#anyways these are my grievances

[macdenlover]

we don’t acknowledge enough how dee used to be a pageant winner when she was a kid and how much damage it did to her. she worked her ass off and got recognition for being pretty and talented at a young age and it was the only source of self esteem she could garner in a family that constantly berated and talked down to her. she sought after that external approval because it was the only way she could prove everyone around her wrong. her dream of being a performer didn’t come from a self-aggrandizing delusion— she genuinely showed a lot of potential when she was younger. but she went through an unflattering puberty and her spinal condition got worse and that natural talent she had as a kid plateaued way too early. the “former gifted kid” dilemma. she slowly lost the thing that promised her that she was good, but she was so desperate to keep holding onto it that she tried anyway. again and again and again no matter how much people made fun of her because it was always about proving them wrong. but after a while she couldn’t jump anymore without anticipating the way it feels when she hits the ground face first. self-sabotage became her way out, choosing to rather live in the fantasy of her own unrealized potential and blaming those around her for her lack of success, than having tried and crashed again. she’d rather buy lottery tickets over and over and never scratch off the numbers than to see that she lost. that self-sabotaging behavior bled into other aspects of her life too, from friendships to relationships to therapy. her own short lived success is what made her grow into embodying the cycle of failure.

[in-the-airducts]

POV ur ambulon

For @lemonomelette's DTIYS! A lot of work but very fun.

[dustykneed]

--Really, Doctor?

[batsplat]

It's a thing I already knew but all your beautiful analysis really made obvious (to me) how much of a grudge holder vale is. That man is never letting it go he's gonna hold his grudges into his grave

you know, I do think this is an interesting issue, because I'm not sure this is true of all his grudges. just sticking here with the grudges he accumulated in his capacity as a competitor, rather than just his general approach to life or whatever... how you judge this will kinda depend on how you feel about the 'reconciliation' he's experienced with some of his rivals - and whether you read the whole thing as sincere or not. now, personally I reckon he still dislikes biaggi, but also you are allowed to just dislike people so I'll give him a pass for that. some of the others, I'm a little more convinced by the whole reconciliation schtick

let's get valentino's take:

interesting that he mentions those three together, isn't it? and like, he's still not messaging biaggi or inviting him to his home - "even with max" kind of tells you all you need to know - but the other two? they said some proper nasty things to each other over the years!! I mean, the casey rivalry, there's some remarks from both sides where quite frankly I think I would struggle just a touch to get over it

I don't know, obviously this could all be pr stuff, but I kind of feel like... y'know, why bother? it's 2022, you're retired, who gives a fuck? sure it's a good look to be all magnanimous, sure it can be a bit of a way of twisting in the knife to the guys left in the cold, but also, who would care if you don't play nice? I think especially with jorge, you surely don't need to do all that, inviting him to your home and dancing with him... (which, again, some of the spats those two had...) and with the casey rivalry, if there's one guy who's still hung up about what happened between the pair of them, it's obviously casey (speaking of blokes who can hold a grudge). maybe this is giving valentino too much credit, but personally I buy it's more or less sincere. there's nothing to really indicate he's still particularly bothered by any of their past disagreements - he's basically going for the 'all's fair in love and motorcycle racing' approach. he knows he was an asshole, he accepts they were assholes too, whatever, that's how these things work. he's generally a fan of drama in rivalries, unsurprisingly, and he was happy enough to contribute his fair share - but he does see it as fundamentally being part of the game

to point out the obvious, check out who he's left out: sete and marc. that's where he can't let go of the grudges... because it's not about the offence itself as much as it is about the betrayal. this is the thing with valentino, right, it's about what kind of bond you had with him. if you weren't his friend in the first place and then piss him off as a rival then, y'know, whatever. obviously he's going to be vicious in trying to get back at you, but also he's really not going to waste his time feeling too aggrieved by it. I mean, think about how all the bullshit between him and casey dropped off sharply post-2012... from valentino's end anyway. think about how jorge and valentino pretty quickly got on again whenever they weren't fighting for supremacy within yamaha. they weren't friends in the first place, then they were enemies for competitive reasons for a while there, then it's over and valentino is basically happy enough to call it bygones

but... if it's a certain kind of bond you had with him and then you wrong him... that little mental list of all his past grievances, all your past transgressions, that's where it comes in. that's where he ices you out. denies you any emotional warmth. ensures that any interaction going forward is conducted entirely on his terms. where even any public 'reconciliation' won't truly be sincere.... or, certainly he's not going to forget what happened. if something else happens... it's like you've always got the potential of triggering this lingering resentment, in a way, where all that past stuff is still primed and ready to be called upon. he certainly doesn't just let it go

or, as he puts it in his autobiography:

Biaggi and I never talk to each other. I mean, we've never had a real conversation, anything that's lasted more than the requisite time to insult each other or put each other down, in the nastiest way possible. In any case, I don't hate him. It's true, we've never been friends, but hatred is something different, and that's too serious a word to describe our relationship. Far too serious. No, we have a reciprocal antipathy. No doubt this is a result of what we do for a living and the fact that we both want to win every single time. And perhaps it's also a function of the fact that we have very different personalities and very different ways of seeing things. Still, I don't think this means we hate each other, as some journalists have written. I think I could feel hatred for someone, but only for someone far worse than anything Biaggi has done. For example, if I were betrayed by a friend, then, yes, I could hate him. But Biaggi will never betray my friendship for the simple reason that we are not, and never have been, friends. Our relationship is very clear: we compete on the track - outside the track, each goes his own way. You could say we detest each other cordially.

... I mean. he said it, not me. and given this book was first published in '05... biaggi can't betray his friendship because they were never friends... I'm not saying he's thinking about sete, but it has to at least be a possibility, right? he's talking about one rivalry here and refusing to even mention the other... and the one he's refusing to mention is the one where he was friends with the other bloke. I don't know, maybe that's reading too much into it! and anyway, even if this passage wasn't really about sete, it's obviously still revealing. "detest each other cordially" is essentially what he was doing with casey and jorge (or from his point of view in any case, not entirely sure they'd agree with that). the grudge comes when he feels let down by you... and then, yes, he'll never let it go

of course, he's willing to set aside his grievances for a while if there's sufficient motivation for him to do so. in 2009, when he had so definitively won that rivalry with sete, why bother kicking up a fuss? in 2016, quite frankly it was just too much, and it was getting to the point where it was obviously hurting him too. on the one hand there was the media furore that had been going on non-stop since sepang, on the other hand it was also hurting his own approach to racing. there's reports from the time how visibly aggrieved he still was in the first few races of the season, and it took until they got back to europe for him to... y'know, have fun again. it's not sustainable to be walking around with a constant dark cloud over your head and broadcasting burning resentment towards your two main rivals. certainly not for someone like valentino - he needs to be having fun! the slight rapprochement needed to happen, in a way, because otherwise those years would have been even worse for everyone involved. but that doesn't actually translate to forgetting any of those grudges. this is about convenience more than anything else

goes to show, really... most of the time he doesn't take these things personally. I talked about it a bit in this post, how maybe it's also something that changed over time for him: the question of whether he was willing to develop these kinds of bonds in the first place with competitors... because he does possess a certain level of self-awareness in terms of what these kinds of rivalries are like and what they do to interpersonal relationships. ideally, you don't want to be hurt by a friend like that, right? better not to have that kind of emotional attachment with your competitors in the first place. how unfortunate it'd be if all those years after sete the circumstances aligned for him to see a competitor as something like a friend again... because, after all, those are the only people who could betray him. those are the only people where he thinks he could truly hate them

[citizenmoe]

i don’t always agree with how the dc animated movie universe runs things but the unbridled joy that battle of the super sons provides to my cold dead heart makes me forgive all grievances

[sforzesco]

Did you used to like Mark Antony and dislike Cassius? What changed your mind ?

honestly the condensed version of events is that Antony and Brutus became uninteresting, extremely boring as POV characters to me at the same time for the same reasons, that prompted me to look closer at Cassius, and then I decided to spend two years trying to untangle Cassius from Brutus which completed my transformation into a part time Cassius apologist

like, both Antony and Brutus are still compelling figures, it’s honestly the versions of them in media and pop culture that I personally dislike and find boring because it’s not discussing anything I find interesting & frequently I feel like my time has been wasted, while their historical counterparts is more of a ‘wow I hate what you’re doing, keep it up!’

and ofc: the general passage of time. you get older. things that interest you change. being a hater as a recreational activity is fun. variety is the spice of life. people who write about Cassius are delivering poetry and I’m not immune to it. etc etc.

[americankimchi]

god i wish they hadn't retconned maul's death. i get wanting to explore more of his character because he was, objectively, one of the coolest star wars characters to ever hit the big screen and didn't get much screentime prior to his death, but also his role was fulfilled perfectly within those constraints so i wasn't too upset by it.

but by retconning it and making it so he never died it's like. okay. what now? the whole point (well, to me, ymmv of course) of the theed generator fight was that it was the first ever fight between the jedi and the sith in thousands of years, and that in the end even though the jedi (obi-wan) won the fight, a jedi (qui-gon) and a sith (maul) still died. a master and an apprentice dying together to herald the start of a new age/the return of the sith. perfectly paralleling the way in rotj a master (palps) and an apprentice (anakin/vader) died together to herald the return of the jedi. in both instances, a father figure (qui-gon/vader) dies in the arms of their son (obi-wan/luke) as a sith (palps/maul) is cast down into the abyss to their deaths. (palps being alive in the ST and retconning his death in rotj is also annoying for this reason)

i mean i like maul. don't get me wrong. he's an incredibly compelling character and i enjoy seeing more of him... but there's always the thought hovering in my mind like "he should be dead though. he should 100% be dead. this wouldn't be happening if he was dead, but i honestly would rather it not if it meant that maul was dead."

like the tpm fight just doesn't hit the same knowing that canonically he's just. going to become a robot octopus at some point. (shoutout to palps becoming sith glados in the ST) it cheapens the moment for me. it was supposed to be a moment of triumph marred by the deep and soul-crushing loss of a loved one and it's just... not, anymore. or at least not to the same extent. AUGH i'm just. frustrated. wish star wars as a whole wasn't constantly reframing/retconning what's been established. just puts a bad taste in my mouth.

[year2000electronics]

ford & funcle bill's dd&md session

[kangals]

since i forget it's not common knowledge for non-Dog™ people, brief overview of the collie thing and why i was losing my shit:

idk every country, but at least for the American Kennel Club (AKC) and Canadian Kennel Club (CKC), "Collie" refers to a specific breed of dog, most iconic as the breed of "Lassie":

these three dogs are all collies. collies come in two varieties, "rough" (longhair, more common), and "smooth" (shorthair, less common). both rough and smooth collies are considered the same breed, judged to the same standards, and can be born in the same litter, similar to how a black lab and a yellow lab are both labradors. it is equally correct to refer to them as a "rough/smooth collie" or as simply a "collie," as that is their official breed name in the US/Canada. while they used to be extremely popular in the mid-20th century, collies sit at #39 on the AKC breed popularity lists nowadays, making them solidly "somewhat uncommon."

a border collie is a separate and distinct breed of dog. while they share a common ancestor with the collie and are also herding dogs, their appearance, temperament, and herding style are all distinctly different. they can come in many colors, but are most commonly black and white with medium-to-long hair:

while a border collie is a type of collie-dog, in the US they are generally referred to as "borders" or "BCs" rather than just "collies," as "collie" is already the name of a different breed. BCs are more popular than collies nowadays, so most laypeople are more familiar with them than with rough or smooth collies. but given that "collie" already refers to a different breed, in the US/Canada it's not technically correct to also refer to a border collie as simply "collie" (or call them a collie, who cares, i'm not a fucking cop).

however, this gets further muddled depending on which country you're in - for example in the UK and many european countries, there is no breed that's simply called "collie" - Rough Collies and Smooth Collies are two separate breeds, in addition to Border Collies, which are significantly more popular. in the UK, "collie" isn't the name of any specific breed, but most people will use it as shorthand for their BCs. "collie" in the UK and "collie" in the US often mean two different dogs.

and then you also have the bearded collie, again a distinct breed, but much more difficult to mix up due to A) their rarity and B) the fact that they look like walking muppets:

and honorable mention to the shetland sheepdog or "sheltie," which while related to the collie is, again, a separate breed, and most notably is significantly smaller than a collie. if you see a dog that looks like Lassie But Small, it's probably a sheltie.

IN CONCLUSION:

several different recognized breeds of collie-type dogs

only one breed is officially named "Collie" and that's the rough/smooth varieties in the US and Canada (aka "Lassie dog")

ergo, there is only one breed of dog that "collie" actually refers to (in North America at least)

however due to the differences in names between countries and the overall higher popularity of border collies, they and other breeds are sometimes also referred to as "collies"

i own a rough collie and she is very pretty and therefore superior and if you call any other type of dog a collie except for the rough/smooth type you're Wrong.

thank u for coming to my TED talk.

[weirdprophetess]

tlt is so funny because yeah these ten thousand year old people hate each other because they've committed mass genocide, created an empire with so many faults built in and they've fought god knows how many times over the eons they've known each other but also one of these bitches ate peanuts in a meeting once and somebody else has NEVER forgiven him for it

[idolomantises]

there's something so comforting about artists you admire talking about their own struggles and insecurities

[1000dactyls]

So I wanna know, you'd true and honest thoughts on THW I think I remember you saying you didn't want to talk about it? I'm so sorry for this ask, but I'm curious because so much of the fandom doesn't like it, and while I agree everyone sees to have different reasons

there is quite a bit i dont like about thw, but the two most primary reasons are a) the artistic direction and b) the narrative's betrayal of the core themes set up by the first movie

a lot has already been said about the artificial smoothness of httyd3's rendering -- the textural smoothness of the dragons and skin, for one -- but it's the botox injection valka and the other ladies seemed to receive that irritates me the most. coming off the heels of two other movies less hesitant to show signs of aging as a natural process, the flattening of their wrinkles and fat feels shallow to me.

IMHO, the unnatural smoothness of movie mimics the hollow feel the third movie's narrative has, lacking the history and depth of the events the characters have lived through and the impact that history has on the characters' physical appearance. the movie instead has a dreamy, hazy quality to it. which would be fine in most movies, but not for a franchise dedicated to the physicality of the characters (which was the whole point of the first movie, that hiccup (and toothless) was visually distinct from the rest of the cast)

so not only is thw ugly to look at compared to the other two movies, it's also a narrative shitshow pitted against the other two movies. like, setting aside the objective masterpiece that the first movie is, how does httyd2 end with "come hell or high water i will always jump after you when you fall" to httyd3's "nah man let's let you go". how did we get here???? by completely assassinating everyone's character

and it's just extremely frustrating because httyd1 was about overcoming differences; that message was the flesh and blood of the series, the franchise's beating heart. httyd1 navigates complicated generational trauma to cease endless bloodshed. httyd3... puts off that conflict into some however many centuries into the future. and then the last 5 minutes of the movie even don't get the departure RIGHT hello???

the only good thing about thw is that john powell got to flex his muscles and compose "once there were dragons" and bring me to tears in 5 minutes and 46 seconds

[asofterepilogue]

I deeply love the epic musical but I have one big and unfortunately pretty central issue with it, and it's that it often seems to conflate kindness and stupidity.

odysseus' mistake wasn't sparing ("sparing") polyphemus, it was going into a cave full of food when he knew something was off about it from the beginning, and then giving the cyclops his real name when he had already won. it wouldn't have mattered that polyphemus was still alive if odysseus had just stuck to his brilliant original plan. polyphemus had to live long enough to move away from the exit that he was blocking, and going back to kill him once he was awake would have been incredibly dangerous, and hard to justify when he'd already so easily killed 7 (14?) men. mercy didn't have all that much to do with it, even though odysseus, athena, poseidon, the crew - the narrative itself at times - all later insist that's what doomed odysseus.

still, the lesson odysseus somehow learns from that is that he needs to be ruthless (which he already clearly is! he might hate it, he might wish he didn't have to be, but he is, at the end of the day, ruthless enough to murder a baby). but when it actually comes down to a choice between mercy and ruthlessness (and not just... a test of whether he can keep his mouth shut), mercy does a lot more for him than ruthlessness.

he's at his most callous in scylla's lair, and how does that work out? he makes the crossing, sure, but his crew attacks him, knocks him out, and takes the opportunity to do the most insanely idiotic thing they possibly could have, which ultimately sends them to their death, and odysseus to 7 years of suffering.

in contrast, odysseus gets help from circe. he chooses to go back for his men, he chooses not to lead with violence, he chooses to appeal to her mercy, and she ultimately chooses to be merciful herself. that's the only time odysseus and his crew aren't worse off having stopped somewhere. and it's not because odysseus was ruthless, it's not because he put his emotions aside, it's not even because he tricked anyone into anything - it's because he was unselfish and honest (but not completely stupid! he didn't provoke her, he used the moly well, etc.), and was met with kindness.

the implicit false equivalence between kindness and stupidity is even more jarring once you get to the wisdom saga, because athena is learning the exact opposite lesson. she's much kinder to telemachus even though he never seems as promising a "warrior of the mind", she sounds downright nostalgic telling him about odysseus, she admits she hasn't been sleeping well since she and odysseus fought.

she chooses to help odysseus not because she can use him for her own glory, but because he's her friend after all, and he's suffering.

and she doesn't win the god games by being ruthless (as in, cruel to her opponents) but by being smart. you could argue she's manipulating them, but I think she's just trying to find what would sway them, and she's not dishonest or mean about any of it. she can be smart without necessarily being ruthless!

there are still two sagas left, so maybe odysseus won't finish the story thinking he has to be the monster every time everywhere if he wants to win (though considering the snippets and tracklist... yeah I'm gonna doubt that). either way, I know I'll love it. I just don't love the casual way wit and callousness get conflated throughout what we've seen of the musical so far.

[empyreansentinel]

......do I dare say r/hack for the ask meme

(head in hands. dejected.) bingo...

[loveguts]

i’m not a transandrophobia truther in the slightest don’t get me wrong, but i think some people on here really need to realize and comprehend the fact that cis women, way WAY more often than not, hold extremely significant social and political power over trans men the vast majority of the time in our day to day lives