#because they know you and they know your beliefs and your morals

[je-blauge]

Even as a values statement, a general description of where you stand on a given issue, they tend to be useless at best.

Like, take "racists DNI" for an example. How are we defining "racist?" Example within an example, forgive me:

One person calls white people "cracker."

The other person says "I'm not a racist, I'm a race realist."

By your definition of racist, are these two racists, not racists, or is one racist and the other not? I know the answer based on my values system. But I don't know how you'd answer that question, so how am I supposed to know whether or not I'm a racist by your definition without interacting with you? Am I supposed to read your entire blog and figure out your moral, political, and philosophical beliefs to figure out whether you'd consider me a racist or not before I reblog fanart from you? Because I'm not doing that. I don't have time, I don't have energy, and I don't care. You are an internet stranger, not even a friend, so why should I be trying to figure out all the inner workings of your mind to know if you'd like me or not?

i don't respect DNIs not in the sense i go out of my way to break them but in the sense that i don't respect DNIs as a concept and consider them to be something of a red flag in general.

i'm not sure how to explain it but it's the combination of usually putting very serious issues on the same level as fandom stuff, the fact that half the time people don't even know what they're against beyond 'the bad stuff' therefore even further watering these issues down, and the idea that other people are expected to manage your online existence for you.

there's a passiveness to it that i think is actually a problem and it does not surprise me in the slightest that people with DNIs tend to view what media they consume as activism. do you get what i'm saying.

[mythalism]

i feel like all of my pondering and analyzing and criticizing veilguard over the past few months has actually truly given me a better understanding of what dragon age meant to me, what about it specifically was so meaningful, and why, as a result, veilguard felt so wrong. it took a while for me to figure it out. about three full months of relentless essay writing, actually. but i think if you had asked me a few years ago what the core of my love for dragon age was, whatever answer i gave would not have truly gotten to the root of it, because i think i had to experience the disappointment of veilguard to fully understand why i love dragon age. and ive realized that core is that i loved how the previous dragon age entries demand so much of the player, and deliberately prompt introspection and critical, often political, thought.

dragon age games have historically forced the player to be self-reflective and introspective about their worldview and beliefs. solas is obviously a fantastic example, as he was deliberately written to be a reflection of the player in order to prompt them to reflect on how they treat people, how our expectations of people influence their behavior, and how people are pushed to extremes and turned into monsters or saved by love and kindness. how do people become monsters? what drives them to blow up buildings or start rebellions or destroy the world as you know it? are they right or wrong? does it even matter? how did you contribute to this? are you innocent? it puts these insane, politically and morally charged situations in your face and forces you to confront them. slavery, a refugee crisis, poverty, class disparities, racism, foreign occupation, the list goes on, and you are not given the option to look away or be a bystander. you have to ACT. you have to choose, you have to make judgements, you have to take responsibility and explore your role in this world as someone with the capacity to act upon it, to make your will a reality, to fail, to make mistakes. i honestly can't think of any other video game that does this to the same extent? nor any media at all because the act of being IN the world as one of it's people through the act of role-playing is essential to how it provokes this experience in the player. its ballsy. they deliberately try to make you uncomfortable. these games are full of liars, deceivers, betrayers. the games themselves lie to you. its character try to deceive you. did you catch it? or were you fooled? what else might you be fooled by? who else might be lying to you? in the game? in real life? and then you get to play it again knowing the end, and what the game prompts changes with your new knowledge. now it asks, do you forgive them? what makes someone worthy of forgiveness? where do you draw the line? what do you think?

i dont think i realized until recently how impactful this was for me considering how i first got into dragon age at 16 years old. i dont think i had experienced anything up to that point that would put a situation like judging a war criminal who ordered the deaths of children or another war criminal who just left me to die and orchestrated a near-coup or a traumatized terrorist who just blew up a church right in my face, and said MAKE A DECISION. and i didnt know it at the time, but looking back i can see how valuable it was for me at that age to have what was effectively an avenue of exploration and self-expression of all of these moral and political issues that i was grappling with as a young adult. i played inquisition for the first time just months before i voted in my first presidential primary. i already had a political consciousness at this point, but it was nonetheless new and vulnerable and still blossoming into something more concrete. inquisition, then, almost provided a sort of political, moral and personal sandbox for me from ages 16-20 to better help me understand myself in relation to the world. the RPG-ness allowed me to put myself into these situations - like the mage-templar war and its metaphor for mass incarceration and police brutality - while i was also simultaneously grappling with and trying to understand these issues in real life. having dragon age to help me further unpack my own beliefs and conception of these issues was undeniably impactful. it provided a space, through a narrative i enjoyed and cared about, to make choices and judgement calls and better understand who i was, and what felt right to me. it asked, "what do you think?"

veilguard lacks this. completely. and lets be clear that the previous games did not always do a perfect job. many of these depictions are messy and harmful and problematic, but they at least, by extension of their own existence in a narrative that forces you to THINK and JUDGE and DECIDE, give me the space and opportunity to judge them as messy, as problematic, as harmful. i can confidently say that i think da2 is too sympathetic to the templars as an organization because the fact that da2 presents me with so many narrative conflicts regarding the templar organization allows me to not just make in-game decisions and play as a staunch advocate for mage freedom and circle abolition, but to form opinions on the game itself by extension. i can confidently say that i believe the qunari's portrayal is islamophobic because the game has prompted me so many times; what do i think about the qunari? what do i think about the oppression of the elves? what do i think about dorian being a seemingly good person but defending the practice of slavery? who should rule orzammar; the progressive asshole or the conservative traditionalist? do i forgive loghain? do i forgive anders? do i forgive solas? this in-world critical thinking about issues in thedas leads to meta critical thinking. further questions naturally follow -> what message did the writers intend to send through anders? how can i notice the echoes of how this story came into fruition in the shadow of 9/11? what do solas's endings tell me about the writers view of retributive punishment? how is bioware's portrayal of the dalish, as inspired by indigenous north americans, reflective of deep-seated anti-indigenous canadian sentiment? why did the writers stop prompting these hard questions at all in veilguard? did they only like it when it was about characters, not when it led to critical thinking about them and the company as a whole? through these processes of in-world interrogation, i am inevitably invited to analyze the effectiveness of their narrative portrayals and the writing itself. perhaps this is why dragon age is so famous for its discourse lol.

ive said before that im not sure that veilguard could ever have been as impactful for me as the previous games, partly because when you are 16 everything is more impactful because your brain is an eager sponge, unless it did something that really resonated with me as an adult. but what it should have been, at the very least, is something that could have been as impactful and formative on a current 16 year old that sees a gif on tumblr and decides to check out the game, as inquisition was to me 10 years ago. and im sure there are teenagers and younger adults out there playing this game and loving it and loving the characters and the world and thinking its great, good fun. thats great. however it fundamentally cannot have the same profound, developmentally catalytic experience it had on me because it simply does not challenge the player. it does not prompt them to question their own beliefs and the power structures within their lives. it does not prompt them to reflect on the political narratives they may have been fed all their lives. it does not confront them with the sorts of topics that get books on banned lists in florida and force them to bear witness, to think deeper, to feel guilt or horror at the outcome of your own poorly-made decision, to make moral judgements, to make mistakes, and to live with the consequences.

i think i now understand why veilguard was so disappointing to me and ultimately would be a failure in my eyes no matter if i enjoyed the combat or the exploration or whatever other shiny coat of paint sits atop it. veilguard does not ask much of you. it does not prompt any sort of introspection or interrogation of your presently held beliefs. it does not demand anything from the player except to dodge at the right moment. this is a fundamental, core departure from what made me fall in love with dragon age in the first place. if you love dragon age because you want "fantasy escapism" and fun characters to smooch, then i am happy for you. but i would remind you that can find fantasy escapism all over the steam library - farming sims, cozy games, a witch looking for her cat in the alps, etc. what you cannot find are games that are willing and brave enough to challenge and provoke the player into a better, more thorough understanding of themselves in relation to our world and it's many, complex and daunting political and moral issues. to have lost such a thing, when media like this has become so few and far between, and during a time when we need it more than ever, is a devastating loss.

[deliriouslyshipping]

do you actually think sincaraz is real?

Hi Anon!

Not quite sure what the tone of your question is, but that’s a non-issue! The answer is the same regardless. 💜

I am a shipper. It means I take parts of the dynamics of people and characters and mold it to fit a constructed narrative. I can take canon events (i.e. the way that Carlos speaks of Jannik) and call it cute and analyze it to fit a “Carlos likes Jannik” narrative. It doesn’t mean it is real just because it is based on real events, but just construction of a story. Shipping is oftentimes a big ‘ol thing of fanfiction, if you try squint hard enough. While it’s much easier to digest (audience wise) for fictional characters, shipping becomes more difficult when it involves real people as more is at stake emotionally and in the physical world. There’s an invisible line to tread between going too far and enforcing your beliefs onto someone else and just enjoying a good moment in time between two people. If you say too much or it reaches wrong person, you get backlash regardless of intentionality. Remaining respectful is the key to shipping, otherwise it dips into delusion and not the fun kind.

Short answer, yes because they do know of each other. The degree to which Sincaraz can be “real” is dependent on what you think real is. They are colleagues and know of each other; that is real. Carlos speaks highly of Jannik; that is real. Jannik and Carlos have a mutual respect of each other and their game; that is real. Now do I think they kiss and have sex? That’s a different story. There’s levels to the real. I don’t know these men’s lives on a deeper level and I shall never claim to.

(Realistically, based on my own and my perceived shared morals and beliefs, Jannik has a girlfriend and both men are - until listed otherwise - straight men. That’s a direct “What does Lexi think” answer.).

Sincaraz is real because they are real people who have interacted. They do have a relationship; it just may not be the one that you or I or someone else can envision.

This is a long and convoluted way to say that I think they are real in the sense that they are real people with real interactions with each other. I, functioning as a shipper, have only taken what is in front of me and interpreted it in my own way. My interpretations don’t make it real in the sense that they kiss or whatever. You can honestly just see it as me having fun, if you’d like, because that’s really all I’m doing. I am well aware of the reality that both men present and will not personally delude myself into thinking there is some super secret undercover relationship that has to be hidden under wraps that ATP has enforced to keep the gays away. These are grown men and I am a grown woman.

Until it is presented otherwise, Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz are just as they are. I just write and blog and I find sense of enjoyment in that. If Sincaraz is real, cool. If not, cool. Life moves on. I still find enjoyment in watching tennis and watching their interactions.

I hope this answers your question 💜

[sonicismyjesus]

welcome to sonics temple!

if you wish to enter you must read on and know what you are stepping into.

1: absolutely NO Christians! I hate christianity with a burning passion, i think all Christians are apart of a dirty disgusting system that has only lead to the pain and suffering of millions of people and if i could i would go back in time and blow up the Catholic Church with 20 separate hand grenades.

2: i’m a huge fan of sonic and am in genuine belief that he’s moral code is the only correct one. I will not go in depth here (thats for a later post) but i truly believe that sonic is more a true jesus figure then that of jesus himself. If that upsets you BEGONE

3: i am an adult, and do not feel comfortable engaging with children, they gross me out and remind me of my bitch ass sister (she’s 17) so please DO NOT INTERACT IF YOUR UNDERAGE! LEAVE ME ALONE CHILDREN!

4: i’m a strict sonadow shipper, sonamy is weird and icky and i do NOT like it, if you like it go away please.

5: i’m a sonic kin, i do not have kin memorys (at least none I’ve uncovered) but do have a very deep tie to sonic and thus see myself in my minds eye as him, i do not talk or act like him much because of my upbringing but i still know deep down that i am sonic the hedgehog so no doubles please and thanks.

6: if you are my sister, GO AWAY. I KNOW YOU USE TUMBLR! I KNOW YOU HAVE A FUCKING ACCOUNT AND I HATE YOU! HATE YOU! STAY AWAY FROM ME I SWEAR TO GO IF YOU FIND THIS ACCOUNT AND START SAYING SHIT IN MY ASK BOX I WILL GO INTO YOUR ROOM AND SMASH UR COLLECTION OF SANRIO BLIND BOX TOYS I’M NOT KIDDING GOD DAMNIT! I WILL DO IT AGAIN MARK MY FUCKING WORDS

7: i’m taken, so please don’t flirt with me :3 my bf is a shadow kinny and we are in loooove hehe

i think thats all, here’s my other dni and interests lol

Dni: people involved in proship/antiship discourse(ya’ll fucking annoying me), vocaloid fans(ex was a hatsune miku kinnie), sanrio fans(reminds me of stupid sister), and other general dni(pedo’s, zoo’s, bigots, etc)

interests: animation, manga, figure collecting, history, the color blue, cooking, and some anime.

Welcome, have a seat, eat a chill dog, and watch the show!

[khorneschosen]

I knew that you're opening argument was far too generous. I don't think you realized what you are offering me because you don't actually know a lot about leftism and I know a great deal out of 10 years of patient study and direct experience. Like leftists don't give you a free hand of how to criticize it because they know that there's a lot of areas that you can be very critical of and they will not have a response to.

Like you see very many arguments about how efficient collectivism is anymore because we very single-handedly proved that leftism of any variety is not more efficient than the free market.

Like collectivism is a very big part of leftism. It's not individual choice in fact you'll find that that is a rarity amongst leftist and that's why my theory is right now the left is pretending to be for personal choices but they actually plan to get rid of those changes after the revolution. They don't even believe that the self or the individual is a unit of society conceptually. The class is the unit of society according to leftism. So if you as a worker and individual are getting shafted under leftism that's okay because your class is technically in a far better position collectively.

It's why when they discuss workers they don't mean individual workers they mean workers as a class.

I'm being very sincere about my point of discussion metaphysics and epistemology. Metaphysics means the philosophy of what is epistemology is how do we know. Most of the time I argue it's to try and bring it to this point because this is usually where the fundamental disagreement comes from.

If you don't understand what epistemology is then you really can't debate philosophy with me because you don't understand what your own epistemology is which is dialectic materialism.

Did you know that that system is why they're sure that they're right that system I described is something did they need to be true in order for every other theory to count that came after to be right.

Also wrong implies that there is an error of knowledge invalid implies there was a failure of logic.

I really want you to understand this but everyone in politics everyone in philosophy every philosophy out there wants people to be happy successful and prosperous in their own way. The point is whether they're capable of producing that.

Like I want you to understand that argument you're giving is very much what feudalist gave back in the day as a justification for their own belief system and social structure. Because if we were to judge political or philosophical systems by their intentions then everything would be valid but we don't judge them by intention we judge them by results because that is the actual thing that should be measured.

It's like trying to say Well I intended to show this with my hypothesis but my experiment doesn't show it. You wouldn't accept it as valid You understand? Because the intention is not the experiment it is not the scientific process it's not the philosophical process and it's not the moral process. It's just an intention.

Yet you remember what I was saying about leftist try to avoid arguments they know aren't very good none of them talk about metaphysics anymore or the very least they typically only do it when you've been in with them for a very long time most leftists have never heard of how dialectic materialism works It's what they call reading theory.

Which just means studying their own philosophy. Which I have done.

Oh no dude it is not a Soviet thing It's a full-on thing with leftism it didn't start with the Soviet Union it started with Karl Marx and Engels. It's why you see it with every branch of leftism and it's philosophical community.

Again leftist don't like talking about it very much because they don't want people understanding. This is the fundamental of their entire philosophy It's foundational They need it to be true in order for every other theory to be true and it's really bad.

And partially one of the reasons why they don't discuss it as much anymore is because most of leftism now has been defined by now and Mal's whole thing was revolutionary change through one method being sloganering which is to dumb down the information to basically one line. You notice this right A lot of leftist points are just slogans.

It's really not my guy if anything it's very simple in my opinion.

Also reject private property means private ownership of the means of production please understand your own philosophy.

Looking more like a checklist these days. I want off this ride. 😭

[4dhaven]

The “Time Delay”, Multiverse + Deeper topics.

First off, yes. You read the title right. Let’s talk about this but also acknowledge you are that person now with the designer clothes, that can shift instantly, has the finest man, and that pet tiger.

Manifestation truly is instant, but there’s ONE little issue with this reality concept.

The “delay.”

Time truly does not exist but again it is a part of this reality concept.

Reality concept = Morality and normality of a reality.

If you are familiar with manifestation, you know there’s a certain amount of time that passes in this reality when you are “manifesting” aka being. This is not normal in every other reality.

BUT, you absolutely can erase this from your reality and i will tell you how in a moment.

The 3d is limited by default.

In many other parts of the multiverse, instant manifestation/shifting is the norm. It is the root and law of the multiverse. People in many parts of the multiverse just think of said thing, and boom. There it is. I have heard from experienced shifters and experienced first hand that this reality concept is one of the weird ones who experiences the time delay by default for some reason. Once you leave this reality, you won’t experience it at all unless you intend to come across it which i doubt anyone wants to. One experienced shifter that publicly spoke about it is Vanilla Love from DRA.

“it's not bad to ask anything sweetie! you are already in your dr but you probably got smt a lot people here have. a time gap in your 3d 4d concept. no idea how this works or anything but it's pretty common in this reality” -Vanilla.

When you decide you are that person which you already have been, the change is immediate occurring outside time and space (the 4d). This limited 3d cant change instantly because once again this reality concept is weird. The truth is, when you want to shift, when you assume when you are that person, you already truly are.

That is why in this reality we have the Law of assumption/Attraction, whatever. Neville/Abdullah discovered that we were truly limitless but has humans in this limited reality they had to figure out ways to overcome the complications. As i explained before, in the multiverse it’s not called that. It just “is” because it’s so normal. Everything happens instantly. You want an apple? Boom. You want to go to japan? Boom.

Like i said, this doesn’t include every other reality. Their physical reality is much different and they can instantly shift/manifest on queue. No one knows why this reality has the delay from what i was told. It’s just how things are by default here.

The delay is different for everyone because we all obviously have different minds and different assumptions. It all depends on your assumptions because that’s what we’re experiencing and living through here, right?

Your subconscious mind believes everything you tell it. It is not against you whatsoever. It never is, was, or will be. It resides in the 4d.

You all may have questions like, “Why did she shift on the first try and i didn’t?”, “Why did i shift on the first try!?” Well, there could be several answers for people who have successfully shifted on the first try, they could’ve had little to no bad thoughts, or anything holding them back. Could also be that they had no negative experiences.

We are not bound to one reality. We are all pure awareness. In this reality, we only have human bodies to experience it because that’s the reality concept.

The question you all have been waiting for…

“How do i get rid of the delay in this reality?” Let’s be real. You already know the answer, but all you have to do is:

Change your subconscious beliefs = Change your assumptions. Same thing. That’s all you need to do. Just use your mind. Change the way you see things, Change the way you think. Do anything that feels natural and comfortable. Tell yourself that there is not a delay and there was never one. Become aware of the fact that you control your own reality and everything comes from you. It’s all about your internal state.

If you still have some trouble, please read this post of mine i have recommended before.

Repeat. Repetition is key. If you repeat something so many times, your subconscious forms a belief. I’m sure you can think of times where this actually worked out for you whether it be negative, or positive. If you aren’t a fan of affirming, repeatedly doing a “technique” could also work out for you. Whatever you believe that will is fine since it’s still being repeated.

How did you learn the ABCS? Repetition right? How did famous basketball players learn how to play? Repetition. How do dancers remember their choreography mindlessly? Repetition.

Ever since we were young, in this reality we were conditioned to think and act a certain type of way. I’m sure when you were young, you were probably told that things like this were not possible but yet it’s the most normal thing in the multiverse. Interesting right?

Some affirmations:

•My mind and physical reality align effortlessly.

•There is no delay between my 3d and 4d realities.

•I manifest in under 24 hours.

•There is no time delay in my physical reality.

•I manifest instantly.

Persist because it is already done. When you are persisting, you are just continuously being the person that is. That’s it and that’s all.

If you get opposing thoughts, just affirm against them. They have no meaning unless you give them meaning. Thoughts are neutral.

“I’m not seeing results!” Girl, stop affirming that. If you can affirm you’re not “seeing results” Then you can affirm that it’s already done. I’m very serious when i say it’s been done.

“It’s taking too long!” Because you assume that it is. Keep saying that and you’ll continuously be in that loop.

I will make more posts explaining more things like this. Hope this helped.

[lollytea]

I think some tumblr posts would really thrive as private discord messages to your friends.

[nintendont2502]

btw i will forever recommend just. refusing to engage in discourse. its free its easy and you literally arent missing anything LMAO - 99% of discourse on here is just on the most pointless petty shit that literally doesnt mean a single thing to anyone in real life (i am looking directly at you "pRo/AnTi" shippers), and the other 1% is genuinely important shit... that isnt going to be solved in any productive way by insulting '''the other side''' online. arguing with strangers online never changes anyones mind all youre doing is making yourself *and* your cause look annoying as hell :thumbsup: maybe chill out. find a hobby.

[danadiadea]

I know an absolutely horrid amount of women, who experienced domestic rapes, but didn't classify them as a form of abuse. Because they've had a belief that "your partner/husband can't rape you". Or that they deserved it. Or that this is what wives supposed to experience. The victim does not always classify what happened to them as a crime, often as a form of defense mechanism or because of cultural settings. Nevertheless, crimes have objective criteria in most legal systems. The victim's personal perception is important, but it's not the ONLY thing that makes up the nature of the crime.

Criminals also often don't know that what they are doing is actually harassment, rape, violence etc. I really don't care if they understand the impact it has on the victim or not. We must not justify someone beating their child, because they believe that this is a normal way of parenting, to which they have a right, and maybe they don't understand the severity of the consequences. If you don't understand that it's unacceptable to violate other people's basic boundaries, then don't function in society and go learn how to socialize in a penal institution.

Regardless of personal perception and how the classification of an action affects our attitude towards it, the person who committed a crime is a criminal. Victims can justify the perpetrators, refuse to victimize themselves, or believe that what happened to them fits into their cultural concept of the norm, but this does not automatically cease to make beating a beating, rape a rape, and sexual assault a sexual assault. In addition, violating personal boundaries, a basic sense of security, control, and ownership of one's own body cannot just pass without any consequences for someone who has experienced that.

We cannot know exactly what Severus had thought about this, but we do know that Snape's strongest and most unrestrained emotional reactions are precisely to what is related to the marauders. He can perfectly control himself while sitting next to the absolute maniac who killed the person he held most dear, but he absolutely loses his shit with Sirius. He placidly parries when Harry throws Crucio at him, but is obviously distressed when Harry tries to use Levicorpus. The only time Snape used physical force on a student was when Harry violated his privacy and watched the SWM. I think it's obvious that this is a very serious trauma for Severus, regardless of how much he himself is aware of it and how he specifically classifies what happened to him. I am personally sure he would absolutely abhore an idea of identifying SWM as SA. But it doesn't change anything for me frankly.

Besides, yeah, the victim's morals have nothing to do with the crime at all. It's just irrelevant. Which bad words Snape used and who he sat with at lunch has nothing to do with the marauders.

(Even if Snape had been spending his free time crucifying kittens, it still wouldn't have anything to do with the marauders in fact)

one of the (MANY!) things that i can’t stop thinking about regarding that horrible discourse post is the way that the terms sexual harassment and sexual assault are thrown around. i think that whether or not the incident (where james turns snape upside down with his own spell and exposes his underwear in front of everyone) “counts” as sexual harassment or assault doesn’t really matter. at least, not in the way the people in that discourse post think that it matters.

how we as the readers would define this event based on our own morality is relatively unimportant. what actually matters in this situation is how snape experienced it. nobody involved in that discourse post considers whether snape himself would define this event as sexual assault – and even if he would define it as such, whether that would influence his perception of how harmful it was. after all, people can experience the same event differently; what one person considers a bad day can be extremely traumatic for someone else. because of this, trying to objectively quantify the degree of harm snape experienced by defining this incident as sexual assault, harassment, bullying, or whatever, obscures the most important part of the incident – which is how it affected snape! it's so frustrating, because this is something that we could actually have interesting discourse about. did james know how deeply his actions were affecting snape? would he have changed his behavior if he knew? or did he already know, and simply not care?

but even more frustrating is the fact that despite all of the animosity in that post, i don't think anyone involved actually cares about whether or not the incident was sexual harassment/assault. the function of those terms in that post is simply to assign morality to the people involved. if the incident counts as sexual assault, then snape is a Victim and therefore Good, and james is a Perpetrator and therefore Bad. if it wasn’t sexual assault, then the incident wasn’t really that harmful, so snape is Bad and james is Good. it’s mind-bogglingly reductive. i guess it's just remarkable that everyone involved in that post seems so confident in their ability to define sexual harassment and assault, while simultaneously ignoring any of the effects that this could have had on snape. instead, sexual harassment and assault just serve as proxies for morality in the never-ending argument of whether or not snape Bad.

tl;dr what you call this incident does not determine the amount of harm it caused, and also you should care about the amount of harm it caused if you're going to make claims about morality

[iwieldthesword]

"Oh wow OP sounds like you weren't Their Good Jew™ enough to avoid experiencing antisemitism in antizionist spaces, I guess you'll change your mind about antizionism now!"

Actually this is so crazy, but my political activism isn't actually based on what will personally benefit me or if I'm rewarded for it, but is in fact a reflection of my moral compass and what I think is right. Way to tell on yourself that your political views and activism are 100% based on other people's approval and what you think will personally benefit you best, though! Couldn't be me.

[timeisacephalopod]

The type of Christian who asks atheists how they don't like, murder people on the reg are so funny to me because they seem to think their religion makes them the Peak of Morality when statements like "if you don't believe in God how comes you don't do X thing" all but outright state they have no idea why shit like murder and rape is bad except that God doesn't like it lmao. Like way to admit you have no intrinsic sense of morality and need to be afraid of a higher power to be a decent person, but I promise if you're not a piece of shit it's actually very natural not to want to do heinous evil shit all the time potential punishment from a higher power or not 🤷🏻‍♀️🤷🏻‍♀️

[toddtakefive]

btw todd’s reluctance to join the dps because he doesn’t want to read (which is then accommodated for) and is scared to put himself out there (which is also worked through) being read as todd not wanting to go AT ALL, and thus neil making the proper accommodations (“todd anderson, who prefers not to read, will keep the minutes of the meetings”) and encouraging him to step out of the box that stifles him being seen as ‘forceful’ or like he can’t take no for an answer makes me insane with rage

[ford-between-dimensions]

…No—You’re thinking about it purely in a consequentialist lens. You can’t write off a bad deed just because it benefited you. By that same logic, your father killing his attempted murderer would be just as honorable from his perspective. You can justify just about anything with that self-focused way of reasoning. You have to think about it more broadly. What other schools of thought even exist? Whose ideas should take precedence? What are generally agreed upon beliefs? Who do they benefit and why?

Humans, as a general rule, look down upon murder regardless of the circumstances. Yes, while there might be special cases where someone certainly deserves their horrible fate, it's the exception that proves the rule. Philosophers may think otherwise, but murder really isn't so complicated.

Think of this way, humans are a family of the Hominidae, the same way you're a family of your own choosing. Conflict between each other is expected, and even horribly messy when it comes down to it, but there's still a governance that you have over one another. I have an authority to disrespect my father, the same way he has to knock me over the head for it. Your familial affairs, regardless of how murderous they may be are none of my business. Well—I suppose they are if I'm included in them...But not any other random third party with an ambition for killing.

That's just the thing: You may be able to make that determination between your own "collective", harbor a death wish, judge them as wrong—whatever! But only because you know them. You have a connection with them that gives you an audacity over their very life.

Strangers aren't the same. Humans aren't the same.

The reason you think so lowly of anyone daring enough to kill your "mother horde" is exactly because they've overstepped their bounds. As an outsider, there isn't that same right. Were we kind? Encouraging? Impatient? Vindictive? It’s all the same to them. They would kill your father and your mothers with the same enjoyment. They aren't working with the same basis as you. Why then would we congratulate them if they just so happened to get lucky, killing the “right” option? It isn’t based on morality! That’s the whole problem!

My point is, your own morals could do with some work. Murder, conquering worlds, etcetera. If you can hardly make sense of it yourself it means it isn't really that worthy of doing. And otherwise...just listen to me. Your instinct may be to write me off, reject anything that interferes with what comes naturally to you, but I like to think I give good advice. It's never steered me wrong so far.

…Connections are a start. If you’re really so concerned about it, aim to please as many people as you can. Endeavor to reduce suffering and promote satisfaction whenever you're able.

...The common good isn't a shackle. It's what anyone is propped up over with any sort of acclaim. It's the making of a worthy life.

*He comes running up to Ford carrying several handfuls of painted rocks*

WANNA BUY SOME FLAVORED ROCKS? (-(

@thesparkingeyeofdawn

Flavored?

[Ford looks at the rocks skeptically]

They don’t look especially edible. Did you…shrink, perchance? On an unrelated aside.

[miodiodavinci]

(single loud AA) (the forest goes silent immediately after) (birdsong returns moments later)

[here-there-were-dragons]

i have to wonder what super hardcore militant vegans think should be done about obligate carnivore animals, because in all my painfully-rapidly-approaching-30-years i've literally never actually seen anyone give a clear consistent much less halfway feasible answer on that

[psalmsofpsychosis]

yeah so i dont get the "wasn't that some fucked up shit? anyway i'm Rod Sterling" mentality some people have towards different narrative reads. It's all sweet and cool to want to explore all the different variations of a fucked up scenario, but i'm gonna need the reasons for it. I need the "why"; why are we exploring this thing? Why is it important to explore this story? what am i getting out of it? and no it's not about morality.

I dont need a story to teach me "good" life lessons, though that'd be lovely. I dont need it to be an exceptional and exemplary narrative even, but i need my discoveries to be purposeful and meaningful. Sometimes the aim for an exploration of say, a very tragic story, is to simply experiences the different flavours and nuances and complexities of a deeply held personal emotion; sometimes it helps us find the mirroring and connection and relatedness that we need to feel seen and heard and understood. Sometimes it helps you parse out your own bullshit by taking it out of your head and putting it in front of you– i dont care what the reason is, but there's a reason. There's a purpose for every single endeavour you take on, even if you haven't discovered the reason yet. "i just want to experience a fucked up shit" lazy superficial thinking, dig deeper. I hate superficial and purposeless shit; and no i'm not gonna explore the 863796373th trending trauma porn piece of the day because "wouldn't that be fucked up?" nah. I dont care, it's got no use to me. I will absolutely respect the endeavour and make space for it if someone tells me something as simple as "it is relevant to me and my interests and experiences and my mental preoccupations, and helps me refine my humanity and my understanding of humanity in general", that is a lovely and true statement. But if someone keeps churning out worst possible fucked up sad scenarios one after another under the "wouldn't that be fucked up?" flag, i'm out, i dont give a fuck. take your sad shit somewhere else, i have absolutely zero space for purposeless horrible narratives that positively add nothing to my life and dont help me navigate it in any meaningful way.