#bc while its true people can grow out of their old faiths

[effervescent-emmett]

have,,,,, have you read the books babe?

Dress as if today is the day you’ll be turned into a vampire. Cut your hair, get that piercing, sit for that five hour tattoo session, because you’ll be the same forever.

[cartoonemotion]

i was a bit confused by other people’s confusion as to why chuck started acting a lot more humbled and, honestly, a bit more soft spoken and nice after his face-turn, and this post poses basically all the things i was thinking about the reasons as to why, BUT ! am i still going to make a sprawling post talking abt how i think its all these reasons kind of interlocking ? Absolutely I Am

anyhoo. as i saw some point out again in the tag chuck is a kind of "might makes right" kind of guy-- but it's not just the strength that makes chuck so fervently loyal to him, it's his (percieved) guts and determination to take what he wants and needs, and we kind of see chuck trying to emulate that quality. he tries literally everything he can think of to get the great leader to come down and do his cool great leader stuff; getting literally severed in half and captured overall doesn't stop him, he goes above and beyond any generic grunt alien by not only getting the leader down here, but by destroying the morale of the hero ! (that line he says that everyone thinks theyre the hero in their own story is interesting, though. might return to that separately some day)

that being said, i think also it's interesting that when the great leader turned out to be a coward, chuck still tried to cling (somewhat literally !) to his faith in the great leader and his sort of place in his grunt alien status. i think it's when the great leader kicks him off of the platform and leaves him for what one might assume to be dead is when chuck really starts having everything sink in for him; bc the other thing chuck really seems to like/want is validation, from those he looks up to specifically. he thinks the great leader will reward him, yes, but it seems like even more than physical reward, he wants praise. he wants his great leader to see him as special, and maybe for the others of his ilk to idealize him similarly to the way he idolizes their leader-- i think it’s fair to assume chuck and his peers werent afforded much in the way of individuality.. i cant provide screencaps bc netflix hates me, but in the scene where his leader shows up, he goes from “it’s me, chuck” to “er-- well, i’m the one who called you...” when the ol’ GL gives him something of a withering look for providing a name... and he specifically says “i don’t wanna be stuck chuck anymore” to him before his leader kicks him off and leaves him for dead ! the text... * chef’s kiss * Delicious

so, seeing as chuck kind of polarizes-- the GL and his army are all abandoning cowards, while The Kid (who saved him, that’s likely still fresh in his mind too) turned out to be more true to the idealizes chuck was prizing in his leader this whole time. i think his next logical leap is to try to think, well, where does kid exactly get his bravery and determination from ? we as the audience get to figure that there’s a couple of different contributors to this, but with the time that chuck’s spent with kid, he knows kid adheres very strongly to the idea of your classic comic book superhero (even if the kid’s understanding of what makes a hero is also a bit misinformed, but, if youre reading this youve already seen the show, you know how kid grows. thats a different post). and we know hes also been reading quite a few comics, so he knows what their idea of a hero (and a heroic subordinate) are: brave, confident, charismatic, magnanimous... in a word, nice !

also, chuck brings up that speaking english without his little doohickey is painful for him.. whether he meant physically painful or in more of a sense of his pride, both seem equally likely to me, but ! the point still stands ! it’s hard to do the kind of long, pithy comebacks and verbal take-downs hes been trading with people if speaking hurts him. and while he did say the pain was one he would endure for the sake of the kid, at the end of the day, saying the nice thing is 9 out of 10 times a whole lot shorter than the mean thing

with these last 2 points though, i think chuck-- while actually committed to being reformed and a good guy now !-- has a lot to learn about what’s actually the spirit of good-guy-ness vs the form. he still has little hints i feel like (his little cry of “you disrespect Kid Cosmic !!!!” felt very reminiscent of the way he talked about his old leader i feel like, and when he, oh yeah, SHOT A TRUCK. WITH A REAL GUN. LOVE THAT THEY LET YOU GET AWAY WITH THAT ONE, CRAIG AND CO) that shows a lot of his “niceness” now is emulation vs actual true understanding of how to be nice. i’d hope we’ll see him learn the actual difference and better ways to grow and be a good person onscreen, but also since s2 will take place 6 months after the final confrontation of s1, it might not happen..

maybe we’ll get allusions to it though ! in either case i would love to see chuck having to learn to actually mind his manners around people who aren’t the kid, or really the other Local Heroes.. i feel like papa g and rosa would both be great for him to have those interactions/lessons (papa g has that vibe and was actually one of the first to be willing to take a chance on chuck, and rosa is 4. you met a 4 year old ? Yeah) regardless ! chuck :]

[maccreadysimp]

breaking down this anti-ian article bc it bothers me ( from the child of a bipolar mother and a male teen with same sex attraction ) while also providing valid reasons ian sucks ( from someone who likes ian )

ive had this drafted for a while so i dont think i cover anything from season 11

tw for i^cest and r^pe

he was with a married man

in this point it points out that he was with kash and he continued his relationship with kash even after linda put cameras in the store

“Ian didn't seem to care about how wrong his affair with Kash was or how much it could hurt Kash's wife Linda, whom he saw at the store regularly. “

that is a quote from that part.

ian gallagher was fifteen in season one, kash was an older man who bought him gifts and payed attention to ian ,, that was not on ian , none of that was ian fault because he was a child

ian wasnt open with lip

“ Ian didn't tell Lip about his preferences and forced Lip to figure it out on his own. Lip was instantly accepting of his brother's truth and even offered to help him figure out any confusion he might be harboring, so it's really strange that Ian wasn't just upfront with his closest confidant from the start.”

no , lip wasnt forced to figure it out on his own and he also wasn’t instantly accepting.

in this point it mentions that ‘they’re extremely close ( bestfriends and brothers ) so its strange ian didnt tell him’

like point 1 , ian is a fifteen year old boy, growing up on the southside , and thoughout the show it has mentioned multiple times that the southside isnt that accepting

back to lip -- lip wasnt accepting, sure he was fine but ‘helping your younger brother figure it out’ by having a (female) classmate give him a blowjob isnt helping

he secretly dated his best friends brother

“Most friends have an unspoken rule about not dating each other's siblings, but Ian broke this rule by secretly entering into a relationship with Mandy's closeted brother Mickey.”

the only thing i have to say about this is , he was still with kash and mickey was a boy in his age group who was gay , growing up in the southside ian probably thought he was the token gay so of course hes going to chase after mickey

he stood by as kash attacked mickey

“Ian didn't do anything to stop Kash from shooting his new lover, and didn't even tell the police about his boss' over-the-top display of jealous action so proper justice could be served.”

okay. because two men he had fallen for had gotten into a fight, there was a gun involved and he panicked, in the end after mickey got shot he went to him

now to address the quote, he didnt say anything to the police because he probably knew that that would bring shame onto kash and his family, along with mickey and his family who are very homophobic

oh yeah and it was like 2011 and cops suck and THEY LIVE ON THE SOUTHSIDE

he and lip tried framing terry milkovich

oh the homophobic and racist dad of his boyfriend and bestfriend who tried to kill him and r*ped his daughter ?

yeah , shit man , that was real bad they shouldn’t have done that /s

he dated jimmy-steves married father

“Ian didn't bother telling Jimmy the truth about his father and didn't end his relationship with Lloyd upon finding out that he had a secret wife and family, either.”

at this point ian is probably sixteen but that doesnt matter bc i wont even address that

he met him at a club and then used his relationship with ned to make mickey jealous which was one of the reasons he kept seeing him, he didnt tell jimmy-steve about the relationship or his father bc he shouldnt find out from him he should find out from his father , again like kash, ned was an older man who payed attention to ian and ned later did develop feelings feelings for ian

he stole lips identity to enlist in the army

he enlisted because he didnt know what to do with himself, its implied/stated that the army timeline was the start of his bipolar

“While impersonating Lip, Ian had tried to steal a helicopter and then proceeded to go AWOL.”

this is because of the bipolar he suffers from, it is referenced later in the series after he gets back and hes manic

ian refused to accept being bipolar

of course he didnt accept it, it is made very clear that his family thinks lowly of monica so of course if hes the lucky duck to get what his siblings demonize her for, of course he’ll not want to be it

“He refused to take medications that could alter his personality or mood.”

okay. this is why im making this whole post, this goes along with part 15 ( or so idk ) ,,

my mother , my dear mother, who is bipolar and doesnt take her meds because they are mood altering , my mom doesnt take med because she told me once that they make her feel like shit, she told me that a little after i was born she started taking them but realized she felt nothing, she felt nothing for my dad or for i ( making her numb )

she told me anti deppresents dont help either because when shes on them and manic it pushes her past productive and into angry

my dad told me that when my mom was on bi polar medication she would seem angry most of the time

he wasnt faitful to mickey

“Ian's bipolar disorder made him very reckless and impulsive and led him to be unfaithful.”

lets break that down.

ians. bipolar. disorder.

this plot point i actually didnt like, mainly bc ian never addresses it so ill give the article a point. but then i take away 2 because they have more of a problem with his bipolar messing with him rather than the fact he never apologized and they never worked it out

ian stole yevgeny

before i start quoting i should mention because his boyfriend, who has supported and helped him is suddenly telling him he needs help, he was helping raise yev so he’ll see yev as his own

“Ian failed to recognize just how crazy he was acting...”

cuting you off right there , he was in a bipolar state, he wasnt ‘crazy’ and isnt ‘crazy’

he cant even keep count of his number of partners

just slutshaming i see

he helped throw frank off a bridge

“His relationship with Frank was understandably never the same after that, as Frank struggled to get over this act of betrayal and cruelty.”

‘was never the same after that’ frank never liked ian, ian was probably his least favorite and that point is very apparent

also , it wasnt just ian , his siblings and his boyfriend caleb

he left a healthy relationship to be with mickey

he fell in love with mickey at 15 , mickey was a comfort and always someone to fall back on, when mickey was taken away and no longer in the picture his heart still obviously was with mickey and when mickey came back he didnt know what to do

he told mickey he had a boyfriend but because mickey has been such a constant in his life he finally has back of course he couldnt resist

he liked trevor, i could tell he did but trevor wasnt the one he watched get r^ped by a russian prostitute, he wasnt the one ian was secretly dating bc it would be a death wish other wise, he wasnt the one there when ian was manic or depressive ( at the start )

he tried blackmailing an old client for money

“Instead of raising the money in an honest manner, Ian chose to visit an old client from his time working at the Fairy Tail and blackmail him into funding the shelter.”

because he felt indebted to trevor and wanted to make it up to him, it would have taken longer to do it in ‘an honest manner’ when his sister would have gotten it instead, he knew how much gay youths like he once was needed a safe place

“He grew up wanting to be nothing like his father, but this whole money-making scheme was straight out of the Frank playbook”

because thats all he knows, he grew up with that ‘playbook’ so of course hes going to take a page out of it, he is nothing like frank , franks money making schemes are selfish and for his own greed while ian wanted the money to help build a safe space for lgbt youth

he let fame inflate his ego

of course he did, hes a southside kid who was destined to fail

also it is very apparent that during the gay jesus era he went off his medication which didnt help

“Before long, he just completely forgot about his ex and focused solely on being a deity”

as much as yes, he did let it mess with his head, he was trying to still help lgbt youth and was going against anti gay churchs , in the end it didnt work out for him because he was off his meds and went over board

he stopped taking his meds

see previous point and ‘ian refused to accept being bipolar’

he actually wanted to stay in prison

because he was doing good in there

ian was helping others and was spreading awareness about lgbt with in the prison , and as him and jail scenes go , we can see people were listening to him and he was trying to make it safe sane and consensual

he let down his army of followers

“Ian admitted that most of his actions were completely irrational and the mere results of his bipolar disorder.”

he didnt want to, we can see this, because he knew he would let down everyone, his family were the only ones to ever ground him and they knew it would be the best option for his own mental health

during the gallavich wedding we can see that a lot of his supporters still have his back because they must know how hard it was for him to put all of that success on something he can’t control

he constantly wasted his potential

this is actually the only point in this article i actually agree with , so only 1/20 i agree with

his relationship with mickey wasn’t actually great

“Mickey spent the first several years of their relationship denying his feelings for Ian.”

he was raised by a homophobic and racist father who he knew would react the way he did when terry had caught the two that one day

“Even after he finally embraced his true self, Ian's bipolar disorder kept them from becoming truly happy together.”

yes but mickey was there for him the entire time and helped him through it, he told him he loved him which was really big for him and did his best to care for him

“They couldn't seem to remain faithful to each other for more than a few weeks.”

back to the point about ians bipolar but for mickey he wanted monogamy , now that scene in s11 may say otherwise but it is very clear that he wants a monogamous relationship with ian and ian ( after getting help ) wants one too, and in the later seasons they are monogamous

“When Mickey asked Ian to run away to Mexico with him, Ian refused.”

he wanted to, it’s obvious, but ian has his family and didnt want to abandon them again, i think part of him knew he would see mickey again because they always find eachother, he gave mickey all of his money and wanted mickey to have a good life

“Their relationship was simply never healthy.”

no it wasnt, but thats why the ship is great in its own way, the gay closet kid raised by a homophobic man is obviously going to have a lot of baggage , and ian who is bipolar and struggling with himself will also have a lot of baggage , but in the end they love eachother and that really shows in season five and season seven specifically

that is all lol ,,, this is long sorry

now, i am not a ian apologist , i love ian but hes a dumbass sometimes

actual valid reasons ian sucks

genuinely believes frank is worse than terry

yes frank was definitely abusive but terry is definitely worse ,,

mentally/physically/sexually abusive , the whole nine yards

terry hired a prostitute to r^pe his son , threatened to kill him and ian on multiple occasions , r^ped his daughter who ended up pregnant and is actively racist

frank on the other hand will make gay jokes but in the end doesnt give enough of a shit , he has attacked his children on multiple occasions but not to the brutality that terry has ( this isnt me excusing it )

sorry ian , terry is worse

never apologized

he never apologized for all the shit he put mickey and his family through, never apologized to mickey for cheating on him , never apologized for all the manic and depressive episodes mickey endured with him

never apologized for walking away when he couldn’t handle it, in hall of shame mickey actually acknowledges this saying ‘its youre whole MO’

debbies sexuality

he has constantly made statements saying debbie isnt gay and that bothers me because , why does it care ? as a gay man and as a gay man who soent time with a lot of lgbt youth wouldnt he support his sister even if shes just ‘experimenting’?

in the recent season he doesnt seem to care and doesn’t say anything but it still bothers me

mickey only getting like 80% of his heart

okay look , i get what ian means when he says this , everyones hes been with has made him who he is but fucking hell dude ,, shut up , thats your husband , thats the love of your life you shouldnt be saying shit like that , especially to him

and then this man had the audacity to say mickey probably feels the same about past flings when he knows that ian is the only one hes probably ever been with/serious about

obviously there is probably more but those are the main ones that come to mind

—

before anyone brings up the trans or bi thing im going to explain my thought process for him

like ive probably mentioned multiple times he grew up southside and obviously only ever grew up with lgb and not t ,, trevor did inform him a lot and ian became supre accepting of everyone,, sexual preference isnt transphobic but i do think he approached the matter badly

now the bi thing , legit all i think is that he doesnt hate bisexual people its just that the man he really liked slept with a woman and never expressed any heterosexual attraction so it probably just suprised him and pissed him off because caleb did cheat on ian

—

if you read this far HOLY SHIT THANKS LOL ,, im not adding things that i think are pro about ian this was just me breaking down that article and giving my two cents :)

feel free to message me and talk to me or send me articles like this about any other character/relationship and i will totally break that one down too lol

thanks for letting me rant

[alethiometry]

Edward Kenway for character asks!

ooooooo okay i should open this with a disclaimer: i have not finished black flag yet (about 2/3 of the way through i think? i need to level up my ship so i can beat the next story mission lol) so everything i'm saying here is based on the game up to thatch's death, and everything we know about edward in ac 3: forsaken and the comics that came out a couple years ago.

First impression

oh boy... to be honest, one of the reasons it took me such a long time to get around to playing black flag (it was one of the first ps4 games i bought when i got my console in 2016, and i didn't start until about a month ago) was because i didn't really feel particularly strongly about edward's character design. i was vaguely interested in That One Pirate Assassin Game after having watched (and loved) black sails, but was afraid i would be let down; to me edward just looked like Some Dude, and i was still hung up on the black sails gang. to me, black sails and its characters were so genre/time period-defining that any other piece of pirate media just seemed lackluster in comparison.

i'd also heard a lot of praise for edward and for ac4 in general so i was aware that it was a very popular and well-received game. but since i mostly heard that from reddit (didn't join tumblr ac fandom until odyssey in 2018) i kind of discounted it, bc gamer reddit tastes are... questionable at best.

Impression now

I LOVE HIM!!! i always think i want stories about virtuous characters who believe in goodness and kindness and aren't motivated by gold or glory but aren't afraid to do what needs to be done to help others who can't help themselves. and sometimes that's true (coughratonhnhake:toncough). other times i end up clowning on myself because i realize that it's so much fun when said good/kind character has a rough and rugged exterior, and is motivated by personal gain (i think edward and kassandra are kinda kindred spirits across time and space in that regard, but maybe that's another rant for another time). sometimes you just want someone to be a little bit of an opportunistic bastard, and boy does edward fit that to a T. he's an incredibly complex man, and i think what really got me was that even as he was impersonating assassins and then templars and then assassins again, all for personal gain (pickpocketing the templars in havana while he gains their trust and agrees to do their dirty work lmfao my beloved <3), his primary motivation for doing so was to prove to caroline and her family that he is someone worth a damn, that he is capable of great things and that he is worthy of their love and acceptance. and i know from ac forsaken that the marriage with caroline doesn't last (though i haven't played ac4 far enough to see if that happens on screen, or if it occurs between the game and the novel) which makes his backstory in the game all the more heartbreaking. but his optimism and perseverance and determination to prove himself are all what make me love him.

so that's edward the romantic. now let's talk about the way edward is with adewale, his crew, and his friends. and let's also put the rest of this behind a readmore bc girl i am RANTINGGGGGG

he has several lines that he says to adewale that make me physically cringe (namely: "many of [these men] wouldn't accept you as captain" or "what was it like being enslaved?" like i get that someone like edward would be asking that question in good faith and genuine curiosity but also JESUS CHRIST UBISOFT). but on the flip side - cringey as those questions are, he also takes the time to actually listen and learn, and i think he genuinely values the perspective that he gets from adewale allowing him to open these lines of trust and communication. there's a patience and mutual respect there that i adore.

i also love how much edward loves his crew and his other pirate friends. those scenes of him + kidd + thatch + adewale + hornigold (lol) drinking on the beach and having a grand old time and talking about establishing - to borrow one of my favorite chills-down-my-spine phrases from black sails - a nation of thieves, for people like them to live and prosper, free from the chokehold of civilization. and i know he's not as outwardly invested in counterculture/independence/anticolonialism as thatch and vane and kidd are, but the fact that he so wholeheartedly supports his friends' goals, lofty and impossible as they are, speaks volumes about his love for his friends.

Favorite moment

every scene he has with kidd when kidd casually and softly reminds him that they see that he is a good person beneath his opportunistic and rambunctious exterior. i especially love when they discover julien du casse's mansion containing orders for templars to go out and hunt down assassins: the way kidd immediately knows that edward wants to help the assassins as a way to make up for the damage he did while masquerading as a templar, even if he hasn't voiced it aloud himself. the way that they don't force edward to admit anything about himself before he is ready, but still constantly remind him that he has a good heart. they give him space to come to terms with his compassionate side in a world/environment that more often than sees compassion as something to be stamped out or cast aside. i don’t love when characters are forced to be the Moral Compass for a main dude character, but i think it works for edward and kidd.

Idea for a story

not an edward story per se, but there are 2 povs into edward's life that i would cut off (someone else's) limbs for:

jenny's pov growing up in the kenway household. from haytham's pov it seems that she knows way more about his past than haytham ever did (it was hinted at that there are rumors about edward’s past as haytham was growing up that he wasn’t privy to, but i don’t think at any point in the novel does haytham ever find out definitively that his father was a pirate) and i want to know how she knew so much, and more into what her life was like - through her eyes rather than haytham, who is like 10 years younger and by his own admission barely understands her and barely has a functional relationship with her. i'll expand further on edward and jenny in the next question/prompt/bullet point, actually, bc i have a LOT more to say.

connor's pov learning about his grandfather from... idk? who's around to tell him? what's so goddamn sad is that by the time connor rebuilds the colonial brotherhood he's kinda the only one left. sure there's aveline down in louisiana, but as far as we know everyone who was around in edward's generation is dead now, and i'm not sure how much of the kenway saga is preserved for connor to discover, or if all this information about their family line was discovered in the modern-day, by your abstergo employee character, and later by osto berg in the comics. which is why i so badly want a revelations-style game where connor traces his assassin heritage back to the caribbean, relives some of edward's memories, and then makes the trip to london to see his aunt jenny. it would have been such a cool way to round out the kenway saga.

Unpopular opinion

idk how popular or unpopular this is bc i rarely see other in-depth posts about it on my dash, but edward was a terrible father to jenny. he was every bit the wonderful and loving father to haytham for the 10 years that haytham had a father, but i wish we'd seen more of jenny's perspective than just a few lines of dialogue in haytham's diary: i hate the way edward sidelined her and raised her in the same manner that any other wealthy person of the time would have raised their daughter - that is, for the sole purpose of sitting pretty and marrying her off in an arrangement that would benefit the family. it's especially hard to reconcile because in ac4 there are female assassins in the americas, and there are female pirates in the caribbean, so it's not like edward isn't aware that women have as much right as any man to live life on their own terms. it just seems like by the time he returns to england and settles down with his family, he's reverted back to the societal norms and gender roles that the pirates fought (and lost) against, and it's hard not to be deeply disappointed by that.

to be clear, i don't begrudge edward settling down and becoming a Rich Society Man. dude deserves to live comfortably with his loving family. he has every right to dote on his wife and children, and leave behind the hardships of being a pirate. but i think "fightning against deeply-ingrained cultural norms/expectations is a long and bloody struggle, and after losing so many people he cared so deeply about, i think it's understandable that edward wouldn't want to continue that fight alone (and also adewale is still fighting the good fight) (do NOT @ me about ac rogue I Pretend I Do Not See It)" and "i don't love the way edward sidelined his daughter into societally-expected gender roles she did not want; it makes me think that he did not continue drinking his Respect Women Juice as much as i thought he did/wanted him to" are two opinions that can coexist.

Favorite relationship

i don't know that i ship edward romantically with anyone, actually. i thought he and caroline were cute in the beginning, but it's hard to want to ship them knowing that she leaves him eventually. and ofc there'd edward/tessa in ac forsaken, and we know they were very happy together and that he loved her so so much. but we don't see that relationship except through haytham's eyes.

as for non-romantic relationships, i already talked at length above about his relationships with adewale and the other pirates and kidd, and i'll just leave it at that. i'm also vaguely aware that edward's got some upcoming scenes with anne bonny, but i'm not at that point in the game yet so i don't have much to say about the two of them. so far i've only seen them say a few lines to each other at the nassau tavern.

Favorite headcanon

kassandra absolutely rubbed shoulders with edward at some point during his time in the caribbean; i like to think that she needed to lie low for some reason (maybe she was with the assassins idk) and joined his crew. i just need my best stabby gal and my second-favorite stabby dude to be pals!

finally, this isn't a headcanon per se but it is obligatory that any time i talk about kenways i yell for a bit about the fact that EDWARD WOULD HAVE LOVED CONNOR SO SO SO MUCH AND I'M FOREVER DEVASTATED THAT HE NEVER GOT TO MEET HIM. at the same time, if edward hadn't been murdered and haytham not been indoctrinated into the templars the way he had, i'm not sure connor would even have existed. and in a way i'm glad that edward wasn't around to see how broken and cynical and depressed haytham became, because i think that would have absolutely broken his heart.

send me a character!

[howwelldoyouknowyourmoon]

Doubting the Story of Exodus

By Teresa Watanabe Los Angeles Times religion writer    April 13, 2001

It’s one of the greatest stories ever told: A baby is found in a basket adrift in the Egyptian Nile and is adopted into the pharaoh’s household. He grows up as Moses, rediscovers his roots and leads his enslaved Israelite brethren to freedom after God sends down 10 plagues against Egypt and parts the Red Sea to allow them to escape. They wander for 40 years in the wilderness and, under the leadership of Joshua, conquer the land of Canaan to enter their promised land. For centuries, the biblical account of the Exodus has been revered as the founding story of the Jewish people, sacred scripture for three world religions and a universal symbol of freedom that has inspired liberation movements around the globe. But did the Exodus ever actually occur? On Passover last Sunday, Rabbi David Wolpe raised that provocative question before 2,200 faithful at Sinai Temple in Westwood. He minced no words. “The truth is that virtually every modern archeologist who has investigated the story of the Exodus, with very few exceptions, agrees that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all,” Wolpe told his congregants. Wolpe’s startling sermon may have seemed blasphemy to some. In fact, however, the rabbi was merely telling his flock what scholars have known for more than a decade. Slowly and often outside wide public purview, archeologists are radically reshaping modern understanding of the Bible. It was time for his people to know about it, Wolpe decided. After a century of excavations trying to prove the ancient accounts true, archeologists say there is no conclusive evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt, were ever enslaved, ever wandered in the Sinai wilderness for 40 years or ever conquered the land of Canaan under Joshua’s leadership. To the contrary, the prevailing view is that most of Joshua’s fabled military campaigns never occurred—archeologists have uncovered ash layers and other signs of destruction at the relevant time at only one of the many battlegrounds mentioned in the Bible. Today, the prevailing theory is that Israel probably emerged peacefully out of Canaan—modern-day Lebanon, southern Syria, Jordan and the West Bank of Israel—whose people are portrayed in the Bible as wicked idolators. Under this theory, the Canaanites who took on a new identity as Israelites were perhaps joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt—explaining a possible source of the Exodus story, scholars say. As they expanded their settlement, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps providing the historical nuggets for the conflicts recorded in Joshua and Judges. “Scholars have known these things for a long time, but we’ve broken the news very gently,” said William Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona and one of America’s preeminent archeologists.

Dever’s view is emblematic of a fundamental shift in archeology. Three decades ago as a Christian seminary student, he wrote a paper defending the Exodus and got an A, but “no one would do that today,” he says. The old emphasis on trying to prove the Bible—often in excavations by amateur archeologists funded by religious groups—has given way to more objective professionals aiming to piece together the reality of ancient lifestyles. But the modern archeological consensus over the Exodus is just beginning to reach the public. In 1999, an Israeli archeologist, Ze’ev Herzog of Tel Aviv University, set off a furor in Israel by writing in a popular magazine that stories of the patriarchs were myths and that neither the Exodus nor Joshua’s conquests ever occurred. In the hottest controversy today, Herzog also argued that the united monarchy of David and Solomon, described as grand and glorious in the Bible, was at best a small tribal kingdom. In a new book this year, “The Bible Unearthed,” Israeli archeologist Israel Finklestein of Tel Aviv University and archeological journalist Neil Asher Silberman raised similar doubts and offered a new theory about the roots of the Exodus story. The authors argue that the story was written during the time of King Josia of Judah in the 7th century BC—600 years after the Exodus supposedly occurred in 1250 BC—as a political manifesto to unite Israelites against the rival Egyptian empire as both states sought to expand their territory. Dever argued that the Exodus story was produced for theological reasons: to give an origin and history to a people and distinguish them from others by claiming a divine destiny. Some scholars, of course, still maintain that the Exodus story is basically factual. Bryant Wood, director of the Associates for Biblical Research in Maryland, argued that the evidence falls into place if the story is dated back to 1450 BC. He said that indications of destruction around that time at Hazor, Jericho and a site he is excavating that he believes is the biblical city of Ai support accounts of Joshua’s conquests. He also cited the documented presence of “Asiatic” slaves in Egypt who could have been Israelites, and said they would not have left evidence of their wanderings because they were nomads with no material culture. But Wood said he can’t get his research published in serious archeological journals. “There’s a definite anti-Bible bias,” Wood said. The revisionist view, however, is not necessarily publicly popular. Herzog, Finklestein and others have been attacked for everything from faulty logic to pro-Palestinian political agendas that undermine Israel’s land claims. Dever, a former Protestant minister who converted to Judaism 12 years ago, says he gets “hissed and booed” when he speaks about the lack of evidence for the Exodus, and regularly receives letters and calls offering prayers or telling him he’s headed for hell.

At Sinai Temple, Sunday’s sermon—and a follow-up discussion at Monday’s service—provoked tremendous, and varied, response. Many praised Wolpe for his courage and vision. “It was the best sermon possible, because it is preparing the young generation to understand all the truth about religion,” said Eddia Mirharooni, a Beverly Hills fashion designer. A few said they were hurt—"I didn’t want to hear this,” one woman said—or even a bit angry. Others said the sermon did nothing to shake their faith that the Exodus story is true. “Science can always be proven wrong,” said Kalanit Benji, a UCLA undergraduate in psychobiology. Added Aman Massi, a 60-year-old Los Angeles businessman: “For sure it was true, 100%. If it were not true, how could we follow it for 3,300 years?” But most congregants, along with secular Jews and several rabbis interviewed, said that whether the Exodus is historically true or not is almost beside the point. The power of the sweeping epic lies in its profound and timeless message about freedom, they say. The story of liberation from bondage into a promised land has inspired the haunting spirituals of African American slaves, the emancipation and civil rights movements, Latin America’s liberation theology, peasant revolts in Germany, nationalist struggles in South Africa, the American Revolution, even Leninist politics, according to Michael Walzer in the book “Exodus and Revolution.” Many of Wolpe’s congregants said the story of the Exodus has been personally true for them even if the details are not factual: when they fled the Nazis during World War II, for instance, or, more recently, the Islamic revolution in Iran. Daniel Navid Rastein, an Encino medical professional, said he has always regarded the story as a metaphor for a greater truth: “We all have our own Egypts—we are prisoners of something, either alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, overeating. We have to use [the story] as a way to free ourselves from difficulty and make ourselves a better person.” Wolpe, Sinai Temple’s senior rabbi, said he decided to deliver the sermon to lead his congregation into a deeper understanding of their faith. On Sunday, he told his flock that questioning the Jewish people’s founding story could be justified for one reason alone: to honor the ancient rabbinical declaration that “You do not serve God if you do not seek truth.” “I think faith ought not rest on splitting seas,” Wolpe said in an interview. “For a Jew, it should rest on the wonder of God’s world, the marvel of the human soul and the miracle of this small people’s survival through the millennia.” Next year, the rabbi plans to teach a course on the Bible that he says will “pull no punches” in presenting the latest scholarship questioning the text’s historical basis. But he and others say that Judaism has also traditionally been more open to nonliteral interpretations of the text than, say, some conservative Christian traditions. “Among Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist Jews, there is a much greater willingness to see the Torah as an extended metaphor in which truth comes through story and law,” said Rabbi Bradley Shavit Artson, dean of the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies at the University of Judaism in Los Angeles. Among scholars, the case against the Exodus began crystallizing about 13 years ago. That’s when Finklestein, director of Tel Aviv University’s archeology institute, published the first English-language book detailing the results of intensive archeological surveys of what is believed to be the first Israelite settlements in the hilly regions of the West Bank. The surveys, conducted during the 1970s and 1980s while Israel possessed what are now Palestinian territories, documented a lack of evidence for Joshua’s conquests in the 13th century BC and the indistinguishable nature of pottery, architecture, literary conventions and other cultural details between the Canaanites and the new settlers. If there was no conquest, no evidence of a massive new settlement of an ethnically distinct people, scholars argue, then the case for a literal reading of Exodus all but collapses. The surveys’ final results were published three years ago. The settlement research marked the turning point in archeological consensus on the issue, Dever said. It added to previous research that showed that Egypt’s voluminous ancient records contained not one mention of Israelites in the country, although one 1210 BC inscription did mention them in Canaan. Kadesh Barnea in the east Sinai desert, where the Bible says the fleeing Israelites sojourned, was excavated twice in the 1950s and 1960s and produced no sign of settlement until three centuries after the Exodus was supposed to have occurred. The famous city of Jericho has been excavated several times and was found to have been abandoned during the 13th and 14th centuries BC. Moreover, specialists in the Hebrew Bible say that the Exodus story is riddled with internal contradictions stemming from the fact that it was spliced together from two or three texts written at different times. One passage in Exodus, for instance, says that the bodies of the pharaoh’s charioteers were found on the shore, while the next verse says they sank to the bottom of the sea. And some of the story’s features are mythic motifs found in other Near Eastern legends, said Ron Hendel, a professor of Hebrew Bible at UC Berkeley. Stories of babies found in baskets in the water by gods or royalty are common, he said, and half of the 10 plagues fall into a “formulaic genre of catastrophe” found in other Near Eastern texts. Carol Meyers, a professor specializing in biblical studies and archeology at Duke University, said the ancients never intended their texts to be read literally. “People who try to find scientific explanations for the splitting of the Red Sea are missing the boat in understanding how ancient literature often mixed mythic ideas with historical recollections,” she said. “That wasn’t considered lying or deceit; it was a way to get ideas across.” Virtually no scholar, for instance, accepts the biblical figure of 600,000 men fleeing Egypt, which would have meant there were a few million people, including women and children. The ancient desert at the time could not support so many nomads, scholars say, and the powerful Egyptian state kept tight security over the area, guarded by fortresses along the way. Even Orthodox Jewish scholar Lawrence Schiffman said “you’d have to be a bit crazy” to accept that figure. He believes that the account in Joshua of a swift military campaign is less accurate than the Judges account of a gradual takeover of Canaan. But Schiffman, chairman of Hebrew and Judaic studies at New York University, still maintains that a significant number of Israelite slaves fled Egypt for Canaan. “I’m not arguing that archeology proves the Exodus,” he said. “I’m arguing that archeology allows you, in ambiguity, to reach whatever conclusion you want to.” Wood argued that the 600,000 figure was mistranslated and the real number amounted to a more plausible 20,000. He also said the early Israelite settlements and their similarity to Canaanite culture could be explained as the result of pastoralists with no material culture moving into a settled farming life and absorbing their neighbors’ pottery styles and other cultural forms. The scholarly consensus seems to be that the story is a brilliant mix of myth, cultural memories and kernels of historical truth. Perhaps, muses Hendel, a small group of Semites who escaped from Egypt became the “intellectual vanguard of a new nation that called itself Israel,” stressing social justice and freedom. Whatever the facts of the story, those core values have endured and inspired the world for more than three millenniums—and that, many say, is the point. “What are the Egypts I need to free myself from? How does the story inspire me in some way to work for the freedom of all?” asked Rabbi Steven Carr Reuben of Kehillat Israel in Pacific Palisades. “These are the things that matter—not whether we built the pyramids.”

Teresa Watanabe Teresa Watanabe covers education for the Los Angeles Times. Since joining the Times in 1989, she has covered immigration, ethnic communities, religion, Pacific Rim business and served as Tokyo correspondent and bureau chief. She also covered Asia, national affairs and state government for the San Jose Mercury News and wrote editorials for the Los Angeles Herald Examiner. A Seattle native, she graduated from USC in journalism and in East Asian languages and culture.

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-apr-13-mn-50481-story.html

_____________________________

Adam, Eve, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses and Joshua – there is no evidence any of them ever lived

The Divine Principle: Questions to consider about Old Testament figures

Unearthing the True Origins of the Bible 

– interview with Dr. Andrew Henry

[sometimesrosy]

What things in 7x02 do you think were the most significant in terms of the direction the show is taking toward its end? And how do you think it may lead back to Bellarke, as well, since they’re the center of the story?

Hmm. I’m not totally sure because this is the beginning of the end, see, so I’m starting to collect details and information and references and symbolism... bread crumbs. Sometimes I’m still running on a FEELING of it being connected without being able to pin point how it is? So I’m going to have to put things together as I go.

But like, first of all, this episode was about Octavia and growth from “monster” to hero again. One of the things that was vital to her was that she learned to understand her brother and his relationship to her, and while it wasn’t as blatant, also clarke’s relationship with Madi. It was also an affirmation that she believes her family is Bellamy, Clarke and Madi... which was not really there in season 5 and 6. But if you’ll notice that after she came back from the anomaly, Clarke WAS suddenly her people again and she was NOT going to let anything happen to her. This is where she learned that. This is what led to her hearing Clarke was in trouble on that radio and then taking off to save her. ALSO what led to her faith in Clarke at the gate. And what led to her refusing to sacrifice the sancumites or the COG because she wanted to be better and do better, what led to Bellamy embracing her again as his sister.

And no matter WHAT you think of Octavia as a character, whether you think she’s irredeemable or god’s gift to “I love her and she’s never done anything wrong ever,” Octavia Blake is a SUPREMELY important character in this show.

If this story is an allegory about humanity’s self destruction and rebirth, then Octavia’s role in it is... humanity itself. Clarke is the Head, Bellamy is the Heart, and Octavia is the SOUL. Father, son, holy spirit is Octavia as the “son.” How Octavia suffers, falls, and is redeemed is how it goes with humanity. They are the trinity (in whatever myth you choose I think it fits) and Octavia is the child symbol in that trinity. So, what happens with Octavia finding redemption goes back to Bellarke as mother and father or head and heart.

ALSO we have a replay of Aurora, Octavia and Bellamy with Diyoza, Bellamy and Hope. And it’s quite possible that Bellamy can’t find true love with Clarke until he makes up with Octavia. AND Clarke and Bellamy have ALWAYS used Octavia as a bridge between them. Instead of talking about their feelings for each other they always talk about Octavia. If Octavia is separated or evil or antagonistic, their bridge to each other is gone. 

Another consideration is the set up of the backstory and narrative this season, which is WAY complicated with multiple planets, new technology, old influences and timey wimey stuff. SHOWING us how the time stuff is working with new mysteries, prisons, families, a kid growing up before our eyes who was actually conceived before the first praimfaya I think, minddrive readers so we could see Becca, a focus on Bellamy in a kind of mythology for Octavia, Diyoza, Hope, Echo etc, I mean, it’s not TECHNICALLY about Bellarke, but it’s setting up a story that will be getting there.

That’s the part I can’t know yet. I don’t know what is being laid out yet. Some people have mentioned the CB letters carved into the cave. I said it didn’t matter, but it might very well have been an easter egg. That won’t make sense until we know the whole story. We’ll get a bit more when we see how Clarke responds to this all. 

Oh also, Echo brought up the Together thing. That’s a bellarke phrase. And it’s being used for a part of their family that is NOT together. Because TOGETHER is important to the story. Bellarke are the SYMBOL of the togetherness that they need for all their people. Also the Trust Bellamy... “I trust you,” was a big thing for Clarke and Bellamy. There were a couple of other places where the Bellarke dialogue was repeated in this episode, and I don’t want to necessarily say that is ABOUT Bellarke, but I think we SHOULD be paying attention to Bellarke as the central relationship AND the metaphor IN the story for the unity and understanding and coming together that is needed for ALL the characters and humanity itself. 

So like these stories about the secondary characters are leading back to Bellarke because they are now telling the same stories Bellarke struggled with but for the other characters. Bellamy’s near raising of Octavia and Octavia near raises Hope. Echo’s isolation/solitary confinement for 5-6 years like Clarke’s isolation. And actually we’re getting in coming up to. Raven and Murphy having to make life or death decisions and keeping the communities from infighting. 

CRIMINY!

Octavia resented Bellamy for being parental. Now she’s parental. Echo took Clarke’s place on the ring while Clarke was isolated, now ECHO is isolates. Raven accused Clarke of deciding who lives and dies while forcing her to decide who lives or dies, now SHE’s causing people to die with her decisions. Murphy killed their own people and brought plague and blew a hole in their dropship and wanted to be the new king and NOW he’s in charge of keeping random peoples together and is playing GOD-King.

I mean. 

LOL.

If you only watch when Clarke and Bellamy and Bellarke (but no b/e) is there you will miss all that. You lose out on the comparisons. You won’t be able to see the similarities or links because you’ll be missing the data points.

You know that saying “once is chance, twice is a coincidence, three times a pattern?”

You’ll never get that pattern if you don’t watch the parts that you think are irrelevant. You’ll miss #3 and maybe #2. The details will continue to be irrelevant and you won’t get the reinforcing or breadcrumbs or narrative links that make the story deeper. All you’ll get is a love story with a lot of irrelevant nonsense around it that makes it frustrating for you. And then you’ll say that the story is too slow, or subplots are macguffins, or important episodes are filler, or it doesn’t make sense, or it’s bad writing, or a character is being minimized or vilified, or the writers didn’t give you enough information to understand so it’s their fault you were off in lala land with some other plot and endgame. (season 3 is a BIG example of this. Lxa was NEVER the hero. Bellamy was NEVER the villain. And Clarke was NEVER the love interest. That WIDESPREAD interpretation in both bc and cl fandoms was a misinterpretation because people didn’t follow the narrative and only watched what they liked. It’s backwards. L was villain/love interest. Bellamy was hero/love interest, and Clarke was hero/villain. HA!)

I mean you can continue to only watch for Bellarke, you might still get the love story you want, (better bet than s3 CLs since they shipped the non endgame pair,) but everything around it is treated as an obstacle or an offense, rather than part of the structure of a much better love story.

[notthatiwilleverwriteit]

thanks for ur as always deepful analyses and answers ! another ask for u : im soo afraid in the next chapter momo will be homophobic towards ht !! I mean except Zzx who seems at ease with his sexuality, the other boys all seem kind of homophobic. Jy called ht repulsive bc he called him pretty while he was a guy, Ht is very agressive in his advances (which i linked to toxic virility which entails homophobia) ; then both of them changed for the better bc of their feelings for another man. 1/?

Good evening, dear anon-san!

“thanks for ur as always deepful analyses and answers !”

I’m glad you’ve enjoyed them! Every time people send me questions it always makes me happy and to be honest, a bit taken aback because I’m just a little old me. But I’m glad my answers have had such a positive reception and given people food for thought. And it’s always a pleasant surprise when people feel like they can come to my ask box with their interpretations and strike up a conversation.

Homophobia is a very complex topic, and I wondered where I should start to unravel this ask. But soon I realized before I can even begin that I have to take a moment to sort out my own feelings. Whenever people say the boys in 19 Days are abusive or homophobic for whatever reason I tend to get ticked off. It’s a knee-jerk reaction, often sparked by my own bias, but something that can very easily cloud my answer and make it unfair for you. Exchanging interpretations and perspectives requires a level of objectivity and the ability to rise above your own bias. I can’t dismiss something just because it uncomfortably pokes my nerve. Instead, I should take a step back, try and see things from another point of view, and find some common ground.

I’m not saying I had to struggle to agree with you on anything but your ask certainly reminded me of how challenging yet rewarding it is to actually listen to an interpretation that differs from my own and try to objectively look at the story from that point of view. It hurts your brain at first but is surprisingly freeing in the end.

Because you addressed so many things in your ask, I will tie my answer together under the theme of homophobia and give it some structure that way. This will be my great 19 Days - homophobia edition. \(^v^)/

Sexual orientation and environment

Let’s start with the biggest context you brought up in your ask: social and cultural environment. I’m not familiar enough with Chinese culture to have anything definite to say about its attitude towards LGBT people. Of course, I’ve heard of the discrimination and even blatant hate by their government but I don’t have any idea about how ordinary, modern-day Chinese people view others with different sexual orientations. Not to mention, it’s always risky to take fictional works as an accurate representation of the milieu in which they’re set.

But I do think that 19 Days discusses homophobia in societies, though on a more general level. As Jian Yi has come to realize his feelings towards Zhan Zheng Xi, we’ve also gotten glimpses of his struggles. They’re surrounded by other kids in school, and from the very early chapters it’s been implied two guys being that close together or comfortable with that level of skinship turns people’s heads (ch. 53, 54, 55, and 57):

Of course, those panels also poke fun at the stereotype of girls being interested in cute guys being cute together. The girls stare, take pictures, and even smile knowingly. This bothered ZZX because it put him in awkward situations and created misunderstandings that would be embarrassing to correct. And the more he would try to deny and correct them, the more he would probably end up looking suspicious. But the bottom line is, he was increasingly conscious of the weird looks and attention JY’s antics were attracting and didn’t want people to get the wrong picture of his friendship with JY. All of that could give us some hints on how two boys being close might be viewed by their peers, but it should also be kept in mind that those kinds of “gay panic” moments are a big part of the humor you find in 19 Days.

Having a crush on someone of the same gender gets more serious tones after JY kissed ZZX (ch. 142)

The secret was finally out in the open. JY had carried his feelings in his heart for a long time. He had wanted to confess them so many times and often hidden them behind jokes and antics. Perhaps every time he had jumped to hug ZZX he had caught a whiff of his scent and enjoyed the feeling of him in his arms. But to take the definite last step of confessing and lifting that curtain had always terrified him. And who wouldn’t have been scared? Not only would you have to come out but also risk losing your childhood best friend. It could be JY had even thought of never telling ZZX about his feelings because it could go horribly wrong.

For a while, things are somewhat put on pause after the first reveal which I found very realistic. JY wasn’t flat-out rejected but ZZX most definitely needed a moment to sort out his own feelings. He pestered JY to be straight with him (pun not intended...) and made it clear it would be safe for JY to rely on him and free himself of the burden. Despite that JY was still very unsure if his confession won’t result in ZZX abandoning him because “gay” is abnormal and disgusting (ch. 164):

Even when JY finally confessed he was expecting to be rejected in disgust (ch. 209):

But he had sort of reached the point of just finally getting it all out even if ZZX wouldn’t return his feelings. Even if it meant they wouldn’t be friends anymore. At least he had said it. He had heartbreakingly little faith that their kind of relationship wouldn’t be completely doomed. Thank god he had fallen for someone like ZZX. I don’t think I’ve never been as grateful for a character like him before.

A tangible example of how Zhanyi and their environment collided was Xiao Hui’s character (ch. 158):

When she called JY a disgusting gay, it was the first time he was facing that kind of homophobia. Though her actions were frustrating, I think Xiao Hui’s character was a good addition to Zhanyi. At first, she lashed out both because she was hurt and publicly humiliated but also no doubt because she had internalized the idea that heterosexuality was the norm and anything else was abnormal and wrong. Later on, she had had time to lick her wounds and calm down (ch. 258):

She still has a crush on ZZX but even though she probably realizes she doesn’t have a chance she still wants a clear rejection from ZZX. It still hurts and stings but doesn’t upset her as much. It could even be she’s a little happy for them. I think Xiao Hui’s character is a good example that people are capable of changing and reflecting when they’re given a chance. And no one should be forever held accountable and punished for the mistakes they made and have since bettered themselves.

In a broader sense, I think Zhanyi also discusses what kind of future a same-sex couple could have in society (ch. 268):

That drawing on the wall is my favorite Zhanyi moment. As cute as ZZX drawing him and JY together was, it also carries some bittersweet undertones. The original drawing represents the norm: a boy and a girl in love but if there are no skirts involved, it’s a whole other story. To be open about their relationship would most probably never be an option for JY and ZZX. Something as simple as holding hands in public would take courage and threaten to complicate other aspects of their lives (school, work, family). They don’t have the same privilege as straight people to openly and safely share their feelings and have that universal experience.

Your ask was mainly about Mo Guan Shan and He Tian, but I wanted to take a moment to talk about their environment since you also referred to it. And the easiest way for that seemed to be to talk about the progress of Zhanyi. As you suggested, it does seem the society in which all of the characters live is very much heteronormative which puts pressure on the characters to fit in. And if they fail that, they will face homophobia and most probably feel the need to hide their true selves. Case in point, Zhanyi.

Boys being boys

As much as I know that phrase is deemed Problematic™ these days, I think it fits the dynamics of the boys of 19 Days. They mess with each other, and all of that is typical humor for the comic. Personally, I’ve never taken any of their teasing and good-natured bullying seriously because it’s how 15-year-old boys are around each other.

However, I just finished talking about the environment under which influences and discourses the boys have grown up. I don’t feel like I can ignore what I had just been saying and brush it off as “oh well, they’re just boys” if they’ve always been surrounded by certain attitudes. Does that mean the boys have also internalized those attitudes towards gay people despite having feelings for someone of the same sex? Does that make them a representation of toxic masculinity and internalized homophobia?

In all honesty, I’m struggling to answer those questions. On one hand, I do agree that society’s norms of what is masculine put a lot of pressure on boys when growing up. You have to act, talk, dress, and be in a certain way to be accepted, and it doesn’t take a lot for kids to internalize those ideas. And as you said, acting or looking gay (not to mention, actually being one) is probably the worst a young boy could be. Being gay is often linked to everything a proper man shouldn’t be: sissy, effeminate, sensitive, weak, submissive, on the bottom. The list goes on and on.

On the other hand, do I think you can see that in the four main boys of 19 Days? I suppose it’s possible if that’s the direction you want to take. If you look at anything through those lenses, you can probably find toxic masculinity everywhere. Do I think HT, MGS, JY and ZZX are homophobic because they possibly showcase traits of toxic masculinity? I guess. I don’t know. I see where that interpretation comes from, but some part of my brain never manages to make the full connection between those two. I’m constantly having a feeling that my way of thinking differs from your interpretation but I can’t properly validate or argue my opinions.

Perhaps taking a look at the examples you mentioned might help. You talked about JY being homophobic when this was his response to HT calling him good looking (ch. 108):

I can’t exactly deny that panel couldn’t be taken as toxic masculinity. I might even agree with you on that. I wouldn’t probably go as far as saying JY was being homophobic but it does seem like his masculinity was threatened or questioned in that situation. Interestingly, I’ve seen that phrase pop up a lot in yaoi/shounen-ai comics. Characters who are in a gay relationship don’t often feel comfortable with guys complimenting them - or even the guy they’re in love with. I’ve always wondered that. Does that mean there’s a level of self-denial in those characters or is it just a cultural thing? Does it embarrass them?

In general, I think all of that has to do with their age, and another good example of that would be ZZX and JY’s reaction to HT messing with MGS (ch. 289 and 298):

I’ve seen people calling those moments homophobic as well and can’t really agree with them. I would say those reactions have more to do with teenage boys being awkward and embarrassed. HT putting the moves on MGS in front of them is embarrassing and something they don’t wish to see. I mean, I wouldn’t want to see my friends constantly acting like that around me either. Seeing public displays of affection embarrasses me and makes me awkward as hell. (Though, I don’t know if that’s just a Finnish thing...)

In short, I see a lot of how the boys act around each other just natural to how teenage boys are. They mess with each other and standing up for yourself in that sense (for example, getting revenge, being physical, or returning the verbal teasing) is important and typical. That’s how I see JY’s words in the example you mentioned: he felt like HT was messing with him and shot back. All of that could, of course, be seen as internalized toxic masculinity, but I don’t think it’s quite as blatant as people sometimes make it out to be. I’ve always taken it as boys just being boys and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that.

What comes to HT being pushy and overbearing, I don’t see that being connected to toxic masculinity and making him homophobic because of that. It feels a bit of a stretch and shakey. Instead, I actually think HT is quite comfortable with both of his own feelings for MGS and the idea of same-sex relationships in general (ch. 187):

The little heart-to-hearts JY and HT occasionally have also show us that despite often making fun of each other, they can take it more seriously when needed. JY would have never asked about having feelings for another male if he couldn’t trust HT wouldn’t make fun of him.

The case of Mo Guan Shan

You talked a lot about MGS, so I thought I’d take a closer look at his character separately. You made some interesting points I’ve also been thinking about and was glad they popped up in your ask.

Since we’ve talked about toxic masculinity so far, let’s continue on that. You mentioned that MGS is prone to homophobia because he’s had to act tough. Upholding a certain kind of image is essential in gangs. Being weak and submissive - aka gay, as I talked about above - isn’t an option in that line of work.

I agree with you on all of that. Why MGS is so uncomfortable with HT being physical with him is at least partly because he can’t come across as someone who can be taken advantage of (ch. 250):

If he can be physically overpowered and made vulnerable, it means he can be submitted. In the masculine world, physical strength seems to be the final and ultimate law that settles all the disputes at the latest. And if you lose in that you’re on the bottom or at least lower on the hierarchy. Now, multiply that mentality by a lot to fit it in the world of teenage gangs and the borderline criminal underworld. So, yes, I would most definitely say MGS doesn’t want himself to be put in that situation. Much less anyone finding out about it.

Then again, the story has kind of revisited that idea when HT “joined” MGS’s gang and his underlings started seeing HT around more. And they seem somewhere between intimidated by HT and impressed their boss has managed to make someone like HT call him “brother”. That fits the same mentality of strength, but I can’t honestly see Buzzcut or other members of the gang giving MGS a hard time even if they found out about HT’s affections. Chances are, they would be even more impressed, bless them.

Overall, I think MGS lashing out (or being homophobic) is mostly due to him not trusting HT and HT slowly but surely wearing him out and making him see his own prejudice against people like HT. Yelling out insults has been the easiest way to fight HT’s affections, although it’s not proven very successful. It’s also important to remember MGS is fairly inexperienced when it comes to love and romantic affection (ch. 222):

He’s always been rejected and discriminated by his peers and over the years, he’s started to mirror that behavior and push people away. Having crushes (let alone having a girlfriend) has never really been a concern for him. And it’s not like he’s had time for something like romance anyway because working has taken so much of his time. In this regard, MGS isn’t that mature or experienced and tends to get uncomfortable and lash out very quickly.

I’ve already talked about the note and what kind of role I think it will have (if it will be addressed at all). And I’m not really worried about MGS saying something homophobic to HT. I think we’re way past of him being like “I don’t speak to a homo” at this point already. He’s been aware of HT’s affections for a good while by now and even tentatively warmed up to some of it (for example, the aquarium date and the studs). (Even though, I think it’s still too early to talk about MGS being in love with HT.)

MGS has come a long way, and I might even say he’s gained some sexuality-related maturity on the way. Slowly but surely, he’s become comfortable with having HT around, and if after all this development he would say something like that, it would be a pretty big step backward. Of course, that doesn’t mean he can’t throw insults and lash out but let’s not forget we’re talking about a purebred tsundere here. That’s always going to happen with him.

And while we’re keeping it real, it’s not like HT would pay any mind to those insults. After MGS asked for the studs, I think HT’s resolve has only strengthened.

I hope this answer makes some sense, to me it feels like a bit of a mess of this and that. A lof of “I can’t deny that but still...” You really threw some hard questions and challenged my thinking a lot. Thank you!

[theseerasures]

Frozen 2 Reactions, Pass #2

went to see the movie again yesterday, which helped solidify a few more thoughts percolating in the back of my head. i don’t think this one will be QUITE as long as the first, but everything’s going under a cut anyway because i’ve met me

tbh most of this is just me dunking on Elsa

one of the things that i think both helped AND hindered the movie is that they really did make an effort to make the sequel its own separate story from the original--hence the timeskip, the retcons, and so forth. on the positive end of things there’s obviously a much lower barrier of entry for the like...three people who never watched the first movie, and the characters get to feel more grown up while remaining (thanks no doubt to the writing team remaining much the same) consistent enough that the changes to their personalities still make sense. it never feels like it’s retreading old ground, and if fans want to connect the new ideas and themes to the older material (and i count myself among those, what with my first fic in almost four years being about exactly that), there are plenty of kernels with which to do so.

on the other hand: some of the new plot stuff really just DOESN’T work with what’s already been established. chief among those is the idea that ~~~the story of the enchanted forest with requisite creepy lullaby~~~ is a well remembered bedtime story for BOTH Anna and Elsa?? like what does this imply about their childhood? that their parents told them this same bedtime story over and over again, but separately in their own respective rooms? that Elsa got charming bedtime stories about magic-based conflict and war???

(”yeah papa!!! please tell me again about how magic can not only kill people but also SUNDER AN ENTIRE LAND FROM REALITY, that story’s my favorite!!! looking forward to some really spirited nightmares tonight!”)

or are we supposed to assume this is like. the thing bad Batman writers try to do where everything poignant that has ever happened to Bruce happened the night his parents were murdered? that Elsa and Anna remember the story only because it was the night of the Accident (tm)? because that’s...also stupid, i gotta say.

i love that Elsa’s verse in this song start with “the winds are restless” bc it’s exactly the way i imagine her starting conversations with her hapless subjects. “good morning, Your Majesty! how goes the kingdom?” “the winds are restless” “...” “...” “...yes. that was...something i noticed as well”

Local Sisters Make Every Time They See Each Other in Town a God Damn Event

ever since @professorspork pointed out how stupid the “and i promise you the flag of Arendelle will always fly” line is in Some Things Never Change i haven’t been able to stop laughing about it. it’s just such a BLATANT telegraph: “whooo!!! yes! Arendelle!!! we all love that place and want to save it, and you can tell because the song said so!”

the Friends shot of them all walking back to the castle and Anna has kicked her heels off is great though i love it

also love the multitude of shots where it’s Elsa and someone else and we get a peek at her silent reactions to whatever the other person is saying. not since Legolas have we been blessed with so many memeable dumb faces

“ah yes, Mama’s words! cuddle close, scootch in! you remember her saying that all the time right Elsa?? after all it’s not like you have any decade-long baggage about not being able to be near anyone, most especially family members, because you were deathly afraid that you’d instantly murder them”

more thoughts on why Into the Unknown stands out so vividly in my mind: the first movie’s songs by and large did a VERY good job of moving plot around while still exploring character emotion. Do You Want to Build a Snowman moves us through ten YEARS of story, while still leaving space for long, unsung moments where we just get to process what’s going on between the sisters as they grow up. For the First Time in Forever catches us up with the sisters, gets the gates open, and has Anna meet Hans at the end, a pivotal moment for both her and the plot. Love Is an Open Door has them get engaged and sets up the rest of the story. Let It Go is Elsa’s big character shift and sets up the goal for the other characters: the ice palace is where they all need to go to bring back summer. the FtFTiF reprise begins the endgame. the other songs are all more fluff pieces that JUST serve to introduce characters, which is why they’re...not as good, and most people don’t really care about them, but we can accept that they’re there because the strength of the other material.

with Frozen 2...Into the Unknown is pretty much the ONLY song that fits into the first category: Elsa works through her conflicted feelings about wanting to explore the unknown, AND wakes up the spirits (sidebar: her pure joy at using her powers to communicate with the spirits is SO GOOD, guys. it gets me every time). the other ones just kind of transporting their singers into the Emotional Expression Dimension for them to do their thing. sometimes the songs transport them to the next plot point while they’re singing, but nothing really happens DURING them. i can give Some Things Never Change a pass on this because it’s supposed to be about stasis (and because i’ve bitched about it enough on other fronts), but much as i love Lost in the Woods and Next Right Thing for their character exploration they’re really just music videos to get us to the next scene. Next Right Thing is particularly egregious about locking the plot in the boot--the ENTIRE sequence is just Anna climbing or slumping against random rocks until the song ends and she can actually move the story along. one could make an argument that Show Yourself does get stuff done, but it’s still mostly Elsa running around in a cave for three entire minutes before we get to that point

i don’t think Get This Right is perfect but it DOES pull off the multitasking well, and it would have not only resolved the torturously stretched engagement subplot early on but creates a nice thematic echo to Love Is an Open Door: she really knows Kristoff, she really loves him, and she proposes. it’s her choice.

Kristoff’s line about question of how/question of whether works great for highlighting his continued insecurities, but again: either we’re supposed to think he’s wrong and Anna has ALSO been thinking in terms of how and she’s just been too busy in sister-drama-land, and this whole plot should have been resolved early, or we’re supposed to think that Anna really ISN’T on the same page, in which case they...probably should have a serious conversation about where they see their relationship going and not just get engaged at the end because Elsa made a new dress

as soon as an HD version comes out i demand a gifset juxtaposing Anna slumped against a rock with Anna slumped against Elsa’s door at the end of Do You Want to Build a Snowman, because this whole sequence is where the distance between sequel and original really WORKED. Anna is singing about how alone she feels, how she’s never felt such darkness before, when we know that that’s...not true. she's felt pretty close before--not long ago that was her whole LIFE. it’s natural for her to feel this way, because being knocked off your happiness always hurts more than never having it in the first place, but we the audience get to have faith in her, because we remember. eventually she does too, and now she knows exactly how resilient she can be, exactly how strong she’s ALWAYS been.

the animated faces are SO GOOD. we see Anna flicker through seventeen feelings at once when Kristoff rescues her from the dam: delayed fear, relief, and--this is the crucial one for me--horror that she survived, because that means she’s going to have to live with the fact that Elsa didn’t.

Elsa riding into the sunset of her sapphic life is great obviously but every time i see it i worry that the movie is going to end with the same face smear effect as the Prisoner of Azkaban movie

[koalas-koalas-everywhere]

Regarding Vulcans and autism

Since why the hell not make it a series with recognizable titles that will make it easy to look up and create links for if I ever make enough of them for it to be worth it. Disclaimer: it might be hard to understand what I’m getting at without reading the other posts since this isn’t supposed to be, like, a comprehensive analysis on how one is like the other.

Thing is, as an Aspie woman, I can see perfectly well how Vulcans expressing nothing but neutrality gets twisted in reception and interpreted as smugness/disdain, and autism (or at least Asperger’s, I am sorta more knowledgeable about one than the other) does tend to include self-awareness issues that leads to feelings of superiority and/or inferiority, and with the most recognizably “autistic” (either explicitly or through coding) being the Sheldon Coopers and the BBC Sherlock types, the assumption that anyone like them in some ways will follow in others (heck, might be why pop culture has accepted Holmes as an asshole at all, since he wasn’t that bad in the stories but he WAS smart and eccentric and every once in a while disdaindful of the people whose jobs he did better than them) is not unexpected.

The problem’s not really there because I actually have faith that we could have talked about it and raised awareness of not only this case, but also made people question why seeing a smart(er), seemingly cold but all-around just neutral characters or races made everyone raise their hackles to such a degree, assume that they’re actually mostaken about their skills (literally have seen people go “but what if Vulcans only think they’re some of the best scientists around bc they’re supercilious assholes and it’s just not true”)and wrong about life in general. Don’t get me wrong, I do get the impulse ever since Star Trek (2009), but, well, that’s just the thing, that’s where the problem is. Because we could have talked about it in fandom and be friends about it, but now there are TWO official canon sources that depict the Vulcans as intolerant, xenophobic, racist, ableist hypocrites, and not only is it harder to argue with actual canon telling you that you were right about your worst assumptions, but now you’ve seen them be actually WORSE than you first thougt, and to your faves, and in such a way that none of their positive/redeeming qualities (say, being all of that stuff sorta kinda messes up the whole IDIC thing, but it wouldn’t be so bad if they weren’t doing it out out of malice, but out of ignorance and genuine misunderstanding, and if the only members who were shown to be sorta kinda decent weren’t at least partly from a different species (u.s., uh, I mean, us) and/or implied to have been influenced by a different culture) were shown. In fact, those good qualities, such as their pacifism, reverence for life, belief and respect for diversity, their curiosity and constant push for knowledge that probably wouldn’t let them just let a kid fall by the wayside becuase he was dyslexic (“there is no other wisdom, and no hope for us, but that we grow wise”), their deep attachment to their morality that’s even more important to them than to be liked by the other members of the Federation COUGH COUGH AUTISM MUCH COUGH COUGH were the first to be dropped in favour of what’s anathema to all of this, the last one in particular was turned on its head so it wasn’t that they used their logic to arrive to the most compassionate and fair choice, and it had to be logic since emotion would resist a sacrifice in a way logic won’t, making logic the compassionate choice (as they saw it, I don’t think it’s universally true, but also not universaly false), but that they were mich more willing to let people suffer and to look the other way and not be affected at all because, I don’t know, they mistook logic, which is a tool, with efficiency, which is a goal, I’d guess.

They lost the best things about them because freaking J J Abrams decided to make movies about a franchise he didn’t even like and then, even though all of it could have stayed in a parallel universe were, as many have proposed, Vulcans were worse because the Kelvin accident led people to know what Romulans looked like earlier so THEY were worse and everyone was just an asshole to each other, but then Discovery took a leaf out of his book and used his version of Vulcans and even changed old characters to fit this new version better (Sarek doesn’t disagree with Starfleet because of its bellicosity [you can’t even argue that he still disaproves of violence because he spent the worst part of the war following General Cornwell around and idk commiting mind crimes] or because he sees it as a rejection from Spock [since he says he’ll keep his distance because it’s what Spock would want and what the fuck even was that?] and he’s a cold bastard who’d take a child to a completely different culture than the one she’s used to purely for superficial beliefs and even then he’ll still prioritize his more Vulcan son, Amanda doesn’t think Vulcan’s is a hard but better way [and honestly she wouldn’t be justified to] so since she can’t be staying because of her children since they’re being mistreated, she must be doing it because of Sarek which is just so feminist, you guys, and ok, I better change topics before this becomes an “everything that’s wrong about Disco with a sidenote of everything that’s not objectively wrong but I still didn’t like”, but also, Vulcan brains can literally lobotomize themselves while dealing with trauma, don’t you think they’d take mental health seriously?) so now it’s canon in the original universe, too. Even with Enterprise (which, to be honest, I haven’t watched, I’ve only learned what was going on with Vulcans from Memory Alpha and the recounting might hace left events and/or the essence and implications of the plotline out), the tomfoolery was supposed to be Romulans infiltrating the government and twisting Surak’s teachings, all of this is supposed to be how things vecame after they got his katra back and went through the Reform.

And this got long, but the thing is: it’s not just about the Vulcans. It’s about the fact that some of the worst assumptions made about them were recognizable at least by this one Aspie as, among other things, a neurotypical’s response to an autistic trait and a long history of negative autistic coding, and now they’ve been confirmed by canon, so instead of having a nice discussion and maybe a bit of disk horse about this, we’ve gotta deal with the fact that now some people feel legitimally repelled by and resentful of Vulcans (insofar as any emotion applies to fiction) because they are now the bigots and oppressors - now it’s not a one episode race of black&white and white&black people ridiculously pointing at the obvious differences between each other, but Vulcans who have said and done bigoted things many people have been exposed to during their lives, and if they were ever willing to give them, and by extension us, a chance, now it’s ruined. I am not, of course, saying that if you hate Vulcans, especially now, you’re ableist, or that making them the Asshole^tm will turn people ableist. Just that it would have been nice to see people like me who didn’t end up justifiably despised.*

*Especially through character assassination, couldn’t you have at least made them unlikeable from the start?

[nvrissa]

hello laid ease and furries ( u know who u are )......hahaha....are u ready for this ? zimzalabim ! my name is xan ( she/her pronouns ) and my laptop has been broken for a good 3 years now i have to use an onscreen keyboard so if u see me typing for 20000 years on discord only to send u a single sentence u know whats up x JSDBJWBJW here is the intro....im really winging this no one call me out for that WOOO....tw: medication, mental health, body image ? perhaps just to be safe <3

ok ! so im not gonna talk too much abt family stuff bc yuno and i are doing the collab of the century here and art takes time people ! JSBDJBWDJW but so u get a good idea...i will write a little abt it lets get it 

so the kwons were two of the biggest faces in hollywood ( and tbh they are still considered icons / hollywood royalty no matter how old they get they stay #Relevant ) think bradgelina ! literally everyone knows who the kwons if u dont u probably live under a rock /: 

their parents are very into the fame thing...so when it came to their kids ( nari and wolfe ) they SUPER pushed the famous life onto them, really expecting both of them to be just as obsessed and enamored by the public. idk if u guys ever say that vid of gigi and bella hadid before they were huge were their mom was pressuring them both to get into modeling and to stay skinny and to be stars etc....it was kinda like that !

so narissa, being the first born, really just internalized that shit...like imagine being told ever since u were a baby that fame and status and ur last name are wildly important and not being able to remember a time when u werent being watched by cameras / a third party ( the public ) bc that was her life ! nari has....no experience as to what life is like without cameras and without having to create this image of herself that ppl are gonna be into 

obviously that’s NOT normal....and it had it’s toll on her /: as a kid she grew up so fast like u know those kids that seem so mature and wise for their age ? that was nari. she always had two versions of herself: inside nari vs outside nari. she was so good at being good just bc she knew what stuff to express and what stuff to keep inside ( spoiler alert: most of it was kept in x )  

she is still very much desperate to please her parents despite it all /: i feel like for a long time she kinda excepted and agreed that fame is everything ( hence why shes known for using her last name to get her places ) but shes starting to realize just how FUCKED it all is and just how much it’s messed her up so stay tuned for more fun !

ok so career stuff ! nari started off as a child model bc she was um super cute and super good at knowing what to do / not freaking out in front of cameras <3 but she was always obsessed with actors ! she used to sit in front of the tv for hours legit study and memorize ppls mannerisms and various movie lines.. she was literally always just quoting random lines / imitating various actors so often her parents were like ok word go act !    

she landed her first role at 12 and it was a pretty huge role as a lead chara in a mini television series that revolved around a cast of kids ( think stranger things but not plot wise just how some of the mains were kids ) with zero acting experience before hand ... so it was pretty clear to the media nari got the spot bc she was a kwon ! there was a bunch of controversy around the show before it came out but once it was released...there was no denying nari had talent

after that it was just a whirlwind of acting doors opening up for her. everyone wanted nari bc of her last name and all the attention that came from it, not to mention every director wanted to be The One that helped narissa kwon become one of the most famous actresses of the 21st century. most of the time she was getting cast for selfish reasons but nari never realized it /: she was just happy to be acting bc it really was like therapy for her to become different ppl

flash forward to age 15 when narissa was finally diagnosed with generalized anxiety disorder and was prescribed meds to help ! it was actually a director from a movie she was working on that suggested to her parents nari might be struggling after witnessing her have a panic attack on set. not wanting a scandal, her parents agreed it was best to get her “help” which included pills and weekly therapy ! 

so nari actually didnt mind it too much tbh she HAD been struggling for a while she just assumed her anxiety was normal and just like something all famous ppl were dealing with but that wasnt the case. she was hesitant to open up to her therapist just bc she was still obsessed with this idea of inside nari vs outside nari, and she was very scared to cross that line so it took....years of sessions to build up that trust

as she got older though and as she got more famous, everyone just assumed she was better. she was more famous and loved by the day, she had become a chanel ambassador ( thank u jennie x ), her interviews on youtube always brought in record views, she’d started in plenty of movies critics agreed would become cult classics, her social medias were nearing kardashian level in terms of followers: everything was on track....

....except nari had actually never been more unstable. she had become so dependent on her meds she couldnt go anywhere or talk to anyone without popping a few in. all the watching eyes were starting to make her paranoid, not to mention the pressure from her parents ( who couldn’t be happier with nari being so famous ) was at its all time high. she had been nominated for an oscar at 21 and everyone was expecting her to win...and then she didnt

narissa kwon famously fainted at the 2018 oscars after it was announced she had lost the award. her actual fainting wasnt caught on camera or televised, but it WAS witnessed by some of the most relevant names and faces in hollywood who were in that room. the scandal took the media by storm, the hashtag #getwellnarissa trending for over 42 hours until a statement was released she had fainted bc of dehydration and other undisclosed causes and that she was okay & currently taking it easy at home surrounded by family 

in reality it was the abuse of her medication as well as all the stress, but when your last name is kwon manipulating the press is as simple as making the right phone call. unfortunately for nari and her parents, the article about the brat pack came out a week later, and there was no manipulating that source /:

for narissa, it was all a wake up call. she decided to go off her anxiety meds altogether. after falling out with the brat pack she spent that year trying to figure out who she was separate from her fame and her last name. despite some offers from a few casting directors ( surprisingly some people still wanted her despite the scandals bc she was still a kwon, after all ) narissa rejected every role except one in a coming of age indie movie that explores womanhood and mental health as well as strained relationships with mothers. the movie is set to release sometime mid august hehe (~:

she agreed to come to milan to reunite with the brat pack bc she’s still searching for herself ! nari figures the people who quite literally grew up with her might give her some answers......not to mention there is still a part of her who is desperate to reclaim the image and status she had before everything fell apart </3    

PERSONALITY/TIDBITS

narissa is....complicated to say the least. growing up in front of the cameras and in a family who prioritized fame and outside opinions of you as the most important thing, she is quite literally desperate for praise and approval. because she legit has no idea what parts of her are real and what parts of her she’s created for her public persona, she often looks for understanding in others!! shes very very good at analyzing people and understanding people in the hopes that its gonna make her better at analyzing herself, but to no avail. 

libra sun capricorn moon !! THIS is super accurate and telling if u wanna read but i kinda just summarized it in the last bullet

she is such a perfectionist with everything she does and a bit of a control freak in the sense that if she’s not the one doing something, she doesnt have faith whatever that is will be able to live up to her unrealistic standards. directors are often concerted with nari bc whenever she gets big roles.....she is so hard on herself, often asking for take after take bc she monitors every little thing abt her expression or her movements. she’s often left frustrated and disappointed with herself bc again, her standards are SUPER unrealistic ):

she’s relatively sweet!! growing up with the brat pack they probably knew her as the life of the party, very bubbly, confident, and very easy to have fun with as long as you’re being tolerable. however, she can get kind of opinionated at times so it’s very hard for you to gain her trust and respect back if you lose it. she’s also prone to random mood swings / periods of isolation, but whenever she returns its with a big smile and a soft voice assuring you everything is okay 

very good at lying and deceiving ppl but she hardly ever does it on purpose ( unless her publicists asks her too ). she’s carried this persona / public image of herself curated for consumption from others for so long, sometimes she has no idea when she’s being sincere or if she’s just convincing herself she’s being sincere. most of the time she only deceives other people about herself. she can come across as kind of elusive because of this ( think daisy from gatsby’s perspective ) but it’s not on purpose. she just legit has no true sense of self isnt that sexy?

speaking of sex. JWDBJWBDJWBD she also uses that as a coping mechanism / a weird affirmation that yes, she IS wanted by others and yes she IS seen as someone beautiful and that she IS something to be consumed by others ( like i said in my tags....male fantasies male fantasies ) but then at the same time she feels guilty abt this and so unsatisfied and disgusted at how she’s living her life as an object / manifestation of other people’s projections rather than as a normal person...rip </3 its a cycle

ever since her relationship with micah that was so hated by the public it actually ruined and ended their relationship, nari has been too scared to publicly have a relationship again. the media seems to love seeing her on casual dates with other stars, but not to see her tied down to one person, as that kind of “damages” this super accessible persona she’s put out ( think idols and why they cant date )  

she loves poetry, french music, all of marilyn monroe and audrey hepburn’s movies, nonfiction essays abt womanhood and identity, anything chanel, is particularly fond of silk dresses but is partial to velvet as well, wears lacy bralettes under everything bc it makes her a little more confident, actually prefers large parties to small ones because small gatherings are more personal therefore give her more anxiety, would only eat fruit and drink champagne if she could live like that, doesn’t know how to swim so she’s scared of the ocean as well as the dark, used to study ballet as a kid and misses it terribly, doesn’t know how to drive and isn’t planning to learn, can be materialistic at times, is probably an introvert masquerading as an extrovert for 22 years now, the only movies she cant stand are westerns, loves to travel but is scared of flying, doesn’t drink coffee, and is allergic to nuts. 

last but most important fact about narissa is that she loves her brother wolfe more than anything in this world so messing with him is the only way nari is bound to 100% hate you. she can bully him all she wants ( ex. starting very real rumors he IS in fact a furry ) but no one else is aloud to actually be mean to him or she will kill you

also very random but i had a hc that when she was 6 and her pet cat jinx died she caused enough fuss at home her parents actually made it a national holiday in about thirteen different states. the anniversary of this death is december 4th and yes . the brat pack better mourn jinx with nari every year......

pls spare plots im sorry this is so long.....JBDJBWJDBWJBWDJBJ i promise it will be worth it also im sensitive and very small ... how can u say no ? 

[lilyev]

wassup my dudes, i’m bee and i’m a huge ass nerd who’s super excited to be here ! pls take my daughter lily and love her, or hate her, w/e, i’m fine with it either way

isn’t that LILY EVANS ? yeah that is HER, sitting there at the GRYFFINDOR table with those other SIXTH years and i think i heard sybill saying they look like ZOEY DEUTCH… whoever that is! when she looks into her crystal ball she sees fireflies, coffee with cinnamon, cigarettes in the backyard, honey-flavoured chapstick, chipped nail polish, lying on the roof during a thunderstorm, flowers growing from cracks in the pavement, the feeling you get walking out from a cinema.  anyway i’ve heard they’re pretty TENDERHEARTED, TEMPESTUOUS, and INDEPENDENT. apparently they’re a MUGGLEBORN but i’m sure that’s not related. 

aesthetic: fireflies, coffee with cinnamon, cigarettes in the backyard, the smell of bookstores, honey-flavoured chapstick, whispered secrets, the burn of firewhiskey in your chest, chipped nail polish, polaroids, lying on the roof during a thunderstorm, chapped lips, the summertime buzz of cicadas, flowers growing from cracks in the pavement, burnt chocolate chip cookies, jane austen novels, angry tears, happy tears, scribbled notes in the margins of old books, the red glow of a sunset, the feeling you get walking out from a cinema

CHILDHOOD

lily evans grew up in cokeworth, england, a “distinctly unmagical” town that is solely known for being the fourth-largest steel producer in england. the steel factory smokestacks in the west loom over the town and its winding alleyways, cinder blocks, and weeds growing out of pavement cracks.

lily’s childhood was that of mowed green lawns, challah bread, flintstones reruns in grainy black and white, and playing outside after dinner with petunia till the sky grew dark and the fireflies and mosquitoes came out and their parents would call them back home for bed.

her parents were both university professors who had met while getting their doctorates, her mother in german literature and her father in political science. they were both academic, intelligent people, and saw no reason not to treat their children as such. this meant lots of political discussion over the dining room table — at nine, little lily knew more about the government deficit than most of her schoolteachers probably did. petunia tended to tune out these debates, claiming disinterest, but lily loved them, listening in avidly even if she didn’t understand. as she got older she began to participate more and more, and often even brought up issues she was interested in.

but despite her brightness, contrary to popular belief, school hasn’t always come naturally to lily. she just could never quite bring herself to focus in school. some teachers labelled her a chatterbox, others simply labelled her trouble. really, it was more of a combination of a desire to befriend every creature she met with an inability to sit still.

because lily yearned for something more than life at the end of the cul-de-sac, yearned for some great adventure. she was a curious, fearless thing as a child, always leaping off of the swing and tugging tuney to go explore on the other side of the tracks, where their parents didn’t allow them to go.

so when she met a sallow-skinned boy from the wrong side of town, and he told her about magic, lily was enraptured by the thought. severus snape and the world he spoke of represented, to lily, the adventure she’d only ever dreamed of.

you all know the story — lily didn’t mean to, but she traded one best friend for another, and petunia was left behind, hurt and angry.

HOGWARTS

flash forward to eleven year old lily – small for her age, sitting on a stool in the great hall and listening to the hat debate between slytherin and gryffindor. after she ended up being sorted into gryffindor, and heard everything her housemates had to say about slytherin, she couldn’t help but wonder why the hat had thought it might suit her. ( like mother like son, am i right ? )

but lily is ambitious and proud, and ( especially as a first year ) overflowing with a desire to prove herself. but when it comes down to it, she has a softness under her skin that doesn’t suit the cold blood of a snake, and her instinct to protect those she loves vastly outweighs her self-preservation instinct.

and all of a sudden, she was doing better in school than she ever had before. hogwarts gave her eager, curious young mind the adventure and intrigue it had been craving. for the first time, she actually wanted to learn. the professors quickly became used to the wiry girl with messy auburn hair and bright eyes sitting in the front row of every class and peppering them with questions.

she became the gryffindor prefect last year, something she was both very excited and very apprehensive about. she’s very conscious about the influence she has on younger students, and she’s determined to prove that she was the right choice.

PERSONALITY

lily evans has two main motivators: sentiment and spite. on one hand, she’s romantic and nostalgic, clinging to her fairytale endings and her belief that everyone has at least a little bit of good inside of them. she’d like to believe that everything will turn out the way it should, and that all pain is temporary and useful.

but on the other hand, she has her temper. lord, this girl is stubborn and proud to her very core. she does not easily admit she’s wrong, and she’s often guided by her emotions rather than her reason. it’s not a great combination. she has been called tempestuous.

she tends to make snap judgements about people and stubbornly sticks to those snap judgements. it takes her a while before she admits that someone isn’t as bad as she had previously thought, or that someone is worse than she previously thought ( see: james potter, severus snape )

she doesn’t react well to personal criticism. she can be pretty defensive and even hypocritical sometimes.

but for all her faults ( and she has many — she’s stubborn, over-idealistic, proud, spiteful, at times selfish, hypocritical, quick-tempered, biased ) lily loves. and she hopes. with all her heart.

she cares so much about everything. she wears her emotions on her sleeves. she cries when she’s angry, and when she’s happy, and when she’s talking passionately about something she loves.

if you’re someone lily evans loves, you should count yourself lucky, because she will defend you to the death. and if you’re a person who lily evans hates, you should also count yourself lucky, because no matter how much she hates you, there’s a little part of her that believes in the good part of you.

sometimes she wishes she was tougher, less vulnerable. she wishes the word ‘mudblood’ wouldn’t sting each time it’s flung at her like a grenade ( but it does ), and she wishes she isn’t disappointed with every chanukah that goes by without a card from pertunia ( but she is ). but in true lily evans fashion, she stubbornly holds her chin up high and smiles and doesn’t let the world see her hurting.

HEADCANONS

she keeps trying to keep a diary but she always forgets to write in it, although she refuses to admit it’s a hopeless cause.

has a love for sweeping, dramatic classical music and movie soundtracks

lily comes from a progressive jewish family ! lily was never really super into it when she was little ( she enjoyed the chanukah dreidel games and the purim festivities, loved listening to the stories of esther and the exodus, but fidgeted all through hebrew school and hated the solemnity and fasting of yom kippur ) but she has a greater appreciation for the culture now she’s older. still doesn’t really observe kashrut though.

[ HOLOCAUST TW ] part of the reason she’s super super super against blood purity is bc of this and obvs also cause she’s a muggleborn ! her mother was eight when the second world war started, and as lily’s gotten older she’s heard more and more about her mother’s experience. and it chills her how much it reminds her of all this blood purity and voldemort stuff. [ END TW ]

petunia converts to catholicism for vernon when they get married and lily is so angry she cries for days, but then their mother sits down with her and talks about how everyone has their own faith and you can’t judge someone else for theirs

loves cats even though she’s allergic to them ( has a toad named gilbert, after gilbert blythe from anne of green gables )

has an irrational fear of seaweed – not the kind you eat, the kind that brushes up against your ankles when you’re swimming. also afraid of flying and airplanes

has an extensive collection of nail polish ( picks at her nail polish when she’s nervous )

a physically affectionate person – loves hugs, and cheek kisses, and platonic hand holding

loves old audrey hepburn movies 

she always loved when her parents read to her but she never had the attention span for actually sitting and reading books even though she loved them

[ DEATH, SMOKING TW ] she smokes …… she knows it’s bad but she started after her paternal grandfather died when she was 12 – they were going through his belongings and she found a half-used pack of his cigarettes and pocketed them. she just smoked them to try and catch his smell and feel closer to him but it developed into a habit and then an addiction ( although lily will insist she can stop anytime ) [ END TW ]

bisexual as FUCK thanks 4 coming to my ted talk

[pamphletstoinspire]

Living By Faith: The 27th Sunday in Ordinary Time (October 6th)

Our readings this week take up the theme of faith, both Israel’s faith under the old covenant and the faith to which we are called in the new. Jesus urges us not to despair even if we feel our faith is pitiful. God can work wonders using small material.

1. Our First Reading is a famous passage from Habbakuk:

Hab 1:2-3; 2:2-4

How long, O LORD? I cry for help but you do not listen! I cry out to you, “Violence!” but you do not intervene. Why do you let me see ruin; why must I look at misery? Destruction and violence are before me; there is strife, and clamorous discord. Then the LORD answered me and said: Write down the vision clearly upon the tablets, so that one can read it readily. For the vision still has its time, presses on to fulfillment, and will not disappoint; if it delays, wait for it, it will surely come, it will not be late. The rash one has no integrity; but the just one, because of his faith, shall live.

Like Jonah, the Book of Habakkuk is an anomaly among the Twelve Minor Prophets. The other ten relate oracles the various prophets delivered on behalf of the LORD to Israel and/or the nations. In Jonah and Habakkuk, however, the focus is largely on the spiritual struggle between the prophet and the LORD concerning the wisdom and righteousness of God’s providence over world history. Both Jonah and Habakkuk struggle with the justice of God’s ways. The Book of Jonah explores this question largely through narrative, whereas Habakkuk engages it through dialogue between the prophet and the LORD. Habakkuk resolves doubts about God’s justice by urging God’s people to live by faith in God’s promises, even if contemporary events seem contradictory or inexplicable. Habakkuk 2:4, which summarizes this message succinctly, is one of the most-quoted verses of the Old Testament in the New (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38-39) and has powerfully influenced Christian piety, prayer, and theology.

As is the case with so many of the Twelve, no biographical information is available for Habakkuk. The form of his name is unusual and its meaning uncertain. It may be a passive form derived from the Hebrew root h-b-q, “to embrace,” i.e. “one who is embraced.” The date of the book is likewise uncertain. At least Judah, if not Israel, still seems to be in existence as the prophet writes, so it must be before the exile (>597 BC). Beyond that, the mention of the “Chaldeans” (=Babylonians) as a rising threat in 1:6 (cf. Isa 39) is the best piece of evidence for dating. The prophet’s words indicate that people will be surprised to hear that Babylon will be the agent of God’s judgment (1:5-6). This would certainly not be the case in the early sixth century BC (c. 590s-580s) when Babylon was a dominant and feared world power, so Habakkuk should probably be placed sometime in the late eighth (late 700s) or (more likely) the seventh century (600s) BC, when Assyria was still dominant in the Levant but Babylon was growing in power (cf. Isa 39).

Habakkuk begins his book by complaining to the LORD: why does God seem to do nothing about the violence and injustice the prophet sees around him (1:2-4)? God replies that He is preparing the Babylonians to come and destroy the evildoers (1:5-11) and Habakkuk acknowledges this divine judgment (1:12). However, sending the Babylonians as executors of justice raises another theological problem: how can God judge wicked persons by others who are yet more wicked (1:13)? The prophet goes on to describe the wickedness of wealthy man who consumes others (1:14-16) and “slays the nations” (1:17), perhaps the King of Assyria or Babylon.

The LORD’s response to this second, more sharply-focused complaint from Habakkuk is much longer and more detailed (Hab 2:2-20). First, the LORD counsels the prophet and all the righteous to have patience, even if it seems like the oracles of God are slow in fulfillment (2:2-4). Secondly, the LORD pronounces five woes (vv. 6-8; 9-11; 12-14; 15-17; 18-20) on the “arrogant man” whose “greed is as wide as Sheol” and “gathers for himself all nations.” This may be simultaneously (1) a hyperbolic description of any wealthy oppressor, and (2) a specific description of the King of Babylon (or Assyria). The message of these woes is that the wickedness of the wicked man will come back on his head: those he oppresses will one day suddenly turn on him (2:7) and he will experience the destruction to which he subjugated others (vv. 8, 10, 17).

The Book of Habakkuk ends with a psalm composed by the prophet, which appears in its present context to be a response to the woes against the evildoer just pronounced by the LORD (2:6-20). This psalm, which bears a strong resemblance to Ps. 68 and others, recounts a theophany of the LORD in which he marches north to Israel from the south (the region around Sinai), accompanied by a violent storm and earthquake (1:3-12). Having arrived, he vindicates his “anointed” (v. 13, probably the Davidic King) by slaying the sea serpent that embodies evil (vv. 13b-15). This entire poetic composition, colored with mythological imagery, may be a figurative description of the Exodus, the conquest of the land, or one or more other of God’s great saving acts of his people in Israel’s history. Essentially, it is a mytho-poetic description of God’s power over the forces of evil as the divine warrior, which is manifested in various ways throughout history.

In response to his vision of God manifesting his power and justice, the prophet resolves to “wait quietly” for the day of judgment on those “who invade us” (v. 16) and to rejoice in the LORD even though there is, as yet, no sign of the consolations and blessing that God has promised for his people (vv. 17-19).

The Book of Habakkuk is of perennial theological and spiritual interest because it struggles with the ever-pertinent question of theodicy, the justice of God. If God is good and all-powerful, why do the wicked seem to prosper? Of course, many other biblical books, notably Job and the Psalms, also deal with this issue. The answer offered by the Book of Habakkuk is that God will, in the end, deliver justice to all. In the meantime, it is necessary for the righteous to exercise trust or faith in the goodness, justice, and promises of God. This practical advice is summed up well in Hab 2:4b: “The righteous shall live by his faith” (RSV). The word translated “faith” is ‘emunah, which is more precisely rendered “faithfulness,” “integrity” or “fidelity.” It derives from the same Hebrew root meaning “true” (‘-m-n) that gives us “Amen,” i.e. “so be it!” or “it is true!” St. Paul quotes Hab. 2:4 in Rom 1:17, but follows the Septuagint in rendering Heb. ‘emunah as Gk. pistis, “faith.” Although the Gk. pistis (“faith”) is not the exact equivalent of Heb. ‘emunah (“faithfulness”), it certainly is the case that the Book of Habakkuk, taken as a whole, counsels the follower of the LORD to exercise trust or faith in the present while he awaits the fulfillment of God’s promises in the future.

P. Our Responsorial Psalm is Ps 95:1-2, 6-7, 8-9:

R. (8) If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

Come, let us sing joyfully to the LORD; let us acclaim the Rock of our salvation. Let us come into his presence with thanksgiving; let us joyfully sing psalms to him. R. If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

Come, let us bow down in worship; let us kneel before the LORD who made us. For he is our God, and we are the people he shepherds, the flock he guides. R. If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

Oh, that today you would hear his voice: “Harden not your hearts as at Meribah, as in the day of Massah in the desert, Where your fathers tempted me; they tested me though they had seen my works.” R. If today you hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

Psalm 95 is a very common responsorial, and also appears frequently in the Divine Office. The Psalm recalls the trials of faith that Israel underwent in the desert, while wandering forty years under Moses. Massah (“trial”) and Meribah (“contention”) are names of the location in Exod 17 where the people ran out of water, and lost their faith in God and his prophet Moses. The grumbled and complained, accusing God of intending evil for them. We can say that those two events became iconic examples of the loss of faith by God’s people, and they resulted in plagues in both instances. They become ensconced in Israel’s memory as counter-examples to the faith we should embrace and demonstrate toward God.

2. Our Second Reading is :2 Tm 1:6-8, 13-14 :

Beloved:

I remind you, to stir into flame the gift of God that you have through the imposition of my hands. For God did not give us a spirit of cowardice but rather of power and love and self-control. So do not be ashamed of your testimony to our Lord, nor of me, a prisoner for his sake; but bear your share of hardship for the gospel with the strength that comes from God.

Take as your norm the sound words that you heard from me, in the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. Guard this rich trust with the help of the Holy Spirit that dwells within us.

Unlike the Israelites in the desert, we have the tremendous “help of the Holy Spirit” in order to maintain the “faith and love” of Christ Jesus in our lives. Faith is contrary to a “spirit of cowardice,” but leads us to an attitude of “power, love, and self-control.” This reminds us of St. Josemaria’s teaching that Christians should have a kind of spiritual “superiority complex” when tackling the challenges of this world. Confidence should characterize the Christian; not self-confidence which the world urges, but what we might call “Christ-confidence” or “Spirit-confidence.” Knowing that “it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me,” we should have this great confidence that God will provide a means for us to overcome the obstacles we face. No doubt this will mean we must share in the “hardship for the Gospel,” but we can rely on the “strength that comes from God” to persevere through it.

3. Our Gospel is Lk 17:5-10:

The apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith.” The Lord replied, “If you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it would obey you.

I think many take this parable wrongly. Hearing that faith the size of a mustard seed would be sufficient to perform miracles, folks reason like this: “I can’t work miracles; therefore, my faith must not even be the size of a mustard seed! I must try real hard to muster up some faith the size of a mustard seed, because my faith is microscopic!”

However, I don’t think our Lord was trying to discourage us and tell us that our faith was insignificant. Rather, the purpose of our Lord’s words are consolation, not rebuke. The point he is making to the disciples is this: You don’t need much faith to be effective! Just give me a little bit of faith and I can do great things for you! Just as I took five loaves and two fish and fed 5,000, I can take a mustard seed of your faith and transplant a tree into the ocean.”

Our Lord’s words are meant to be an encouragement. You may only have a tiny amount of faith, but go ahead and step out on that faith anyway. You do not need huge faith already in order to begin serving the Lord. He will take what you have and do great things with it.

“Who among you would say to your servant who has just come in from plowing or tending sheep in the field, ‘Come here immediately and take your place at table’? Would he not rather say to him, ‘Prepare something for me to eat. Put on your apron and wait on me while I eat and drink. You may eat and drink when I am finished’? Is he grateful to that servant because he did what was commanded? So should it be with you. When you have done all you have been commanded, say, ‘We are unprofitable servants; we have done what we were obliged to do.’”

It’s not immediately apparent what the connection is between this saying of Jesus and the previous teaching on faith. Maybe it’s this: sometimes those who do great works of faith think they are doing God a favor. Jesus says in a different place, “Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’” (Mt. 7:22) These are works of faith. However, to these individuals, Jesus responds, “Depart from me, for I never knew you, you evildoers.”

We don’t do God favors by serving him. Paul says, “If I have faith to remove mountians” — alluding to a version of our Lord’s teaching in Luke 7—“but have not love, I am nothing.” Great works of faith do not add to God’s glory. Nor does our holiness.

Jesus is reminding us here that we can’t actually put God in our debt, and that even a holy life is only “normal” for God to expect of us. After all, holiness is normal, it is sin and evil that is abnormal. Sin may be typical, but it is still abnormal. Mary was the first normal human being since Adam and Eve fell.

If we live a saintly life, in a sense it is nothing exceptional. All we’ve done is to be truly human, to fulfill the destiny for which we were created in the first place.

It makes me think of an anecdote a friend of mine shared with me this week. A construction crew was rebuilding a Carthusian monastery and came across the grave of a monk. Opening the casket, they found him incorrupt. Wondering what to do, they called the nearest Carthusian monastery, which was in another country. “What shall we do with the body?” they asked. “Bury him again”, came the reply. “But he’s incorrupt!” they protested. “All Carthusians are supposed to be holy,” came the answer, “this is not exceptional. Bury him again.”

This Sunday’s Gospel is calling on us not to pat ourselves on the back every time we turn away from temptation or do an act of mercy. It is only normal. Holiness should be ordinary.

From: https://www.pamphletstoinspire.com/

[dukeofriven]

‘The AfD declares autistic climate activist to be “mentally challenged” and firms-up its campaign platform around the idea of publicly ridiculing a teenager.’ Throw their pathetic fear of a teen back in their faces. Mock them at every opportunity. Smear their faces in their own shit until they can’t breathe without opening their mouths to swallow it. Remind them always that they are small and weak and frightened by a 15 year old - jeer them, giggle in their presence them, howl with laughter every time they try and pass their crayon scrawl as policy.  Make their every waking second a taunting Mean Girls hell in which they can never be free of the knowledge that everyone knows they’re nothing but a pathetic joke. And every time they try and draw strength from that, to try and don the mantle of the oppressed underdog, punch them in the nose and remind them that their bodies are as fragile as their egos and their ideas. Push them down again and again and again. Whisper in their ear that their Nazis forebears used to get treated like this - until one day they found the courage to stand up for themselves and their beliefs and fight. And then they lost. And then we killed them. And then we displayed their bloated corpses for all the world to jeer. And then we destroyed everything they had built and they were powerless to stop us because these failed, pathetic losers put their faith in beliefs that were wrong. Demonstrably false. Literally untrue. The Reich to last a thousand years never grew old enough to get a driver’s license. The Nazis who were humiliated in the Beer Hall Putsch vowed that from that day forward no one would ever treat them like that again. But we did. Because they’re losers who fail. These are people whose ideology gives them cover for advocating some of the most heinous acts this earth has ever seen. The alt-right, whether they openly identify as Nazis or not, are Nazis, and are in accord with the exact same belief system that advocated for genocide, racial supremacy, patriarchy, antiquated conservatism, and other such debunked delusions even if they distance themselves from the Nazi label. When someone’s ideology gives them cover for being a piece of shit like that then you should oblige and treat them as such. Drag them into the nearest restroom and give them a couple swirlies -shit belongs in the toilet, after all. Alright. Despite my bellicose rhetoric above I am a pacifist at heart - violence ultimately begets more violence. So don’t let them drown. Don’t break any bones. Don’t go pulling off fingers the way you might the wings of a tiny, helpless, pathetic, utterly incapable-of-fighting-back mosquito before carelessly squashing it with the tip of the nail on your pinkie finger. Even though you could. Easily. It would not be hard.

But there’s a difference between perpetuating a cycle of violence by starting a blood feud or spending decades abusing someone emotionally and physically and dragging someone who said “you’re a weak effeminate pansy degenerate who wouldn't exist in our pure society and its not hate speech to want a country for white straight men and women with shared moral values” into a park bathroom and demonstrating certain inaccuracies of that argument by clamming their heads into the urinal and forcing them to eat a urinal cake. It’s not the most intellectually robust rebuttal, but you could rephrase “you’re a weak effeminate pansy degenerate who wouldn't exist in our pure society” as “you’re a stinky doo doo head who sucks and when I grow up I’m gonna be strong enough to throw you into space.” They’re functionally identical in terms of tone, content, self-aggrandizement, and mental acuity. There is no intellectually appropriate response to that kind of infantile argument - these are not intelligent people. I don’t mean ‘lacking in formal education.’ I mean they’re stupid. ‘Burn the blankets to warm the bed’ stupid. Leibowitzian ‘Proud To Be A Cretin’ stupid. ‘Smart Men Stay Ignorant; Leaning’s For Libs’ stupid. Their positions should not be treated as intellectually valid out of a misguided belief that a good intellectual should be open-minded to every idea every time it’s proposed. Sure, absolute-free-speech defenders always willing to normalize Nazi “discourse”, I’ll concede that the world-is-flat guy might have had a right to explain what his beliefs were. In 5000 BC, When nobody had heard them before and we didn’t know what he was going to say. Eight thousand years later, though, indulging his ancestor who’s just going to repeat the same points that were wrong eight millennia ago is lunacy.

A good intellectual knowns when something isn’t worth their time and acts accordingly. Sometimes this means not letting someone fill the air with hate speech out of slavish obligation to letter of freedom of expression instead of its spirit (when someone is granted the freedom to debate the idea that everyone who disagrees with them should be purged, you only harm freedom, not celebrate it.) Sometimes this means force-feeding an advocate of genocide a tasty lunchtime treat of urine and quaternary ammonium compounds while cheerfully wondering aloud what might happen if there’s still unswallowed cake in their mouth and you need to resolve certain biological necessities.

The first mistake we ever made with the alt-right was to leave the whoopee cushion at home, when we should have attended their every rally with an armful and play them constantly every time they tried to speak. “There’s nothing wrong with saying I’m pr-THPPTPHTPHPHHPH proud to be THPPTPHTPHPHHPH be white and to stand up for THPPTPHTPHPHHPH the achieveTHPPTPHTPHPHHPHments of the whitTHPPTPHTPHPHHPH of the whTHPPTPHTPHPHHPH white THPPTPHTPHPHHPH white raTPHRRURURURPHH-P-P-P- whiP-P-P-P whP-P-P whiteP-P-P-P WHITE RACTRRHPRPRP-P-P ... ... ... *cough* ... ... WHITE POWFFFFWWWPWPPRPRPRPRPRPRSQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAKTRRRHHPPPP-PPP-RPPP-PPP-P-P-P-PLIPPPP-THRP plip! We should attend their rallies and events with boxes of red noses, rainbow wigs, and buckets of greasepaint and throw ourselves upon them until we’ve forced them into wearing their true colours. Remember: every SS officer who looked so forbidding in their tailored uniform stank of their own disgusting sweat because all that blackened leather couldn’t breathe and every SS trooper standing in that imposing formation was broiling in their own filth. Nothing but bozos in fetish gear. The vaunted Wehrmacht had their uniforms rot off their bodies in the snows of Stalingrad as they had to strip the dead for scraps and rags, freezing to death, starving to death, because Hitler - the great genius who personally involved himself with the running of his forces almost to a tactical level - he didn’t think they needed to be resupplied. The Nazis lost. The Nazis lost so badly their monuments were ground into dust, their leaders bodies destroyed or abandoned in the mud, the dreams of Germania proven nothing but a dusty model in a museum devoted to cursing the Nazi’s memory. Nothing but a shrine to hubris and grossly over-estimating your own abilities. The legacy of the Nazis is humiliation, shame, and utter fucking failure. Neo-Nazis, this ‘new’ alt-right whose philosophies are all old, have as their heroes men who did nothing but fail, who achieved nothing but to have their life’s work expunged, debased, destroyed, and condemned by the world not just in their time but for generations after. Not misunderstood geniuses but understood buffoons. Never, ever, let them forget this - and never, ever let them try to turn it into a virtue. No ‘we shall rise again’ narratives. No abyss-to-transformation in some bullshit Cambellian hero’s journey. Their past was not a defeat to inspire them to future victory. They are not the underprivileged hurdle jumper who against all odds and obstacles wins gold at the Olympics, they’re the guy on your track team who once pushed so hard on a door marked pull that he fell through the glass and had to get ten stitches, the guy who got so drunk at an out-of-town meet that he shat his bed at the hotel and tried to hide the dirty sheets in his bags and stunk-up the bus ride home until Coach found out and chewed him out in front of the entire team for being the biggest fucking tool in the whole wide world. Not the guy who was a loner in high school but who found like-minded friends in college, started a cool band where they sang about their sucky pasts, and wound-up a rich and famous with legions of adoring fans. Nah, they’re the guy who was a loner in high school, and in college, and in the job at the napkin distribution company, the guy who retired without a party, spent weeks at a time with no one to talk to, and ultimately died alone - not because he was socially awkward or shy or struggled to communicate, but because he was really unpleasant to be around and even those virtuous folk who try and make sure that nobody is lonely gave up on him because he was such a nasty, loathsome, turd of a human being whose only impact on the world was that he improved it by leaving it. That’s the past of the Nazis. That, too, is their future. Never let them forget this. Their past should embarrass them. Mortify them. There’s is the ideology of pathetic losers. When you march against them, raise high above your heads images of Nazi Germany - not rigid columns of well-armed soldiers or shining tanks rolling off the lines, but the images of their ineptitude. The shuffling columns of defeated, broken men. Their burnt tanks, their downed planes, their sunken ships, their pulverized cities, and all the equipment abandoned in panicked withdrawals or through sheer bureaucratic incompetence. Show images of Jews defiant, the simple act of their still drawing breath spit in the eye of those who thought to see them erased. Humiliate the Nazis again and again and again. They. Failed. The Jews endured, survived, flourished - won. The conquered nations of Europe rebuilt their cultural wonders and their ruined homes and brought back their stolen treasures. They won. The disposed Roma preserved their ways of life despite the will of an entire conquering empire set against them. They won too. The queer communities persecuted for their ‘deviancy’ not only survived they reshaped the post-war world into a place that could no longer sideline them in history. Another victory. The Nazis lost. The Nazi’s failed so completely that they lost not only the territory they had tried to gain but their own nation lay shattered at their feet - politically, socially, economically, spiritually. The Great and Powerful Nazi Party so failed its own people that Germany was sundered into West Germany, East Germany, and Eastern Prussia, promptly swallowed whole by the Societs - the trauma from that lingers generations on. The Nazis not only failed to achieve any of their goals - they failed in the promise made by any such ideology: in joining us we will protect you. They did not just fail to make Germany greater, they literally destroyed it, and left it in pieces. So when you march against the alt-right, these neo-Nazis, Hoist photos of the bloated corpses of the hanged at Nuremberg - their swollen faces distorted in death. Chant the cry “Morons, Not Martyrs!” Remind every alt-right shit-eating soul that they were nothing, are nothing, will always be nothing but failures, losers, and followers of stupid, incompetent, incapable fools. They were, are, shall always, can only ever be wrong. “These are your role models? This is your dream? Failures! Failures! Failures!” “Be A Nazi To Lose It All” Do not, for a single solitary second, treat their ideas as grown-up. Do not, for a moment, give them the cover of adulthood, maturity, or sober discourse. Do not, for one second of time, treat them with respect so long as they seek to hold power over you, to be feared by you, to be thought of as an enemy and not something foul but forgettable to be scrapped off your shoe. Never give them an inch of fear to feed their starving egos. The man who said that rocks were soft as butter and as edible as custard would be given no weight as a person of substantive ideas - Nazis deserve the same derision.  And do not allow them a moment of privacy to brood on the indignities you heap upon them, to be like a teen sulking in their bedroom crafting fantasies about how one day they’ll be proven right and everyone will be sorry. Drag them out into the light again and again and again, give them no moment of peace, allow no instant of time to pass when you are not holding images of their ideology’s worthlessness and failure above their heads. No hiding. No sulking. No second to plot or brood or dream. Stake them to the earth, keep them forever in the light, and pummel them with pie until even they can not deny that they are nothing but clowns worthy only of mockery, ridicule, and endless savage laughter.

[marvmacdonald]

“she's fucking impetuous and daring, a little too bold and way too fucking fearless.”

MARY MACDONALD is 21 years old and works as an JUNIOR AUROR and is loyal to THE OOTP they were an GRYFFINDOR and are a MUGGLEBORN. SHE look like CHRISTIAN SERRATOS. 

CHARACTER PARALLELS: jessica jones ( jessica jones ), leia organa ( star wars ), arya stark ( asoiaf ), johanna mason ( the hunger games ), nancy wheeler ( stranger things ), rosa diaz ( b99 ), ellie ( the last of us ), raven reyes ( the 100 ), kat edison ( the bold type ), nina zenik ( six of crows ) AESTHETIC: red lipstick stains on drained cups of tea, leather jackets, cigarette bums crushed under doc martens, sitting down in the shower and letting time pass by, always wearing your gold cross necklace, messy ponytails, beer burps, laughter that’s filled with desperation, jean dungarees, screaming in your pillow, mud stained clothes, denim on denim on denim. LINKS: stats. pinboard. character tag. playlist.

history

mary had a little lamb? WRONG. mary had a little calf. because she was born on a dairy farm in the highlands of scotland ( laugh at my joke pls i worked hard on it ). she was born third to two muggles – a scottish father and a mexican mother, who loved each other deeply – and would eventually become their middle child. she could have become overlooked, but mary never felt discounted at home: while her parents were very often busy with the cows, their love ran deep.

her youth consisted of this: running through fields of grass, attending a muggle elementary where people sang songs at her ( old macdonald had a farm and mary had a little lamb, the former of which was, of course, accurate ), playing with the animals, building tree houses with her brothers and sister and playing football every spare moment she got. it was good and simple and wholesome.

of course, strange things happened, as they tend to with muggleborns: she’d explode her brother’s toy when she got angry, or let things fly around the room when she was laughing. when she found out she was a witch at age eleven, things fell in its place. and the macdonalds, while traditional catholics, accepted mary, which is the most important thing of it all. her parents were shocked, yes, but they squeezed her shoulder and promised to discover this all together.

which?? very much influenced mary greatly? because it went against a lot of things they – and she, too – believed in. magic was deemed evil by the church they attended. everything about this was supposed to be wrong, but her parents shifted their views because their love for their daughter was greater than their desire to cling to all the rules the church laid down for them, this has allowed her to have a faith in people, and while she may be cynical and bitter at times, that faith is still there.

i mean --- her parents accepted her, they were capable of openmindedness despite being traditional people in most other situations. other people can too.

hogwarts was as chaotic as home, and mary settled in quite nicely. sorted into gryffindor ( she guessed it was for her rambunctious nature, but who knew ), she found herself a second home and loved it. as it turned out, she was rather good with a wand as well – she didn’t do so good at essays, though – and genuinely liked learning ( except for history of magic. fuck that. ).

being a muggleborn had its downsides, of course, but mary never really allowed herself to feel discouraged. hurt? yes, definitely, but never discouraged. she wasn’t going to let it get to her, she told herself, but it did, especially when the harsh words turned into something more. it was during her confrontation with mulciber that mary felt true, harsh fear for the first time. she felt shut down, paralysed, depressed —– but then, after a while, she got up and took some important steps. she reported mulciber, which led to nothing, which caused her to feel angry, which in turn caused her to feel determination. if the system wasn’t going to be on her side, she’d just have to fucking change it, right? mary started throwing herself in her schoolwork, determined to join the dmle – hopefully as an auror, but any position would do. she suppressed her fear and the trauma that was there, and kept her head straight.

this entire situation is up for change and stuff when/if we get a mulciber! 

graduation rolled around and mary got the five required NEWTs to even apply. it was a nervewracking process, but once she got into auror training, she cried. like. for a full ass day. she was so proud of herself and she felt so determined and !! man. it was such a good, defining moment. around the same time, mary joined the order; she knew the ministry was corrupt, and that it’d not allow her to do everything she wanted to, when the order DID. mary had too much anger, too much determination to fight this bullshit to just stick with the ministry, and so the order seemed like the right place.

it’s only recently that mary graduated from her training and became a junior auror. it’s ... infuriating, at times, but also amazing. she hates the ministry and most of the people in it, feels paranoid in those walls, but knows that there are good people, too. people who want to better that place, like she does.

kaz brekker voice: brick by brick, i will destroy you.

also --- mary is ... very quite involved in the war. her time is divided between the order and work, and her dog. she’s determined to get this war to end. she doesn’t even care if she destroys herself in the process --- what does her life mean, if she could help save numerous people?

so right now, she’s fighting. she’s gritting her teeth and keeping her goals in the back in her mind and is focusing. and she does not always feel brave or confident or self assured, but that does not matter: mary macdonald always gets the fuck back up, and that’s what she will keep doing until she’s completely knocked down.

personality & tidbits.

mary is a human espresso. she’s so. damn. bitter?? despite the fact that she keeps on going and that she’s fighting her ass off, she’s tired and angry that things don’t seem to be moving in the right direction, she’s feeling bitter about the fact that this kind of discrimination is happening right in front of her eyes and that she does not have enough power to stop it. she feels powerless, which makes her feel bitter, which makes her cynical.

still! mary is not necessarily a debbie downer to be around. she keeps her bitterness ( and hopelessness, even ) carefully hidden in boxes in her mind. on the outside, she’s filled with quips and smiles and quick comments! just a sociable bean, but just a bitter one.

is a dog person and will fight anyone who prefers cats. has a cairn terrier called bowie. she loves him more than anyone.

obsessed with tea, tbh. her ma always said that ‘there’s nothing a cuppa can’t fix’ and mary definitely agrees with this statement.

though is also a ‘whiskey in a teacup’ kinda gal

can be spotted wearing either a rly nice ass blazer or a jean jacket, no inbetween. either office-fancy or farmer-chique

fucking loves muggle culture and loves fellow muggleborns and !!!!!! she loves it!!!

very much in a take-no-prisoners mindset at this point re: death eaters. it kind of scares her, tbh, but mary is very much capable of murdering a death eater, even if she could stun them — she’s just done. she’s very. done. with them. and this whole shbang? will only feed into this.

mary is ruthless, that’s what it boils down to. she’s a lot more than that, of course, but she’s ruthless — in small things ( football matches & boardgames ) but also in bigger ones, and of course the war is the main way it shows. mary is so angry. she’s so angry and scared and tired of feeling that way and tired of being scared to lose people and herself and of death and she’s so angry that people really are this way and that they really do these things — she wants it to stop. she wants the world to be right. and sometimes she thinks the ends do justify the means.

this is why she’s chaotic neutral and not chaotic good.

like ive had her turned to dark arts before just bc she’s so desperate to. fucking win. tbh i’m sure she has a growing interest rn. stop it mary :(

and she’s also like — mary doesnt care if she ruins herself? if she becomes a bad person who’s unable to live with the shit she’s done? as long as the world is better for it, as long as kids can go to hogwarts and feel safe and the world is a safe place for everyone. what does her soul matter in the grand scheme of things? she’d burn in hell forever if it meant the rest of the world changed for the better.

emotionally driven mess of a being

is catholic but struggles a lot with religion and feeling faithful, but she does still identify is a catholic, it’s just? complicated. it’s rly complicated and she hates it.

is a bit flighty when it comes to romance, def has a lot of one night stands/fwb situations though??? she’s just like??? i dont have time for romance its a WAR

has been trying to stop smoking for five years, but alas

a proud scot. a proud latina. proud proud proud. such a fucking lionness.

mary was a beater during her time at hogwarts and was Highly competitive. threw herself into the sport tbh after the mulciber incident. she still thinks football is superior, but you know, it isnt in the air.

she’s pan and out of the closet --- something that did put a strain on her relationship with her family. ( the fact that they could accept her magic but not her sexuality ... baffles mary, but bigots have never been very reasonable. ) she’s not very open about it at home, but otherwise ... she’s out here lovin everyone.

plot ideas!

roomies —– so mary is not Earning A Whole Lot Right Now but does not want to live at home any more because 1. its in the middle of nowhere and 2. most importantly, she’s afraid of endangering her family. she needs roomies! i’d love for her to live in glasgow/edinburgh/london/idk a city!!!

hook ups/fwb’s/etc —– mary is what the old ppl call promiscuous and she sleeps around. so ! let’s talk! former hook ups! booty calls! friends with benefits! etc etc etc!

party pals —- mary likes going to pubs and clubs in the muggle part of town bc it is a LIT way to escape the reality of the wizarding world and also, muggle clubs have better music. come party w her!!!!

in the dragon’s den together —- fellow ministry employees who side eye the ministry and whom mary can sip tea and judge their colleagues with

mudbloods club —- mary loves her fellow muggleborns and i would love some muggleborn friends that she can be buds with. ranting about dumb pureblood names and traditions and the fact that wizards dont have movies

general friendship ideas —- im just going to a bunch of ideas here: hogwarts friends, ride or dies, order pals, friendly exes, fellow tea drinkers that she can go on coffee/tea dates with, friends who are growing apart bc of the war (my fave), etc.

etc —- some other ideas i want to spitball: purists who h8 on mary’s life, fellow diagon alley employees, fellow order members, Annoyances, there is solidarity in being scottish, ministry connections, etc etc etc HIT ME UP

[macdvnald]

[ CHRISTIAN SERRATOS ] • [ SHE/HER ] | is that [ MARY MACDONALD ] , the [ NINETEEN ] year/s old [ GRYFFINDOR ] alumnus , walking down diagon alley ? I heard that the last time they had their fortune read, they drew the [ HIEROPHANT REVERSED ] , which seems [ UNLUCKY ] . hopefully they won’t come to any harm, considering their recent choice to ally themselves with [ THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX ] . they’ll probably be fine - I know they’re [ PERSISTENT ] , though apparently they can also be [ RUTHLESS ] . what’s the worst that could happen ? | 

LINKS: stats, pinboard, playlist PARALLELS: johanna mason ( the hunger games ), jessica jones ( jessica jones ), raven reyes ( the 100 ), ellie ( the last of us ), rosa diaz ( brooklyn 99 ), nancy wheeler ( stranger things ), kat edison ( the bold type ), sarah manning ( orphan black ) HELLO and welcome to the mess that is this intro!! on the bottom are some plot ideas & besides that its a big old mess! but we love disorganisation! hit this up with a like if u want me to hit u up for plots and i sure as hell will <333

history

mary had a little lamb? WRONG. mary had a little calf. because she was born on a dairy farm in the highlands of scotland ( laugh at my joke pls i worked hard on it ). she was born third to two muggles – a scottish father and a mexican mother, who loved each other deeply – and would eventually become their middle child. she could have become overlooked, but mary never felt discounted at home: while her parents were very often busy with the cows, their love ran deep.

her youth consisted of this: running through fields of grass, attending a muggle elementary where people sang songs at her ( old macdonald had a farm and mary had a little lamb ), playing with the animals, building tree houses with her brothers and sister and playing football every spare moment she got. it was good and simple and wholesome.

of course, strange things happened, as they tend to with muggleborns: she’d explode her brother’s toy when she got angry, or let things fly around the room when she was laughing. when she found out she was a witch at age eleven, things fell in its place. and the macdonalds, while traditional catholics, accepted mary, which is the most important thing of it all. her parents were shocked, yes, but they squeezed her shoulder and promised to discover this all together.

which?? very much influenced mary greatly? because it went against a lot of things they – and she, too – believed in? this has allowed her to have a faith in people, and while she may be cynical and bitter at times, that faith is still there.

hogwarts was as chaotic as home, and mary settled in quite nicely. sorted into gryffindor ( she guessed it was for her rambunctious nature, but who knew ), she found herself a second home and loved it. as it turned out, she was rather good with a wand as well – she didn’t do so good at essays, though – and genuinely liked learning ( except for history of magic. fuck that. ).

being a muggleborn had its downsides, of course, but mary never really allowed herself to feel discouraged. hurt? yes, definitely, but never discouraged. she wasn’t going to let it get to her, she told herself, but it did, especially when the harsh words turned into something more. it was during her confrontation with mulciber that mary felt true, harsh fear for the first time. she felt shut down, paralysed, depressed —– but then, after a while, she got up and took some important steps. she reported mulciber, which led to nothing, which caused her to feel angry, which in turn caused her to feel determination. if the system wasn’t going to be on her side, she’d just have to fucking change it, right? mary started throwing herself in her schoolwork, determined to join the dmle – hopefully as an auror, but any position would do. she suppressed her fear and the trauma that was there, and kept her chin up.

the entire mulciber situation is up for change, should we get a mulciber, or if it doesn’t correspondent with the plot/rp canon! 

graduation rolled around and mary got the five required NEWTs to even apply. it was a nervewracking process, but once she got into auror training, she cried. like. for a year. she was so proud of herself and she felt so determined and !! man. it was such a good, defining moment. around the same time, mary joined the order; she knew the ministry was corrupt, and that it’d not allow her to do everything she wanted to, when the order DID. mary had too much anger, too much determination to fight this bullshit to just stick with the ministry, and so the order seemed like the right place.

right now, she’s fighting. she’s gritting her teeth and keeping her goals in the back in her mind and is focusing. and she does not always feel brave or confident or self assured, but that does not matter: mary macdonald always gets the fuck back up, and that’s what she will keep doing until she’s completely knocked down.

personality & tidbits

mary is a human espresso. she’s so. damn. bitter?? despite the fact that she keeps on going and that she’s fighting her ass off, she’s tired and angry that things don’t seem to be moving in the right direction, she’s feeling bitter about the fact that this kind of discrimination is happening right in front of her eyes and that she does not have enough power to stop it. she feels powerless, which makes her feel bitter, which makes her cynical.

still! mary is not necessarily a debbie downer to be around. she keeps her bitterness ( and hopelessness, even ) carefully hidden in boxes in her mind. on the outside, she’s filled with quips and smiles and quick comments! just a sociable bean, but just a bitter one.

is a dog person and will fight anyone who prefers cats. has a cairn terrier called bowie. she loves him more than anyone.

obsessed with tea, tbh. her ma always said that ‘there’s nothing a cuppa can’t fix’ and mary definitely agrees with this statement.

though is also a ‘whiskey in a teacup’ kinda gal

can be spotted wearing either a rly nice ass blazer or a jean jacket, no inbetween. either office-fancy or farmer-chique

fucking loves muggle culture and loves fellow muggleborns and !!!!!! she loves it!!!

very much in a take-no-prisoners mindset at this point re: death eaters. it kind of scares her, tbh, but mary is very much capable of murdering a death eater, even if she could stun them — she’s just done. she’s very. done. with them. and this whole shbang? will only feed into this.

mary is ruthless, that’s what it boils down to. she’s a lot more than that, of course, but i chose that trait for her app because she is --- in small things ( football matches & boardgames ) but also in bigger ones, and of course the war is the main way it shows. mary is so angry. she’s so angry and scared and tired of feeling that way and tired of being scared to lose people and herself and of death and she’s so angry that people really are this way and that they really do these things --- she wants it to stop. she wants the world to be right. and sometimes she thinks the ends do justify the means. 

this is why she’s chaotic neutral and not chaotic good.

like ive had her turned to dark arts before just bc she’s so desperate to. fucking win.

and she’s also like --- mary doesnt care if she ruins herself? if she becomes a bad person who’s unable to live with the shit she’s done? as long as the world is better for it, as long as kids can go to hogwarts and feel safe and the world is a safe place for everyone. what does her soul matter in the grand scheme of things? she’d burn in hell forever if it meant the rest of the world changed for the better.

emotionally driven mess of a being

is catholic but struggles a lot with religion and feeling faithful, but she does still identify is a catholic, it’s just? complicated. it’s rly complicated and she hates it.

is a bit flighty when it comes to romance, def has a lot of one night stands/fwb situations though??? she’s just like??? i dont have time for romance its a WAR

has been trying to stop smoking for five years, but alas

mary also works part time at quality quidditch supplies because the girl loves quidditch ---- though not as much as she loves football.

a proud scot. probably lives in scotland, but i’m ... going to keep her living situaiton open and segue into Wanted Plots!

plot ideas

roomies ----- so mary is not Earning A Whole Lot Right Now but does not want to live at home any more because 1. its in the middle of nowhere and 2. most importantly, she’s afraid of endangering her family. she needs roomies! i’d love for her to live in glasgow/edinburgh/london/idk a city!!!

hook ups/fwb’s/etc ----- mary is what the old ppl call promiscuous and she sleeps around. so ! let’s talk! former hook ups! booty calls! friends with benefits! etc etc etc! 

party pals ---- mary likes going to pubs and clubs in the muggle part of town bc it is a LIT way to escape the reality of the wizarding world and also, muggle clubs have better music. come party w her!!!!

in the dragon’s den together ---- fellow ministry employees who side eye the ministry and whom mary can sip tea and judge their colleagues with

mudbloods club ---- mary loves her fellow muggleborns and i would love some muggleborn friends that she can be buds with. ranting about dumb pureblood names and traditions and the fact that wizards dont have movies

general friendship ideas ---- im just going to a bunch of ideas here: hogwarts friends, ride or dies, order pals, friendly exes, fellow tea drinkers that she can go on coffee/tea dates with, friends who are growing apart bc of the war (my fave), etc.

etc ---- some other ideas i want to spitball: purists who h8 on mary’s life, fellow diagon alley employees, fellow order members, Annoyances, there is solidarity in being scottish, ministry connections, etc etc etc HIT ME UP

[urfavmurtad]

What is your opinion on arguments that claim the islamic golden age proves islam isn't anti-science or "problematic"?

I read this article a year ago and I’m glad I bookmarked it bc it says pretty much my exact thoughts on this topic. First lemme just get this part out of the way:

Like many other concepts that shape our understanding of medieval history, the idea of a “Muslim Golden Age” is a historiographical construct. It promotes the notion that, until at least the early thirteenth century, the Muslim world experienced an era of unprecedented stability, prosperity, and cultural production. … Putting aside the fact that it imposes an anachronistic framework on medieval Muslim history, its main argument that the period between the eighth century and the thirteenth century can be characterized mainly by tolerance, cultural efflorescence, political unity, and religious harmony is contrary to many of the facts that one encounters upon reading the history of the various civilizations which are subsumed under the category of “Islamic civilization,” a phrase which conceals the linguistic, cultural, intellectual, theological, and political diversity of the lands in which Muslims resided during the medieval and early modern periods. This is to say nothing of the fact that the narratives promoted by these “Golden Age” perspectives are usually a reworking of official histories that do not take into account the realities of marginalized groups during the same period. The “Golden Age” perspective is also problematic because it is in many ways reactionary and a response to the many political, religious, and intellectual challenges faced by the Muslim world in the modern period. History, or rather particular historical narratives about a “Golden Age,” therefore becomes an important repository for the “greatness of Islamic civilization” and a refuge in which Muslims can seek solace in order to refute the idea–promoted mainly by those hostile to Islam–that Muslim civilization was, is, and always will be characterized by death, destruction and chaos.…

In other words, the nuances of Muslim history and civilization are completely obscured in the face of broad, sweeping statements geared towards emphasizing not only the uprightness, but even the absolute supremacy of Muslim civilization, as it was believed to have manifested between the ninth century and the eighteenth century. It is at this point where history ceases to be a critical intellectual endeavor and instead becomes polemic and apologetics.  

The “Golden Age” is one of those abstract things that exists more as an idea than as a reality, like all other “ages” (“Dark Ages” etc). It’s important to point out that this is an Orientalist idea that was created to give the impression that Muslims in the distant past were productive and peaceful, versus “modern Muslims” (in the 1800s) who suck and must be brought back to their ancestors’ values by Ye Olde Hwhite People. It was not a term used by Muslims or Arabs themselves until the permanent inferiority/superiority complex (we r the Sasuke Uchihas of the world tbh) kicked in last century and people started using it.

No one can agree on when the “Golden Age” exactly took place. In the earliest usages of the term, it was just meant to refer to some vague past period of glory, to differentiate the past from the present squalor. The people using it did not have a damn clue about Arab history. In its modern-day usage, there is an enormous range from like… 700 AD to 1300 AD. Or even longer. That time period involved multiple civil wars, plagues that destroyed a huge portion of the population, genocides, invasions, ethnic cleansings, famines, breakdowns of society–as is expected of such a huge time period, of course. There were plenty of periods of stability and progress within that time period in some regions, interspersed by various issues… so where exactly is the line drawn? Was there really one “Golden Age”, or did Muslim lands, like literally every other civilization on earth, just go through periodic growth and collapse eras, up until the present?

No one can agree on where the “Golden Age” took place, either. Every single place where Islam was practiced? The lands of the Abbasid Caliphate, in general? The remains of the Umayyads in Spain? Fatimid Cairo?  Khorasan? Mughal India? Ottoman Anatolia? What? By the 1000s AD, Muslim lands were ruled by dozens of different empires. They had different laws, different populations, different levels of development and urbanization. Some were more built-up and wealthier than others, again like every other civilization on earth. Some areas were largely rural and illiterate, others were urbanized and better-educated. Some empires attacked others and absorbed them; dynasties rose and fell all the damn time. Throughout the “Golden Age”, non-Muslim lands were invaded and absorbed into larger empires, growing the area governed by Muslims even larger. Parts of the Middle East/North Africa/Andalus/India remained poor and isolated, other parts of it became wealthy and connected to trade routes. I mean… of course?

Like… I don’t think ppl realize what a large area of land we’re talking about here. Are people under the impression that every inch of land conquered by some Muslim dynasty was not only urbanized, well-developed, wealthy, and tolerant, but also homogeneous? Not all of these places had the same conditions!! Not all were even majority-Muslim throughout this period! Many had virtually nothing in common beyond the fact that their rulers were all Muslims of various sects–and many of those rulers were only nominally religious, again just like every other civilization in the world. There were different ethnicities being ruled over by different ethnicities–I mean by the 1000s the Turks were already running amok. This whole Orientalist idea that the Abbasids were in complete control of their peaceful happy lands until the Mongols destroyed them or whatever is nonsense.

It’s all a bit like saying that Europe had a “golden age” after the Italians took over Constantinople while rural French villagers had finally realized how to wipe their asses. Hell, it’s like saying that Europe already had a “golden age” during Byzantium’s peak centuries earlier while the western half of the continent was enjoying a Germanic Rave Party. You can’t assign one label to hundreds of years of history encompassing thousands of different tribes and dozens of empires on different continents.

No one can even say what they mean by “Golden Age”. Usually it’s referred to as some combination of scientific development and “tolerance”. It goes without saying that when you’re talking about like 600 years spread over parts of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia, the idea that all of these areas were happy, peaceful, and productive places for that time span is insane. Not to mention that there were plenty of eras outside the “Golden Age” that had just as much development. Why exactly are the Ottomans or Safavids or Mughals not considered part of this age? What measure of goldenness are we using rn, is there a table I can consult to see how many gold units are necessary to become Golden or some shit? What does “tolerance” mean when we’re talking about eras in which religious minorities were almost universally discriminated against, even in the best-case scenarios? Are we supposed to just ignore those laws, the mass slavery, conquests, etc? Is “golden age” code for when we were the ones oppressing the people of foreign lands?

But typically, when people (this includes not just Muslims btw) talk about the “Golden Age”, I think they are picturing one of three vague areas, in different continents and eras. One is al-Andalus in what is now Spain/Portugal. Plenty of people have heard of Cordoba and its “tolerance”. The second is the Syria-Iraq-Iran region (as though they’re all one place???) and especially Baghdad at some point before the Mongol invasion of the city, like 800s-1100s or something. Again, even when people know very little about Islamic history, they often know of the completely-misrepresented “House of Wisdom”. (In my experience, the focus is almost always on the Arab parts of that area, while places like modern-day Iran are basically ignored, despite the fact that this is where many Muslim literary traditions, architecture, and research kicked off. I think it’s because the “Golden Age” is usually billed as an era of peaceful coexistence, and there weren’t many happy religious minorities in Iran. There’s also doubtlessly some Arab-centrism thrown in there.) The third and imo less well-known one is Fatimid Egypt. Fewer people have heard of the Fatimids themselves, but many institutions and ideas associated with Arab science and learning are from their time.

These are… uhh different dynasties on three different continents in different eras. But let’s roll with it for the sake of argument. The article I linked to sums up my thoughts on al-Andalus (side note: I know someone who calls Spain “occupied al-Andalus” in 100% seriousness and it makes me laugh every time. “No wait only WE’RE allowed to be imperialists!!!” - ancient Islamic proverb):

Another myth that Islamic Golden Age writers like to promote is the idea of medieval Islamic Spain (al-Andalus) as a haven of tolerance and coexistence. Although it is certainly true that there was a large degree of coexistence of faiths in medieval Spain and some important examples of toleration, there was also a great deal of intolerance. In fact, some of the most brutal episodes in Islamic history occurred in al-Andalus. In 1066 a Muslim mob murdered nearly 4000 Jews in Granada (the first major pogrom to occur in Europe), while in the twelfth century the Almohad dynasty forced all Jews and Christians in al-Andalus and North Africa to convert to Islam (or choose exile); among the most important of these exiles was the Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides (d. 1204). The works of various Muslim philosophers and theologians, including both al-Ghazali (d. 1111) and Ibn Rushd (d. 1198), were publicly burned in the courtyard of the Great Mosque of Cordoba. Other episodes, such as the Martyrs of Cordoba (851-859) and destruction of Santiago de Compostela (999), also show that al-Andalus cannot simply be reduced to a paradise of tolerance. The existence of oppressive institutions, such as slavery and the social stratification of Andalusi society also underscores this point. However, just as we should not claim that al-Andalus was a haven of tolerance based on several examples and anecdotes, we should also not reduce Andalusi history to a sequence of ravages and massacres, as some anti-Islamic thinkers have done.

Al-Andalus was, for its early history, ruled by a remainder of the Umayyads, who had been overtaken by the Abbasids almost everywhere else. By necessity, they had to negotiate with their (mostly Christian) population to avoid unrest that would make them weak to enemies coming north from Morocco. While non-Muslims were discriminated against on a level that would cause Nazi accusations if it were implemented against Muslims in the West today, there were in fact plenty of decades in which development thrived and both Muslim and non-Muslim scientists and researchers made important progress, and there were times in which people lived in peace, even if it wasn’t an equal peace. After the collapse of the Umayyads, there was a period of unrest, followed by domination by the Almoravids and then the Almohads, the latter of whom were one of the nastiest Muslim dynasties to get into Europe prior to the Ottomans. People reacted somewhat negatively to the convert-or-die order and the “Reconquista” restarted not long after. The history of the territory is more complicated than “science and peace then iron maidens and Catholics :(((”.

The Fatimids were an Arab Ismaili dynasty that ruled parts of the ME and NA from Egypt for a couple hundred years starting in the 900s AD. During the first century of Fatimid rule it is absolutely true that Egypt, and especially Cairo, developed a sophisticated and wealthy culture that gave rise to all sorts of authors and scholars. But like every other long-lasting empire on earth, in terms of tolerance and peace, it was a mixed bag, and some leaders were better than others. Some Fatimid caliphs were out of their god damned minds, the most notable of whom was al-Hakim, who facilitated both an increase in scholarship and learning and a campaign of terrible religious persecution, against both Sunnis and Christians and Jews at different points of his lifetime. He was like the Arab Louis XIV or something. Nonetheless, many educational institutions did flourish in this era. Al-Azhar, which today puts out fatwas about how Shia people are devils, was in fact founded by the Shia Fatimids…

The Syria-Iraq-Iran trio, by which I mostly mean Baghdad bc 99% of the time that’s what people focus on, was one of the Muslim world’s most urbanized and educated cities for quite a while. The Mutazilites are usually credited as the ones to kickstart this, and this was a school of early Islamic theology that incorporated a lot of Greek/Hellenized Christian ideas into their works, to the chagrin of most other Muslims at the time. The Mutazilites shouldn’t be seen as hippies or harmless–they did often persecute other Muslims (and non-Muslims) and attacked non-Muslim lands in order to subjugate them. Eventually they went too far and triggered a backlash. But they saw themselves as “rationalists” I guess the word would be, and that is what drew them to the creation of learning institutions. These are some of the first places that commissioned the translations of Indian texts after the first Arab conquests of parts of India, and those texts included many important mathematical concepts that were expanded upon by (or sometimes wrongly attributed to) Arabs. Even as this school began to fade, it left an imprint on what is now Iraq, and huge numbers of scholars from the surrounding area did visit its large cities to further their education at various points. Again–world history is really long!! Starting in the 900s AD, it was ruled by all sorts of Iranian empires, then the Turks came to town, then the Mongols came in and wrecked shit. Periods of progress existed before, during, and after that era, interspersed by periods in which progress stalled. Tolerance went from ehh to really bad depending on the particular ruler and dynasty in charge of the area, which is completely expected.

To sum it up: there was no one “Islamic Golden Age”. There were many different eras of relative progress/tolerance interspersed with less-happy eras all throughout the Muslim areas of Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Asia from Islam’s creation to the modern day. And of course there were! This was a huge area and a huge time span. How much of that is due to Islam itself is, uh, debatable, to put it gently–certainly the enormous wealth that came from conquest and domination of trade and slave routes didn’t hurt, and not all major figures of this “age” were even religious. I don’t think many people would call the 1500s-1800s the “Christian Golden Age”. But whatever factors you want to attribute it to, it is at least true that multiple Muslim empires, at various points in time, did contribute a lot to the development of science and medicine. Granted, it wasn’t even close to every area ruled by Muslims in every time period from 700 to 1300, and to say that these areas were tolerant or progressive by modern standards is lunacy, but still.

The idea that there was one singular chunk of time in which “Islam” as a whole was tolerant, peaceful, progressive, wealthy, and scientifically knowledgeable–after which something (Mongols, imperialism, ??? we just don’t know) happened to reverse all of that–is a modern idea mostly promoted by Orientalists, and it’s been adopted as a magical Lost Age by Muslims who feel bad about the admittedly shitty situations that many currently find themselves in. But past Muslims dealt with war, poverty, dictators, destruction, and intolerance too. Sometimes people in the “Golden Age” were ruled by horrible leaders and influenced by terrible, intolerant, anti-science movements; other eras saw a backlash to that and facilitated better conditions and people rebuilt. Then there would be some disaster that set people back again, on and on. Just like today. And just like every other part of the world, including Europe. Things move in waves, man. timeisaflatcircle.gif

(Also if I see that “Muslims invented MATH. There was NO MATH before goddamn 610 AD” post with like 5000000 notes one more time imma cry tbh)