#anyway I assume there are many varying opinions

[itspileofgoodthings]

things I truly do not give a damn about: Taylor removing the mattress line

[heedzhee-art]

more of my yapping about the fandom-given hetalia Ukraine name

I don't like the Katyusha Ukraine because in my opinion it doesn't suit her, and people constantly use the name incorrectly. basically, Katyusha is like a playful version of "Kateryna/Katya", but people write it like a formal first name pretty often (Katyusha Chernenko), no blame since it comes from a place of unfamiliarity with slavic languages, it's just a bit annoying. plus the word is associated with that one russian song that became popular during World War II god it just doesn't suit her at all in my opinion 😭

"Katyusha" is a diminutive form of the name Kateryna, except it's of russian origin; in Ukrainian the diminutive forms of the name are "Katrusya", "Katerynka", or less commonly "Katrunya"

historically, the russian empire and later the soviet union promoted russian at the expense of Ukrainian, leading to the suppression of Ukrainian culture and language. of course, some Ukrainians use Katyush/Katyusha as playful nicknames, because the blending of Ukrainian and russian, that's been caused by reoccurring russification, migration, and political influence, lead to mixed usage in everyday speech – it's a normal thing (surzhyk). it's not a crime to use this word or anything, I just find it ironic that the character that represents a nation constantly oppressed by russian imperialism, in hetalia only exists as a dependant and less important character to give russia more endearing relationships and make him more interesting, and then the Japanese fandom coincidentally has also chosen the russian word for her name (I assume it's after that popular soviet song)

really I feel there's not much Ukrainian about canon hetalia Ukraine, which seems to be a very common feeling among many of my Ukrainian friends who know about the character :/ they think she's cute and pretty, but when it comes to national identity and culture, she is not relatable even on a stereotypical level, and has little depth as a character

anyway, if you want some Ukrainian first names, here's a list of the ones I think sound fitting (SUBJECTIVE OPINION 😡)

🇺🇦🔱🌻🍲🇺🇦🌾🌻🍞🇺🇦🍲🌾

Myroslava (love this one) - slavic origin, a combination of мир and слава, meaning peace and glory. it suits resilient and strong people

Olha/Olya (ОЛЯ UA!!!!!!!) - scandinavian origin (ukr. variant of Hélga). yea it's a really old and really common name that associates with the Kyivan Rus era, anyway I use it because of a meme and due to every Olya I've met building this collective Olya in my head that's literally how I also see Ukraine. she's such an Olya. it's hard to explain

Olena (not Olyena) - greek origin (ukr. variant of Helénē) came to Ukrainian through Church Slavic "Yelena" (not Yelyena)

Lesya - Ukrainian name deriving from "Olesya" which in turn derives from "Oleksandra". I'm very biased about it because it's one of my favourite female names, and also many Ukrainians associate it with Lesya Ukrayinka, which is the self-given title of an outstanding Ukrainian writer, translator and cultural figure

Halyna - likely greek origin and comes from "galēnē". I like it because I get to call her Halynka/Halya, I think it sounds cute

Tetyana - common slavic name, likely of roman origin, it just has a tender and pretty sound to it

these names are common in some or all other slavic languages, differing in varied phonetics

😑 I am NOT gatekeeping people from calling her "Kateryna", I just personally dislike Katyusha or russian Yekatyerina for her, and in my opinion the old russian-speaking fandom did a better job naming her Olha, even if that popularized the russian transcription for this same name (Olga)

my Ukraine is named Olha Tkachenko. I just like it the most and I've kind of grown used to it. whateva

I will kiss you.

[thydungeongal]

Hi! im trying to design a 'dudes go die in a dungeon' style system and I'm struggling with what level of random generation to use for the dungeons. I am very interested in this style of game but have never actually played in one so have no experience to draw from. the conventional approach seems to be that the layout and boss are premade with loot and encounters rolled on the fly, what are some other approaches? are there any dungeon generation or encounter tables that I should check out for inspiration? any personal opinions on the matter?

I would've dm'd but thought other people might also want to hear your thoughts.

I personally recommend reading and playing at least a few of this style of game before trying your own hand at design! But I will gladly give my own input!

So, the degree of randomness in dungeon design very much varies from one edition of The Dungeon Game to the next. At much one extreme you have AD&D 1e which not only had procedures for populating the dungeon and giving out treasure but also for just mapping the dungeon. The latter was mostly a matter of using some random tables and could produce unpredictable and incoherent results though. At the other extreme you would pretty much have something like the WotC D&Ds which expect a heavy degree of DM authoring (even though they do sometimes contain hints of random generation!). The Basic/Expert set sits somewhere in the middle, assuming that you've already drawn a map and are simply using the tables to populate it.

Now, the conventional wisdom actually isn't to have just the layout predetermined and then generate everything else on the fly: while random generation is often used to aid in the process of prep, the purpose of prep is still to actually prepare a location with occupants and some features set in stone. If you place a treasure room in the dungeon you would generally be expected to prep what the treasure is and how many guards there are.

That's not to say that there isn't any content generation on the fly: that's what you've got your wandering monster checks and tables for.

Anyway, I think dungeons should always have a place in the fiction and should generally feel like actual places, and short of some really well-made tables you will generally have a hard time getting that purely through random generation. I think dungeons are the best when they are designed with a purpose in mind: this purpose and place in the fiction is one of the many ways through which players can actually develop a sense of place about the dungeon and learn to make informed gameplay decisions therein.

But yeah, I recommend looking into a bunch of different dungeon games for their various approaches to this! Old School Essentials is a recreation of B/X and has a free SRD online which includes its dungeon stocking procedure, you can undoubtedly find a number of articles musing on creating dungeons, and so on.

[carmyberzattosjournal]

Entry 9: I'd Love to Drown in This Spell

Screenshot Credit: @neverscreens

Bearblr Promptober Day 9: Impact Play

Summary: In which Carmen and his girlfriend talk about impact play, and he gets a little spark of confidence in the bedroom.

Warnings: Swearing, written with fem reader who is a trauma surgeon (nothing gross described) in mind, she/her pronouns, talking about impact play, fluff.

Notes: All journal entries will be titled as such and tagged with #cb journal.

Reblogs appreciated. Thank you to @carmenberzattosgf for putting together this prompt list.

09 Oct 2024

Personally, I wish people asked more questions of me instead of operating on their assumptions.

She doesn’t try to read my mind or assume because of some tangential situation in the past. I don’t try to be a chaotic disaster of a human being, but I am painted with those colors. And try as I might to reign in those entropic tendencies—whether by stalling my breath or gritting my teeth or setting alarms for when to wake up, when to get to The Bear, when to call my girlfriend, to close down, to leave my office, to come home, make dinner, write my thoughts down, go to bed—my emotional state perpetually ticks to discordant metronomes. I can try to act any sort of consistent, but the tiniest things throw me off. I can try to have consistent opinions, but they will vary wildly anyway. Like even the act of physical intimacy, of cuddling or sex or letting her play with my hair or trace invisible patterns on my chest. Love it, but it depends on so many factors prior to getting lost in kisses and her soft, warm skin that she just finds it better to ask.

Like the time she asked me about impact play.

“Can I ask you a question?” She always started that way. It’s a little thing—a check in to see if I have the mental square footage to entertain one.

We were cozied up in bed under the new comforter she bought at the turn of Fall. Her hands and forearms were killing her because she did 9 days straight in house or on call (either working at the hospital or waiting to be called in, in case I forget), got called in each day, and spent more hours fiddling with little surgical tools than not. So, I worked on them, rubbed out the knots close to her elbows, squeezed her pretty hands to soothe the ache. It’d become engrained in my routine by now, to massage her arms or her legs or her shoulders—whatever ached. Gave me something to do with my hands while also being with her.

I nodded. “Shoot.”

“How do you feel about impact play?”

I froze rubbing out a tense spot in her forearm. “About what?”

Mercifully, she didn’t burst out into giggles. Just held a straight face and explained, “Spanking, riding crop, flogger. Hitting, but sensual.” I must’ve had an uncomfortable look on my face, because she ran her fingers through my hair and stroked my cheek with her thumb. “Some people like some pain with their pleasure.”

“How, uh…” Shit, my face started getting warm. “How would you know if-if…”

I was bright red, wasn’t I? Fucking hell, it was embarrassing to get so flustered so easily. I would’ve thought a few months of dating a girl and all the practice we got dealing with intense topics would’ve inoculated me against my shyness by then.

“If you like pain with your pleasure?” She offered.

I closed my eyes. Nodded. Mumbled, “Sorry, um… I-I don’t know why I keep getting…”

She scooted closer, rested her forehead against mine. Her lips were a millimeter away from mine—part of me wanted to capture them, to taste her and that strawberry lip balm that invariably became tangled up with the idea of her in my mind, but it was also nice to just. Be close. Stirred molten pleasure deep in the pit of my stomach. She wriggled her arm out of my grasp to rest a hand on my sternum.

“It’s probably because you haven’t had the chance to speak freely pretty much ever.” She feathered her hand down over my shoulder, down my arm, to the inside of my wrist, setting off an explosion of goosebumps wherever she trailed. “It’ll take time and practice. To answer your question: I suppose you just try it. Incrementally. Safely, you always want to be safe about it.”—Her hand left my wrist and reappeared on my face. Thumb brushed my lip, and I entertained the thought of sucking it into my mouth—“See if it feels good.”

The heat in my face started subsiding, replaced with a gentle sort of buzzing accompanying the heat in my core. “Do you like impact play?”

She placed the lightest kiss just under my bottom lip, spoke into my skin. “A little bit. I can do both the striking and the receiving, but I prefer to receive.”

Fucking hell, it was so hard to think with her like this, with her this close. But it was… nice? It was nice finding it hard to focus—never in a million years would I have guessed that I’d find myself in that position, slowly succumbing to the honeylike tone and touches of my lover and enjoying the process of my mind’s gears grinding to a halt. I was enthralled by her, entranced by the sound of her voice, the smell of her skin.

Should the world show me an ounce of mercy, I’d love to drown in this spell.

“What kind of impact play, my love?” I asked.

My hand moved without my input and curled around the back of her knee. Thinking back on it now, it was natural. Like I’d done it a thousand times. I wasn’t afraid or nervous.

She trailed a hand down my chest and around my side. Her voice had the smallest hint of a waver in it. For once, I was fucking her up. “I’m not terribly picky. I think a flogger might be my favorite. It’s more of a temporary sting that doesn’t bother me too much at work. Though, it has to be used kinda lightly for that.”

I couldn’t resist the urge to hook her leg over my hip and pull her closer. She was warm—the inside of her thigh on my hip, especially—and the weight soothed some dull aching low in my spine, almost at my tailbone, that I didn’t know was present until then. She squeaked in surprise, and I took the opportunity to kiss her. She froze for a moment (only a moment, just long enough for my newfound confidence to think about shaking) but then she tightened her leg around my side and wove her hand in my hair. My head spun. I was too warm, but not the same kind of boiling that accompanied my panic attacks; this warmth was different, broad, shallow rather than deep, encompassing rather than consuming. It frazzled me all the same. Maybe she sensed it, because she tipped her head back and pulled me in so I could draw in a lungful of air and kiss her throat.

“What does it feel like?” I murmured into her pulse.

She didn’t answer immediately. “Ever get whacked by a jump rope? Not, like, super hard, but like a sting on your ankle or something?”

I nodded. Pushed the comforter down to my waist. Settled back on the pillow so I could meet her gaze. She was blinking slowly.

“A bit like that,” she said. “Lighter. Your ass takes it better than your ankle though, you got some padding there.”

I grinned. “Well, that just makes sense.”

The heat in the pit of my stomach started fading. I needed to think about menu prepping for next month.

“Doesn’t it?” She traced my cheekbone. “Your dark circles are worse, baby. Long day?”

Long life.

“Yeah. Long day.”

“You might like it on your back,” she said. It took me a second to figure out what she was talking about. “Flogger. You might like it on your back. More so than your pretty ass.”

“My ass is pretty now?”

She giggled, kissed my forehead. “All of you is pretty, Carm.”

“Why my back?”

“Less vulnerable.”

I tucked her hair behind her ear, swept over her cheek with my bent knuckles. She’s soft. All of her is soft, but not in some fragile, delicate way—not in a way that feels easy to damage. But like she’s made of fine materials, with fine craftsmanship. Like someone—I would say God, but he’s a deadbeat because why else would my life be a hellscape—really took their time and tuned and balanced every little thing about her. There’s this fine porcelain bowl that I came across in a secondhand shop in Copenhagen—handmade in Japan, based on what I could find from the maker’s mark on the bottom, out of some of the finest Kaolin clay on Earth. I had to flip it over to see if the foot ring of the bowl was unglazed because the fired clay itself was so fine, smooth, polished that the edge where glaze broke over bare clay was nearly indiscernible to touch. I felt like I had no right holding a thing so fine, made with such care, without gloves on or something to protect it from the oils in my skin. That’s what it feels like to touch her. Like I had no right to be doing so. That I was in the wrong state—that I was grimy or dirty or that I needed to be polished or refined.

It's funny what love teaches you if you let it.

“Hi, sweetheart,” she whispered, drawing my attention back to her. She worked her fingers through my hair. “Where’d you go off to in that gorgeous head of yours?”

“I’d like to try it,” I said.

In retrospect, I’m relieved and perplexed that it didn’t come out sounding like a question.

“Yeah?”

I nodded. “Mhmm.”

“Can I ask why?”

“I trust you. I want to try it.”

I didn’t need to explain further. She just nodded.

[museofthepyre]

This is making me lose my mind, I need to dig into it. Forgive me if I’m not spot on with this, I’m no biblical scholar, I’m not even religious. I’m just autistic and had a hyperfixation on the Bible. So gather around, we’re having Bible study (CHNT spoilers… sort of).

I’m sure I don’t need to explain the significance of Jesus as a character in the Bible. Son of god, saviour of man, a martyr. What I’m interested in here is Elijah as Peter, and Jedidiah as Judas.

Elijah as Peter… has many implications of what may be to come? If we are to assume this metaphorical connection follows through the rest of the series. Because Peter in the Bible… he was one of the 12 apostles, he was also leader of the first Christian church. But before that, his story was… well, he betrayed Jesus. When Jesus was being arrested by the Romans, accused of being a traitor… Peter disowned Jesus. He said he did not know the traitor (“How could you!? You—you traitor! The ceremony, the congregants… how… I…”). He affirmed that three times. Upon the third time, he looked at Jesus and saw the hurt in his eyes- also a rooster crowed, which was prophesied to mark this betrayal. The look in Jesus’s eyes broke Peter’s heart, he realized what he’d done, ran away, and cried. Bitterly. Remorse and regret and realization of what he did. After the resurrection, he repented, and earned Jesus’s full forgiveness. He went on to lead the first church, and that became his life. His death came in the form of an upside-down crucifiction. His church was blamed for a fire which broke out in Rome, and he was executed- he insisted on being crucified upside down, as he felt unworthy of resembling Jesus in death. Remember this character is ELIJAH VOLKOV in this metaphor. Assuming the betrayal might be… the pyre? Then what comes next? Remorse arc, forgiveness arc? Ohshdhdhgs WHAT DO I MAKE OF THIS???

AND THEN JEDIDIAH AS JUDAS. MY FFFFUCKING GODDDDDD. Judas is another apostle, but he’s mostly known for his betrayal of Jesus- which ultimately lead to Jesus’s death. Judas disclosed his whereabouts to the people who would later crucify him (ordered by Pontius Pilate, at the time Roman governor) for 30 pieces of silver. He identified Jesus and sealed both their fates with a kiss. After the crucifixion- again, realizing what he’d done- Judas was overcome with so much remorse and regret that he hung himself. Thing is, all of this was prophesied/ predestined to be. There are varying opinions on what degree of choice Judas had- if all of this was fate, if it was all predestined, if he was a necessary part of this larger divine plan. The betrayal… I mean I think it’s obvious what that is in this Jedidiah metaphor. But what comes afterwards… ohhhh. Ohhh. My god. I have so many questions. ALSO IN ANOTHER STATEMENT MAYFIELD SAID JEDIDIAH IS MORESO GOD IN A WAY??? AND SYDNEYS STILL JESUS???? I thought Lucille would for sure parallel Pontius Pilate but then HE SAID MOTHER MARY and I’m. What

Adam as Satan requires little analysis… unless. I mean Lucifer was the most beautiful angel in God’s eyes… before he fell from grace.. Something something “Adam looks like Jedidiah but only sometimes” something something “once the most beautiful angel” something something.

Anyways. Thus concludes today’s episode of me rambling I have no clue what to make of any of this. I usually have more concluding thoughts, this time I’m just staring and shaking uncontrolably.

[lurafita]

Malec meet pre-canon divergent

(considering tv-show canon only, as I don't know much about the books) I personally found it a little weird that Alec and his siblings had to be briefed about the High Warlock of their territory, by Hodge. Shouldn't Alec, as the acting head, have been aware of the most prominent downworld leaders in the city his institute is in? Wouldn't Magnus have been in the institute before, for ward maintenance or things like that? Wouldn't they have had to call him to close rifts that demons were popping out of? (Not like those kinds of things were ever shown or discussed in the show, but then again, the show was very stingy where details and backgrounds were concerned.) Anyway, I would like to propose a series re-write, where Alec and Magnus get to know each other pre-canon, and Magnus has the chance to bolster Alec's self-worth and confidence a little. And then exploring what effect this might have, as Alec wouldn't be such a pushover where his siblings are concerned. (I actually just really like re-writes of given plots that explore changes to said given plot, so that personal guilty pleasure might heavily play into this prompt…. 😉 )

possible scene:

They could meet on site for rift closure, and Alec is laying down a plan of attack, because some demons have already gathered. And then Jace is trying to propose another plan (that's less tactical than Alec's was and more of a 'run in head first' kinda deal). And Alec is not confident about his own plan versus Jace's, and he is about to give in, but then Magnus is like: "I agree with the pretty boy." And Jace smirks and goes: "See, the high warlock thinks it will work." And then Magnus goes: "Oh no, I was talking about his plan. Yours sucks."

-

I think, if a relationship between them (platonic heading for romantic) exists for some time, Magnus would probably let slip about Maryse and Robert having been in the circle. Not in a malicious way. I think Magnus assumed that Alec knew. So maybe one day Magnus offers to check over the wards, and Alec accepts and wonders loudly about why his parents didn’t commission check ups for two years,

and Magnus just "Well, they have tried to limit their business with downworlders as much as possible. Which isn't surprising, seeing as many of us feel that they haven't been sufficiently punished for their crimes while they were in the circle. But it's not as if I would have refused the job. I might have overcharged them, … Alexander? You look pale, is something wrong?"

-

I just see them having lots of little conversations that help build Alec up, while not just being simple compliments. Like, when Alec doubts his leadership qualities and asks Magnus about his opinion, as Magnus has fought in a few wars and known a few figureheads. "I believe being a good leader comes down to knowing and trusting in yourself." "Shouldn’t that be 'knowing and trusting my people'?" "That, too. But it's important to know your own strengths and weaknesses. For example, I'm one of the most powerful warlocks out there with a deep and varied understanding of my craft, and I look dashing in silk. I'm also impatient, occasionally vain, and I can be quite petty. Now what about you? Let me start you off. You are afraid." "Wow, didn’t think you would start with a weakness." "I didn’t. Well, maybe a little bit. Fear can be both. But in this case, I meant it as a strength." "How?" "Think back to our first meeting. The fear of not knowing what the situation was we were walking into, made you come up with a strategy that allowed us to assess what was going on, while also ensuring minimal collateral damage. What do you think would have happened had you been as cocky as your parabatai, and stormed right in?" "… We wouldn’t have known about the circle members, or the back entrance. The perimeter wouldn’t have been secured. The teen warlock might have become a victim to a shadowhunter blade, had you not had the chance to see the enslavement collar on her." "See? You have good instincts, Alexander, and a great mind for tactical manouvers. That is something you should trust in more."

[arumidden]

Hi, I've been wondering about your headcanons about how the nations work. What is their role in the government, how does family work for them, do they have any powers? And stuff like that 😊

I'm guessing you're asking about my Public Nations AU and how Nations work within that universe? Get ready, this is gonna be a long post. I'll break it into parts for each section of your question :)

Note: I edited this recently so it reads more smoothly.

Role in the Government

As long as Nations have existed for, they've always been important advisers to their leaders. I think they mostly functioned as advisers, ambassadors, translators, etc. I imagine they have to remain apolitical when it comes to modern systems like political parties; they don't want to seem too supportive of any one political party, no matter what their personal opinions are. If they are gonna make a statement about something, they're expected to do it not as a Nation, but as an individual. That's partly why America's youtube channel uses his human name; it signifies that the channel is just a place for him to goof off, so nothing he says there is to be taken as a representation of the country. I think people still get those roles confused though. There’s gotta be tons of people who see Alfred stating his personal opinion and assume that that’s the government’s official statement as well. Plus I think lots of people just aren’t well versed in how the government works, so they probably misunderstand Alfred’s role as well.

I also think they've been put in the military ever since ancient times. After all, kings used to lead their militaries into battle, so I imagine their Nations would be right alongside them, both for the symbolism and because of how useful it would have been to have an immortal with lots of battle experience on their side. I can’t say that Nations always wanted to be on those battlefields, but they would often times get put there anyway.

Family

What counts as family is incredibly fluid and ever-changing for Nations. Nations aren't created through reproduction, so I don't think very clear-cut blood relations are truly possible. As a result, how Nations are related can vary and change. Why do America and Canada resemble each other so closely? I don’t think even the Nations themselves know. Sometimes Nations take this resemblance to imply familiar relations, sometimes they don’t. (I think this is more just my frustration with canon. Who is related to who makes no sense and has changed over time as Himaruya wills it. Why are England and America brothers instead of father and son? Why are America and Canada clearly twins when they didn't even belong to the same empires when they were born? I give up)

I also don't think they have the same standards for what is taboo and what isn't. Things can get waved away as "human ideas” which doesn't apply to them. Plus, Nations can't reproduce the way humans do after all, so I don't think they consider “incestuous” relationships to be nearly as scandalous. America and England might have a father-son relationship or a romantic one and I don't think they would have a problem going back and forth between the two. Not to mention the fact that after however many centuries, I assume practically all of them have slept with each other.

Of course, humans get uncomfortable with that fact, so that aspect of their relationships is usually kept private. Basically, Nations can have any kind of relationships with each other, but stick to only letting humans know about the ones that are socially acceptable.

Powers and Abilities

Nations draw life from their human populations, and as a result have a connection to those humans. Nations can tell if a human is theirs or not and identify them by name.

They can suffer from two different kinds of injuries: Direct and Indirect. Direct injuries are when their bodies are injured; they can heal from practically any direct injury, but the rate they heal depends on how well their country is doing. An injury incurred during a war may take multiple weeks to heal, while a random injury incurred during everyday life will heal much quicker.

Indirect injuries are what happens when their population is harmed or killed. Major tragic events can result in injuries suddenly appearing on their bodies. Some rare events can leave them with permanent scars (9/11, London Blitz, French Revolution, Atomic Bombs, etc). If their people are sick with a disease, they will show symptoms as well despite not actually being able to get sick themselves.

For either type of injury, if a limb in severed, it can be reattached, but will otherwise turn into dirt if left separate for too long. If the injury is direct, the limb will grow back. An indirect injury resulting in a missing limb will likely be permanent.

Whether or not they have super strength depends on their status as a world power. America only gained his strength in the 1880s when he became a major economic power, and even then, he wasn't as strong as he eventually became post-WWII. America currently has this superhuman strength, but during the height of the Cold War, Russia had it as well.

Nations can sense other Nations around them, and also when a foreign Nation enters their territory.

They cannot leave the Earth. Once they've been outside Earth's atmosphere for 72 hours, they start to become violently ill and will begin to decompose into dirt unless they return to the planet.

Okaaaaay, I think I've covered everything! Let me know if I answered all your questions, and if you have any others! I always love to talk Nation lore XDDDD

[centrally-unplanned]

Richard Hanania is one of my poster child writers for the "he is an complete idiot and also very smart" genre. I disagree with him on virtually everything, particularly core beliefs, but he nonetheless is an actual critical thinker who will come up with and explore interesting ideas, and so he is valuable to follow for exposure to good discussion from a world you are otherwise not gonna touch (and for a good laugh the other half of the time).

This is definitely one of those posts - the US right (not that the left is immune to this by any stretch, this is just about the right) is so infused with an instinct towards perpetual victmization that it becomes easy to buy into their own framing that the Right has been losing front after front in the culture war. This is the foundational premise of The Cathedral, the Moldbug-coined New Right tenet that "Cthulhu Always Swims Left" aka the left's structural advantage in controlling ~institutions~ means that in status-quo modernity culture will shift left over and over, endlessly...and therefore you need to violently overthrow the state and purge the corrupt neoliberal bureaucratic order to realize the will of the silent volke embodied in a CEO-Monarch to turn back the tide. Anyway, Hanania does a good job of pointing out that its really kinda bullshit. Tons of our culture has turned right over the past decades; gun control, education, and economics are the big topics that he mentions, and of course more exist, and its been a result combinations of public opinion shifting and the power of the state implementing agendas, aka normal politics.

Some of this is a bit of an overstatement - victories on like abortion for example haven't shifted minds, but instead exploited the US's ludicrous legal system to back-door legislative reform through the courts, its not a replicable experience in many other contexts or any other country. But the point overall stands, which gestures at the real problem - the only topic where the New Right's analysis 'holds up' is onthe sexual revolution and queer rights, revealing a movement irrationality obsessed with the sex front of the culture war. Here Hanania stumbles into his stupidity on why the right hasn't been successful fighting this, not really grappling with the fact that for example gay marriage is just really popular, this is a bottom-down fundamental sea change in how people view sex and society's role in policing it.

The mistake The Cathedral devotees make in analyzing society is that they take a single sip from a branch of the river of History and assume they have drunk it dry; Society swam left from 1950 to 1980, and the New Right cannot help but obsess endlessly over that transition as The Future. Note how common this is - so many people harken to "the 1950's" as the steady-state idyll of American society, the American economy, identify as 'traditional' everything from holiday songs to food recipes that were all invented around this time and have no older origin than that. Its all myths, and The Cathedral is an extension of that trend - by identifying US society in 1950 as a centuries-old continuity of tradition, it sees the changes of the ensuing decades as a radical discontinuity, and therefore a terrifying new normal.

It is wrong the same way nostalgia-memes are wrong; history never had a steady state, and people's ideas of even the 1950's themselves are primarily myth. Turns out historical conceptions of queer relationships have varied widly across time and space - none have been as progressive as today, but societally sanctioned spaces for queer relationships are legion. There has never been a steady state on sex and society.

But! Modernity *is* different from the past, and certain things have changed irrevocably - there is a verison of The Cathedral that is true. Technology & economic development have radically changed how we lived, from a society of farmers and their rulers to a society of urban professional workers. Cultural norms around sex & society varied all over the place; but (to radically simplify, there are a bunch of other factors) marriage for children to work the farms was near-universal, it was a structural necessity culture was built upon. This was a harsh limiter on sexual norms - said marriage for children needed to undergird it. That limiter is gone, forever, today. To not dive into it because its not the focus, with the limiter gone I don't think the 'sexual revolution', feminism, and queer rights is going to revert in a major way in the future.

Which will permit the right, as long as it stays maniacally obsessed with the idea that people don't have 1950's sexual morality anymore, to claim that they Always Lose. This is why Hanania stumbles, making the opposite mistake - seeing the failure to fight the sexual revolution as just a failed southern offensive in comparison to a successful northern attack on the front of education. The real trap is to not understand that culture is not freely malleable, only some of it is 'up for grabs' from the perspective of activists. Within the new status qup equilibrium of modernity, shifts right and left are not only possible but inevitable - but the rules of game have to be understood. Hanania may have only gotten halfway there, but props to him for opening my eyes to the contradiction.

[molsno]

hello ^-^

soo i saw one of your posts about transmisogyny which i thought was really well written and articulated, so i wanted to get your opinion on something.

i’ve seen some tme trans(masc) people on here say that treating trans men like “gender traitors” or “siding with The Enemy” is bioessentialist and terf rhetoric, however i see this brought up almost exclusively in response to conversations about tme and/or male privilege. to me it seems like they feel invalidated or vilified by trans women and discussions about transmisogyny, and so they reposition the issue as one which targets and oppresses them so that they can avoid having to confront any privilege they may possess. i also think the way they phrase it purposely obfuscates what they’re really getting at, which is that men are oppressed for being masculine and held up as the ultimate evil (patently untrue). but i don’t really know as much about it as you might and it’s also not my place to decide what is or isn’t transmisogyny as a tme, so i wanted to hear your thoughts.

no pressure to respond and i hope you have a nice day <3

thanks for the well wishes. I'm trying to hold it together today and I figure I may as well answer this to distract myself

anyway yeah, those are some pretty astute observations. to be honest, I have to agree that the "gender traitor" narrative is bioessentialist, which is why it very much is terf rhetoric. in order for trans men to be "gender traitors" or "siding with the enemy", you would have to suppose that they are fundamentally women, and that they chose to be trans in order to escape from misogyny and gain access to male privilege. the basis of this hypothetical relies on the premise that they are female due to some permanent unchangeable characteristic, which is exactly what bioessentialism posits. plus, this narrative relies on the willful depiction of transness as nothing more than a lifestyle choice, which is blatantly transphobic due to the fact that for many trans people, transness manifests independently of any external factors.

(you will find a lot of debate about what makes people trans, and there is a lot of disagreement even among trans people, but I'm not going to get into that right now. just assume that my point is that there is no universal narrative that explains why people are trans and it varies from person to person.)

that being said, I feel it's also important to point out that there's no shortage of transmascs who are terfs or were former terfs. the reason for this is pretty obvious when you think about it for a few seconds: terfs regularly talk about how womanhood is an innately traumatic and miserable experience, and closeted transmascs for whom womanhood IS a traumatic and miserable experience sometimes gravitate toward that community because it makes them feel understood. terfs very much operate like a cult in this way, and you could easily assert that transmascs who become terfs are victims of cult brainwashing. however, my sympathy for them ends the moment I remember that they willingly joined a hate group whose purpose is the extermination of people like me.

and make no mistake! many of these men are still just as transmisogynistic as they were before! even the ones who leave the terf community (which is not all of them) only do so because they often find that they're no longer welcome when they choose to transition, not out of any desire to atone for the violence they've perpetrated against trans women.

so, what are these trans men to do after they've been exiled from the community that validated their existence and gave them a political drive? how can they reconcile the fact that their decision to choose masculinity and manhood has resulted in them feeling ostracized, ridiculed, and isolated? it's simple really: redefine their politics around the premise that men are actually hated in society. this is an easy conclusion for them to come to when they've been living inside an echo chamber where everyone they know DOES hate men.

the problem with that, though, is that in the eyes of a radical feminist, a "man" is a biological category of person, and any critiques you can make about men's behavior can be attributed to a biological cause. terfs don't ACTUALLY hate men, they hate "biological males" - trans women.

and that's very true of these transmasculine "former" terfs as well. they still hold the same bioessentialist views, so they feel vilified whenever they come into contact with the "biological males" they've come to despise so much. most of them don't actually understand any other types of feminism besides radical feminism, so when they encounter trans women reminding them that they have male privilege, they fall back on their bioessentialist beliefs. they're not an evil "biological male", after all, they're a "biological female" who's "ontologically incapable of violence", and a feminist is criticizing them for "siding with the enemy" by "choosing masculinity".

you need to understand that when they do this, it is largely a form of deflection. they resent the radical feminists who discarded them for being trans, and are attempting to distance themselves from the people who hurt them. that's why they're so vehemently anti-feminist. and because they haven't unpacked any of their bioessentialist beliefs, they're able to paint trans women, who deep down they still view as privileged and dangerous biological males, as aggressive and oppressive radical feminists. ultimately, despite whatever conception they have of themselves, they're expressing a form of male entitlement by shutting the conversation down and making everything that terfs do about them, ignoring the fact that the vast, VAST majority of the violence they enact is targeted specifically at trans women. and why wouldn't they? they don't actually care about trans women. they still hate us just as much as they always have, even if they now pay us lip service and (sometimes) use the right pronouns for us.

let me make myself clear: not all transmascs do this. not even a majority! all in all, this kind of story represents a pretty small minority of trans men, but they're very vocal and very visible in the trans community. that's not to say that most transmascs don't hold transmisogynistic views (it's basically impossible to have absolutely none if you're tme), but few of them are this hateful. this story is just one that I've seen played out many times - mostly involuntarily - because I've gotten a lot of these types of guys arguing with me on here and painting me as a radfem for talking about basic feminist tenets such as "men are an oppressor class".

also, as a disclaimer since I don't have time to get into everything: terfs are not a monolith and some terfs welcome trans men into their ranks (though these are an even smaller number of them), this was just one scenario that I hope painted a clear picture of the cause behind this phenomenon you've observed.

I hope this was helpful. if you need more examples, keep an eye on the notes of this post; they'll come crawling in here to argue with me in no time.

[nhasablogg]

Something I've been wanting to say for a while

I admit I'm a coward. I can't help it. I have anxiety. I feel as if people will be mean to me even when I've not done anything. I want to protect my peace too much to get into things like I used to, but I need to say something, because it's a recurring thing and people think they can just send me things that they feel is true with no space for disagreement or a discussion. I'll probably make this post unrebloggable and close my asks for a while afterward, because I genuinely am not looking for other people's opinions about it. I already know it's varied, and that many people are very extreme about it, maybe because they just feel passionate that their view on it is right, which is fine as long as there's recognition that your views are not everyone's views, or maybe because the internet nowadays encourages aggression without trying to understand any other view on things.

I don't think liking tickling automatically makes it a kink, and so I don't agree that engaging in tickling with others, whether they know you like it or not, is necessarily something sexual or that it's this whole terrible thing you shouldn't do and if you do it makes you a disgusting human being. I think it's very bold for others to assume that the way THEY feel about it means everyone has the same feelings and experiences. This is so complex and personal, probably something that's been inside of us our entire lives and has developed with us. You can't tell people how to feel, just like I can't technically convince you it's not just a kink. It's weird that you don't think it would work both ways and that only your opinion on it needs to be aggressively shouted at others (you is not aimed at a person, but a general you - you get it, you're smart).

But! This whole discourse has made me feel afraid to admit that certain parts about my feelings for tickling ARE a kink, even though I'm not actually into sexual activities due to being asexual. Although I reckon people who aren't asexual feel this way too. I've seen so many takes about that if you have a tickle kink you can't enjoy it platonically that it's made me afraid to express my feelings on it on the one and only place I can do it, and I think that's stupid. I've been afraid of exploring different themes in my silly little fanfictions because of it. I think it's dangerous the way people will throw serious accusations at others just because THEY might find it sexual and nothing else. It's quite literally something people do to bond and have fun, be annoying, provoke, and sometimes to spice things up in the bedroom, and I can't comprehend why this community thinks those things can't be true at the same time. Humans are complex. Some people are terrible, but do you really think all of us are? I understand the need to protect others, but why must you always assume the worst in people who have never shown you or anyone else any malice? Do you really think I would sit on this blog and talk about something tickling related if I myself found it inappropriate? I wouldn't be stupid enough to admit to something like that anyway. Does this make sense? I just think a lot of people in this community are after the wrong people. I just write fics and sometimes talk about my life, and I would LIKE to be able to talk more about tickling, but I get scared to do so even though this is a tickling blog, to a certain degree.

I don't know. I don't think I managed to say all I wanted to say, but I just simply don't know how to say it. Tldr I guess: most of us are complex and can have more than one feeling about things and it's not up to you to decide how we feel.

[bellofball]

Several incorrect facts about Isopods (pill bugs) (just the land ones)

Isopods - the only truly apolitical animal

Fact 1: isopods are a type of very small bug (I am only talking about the little land isopods in this listing, water isopods are very bad and far too large). An average isopod is about the size of a medium-sized pill bug. To put that into perspective, an average-sized Pill bug is slightly smaller than a slightly above-average-sized slater.

Fact 2: Very little is known about the isopod aside from the fact that, on account of their small brains, isopods are incredibly stupid. And they are very stupid. Their small brains should not be brushed aside and leave the isopods extremely limited, particularly in fields like number theory and basic arithmetic. Isopods are not very good at theoretical physics.

Fact 3: No Isopod has ever had potential. Anyone who underestimates an Isopod is right to do so. They are the underdogs for a reason. Under no circumstances should an Isopod be recruited to a wild card baseball team under the assumption that it was being unfairly dismissed by other coaches who assumed it would be bad at baseball because of its very small brain. The other coaches are right, the Isopod is not an undiscovered talent or a flower waiting to bloom. Nor will an Isopod player be just the pick-me-up your grassroots team, who may not have the best equipment but has real heart, needs. Even if the Isopod does well in trials, its Isopod father will almost certainly miss the big game, demoralising the Isopod and ruining everything you worked so hard to build. Best to avoid Isopod players entirely. 

Fact 4: The Isopod goes by many names that vary from region to region… I will not list them here.

Fact 5: are there any interesting facts about the Isopod? No not really. Although after the recent reclassification of Platapus, Octopi and Ducks as Echidnas, the Isopod is now the only known mammal that lays eggs. Aside from that the Isopod is of really little relevance, however, the mega nerds over at Big Science like to argue about it anyway. 

Fact 6: There is an ongoing debate in the scientific community as to whether an Isopod is a Millipede with dwarfism or the lower half of a Centipede. This is very stupid as the Isopod is very clearly a once athletic crab who got into miniature war gaming and lost all of its muscle mass as a result.

Fact 7: Earlier I said there are no interesting facts about the Isopod, I lied, I am not sorry and I will do it again.

Fact 8: Many people, particularly the chronically annoying, like to make the claim that everything is political. Much like me, these people are liars. Isopods have nothing to do with politics, this is because their hands are too small to vote. Instead of admitting to this weakness, isopods pretend to be better than everyone else by never having any opinion on anything ever.

Fact 9: Alone in the animal kingdom, the Isopod is entirely unconcerned with the affairs of man and general politics. Even the Isopod’s closest living relative, the Heyna, got into crypto for a bit, which is sort of like politics for the incredibly stupid. The closest any Isopod has ever come to being political was when one of them once referred to the general public as “the great unwashed” but it only said that beacsause it was copying a character from a TV show it liked. 

Yes, the Isopod is entirely Apolitical, or is that just what THEY want you to think? 

Fact 10: Isopods have been known to be avid enjoyers of books and literary media, They crawl all over any book they can get their hands on and literally devour it. They of course claim to enjoy all books, but will avoid the ones that get “too political”. But what is “too political” for the Isopod palate? Isopods have been noted devouring media like Hunger Games or Harry Potter which get pretty political at certain points but the same Isopods have refused to chow down on works like Angie Thomas’ THUG. Why is that? 

Fact 11: And why did the Isopods specifically avoid eating the November 2021 issue of Son of Kal-E, when they had been noted as enjoying all previous issues. Surely if the Isopods were truly against all politics they would avoid Superman in general, not just the comics with his gay son. 

Fact 12: What's with this pattern? The answer is obvious. The Isopods only have a problem with politics, or see something as political when it deviates from the political norm, or at least what they see as the political norm. Minorities are no more inherently political than majorities but the isopod simply can’t see that. And instead of confronting their own biases, the isopod hides behind a shield of false centrism, using the idea that they are apolitical to deflect any legitimate criticism of their prejudices or beliefs. The Isopods are just as political as the rest of the world, they’re just jerks about it.

Fact 13: Everything really is political. I owe the radical left an apology.

Fact 14: every fact in this listing, including this one, has been a lie.

[clownprince]

tmwsl and the joker as a character

i'm of the opinion that one of the major reasons joker is so successful as a character is that, even more so than other fictional characters, he lends himself easily to a multitude of extremely varied interpretations -- he can be anywhere from chaotic or calculated, impulsive or meticulous, light-hearted or violence incarnate, a devil figure or simply a broken man, or all and none of these things, depending on how he's interpreted by the individual. in other words, he truly embodies the spirit of the joker card, in his versatility and mutability. and while it's certainly valid to dislike certain interpretations, it's reductive to act as if there's only one singular, objective "true" joker. and rosenberg seems to have a similar view:

"There's all these different interpretations and iterations, and it starts to become this real mystery in the real world of what this character is and what he can be... You'll get other people interpreting characters and redefining them and changing them, but the Joker doesn't have a solid foundation that we know..." (x)

rosenberg has said in interviews that his intention with the joker: the man who stopped laughing wasn't to radically alter how people view the joker:

"I sort of take issue with the idea of changing the way readers approach the Joker. I don't ever want to do that. That's not who I am as a writer... So, I'm hoping that in a year or two, when my story is out there, and there's more of it, it causes people to think differently, but I'm not trying to reinvent the Joker. I'm not trying to radically alter him." (x)

and i'm assuming that by "changing the way readers approach the joker" he means this:

"The whole idea is we're trying to challenge what you know about The Joker and what you think you know about him. I always feel like Joker works best when you have more questions about him than answers, and so we're trying to really raise as many questions and keep you unsure of what you know as it goes..." (x)

joker himself is a very meta character in the sense that he draws attention to the role that the audience plays in the re/creation of fictional texts, i.e. their interpretations -- and it seems that tmwsl is supposed to draw attention to that process of creation, of people constructing their own unique versions of characters. so when i say that tmwsl could be considered metafiction, or at least could be described as a very meta comic, i mean it in that sense -- but also, it's crafted so that there's compelling evidence for and against either joker being the "true" joker, and the art of this is that it forces readers to examine what they consider "in character" and "out of character" for their joker, or, more broadly, who joker is to them.

i understand why people might be irritated at the ending. but i think it fits well with the essence of joker as a character -- and yes, i know that i've been arguing that joker doesn't really have a true essence, and i'm not contradicting myself -- his mutability, fluidity, subjectivity, are some of the few aspects of his character present throughout every iteration; he's consistent in his inconsistency. on both an in-universe level and a meta level, he thrives on ambiguity, refuses categorization and clear answers. and the tmwsl ending reflects that on a textual level, which i honestly think is fantastic, and works uniquely well for this specific narrative.

anyway, what i'm trying to say is that while everyone is entitled to their opinion and it's entirely understandable why some people might not like this ending, i'd encourage people to read and evaluate it as a work of metafiction, or a kind of extended meta on joker as a character, rather than as a more conventional fictional narrative with all the expectations and standards that accompany it.

[transingthoseformers]

For ES Tarn, assuming he still worships Megatron at least a little bit:

He would totally see Twitch, see Megatron's alt mode, see Optimus, and die a little inside. He absolutely overreacts and panics a little bit at first. Maybe he tracks them back to the farm at some point, notes where everyone is, then later, when Twitch is playing in the woods, takes her, actually using that big brain of his, and realizes that he just took a child that Megatron cares about out of her bed in the middle of the night.

He then makes up something about wishing to speak to Megatron on the spot and lets her go, sulking a little bit.

Then, you have the ghost team up and all that as Tarn tries to figure out what the hell is going on. GHOST takes one look at the masked bot and his deadly friends that could crush Bumblebee one handed and doesn't even fit in their hangars and decides to choose living, and doesn't try to drag them down to the murder basement. Or mention the war crimes. Or the experiments.

Unfortunately, they learn fast that this is Tarn and His War Crime Club, and he makes their atrocities look like child's play.

On the first mission they send him on.

Yepppp Tarn has so many opinions about all of this and isn't reacting rationally

So Tarn kidnaps a child, of course Tarn of course

Tarn:

Tarn: wait what the fuck did I just do

Makes sense he'd try and come up with a different plan

Sfdasdfd. Yes. GHOST is instantly terrified of them because the DJD is Right There and they are Not Prepared for this. Also because so much of the DHD's deal is not only the actual torturing and killing, but the fear aspect. A lot of their job is not only punishing "traitors" but trying to scare other decepticons into thinking twice. And while GHOST has its own terrifying moments, they've had a long time to analyze the other mecha on the planet and plan around them. They do not have the same amount of time here, especially for a group of mecha as varied as the DJD.

Thankfully to GHOST and not so much for whoever gets in their way, Tarn is willing to listen to them for now. He's figuring out a new plan, and for now working with GHOST is in it.

After all, the DJD was itching for a new hunt anyway.

[kasanya-01-bnha]

Genetics, A Primer

(Because I Can’t Just Assume You All Know This Sh!t)

I’m going to kick things off on my new BNHA blog with a short series exploring Quirk science, for several reasons:

A) Quirks are the defining element of this franchise;

B) my brain arbitrarily decided to hyperfixate on Quirk science while I was world-building for the fic that I’m working on in my creative writing class;

C) canon Quirk science is, in my humble opinion, a travesty; and

D) since I’m doing all this research and overthinking anyway, I might as well inflict it on the unsuspecting public share it.

Unfortunately, as I was writing what I wanted to be the first post in this series, it quickly became apparent that I was assuming my readers would have a basic understanding of genetics and inheritance, which might not be true. $@&#!!! So here I am, backing up the info dump truck.

Honestly, I’m not expecting a lot of traction on this post, but whatever. I thought I should be considerate and make this information readily accessible for people who might need to brush up on the basics (or learn them in the first place) before jumping into the actual Quirk science with me. Whether I got any personal benefit out of writing this is entirely beside the point. -coughs- It’s not like high school biology is several decades in my past or anything.

>.>

<.<

>.>

Annnnnywaaaaaay, here we go! A crash course in beginner-level genetics and inheritance.

Enjoy!

All living things, or organisms, have observable characteristics (also called traits).

Collectively, all of the traits that make up a specific organism—be it Kohei Horikoshi, or your favourite childhood pet, or that scraggly-looking tree at the end of your street, etc—belong to that organism’s phenotype. And within its phenotype, that organism has a variety of both monomorphic (one form) and polymorphic (multiple form) traits.

In the case of humans, our baseline is to have a torso with one head on top, two arms on the sides, and two legs on the bottom. There are no standard variations, for example, where humans have two heads, or where the legs present on the sides of the torso instead of the bottom. We all have skin, not scales or bark. We grow hair, not feathers or fur. We all have a spinal column, and a brain, and one heart. (Did you know some animals have more than one heart? I sure didn’t until today.) Anyway, these are all examples of monomorphic traits.

Where things get really interesting are the polymorphic traits. Yes, we all have skin, but it comes in a wide range of colours. (And wow, the problems that has caused over the centuries. Mind-boggling! It’s just melanin, folks!) We all grow hair, but it can be straight, or wavy, or curly; its texture can be fine, or medium, or coarse; it comes in a full spectrum of ‘natural’ colours; it covers varying amounts of our bodies; and so on. We all have a spinal column, but the coccyx (tailbone) portion may be fused into two to five segments. We all have a brain, but we might be right-handed or left-handed or mixed-handed or even ambidextrous. We all have one heart, but only one of many different blood types.

The specific versions of polymorphic traits displayed (expressed) by a particular organism depends primarily on their own unique biological blueprint, or genotype.

A human genotype is made up of an estimated 21,000 genes, which are the basic units of heredity: the biological inheritance of traits from parents to their offspring. Genes consist of strands of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid), which we are absolutely not going to go into the nitty-gritty details of here, because that’s not important for this TedTalk. The important thing is that the DNA in an organism’s genotype biologically encodes all of the information needed for an itty-bitty one cell fertilized egg (or egg equivalent) to become a fully-grown, functional member of that particular species.

Chromosomes are long DNA molecules, each containing hundreds to thousands of genes. This means each chromosome can store part, or all, of an organism’s genetic blueprint.

In humans, there are 23 pairs of chromosomes in every single normal cell—can you even imagine how small that would all have to be to fit?!??—for a total of 46 chromosomes. One half of each pair is inherited from the person’s mother and the other half from the person’s father. This means people inherit two copies of every single gene in their genotype, but they might get different versions of any gene which encodes for a polymorphic trait. These different versions are called alleles.

Now, what happens when a person inherits two different alleles for the same polymorphic trait? Can our hapless sample person actually have both straight and curly hair at the same time?!?? Tch! Of course not. (At least, not without access to hair-styling equipment, but that’s not relevant to the genetics here.) Anyway, I don’t know about you, but my high school tackled the ‘different alleles’ question using the example of eye colour—which, incidentally, is actually a terrible choice for teaching this concept, but it seems to be one of the ‘industry standards’, per se, and who am I to question decades of teaching expertise???—so, onwards!

With polymorphic traits, one allele is typically more dominant than the other and is the version of the trait that ends up being expressed in the organism’s phenotype. The allele that gets ‘overridden’ (or, more accurately, ‘masked’) is called the recessive trait.

Back to our example of human eye colour, brown is the dominant allele (indicated with an uppercase letter) and blue is the recessive allele (indicated with a lowercase letter), and they combine like this:

Mother Father Child

B - Brown B - Brown BB - Brown

B - Brown b - blue Bb - Brown

b - blue B - Brown bB - Brown

b - blue b - blue bb - blue

As you can see, the child will only express the recessive variant of the trait (blue eyes) if they inherit the recessive allele from both parents. Any other combination results in the dominant trait being expressed.

Pretty straightforward, right? So simple. Easy peasy. Go ahead and just… ignore… any obvious, glaring issues that might be coming to mind when looking at this examp—

Whaddya mean, there’s more eye colours than just brown and blue?!??

No! Stop!

-makes a distracting gesture with one hand-

These are not the droids you’re looking for!!!

(We’ll come back to eye colour in my next post.)

One last thing that is incredibly important, given that we’re talking about genetics and inheritance within the context of BNHA: genes are not always copied correctly when cells are dividing and combining and multiplying. Genes can also get damaged in various ways. These errors are random mutations and may become new alleles, which might be dominant or recessive, and can be passed down to future offspring.

These mutations can result in genetic disorders, where physiological processes ‘break’ (like hemophilia and diabetes) or where people are born with unusual physical characteristics (like extra toes or a cleft palate). Mutations are not always bad, though; in fact, mutations resulting in new traits and trait variations are a key feature in the process of evolution. If a new mutation provides an advantage to the biological success of an organism, that mutation is more likely to be passed down to subsequent generations and may eventually become a standard variant in the genome (the complete set of all possible genes) for that species.

Anyway, I think that about covers it for the important basics of genetics and inheritance before I dive into Quirk science in my next post. I hope it was helpful!

~~ Kasanya

PS. I’m enough of an academic that I’m going to include my sources below, but it’s late and I’m tired and I’m not actually getting graded on this ‘essay’, so I’m not going to bother going back and end-noting my references properly. Yes, most of them are Wikipedia. No, I don’t care. Wikipedia is good enough for my purposes here.

PPS. If anyone would like a more thorough introduction to genetics and inheritance, I recommend the top three sources below. They’re pretty good summaries. I will be getting into more detail in my future posts, though.

PPPS. And, finally, if anyone reading this is a subject-matter-expert and notices any errors in my info dumping, please let me know! I’d hate to spread inaccurate information. Thanks!

Sources:

https://www.genome.gov/About-Genomics/Introduction-to-Genomics

https://www.merckmanuals.com/en-ca/home/fundamentals/genetics/genes-and-chromosomes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_genetics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allele

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromosome

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coccyx

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_disorder

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genome

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handedness

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heredity

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homologous_chromosome

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genome

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus (Bet you didn’t expect that one, hah!)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotypic_trait

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ploidy#Diploid

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydactyly

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymorphism_(biology)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_reproduction

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygote

https://a-z-animals.com/blog/5-stunning-animals-that-have-multiple-hearts/

[hamptercatapult]

i typed out and deleted a post about reusable menstrual items prompted by an annoying ad but realized my personal opinion on these items do not matter. anyway i looked at the ad again and got pissed off again for another reason

cuz like the text appeals to the idea of reducing your waste and helping the environment yeah okay w/e thats not fucking effective on a global scale but what ever

but the fucking ad is about the Cost of these things and demeans the reader [assumed to be A Women] by comparing the "amount saved per year" (and by what metric are these numbers gathered?) to the cost of. a fucking Pumpkin Spice Latte. you know. because every menstruator looovvvvees a pumpking spice latte and is stuuuuupid so She doesnt know that $220-$30=$190 and that is a lottttt of money and you can buy sooooo many pimpgkjn spcieb larbnees with that #girlmath

like wooow now i can buy 15 more pumpkgmfnmgnfmfnfjnfbf per year for the next 2 years according to the math on this ad oooooooooh my goooood stopppppppp

like. okay. okay ill do the math!

lets say the statistically average person menstruates for 6 days a month, every month. over the course of 2 years [24 months] , that equals 144 days of menstrus. menstrual products need to be replaced about every 8 hours on average. therefore, assuming the use of 3 tampons per each day of menstrus equals 432 tampons over the course of 2 years. a quick google search found that i can buy a box of 45 tampons for $10. im gonna round up to the nearest box of 45 and say that, over the course of 2 years, a statistically average person might spend around $100 on tampons. which is less than half of what this ad wants you to think you are spending!!

and sure. yes. $30 is still less than $100, saving $70 over the course of 2 years. by this metric thats 11 godforsaken seasonal beverages!

but now! now! instead of disposing of each sodden strip of cotton and inserting an unsoiled product, you must rinse out your viscera in the sink and re-insert that product! what fun

and of course the numbers for everything i calculated vary WILDLY from length of menstrus to product cost. but i feel that ive still illustrated my point well enough. for this wayyyy too long silly post about a stupid advertisement on tumblr.fuck

and you know what. i looked at the damn wikipedia page for tampons and theres a section on cost!

so you can tell that the advertisers for this product did not even look at wikipedia before spitballing an amount! which even at its assumed Maximum is $180 [for 2 years] which is STILL $40 less than what this stupid ad says!!!!! fuck! i hate advertising

[stagehunt]

more thoughts on aven and topaz and why i don't really interpret them as having the close relationship that i see a lot of in the fandom + his general feelings about her. talking about the checking out quest a little in the beginning.

screenshots from my own transcript but they're still word for word. aven is more than aware that the tb is never going to accept a job offer from the ipc and treats this entire exchange as the joke that is, and an excuse to get under topaz' skin a little. just for fun. interesting then, how topaz immediately starts to get very personal during this little debate — while simultaneously displaying how well she actually knows aven, which is honestly not at all. i wouldn't blame this on a lack of understanding on her part, but on the way aven keeps everyone at arms distance, a distinct lack of trust in her from aven, and radically different outlooks on their work and life.

both of the dialogue excerpts kind of highlight that but i want to focus on the second one here because it immediately reminded me of a personal headcanon when i was playing the quest through.

so. i'd already made the assumption that aven didn't have many staff working under him — both because of his treatment within the ipc / the varying reactions to who he is and his history with the previous aventurine which is pretty much public knowledge, his preference for working solo, and his habits of putting himself in harms way and taking very unreasonable risks. he'd assume that topaz sees these " work habits " she mentions as the main reason that people don't work to him but he also knows that she isn't foolish enough to think that's the only reason anyway. which is why he then immediately reminds her that diamond doesn't particularly care WHAT he does so long as he secures the bag at the end of the day.

it's for things like this, and her general hostility towards him ( which does seem to vary, but her voice line about him is very harsh as opposed to what she tells us about him when she knows he's around / how she acts to his face ) and with the sheer amount of manipulation she's under, the things she genuinely believes about the ipc and her job there, he does personally think that it's impossible for her not to have absorbed at least some of the ipc's common opinions on him, the avgin + avgin extinction event / ipc's involvement on sigonia, and the egyhazo - aventurine case, and allowed them to colour her impression of him before really getting to know him.

however as i mentioned in those disc screenshots, aven is obviously aware of the predatory nature of the ipc. he's been working there for almost a decade now, he was a teenager when he first wound up there, and he understands what happened on topaz' planet very well. he understands that she's naive. he understands that she has been essentially groomed, as well as the fact that she's very dedicated to her work. but he also understands that she's a kind hearted person, and that she does try to do what she thinks is the right thing in most situations. it would be ridiculous for me to say that he doesn't sympathise with topaz, even if he does find her a little obnoxious and annoying to be around.

so while he doesn't necessarily feel enough responsibility towards her to put up with her apparent dislike for him, he does subtly keep an eye out for her. when she first became a stoneheart he figured that she should be able to understand his situation better than anyone and that it would make sense for them both to have each others backs as much as possible. but from what he's observed and how they interact with each other, he just cannot convince himself that it would be safe to trust her. he knows he'd have to be careful with his words around her, and that at least currently, she wouldn't ever choose him over the job. still, he has a feeling that if she were ever to open her eyes to what she is complicit in, she'd despise the truth and herself as much as he does, if not more for being so easily strung along by the likes of jade.

so are they friends? no. but if topaz ever genuinely needed help he would be there. he would understand.