#as could sociological concepts

[ghost-bxrd]

eldritch Jason Todd is such a fun concept... fhjdszjdfuhwjieokwakmfdnsfbrniwfea

Eldritch entities will forever have me in a chokehold.

Look, if we go with concepts as eldritch entities (or concepts that said eldritch entities adopt as their primary moniker) Jason could totally go with becoming “the Unloved” in his Red Hood days 👀

[absolxguardian]

When people talk about "gendered socialization" I remember how when my brother was born, my mom got a book that if it was published now would be called something like "raising your son without toxic masculinity", but since this was the mid aughts was called something like "how to raise kind and emotionally intelligent sons". My brother received a completely different gender socialization from other boys of the same ethnicity, religion, class, and even broadly similar politics in my very town because my Mom didn't want to treat her kids differently, and was aware of what we'd now call toxic masculinity. He was never punished for showing his emotions or given more leeway when it came to roughhousing than me.

When I was a young child I thought of gender like a society mandated aesthetic and grammatical rules. That people used to say meant you needed to act a certain way, but only Bad People did that now (I was given an extremely optimistic view of how much feminism had achieved). And while my egg didn't quite crack before I was of age to receive the second stage of post-pubscent gender socialization (of which parents have less control), I had become self actualized enough to be reflective of how society worked and not care about conformity, a result of my autism and developmental precociousness. I didn't even blink when a girl told me I needed to start shaving my armpits. And my mom never told me to either. And as for my brother, given the kind of circles he orbits now, my mom reading and following that book is probably the final thread keeping him from falling completely into the manosphere.

All this is to say, this is just one example of how so many little things influence the gender socialization an individual receives, and so acting like trans people have "x socialization" rather than existing and growing up in a society with certain norms is ridiculous.

[ibijau]

slapping a big disclaimer on all OCs like "this person has values inspired by a different time period, please I beg you don't go thinking that their views on society and justice match mine"

[always-a-joyful-note]

new game im gonna play is to take a shot every time an enstars song has the words "holy night" (in either english or japanese)

[whitmore]

The island being alive is so!!! Rahhhh!! I love the concept so much!

The idea that it will give you everything, make you happy, and then take even more from you. It's so interesting! Always loved the sorta Neverland vibe that the island gives. A place you never have to leave and can be happy and explore every day...but watch out!

not to bring it back to tubbo’s wall street metaphors but the island really invests in its residents and generates entities and natural challenges that the players will enjoy just to keep them there, it really is such a give and take. the way it learns what each player desires, improving itself and going steps above every time to better the experience for the players and keep them around. it’s so very neverland it’s quite seahaven island too

if the island is alive my theory is that the federation is there to study it. the island is some paranormal being and the federation has been established on the island and prodding at it for much, much longer than the players have been there. i think it’s possible that the crashes in this case were not accidental (which. idk how hot that take is tbh) but instead the island causing them in some bermuda-triangle type maneuver to get somebody, anybody else looking at what the federation is doing. still incredibly possible that the federation caused every crash because they wanted to see how the island would interact with people— sidenote i saw this theory somewhere (i think on here pls let me know if it’s you i’ll link the post) that the ice block batch of players are actually the original players from the trailer because the island’s infrastructure looks so different between the trailer and when our initial sixteen batch joined which is delicious meta that’s so interesting, n makes it possible that the federation brought that first ice block batch and the island knows what happened to them and then crashed a train and a boat and a plane to rally up players to find them

[bad-tf-fic-ideas]

(381) Today's fic idea is to rework the ever-popular concept of "being in heat" away from sexual reproduction and into some other aspect of cybertronian life instead.

It could be a lot of different things: A symptom of poor maintenance and upkeep? Illness? A mysterious phenomenon that is half sociological and half biological? Battle fatigue? An interaction between the atmosphere of wet planets and a cybertronian's internal mechanics? The will of Primus exercised upon his unsuspecting subjects?

The sky is the limit. The central conceit is simply that this trope gets subverted so it does not concern reproduction or childrearing.

[queenvhagar]

Can I get your personal thoughts and feelings about Criston Cole. I'm interested in hearing what you have to say about him.

My personal background is in sociology, so I'm really interested in social stratification and how different groups in society interact, as well as how intersectionality comes into play in societies. This comes into play for my media interests in that I find shows that explore sociopolitical issues to be most compelling to me personally. A side note is that I also studied medieval French society and concepts of chivalry and courtly love, so this also informs my perspective on how I view stories in medieval contexts.

Fire and Blood explores the history of the society in Westeros and tells stories of wide-scale societal conflict that impacts people of various social backgrounds. In this society, people are stratified by race, class, socioeconomic status, gender, ability, and more. When it comes to the adaptation House of the Dragon, one of my major gripes is that it's only interested in looking at one of these aspects of stratification, gender, and examining it on its own without regard to its intersection with race, class, socioeconomic status, ability, and other social markers that exist in this world. The show wants to explore sexism, but it does so in a vacuum without meaningfully and realistically taking into account how classism, racism, ableism, and other systems of power interact with and exist at the same time as sexism. The way the show handles the character of Criston Cole is a good example of how they fail to fully explore these aspects of world building.

Criston Cole is Dornish in a medieval, feudalist monarchy where Dornish people are looked down upon and discriminated against. He is lowborn in a society that values highborn people and royalty above all else. As he is not born to an important family, he lacks resources like money and land that could allow him social mobility. However, he does have skill at being a knight, a role highly mythologized, idealized, and romanticized in medieval contexts. Knights operate with honor and abide by a code of chivalry, and it is viewed as a noble and honest pursuit and means of living that any boy in that world could dream of embodying. It is Criston's skill with the blade and other knightly abilities that allows him to pursue this role and begin to rise in status and achieve upward mobility.

At the tourney for the heir that Viserys throws in anticipation for Aemma's birth of a son, Criston stands out due to his skill and due to him surpassing expectations of a Dornish lowborn man at a royal tourney. His performance and appearance lead him to be selected by the princess for Kingsguard, the highest position a knight could rise to in this society. Now, Criston finds himself as the highest of knights in service to the realm and particularly the royal family who rules it, the members of which who stand at the top of social hierarchies in this society: Valyrian race, royal blood, immense riches, power, and privileges available to them. And, of course, access to dragons, the ultimate weapons and safeguards of power in this world.

As Criston says himself, his position as Kingsguard is something he worked for his whole life and it's all he really has to his name and legacy, due to his birth and his family's position in this world. As a Kingsguard, at least early on, he takes his vows seriously and performs the job as he thinks an ideal knight would.

One night, the princess, the who promoted him to Kingsguard in the first place, reveals her attraction to him and pressures him to break his vow, and she does not accept multiple refusals as an answer. He implicitly cannot refuse her request, as she holds authority over him. Despite the fact that, yes, she is a young woman of 18 and he is a young man in his early twenties, it stands that she still holds an exceptionally higher amount of power than he does: she is a Targaryen, of the blood of Old Valyria, a dragon riding princess, daughter of the king, and heir to the throne that grants the best absolute power her father holds, while he is a knight from a lowborn family of Dornish background. In this instance, on a whim, the princess knowingly or unknowingly uses her power to take sex from him without considering what might happen to him as a result. The consequences of this event are potentially severe for him while relatively minimal for her. As it stands, if anyone found out, the consequence for him is to be slowly tortured to death. For the princess, if anyone found out, there is ultimately protection from the king. Criston would die an agonizing death, but at the very worst, she is disinherited, but only if her father wishes it (and she still retains her name and her dragon to help her survive in the world). Following this event, the princess tells him that she expects him to be fine with being used for sex whenever she wants, despite the severe risks to safety and well-being this poses to especially him.

Criston becomes disillusioned with the world he knew. He did everything he was supposed to do - endeavor to improve his position in the world through the righteous means of being a knight - yet now, everything he worked for is potentially crumbling before him. He tries to rationalize her decision to take advantage of him - maybe she truly loves him and that is why she would not accept his refusal? But the reality is that she views him as a plaything. His whole life of work to achieve upward mobility and make a name for himself in the world, and on account of his race, class background, and relative position of powerlessness, he is simply used and treated like an object by royalty. What purpose does he truly serve, if it is not to be a sworn knight abiding his vows and serving the realm and the royal family? Criston's grasp on his identity and purpose waver. When interviewed by the queen, he confesses his guilt and asks for a quick death. He accepts that his life may be over and that everything he suffered through in his life meant nothing. At the princess's wedding, he is threatened by someone he perceives as attempting to expose what happened, which would result in a torturous death. He snaps, killing the man to silence him. Having taken this life, resigned to death himself, he retreats to the weirwood to commit suicide. But it is there that the queen appears to stop him, and in Alicent, he finds a renewed sense of identity and purpose. In Alicent, he can relate to being thoughtlessly used by members of the royal family. In Alicent, he can believe once again in the idea of being a knight serving a queen who saved his life when it would have been easier for her not to. In Alicent, and in her children, Criston renews his identity in knighthood and his purpose in protecting the royal family. This time, though, these royals are not just using him without consideration and will not take him and his sacrifices for granted. Criston once again buys into the mythologizing of knighthood and royalty, which gives him identity and purpose in the world once more.

At this point, I'll address that many viewers and readers see his dislike of Rhaenyra as evidence of him being a uniquely misogynist man in this world where gender is heavily stratified. While sexism does exist at large in this society, there is only evidence of Criston disliking one single woman who used him and then discarded him at great risk and harm to him personally. In this regard, him hating Rhaenyra is logical given their past. He does not seem to be more exceptionally sexist than any other character in this story, yet fans focus in on him in particular for this. The "why" of it all likely has to do with the framing of the show: the writers emphasize the perspective of the royals and those with the most power in this world, and from their perspective, anyone in proximity to these royals should be grateful for it, despite anything that happens, because they are the sympathetic main characters. This is especially true for someone like Criston who apparently should be happy that despite his low birth and inferior (in this world) racial identity, the princess still offered to have sex with him and this is the best thing he could hope to ever achieve in his life. Once again, the show hyper focuses on sexism in Westeros but does not explore other systems of power that exist in the world and/or their relations to one another and the result is a skewed view of how the world really functions and who actual holds power relative to who. This, combined with the shows insertion of certain 21st century politics into aspects of the show when realistically no such things existed in historical or fictional medieval feudalist monarchies, results in fans insisting Criston is an incel, showing fundamental misunderstanding of the world of Westeros and also apparently the term incel itself, as Criston is tied for the character with the most sex scenes so far at 3 separate scenes so clearly he is not involuntarily celibate.

Post time skip, decades pass and Criston continues to fulfill his roles as knight and protector of the royal family until finally the day comes when the king dies. Then, he works with the Green Council to take action to protect his faction of the royal family from the perceived threat of the other and becomes "Kingmaker" by personally crowning Aegon. Following the murder of Jaehaerys by Daemon and Rhaenyra in retaliation for the death of Lucerys, he advocates for stronger, strategic military action in the then inevitable war while Otto Hightower insists on sending more ravens. This results in Aegon making him Hand of the King instead. His plan with Aegon and Aemond to trap one of the Black's dragons allows the Greens to take Meleys out, but it also allows for Aegon to become injured and bedridden, necessitating that Aemond take over in his stead as Prince Regent and Protector of the Realm.

As for season 2 additions and changes from the source material, I always saw Criston's relationship with Alicent as one of courtly love, and so far in the show the motivations of each character regarding a sexual relationship have been confusing at best. How did it even start? When? What does it mean for their long term relationship and how it's grown? How does it impact each participant's view on the world and knighthood and royalty and honor and loyalty? The show seems to not care to explore any of this beyond trying to paint the two in a bad light. I could maybe buy a sexual relationship if it was well-developed, but there was basically no set up or narrative reason for its addition beyond making the characters look worse and deflecting blame from Blood and Cheese onto them. In the case of a developed romance or sexual relationship, I would say that Criston's relationship with Alicent has grown for over a decade into one of loyalty and trust, and a physical relationship might come from that once the king died, although some amount of moral conflict would likely still occur for each character.

As for the plan at Rook's Rest, it doesn't make much sense for Aegon to be left out of the loop, just as it doesn't make sense for Aemond to willingly sabotage his own side of the war by taking out Aegon and his dragon, especially over something like bullying when the stakes are so much higher than that at this point. If anything, the animosity between the brothers should be about how Aemond's actions indirectly lead to the death of Aegon's son (if the writers allowed Blood and Cheese to have any major impact on the story, but their goals are instead to minimize Team Black's involvement and lessen Team Green's reaction to it, so it remains obscured and in the background).

In general, I might be interested in the writers potentially wanting to explore in season 2 Criston's relationship with his vows and honor and even showing some hypocrisy while highlighting the conflict between his righteous ideals and less than righteous means of accomplishing his goals. However, it's clear that their intent with Criston and Team Green is to point fingers and label them as dysfunctional, morally reprehensible villains in contrast to a righteous Team Black and that's all they're interested in. There is no meaningful exploration of character or growth to be expected from Criston Cole. Unfortunately fan vitriol will continue to focus on Criston above other members of Team Green for the reasons listed above, and the writing will likely only continue to add to that.

[saucyjothoughts]

💜At anatomy lecture today we were learning about muscles. And it come to my mind (yes during lecture) that would the boys allow me to use their body as a tool to learn where are certain muscles are. Touching their muscles and asking them to flex it so I could feel how the muscles move under my hand. Skin to skin contact so I can feel the muscles without any layers. Of course after helping me study they would have their reward 😏.

I don't know if you're studying anatomy for biology reasons or art reasons, sweet 💜 boo, but I just had to run with this concept.

(mostly sfw under the cut)

"Pervert," he teases you.

You're in the university library with him - the cute one who does sociology - while your mutual friends are in lectures and you two have a free hour.

"It's for research," you inform him. You really don't know him that well and now you think about it, this is probably the first time you've been alone together without the buffer of your friends.

But that isn't what Bojan is referring to. You're ignoring the book and watching slow-motion, zoomed-in videos of men playing rugby on your phone. Muddy, rippling, sportsmen's thighs under tiny shorts.

In front of you is an open copy of a heavy book, the page featuring a sketched torso with all of the muscles labelled.

'Anatomy for Artists.'

"Research? Of course." He looks at you in a way that makes your heart flutter.

"It's very important to study."

As it turns out, he does really mean it. He's in your DMs before the end of the day.

"You should come to one of my MMA sessions." He probably doesn't really mean it. He's probably just being nice, trying to make a friend in this new city away from home, full of adventure and fear and promise. "Do some research in the flesh."

And when you study together, he lets you see exactly how skin moves over muscle, how the human body bulges and flexes and sags and creases, hair and freckles and dimples and veins. He lets you study a little at a time, hitching the sleeve of his t-shirt up so your paintbrush can outline the deltoid, the tricep, the brachioradialis, the extensor carpi ulnaris; elegant sweeping strokes of deep red that he says feels good on his skin as you paint him. You're thinking about pectoralis major. But you're not brave enough to ask him for it. Not yet.

Your study sessions have moved. You don't use the library anymore. Bojan thinks it will be more useful if you can see him when he's pumped, after his training, so you join him at the gym with your sketchbook. His skin looks good (he's worked up a sweat) and he takes his shirt off to show you his biceps, his armpit hair, then turns around so you can see his back. He sweeps his hair away when you ask for the angle of his neck and writhes slowly when you want the movement of the scapula, the ilium.

"I'm probably too soft for you to get a good idea of abdominals." He's apologising, self-conscious about his love handles. In your eyes, he's a perfect specimen (when did he become perfect to you? It happened so naturally) and his shyness is endearing.

"I'm sure there are plenty of abs I can see around here," you tease, making a show of looking around the gym at the other guys.

No.

He takes your wrist, pulling your attention back to him.

"You didn't let me finish."

He's sweaty, and you're close enough to smell him, musky and masculine.

"You probably can't see, but you can feel."

He pulls your hand close to his body and you touch your fingers to him. Around his navel, over that little trail of hair, and he flexes his core as you push your fingertips through the softness of his flesh to feel the strength beneath. Rectus abdominis.

Why are you suddenly struggling for breath when you aren't even the one working out?

He asks you if you want to have the next study session at his place. You do. You desperately do.

His room is cosy. There's a nice view from the window and you skim through his record collection and the whole place smells of coffee and Bojan.

He offers you his chair and you're spreading out the media you brought onto his desk while he prepares to pose for you.

"You know, if you wanted..." There is hesitation in his voice. "You could draw all of me."

Your mouth is suddenly dry. You just nod.

Slowly, he peels away the last of his clothing until all he's wearing is the chain around his neck.

He reclines on the bed, fully on show, the lines of him looking beautiful in the window light.

You pick up your sketchbook, and draw.

[alpaca-clouds]

Understanding Individualism vs Collectivism

Making that post about individualism and capitalism yesterday, I got some questions, that showed me the same problem as the person I was talking about had: A lot of people do actually not know what individualism and collectivism mean. So, let me try to explain.

I had kinda hoped that Abigail from Philosophy Tube might have made a video on this, but no such luck. So, I guess I have to try and explain it, even though I mostly know it from sociology, rather from the philosophic origins where it comes from.

Basically, both concepts originate with socialist philosophy in the early 19th century, which correctly identified the early capitalist society as individualist and saw the dangers coming with it. It argued that an individualist society will be harmful on a societal level, because the society at large would always focus on the self, rather than the other. Capitalist philosophy however picked this up was like: “Yeah, awesome, right?” And especially in the 20th century they really started to run with it, realizing that they could use it to make people into better consumers.

Now, individualism does not mean “a sense of self”. This is not connected to it. You will still have a sense of self in a collectivist society and nobody says that you shouldn’t have. Rather it means that the focus of everyone should be on the individual. Both themselves – but also the individual actors in society. It is as such not a surprise that the idea of “Great Man Theory” came up and started to thrive during early capitalism in the 19th century.

So, if individualism does not mean “a sense of self”, what does it mean?

I would argue there are two aspects to it. Once the aforementioned tendency to put the individual above the society and apart from it, but also to create and sell a personal philosophy that people are defined by their differences from others, rather than what they have in common. It tells people that they are all so very different from everyone else, which is a useful political tool for capitalism to fight collective actions such as unions, but also collective action for things like environmental protection. In the same vein it is used to keep people riled up against one another within society, as they focus on their differences, rather than what they have in common.

The most anarchistic professor I had at university put it very well: “If you as a worker talk to a factory worker from Bangladesh, you will find you have a lot in common. In fact you will always have more in common with this other worker rather than any billionaire there is.”

Which brings me to the other aspect that individualism is about: It sells you an individualistic dream. Which is why capitalism focuses so much on those rags to riches stories (that tend to be lies most of the time). “See, this millionaire started out his business in daddy’s garage. So you can also become a billionaire if you have the right idea.” Fellow leftist might know the saying: “You are just one bad day away from homelessness, but you will never be a billionaire.” Which is basically the counter argument to this.

See, capitalism tries to convince you, that “I am the better system, because in me you could become a billionaire,” to sell you not only on your own exploitation, but the exploitation of the masses.

And more than that, capitalism also has realized that it can use individualism to make you a better consumer. I alluded to this a bit further up. But the long and short of it is, that capitalism pushes this idea of “you are, what you consume”. Your individuality is defined by the things you spent money on. Maybe by you having the most expensive things, but also by you having maybe the weirdest things or something. You know, the “not like the other girls” girl will probably spend as much, if not more on the things that make her special, as “the other girls”.

This also goes into the whole idea of greenwashing, pinkwashing and rainbow capitalism. All this is about getting you to consume something to gain some sort of individual aspect from it. Basically, through buying the “green” stuff, you are a better consumer.

Ironically this also goes into the entire anti-shipping discourse, which basically also says that your goodness as a person is defined by the things you consume.

Capitalism is selling you your identity. Your individual identity.

But sadly this is an idea very, very deeply engrained into the heads of most who have grown up in capitalism. Because it is everywhere in media. Sure, there is some media that calls it out, but most of it actually peddles the idea of the individual.

Because this is the second aspect at the core of individualism: The myths that only individuals can change something, rather than a collective. Which is what I call out so often when I am talking about the entire punk-genre stuff.

Even though it is less punk, let me take Star Wars as an example, because it is an amazing example of this. Especially the original trilogy, in which the Rebellion battles the Empire. However, the evil Empire is not defeated because the Rebellion manages to somehow outwit or outmaneuvre the Empire. Or because maybe the collective of the workers in the Empire turn against it. Rather it gets defeated because Luke, the individual, turns Darth Vater, an individual, and defeats the Emperor, the individual. Which goes back to this idea of the “great man”. It is those unique individuals who will save the world, rather than collective action.

This idea of some individuals being the ones to save the world, rather than we – the people – as a group and ourselves, is used to keep the people pacified under capitalism. They are waiting for “a good billionaire” to solve climate change, homelessness and all the other problems for us, rather than getting active themselves. They keep telling themselves: “Hey, under capitalism everyone can be a billionaire, including myself, and also my life isn’t that bad right now. So who cares that under socialism/communism everyone could be lifted up?”

Look, folks. I am saying this lovingly. But you are not as much of an individual as you think. You are your own person, but you are not unique. In fact, if you talk to a random person on the street – no matter who they are – and you and them are not instantly judging each other for one reason or another, you will find that you have a lot more in common than you think. Capitalist individualism just taught you to not see this, because your empathy can be its undoing.

[sophieinwonderland]

On "colonizing" spaces...

@obsessive-schizoid

Now, "colonizing" is such an interesting term to use here. It's a very loaded word meant to imply that endogenic systems are oppressors.

The idea that somehow, the concept of being a system is a unique cultural right to traumagenic and disordered systems, and that we're moving in to claim what's theirs.

What's funny about the use of the word here is how DID, and mental disorders in general, are largely colonialist constructs.

The concept of plurality is as old as time itself. Like most other strange and unexplained phenomena, people create their own explanations for what they were experiencing. Usually some sort of ghosts or spirit guides. It varies from culture to culture what plurality was interpreted as. But it has always existed.

But then you have these white, Christian nations that spread their religion across the globe. And with their beliefs, comes those that stigmatize and literally demonize spiritual plurality. To most Christians, there are no spirits other than demons and God's own angels. All possessing spirits must therefore be demonic entities that need to be cast out and destroyed as Legion was in the bible.

And thus, any cultural and spiritual plurality is stamped out by colonialists.

When psychiatry and psychology form as institutions, these doctors have been taught in this environment. An environment where there is only one person per body, and anything outside of that is bad and evil.

Instead of calling it demonic possession though, they call it a mental disorder. Just as these doctors, who grew up in this religious climate, once called homosexuality a mental disorder because even if they're atheist, they're still essentially culturally Christian.

A History of Secrecy

In the middle-ages, plurals couldn't be out as plural because if they were public, they would be accused of being demonically possess or even of witchcraft which could get them put to death.

By the 1900s, we saw the rise of insane asylums, torturous electroshock therapy, and even lobotomies for the mentally ill.

It's no wonder that most non-disordered plurals during this period would have kept their plurality to themselves.

Why risk people thinking you mad and stripping you of your human rights if you can avoid it?

This lasted until the 90s after this thing called the internet came along and allowed people to communicate across the globe anonymously. And for the first time, plurals learned that they weren't alone in the world.

Separatists, Not Colonists

I don't expect anti-endos to have a good grasp on plural history. Or any history. Or psychology, psychiatry, sociology, basic literacy or reasoning skills.

So let's take a moment to remind everyone that in the 90s, all "multiple personalities" were seen as pathological. This was a result of centuries of actual colonialists treating it as either evil or a mental disorder that needed to be cured.

Most non-disordered and endogenic systems at the time started in the MPD/DID community because all systems were treated as pathological. Some had self-diagnosed. Though others were actually diagnosed with DID before rejecting the diagnosis.

This idea of endogenic and non-disordered systems "invading" or "colonizing" is a fiction. It's a rewriting of history. "Alternative facts," if you will.

The TRUTH is that endogenic and non-disordered systems were always part of the DID/MPD community until they decided to break away from it.

And it's that breaking away that sysmeds hate.

The idea of all multiplicity being a disorder is, itself, a colonialist idea. It is inherently rooted in a history of colonialism, pushing a one-size-fit-all world, beginning with Christianity demonizing spiritual plurality, and continuing with Western psychiatry pathologizing all plurality.

Sysmeds are products of this colonialism, and have become its chief propagators on this site and others like it.

When separating themselves from the medicalization of plurality, the new natural multiples created their own language to distance themselves from the medical association.

"Headmate" became the alternative to "alter". "Plural" became the alternative to "multiple" which plural systems at the time felt was too closely related to "multiple personality disorder." "Fictive and factive" were borrowed from endogenic soulbonders.

And all of these are terms that, after being coined by pro-endos, were taken by sysmeds and claimed as their own.

Sysmeds have also attempted to claim resources like Pluralkit and Simply Plural as their own despite both being made by pro-endos. And many have tried worming their way into the Alterhuman community despite "alterhuman" being a term that was made by a pro-endo and is explicitly inclusive of endogenic plurals.

Surely you can see how ridiculous this is, where you have endogenic systems trying to distance themselves from the medical community only for the medicalists to come into our spaces, claim all the terms and resource we built for themselves, and then accuse us of colonizing them.

[mazzystar24]

Okay for context look at this first and the link inside it^^^

Then this was part two here of the video

And now imma rant:

STOP THE HETERONORMATIVITY AND CONSERVATIVE ASS VIEW OF HOW FAMILIES FUNCTION

Thats point one I’m not elaborating on that one again but fr what coparent role entails differs family to family so without recognising that every single point you make abt what we should see happening is moot and a title being “reserved by Eddie” is a bullshit concept so that’s just getting ignored before I rant abt it again

But for real she’s like I think people don’t understand what coparenting is- brother in Christ the hypocrisy like coparenting plain and simple is two or more people parenting a child together regardless of romantic status

So let me ask you parenting itself? Is it about financial contribution or the shit on your list? Because

1. No it goes beyond that it’s being there for your kid it’s making decisions for your kid it’s helping them it’s childcare it’s being there for the hard stuff it’s doing annoying tasks, supporting the other parents decisions and a bunch of stuff that go beyond financial contribution or whatever

And this is stuff we’ve seen buck do such as their heart to hearts, being a safe space for him, making decisions abt where he should stay while Eddie was in the hospital, preparing food for his class, the implications of that one Eddie technophobia scene where Chris asks to go to buck and Eddie does a face implying that buck COULD agree but Eddie seeks him to back him up, and a billion other things that both @lenaboskow and @warpedpuppeteer said

Like there is also the debate of instrumental vs expressive role but that’s gonnna get me carried away in a sociology lesson but lemme explain briefly- instrumental role is monetary contribution it’s discipline it’s making the decisions for the child and family whereas expressive role is physical and emotional care of the child and their socialisation and other responsibilities

It makes sense that since buck isn’t legally a parent to Chris he leans more on the expressive role but also plenty of parents who are biological or legally parents of their kids will still take an expressive role and their partner will take an instrumental role like it’s just down to personal preference really even if it’s more common now for the roles to be split equally, because originally it was from the idea that women should be in the expressive role and men in the instrumental but for obvious reasons more people split or invert the roles nowadays but again it’s down to preference

2. THIS IS A TV SHOW not everything will be explicitly stated until it comes up

Chris hasn’t had a medical thing or an emergency or allergy thing yet so why would those things have come up as buck knowing them

Butttt it’s a safe assumption to say he does because not only are they firefighters and know the risks and how important medical history is but also because in canon Eddie pestered some poor mom with a bunch of info FOR A BIRTHDAY PARTY CHRIS WAS GOING TO so you’re telling me the guy who cares for Chris constantly isn’t gonna know the necessary info???? Where is the logic

3. By that logic of oh have we seen this or have we seen that then Athena, Bobby, Michael, henren, madney and even Eddie HIMSELF are apparently not parents either cos all of them have a few things on that list that aren’t explicitly stated or even implied

4. it’s an undisputed fact that Bobby is a dad to buck or Maddie was a mom to buck or bobby a dad to may

And because I can see the “father figure vs dad” defence a mile away let’s go with most relevantly the last two points

Maddie raised buck plain and simple- she was also a teenager so did she financially contribute did she know his past doctors did she make decisions abt where he should go to school etc etc? No because raising someone goes beyond that

Bobby is May’s dad- does she call him dad regularly? No she’s done it once and it was quite late into it but she considered him a dad before that

And also he came into her life when she was older than Chris so again moot point

Does he make decisions abt her or financially contribute? No

In fact a lot of the parenting moments for him in relation to her or Harry has been similar circumstances to buck and Chris

I’m gonna shut up now but like I beg some of y’all to think before you speak because the teeny tiny boxes y’all try to shove stuff into is so weird

Like this stuff is legit canon

On a final note I wanna give a heartbreaking reminder that the decision to have buck jump back into the water eventhough it had practically no chance of survival was based on asking one of the crew (directors?) if it was their kid would they jump and they said they would without hesitation so that’s why they had buck jump in without hesitation (tehe guys I love giving you guys heartbreaking reminders🤭🤭🤭)

[lilareviewsbooks]

4 SFF Books For (Humanities) Nerds

Hey guys! I know I promised this like, last year, but life got in the way :( But now I can finally present to you - my list of books for humanities nerds!

To put it simply, these are books I think broach topics that are close to the humanities nerds' interests - sociology, history, art, anthropology, political sciences... And sure, they could be considered "boring", but if you're into the humanities - you'll have a ball with them! (and, of course, anyone can enjoy these!)

The Goblin Emperor, by Katherine Addison

5 stars | 446 pages | standalone, but there are spin-offs | queer side character

This is the book that spurred this list, so, if you want a longer review, I have it on my blog. But suffice it to say that The Goblin Emperor is a fairly long and detailed account of what happens in the court of a country of elves when the youngest, unfavoured and half-goblin son of the king ascends the throne. This book is masterful. It seemlessly weaves in personal and political concerns as we follow Maia, the newly crowned emperor. The writing style is slow - we follow the emperor's every day life. We are with him when he rises in the morning until when he wakes up. It waits for something to happen, and is quiet and slow. It's absolutely delightful: despite his politicking, Maia is mostly and more ardently concerned with kindness. He wants to treat people fairly. This not only makes for a sweet main character, it also means the book is a fascinating character study, as well as an incredible feat of world-building. I think nerds will enjoy its slow and traquil pace, its dedication to politics, language and customs of this world and its charming main character.

A Memory Called Empire, by Arkady Martine

5 stars | 462 pages | completed duology | queer main characters

For a sci-fi twist, I think A Memory Called Empire is the way to go. The duology follows Mahit, a citizen of a small satellite of the Teixcalaan Empire, who is chosen as the next ambassador for her home. She must journey to the capital with a very important mission - find out why her predecessor mysteriously disappeared. Again, what there is to enjoy here is lush, expansive world-building. The Teixcalaani feel so, so real. Every little detail was thought of, from their language to their smiles. It's truly impressive, and the prose, I remember, is also beautiful, making these details pop out even more. This is also incredibly political, as Mahit descends into the belly of the beast, so to speak, in search of answers. But it is framed by a pretty straight-foward murder mystery, which might be fun for people used to mystery stories. And the second book broaches first contact! - it's just so much fun! I also have a longer review for this series, if you would like more details! Nerds will be drawn to the expansive world-building, attention to detail, and reflections on empire, memory and legacy.

Elder Race, by Adrian Tchaikovsky

4 stars | 201 pages | standalone | no one's queer, I don't think :(

This one might be a good pick for veterans of SFF - it has a fun gimmick! You must've heard the phrase "any science advanced enough in undistinguishable from magic", attributed to Arthur C. Clarke. This book takes that concept and runs with it. For Lynesse, a princess in a medieval society, Elder Nyr's "giant tower" is magical, and he, a magician. For Elder Nyr, an anthropologist come from a different planet, his interests are scientific, and his "tower", a spaceship. The fun of the novella is that we flip-flop between these two people's perspectives, so that half the story is a sci-fi, and the other half, a fantasy. I found this story to be unique, and to understand its place in the speculative genre quite well. It defies expectations and conventions in a creative way that I think nerds familiar with them will enjoy!

The Traitor Baru Cormorant, by Seth Dickinson

5 stars | 399 pages | uncompleted series | queer main characteres

Another good bet is The Traitor Baru Cormorant, the first installment in the Masquerade Series, which is not finished yet. It follows Baru, who, as a child, watches her country be colonized by the Masquerade Empire. She vows revenge, and to destroy the empire from the inside out. In this installment, she is finally trusted to be sent as an Imperial Accountant to Aurdwynn, a famously ungovernable territory... This one is very, very brain-y. It's dense political fantasy, and I admit I had some trouble following the economics, sometimes - that was never my strong suit!! The tapestry of betrayals, alliances and twists is rich, intricate and realistic. People have diverse interests, are multi-faceted individuals, and yet have a reason to be acting they way they are acting. This makes for satisfying plot lines, and incredible twists. I still haven't recovered from what the first book did to me, to be honest. Nerds, if you want to be dazzled and made to work for it, pick this one up. The Traitor Baru Corumorant will have you scratching your chin, thinking hard and having a lot of fun with (yay!) economics and accounting!

I have a couple more of these if anyone is interested :) And as always, if you need a book rec, feel free to send me an ask!

[mdhwrites]

Did TOH Need More Time For Its Ambitions?

No. Because Amphibia exists. Why can I say that so confidently? Because Sasha and Amity show a VERY clear comparison in how the storytelling in each show is handled and how that shows that even with a similar amount of appearances, TOH is just lacking in actually doing anything with its concepts.

(Quick interjection: Consider this effectively a part 2/rehash on why Anne's arc in S1 is so much better than Amity's arc period, which is a blog I did a LONG time ago that analyzed critical portions of character arcs in general. This one though uses the more obvious pairing and also the two with much closer screen time and narrative importance... though with TOH that term is entirely fucked.)

Both characters are enemies to allies. Both have complicated relationships with the main character and are motivated by that relationship to change themselves for the better. Both have positions in the world and priorities that explicitly makes them opposed to the main character not only ideologically but sociologically. And, above all else:

Sasha's redemption arc, from her first appearance to Turning Point when she explicitly turns full good, is 9 segments. Ten/Eleven if you count Reunion/True Colors as two.

Amity's redemption can range anywhere from seven A plots to nine/ten depending on if A: you count Hooty's Moving Hassle, which I don't, and B: if you count the end of her redemption arc at Winging it Like Witches (when she rebukes her old friends), Escaping Expulsion (when she rebukes her parents) or Looking Glass Ruins, the first episode where she is 100% an ally. Or hell, you could actually for FIVE episodes and say it's Understanding Willow as she apologizes for the past and promises to stop bullying at least Willow at that point, which was her first antagonistic act before.

And mind you... Understanding Willow is in S1. LONG before the shortening took effect. Even the latest one of these puts it at before the shortening. So I think these are fair comparisons of just how the two's arcs were handled with the amount of time spent on them. Which raises the question: What did we get in that time?

Well... We got an actual arc with Sasha while Amity just changes randomly. That's not even really a joke. I'll try to bounce between the two to really highlight the difference, especially in storytelling.

In her first appearance, we get pretty much all possible suspicions about Sasha based on Anne confirmed. She is manipulative, self serving, self aggrandizing and tells people what they want to hear to get them to do what she wants. She is your friend so she can control you. However, she isn't all bad. She could have just ran during the Heron attack but instead helps save the day though it's very possible that she recognized she was better off staying as an equal of Grime's than running off on her own. The Toads are opposed to the Frogs in Amphibia's society though, creating an inherent conflict between Sasha and Anne due to the social dynamics of the world they are in.

Meanwhile, Amity in her first appearance actually makes a strong case for herself. She looks down on those magically challenged, which Luz is, is a bully while Luz is an outcast who has struggled with friends and has a drive to succeed conventionally while Luz uses more unconventional methods. The opposing elements are actually lined up really well between the two but we don't get a lot of Amity's actual personality. She just comes off as an entertaining, almost neurotic bitch. We get more of her personality in her second episode where she is a little more in control of her emotions, shows a potential softer side, and also sets up another sociological conflict in that Luz inherently is on the side of the wild witches due to her mentor and her magic style while Amity is full on the coven train, even to the point to wanting to one day potentially lead the Emperor's Coven. Though, importantly... The only thing that's challenged about Amity's worldview in this episode is the idea that someone she thinks is weak could actually be strong, something that theoretically could have been said to have been covered by the end of Teenage Abomination when Willow proves herself with the seed. Hell, it's also reinforced in an episode I don't usually count for this but is kind of important: Hooty's Moving Hassle. So that's one problem addressed but only tangentially and it's by no means the biggest issue between Amity and Luz. Amity is still a bully after all.

Meanwhile, Reunion goes for the core, both sociologically and personally. The Toads want Hop Pop dead and Sasha doesn't care. Not only that but Sasha assumes that if she tells Anne not to care, Anne won't because in her eyes, Anne serves her. She is the one in charge after all and she won't take no for an answer. Period. We're even shown this explicitly in the flashbacks. The problem is... Anne has gone through an entire character arc to make it so she can stand up to Sasha and challenges pretty much all of Sasha's beliefs. Her need for control, her callousness towards others and her warped view of reality where she is the hero and all else are best off listening to her. Sasha even gives in for a moment in an act of genuine selflessness by letting go of Anne's hand so her and the Plantars can live. It does a lot of work but... It might be considered rushed if that were the end of her primary antagonism.

You know where this is going. In her third major appearance, forth appearance overall... Amity is a neutral entity and a friend by the end of Lost in Language. Honestly, if you wanted to argue that the majority of Amity's arc, especially friends to allies, was three episodes, you'd be actually making a very compelling point. This episode after all is the one where she effectively stops being a bully. She just is now the overly dedicated smart girl. She is explicitly not the antagonist though but instead the victim and the one we're primarily supposed to sympathize with. Then, thanks to Azura, she befriends Luz by the end of the episode. They are already allies and... There isn't much reason for it besides one time teaming up. Sure, Luz has challenged Amity's perceptions but even she calls out in this episode that each time they meet up, Amity gets in trouble or/amd embarrassed. Luz has actually done extremely little to deserve this because all Luz has actually done with Amity before this episode is a declaration of combat and then their last talk in Covention which was just about maybe rethinking if someone could or couldn't do something, not about Amity's morality. Also, Luz is important to consider here. These sorts of arcs involve the MC in a pretty crucial way because they're the one the antagonist wants to become allies with and so the MC needs to accept them. Amity hasn't done fuck all at this point to deserve Luz's attention because she's a bully and is cruel to her mostly besides her final act in Covention. It is literally NARRATIVE TROPES that make Luz forgive Amity and want to befriend. Literally. Nothing about Amity's actions or actual character, Luz just wants to live out her fanfic.

And that brings up the fact that Anne does keep giving Sasha chances but they have an established history and that push and pull of trust is a large part of this. It's the main driving factor for why Sasha will change at all and why the lengths she goes both for manipulation and redemption are important. It's also important to show WHY Anne might have wanted someone like Sasha around. Toad Catcher is not crucial for Sasha's arc, Barrel's Warhammer also shows how much Anne's rebuke of her and choosing the Plantars over her fucks with her mentally, but it does let you see why people follow her. The motivation she can bring them because Sasha does see the best in people... But mostly because people's bests are also the most useful for her. It also doubles down on her good quality that she rarely gives up on someone she chooses to ally with. All while still making it clear that if given the chance, she'll try to get back at Anne because accepting Anne was right is too antithetical to how she sees the world.

And then for both, we get episodes that mostly just explore the characters. A sort of holding pattern for both arcs with Barrel's Warhammer, Third Temple, The Sleepover and The Battle of the Bands for Sasha while we have Adventure in the Elements, Understanding Willow and Grom for Amity. This is also where you can extend this to include Winging it Like Witches and/or Escaping Expulsion depending on where you count Amity's arc as fully ending. For both characters though, the status quote they're primarily in doesn't change a lot. Amity is a tentative ally who has to get dragged into things and is generally a good person but not hanging out with everyone else casually yet. Meanwhile, Sasha is barely controlling her growing rage and insecurity about losing her power over Anne, exacerbated by Marcy coming into the mix and, from Sasha's perspective, siding with Anne. Though, there is a critical difference.

One is actually exploring the character, their motivations and their mindset. In all the episodes I listed for Amity, Amity gets small steps but they're NOTHING we don't already know. She's a generally good person who has a compulsion to succeed until suddenly in Escaping Expulsion that she's let her grades slip. There's nothing about what drives her towards success, no exploration on if these changes are difficult on her, both of which are actually in Battle of the Bands to some extent for Sasha. We don't see how this stuff is affecting her besides her growing crush and if that's getting her to act out. That takes until fucking Looking Glass Ruins to actually manifest while Barrel's Warhammer shows how much the idea of changing is fucking with Sasha's head but also why her behavior is toxic. How her best traits can also be her worst. Amity's traits are barely even being examined. She's just slowly becoming more and more obsessed with Luz and bleeding personality for it by becoming a very generically good person.

THEN we get Sasha's big relapse. Her denial of her arc. The attempt to wrestle back control because she saw an oppurtunity to be on top and took it. This is book 2's ending for Zuko. A moment of weakness where the character's vices means they at least have to question their character arc. If that's what they want or if they want to continue being who they always were. True Colors is this for Sasha, even to the point where she is willing to throw out parts of her past if she can't find a way to keep them. It is that same weakness that makes her plans fail though because once she can try to justify her actions and bring Anne back to her, she can't fight Anne properly and loses for a second time. Again, that push and pull of trust and control.

And Amity doesn't have this. The closest there is to it is Escaping Expulsion... Where she doesn't do shit. Calling that an Amity episode is FRUSTRATING for me because she is barely in it. Not only that, but she doesn't decide to do villainy. Instead, it's that she is a teenager with a controlling mother. But don't worry, despite only showing up for like four minutes of the episode, Amity can just tell her mom to piss off and that's that. It isn't motivated by a push or pull, Amity doesn't want to go back at all and she actively is miserable the entire episode despite having explicitly chosen to be a bully for YEARS before this. After all, her parents only told her she couldn't be friends with Willow. They never told Amity to bully her for years and become queen bitch of the school over all. That was Amity's choice.

And then finally resolution. When the character themselves accepts the change and stops shifting morality. This is actually why I consider Turning Point the end of Sasha'a arc. Commander Anne is follow through but it's just reinforcing the version of Sasha that takes form in this moment. The Sasha, who reading how much her betrayal hurt Anne but how much trust she had for the mean girl, who has to face all she's lost in her pursuit of power, takes the mantle of guardian seriously. It is not a moment of weakness like in Reunion that makes her put other lives over hers but instead a moment self actualization and determination. A moment of strength and one she'll stick to for the most part. She is no longer manipulative, she is a commander, even if she doesn't have the title yet. This is especially satisfying because... Well, we've seen EVERYTHING that motivates this moment. Not just Anne's stuff but Grime's loyalty to her and how much that means to her. Percy and Braddock abandoning her and her trying to use the calculus of war to be okay with that. We can see MOUNTAINS of evidence for why she would choose this over her old self. Over one more time to try to conquer Amphibia like Grime suggests.

I... Genuinely can't really say when this happens for Amity. This actually has way less to do with how many times she rejects her past self and more to do with... Why does she? Why does she ever change in fact? What are her motivations? Because even in Escaping Expulsion, Luz's conversation with Amity isn't "You need to stand up to your parents because you shouldn't let others dictate your life." It's instead, "You should stand up to your parents so I can go back to witch school." And this happens CONSTANTLY. Remember: You can argue her villain role ends on her third major appearance and Luz NEVER talks morality with her. Never has Amity actually learn something.

It actually comes down to an inherent storytelling choice with TOH as a whole: Very few episodes are about anyone other than Luz and Luz actually really sucks at helping people during their episodes. Gus actually has some of the best episodes dedicated to a side character as they're actually addressing a core element of the character... And in his first one, Luz is a bystander. She does fucking NOTHING except maybe give Gus a pep talk. She is mcguffin than anything. With Amity though? Covention is mostly about Luz learning about the coven system. Lost in Language is about Luz and the twins and her want to befriend Amity, not the why she wants to befriend Amity. Adventure in the Elements: About Luz having a Winter Adventure where Amity is a perfectly good person. Understanding Willow is actually one of the better ones because at least for that one, Amity makes her final choice because she's nostalgic for an old friend. Grom has her only stand up though when Luz in trouble. Winging it Like Witches? It's just Luz being in danger that motivates her. Escaping Expulsion? Luz being in danger. Looking Glass? Luz needs her.

This is why Amity feels like she changes just for a pretty girl. Luz actually does NOTHING to ever try and change Amity. To ever actually interact with Amity's arc. Reaching Out will be the pinnacle of this where Amity has suddenly written off the entire coven system, one of the only things besides Luz we've been told she cares about... And Luz has never once talked to her about the coven system or Belos. Because Luz has barely actually talked to her about her besides to call her cool and pretty. It is remarkable how little Luz actually interacts properly with Amity and how few real conversations they have, especially about their differences and feelings about each other. Each time Sasha and Anne are in the same room, you know their philosophies and relationship is going to come up in some way. It's too omnipresent for both to ignore. Meanwhile... There's a lot of episodes where Lumity exchange cute jokes and that's it, despite the main plot focusing on those two characters for that episode. And remember: TOH's A plots explicitly have more time to include those sorts of slower conversations. Oh, and, you know, one of these pairs are just friends while the other GETS INTO A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP.

And the pinnacle of all of this: Amphibia does this amazing character arc while also making it plot relevant and REALLY important to its themes. Sasha is a primary antagonist for two seasons technically. She genuinely challenges both the message of change being good from a meta perspective but also challenges Anne's own character arc from a narrative perspective. Her degradation of care is contrasted by how Amphibia makes Anne care so much about others that it makes it harder and harder for her to write off Sasha despite what Sasha did. Then, Sasha changing her perspective and treatment of others, while keeping the core of herself true, is what helps keep Wartwood alive while Anne is gone while also demonstrating the power of change but also that you don't have to change literally EVERYTHING about you.

Meanwhile, it was a fucking meme in the TOH community that if Amity was on screen, nothing could happen and that stayed almost true for literally half the series. Not only that but Amity's complete change for Luz doesn't really feel coherent with the themes of self acceptance and not changing for others. It tries because the show posits that Amity just needed a better environment to go back to being the good person she always was but A: that's never explored because challenging her environment is not actually a part of what motivates her changes, just B: Luz is the whole reason for her change and she changes effectively into Azura, Luz's favorite character. That doesn't feel like becoming her own person and instead changing literally every aspect of yourself for your partner which... Yikes. To put it mildly.

You can cut EVERYTHING to do with Amity out of the show and you lose literally nothing except representation. You cut Sasha out of Amphibia though? You do not have the same story. Period. You have to rewrite a good bit because despite her lack of appearances, she is important. A lot of elements of Amphibia are important like that.

And Amphibia did it with smart storytelling that actually explored its own elements, not because it had three full seasons. Not when Sasha takes up so much less time of her show than Amity does.

This is all because Amphibia actually was interested in telling a character arc instead of just kind of weakly being able to claim it had a character arc. You can even extend that to almost literally any element that TOH and Amphibia both did. And not because of time, simply because one is written a hell of a lot better and was more interested in actually telling its story rather than making a bunch of statements that Twitter could freak out about.

======+++++======

I have a public Discord for any and all who want to join!

I also have an Amazon page for all of my original works in various forms of character focused romances from cute, teenage romance to erotica series of my past. I have an Ao3 for my fanfiction projects as well if that catches your fancy instead. If you want to hang out with me, I stream from time to time and love to chat with chat.

A Twitter you can follow too

And a Kofi if you like what I do and want to help out with the fact that disability doesn’t pay much.

[realitys-ex]

On Dwarf Gender in Discworld

So, Dwarfish gender stuff is clearly something that PTerry decided to add in later [I can't recall the first time it came up in any form, but I am 90% sure it was with Littlebottom], seeing as in earlier books he does use 'she' when Carrot is sending letters home, and he differentiates between Mom and Dad, which one can assume wouldn't happen in the mono-gender Dwarf world (admittedly it could happen, but I think with an ex-nihlo construction it wouldn't).

Now I have seen people attempt to explain Carrot's letters, but it always felt a tad flat to me.

Tbh, there is a lot of world building that happens in the Early Discworld books that gets retconned to one degree or another in later ones (the behavior of trolls changes, the set up of the university with its schools of magic disappears, the Dungeon of Dimensions becomes a non-factor, Hell with its Devils doesn't even get a nod after Eric, etc.).

This is not really a complaint, the books grew, as did PTerry's writing skill and ideas. This is just an observation.

So some of his ideas weren't fully thought out or explored.

And I really feel like Dwarf Gender is one of them.

So we have established that Dwarfs have a single Gender both Linguistically and Culturally/sociologically. They recognize another sex, obviously, but as something private that effects nothing outside of the bedroom, and should not be spoken about.

And that Gender is Dwarf-Man (which is, btw something that somewhat bothered me. shouldn't it just be dwarf? If they had an issue with knowing that someone was a woman, wouldn't that mean they have equal issue knowing that someone was a man? For a simple purpose of 'if person A tells me they are a man which is socially acceptable to do, but person B says nothing, I can infer that they are not man.'? Like, I understand the point that Pratchett was making would not have been served that way, but still).

But anyway, Littlebottom adopts some human-female gender norms, and what happens in the books happens.

But well, aside from the slight annoyance of Human Gender Norms being the Gender Norms, the concept of possible impact to Dwarf Society is never explored!

For example, accepting everything above, Dwarf society is Sexism (genderism?) free, due to the fact that outside the bedroom, there is no Sex. You can't bar women from jobs etc. if there are no women.

But now there might be women. Will human style sexism enter Dwarf culture? Will Dwarfs be barred from being Low King or Grag?

What about linguistics? Obviously Dwarvish would have no female pronoun, so would they add one? Is Dwarvish a gendered language that they need to create a full new set of styles for?

I know that none of these things would be the focus of a book, but I would have loved it if it got a bit of a spotlight.

[deadrobinthoughts]

Bat Kids & Their College Degrees.

Dick Grayson - Criminology and Law. - Dick has always been involved in crime fighting. A major in crime and law would easily fit in and deepen his understanding, which only aids in combatting criminal behavior.

+ definitely a performing arts major. he would love being able to explore and express himself through dance and theatre.

Jason Todd - Criminal Justice and Psychology. - during his time as the Red Hood would instill an understanding of crime from a pov that could easily be etched in a psychological perspective. This would be able to aid in his navigation of the darker corners of his vigilante methods. ( Ignore him when he says it's to get answers, with a smirk. )

+ literature and philosophy. it's never been a secret that jason loves to read and study things. he would also get to explore complex composition and moral questions.

Barbara Gordon - Library Sciences & Information Technology - Barbara's initial career in the librarian field would be a dead give away for library science. Her expertise lies within collecting, organizing and checking information, along with hacking, which would be helped by a strong IT background.

+ creative writing. i'm not sure why, i just feel like her level of knowledge and intellect would lead her to enjoy writing and creating new worlds.

Tim Drake - Computer Science & Detective Minor. - Tim is very much known for his computer and detective skills already, majors and minors in these areas would definitely pair with where his interests already align.

+ i feel like regardless of the universe, he's got something to do with computers. even if it's graphic design. i feel like he'd enjoy creating things, too. or, he could go the way of being an agent of some sort but i'm not sure, outside of everything, if he'd be okay knowing the things that agents do. because that's beyond even what the batfam sees.

Stephanie Brown - Forensic Science & Journalism. - considering the time she's spent uncovering the truth and mystery solving, it would be easy to stick her with forensic science. plus, her determination to bring justice to light could easily be an end with journalism.

+ sociology. she'd probably enjoy studying the structure of society and understanding issues better. ( i don't like steph, i'm sorry otl so this isn't great. )

Cassandra Cain - Martial Arts & Linguistics. - her background is already deeply rooted in martial arts, so a major focusing on that area would make sense and be a breeze for her. her communication barriers are what would lead her to want to learn to read, speak and write on an effective level.

+ going the same route as dick, i feel like she'd major somewhere in dance and performing. it would be something expressive.

Damian Wayne - International Relations & Strategics. - damian would be very interested in global affairs and strategic combat. his upbringing would aid in his international relations, while other studies would align with his intellect and training. ( let's not pass up the fact he would have a minor relation to animals, medicine or plants. )

+ fine arts ( still with a double major or minor with something involving animals or plants. ) but, damian does have talent with art and i think he would enjoy the silence and time to delve into that outlet.

Duke Thomas - Electrical Engineering & Urban Studies. - duke's abilities would make it easy to work with concepts of engineering. his focus on protecting and improving, during daylight, aligns well with urban studies.

+ environmental science and, hear me out, music theory. i think duke deserves the ability to explore his creative side, as well.

[the-perfect-wagnerite-again]

Millenials make especially bad parents because they have no faith in themselves as authority figures. They believe that authority can only be valid when it's constantly and routinely reified through the apparatus of consent - the concept of "innate authority" is deemed heretical and backwards. Parenthood forces this innate authority onto them, because the very nature of the relationship between parent and child precedes politics or social convention: there is no deeper, more primordial, innate form of authority. This produces a panic in the millenial who cannot see themselves as having "unearned" authority, but simultaneously cannot be rid of it. Parenthood then becomes an exercise in proving oneself worthy of their parental station, an exercise of self-validation for the sake of the millenial's "mental health" over and above the child's.

This internal panic is exacerbated by the millenial's chronological snobbery, the assumption that they are superior to their ancestors by virtue of their modernity. They have all the answers now, with the advent of sociology and child psychology and modern medicine and counseling and social organization. All those generations who came before (their own parents especially) were likely all child abusers, how could they not be without all this science and child psychology research to tell them how to be good parents? The millenial will do better than all of them.

They are simultaneously the parents with the most answers and the fewest solutions, the most self-righteous certitude in their moral superiority and the least self-confidence in their authority. The resulting dysfunction is hardly surprising to witness.