better when you're reading them.

But on the note of battles, it's frustrating how bloodless this arc was. We started off with tigerHeartstar invading and occupying RiverClan-- yet we're looking at a total body count of 5, with one heart attack and one illness.

And speaking of deaths.

Whoever decided to give Berryheart a redemption death should get offscreen greencough.

UTTER shite. You have this whole arc with radicalization as a major theme, show Berryheart trying to brutally murder her in-law with a snake, grabbing at power desperately to the point where she CHANGED CLANS to be Splash's deputy, and decide that her ideal ending is "she would die for her baby :(((("???

Ffffuuuuuck yoouuuuuuuuuuuu

This is why we can't have good, nuanced villains, these writers trip over themselves the MINUTE they have a sad parent. It could never actually STAY about power or politics, they cant allow a parent to truly be willing to sacrifice their child for their own ends.

No matter how badly or violently they treated you, They're Still Your Parent. Hogwash. I'm sick to death of this thought-terminating cliche.

Being a parent does NOT automatically mean they'd die for you. They already did this earlier with Curlfeather, and the absolute insult it is to the theme of radicalization aside, having Berryheart repeat that sacrifical death cheapens hers.

Now it's not that CURLFEATHER is the one who would never go so far as to allow her daughter to die for her own ends, contrasting Berryheart. It's Just What Moms Do.

And furthermore if they were going to do a "redemption death," it REALLY sucks that they decided to have Berryheart refuse to kill Yarrowleaf and not FRINGEWHISKER.

It's not even indicative of GROWTH or RECONSIDERING HER BELIEFS or anything. She won't kill her SISTER.

It might have meant something to have a chance for revenge and refuse it, but nooooo. Yarrowleaf. My god. Yarrowleaf.

and don't @ me about Yarrow being ex-kin, they both joined and rejected it at different times.

All that said...

There are some things I like here!

Frostdawn and Whistlebreeze getting their names at the same time was really sweet. I like them a lot.

Sometimes a predictable choice is the right one. Icewing becoming leader is a good move. Icestar my beloved.

I'm personally excited to get to Icey's leadership ceremony in my own rewrite, the canon one was as fanservice-wanky as you'd expect of modern arcs but I LOVE rewriting those.

Though I would have preferred Froststar, I'm ok with this.

The fracturing of RiverClan is a great move. I love the idea of there being a mass exodus following these events. It's wild we haven't gotten that before.

While I bemoan the awful politics and lack of setup, I do LIKE the idea on paper of there being "ex-Splash Supporters" to cause problems in future arcs. Not that these writers know what setup and payoff is, but hey, more for me.

I liked the sort of desperate feel of Frostpaw being exhausted in StarClan and deciding if she wants to go back or not. Im a little iffy on how much other cats PRESSURE her, though.

I need to read the chapters myself but I fear that it might not read like her own choice, but another thing that she's being forced into.

Shut UP Tree why are you HEREEE

The part where they all point out that without her, RiverClan wont have a holy messenger and that's bad, fits the consistent way the writers try to portray StarClan as a good thing when they're really not... but.

I think it would have made a fascinating moment for Frosty to realize that SHE is the one who really holds the power in this situation. What spirituality is going to look like in the future of her Clan is in HER paws now.

They are absolutely going to toss this potential away, but I guess the things I like most about the ending are the ways it kinda softly threatens the status quo.

The fracture of RC and the exodus of cats, Frostpaw deciding she will return and fix RiverClan, Icestar accepting help from the other Clans to fix the camp...

It's not ALL bad, it's just that the negatives outweigh the positives and this is exactly the kind of ending I feared. I hope that this isn't just a tease of a change to the status quo, but I've learned to not get my hopes up.

And, lastly, Owlnose deputy and Nightheart's ending chapter are just straight up beyond parody. I can't even be mad, they're such bad moves they're funny to me at this point.

[butchpeace]

it is so insane to say that doctors shouldn’t practice gender reassignment surgeries, or that hrt shouldn’t be accessible, and not for transgender activism reasons either (though ignoring the enormous number of people that are happy with their transition is just willful ignorance). where do you draw the line on what adults can do with their bodies? do you ban all plastic surgeries? do you ban all the surgeries that require removing “healthy” body parts? Do you have any idea the amount of autonomy that strips cis women of? What about breast reductions? Oh, they can be removed because the woman’s back hurt? What is the level of hurt required, how do you decide which women’s backs are hurting enough and which aren’t? What about cis women who desire hysterectomies for a variety of reasons? how is removing my breast different from say, getting breast implants. do we ban breast implants, and then where do you draw the line? it’s such a non-nuanced way to see things.

“all plastic surgeries should be banned!” what if somebody gets into a car accident and doctors have to reconstruct their face. Probably they can live without it, but are you saying they should? What if somebody breaks a nose, should the doctor do the absolute bare minimum to fix it instead of trying to give it the aspect it had before? What if a woman requires a mastectomy for medical reasons, and lately wants breast implants, should it be illegal for her to get those? besides, what is the level of illness required to perform a surgery that is outlawed? Do you think having to fight the law as well during something like breast cancer or similar would be of benefit to women? worth it if it means transgender people can’t get it either?

and don’t even get me started on hrt, because if you can’t prescribe those meds for a certain mental condition, what is the difference with any other medicine, especially psychomeds? That it has collateral effects? Guess what? Most of them do! That it shows on the body? What is the actual difference, that you can make a law out of, without any overlapping, between something working on your hormones to show a change in your physical appearance and something working on your hormones to show a change in your brain activity? What if a med that’s needed to cure whatever illness has certain effects on the body? I swear you people do not think.

I’ve thought about all of these things, over the 12 years I spent in the trans community and the 10 years I spent on hormones. I still came to the conclusion I did. Actually, going through it myself is what brought me to this belief and cemented my opinion.

HRT and gender surgeries are different from necessary medical treatments and procedures because they aren’t medically necessary. They are medically harmful across the board in every case, to varying degrees. Female bodies are not meant to have high levels of testosterone. It causes health problems. Same for males.

So in order to defend using HRT, they have to prove that the benefit outweighs the harm. How do they attempt to do that? By claiming that everyone will commit if they can’t transition.

And what basis do they have for that belief? Nothing scientific. The only way they could get that data is through a study that gives half the participants HRT and doesn’t give it to the other half, and compares how many people commit.

So right now, they’re just going on the assumption that transitioning helps our mental health better than any alternative mental healthcare treatment option would be able to. (And better than just leaving us alone.)

This is when most people bring up how trying to treat dysphoria in another way would be “conversion therapy”. Because they apparently aren’t aware that there’s a huge difference between using electric shock to try to change people’s sexuality, and using exploratory talk therapy to help dysphoric people work through the issues that caused them dysphoria in the first place.

Proper mental healthcare, medical education, feminist education, and teaching dysphoric people to connect with their body has the ability to get rid of their dysphoria. It worked for me and many others I’ve talked to who have detransitioned or desisted. And sometimes all it takes is just growing up for us to understand ourselves better and accept our bodies. But of course, that idea threatens the entire foundation of the trans movement, so it can’t be true. Right?

In my mind, it’s fucking dystopian that we have all these kids now who never even got the chance to grow up before having these decisions made for them. Being fed the idea that they’re trans, and the only way for them to be happy is to make drastic medical changes to their body, has a devastating affect on their mental health and leads them to medicalization they otherwise may not have needed.

As for elective procedures, yes I also oppose those. I think any surgeon who gives someone a potentially dangerous procedure, or a procedure with a high regret rate, should lose their license to practice.

It’s not “oppressive” to women to say I don’t agree with them getting cosmetic surgeries or electively getting their important reproductive organs removed. That’s fucking ridiculous, to call that “oppression”. The fact that women think they need these cosmetic surgeries is the real oppression.

Anything with a legitimate medical reason, breast reduction, or simple procedures to prevent pregnancy are exceptions to the rule because they legitimately improve quality of life.

I hope that helped you be able to follow my train of thought about all this, and understand better what I’m saying.

[hotdaemondtargaryen]

EWAN MITCHELL INTERVIEWED BY DECIDER MAGAZINE.

SO KNOWING HOW HE'S SO STUDIOUS AND THOUGHTFUL, WHAT DO YOU THINK THE CHANCES ARE, IF HE STILL HAS THE DANGER, HE CAN FIGURE OUT THERE'S A HIDDEN MESSAGE THERE?

"Yeah, I think I could imagine that."

"I could imagine Aemond reading a book by the fire and he just puts it over the fireplace and then he’s privy to the information of Aegon’s dream."

"But I can’t confirm nor deny it."

ALICENT MENTIONS TO RHAENYRA IN THE FINALE THAT AEMOND PLANS TO FLY TO HARRENHAL. DAEMON HAS HAD QUITE THE SEASON THERE, BEING AFFECTED BY THE MAGIC THERE. DO YOU HAVE A SENSE OF HOW THAT MAGIC COULD AFFECT AEMOND?

"I think that’s a good question."

"I think if he was to go to Harrenhal, I think, I don’t know."

"It’s similar to what we were saying with Helaena."

"Like, if there was some sort of way that he would be able to harness that power and to use it to his advantage, he could be quite dangerous."

SO, ARE YOU EXCITED TO SORT OF DELVE INTO WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY MOTIVATE AEMONE TO OPEN UP TO SOMEONE? WHAT DO YOU THINK WOULD MAKE HIM SO VULNERABLE?

"I think just finding all of that multifaceted nuance in Aemond, and really exploring that shadow side even more…"

"You know, just constantly keeping the audience on their toes and presenting an angle of Aemond that we hadn’t really seen before."

"He always kind of looked for surrogates for his mother."

"He found it in Vhagar, so to speak."

"An old she-dragon parallel."

"And he found it in the madame."

"But is that enough? So he’s always looking for his match, so to speak."

"Whether or not he finds it is another thing."

"Maybe there’s no one good enough for Aemond."

"Maybe he’s not good enough for anyone either."

HE'S SO RUTHLESS IN TERMS OF THE WAY HE WANTS TO APPROACH THE BATTLES AHEAD. IS HIS MINDSET FOR HIS OWN GLORY AND POWER, OR IS HE ACTUALLY JUST TRYING TO SAVE HIS FAMILY AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND SECURE TEAM GREEN'S CLAIM?

"I think it’s interesting."

I think when he approaches Alicent and Helaena in Episode 8, he kind of says, 'Like, look, it’s either them or us and I’m choosing. It’s gonna be them.'

"We can’t go down without a fight."

"Because if the Blacks were to come into power, it would be the Greens heads who would be on the chopping block."

"And Aemond especially."

"So it is a fight for self preservation."

"But whether or not he has his family’s interests at heart or whether or not he’s just thinking for himself?"

"I want to leave that out there."

"I want to let people make their own judgment on that."

"I think he definitely loves his mum and he wants his mum at the end."

ONE OF MY FAVORITE SCENES IS THE ONE WHERE YOU BASICALLY DRESS DOWN AEGON IN HIGH VALYRIAN. WHAT WAS IT LIKE PREPARING FOR THAT? WAS IT AS DELICIOUS TO DO AS IT LOOKED OR WAS IT JUST ANOTHER EXTRA CHALLENGE THAT YOU JUST DID NOT WANT TO FACE IN TERMS OF MASTERING A FOREIGN LENGUAJE?

"I mean I remember doing it a few different ways, but I always kind of settled on the idea that Aemond, throughout those first four episodes, he’s just so composed."

"We see other players around the council table and they raise their voices, and Aemond is the kid who’s just acting from the peripheries."

"He’s waiting for his moment."

"He never raises his voice too much."

So in that moment, when he very much seizes a chance to attack Rook’s Rest and work with Criston Cole, he very much says, 'I’m taking over now.'

"It is a public humiliation, but he does it in such a way that Aegon is able to save face because only him and Aegon can understand it (and maybe Grand Maester Orwyle can, as well)."

"It’s something quite merciful in a way.

BEFORE THE SEASON STARTED, I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT HOW YOU STAYED AWAY FROM MATT SMITH ON SET IN SEASON 1 SO THAT WHEN THEY STARE EACH OTHER DOWN DURING DINNER, IT WOULD BE MORE IMPACTFUL. SO I'M CURIOUS, HAVE YOU MET GAYLE RANKIN YET?

"I – I have not."

OH, OKAY. IS THAT INTENTIONAL OR?

"I mean, I’ve obviously seen Gayle Rankin’s phenomenal performance in the show, but also like the Harrenhal set itself is in a different studio to the studio of the Red Keep."

"So I never really brushed shoulders with Gayle Rankin or Matt Smith this season, other than that moment when Daemon sees the vision of Aemond in Harrenal."

"I think — I think I briefly [met Gayle] at the read through."

"Briefly."

OK, COOL. I WAS JUST CURIOUS, BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT AND I'M REALLY EXCITED TO SEE ALYS AND AEMOND MEET BECAUSE THAT IS A RELATIONSHIP I HAVE SO MUCH CURIOSITY ABOUT.

"No comment."

[a-star-that-burns-brightly]

It's kind of disheartening to me how the common fanon portrayal of Xander and David's dynamic is usually boiled down to Xander being a 'simp' (for lack of a better word) with a one-sided adoration and idolization of David. Especially after the latter's heel turn in CH2-11. And I say that because one of the most important facets of their dynamic to me is the fact that David also very much idolizes Xander just as much, if not more then Xander idolizes him. David believes the world cannot change, we know this. But I think an aspect of his philosophy that I think goes severely overlooked is just how badly he wants to not believe that. He wants to believe that the world can change, and more specifically, that people can change. This aspect of himself can be seen in many parts of his character. I'll most likely touch on this in a later post, but it's most likely part of why he devised his plan to share the secrets. It's very likely the reason he became a motivational speaker, and it plays a massive part in his two closest relationships during the killing game, Arei and Xander. But today, we're talking about Xander. David looks up to Xander. Incredibly so. Xander is everything that he wants to be.

David: You wanted to make Nico feel comfortable, even though you wouldn't necessarily get anything out of it.

Someone who is unconditionally kind to others with no ulterior deceitful motive, just for the sake of being kind to others.

David: You're always full of energy and bravery to achieve your goals, no matter what they are. Yet at the same time, you're a compassionate person who takes the time to help others.

Someone who strives for hope and change, and will never back down until he has it.

David: I have trouble believing that Xander would be the kind of person to commit murder.

An unquestionable Good Person.

That is why he pushes back so hard when Teruko accuses Xander of attempting to kill her. He refused to acknowledge the possibility that Xander, for all of his good qualities, might've been a much more deceitful person than he was letting on.

Because quite frankly, even though the two of them agreed to treat each other to treat each other less as role models and more as friends, if you ask me: I don't think David ever stopped seeing Xander as his role model. I mean, why would he? Like I said before, Xander is everything David wants to be, everything David so badly wishes he could be but has it etched into his brain that he is incapable of such. Xander is a light in his dark chasm of cynicism, a glimmer of hope. That maybe, just maybe...

Xander: Enough with these idols or role models, okay? Let's just be friends. David: I... David: I'd love that. Thank you.

Things could change.

Teruko: Earlier at lunch, Xander had asked for me to meet him in the computer lab, claiming that he wanted to tell me about some plan he had to confront the mastermind. Teruko: We both met up there after dinner, where he tried to murder me instead by stabbing me with the kitchen knife. David: Xander tried to kill you? I find that hard to believe.

And then the light starts flickering. I've mentioned it before in this post, but one of David's biggest flaws in his mindset is that it causes him to view people, including himself, in a nuance-less binary lens of black and white.

David: People who are born lazy, useless and stupid will stay that way until they die. If you were able to "improve" yourself into a better person, then it only means you were a better person to begin with.

You are either a good person, or a lazy, useless, stupid piece of shit. In simpler terms, you are either born a good person or you are born a bad person, and whichever you are born with will become your identity until the day you are in a casket. That is what David believes. Up until now, Xander was strictly placed into the slot of "good person". Not just that, but practically the opposite of what David deems as a "lazy, useless, and stupid" person. He himself has described Xander as someone who is full of energy and will do anything to achieve his goals, someone who takes the time to help others, and a compassionate and generally emotionally intelligent person. That is who Xander Matthews is to David. But now that he is being given evidence of a more potentially malicious side to Xander, the pitfalls of a firm black-and-white mindset rear their head and repeatedly bludgeon David in his own.

David: It's possible that those bloodstains are Xander's, not yours.

(he's reaching so fucking hard here and he fucking knows it, god I hate him. /pos)

David: Are you saying that Xander is a killer? I find that difficult to believe.

Teruko: -But I believe that the origin of the DVD is not from the culprit, but rather, from that person (SELECT: Xander) Teruko: It was most likely Xander. David: Xander... He planned something that manipulative?

David's monochrome mentality (Riproducer reference completely intended) makes it so that he cannot even fathom the idea that Xander, someone he previously marked off as not just a good person but the good person, is even capable of hurting someone, of being cruel enough to intentionally trigger someone just for his murder plan, to murder someone in general. If his feelings towards Min are anything to go by...

David: Something as horrible as this murder, as horrible as this class trial-- David: How dare you! You killed Xander, and you were perfectly willing to kill everyone else here to escape!

David: At that time, watching Min, I kept thinking... David: ... David: How utterly pathetic she was!

That would certainly bring Xander to the category of lazy, useless, stupid bastards. But David has already put Xander into the category of a "good person". So what else is he meant to do other than defend and deflect anything suggesting otherwise? David doesn't want to believe that that glimmer of hope that Xander gave him was just a lie, that hope that things could change, that he could change. So he defends it. He clings to it. He doesn't want to let go. But here's the funny thing about David. Despite his black-and-white mindset, despite the fact that he does believe good people exist, he will always be, first and foremost: A cynical bitch. Point being: I think David, deep down, knew full well that Teruko was most likely telling the truth. Like, I joked about it earlier, but do you really think he believed the lack-luster argument that completely ignored evidence that he could gleam by just looking at the crime scene? I think he was just reaching for anything at that point to try and prove himself wrong. But it's no use, the light continues to flicker. David's denial of Xander's cruelty is quiet to none, but it's clear he is still clinging desperately onto the positive image of Xander he used to have, seeing as he does not show nearly as much animosity (verbally anyway) towards Xander then he does towards Min, despite the fact that Xander also seemed more than willing to kill the rest of the class to escape. It's breaking. But after Min's execution, it's clear that it all hits him at once.

David: I... I've seen enough. There's no point in keeping my hopes up anymore. David: We are all certainly going to die here.

David Chiem left the courtroom that day with his hopes snuffed out, nothing left within him other than the cruel reminder of something he already knew:

If something is important, then

It'll break and disappear.

[xhikatsu]

Topaz's Awareness

I feel like people don’t give Topaz enough credit on how aware she is about her surrounding… It is easy to think she just blindly believes the IPC is good, or that Jade means well based on what she states. But there’s some nuances that shows her thinking is far more complex than that.

For example, just in her character stories alone, she goes against IPC rules in what she doesn’t believe in. This is shown through her rebellious behavior of purposely failing the business formality exam, or going around the rule regarding pets.

She didn’t agree and found it won’t harm her if she didn’t listen exactly to those rules according to her contract. She also tries to beef up her reasoning by proving it won’t hinder her capabilities to get her job done, making it harder to question her “exclusion” to said rules.

In a way, despite being stuck in a lifelong contract, she seems to try and go around the system as much as possible to operate the way she believes instead of blindly following the rules set.

For someone who was molded at a young age, you would think she wouldn’t be this rebellious. Especially if she truly did think that the IPC is ultimately good (added: which she actually has never out rightly stated). It’s more like she believes you can do good in the company, and she tries to take advantage of it to try and do that.

There’s only so much she can do at the end of the day, as the IPC clearly has specific conditions and goals in mind she still has to follow. However, she tries her best to examine all parties involved and present a solution that tries to make majority happy or satisfied.

This showed quite a bit in her approach with Jarilo VI. She did start off rather roughly with her initially engagement. Though she backs off to be able to assess the planet, trying to find evidence and proof for the IPC to say they can get a better deal because they have more value.

During her talk with Svarog as well, she states that she went out of her way to do extra research on seeing if planets could recover on their own from a Stellaron, indicating the possibility of not needing the IPC’s help.

For someone who claims that the IPC can help, this little action of hers shows that she doesn’t necessarily agree with the company’s method and would rather them recover on their own without the deal as long as they have proof to backup the claim.

If the planet is able to recover on their own, why sign a deal with the IPC and possibly be put on a lifelong contract like her? Topaz goes out of her way to try and find proof that they can recover on their own. However, she states her results were all negative about that search.

Going into the end of the Jarilo VI’s case when Bronya reveals the Engine of Creation, Topaz genuinely takes into consideration that the planet has a chance to recover without the IPC, giving them her full support by even taking a demotion to her position to ensure they don’t sign a deal.

This only occurred though because the planet appealed to Topaz’s rational/logical (added: risk-averse) side with proof, something she seems to value when making decisions. Without proof, she can’t take the words at face value and treats it as a note to maybe consider with some skepticism.

Now, this leads to her dynamic with Jade. Her voice lines about her does hold her in high regards, but most of it talks about her business skills and support she can provide (with a hefty price). (Added: Note that this is only EN TL, which is inaccurate as in CN, she actually refers to Jade as a benefactor and not “nobility”.)

In a logical and business standpoint, Jade’s skills are widely known and similar to Topaz’s style of getting things done efficiently. Especially as her student of sorts, she takes her teachings of business but places her own twist to it by adding in her kindness as a factor.

However, despite seeming to “idolize” Jade’s achievements and skills, Topaz has made points to show that she is aware Jade is not exactly who she tries to present herself to be as. In 2.3, she reminds her team to not call Jade “big boss”, saying they would get punished if so.

It hints that she is aware that there’s more to Jade than what she shows, especially knowing that Jade didn’t want Topaz to see her negotiate with the Family after learning how greedy they were to try and push the IPC out.

It was further hinted as well that despite seemingly knowing Jade for a decent amount of time and even being mentored by her, Topaz creates this “distance” with Jade when interacting with her. She would stay very formal ironically to her, calling her “Madam Jade” instead of "Miss Jade" until told not to.

Even when Jade insists that they are equals and there’s no need for such titles, Topaz still mentions that Jade is her senior. Even during their other talks, Topaz seems to try and strictly keep their topics to business, seemingly a bit cautious when Jade brings up Aventurine.

This is really seen specifically when Jade mentions Topaz’s trust in him. She seems to divert the topic to her logical business reason to why she would bet her cornerstone in this mission. But the minute Jade seems to casually speak about Aventurine, Topaz tries to go back to business.

It shows that Topaz is mindful with how she should behave in front of Jade, not wanting to divulge more into personal topics and strictly staying professional. This hints that she is aware of Jade’s manipulation and tries to extract what she learns from her.

What I mean is, she takes Jade’s teaching with value in a business sense. She clearly remembers her lessons and how to approach negotiation well. However, she doesn’t follow all of it by heart, changing it according to what she believes in and how she adds kindness to it.

She does value what she can learn from Jade, as it helps her strive and excel in her goal of helping others. But she navigates cautiously and seems to keep her guard up when gaining knowledge. It’s similar to Aventurine where he knows about Jade, but values what he can gain from her.

This doesn’t even go into the Keeping Up with Star Rail trailer where Topaz was co-hosting. She has always been good at analyzing and assessing. But it’s interesting she mentions not to test Jade, even hinting she was close to being “swallowed” by the abyss while looking nervous…

Ultimately, I just think Topaz is far more complex than she presents herself to be. I really don’t think she is that blinded as her words make her out to be, and her actions do seem to be contradicting to that as well.

This is just how I’ve come to interpret her behavior as I found it really off despite her words. She makes for an interesting character to analyze.

Original Date of Posting on Twt/X: Jul 3, 2024

[drmajalis]

I feel like talking about Kira Nerys.

She is definitely one of the all time greatest Star Trek characters, and an absolute triumph of character development and payoff. She was a terrorist, she is absolutely open and unapologetic over that fact. Her planet was under a brutal, genocidal imperialist occupation and she did whatever was necessary to frustrate the Cardassians and eventually expel them from Bajor. She starts the series with that initial, momentary victory- the Cardassians have retreated, the resistance- now Bajorian militia have captured Terok Nor, but she barely gets to enjoy it for the day before Bajor's new provisional government decides to invite Starfleet to run the space station, wanting to set up their slow, eventual ascension to the Federation. And she's PISSED. Her literal first scene is arguing with her superiors before reluctantly handing over the commander's office to newly arrived Benjamin Sisko, and while that resentment slowly fades as Sisko shows overwhelmingly that he wants to be the best advocate possible for Bajor, it remains even as he is revealed to be the Emissary, Bajor's literal messiah. Kira never ceases in her struggle to see Bajor truly independent and thriving, even when it comes into conflict with her own conflicted moral code, something she had to adopt while fighting the Cardassians, but is ill equipped to handle the nuances they now have to face. This even eventually leads her to rebel, if briefly, against her own government, because she eventually decides her allegiance is to the Bajorans she fought to liberate, not Bajor the planet, or political entity.

And then there's Kira's complicated, evolving relation to the former Cardassian occupiers. It's easy to understand why she would paint them all with the same brush, they were genocidal, unforgiving, claiming to do what they did in some deluded idea that they were "helping" Bajor. But very quickly events transpire that shake her previously black and white beliefs about them.

What can I even say about "Duet" that hasn't already been said? Being confronted with a Cardassian who was so traumatized by what he witnessed his own people doing to the Bajorans that he pretended to be the very Gul who ordered the killings just so he could beg the Bajorans to put him on trial and execute him! It's such a shocking reveal that it turns Kira from eagerly wanting to put him to the death, to weeping over his murder by the very kind of revenge obsessed Bajoran she started out as.

I still cry over Marritza's confession. And the worst thing was, he was absolutely right. He knew that if Cardassia didn't own up to the crimes they had committed that they would eventually be destroyed, and he was proven right as Gul Dukat's irredentist views led him to ally with the Dominion, which ended up nearly destroying Cardassia in the long run. She even finds it in her heart to welcome Ghemor as a surrogate father figure after the time spent thinking she might actually be his daughter, and fully accept that he was trying to atone both for his own actions and that of Cardassia's, eventually burying him on Bajor next to her own father. She also ends up being confronted with the consequences of her zealotry by Silarin Prin, just a humble, innocent servant who was horribly disfigured by a bombing of a prominent Gul that Kira was involved in. And yet, she's able to recognize that while what she did was not an absolute good, fully justified by what the Bajorans were subjected to, she doesn't denounce her old self and her activities. She doesn't forgive, or forget, and that goes for both her actions, and the Cardassians. That's why she was the perfect person to help the Cardassian resistance against the Dominion, because like Marritza said, to save Cardassia, they have to change, and admit that what they did was wrong. Even Garak, who is really never shown to be that remorseful over his past activities acknowledges this when Kira points out to Damar that his family being executed by the Dominion was no different from Cardassia executing the families of Bajoran freedom fighters. "Yeah, Damar, what kind of people give those orders?" Her character came full circle, and that's why it was perfect to end the series with her finally, fully taking over command of DS9.

She'll always be one of the greatest of all time.

[aliciavance4228]

Before starting to talk about this subject I want to make one thing clear: Hephaestus is one of my favourite Greek Gods (either in Top 5 or Top 10), so I'm not writing this post because I dislike him, but because I cannot stand superficial/surfface-level depictions of greek gods' personalities, nor the simplification of them and the erasure of their nuances (either through romanticization or demonization).

I do appreciate the fact that a lot of people start to realize that the relationship between Aphrodite and Hephaestus was a disfunctional one and that both of them are happier with different people (Ares and Aglaea, respectively). However, the fact that many people are usually focusing only on Aphrodite's actions and ignore Hephaestus' abusiveness rubs me in a wrong way.

Now, referring to Hephaestus as an Incel or choosing to villainize him for that is not the best solution either. He wasn't the only god asking Zeus for a wife, nor the only one who presents a more or less misogynistic attitude towards women. We're talking here about Ancient Greece, so expecting the deities to act how we would expect them to act based on nowdays' principles and standards is unrealistic and juvenile. I would also like to point out the fact that Hephaestus is, according to Hesiod's Theogony, happily married with Aglaea, who is also described as his first and only wife. They also have four daughters according to Orphic Rhapsodies Frag. And yet he is the exact same deity that you guys claim to be an Incel, which is a contraditiction to the original meaning of the term. The word was ment to reffer to a category of men who blame their appearance for not being able to have sex (when in truth the reason why women don't want them is rather due to their personality and beliefs; and by beliefs I mean their tendency of objectifying women and having ridiculously high standards for their future wives while simultaneously getting offended when a woman has her own standards too). I can see Apollo and Hades falling into more Incel Stereotypes than him, considering the fact that one of them cursed many women for refusing to sleep with him, whereas the other literally had to kidnap a woman in order to have a wife. And yet nobody dares to call them Incels, just because they two aren’t described as being disabled nor falsely considered unattractive, unlike Hephaestus.

That being said, negating his wrongs and turning him into a woobie who did nothing wrong just because you cannot stand Aphrodite isn't a good way of perceiving their relationship either. While Aphrodite was indeed manipulative towards Hephaestus and her sleeping with his own brother in his bed was hardly admirable, I would also like to point out the fact that Hephaestus was pretty much toxic and revengeful towards her too.

Now, there are a lot of versions on how they got married as well as a lot of lost fragments, which leads to speculations rather than something 100% certain. So I won't talk about it purely because I want to avoid misinterpretiation and misinformation, and discuss directly about what intetests me the most.

Wheter or not Aphrodite willingly married him or loved him, what do we know for sure is that she preffered Ares more and had an affair with him all this time. Being cheated on is a form a betrayal from a partner, so Hephaestus being angry on her is understandable. However, instead of divorcing her directly, he decided to humiliate her in one of the worst ways possible before separating from her:

Quintus Smyrnaeus, Fall of Troy 14. 40 ff (trans. Way) (Greek epic C4th A.D.) :

"With cheek shame-crimsoned, like the Queen of Love, what time the Heaven-abiders saw her clasped in Ares' arms, shaming in sight of all the marriage-bed, trapped in the myriad-meshed toils of Hephaistos : tangled there she lay in agony of shame, while thronged around the Blessed, and there stood Hephaistos' self: for fearful it is for wives to be beheld by husbands' eyes doing the deed of shame."

On top of that, Hephaestus directed his wrath towards one of Aphrodite and Ares' daughters (Harmonia) and her descendants as well, despite the fact it wasn't technically her fault that she was fathered by his brother:

Statius, Thebaid 2. 265 ff (trans. Mozley) (Roman epic C1st A.D.) :

"The dread necklace of Harmonia . . . The Lemnian [Hephaistos], so they of old believed, long time distressed at Mars' [Ares'] deceit and seeing that no punishment gave hindrance to the disclosed armour, and the avenging chains removed not the offence [of his affair with Hephaistos' then wife Aphrodite], wrought this [a cursed necklace] for Harmonia on her bridal day to be the glory of her dower [description of the necklace follows] . . .

The work first proved its worth, when Harmonia's complaints turned to dreadful hissing, and she bore company to grovelling Cadmus, and with long trailing breast drew furrows in the Illyrian fields [the pair were turned into serpents in Illyria]. Next, scarce had shameless Semele [their daughter] put the hurtful gift about her neck, when lying Juno [Hera] crossed her threshold. Thou too, unhappy Jocasta, didst, as they say, possess the beauteous, baleful thing, and didst deck thy countenance with its praise - on what a couch, alas! to find favour; and many more beside. Last Argia shines in the splendour of the gift, and in pride of ornament and accursed gold surpassed her sister's mean attiring. The wife of the doomed prophet [Eriphyle wife of Amphiaraus] beheld it, and at every shrine and banquet in secret cherished fierce jealousy, if only it might be granted her to possess the terrible jewel, nought profited, alas!"

Furthermore, I would also like to emphasize the fact that Hephaestus had a considerable amount of lovers. And while timeline is another uncertain aspect and he might have slept with those women before he married Aphrodite and/or between the moment when he divorced her and the one when he remarried, the possibility of him cheating on Aphrodite isn't an impossible one. In this case, that could be taken as a Double Standard, and his reaction when he found out that Aphrodite was cheating on him would be completely hypocritical.

As I said, Aphrodite was abusive and toxic towards him as well. But deciding to solely demonize her instead of acknowledging that both of them were abusive and toxic towards each other -I don't like to use this term but I can't find another one for the moment- is purely slut-shaming. Some of you guys are complaining about how "Hera has no agency" and were praising Kaos for portraying her as cheating on Zeus despite the fact that this is out of her character because "He finally got a taste of his own medicine", yet when Aphrodite cheats on her possible unfaithful husband she's suddenly a whore. You guys want a goddess who can be sexually active without any sort of inhibitions, yet when Aphrodite is brought into discussion there's at least one person who won't hesitate to call her all slurs for that, whereas Demeter is turned into a prude on top of being a Helicopter Parent in many fanfictions and retellings (because apparently when a woman becomes a mother she cannot care about anything else).

So instead of choosing one extreme or another where a) Aphrodite is a brainless slut and Hephaestus a poor woobie or b) Aphrodite is a helpless victim and Hephaestus an Incel who deserved to be cheated on, perhaps it would be a better idea to treat them as humane, realistic figures, instead of some sort of cartoonish caricatures who can easily fit into whatever labels and tropes you want them to fit in.

[gougarfem]

i know this is cliché and there are a million posts like this but i'm getting so tired of the pointless infighting on here. and before you accuse me of anything, i'm a lesbian who practices complete female seperatism with the exception of having to interact with male healthcare staff. yes, i'm far from a perfect radfem, and yes, we should all try but I don't think anyone on here meets that ideal. seeing misogynistic slurs and insults thrown at women who are bisexual, het-partnered, or god forbid need a fucking abortion is so saddening when tumblr is one of the only places i feel a sense of community with other feminists. most people on here have at some point been isolated and ostracized for our politics. we're lucky to have a space on a site like this where we can express our beliefs and form a community and have nuanced discussions (look at what's happening to other apps! look how quickly radfem pages are termed on instagram and tiktok!) and instead of using this platform for constructive discussion some of you are spending 4+ hours a day in petty arguments over semantics, attacking vulnerable women for needing medical procedures and cyberbullying anyone who happens to feel attraction to men. we are not going to form a movement like this. no progress will come from this! outsiders see us picking each other apart and are discouraged from radical feminism, men use the holes in our community to tear us apart and make us look like a joke. people go back to liberal circles because their first day on radblr gets them an inbox full of insults and slurs and they quickly see how other women are treated on here.

i can't believe this needs saying but spending your day online calling osa women traitors/c*nts/c*cksuckers/brainwashed, telling detrans women we're deformed and damaged goods and throwing around the r slur is not activism nor is it feminist. some of you need to watch a primary school cyberbullying powerpoint about how there's another person at the end of the screen because i know no one on here would say those things to a woman's face. radical feminism fights for the liberation of EVERY woman, no matter if you personally dislike them or disagree with their choices - and even so, it's common sense that people will be more open to conversation and willing to change if you treat them with kindness, instead of denouncing and dogpiling everyone who doesn't meet your standards. i'm a radfem because so many women aren't. i'm a radfem for the women who wear makeup and insist it's for themselves. i'm a radfem for women who have been "happily married" 10 years and still do 100% of the housework. is that you? are you fighting for these women? or are you on here to boost your superiority complex and put others down? because if that's the case our movement doesn't fucking need you.

i hope some of you think about why you're on tumblr and how exactly you're aiding female liberation or even helping women to begin with. where the majority of other communities are toxic echo chambers, we need to be able to accept differences of opinion and fight for the bigger cause. anything else will alienate the same women we claim to be fighting for.

[jon-withnoh]

Give me the hot Elisabeth and Rebecca takes!

Sure thing! (Oh boy this turned out long.)

Elisabeth disclaimer: this is purely based on vibes. I have some knowledge of the historical background, but it’s not really my field of study.

Rebecca disclaimer: this is my field of study and I have very strong opinions on it, though I do not claim that I am always correct. I do however maintain that I could back up many of my claims if I had the time to do proper textual analysis and read secondary sources.

I genuinely think Elisabeth (the musical as it was written) is a masterpiece. The framing device, the way certain melodies mirror each other to foreshadow events or indicate character development — it’s amazing! Plus, the music is ridiculously good. 100/10. I love this musical.

Most stagings/recordings of Elisabeth since 2012 though? More than questionable. Levay/Kunze musicals in general appear to be following a pattern where the original production and a maybe one or two productions after it are full of nuance and complexity, only to have that complexity broken down and reduced over time. That is no fault of the musical itself, but a worrying trend of not trusting audience to be able to handle nuance and trying to make every element of a production more palatable and easier to handle. I hate it. Both the 1992 and the 2005 Wien productions have so much to recommend them (I can’t speak for the German productions but would humbly turn over the questions to more Elisabeth-versed mutuals like @fitzrove), but it all seems to be going downhill.

HOT TAKE: I think bringing on more and more “Broadway-sounding” performers to do both Elisabeth and Rebecca is a mistake. For me, Levay/Kunze shows have a very specific sound to them, a sound that fits into European musical theatre and makes sense for when and where they were created. Hiring almost exclusively people with a way more modern, belt-y sound is not a direction I personally like for these shows. Don’t get me wrong, this is not about any specific performers, it’s about trying to change the sound of these shows into something more akin to a big Broadway musical and that really doesn’t work for me. Both Elisabeth and Rebecca are so idiosyncratic in how they sound and how they’re written, trying to make them fit into a mould they don’t belong in does them a disservice. (Looking at you, VBW.)

Maybe not a hot take: but I love the 2005 Wien production of Elisabeth so much. It was my first exposure to the musical and remains my go-to cast album. It certainly has faults and I totally understand why people might gravitate towards different productions, but since I haven’t listened to the full 1992 Wien and 2001 Essen (?) productions yet, I can only compare it to 2012.

REBECCA HOT TAKE: Michael Kunze has stated that he views Rebecca as first and foremost a love story and I think he is WRONG. Daphne du Maurier herself would probably think he was wrong (seeing as she hated the story being described as a romance). This is a core problem with Rebecca das Musical. There are many things to love (Danny, Danny, Beatrice, and did I mention Danny?), but in my opinion, the whole “this is a great love story” angle does it a huge disservice. Let’s make it weirder! Let’s make it as bleak as it fucking is! (Probably not a crowd pleaser but let me have my fun).

Rebecca the musical could have done with some serious editing.

The Magdeburg production of Rebecca, which I am aware was not very accessible to a lot of people, might be one of the best productions of Rebecca ever. Kerstin Ibald absolutely knocked it out of the park with her Mrs Danvers and gave her all the nuance and emotion we so desperately crave. Her Danny is so broken, so lost. Patrick Stanke’s Maxim strikes the perfect balance between the haughty upperclass Englishman who takes kind of a fatherly tone with his young wive, and the haunted, jealous husband who absolutely did murder his first wife. Also in this production Maxim and Ich finally have some chemistry! This production’s Ich (Sibylle Lambrecht, I think) has such a great character arc and it is completely believable that she is into Maxim, even (or especially??) after his confession. Plus, the set design was amazing!!!

More Rebecca hot takes that I’ve definitely brought up before: I know we all like to write Ich as a repressed queer woman who ends up not being all that into Maxim, but honestly, she probably is very attracted to him. We can speculate about the why, but like, it is strongly implied that they have sex for the first time shortly after Maxim’s confession. She wants him.

I maintain and will die on this hill that making Danny sing “Ich liebte sie, doch sie hat mich verraten” is a mistake. I mean, yes please let Danny tell us she loved Rebecca, but come on. Danny doesn’t lose her faith in Rebecca. She doesn’t stop idolising Rebecca. Whatever her reasons for setting Manderley on fire may be it’s not that she thinks Rebecca betrayed her. I don’t even think Danny thinks highly enough of herself to even consider feeling betrayed by Rebecca. Rebecca is god to her.

I definitely have more, but this post is really long and I’m running out of steam… Hope you enjoyed!

[fuck-hamas-go-israel]

Ok so I have watched multiple videos on the history of Israel - Palestine and honestly? Go Israel.

The only thing I am not able to understand is, why is the whole world in the support of Palestine? Even Tumblr? (Yes the death of innocent people is bad but it's happening on both sides, why are they pretending that everyone in Israel lives in idk, rocket-proof luxury rooms?)

And people are purchasing books on history of Israel - Palestine, and still violently supporting Palestine. And not even seeing a shread of "blame" on them? :(

This is just an observation, but wherever muslims are in majority, they won't let the minority in peace, no matter what — they're not the “peaceful” community the world tries to show them as.

There is whole history on how they are ruthless, tyrants, who can not accept let alone tolerate another religion in their proximity.

I JUST don't know what will it take for the world to see the actual history and stop viewing Israel like The Evil Nation.

That’s a good question, but a very difficult one to answer.

As you’ve said, the information is out there in the open, available to anyone willing to put in the time to read and understand.

However, it takes a lot of mental effort to wrap one’s mind around the historical and geopolitical nuances of this conflict. As a result, it’s definitely less of a mental burden to get information from reading headlines, reading tweets, and watching TikToks.

Of course the information isn’t always accurate, and if someone absorbs news from these sites that all have the same bias, they’ll be inclined to think a certain way. But even still, it’s digestible, and why put in the work to make informed opinions of the subject when these smaller, bite-sized pieces of info are being spoon-fed to you easily?

You can tell people to “educate themselves”until the cows come home, but the chances of them actually going to read up more are pretty slim. After all, it’s more comfortable and safe to maintain your opinion than actively seek out information that challenges your point of view.

That aside, I think the Israel-Palestine conflict in particular has elicited, or rather, uncovered a very worrying hypocrisy and double-standard, and caused a rise in antisemitism that’s alarmingly reminiscent of 1940s Europe.

Those who support Hamas claim to be on the side of “human rights” and “protecting the innocent”, yet turn a blind eye to or rejoice at the slaughter of innocent children.

They present this issue as intersectional with other liberalist movements such as feminism and LGBTQ+ rights, yet Hamas rapes and parades the naked bodies of women around to publicly humiliate them, and calls the LGBT community “sinners” that will be “punished by Allah”, and refuses to allow any LGBT person on Palestinian soil.

Yes, it is baffling to see people defend a terrorist group that has such fundamentally incompatible ideologies with them, and would kill them on sight. Normally I wouldn’t just tell them to go to Palestine if they like it so much, but if they can’t see the irrationality of their own beliefs themselves, if they can’t see that their parroted platitudes are of no use and don’t make them immune or exempt from the hate-filled violence of Hamas, then maybe going there to see for themselves is perhaps the only solution.

So maybe there isn’t anything that can be done, unfortunately. It’s very telling that many pro-Israel accounts are sent hate mail daily, and instead of being presented with the opportunity for discourse on the complicated subject, it’s just crusty anons calling for the end of Israel and telling them to kill themselves for supporting Israel.

If someone calls for your death, then there’s little to nothing that can be done anymore to have a rational discussion. All you can do is stay safe and stay informed, and don’t stoop to their level because they’ll use that as ammunition against you to justify calling for your death.

Am Yisrael Chai 🇮🇱

[highfantasy-soul]

So I need to get something off my chest about 'writing' and what a show is trying to do vs if the writing is the best to show that.

I haven't seen this complaint so much on Tumblr, but it has been brought up several times in a Discord server I'm in and I don't think there is the best place to address it (it might be taken as too political or an attack against specific people) but I really really needed to write out how I'm feeling about it.

So a massive complaint in this Discord is that the writing of the Acolyte is bad. The ones making this criticism claim that they like the ideas behind the show, but the execution with the writing is terrible and they need to get a whole new writing team for season 2.

So. Hmm. How to not get too in my feelings about that.

Let's take a look at who the writers are. We have:

3 men - 2 of which are men of color, the last I don't know enough about to say if he's part of a specific marginalized identity or not

and we have 7 women - Leslye who is openly queer, 3 black women, an asian woman, a trans woman and activist, and another who I again, don't know enough about to say if she's a part of a specific marginalized identity (other than her femininity) or not.

I didn't do deep dives on them, they're writers, so it's kind of hard to specifically find out 'hey, do you personally have a lot of experience with colonialism/religious trauma?' BUT I think that just baseline seeing how many women, people of color, and queer people there are on the writing staff and the way I could see so many extremely nuanced and real things on screen that I personally know about gives me a good idea about their own experiences/knowledge about such subjects.

Despite the claim that 'they like what the story is going for', the understanding of how the writers are telling that story isn't translating to everyone. I have a little suspicion as to what unites the people who 'don't get' the writing despite claiming to like what the show was going for. Kind of like how people 'liked what the civil rights movement was about, but those leaders and their methods? Get those out of here and accomplish the goals in a different way'. Or reading a classic and having no context for who wrote it or when the story was written and trying to judge it based on your own very limited understanding and claiming it's "bad" because you, personally, are just not aware of anything outside of your own world view.

It's important to be able to identify where your own understanding might be lacking - and acknowledging that just because YOU don't 'get it' doesn't mean that the writing is BAD. It just means... you don't get it. Personally, I don't get every single show made for a very specific audience - especially racialized comedies specifically for the race the writer/performer is. As an example, Dave Chapelle (horrendous transphobia aside) wrote a great deal of his material for his very specific audience of Black Americans. I personally, as a not-Black person, wasn't sure how to feel about some of his jokes - but what I DIDN'T do was say that he was bad and 'I get that he's making fun of his own community, but he should do it in a different way, maybe get a different writer'. Because I'm not the one equipped to judge that. I acknowledge that his comedy is outside my wheelhouse and honestly, for Chapelle's case when it comes to his racial jokes, I simply remove myself from the equation and just look to other Black people and how they react to his comedy to see if he's stepped over a line. (Also, when it comes to comedy, as he himself pointed out, some white people were laughing a little TOO hard at his jokes - I think that's mainly an issue with comedy and poking fun at yourself only to have someone not in your 'group' not take it as friendly ribbing but rather more malicious - and so he dialed it back).

Comedy is a bit different than any other media - I do think that comedy requires a lot more knowledge of the subject matter to know when the person is exaggerating, critiquing, or affectionately ribbing that is pretty important to know before internalizing what's said in the show. If you're not aware of that stuff, you might hear a stand-up routine and internalize a lot of really harmful stereotypes so I think it's ok to step away from comedy that isn't "for you" in a way that I don't think is particularly great for ALL types of media that isn't "for you".

With romance stories - I just don't get why a character would make all their decisions focused around getting a romantic partner, maybe I actively dislike watching/reading about that, but what I'm NOT going to do is say Jane Austen is a bad writer. I can point out things I disliked aside from the romance aspect or even larger writing critiques, but I'm not going to say that 'I see what she was going for, but get a different writer because I didn't get it'. Those stories were intensely personal to her and many people see themselves in the characters she wrote. Just because *I* don't get their motivations doesn't mean others don't.

So, examples aside, I think it's incredibly important that before we say 'the writing was bad', think about if maybe it's just that you don't have the meta understanding of the groups being highlighted in the story. It does give me the ick when people say to 'replace the writing table' on The Acolyte when the story trying to be told is of marginalized groups interacting with massive colonial institutions and the generational trauma that causes - and when you look at the writers....they are part of the groups affected by those issues, and the ones who are saying 'replace them'....aren't (largely).

When you 'don't get' something in media, especially if that media is telling the stories of groups you don't belong to, go to see what those groups are saying. There have been articles written about The Acolyte from the points of view of marginalized groups and meta posted around about how these irl subjects are being handled. In my opinion, as someone a part of such effected groups, I think the writers have done an incredible job with the show.

The main issue I think (good faith) people have is that DISNEY didn't give the show more time to tell its story, but then they lay the issues at the feet of the writers for 'not explaining enough' - but the things they want explained, largely I find are things that...were explained enough if you know the basics of colonization, missionaries, and generational trauma.

Other complaints I've seen boil down to "the show should have told me everything in order, clearly, and told me what to think about it and each of the characters - because I was left guessing, instead of using my own brain to think about it, I have decided it's bad writing because everything wasn't fed to me in a straightforward way" which again, isn't a fault of the writing, it's a flaw in the way you THINK all shows need to hand-hold you. Just because a show doesn't spoon-feed you the story and character motivations, doesn't mean the writing is bad.

Finally, I've seen critiques of the writing (and story) to the effect of 'it's a Star Wars story - it NEEDS to fit into the Star Wars box/expectations and if it doesn't, that means it's bad writing' - which again, kills diversity. You want surface-level inclusion where "yay! It's a woman doing bombings now! Cheer for her!" rather than "Look, it's a woman doing war-crimes and we're pointing out that war crimes are STILL wrong and here's other marginalized people fighting against that!"

So before claiming 'the writers need to be replaced', take a step back and look at why you feel that way, take a look at who the writers are and what story they were trying to tell, and first consider: maybe you just aren't knowledgeable enough about the subject matter. And just because it's not 'baby's first colonizer story', doesn't mean the writing is bad. Maybe you aren't the center of the universe for once and maybe its OK for you to feel a little behind in understanding - it just means there's new stuff for you to learn! Which is a good thing!

Obligatory explanation that all this doesn't mean that you can't critique the writing or that if you critique the writing that means you 100% are who I'm talking to in this post. All I'm saying is that maybe before having the knee-jerk reaction 'get rid of the writers', take a look at it from this perspective to see if you 'not understanding' isn't on the writers, it's on you and your life experiences not preparing you for such a story told in this way.

[velvetvexations]

This is an edited version of something I posted to r/DaystromInstitute, a Star Trek sub. I'm proud of it and, having deleted my account, want to preserve it here.

Dukat is a fantastic example of Narcissitic Personality Disorder

I'm an individual with Narcissistic Personality Disorder. It's very, extremely frustrating to see people claim everyone from Dolores Umbridge to Donald Trump also have NPD because they're like, just the worst. NPD doesn't mean "selfish", or "controlling", or even "self-absorbed", and certainly is not a synonym for abusive, despite all the self-help books that say sniping a narcissist who came within eight hundred yards of you is legally permissible under Stand Your Ground laws.

You might expect me to not be so appreciative of Dukat, who is, after all, a pretty horrible person. I actually have a worse opinion of Dukat's supposed nobility than many, as fairly often the fandom prefers to back the idea that he really was a misguided anti-villain who only succumbed to devil-worshipping when the writers assassinated his character.

Well, unfortunately, it's harder to recognize authentic NPD traits in heroes, and "recognize" is a term I use loosely, since most writers certainly didn't have NPD in mind at all. Nonetheless, I love Dukat because he exemplifies a nuanced, if not overly flattering, portrayal of a personality disorder that actual human beings deal with, and 99% of the time is just flattened into a thing you call people you don't like.

As a child, one thing that did a lot to mitigate the more negative social aspects of NPD was having it imprinted on my brain by anime and video games that being a Hero and as good as possible was the best thing to be. While praise and attention in general does scratch a powerful itch too, once my child-self internalized the values of the media I consumed - helped along by also being autistic - the standard for which I judged myself was set. I would literally cry if I accidentally picked up dark side points in a Star Wars game.

I think Dukat went through a similar process. Not all narcissists cling to a model centering morality, but Dukat, for one reason or another, did. He sincerely believes everything he does is altruistic and fair, and more than that, he wants to be altruistic and fair, having misidentified the origin of his cravings.

Another thing that helped me a lot growing up was a book called The Screwtape Letters. If you're unfamiliar, it's by CS Lewis and is presented as a series of letters from a high-ranked demon to his nephew, who works as essentially a shoulder devil attempting to guide his patient into sin and disconnection from God. I feel like Lewis would probably be annoyed with me not getting anything properly Christian out of it, but it is an amazing manual for teaching you how to examine your own thinking and subconscious impulses. It started me down a path of being very self-aware, which made it easier to navigate NPD, because I'm incapable of tolerating the flaws in my internal logic that I'm able to catch. If I may be excused for saying so, I think I do a decent job on that count, with the downside that I'm often far too hyper-critical and it results in regular anxiety.

But Dukat never learned that skill. As a result, his attempted nobility clashes with his other competing impulses, and all his actions are reinforced, rather than rejected, by his conscious, which his NPD assures him is being followed to the letter. As Lewis said:

The baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point may be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent. But the Inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely more because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations.

Dukat's inner struggle is fueled by the need to be a revered benefactor while also having served at the head of the bastard offspring of the Iraq War and Holocaust. His solution at the time was to make it more like the Second Boer War, the conflict that originally popularized the term "concentration camp" despite the fact that those concentration camps weren't even meant to eliminate the thousands that were killed in them.

DUKAT: So in my first official act as Prefect, I ordered all labour camp commanders to reduce their output quotas by fifty percent. Then I reorganized the camps themselves. Child labour was abolished. Medical care was improved. Food rations were increased. At the end of one month of my administration, the death rate had dropped by twenty percent. Now how did the Bajorans react to all this? On my one month anniversary they blew up an orbital dry-dock, killing over two hundred Cardassian soldiers and workers. "KIRA": We didn't want a reconciliation. We wanted to destroy you. DUKAT: So I had to order a response. But even then it was a carefully tempered one. I ordered two hundred suspected members of the Resistance rounded up and executed. Two hundred lives for two hundred lives. That's justice, not malevolence. Justice.

Throughout the episode the Kira hallucination embodies the disrespected and ingratitude he feels he gets for being "nice". Cardassian values, attitudes, and objectives came first. Dukat, however, was smart enough to understand some of what was being done to Bajor was wrong, but not quite able to tear himself away from his own identity as a Cardassian and the protagonist of the universe. That was just too much to totally upend, as would be required to fully comprehend the reality of the situation.

So he tries, in his own way. Because he wants to be a good guy, the hero, the main character, and he truly believes that he is. Unfortunately, it remains pointed solidly in the direction of his own ego. He's unable to recognize that to err is Cardassian, but repentance divine, because he's already invested in so much. His identity as a Cardassian, his own past actions, his impulsive grabs for power, and being convinced he's such a good man shields him from thinking critically because it would necessarily mean criticizing himself. Dukat can only truly appreciate that he's made mistakes when it makes him feel like he's being the bigger man willing to compromise and graciously admit fault, but he was in charge of the Occupation for twenty years. It's hard to walk back from that.

And I should know, because even understanding I'm the one at fault, it's pulling teeth to force myself through accepting I did wrong, much less admitting it to someone else. I don't want to be someone who fucked up, no matter how minor. Pulling teeth. Quite a lot of NPD can be described that way, in fact. While half-brained wannabee psychologists present narcissists as being sociopathic manipulators who skillfully terrorize those around them, most of NPD is horrible, chest-thumping anxiety. It's not fun at all to want to break my controller in half every single time I get got in a game of Splatoon, even when the round is far from over.

Most Cardassians involved with the Occupation seemed to be either outright monsters or falling under the "banality of evil", like Damar. They considered the Bajorans as, at best, a bunch of backwards hicks who needed to shut up and listen to their betters. Dukat, though, fetishized Bajor and the Bajorans themselves, as quite creepily seen in his string of Bajoran lovers and his dogged pursuit of Kira throughout the show (which horrifically took Nana Visitor putting her foot down to keep from being canon!). He pursed his tenure as head of the Occupation with the zeal of someone who truly wanted his subjects to see he was doing all this for their own good.

The Dominion and most other Cardassians don't give a fuck if your subjects like you except insofar as it's convenient and makes them less likely to rebel. That's the Dominion's whole thing, they just want control, and if the carrot doesn't work they'll shrug and without a hint of emotion give you the stick. It doesn't matter to them how they're in charge as long as they are. When Dukat makes his point about having only executed two-hundred (suspected!) members of the Resistance, the Weyoun hallucination comments:

"WEYOUN": The Dominion would never have been so generous.

It's telling that Dukat is fixated on the contrast between him and the people he allied with enough for it to show up in his breakdown. Just a little before that, Dukat says:

DUKAT: Major Kira knows full well I made every effort to heal the wounds between Cardassia and Bajor. Since the very beginning it was my intention to rectify the mistakes of the past and begin a new chapter in our relations.

Dukat is capable of saying, vaguely, abstractly, "mistakes were made", but it infuriates and honestly baffles him that it's not enough for him to be recognized as the most brilliant and loving extraterrestrial patriarch the Bajorans could ever wish for. In an earlier episode, he has this conversation with (the real) Weyoun:

WEYOUN: If you ask me, the key to holding the Federation is Earth. If there's going to be an organized resistance against us, its birthplace will be there. DUKAT: You could be right. WEYOUN: Then our first step is be to eradicate its population. It's the only way. DUKAT: You can't do that. WEYOUN: Why not? DUKAT: Because! A true victory is to make your enemy see they were wrong to oppose you in the first place. To force them to acknowledge your greatness. WEYOUN: Then you kill them? DUKAT: Only if it's necessary. WEYOUN: I had no idea. DUKAT: Perhaps the biggest disappointment in my life is that the Bajoran people still refuse to appreciate how lucky they were to have me as their liberator. I protected them in so many ways, cared for them as if they were my own children. But to this day, is there a single statue of me on Bajor? WEYOUN: I would guess not. DUKAT: And you'd be right. Take Captain Sisko, an otherwise intelligent, perceptive man. Even he refuses to grant me the respect I deserve.

Weyoun ends the scene laughing at Dukat. Because he was just advocating they exterminate all life on Earth, and yet he's amazed, truly stunned by how crackers Dukat is. The sheer depths of Dukat's psychological need for validation is as clinically fascinating to Weyoun as it is to the audience.

As it is to me, anyway. Like Narcissus and his pool, I peer into Dukat and see myself. Unsurprisingly, he's one of my favorite characters.