#because imo the original post is mostly correct

[27daisuki]

Hello again! I recently added subs to the dmmd stage plays (except Ren's! i do not take credit for that). Originally i only had 4 routes, but I received Mink's and ViTri's routes and just finished subbing! (thank you @minkiemoo for sending them to me!!)

They're all updated on the same Google drive that i posted before but I'll repost it here

I hope you all enjoy!! please let me know if I missed anything or if it's not working (I didn't finish subbing the post credit conversations but i wanted to get the rest of the play out there first)

translators notes and general thoughts below if u care

Woo!!!! I'm so happy i got to watch all the routes and I'm very happy to make it easier to consume for English speakers! the game blew up in 2014 on tumblr from a fan translation iirc? so I think it's only fair that I do my part now that I'm at a level of fluency where I can do that too! my goal since i was a kid to be able to watch/play things in jp without subs or translation, and i think i only recently realized i can do that now lol

it has been a very long time since I started learning jpn (i believe in total it has been 18 years on and off 💀 god) and i just wasn't confident in my skills but when i was watching Ren's route (it was the only one available overseas without vpn shit and had subs) and no shade to whoever had to sub Ren's route but i noticed some subs were just straight up wrong? (there's a part where aoba is looking at a screen at toue's speech and it was just all wrong) so i think that coupled with having friends that also like dmmd and wanted to watch the other routes inspired me to do my own damn subs lmao 😂

I'm absolutely not saying my subs are perfect, I'm sure there are spots that aren't 100% accurate (mostly because i can't 100% hear exactly what syllables they're saying sometimes because they talk so fast or just the audio quality or mumbling lol noiz I'm looking at you), but if i was unsure at any point I'd cross check the game lol if anyone notices any point where my subs are inaccurate, please let me know! i take no offense and honestly would love to be corrected so i can know for the future

also lastly, i did wanna touch on my strategy for subbing! jpn and English don't translate very well to each other all the time so there are some things that are said in jp that if i wrote literally in English would feel awkward or be hard to understand, so for some dialogue i tried to convey what they were saying with phrases that would make more sense to an English reader. So if you hear some sentences/words and you're like, wait that's not 100% exactly what they said, there's a good chance I know and i made the choice to translate it differently. it can be really hard to know when to leave something literally translated and when to localize it, or how far you should change the wording even if you keep the important information in a sentence, and which words i can leave out because of how fast they talk😭

jpn is also a very context heavy language, which means they leave out words in a sentence because it's implied that they're still in the sentence but you're supposed to fill them in. so there are many times where it sounds like in jp, they say 2 words, but it could really actually be like 6 because they're assuming you filled in the other 4 words. English you can only really get away with so much not said, and it can feel a bit weird when u read 6 words on the screen but hear the actors say 2 words lmao but just trust me on this, i promise I'm not adding words outta no where😂

one example: when Mizuki is holding a knife to Tae, he says 後悔すんなよ which literally means "don't regret this", but with the full context he's saying something close to "don't regret this because it's gonna be your fault your grandma dies" which obviously is a lot more than what he said and I can't write all that on the screen for 2 seconds. The best equivalent to this (imo) was too write "You'll regret this", because even though it's not what he said in jp, it still gets the point across to english speakers and eng speakers can fill in the blank that he'll regret this because he didn't take Mizuki's threats seriously. It's less words and it's easier to digest in the few seconds that you have to read the sub

anyway i just want it to be known that i put a lot of care into these subs and thought very hard about how I translated each sentence, so i hope that you can trust my work!

Thank you again for all the kind words! I hope you enjoy the plays!!

[homotexas]

i think geometry dash's ‘not technically a rhythm game’-ness leaves some more room for conceptual difficulty as well, prioritizing the game taking place in a 2D space rather than just directly mapping input windows to judgements. some levels play into the availability of practice mode by making you come up with the correct path through the level before executing it (e.g. parts of Sculptures by flash, VEIL by neigefeu [includes full screen flashes]). i'd also like to highlight False Horizon by lumpy, which has a clearer path but encourages you to both look ahead and at what's happening directly around the player to get through some segments, and uses some gameplay elements solely to psyche you out.

however, i think you're right for the average level. the only difference between the same tap pattern played on different combinations of mechanics is that how the player moves can map to important motion in the song while not taking up much space on the screen, something not really relevant for playing.

and, while i'm not good enough to engage with anything near the top difficulty, i'm under the impression that most interesting things do indeed get subsumed by muscle memory timings eventually. there's some opportunity to specialize into the flying gamemodes (ship and wave) because those rely more on managing your position within the allotted area that doesn't kill you, and there are levels that play with tech and weird timings (e.g. Sunset Sandstorm by crohn44, chancla by heatherhayes) but it matters a lot less than in other games because as you mentioned there's only one input, so it's just clicking with different visual indicators at a difficulty level where some people play with the music off because it's not a precise enough guide to time their jumps.

i havent played geometry dash but from what i can tell its a 1 button rhythm game (not technically a rhythm game but it's often treated like one so w/e) with rules & an editor that allowed its users to make arbitrarily tight timing windows and not much room for input density so the tightness of the timing windows became basically the only axis upon which the difficulty could vary which left a vacuum of design/expression that was filled entirely with the craft of making the levels look really really cool.

[tangents-within-tangents]

Thoughts on Echo as amputee/disability representation

First and foremost, I am not disabled or an amputee and I don’t claim to speak for those communities (and if I was I couldn't speak for everyone). What little I do know mostly comes from this youtube channel (@oakwyrm), this post, and other research I’ve done for my writing (and like one amputee I kinda knew in passing). By all means correct me and add to the conversation, I just have some thoughts I want to share because I haven’t really seen this discussed anywhere

Overview

So Echo is interesting. He is a triple amputee which is pretty rare in media. His disabilities come from extremely traumatic circumstances: injured in a near-death experience, imprisoned and dehumanized as an experiment with no autonomy over what happened to his body.

There are a few moments in the shows where Echo is treated… questionably. Like this bit where Rex uses him as an example of the Separatists' evils to convince the locals to fight back:

To be fair, yeah Echo’s treatment does prove that the Techno Union is not neutral like they claim. The modifications that everyone is gasping in horror at here obviously weren’t made with comfort and accessibility in mind, nor with Echo’s consent. But you still just want to be sure that “They took away his freedom, his humanity, they tried to turn him into a machine” is about using him as a living computer, not the fact that he is missing limbs. 

The Batch is also pretty insensitive toward him and his trauma imo, which is weird considering they've supposedly also faced discrimination for their mutations

Disabled people do have to deal with stuff like this in this day and age so I guess it can speak to those experiences. I think especially him being mistaken as a droid (and Hunter going along with it (bruh)) might resonate with some people. 

Aside from that stuff, Echo isn't really treated any differently as a character/person which is really good (as low of a bar as that is).

We get this moment in CW where Echo contemplates that yeah things are gonna be different now

While also (imo at least) showing that he is still the same person regardless, evidenced by the fact that he just echoed Rex :,) I also think it's significant that he joins the Bad Batch on his own terms and we're given a really emotional scene to specifically show that he's not just like 'lumped in with the other misfits' but that it is his choice to go where he feels his place is.

A lot of people, myself included, are disappointed that TBB didn't have more time to explore Echo's PTSD, but I think the one panic attack scene we did get is really good. Even thought it's minor it at least is an appropriate reaction from a guy who was medically tortured (which is more than I've come to expect from Star Wars shows lol)

And it's really sweet to see Omega showing Echo some empathy and consideration.

It would have been nice to see more of his adjustment period, and other side effects like chronic pain and maintenance, but there’s a lot of daily life stuff the show never had time for (i.e. we don’t know if he removed his prosthetics to sleep, but we also never saw him sleep anyway). His disabilities might take on a background role (much like the character himself sadly) but for the most part they aren’t invisible or erased, nor do they define his character and arc.

Physical Appearance

Okay this one is bit dicey, bc on the one hand, yes complaints that Echo’s paleness (most likely caused by burns from the explosion or chemical burns from the cryo-chamber) is whitewashing are totally valid. But I also think you can draw comparisons to real life conditions that affect pigmentation/complexion (like you know burns). So while I understand why a lot of fanart will depict him with his original skin tone and with hair, consider that there are real people who have to live with temporary or permanent changes to their appearance, and the idea of “fixing" him by making him look more like his old self can be problematic.

It's also interesting to note that Echo could act as a reversal of the 'disabled/disfigured = evil' trope. He's pale and bald and wears black and red, which is so often visually associated with villains, but we all know Echo is the bestest boy™

The Headpiece

Echo’s headpiece is interesting because within the show we don’t actually ever learn much about it (idk if there is more info in books or whatever bc i don’t have them so?). He didn’t have it in CW so we know it didn’t come from the Techno Union and therefore Echo probably had more choice with it. We don’t know its exact purpose but it’s most likely related to his scomping abilities. When he is hacking with his scomp in CW, before he has his headpiece, it’s clearly very mentally straining:

We don’t see him struggling like this in TBB once he does have it (though that could be bc he got more used to it over time). There doesn't seem to be much of an impact when he removes his headpiece in s3 ep14-15, except that he gets stuck in the ports every time he uses his scomp which is not something we’ve seen before: 

There might not be an exact real-world equivalent, but the headpiece is some kind of accessibility aid. It means that someone specifically designed a device to help him adapt to the changes the Techno Union made, as well as a helmet that integrates it. It’s removable and visually very present, much like a cochlear implant would be. (A lot of people actually headcanon it to act partially as a hearing aid, since it makes sense that Echo’s hearing would have been damaged in the explosion, but there isn't really any indication of this in canon.) The headpiece is never really acknowledged in the show, but I think that's a good thing. It's something he needs/wants and it just exists, completely normalized, and that's pretty cool 👍

Legs

Sigh... So from the very first episode of TBB I was really disappointed that the animation team or whoever completely visually erased Echo’s prosthetic legs (I think we all were, honestly, if fanart is anything to go by). It’s one thing when he’s in armor because he would probably want to protect his prosthetics, but we literally see him in his blacks and there is no indication whatsoever that he lost his legs even though it was not left up for debate at all in CW:

Like ??????!?

This is just really strange to me! Idk what went on behind the scenes with this decision but I don’t really see why it would be that much harder to animate or anything since it’s 3D and they've done it before. We do see some pretty sophisticated cybernetic technology in Star Wars canon that mimics real limbs:

But Luke’s fancy hand is technically 20ish years from now, so Anakin and Maul are more of a representation of what level we could expect here

So yeah, for no apparent reason, his leg amputation is effectively, visually and narratively nonexistent. Which is not great 👎

Arm!

The scomp on the other hand (uh lol!) is the complete opposite and I kinda love it!

At first I, like many others, thought it was a bit odd that they didn’t give Echo a prosthetic arm. Losing hands is basically a Star Wars tradition at this point, so robotic arms/hands are well established within the worldbuilding: 

We aren’t necessarily given a canon reason for why Echo doesn't get a cybernetic arm (again unless it's in some lore book I haven’t read, sorry). General fanon explanations I’ve seen are that he either couldn’t because the Techno Union wired the scomp too far into his nervous system, and/or the resources to give him one were deemed too expensive for a clone (what about his legs tho?), or that he chose not to, usually because he thought the scomping was useful. 

Regardless, I actually really love this choice (and it's the whole reason I made this post), because here's the thing: There’s a lot of problematic tropes out there that either erase/cure disabilities or compensate them with perks (like how pretty much any blind character is actually not blind by some sort of magic power). With amputees that is done with robotic arms. The character is still an amputee or course, and there is still value in that representation, if this story from Mark Hamill that makes me tear up is anything to go by:

but for the most part these characters function like anyone else, just with a limb that looks a little different. It’s no more than a video game skin, an able-bodied actor with a green screen glove. It “cures” the disability, or it actually makes the character even stronger than usual: 

It usually makes sense within the world of the story, but the reason it’s not so great in my opinion is that in the real world we just do not have technology anywhere close to that yet. Prosthetics can more or less replace any mobility from lost legs, but not for all the complexities of a hand (and even if they could the average person wouldn’t be able to afford it).

So

I think it's actually really super cool that Echo’s scomp bypasses the canonically-established amputee erasure and functions much like a stump would irl. He integrates it into his movements and everyday life and it’s (as far as I know) a lot closer to an everyday amputee’s experience. 

It doesn’t define his character, it doesn’t hold him back, he lives a full life, the other’s don’t treat him any differently, and he’s still a total karking badass 

The only additional thing is that he sometimes uses it as a weapon (which given his story, I think it’s cool to see him taking back autonomy in a way, and we only see that like twice)

And also the scomping, which could be seen as the 'added/compensating superpower' trope. But narratively it's no different than if he was plugging in with a hacking gadget of some kind (he didn't necessarily "need" to lose his arm for it) and it’s not like Echo is completely defined by this skill. Personally, I think it's well worth the positives of him actually having a visible and realistically impactful amputation. 

I see a lot of posts or comments out there that say stuff like “how come Echo doesn’t get a hand?” or fanworks that do give him one and I just think it’s a bit of a shame. If he did get a robotic hand, it just would have disappeared the same way his legs and Anakin’s arm did (aside from that one time he got yoinked by a magnet). When Echo did “get a hand” in the last two episodes there were comments like “yay he finally got a hand! but it doesn’t even work” but I was actually so relieved that it didn’t! Bc for one thing that wouldn’t make any sense, he grabbed it off a droid, it wasn’t designed to implement with his scomp, that would be really complicated. But more importantly because it again refused to erase/cure his disability! It functioned like a real-world cosmetic prosthetic (useless beyond appearance) which is exactly what he needed it for, so that he could blend in better with his disguise.

And he continually took it off throughout the episode and ditched it at the end. He only used it for the necessity of a stealth mission, he doesn’t feel the need to visually “fit in” in his daily life. 

And, last but very much not least, he made a dad joke and from my intel that is very accurate representation!

TLDR: Echo’s scomp is actually really cool from an amputee representation perspective, especially within Star Wars, and I think that deserves some appreciation 

[sunglassesmish]

I hope you don’t mind asking but you consistently have some of the best 911 gifs. How are your gifs so sharp? And the coloring so good? Could you do a little tutorial about your giffing?

omg thank you!!! this gets pretty long so i’m putting the tutorial under the cut

so firstly, i use kmplayer to screencap. the most important part though is the quality of the episode you have. you always want to work with 1080p, and my file is around 2gb. that is how my gifs always turn out ‘the best’ as you say 🤗 of course, colouring and sharpening help a lot, but if you don’t have a good download, your gifs can be helped but won’t be the best possible.

this is the gif i’m making having only been cropped and sharpened. i’m gonna show you how i make a gif and my colouring process (which, for this one, is admittedly pretty short and simple compared to what i usually do.) as you can see, it’s dark and pixelated and doesn’t look that appealing, no matter how handsome they both are.

also, i forgot to screenshot this before i started but the screenshot below shows the action i use to basically get all my screencaps organised to make one gif. this is after you’ve got the screencaps into photoshop in a stack.

i can’t find the original post with the action, and i’m not sure how to share it on this post… but if it’s not that important in the scheme of this post, there are many other posts out there with actions you’ll be able to easily find and download.

anyways. so this is gonna go through the process of making a gif assuming you’ve done the process of importing the frames and sharpening. (i would normally cut out my taskbar but there are so many screenshots, it would take foreverrrr)

the next step would be cropping. this is the original:

and i’m doing a 540 x 500 gif. i like mine to be bigger so i can only get the person/people i want in the gif (sorry eddie) but sometimes if i want that it’ll be smaller, usually 540 x 400.

anyways, i crop from the edge and make it a little smaller so i don’t get the white border around it. and then i move the gif away from the top and right edge of the gif just by 3-5 pixels. which i already did here and then zoomed in:

next, image size. i honestly didn’t know about cropping it and then using image size for a few months when i started giffing (i don’t even know what i did back then not knowing that.)

then as you can see, it’s 540 x 500. if you’ve cropped it to the size you want beforehand, it’ll be automatically those dimensions.

next, we’re finally starting on colouring. i always tend to start with curves and use the middle brush on the left. the top one you use to make it darker, and the bottom you find the whitest point on the gif to make it a lot brighter. but i find the middle one colour corrects too, so it’s not too bright or dark, and is less yellow or whatever colours you don’t want.

it depends on where you click to get this result, i’m not sure how to explain what i do but i just click all over and try to get the yellows off and the skin colour to look generally the same as what they have. most of the time, if i get this accurate enough, the rest of the colouring process is just to brighten up the gif.

so, then after i got my desired result, we’re brightening it up because you can’t really see them all that well. i use brightness/contrast but i tend to use exposure the most.

as you can see, i am at +2.78 exposure which is crazy high (imo). but as that and the curves layer did a lot of the work for me, i mostly have the colouring i want.

although i think it could be a little lighter, so i add a new layer of brightness and contrast this time. i don’t brighten it all that much after that. i want to make it so that either one of their faces aren’t shining, and with too much of the exposure, it can make that happen.

next, i notice that tommy is kinda green/yellow, so i want to fix that up and make him more natural. i go to colour balance for that this time. most of the time i go to selective colour -> yellow or red, depending on how much i want to change. with selective colour, it gives you a few options in shades: cyan, magenta, yellow and black to alter, all for your specific colour.

meanwhile, colour balance changes the whole thing. since i wouldn’t mind that in this instance, i just go with colour balance.

tommy is looking less yellow and green, but still, he’s not where i want him to be. (plus oliver’s scruff area is naturally ginger so it shows up as yellow, and i want to decrease that a little.) so i go to hue/saturation, choose yellow, and decrease it a little more.

now, after this, i messed around with selective colour as i mentioned earlier and with the colour yellow and red specifically. but after comparing where i was at before, vs with those selective colour layers, i just liked that previous one more. so my last layer is the hue/saturation one. and i’m done colouring!

next, i go to my trusty camera raw filter to make them stand out more and be a little crispier.

i tend to stick to + 10 up to 30, somewhere in that range. sometimes the texture and clarity match, sometimes they don’t. it’s all up to you, but for this one, i knew it would end up a little too crispy so i didn’t go too high.

i also like to add some grain so that it’s less pixelated (it admittedly annoys me a lot when it’s got those visible square pixels all over.) i never go higher than 5 in grain, it does the job well.

after that, i’m finished with my gif!

next, we want to export the gif.

as you can see, the gif is less than 10mb, is set to loop for forever, and is made with selective diffusion. admittedly, i don’t think about that setting that much, but sometimes if it’s a lower quality gif, i’ll change it to selective/adaptive pattern instead. but that’s not relevant here.

after that, we open our gif that we just made into photoshop again. this time we want to select all frames:

and change the frame delay so it’s not as jumpy. for some reason, it automatically changes so that they alternate in frames from 0.03 to 0.07, but i want them all to be 0.05.

now that’s the last step and you just export the gif again!

this is the final gif!!!

i hope this was easy to understand! thank you for the kind words, and for asking me about my process because i’ve honestly always wanted to make a tutorial. if you have any more questions, or want to see my process colouring something more difficult to work with, let me know! 🫶

[super-paper]

"Thank you for such wonderful comedy."

I've been wanting to talk about how MHA plays with the concepts of "fiction vs reality, the characters vs the actor, the world vs the stage" for awhile now, bc I believe understanding how MHA utilizes these concepts is pretty crucial to understanding our Big Bad (and Tomura!) (...and Izuku!) (.. etc!) (y-yeah...!!!) (wooo.....!!!!!)

If this post is more incoherent than usual, I apologize-- I'm just really enthusiastic about stories that play with the fact that they're stories and characters who throw themselves into a fictionalized role as a means of coping. I love the way MHA handles these concepts in particular, so I lost all sense of restraint as usual.

Hori: "I'm Like Dropping Hints That Hero/Villain Personas Are Actually Coping Mechanisms Lol"

"As Tomura Shigaraki and Tenko Shimura, I've got just one wish: the total destruction of everything that created that house." "If my origin as Touya and Dabi was such a simple thing, then... No, there are still things I want to say. Arguments I want to have."

I've seen a few ppl saying that it sounds awkward/strange to have the characters repeatedly asserting themselves in the third person, but imo, the emphasis on real names versus hero/villain names during these particular scenes plays into the idea of the villain/hero identities being "alter egos" that might not actually have the same core desires as the """"actors"""" that are behind these personas.

Tomura and Touya invoke both their real and villain names while asserting their respective wishes. Himiko also invokes her villain name, though it's less obvious to english speakers because she uses her real name as her villain name (in the raws, "HIMIKO TOGA" as a villain name is written using katakana-- and this is what she uses when asserting her wish). MHA plays with the idea of "fiction"/"Alter Egos" as a form of escapism and as a coping method, and at this point in time, the Dabi/Tomura/"Himiko" identities are still being utilized as a crutch/mask by these three very hurt individuals.

*loud, terrifying chanting* PEAK FICTION PEAK FICTION PE--

Ochako's fight being like the second most thematically important fight in the whole series still makes me unreasonably giddy btw.

To contrast, Ochako uses her civilian name alone when asserting her wish-- and imo we're meant to read this as Ochako wanting to save Himiko as herself, not as Uravity. Saving Himiko is not something she can accomplish as her alter-ego-- Ochako is able to save Himiko by stepping off the stage and becoming a "real" person, while also acknowledging the person behind "Toga Himiko (villain name)".

Izuku hasn't had his "I'm Izuku Midoriya"/"I'm-saving-you-as-Izuku-not-as-Deku" moment yet-- instead, we see Tomura intentionally making that distinction between the-hero-and-the-true-self by constantly referring to Izuku by his real, full name. And I'm pr sure Izuku is also the only one he does this to-- we see him referring to all the other heroes he encounters by their hero names alone, or by insulting nicknames (l-lol). Correct me if I'm wrong, tho!

(side note: Tomura switching to calling Izuku just "Hero" in the aftermath of Bakugate is actually a big step backwards imo-- it reads as Tomura trying to push Izuku away by shoving them both back in the hero/villain box and doubling down on enforcing their respective "roles." Not that I ever expected mister doomdere to make things easy, but, woof. Good Fuckin' Luck, Izuku ( ´･ω･) )

TL;DR The final arc has mostly been about tearing off the hero/villain masks to reveal who is hiding underneath— MHA's careful use of names and monikers plays heavily into that and its distinction between "alter-ego"/"true self" a lot. Which is... probably one of the many reasons why All For One still doesn't have a given name, as someone who has all but completely lost himself in his character.

Anyway! That brings us to the meat of this post: how does MHA take the concepts of "reality vs fiction" and "the character vs. the actor" and apply it to All For One (...and Tomura) (and Izuku--)?

"Pay No Attention to That Man Behind the Curtain!"

"If you refuse to submit, then I'll just rewrite the story." - it's amazing how all of this coulda been avoided if someone had just introduced AFO to Demon Lord x Reader fanfiction. (/j)

AFO fancies himself as the author of MHA's greatest tragedy (the desecration of Shimura Nana's legacy via the sacrifice of Shimura Tenko), while simultaneously inserting himself into its overarching narrative and treating himself as the leading villain of the story-- it's self-indulgent and intentionally invasive in the way that most self-insert fanfiction tends to be invasive, with him going to extremes to make it seem as though the whole story revolves around him. AFO wants to be both the author and the leading character and the leading antagonist. This greed is typical of him, but it also establishes him as a character who's more caught up in (read: trapped by) his relationship to "fiction" than anyone else. Again, MHA explores the use of fiction and alter-egos as an escape from a painful reality-- so, it's entirely reasonable to assume that this applies to AFO as well.

To me, so much about AFO reads as an escapist fantasy of someone who is utterly terrified of being put in a position where he is truly seen. The idea of being vulnerable, of being naked, of being "human," is intolerable to him. But by not allowing himself to feel and "be a human," he has effectively cut himself off from what he wants most. The character of “Shigaraki Tomura” is as much an escapist fantasy for AFO as it is Tenko-- It's just another (younger, prettier) layer of skin he can hide his true self in.

"so basically you're saying that AFO is a never nude" yes, actually :)

AFO dehumanizes Tomura through his attempts to turn the boy into his personal comic book character, but he also dehumanizes himself by desperately trying to insert himself into that “character." It's only fitting that Tomura’s innate humanity and capacity for feeling ends up rendering AFO himself painfully, painfully human-- and ultimately causes AFO's carefully constructed character to start crumbling.

If All the World’s a Stage, Then Let’s Destroy the Stage

"That stage is gone now. The theater's knocked down. How much longer can we afford to be spectators on the sideline?" "Once upon a time, a man named All Might showed all of us how to be a hero. But somewhere along the way, people forgot about the heart and soul that made the man." -MHA, Chapter 325

Tomura is attempting to destroy the stage, because without the stage there can be no "Shigaraki Tomura" (Or "All Might," or "All For One," or "Endeavor," etc etc etc). Without the stage, there are no more "characters" and no more tragedies. But-- without the stage, there are no more stories period. There are no more tragedies, but there are no more happy endings either. The world never recognizes the actor behind "Shigaraki Tomura" without the stage. The stage is not inherently a bad thing, so long as people can remember that the actors on the stage still exist outside of it.

But Tomura himself cannot imagine what happens after the curtains fall, and all that's left is Shimura Tenko. He is stuck in a role that was written entirely for someone else, but remains convinced that the role was always his and that the role defines him.

Tomura rebels against the story the only way he knows how--against an "author" who *LITERALLY* views him as a spicier self insert, and against a "setting" that treats his death as a happy ending-- but even so, Tomura still can't picture an ending that doesn't end in tragedy. His rebellion is not about him trying to wring a happy ending out of a miserable, mean-spirited book-- it's about burning the whole damn library down so he never feels let down or hurt by a story again.

Basically: Tomura cannot act outside the confines of his "character" in a way that will truly save him. Even as he rebels, he's rebelling in a way that is painfully consistent with the way his "character" is written-- and that's why AFO (the author) still poses such an enormous threat to him. Destruction cannot save him from this story when he was explicitly penned to destroy.

The only way to break this narrative is to act in a way "the author" doesn't expect, and to tap into all the traits that AFO desperately attempted to "write out" of him-- Shimura Tenko is someone who has always rebelled against his writing, his author, and the unfairness of this story with his kindness and his willingness to accept those that no one else will.

AFO cuts off Tenko's own power at the root by reinforcing Tomura's belief that the world will always inherently reject him, without fail, always and forever-- so he should just reject the world, too (and I've talked at length about this before, but this is why a story that ends with Tomura dying or locked away from society is an ending that fails in its goal to save Tomura). The more Shigaraki Tomura rejects everything and the more Shigaraki Tomura is rejected by everything, the more he distances himself from his root and the source of his power-- and the more Shimura Tenko gets lost in this character.

While AFO is terrified of someone seeing behind his mask, Tomura longs for it. Tenko has been there since the beginning and has been begging for someone to finally see and acknowledge him (both in-universe and out of universe).

"I’ll Be There, Changing Fate by Your Side."

AFO: "Blah Blah Blah Do you still believe myths can save you? Foolish creature. Let me be clear: every version of the story ends with you being slaughtered yadda yadda yadda :) :) :)" ENTER, MIDORIYA IZUKU WITH A STEEL CHAIR.

Izuku's role is that of a completely average boy who gets pulled into a narrative ''that wasn't for him"-- he has no heroic lineage, no hidden powers, and no connection to the centuries old conflict that drives the plot. He's just a boy who did the right thing at the right time and was rewarded for it. Izuku is someone who was "never supposed to be a hero" the same way Tenko was "never supposed to be a villain" per the "rules" of their world-- and Izuku, like Tomura, is someone who exists to destroy those rules and the expectations of their narrative, completely changing the ending.

But rather than burning the book and ending the story forever (like Tomura wants to do), Izuku believes that the story and characters can still be salvaged. There's always something worth saving. It doesn't have to be a tragedy, they can still change the ending. They can talk specifics after Tomura's crazy ass puts the lighter down.

Izuku, like Tomura and so many other characters, throws himself into an alter-ego in an attempt to redefine himself and escape from pain ("Nobody's been saved yet. Don't be the worthless old Deku who can't save anyone" 😬). He almost loses himself in the role of "OFA's torch bearer" the way All Might did-- but just as Izuku managed to find Toshinori Yagi and helped in convincing him that his life as Toshinori has meaning, Izuku ends up getting saved by his friends who couldn't care less about OFA's ~protagonist power~ and know that Izuku is just a goofy, awkward, human boy who needs help.

Like.... If we explore quirklessness as like... a narrative stand-in for characters that the story typically views or dismisses as irrelevant extras/npcs, then AFO's barely restrained anger at Izuku and Toshi (and possibly Yoichi if we're being honest) for daring to ''act beyond their roles'' becomes even funnier. AFO can't stand the idea of his power/the protagonist role being passed on to someone who seems so utterly unworthy, unremarkable, and plain. He can't stand the idea of someone without a quirk/"role" standing up to him, the leading character. Dude really is a toxic comic book fan to the core.

afo really said "I didn't like how things were going so I stopped reading and just wrote a better ending to the story :^)" like...... @mhareddit that's u buddy...........................;

Anyway...........!!!!! AFO is someone who cherry picks what he likes about a story while ignoring the actual intent/message of the work (#theabsolutestateofthemhafandom), but he has no intention of breaking down the dichotomy between heroes/villains and instead actively enforces it (.............#theabsolutestateofthemhafan--). He just wants to flip what side wins in the end.

Tomura wants to break the narrative because he sees that as the only way to escape from his pain (but in doing so, he permanently cuts himself off from being a part of a story with a happy ending). He wants to destroy the dichotomy between heroes and villains because heroes and villains "will never understand each other and never stop creating each other" (lol. lmao, even).

Izuku wants to break the narrative because he's realized that there's something more to this story than your standard "Hero versus Villain," "good vs evil" affair and that he cannot explore what lies behind those masks and labels without tearing them down, first.

These three work together well as a narrative set of Fucking Nerds, and AFO works well as both Tomura and Izuku's villain for all of the above reasons (& also bc he's the only one who is actually benefitting from their current society) ((which basically offers him an endless buffet of hurt and angry children he can exploit on a silver platter)).

Anyway! Kick his ass, Izuku.

[wanderersrest]

Wanderer's Rest Presents: An Abbreviated History of Mecha

So... I decided today that I'm going to start writing a series of posts based on the history of mecha. Not just mecha anime, but mecha as a concept in fiction. See, it should come as no surprise to anyone who reads this blog that I love mecha. I am also aware that there are a lot of misinformed takes fueled by halfwits like Gigguk that the genre is "dead," and while I am aware that mecha as a genre is not the biggest genre in 2024 as it was in the 80's or the 90's, I do know that the idea that the genre is "dead" is, like Gigguk's podcast and Gigguk himself, trash.

What I aim to do with this series is highlight the rather long history of the genre, as mecha is about as old as modern manga. This is inspired by the fact that the mecha genre is both really old and really massive. And in case you're wondering, this is inspired by Professor Otaku's complete history of mecha series. There are just a couple of differences:

Unlike Professor Otaku, I like G Gundam. That means that I'm a cool person and definitely not petty.

Also unlike Professor Otaku, I want to give the series that I mention in these posts a fair shake, even if I don't like them. I'm not going to watch every series mention here (as even watching every series I plan on listing would be insanity), but I do want people to be aware that they exist.

As hinted at above, I don't plan on covering every single series out there. The sheer amount of just mecha anime is already too much for one person to watch through.

Okay That's Cool, Wanderer. But What's a Mecha?

Good question, actually. Pop culture often defines mecha as being giant robots that are usually piloted by someone. And while that is correct, it is still a narrow definition. It cuts out a lot of influential works that don't quite fit the mold. Things like Astro Boy, Space Battleship Yamato, and Magic Knight Rayearth are series that are worth talking about when it comes to mecha even if they don't quite fit right in with the rest of the canon (and from here on out, I will be saying canon as opposed to genre due to the fact that canon can mean "a collection or list of sacred books accepted as genuine"). And to me, those series are just as worth mentioning as things like Mazinger Z, Getter Robo, and Mobile Suit Gundam. And in case you're wondering, yes, I will venture a little bit into video games and tabletop games. So sit tight Battletech fans, I'll eventually get to you.

Some Transparency Required

I do think, before I start working on this series proper, I should be transparent about things. After all, I am human. I have my own preferences and biases, and I feel it would be disingenuous of me to not disclose this before I started running through all of these shows. For transparency's sake, I will disclose the biases I know that I have. I don't know if I will cover every single one, but I will certainly try to.

My favorite mecha series are Mobile Fighter G Gundam, Patlabor, The King of Braves GaoGaiGar, Magic Knight Rayearth, and Gun x Sword among others.

My least favorite mecha series are New Mobile Report Gundam Wing (both the TV series and Endless Waltz), 86: Eighty Six (no 86 fans, your series isn't special because it's gritty. Iron-Blooded Orphans did everything you were doing but better IMO), and Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion (Mostly thanks to the second season).

Due to how fans often use the series as a means of talking down Japanese-styled mecha, I may have a tendency to be a bit more dismissive towards Battletech.

I actually prefer Prince of Darkness over the original Martian Successor Nadesico. As for GaoGaiGar, I prefer the original series over GaoGaiGar FINAL. I do like regular Nadesico and GGG FINAL as well though, just not as much. This shouldn't be surprising if people remember that this is similar to my tastes relating to Patlabor.

I have not watched Gundam SEED. So if you're expecting me to dunk on it, I probably won't. Likewise, if you're expecting me to say that it's underrated... I also won't say that.

Likewise, I haven't watched a single Ryousuke Takahashi mecha series, nor have I watched either Macross or Giant Robo. I'll get to it one day though, I promise.

I love the idea that Attack on Titan and Ratatouille are mecha shows.

Due to my past of being a contrarian teenager as well as dipshits on Reddit constantly overhyping everything, I tend to be averse to the more popular shows.

I'm also more skeptical of the "Not Like the Other Girl" shows like Evangelion, Code Geass, Gurren Lagann, and 86.

There is a non-zero chance that I will sneak Gintama into this somehow.

But those should be most of my biases out of the way. I hope you'll join me on this long journey. If you're worried about my Gintama post, don't be. I'm still working on it, but I do think it's going to be a bit different from the rest of my posts.

[brydeswhale]

My Giant Anti-Jonsa Hate Post, AKA why a person might not ship Jonsa other than hating Sansa :P

I'm warning you ahead of time, this is mostly me rambling. I'm not smart. Lots of smart people you can read, go read them.

So, I've noticed this tendency amongst some Jonsa shippers to sort of dismiss any criticism as Sansa-hate. Sometimes they are actually correct, some people only read ASOIAF in order to see Jon as a typical hero and any female character as simply the reward Jon gets for being a hero, which is so weird. There is a similar feeling that the biggest reward a female character can get is Jon's dick, so, um, yeah.

Having said that, I have a lot of reasons not to ship Sansa with Jon outside of how my ego feeds into my reading. I have read pics with them as the pairing, tbh, if you're a Sansa fan you kind of get pulled into it just because it's so hard to find ANY fics where Sansa gets treated decently that I just treat Jon in those fics as an original character.

I will now list my non-jonsa feels, in no particular order.

I do not believe the text supports it.

A lot of smart people have dug through the text and pointed to what they believe are clues. I'm not going to go through all of these because some of them are, IMO, a reach so far that the proponents have hired a gibbon to do the reaching.

One of those that kind of makes me super perplexed is the whole Jonnel/Sansa thing. Shippers will point to that as some kind of sign that their ship will sail, but honestly, I do not think so. Or at least, I hope it's not a portent of Jonsa.

Jonnel Stark and his plot line with the original Sansa seem to have more in common with the modern story of Alys Karstark and her flight from her uncle and cousin, who attempted to usurp her claim to Karhold by forcibly marrying her.

That is to say, it's a dark, sad story, made all the worse by the fact that Sansa eventually died, and she and Jonnel never had issue. In fact, Jonnel didn't have kids with his second wife, either. Possibly divine punishment for usurping and marrying his niece, IMO.

Most of the other "Jonsa" foreshadowing, I'm sorry to say, seems similar to that, basically. Either it's a sort of retelling of a completely different event happening in the present, or it's a sort of a weird, long reach. Like the idea that the comet is meant to foreshadow Jonsa, which is, honestly, so weird it's laughable, or pointing to times that Jon has complimented Sansa's looks. Some people even try to fit the Bael the Bard story to Jonsa.

It doesn't seem to fit with the how the text treats incest, in my opinion.

Much is made of the show's revelation that Jon and Sansa, despite being raised as and considering each other siblings, are biologically cousins, what with the revelation that Rhaegar kidnapped a teenaged Lyanna Stark and murdered her through reproductive abuse. For a lot of people this makes the incestuous aspect of the text "not count"(which is annoying for other reasons I will discuss later).

I just don't think "they're actually cousins" really works here, either, though.

GRRM sort of seems to use incest as kind of a shorthand for corruption. The Targaryens are the main example, their inbreeding a symbol of their incapacity as humans, and Craster is a giant screaming red flag but there are other incestuous marriages that seem to operate as symbols for the people involved, most notably the elder Lannister and Stark marriages.

The marriage of Tywin Lannister is an interesting sort of backdrop for the Lannister family as a whole. Joanna is often regarded, in both fandom and the series itself, as a sort of softening influence, a better version of Cersei, the true queen of Casterly Rocks, whose relationship with Tywin was very normal and healthy.

However, when examining Tywin Lannister's serious case of narcissism, I find it very unlikely that he would be capable of anything resembling normal in a marriage. It seems likely to me that his love of Joanna was more likely based on the same thing Cersei and Jaime's relationship was based on, AKA a damaged, narcissistic monstrosity. The marriage, IMO, was based on the fact that Tywin was attempting to emulate the elitist principles of the Targaryens. Only a Lannister could match a Lannister, in other words.

Then we examine the children of this incestuous union. I don't think its a coincidence that Cersei, Jaime, and Tyrion are as fucked up as they are. The example they have of a relationship is fucked up and incestuous, so it wasn't surprising that the twins emulated it. And Tyrion being Tyrion is also not shocking. Joanna may have demanded a place for him, but how much of that was motivated by love, and how much by a similar narcissism to Tywin and Cersei's, the idea of the child as the extension of the self.

But, @brydeswhale , I hear you say, because I have audio processing disorder, what about the Starks?

Well, tbh, I'm pretty sure the Lyarra/Rickard thing being incestuous was an afterthought, another way to mirror the Lannisters, but I do not think they're intended to be an example of incest done right. Rickard had some pretty weird obsessions of his own, if certain people are to be believed, and Lyarra is a near non-entity.

And while their kids seem to be, well, less fucked up than the Lannisters, it's still worth noting that two of the four are dead, of the two survivors, one dedicated himself to ensuring his family's full isolation from the rest of the country and the other joined a penal colony full of slave soldiers dedicated to what amounts to a border patrol that, whatever its origins, seems intent on enforcing an economic and cultural barrier to a random set of ethnic groups beyond the Wall, so good job there.

And even when Brandon and Lyanna were alive, well, no fault to Lyanna, she seems like a good kid, but Brandon was apparently an antagonistic dick and, well, he doesn't seem to have been very respectful of women.

Incest almost seems like a code in GRRM for "something is very wrong here and it won't end well, even for the innocents" and I just don't see him choosing to go against that.

As an incest survivor, the lightness with which the Jonsa fandom treats that aspect of it is messed up.

I don't tend to talk too much about my past as a CSA survivor, but yeah, there is it is. It kind of weirds me out, DOESN'T trigger me, just weirds me out, how casually the ASOIAF fandom treats incest bc, um, yeah, its not really casual. I feel like GRRM treats it with a great deal of gravitas, but fandom kind of skips over it, which is weird.

The "Real" siblings stance is obnoxious

There exists, within fandom, a tendency to devalue families outside the biological family.

It's not specific to ASOIAF, don't get me wrong. It's the same thing that had people giggling over Thor's defensive "he's adopted" or talking about which Robin is "the real son". It also lends itself to pairing in those fandoms based on those same ideas. It's not incest, after all, if they're not really related?

This might seem like small potatoes to some people, but the problem with this is that it's also a problem outside fandom, and it's something I've dealt with my entire life.

See, my family also isn't "real" according to this rule.

I have foster siblings, step siblings, half siblings, so on and so forth. I have siblings I'm almost completely alienated from, siblings I love more than life itself, and siblings who are ex-siblings, pining for the fjords, kicked the bucket, bought the farm, blah, blah, blah.

So to hear people talk about how Jon and Sansa aren't real siblings because of the complexity of how their relationship came to be, how close they are, whether or not the moon was full when they met, is actually kind of hurtful.

It tells me something about the people using this trope and what they subconsciously think of my family. How "real" we are to them, and how much we matter. It kind of makes me think we don't really matter, that because we don't share DNA, we don't count.

Also:

Jon is one of my least favourite characters and Sansa can do better.

To Be VERY VERY clear:

I'm not saying don't ship them, don't read it, etc, etc. If you want to, it's up to you. Like I said, I read it sometimes, just because it's so ubiquitous. I have plenty of pairings that other people might hate, or think are immoral, etc. These are just my feelings, tbh.

I just think dismissing all criticism or even plain distaste for this ship down to not liking one character or another, or whatever, is kind of messed up. There are lots of valid reasons not to like a ship, and it's worth considering all of them.

[lo-diehards]

NBC's Law & Order Franchise -- A Franchise in Disarray

NBC's Law & Order franchise (which started with the original series in 1990) has seen numerous changes over the years, but in this post-COVID-19 era of television, some of these new changes are not for the good.

The Law & Order 2022 reboot is lacking what made it's original run legacy television, Special Victims Unit lost a beloved show runner/executive producer (Warren Leight who decided the leave at the end of season 23) and cast member (Kelli Giddish, who was fired at the start of season 24, which later resulted in controversy as details of her firing came to light), and Organized Crime which has had a revolving door of show runners/executive producers since it's inception BEFORE it even made it to air.

I'm going to start in sequential order in which negative change [IN MY OPINION] came into play with this once beloved TV franchise that was once taglined by critics and press as "Must See TV/Most Watched Television"

Please Click the read more tab below to read my thoughts on the brand and what I feel can be done to correct the course of the brand, before it's too late... hang on to your seats!

Law & Order: Organized Crime (2021-present, season 3) - a Disorganized Mess.

The Christopher Meloni led series has had numerous complications behind the scenes since the show's inception pre-production. Chicago P.D.'s Matt Olmstead co-created the show with Dick Wolf (and later Ilene Chaiken) and Olmstead left the production after the pilot ("What Happens in Puglia") to be replaced by Chaiken (of The L Word fame). Law & Order: OC never started with much of a premise and a way to establish itself as it started with Stabler mostly bringing Kathy Stabler's killers (the Wheatley's: portrayed by Dylan McDermott and Tamara Taylor) to justice. And in between that, Stabler and the unit going in and out of undercover assignments. The Organized Crime Control Bureau has never really been fleshed out since the series start; season 3 brought some new detectives into the fold to assist with that but storylines in the serialized series have been all over the place.

While Organized Crime was meant to distance itself from the formula of the Law & Order brand, it doesn't feel like a Law & Order show - it feels more like the Stabler show to where we mostly see Stabler as IMO this almost vigilante cop seeking retribution, in this day and age (and Stabler's because he should definitely be matured from this kind of mindset), it doesn't work. This show lacks "the Law & Order feel" (title cards don't even exist in this show except for one episode, "Gimmie Shelter") and I believe it's why the series doesn't hold audience much as SVU or even the rebooted mothership.

It doesn't help that the show is now on it's 6th show runner, being SVU's David Graziano (who is surrounded by a controversy of his own that seems to be being pushed under the rug and ignored by higher ups at the network and at Wolf Entertainment). Olmstead, Chaiken, Barry O'Brien, Bryan Goluboff from SVU, Sean Jablonski and now Graziano. What ever is going on behind the scenes at OC needs to come to a full stop otherwise this show won't make it to syndication status (5 seasons, 100 episodes). This show has a super talented cast that deserve the best; Danielle Moné Truitt and Ainsley Sieger absolutely shine!

Law & Order (reboot 2022-present, season 2) - more like crash & burn.

Now this show is really pushing my buttons and it's only because of how the stories are being written for this reboot starting from the very first episode. Dick Wolf and the network decided to give the mothership it's very much deserved second chance (it never should have been canceled) and they've managed to put together a stellar cast out of Jeffery Donovan (Burn Notice), Hugh Dancy (Hannibal), Odelya Halevi, and Camryn Manheim. Sam Waterston returned as Jack McCoy and this season Mehcad Brooks (Supergirl, Necessary Roughness) replaced Anthony Anderson who only opted to do one season.

I'm not going to sugar coat this, making Rick Eid (who 'developed' a show that was already developed once back in 1988/1990 when he was still in grade school - it's a reboot where nothing has changed formula wise!) the show runner/EP over this series is a very poor business decision. Eid has had a poor history within the Law & Order franchise itself. He was part of a writing team that Dick Wolf and the network had to intervene and dismiss back in 2007 due to declining ratings on mother ship due to the decline in the quality of the writing at that time, Wolf made him show runner over Law & Order: SVU's 18th season and Eid "had to move on [to Chicago P.D.]", basically for the same reason. The. Same. Reason. It's a case of "Fool me once, fool me twice," we're on the 3rd now.

From the minute "The Right Thing" hit the airwaves, I knew it was 2007/2016 all over again! The reboot storylines are tone-deaf, have massive plot holes, pull directly from the headlines without much deviance, skew to certain political leanings (hard left and right) and is shoved into the faces of viewers, and problems with legal strategy that actually go against the actual law and procedures that wouldn't even wash in an actual courtroom (and yes I am aware it's work of fiction but that is why they have legal advisors on the payroll - or at least I hope).

And the characters? Caricatures. I can't really root for any of them - Samantha Maroun & Jalen Shaw (Halevi & Brooks who are great) are the closet ones who are actually being fleshed out as characters that can be relatable/likable. Cosgrove and Price need work bad! Cosgrove is basically a more hard-core Elliot Stabler with a thick Bronx accent in one episode and then another episode he's a young Lennie Briscoe/Michael Westen from Burn Notice mix; it's not consistent. Most seem to prefer him portraying Cosgrove in a Michael Westen-ish style as opposed to Stabler 2.0 (if that's the case swap Donovan and Meloni).

Nolan Price? I don't know where to start. Who is Nolan Price? I don't know honestly but I can tell you he is NOT a great prosecutor. He's no Mike Cutter, McCoy or even Ben or Peter Stone. Price is written just as inconsistent as Cosgrove is and the cases as they make it to court and trial make Price worse, because it seems ambition and wanting to win is the only thing this character has. "Bias" that just aired showcased Price as a colleague was murdered and he had a personal investment in the case. He should have be recused and maybe even suspended due to his misconduct. And Price's arrogance in this episode, telling Jack McCoy that he let him run with the case because "I'm the best." I love Hugh Dancy and he's a magnificent actor but this writing is hurting this role for him in my view.

And speaking of McCoy, where the hell is he? I understand Sam Waterston can't do what he was doing back in 2007 in the courtroom scenes and he is the district attorney but my goodness, his scenes "lack meat" now, it's all bone. Jack says something pithy about the case, yells a little, and walks out his office/elevator/outside. Eid said in an interview that he wanted McCoy to walk in the shoes of Adam Schiff (Steven Hill), if that's the case Schiff was way more involved in his prosecutors cases and had more say in the direction the cases go. Again, it goes back to the writing.

Unlike on OC, Law & Order could use a show runner change, and it could use it ASAP, because what's airing as quality in this reboot is tarnishing the legacy that the original mothership established.

Law & Order: Special Victims Unit (1999-present, season 24) - what is going on behind the scenes and on screen is especially heinous.

Warren Leight's departure last year was the catalyst, however Kelli Giddish's firing was the irresistible force slamming the immovable object - so to speak. Kelli Giddish was fired in place of Wolf/NBC wanting younger blood (Molly Burnett, Days of our Lives); not even a year prior Wolf/NBC faced a form of backlash after dropping two cast members of color - Demore Barnes and Jamie Gray Hyder - in exchange for one male (Octavio Pisano). Star Mariska Hargitay tried to step in to keep Kelli on the show but she was overruled by Wolf and the network.

Meanwhile something that hasn't been overruled but more overlooked; new show runner David Graziano's prior and current accusations of bullying, misogyny, and toxic behavior on sets and behind the scenes of show's he's worked on, including SVU. Graziano took to his Instagram to try and 'explain' his accusations but he did not deny them. How can you write and supervise any kind of story about women's empowerment, healing after trauma and sexual assault, inclusiveness, and justice as someone who has/is doing personal actions against that very stance? And how can Dick Wolf and NBC over look it? Money talks in short. He's also running OC for the last 3 episodes in this season.

That aside which is problematic of itself, like the mother ship, the storylines on SVU have taken a turn sideways. Season 24 started off pretty solid, it wasn't the best it's been in it's prime and younger years (S3-7, and again S13-17), but it was passable to view. Now? Post-Kelli Giddish it seems like the focus is on Muncy (Burnett), Velasco (Pisano) and the recurring guest cast (Kevin Kane and Jasmine Batchelor); ICE T and Peter Scanavino's screen time is noticeably decreased this season than season's past. And like mothership's storylines, inconsistency is on display in full view.

Under Graziano in his first 6 episodes (Gimmie Shelter is written by Rick Eid and Gwen Sigan as part of the season premiere crossover) were the solid ones, even before Kelli's last episode I felt a change in tone coming into play; and coming off of the season's Bronx trilogy its even more noticeable. It's like it's a mix of Eid's season 18 and some other show that's NOT SVU. The focus has gone off of the survivors, veteran characters, the pursuit of the worst criminal offenders, the pursuit of justice and the unit itself. SVU has gone off of the rails and if they want this show to continue to break records and preserve the legacy that it has both on and off screen, they better make some changes fast. SVU's ratings haven't exactly decreased but all this 'change' could soon have a negative impact on them; SVU's dominate the entire franchise right now as a show that's consistently been on air for 24 years now in a changing TV landscape.

In summary/my suggestion(s): the Law & Order franchise needs to undergo some major changes behind the scenes, starting with the gentlemen running these shows. I don't directly want to call for the dismissal of show runners/executive producers Rick Eid and David Graziano (certainly from SVU) but I do feel this is the start absent them being given a different set of marching orders that they should follow (not likely). The issues I brought up above only touch the surface, I don't want to sound nit-picky but things could and should be better.

This franchise is 33 years old and still going, and it could go longer and further but if there aren't any immediate changes that make an impact and turn things around, and the shows keep going about as they are: this franchise won't be around much longer. "The Story Is Everything" is what Dick Wolf has said about the L&O brand and NBC even used that as a tagline during the prime years on the network 2003-2007. That's where the investment needs to start.

[tekutiger]

For the past week or so, I've been logging in to Disney Dreamlight Valley again (after a 2 month hiatus 😅). They have a "Haunted Holiday Star Path" event going on right now. When it comes to games I genuinely like, I do actually have fomo and I hate it, lol. So, here I am 🙃

I've been playing a bit of catch up. Like, they added Beauty and the Beast! That was my favorite OG Disney movie growing up. And then Mulan came along and I was like !!! Okay now those two are my favorites (because I couldn't decide between the two).

I also finally watched the live action Beauty and the Beast for the first time. It's been out for a while now, I know... I'm just slow when it comes to watching movies or anything on tv. In my opinion it was very well done! I'm not a harsh critic though.

I also watched the live action Little Mermaid and I really loved it. It gave the characters so much more depth, and displayed more marine creatures than I thought they would have. The actors put so much life and emotion into their vocals in their songs, I was very impressed.

And I touch on this a bit below, but being an octo-nerd, there were things about Ursula that they added to the movie, that was not in the original, and I was like holy crap! I wonder how many people are going to catch onto that? It's when she's shuffling through her ingredient cabinets to create one of her concoctions and her 'arms' (she refers to them as 'tentacles', probably because younger audiences will be like ??? if she says arms, but the correct term is actually 'arms'). They are acting independently from her because octopuses have nine brains. One brain in each arm and one in the mantle (head). So each arm thinks for itself. When she says she can't find anything, everything always gets lost, it's probably because her eight arms are putting things back on the shelves however they please and her main-brain (mantle i.e. head) isn't paying attention to keep track of it all 😅

Okay- weird thing that I complain about often to my friends cause we all play this, and unrelated to the live action movie. Eric, in this game, stalks me, and it's flippen weird. I think everyone who plays this has a character that stalks them though, as if it's in the programming and it's RNG of who it is. I say that because I'll go to Twitch and watch it happen to streamers, and they'll make comments about their 'stalker'. It's just somehow my 'stalker' ended up being Eric 🤷🏻‍♀️. For some, it's Kristoff. Others, it's Maui. I dunno... it's weird.

(For the record, I know they're all programmed to come and find you, but I mean- in this case, there's ONE specific character that follows you WAY MORE than usual.)

Anyone who knows me, knows I have this obsession with the Ocean (also space) and octopuses, and jellyfish... hence why I have the Ursula attire (she's the Octo Queen!). Her quest line, should you put out the moonstones and buy her bundle, is worth it imo, but I'm also biased as heck. I just find it ironic that I'm literally dressed like Ursula 2.0 and Eric stalks me more than half the time I'm in-game, lol 😓. The sound of his flute puts me in that state of like 🙀 -startled cat, eyes wide, looking everywhere, ducking behind furniture-

Ariel, go pay more attention to your man plskthx. I will give it to the live action production for the movie. The actor who plays Eric is handsome and plays the role well 👌🏻 (doesn't make me wanna hide any less though in-game 😑)

I totally veered off course of why I'm writing this post. My rambling is getting worse, akjdhjs.

SO. The star path...!

Last year when we got the first Halloween star path, if memory serves, I recall it not having any Tim Burton, The Nightmare Before Christmas items at all and being really bummed out about it. I figured it was because they couldn't get a contract signed, permission, copyright something or other. The game was still very new afterall.

There's a biome in DDLV named the Forgotten Lands and it's mostly purple hues. I knew the aesthetics would be perfect for The Nightmare Before Christmas if I just waited for it... and now this year a handful of items are in the Star Path event. I've been so ready.

Oh, and we also get... !!

😄

With the new items, I totally remodeled my biome. It's looking cute~

Here's some better shots of a couple Nightmare Before Christmas outdoor furniture pieces (just a couple but they're big pieces). The notorious Skellington's Hill and the popular Frightful Fountain. 👇🏻

And the great thing about this game is, we're just going to continue to get even more fun items and grow as the game develops. We also have the Christmas Star path coming up, at some point. Wonder if there's going to be some interesting items in that 🤔

Oh yeah, I got a cutie Pirate Parrot from this Star Path too ❤️

One Final Edit: On Twitter they mentioned that they added an "AUTUMNBUNDLE" code. If you're playing and missed it, you can copy and paste that in for some furniture pieces.

Should be in the Settings menu > Help > Code box (under 'import avatar') > hit 'claim' after typing it in.

[julesnichols]

Who do you think are the Silo counterparts to the Snowpiercer characters?

Okay here we go, some of these are gonna be similar or the same as the post @onetrainscifi made a couple weeks ago because they just make sense, also going purely off show Silo characters:

Melanie: she's what you get if you crossed Bernard and Jules. She's an engineer yes but her story, especially in season one, of hiding who she really is to keep them all afloat is more like Bernard's and makes it so it can't really be a 1 to 1 comparison with Jules.

Layton: a cross between Jules and Billings, but even these aren't entirely 1 to 1. He's like Jules because he's too curious for his own good and eventually ends up paying the price for it by crossing the wrong character. But he's like Billings because he does have the experience of having been in law enforcement before. So while I can't really think of two characters, let alone one, who are an easy and accurate comparison I do think that these are as close as you can get.

Till: Billings, with a little bit of Sandy. Young, some experience, have biases at first but judging by how Billings was acting might start to come around to the idea of there being other ways of doing things. And in the case of Sandy, realized that hey maybe this person can actually do their job.

Ruth: Jahns, with maybe some Sandy and Billings thrown in there. She's diplomatic and good at it, but she's by the book to the point of not questioning it and originally has her biases. A bit too dark at first to fully be Jahns imo but mostly Jahns, I'd say, with the other two characters' similarities giving her her edge.

Ben: another character I have trouble finding one or more characters I feel like fully fit. But I'll give it a go and say he's some combination here of Knox, Lukas, and a little bit of Shirley. Knox because the times we see Ben betray Melanie, it's not about using her for her knowledge and leaving her behind, it's because he thinks it's what's best for everybody, even when it's not morally correct. He let Wilford catch up to them because he thought the risk was worth it for the parts (and I could and have gone on rants about this before so I'll spare you them now and just say if you wanna hear them again I'll dig them up), and when Wilford forced his hand by braking he chose to leave Melanie behind rather than risk derailing all of them. So it's definitely not a 1 to 1 comparison to Knox, but there are those similarities. Lukas I feel like while it's again not 1 to 1, there's more similarity between him and Ben than George and Ben. Lukas is softer and more emotionally available than Jules and again it's not 1 to 1 because we've seen what happened there in Silo (though who knows what next season will bring), which parallels the fact that Ben is far more emotionally available than Melanie and arguably in some ways more devoted. The little bit of Shirley is because he'll help Melanie with her plans even when they're reckless and is loyal to her.

Wilford: a mix between Bernard and Sims. I don't really have much to say about this one it's more just vibes and it's not like, fully 1 to 1 for either of those, but they're as close as you can get.

Javi: Cooper, I feel like, is the most similar but it's not 1 to 1. He's younger than the other two engine engineers and he's not always included/seen as an equal like Cooper. Unlike Cooper though he's been around long enough that they really should know better that he's as good.

Bonus: a few Silo to Snowpiercer character comparisons because I want to:

Jules: a cross between Melanie and Layton. Brilliant engineer, definitely autistic like Melanie, may or may not be in love with her generator. Decides, rather than is dragged, to go up top to solve a murder and accidentally stumbles onto something bigger that gets her in trouble with the powers that be.

Bernard: a cross between Melanie and Wilford. He is hiding who he is and is pretending to be innocuous like Melanie, and lets other people be blamed for things he does. But while Melanie isn't bothered until she has to do her own dirty work when it's beyond like, drawering somebody, Bernard can and does his own dirty work at points and does not seem bothered by it at all.

Billings: kinda Till, kinda Roche. Has more experience than Till and will probably take a bit longer to come around than she did, the way Roche did. Has a family who is his main concern/reason for not questioning things the way Roche has one. But is also still new enough to this particular job to be like Till, and I definitely think he might be one of the first to start questioning things in the Silo.

[yamayuandadu]

Just going to note that Tokoyo no Kami is referred to very clearly as a kami by Okina. 私に敵対する神の一つだ is very different to interpret another way I highly doubt "It's to reference Okina as a champion of the downtrodden" is the correct reading - it's pretty clearly IMO just something ZUN did to make Larva more interesting.

I do think that was an overinterpretation, yeah. This being said, it was written at a time when tumblr (well, the Touhou tag, but you get the idea) was abuzz with tall tales sourced from a weird article trying to project the notion of cargo cult back into the bronze age (credit where credit is due tho, the entomological part still seems sound to me!) and from a tumblr post which sounded like it was written during the peak of shinbutsu bunri (the wicked buddhist has infilatrated the Nihon Shoki to mock shinto!!! Nvm that it's difficult to speak about shinto in the modern sense at the time NS was compiled) so I at the very least think it is virtually impossible to discuss Tokoyo no Kami without highlighting we're dealing with something that appears in a single passage with limited, if any, larger impact and almost definitely should not be taken as an actively worshiped figure. It is very much a "folk hero vs one dimensional villain" story, as far as I can tell, and not even a notable enough one to get wild chusei shinwa interpretations. Truth to be told, I feel like most of what has been written by me and others on Okina (the Touhou character, that is, not the real mask and associated figure) and Hata no Kawakatsu did not stand a test of time, but also I do not think Touhou offers much room for discussing Shinra Myojin and Sekizan Myojin instead. I think I will include a disclaimer about ZUN’s statements vs. academic consensus in the new version because the “earth mother goddess” comment is... quite something, alright (i think ZUN conflated etymology - sort of ignoring the context in which a Sanskrit term was used in buddhism in the process - with the “landlord deity” role in origin narrative). As a side note, tbh the whole Matarajin-outcasts connection seems slightly overestimated to me from the perspective of time, too. Sarugaku aside it’s mostly indirect via shukujin connections as far as I can tell.

[transgender-anakin-skywalker]

okay so uh. cw for transphobia but this reblog i found made me insane and gave me brainworms so i want to talk about it a bit. i’m not going to attempt to refute the actual claims she’s making (ie: that menstruation is “a women’s issue” and that if women ≠ bio sex then feminism is doomed), i’m coming at this from the perspective that you already agree with me because i don’t care to argue with transphobes. i just kinda want to ramble about the terms she’s using and how they relate to the original post.

• screenshots start here •

• screenshots end here •

so like, this is stupid terf bullshittery but it also (imo) presents a very misleading version of the terms it’s trying to use. prescriptivism and descriptivism describe 2 kinds of approach linguists can take when analysing language, and neither one is necessarily “wrong”. descriptivism is often encouraged as a viewpoint for researchers within the world of linguistic scholarship, as looking at how communities use language without passing judgement on whether that language is correct or not often provides a better understanding of those communities than expecting them to conform to your standards. conversely, prescriptivism can be helpful in everyday communication, as many people have a much easier time communicating unambiguously when all parties involved have similar language (hence why i’m choosing to write this post by adhering mostly to standard english grammar, because most english speakers will have an easier time understanding me that way). again, neither one is inherently wrong, it’s just that different approaches can be preferred in different settings (and you can very much have prescriptivism in a scholarly setting, such as expecting your students to use the expected language of analysis for their essays, or descriptivism in a more casual setting, such as asking someone what they mean by a word that you use differently, instead of just expecting them to use your meaning).

okay then. so where does that leave us with This?

i’d argue that there are elements of both ideas in the original post. telling people which term is the right one is arguably a pretty prescriptivist approach (remember, this doesn’t mean it’s the wrong approach), however, talking about what other terms imply and how they are interpreted by listeners is a fairly descriptivist approach. saying that “women and people who menstruate” centres cis womanhood is very much descriptive. getting back to the point on prescriptivism though, telling someone that they should use different language because the language they are currently using is harmful to you is not necessarily a bad thing. “calling people slurs with the intent to upset them is bad, don’t do it” is a prescriptivist approach, as it makes a value judgement and attempts to change the language, however, i think most people would also agree with me that it’s a good take. as far as “what lens does this post use to discuss language?” goes, i’m going to say both and that that’s actually a good thing for the purposes it aims to achieve.

psa for cis people: it's not "women and people who menstruate," it's just people who menstruate. adding "women and" implies that

the only relevant women are (menstruating) cis women, so there's no need to add any qualifiers (like "cis")

womanhood is central to menstruation & menstruation is central to womanhood by unnecessarily bringing up gender right before using a gender neutral phrase

just say people who menstruate. women who menstruate are people. saying "women and people who menstruate" is a nonsense phrase that only serves to soothe the egos of cis women. they can cope with not having their ciswomanhood centered, I promise.

[apolloslibrary]

Latin Alphabet Revisited: Pars Ⅱ—consonants and digraphs

So last time i talked about vowels in latin, and before i proceed i'd like to make a slight correction: Y in classical latin was most likely pronounced as U which makes sense - some romans would probably know to pronounce it as a rounded i sound having received greek education, but anyway

So the second, larger part of the alphabet is of course made up of consonants. There's little to talk about here imo except some letters that might cause some confusion but I'll go over all of them anyway

so the consonants of the latin alphabet are

B C D F G H J K L M N P Q R S T V X Z

although if you went a bit back in time you'd find the consonant inventory a little bit smaller at

B C D F H (I) K L M N P Q R S T V X

there might be some mistakes, as I am not showing them at a specific point in time, merely listing the ones I know have stuck around since the earliest days

anyway as you can see, at some point the Latin alphabet lacked letters G J and Z - funnily enough, Z was present in the earliest forms of the latin alphabet (and stood between F and H like Ζζ does in the greek alphabet!) but it didn't see much use, so it was dropped

G essentially arose out of necessity—its inventor was Spurius Carvillius Ruga, who supposedly was tired of people pronouncing his cognomen wrong, because at the time both sounds /k/ and /g/ were written with ⟨C⟩ (as K had fallen out of favour and remained in use mostly for abbreviations and to write the word Kalendæ (calends, the first day of the month, etymon of the word Calendar) so he added a stroke to distinguish them

curious might be the inclusion of ⟨i⟩ to some of you: well originally i and v were originally both vowels and consonants—/i~j/ and /u~w/ respectively (which also means that if I wanted to be extra accurate, I could've written the u's as v's, as that's how romans would have done it, but our current latin spelling convention prefers to use ⟨u⟩ for that

Anyway the pronunciation B /b/; C /k/ - in all positions despite what the ecclesiastical (church) pronunciation or most national pronunciations do D /d/; F /f/; G /g/ - as with C, no matter the position it is pronounced as a hard g H /h/; I/J /j/ - this pronunciation occurs when the letter is surrounded by vowels, or at the beginning of the word while being followed by another vowel (e.g. in IVVENIS - nowadays written as iuvenis or juvenis). I'll make a post about the validity of using J in latin spelling some other day! K /k/ - I'll make a post discussing C K and Q another day, as all three make the same sounds, and it may seem like a weird case of redundancy, especially since K, as I said before, didn't see much use L /l/; M /m/ - today it is agreed upon that the classical pronunciation also featured nasalisation (like the thing that happens in French) of vowels in certain environments, usually triggered by M and N - the ending -um was especially guilty of this - but that's another topic for another day! N /n/; P /p/; Q /k/; R /r/; S /s/; T /t/; V /w/ - similar situation to I/J, where it could be used both as a vowel and as a consonant. Again, IVVENIS/iuvenis is an amazing example here X /ks/ Z /z/ - this letter never appears in native latin words, and the sound isn't native to latin either, it was re-borrowed into latin upon the roman conquest of greece (despite having been part of the alphabet before dropping it lmao - anyway that's the reason Z is at the end of the alphabet now), and it was most likely pronounced /ts/ (like in modern italian). In poetry it counted as two consonants, possibly because in ancient greek it was pronounced either /zd/ or /dz/ (about which I will talk in yet another post)

Ok so with single consonants out of the way, let us discuss the digraphs: there are six notable digraphs in latin I believe:

AE, OE, PH, TH, CH, RH

let's start with ae and oe - those two are usually pronounced identically to E in most traditional and the ecclesiastical pronunciation. Romans however pronounced it more as a diphtong - for example Caesar (Cesar the name) - in German the word became Kaiser, which reflects the antique pronunciation, as e in the diphtong would often sound very close to i.

Ph, Th, and Ch are all roman attempts to transcribe the letters φ (phi) θ (theta) and χ (chi), and similarly to those letters, they are pronounced as apsirated plosives (p in party, t in tonne, c in cake - sorry if I got these wrong, I pronounce them with aspirated plosives and no one seems to find it weird) rather than f english th and english ch or something like that

and now rh - seemingly the most useless digraph in all of latin - this one is another spelling adaptation made to accurately transcribe greek loanwords, and the reason behind is the fact that the greek rhotic - ρ - could actually become unvoiced in two situations: - at the beginning of the word (e.g. of such loanwords in latin rho, rhombus, Rhodus/Rhodos) - when geminated (doubled) in which case the second r would become unvoiced (e.g. diarrhoea, Pyrrhus)

So there it is! I think that's all for the Latin alphabet for now, in future posts I will be explaining some history or fun facts regarding the latin alphabet (such as the C-K-Q redundancy), describe the greek alphabet, and of course start doing some grammar and vocab on here!

[gendercensus]

On fae/faer pronouns and cultural appropriation

HOW IT STARTED

I had a handful, a very small handful but more than two, responses in the Gender Census feedback box telling me that fae/faer pronouns are appropriative. The reasons didn’t always agree, and the culture that was being appropriated wasn’t always the same, but here’s a selection of quotes:

“Fae pronouns are cultural appropriation and are harmful to use“ - UK, age 11-15

“I’m not a person who practices pagan holidays but, my understanding is that pronouns like fae/faeself are harmful because the fae are real to pagans and is like using Jesus/jesuself as pronouns“ - UK, age 11-15

“I know you've probably heard this a million times, so has everyone on the internet, but the ''mere existence''of the fae pronoun feels really uncomfortable for some of us. I'm personally not against neopronouns like xe/xim, er/em and the like, I am a pagan but apart from the, imo most important, reasoning of that pronoun being immensely disrespectful, I worry as an nb about people who banalize the usage of pronouns ''for fun'', and I'm quoting what some people have told me.“ - Spain, 16-20

“I don't agree with fae/deity pronouns just from a pagan perspective it's very disrespectful to the cultures they come from. Like Fae are a legit thing in many cultures and they hate with a fiery passion mortal humans calling themselves Fae to the point of harming/cursing the people who do it“ - USA, age 16-20

“only celtic people can use far/ faers otherwise it’s cultural appropriation, many celts have said this and told me this“ - USA, age 16-20

So that’s:

❓ Someone who doesn’t say whether they’re pagan or Celtic.

❌ Someone who definitely isn’t pagan.

✅ Someone who is pagan.

❓ Someone who doesn’t say whether they’re pagan or Celtic.

❓ Someone who doesn’t say whether they’re pagan or Celtic.

So, just to disclose some bias up-front, I am English so I’m not Celtic, but I do live in Wales so I am surrounded by Celts. The bit of Wales that I live in is so beautiful in such a way that when my French friend came to visit me she described it as féerique - like an enchanting, magical land, literally “fairylike” or thereabouts. Coincidentally I have also considered myself mostly pagan for over half of my life, and I can’t definitively claim whether or not the Fae are “part of paganism” because paganism is so diverse and pick’n’mix that it just doesn’t work that way.

To me the idea that fae/faer pronouns would be offensive or culturally appropriative sounds absurd. But also, I am powered by curiosity, and have been wrong enough times in my life that I wanted to approach this in a neutral way with an open mind. Perhaps what I find out can be helpful to some people.

So since we only have information from one person who is definitely directly affected by any cultural appropriation that may be happening, the first thing I wanted to do was get some information from ideally a large number of people who are in the cultures being appropriated, and see what they think.

~

WHAT I DID

First of all I put some polls up on Twitter and Mastodon. [Edit: Note that this post has been updated with results from closed polls.]

I specified that I wanted to hear from nonbinary Celts and pagans, just so that the voters would be familiar with fae/faer pronouns. I asked the questions in a neutral way, i.e. “How do you feel about...” with “good/neutral/bad” answer options, instead of something more leading like “Is this a load of rubbish?” or “are you super offended?” with “yes/no” options. I provided a “see results” option, so that the poll results wouldn’t be skewed as much by random people clicking any old answer to see the results. And I invited voters to express their opinions in replies.

Question #1: Nonbinary people of Celtic descent (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, the Isle of Man, and Brittany), how do you feel about non-Celtic people using the neopronoun set fae/faer? [ It's good / No strong feelings/other / It's bad ]

Question #2: Nonbinary pagans, how do you feel about non-pagans using the neopronoun set fae/faer? [ It's good / No strong feelings/other / It's bad ]

The Twitter polls got over 1,100 responses each, and the Mastodon polls got over 140 responses each. With a little bit of spreadsheetery I removed the “N/A” responses to reverse engineer the number of people voting for each option, combined those numbers, and recalculated percentages.

Obviously this approach is not in the least scientific, but thankfully the results were unambiguous enough and the samples were big enough that I feel comfortable drawing conclusions.

Celts on fae/faer pronouns being used by non-Celts (561 voters):

It's good - 42.5%

No strong feelings/other - 44.0%

It's bad - 13.5%

Pagans on fae/faer pronouns being used by non-pagans (468 voters):

It's good - 47.2%

No strong feelings/other - 39.5%

It's bad - 13.3%

Here’s how that looks as a graph:

The limitations of polls on these platforms means that we have no way to distinguish between people who have more complicated views (”other”) and people who have “no strong feelings”, so we can’t really draw conclusions there. If we stick to just the pure positive and pure negative:

Celts were over three times as likely to feel positive about non-Celts using fae/faer pronouns than they were to feel negative.

Pagans were over three and a half times as likely to feel positive about non-pagans using fae/faer pronouns than they were to feel negative.

So Celts and pagans are way more likely to feel actively good about someone’s fae/faer pronouns, even when that person is not a Celt/pagan. That’s some strong evidence against the idea that fae/faer pronouns are appropriative, right there.

~

CORRECTIONS

To be clear, I haven’t done any research about the roots of fae/faer or the origins of the Fae and related beings, but my goal here was to get a sense of what Celts and pagans think and feel, rather than what an historian or anthropologist would say.

On the anti side, here were the replies that suggested fae/faer either is or might be inappropriate:

“I only worry that not everyone understands the origin of the word outside of modernized ideas of fairies.“ - pagan

“As a vaguely spiritual Whatever (Ireland), I think a mortal using "fae" as a pronoun/to refer to themselves is asking for a malicious and inventive fairy curse (on them, their families and possibly anyone in their vicinity, going by the traditions). I have not heard of this term before, so this is an immediate reaction from no background bar my cultural knowledge of sidhe/fae/term as culturally appropriate. My general approach is people can identify themselves as they want.“ - Celtic

So we’ve got a pagan who’s wary that people who use fae/faer (and people in general) might not have a fully fleshed out idea of the Fae. And we’ve got a Celt who doesn’t mind people using fae/faer personally, but based on what they know of the Fae they wouldn’t be surprised if the Fae got mad about it. No outright opposition, but a little concern.

There were not a lot of replies on the pro side, but not because people weren’t into it, judging by the votes. There were a lot of “it’s more complicated than that” replies, many of which repeated others, so quotes won’t really work. Here’s a summary of the Celtic bits:

“Fae” is not a Celtic word, and Celts don’t use it. It is French, or Anglo-French.

“Fae” can refer to any number of stories/legends from a wide variety of cultures in Europe, not one cohesive concept.

There are many legends about fairy-like beings in Celtic mythologies, and there are many, many different names for them.

The Celts are not a monolith, they’re a broad selection of cultures with various languages and various mythologies.

And the pagan bits:

Paganism is not closed or exclusive in any way. It might actually be more open than anything else, as “pagan” is a sort of umbrella term for non-mainstream religions in some contexts. A closed culture would be a prerequisite for something to be considered “appropriated” from paganism.

From my own experience, pagans may or may not believe in the Fae, and within that group believers may or may not consider the Fae to be sacred and/or worthy of great respect. (I’ve certainly never met a pagan who worshipped the Fae, though I don’t doubt that some do.)

And then we get into the accusations. 🍿

“this issue wasn’t started by Celtic groups or by people who know much about Celtic fae. It was started primarily by anti-neopronoun exclusionist pagans on TikTok.“

“[I’m] literally Scottish [...] and it’s not appropriative in the least and honestly to suggest as such is massively invalidating towards actual acts of cultural appropriation and is therefore racist. Feel like if this was actually brought up it was either by some people who seriously got their wires crossed or people who are just concern trolling and trying to make fun of both neo-pronouns and of the concept of cultural appropriation and stir the pot in the process.“

“It wouldn't be the first time bigots falsly claim “it's appropriative from X marginalized group" to harass people they don't like, like they did with aspec people when they claimed "aspec" was stolen from autistic language (which was false, as many autistics said)“

“It's been a discussion in pagan circles recently ... People were very quick to use the discussion as an excuse to shit on nonbinary people.“

“I think it would be apropos to note that the word "faerie/fairy" has been a synonym for various queer identities for decades, too. The Radical Faeries are a good example.“ (So if anyone has the right to [re]claim it...)

A little healthy skepticism is often wise in online LGBTQ+ “discourse”, and some of these people are making some very strong claims, for which I’d love to see some evidence/sources/context. Some of it certainly sounds plausible.

~

HOW DID IT START?

I had a look on Twitter and the earliest claim I can find that fae/faer pronouns are cultural appropriation is from 18th February 2020, almost exactly one year ago today. Again, tweets are not the best medium for this, there was very little in the way of nuance or context. If anyone can find an older claim from Twitter or Tumblr or anywhere else online, please do send it my way.

I have no idea how to navigate TikTok because I’m a nonbinosaur. (I’m 34.) I did find some videos of teens and young adults apparently earnestly asserting that they were Celtic or pagan and the use of fae/faer pronouns was offensive, but the videos were very brief and provided nothing in the way of nuance or context. For example:

This one from October 2020 with 29k ❤️s, by someone who I assume is USian based on the word “mom”?

This one from December 2020, that says “I am pagan and i find it rather disrespectful. It’s like using god/godr or jesus/jesusr.” That’s probably what inspired the feedback box comment above that refers to hypothetical jesus/jesusr pronouns.

If anyone is able to find a particularly old or influential TikTok video about fae/faer pronouns being appropriative I’d really appreciate it, especially if it’s from a different age group or from not-the-USA, to give us a feel for how universal this is.

For context, fae pronouns were mentioned in the very first Gender Census back in May 2013, though you’ll have to take my word for it as the individual responses are not currently public. The word “fae” was mentioned in the pronoun question’s “other” textbox, and no other forms in the set were entered so we have no way of knowing for sure what that person’s full pronoun set actually is. This means the set may have been around for longer. The Nonbinary Wiki says that the pronoun set was created in October 2013, as “fae/vaer”, later than the first entry in the Gender Census, so I’ll be editing that wiki page later! If anyone has any examples of fae/faer pronouns in use before 2013 I would also be very interested to see that.

~

IN SUMMARY

Obviously I can’t speak for everyone, as the Twitter polls are not super scientific and they only surveyed a selection of Celts and pagans within a few degrees of separation of the Gender Census Twitter and Mastodon accounts, but I can certainly report on what I found.

For a more conclusive result, we’d need to take into account various demographics such as age, culture, location, religion, race/heritage, etc.

As far as I can tell based on fairly small samples of over 400 people per group, a minority of about 13% of Celtic and/or pagan people felt that use of fae/faer pronouns is appropriative.

A much higher number of people per group felt positive about people who are not Celts or pagans using fae/faer pronouns. The predominant view was:

It can’t be cultural appropriation from Celtic cultures because fairy-like beings are not unique to Celtic cultures and Celtic cultures don’t call them Fae.

It can’t be cultural appropriation from pagan cultures because paganism is not “closed” or exclusive in any way, it’s too broad and open.

~

If your experience of your gender(s) or lack thereof isn’t described or encompassed by the gender binary of “male OR female”, please do click here to take the Gender Census 2021 - it’s international and it closes no earlier than 10th March 2021!

[dollsorwhatever]

Bandai America SM, 1995

Hello

it’s her I’ve always wanted this doll, I got her mostly for comparison (she’s one of the last 12′’ American SM doll bodies I need for comparisons) but I am still really excited to have her after all these years! The 6′’ bandai America dolls were my faves as a kid (the Dream Castle playset....exquisite dress) and I didn’t even know Bandai America made 12′’ counterparts to them until my early teens lol 

(Himari-Chan is really stealing the show from the background...sorry ****Serena*** ) Post-hair wash (yes those are panties on her head, my go-to method for training SM doll bangs into shape lol) Her body is probably the nicest of the American SM lines honestly; iirc the torso is the same (or very similar) one that Irwin used in 2000, but the legs are much nicer and I like the addition of a grip hand (even if it looks hideous with the gloves on).  I find it super fascinating that she is almost a 1:1 replica of the 6′’ doll from the same line, complete with an enlarged version of the same body with the same hands and smooth, toe-less feet lol  I also find it interesting that she’s not only more accurate to the anime than her Irwin 1995 counterpart, but she takes a lot more aesthetic influence from the Bandai Japan dolls than Irwin did once they got the license; looking at the prototype dolls you can see a much more obvious influence from the Japanese dolls, from the pink bows/boots/choker to the Bandai Japan brooch, even the way they’re packaged without gloves is reminiscent.

I honestly think this prototype is quite lovely- the hand painted face is so much softer, and if she had a nose and mouth, she would have been an excellent SM doll imo- everything is pretty perfect with the exception of the head.  They’re also ever-so-slightly more ‘girly’ than the Irwin 1995 dolls, and I wonder what would have happened if Bandai America kept the license? I feel like they would have course corrected a lot sooner than Irwin because they were already so close to getting it right. Her Moon Stick (excuse me, cosmic crescent wand) is also fascinating because the sculpt is a nearly exact miniaturized version of the Bandai Moon Stick toy from 1992 (which was reproduced by Bandai America as well) while the Irwin dolls have a brand new original sculpt; the Season 1 Moon doll from Japan didn’t come with a wand, but I feel like it would have looked identical to this one if they had! 

Anyway while this doll is not significantly better than the Irwin 1995 versions, I do think she’s at least somewhat better and perhaps a little more aware of who she is and who her intended audience is meant to be compared to Irwin 1995, who really leaned into the “these are action figures for boys AND dolls for girls!!!!!” vibe I know we all make fun of these dolls and ignore them 99% of the time but I think people should pay a little more attention to them, if only to understand Sailor Moon’s history a little better, and I’m glad I’m taking the time to handle them as an adult and give them a chance to look nice.  Sailor Moon Says- Believe in Yourself! (even if you have no nose)

[inthehouseoffinwe]

Fair points. I’m not sure about Varda only tolerating it though (forgive me, I’m not entirely clear on canon there, but I thought it was out of respect for their creation that they were hallowed.)

As a general disclaimer: In my post I’m moving away from what canon says to what I personally understand and take from it. Canon might say it wasn’t Fëanor’s but imo the light inside the Silmarils was by all rights his own. To take a drop of light from the trees doesn’t harm them, and to create something entirely new to contain that light to make these stones is fair game.

This post was also reacting to Tolkien’s claim that silmaril rights went from Fëanor to Thingol because of morality in how they were taken, but as I said you’ve raised some very good points and I’ll give you my thoughts back.

Ok first point. I’m not going to defend Fëanor but it’s canon that he was such a great orator, he could move even those who disliked him to his cause. By this point there was a schism between the Noldor and the Valar, so when their new king says he’s not giving them up, they follow out of loyalty and being drawn into Fëanor’s passion.

On the non-Fëanorian Noldor not wanting the Silmarils, true, but I mean in the general sense. (I think Fingolfin’s family and followers probably sat somewhere between Finarfin and Fëanor’s as they generally do.) This is my post being a reaction to Tolkien saying Thingol and co.’s claim was more so than Fëanor’s. They might not have wanted it, but there were many Noldor who still did. As in not all of them have to want it for the emotional value to be more valid, if you get me.

On the Sindar and their love of the Light: Thanks for correcting me on their love of the light. But relative to the Sindar, I still feel the light was of far more value to the Noldor. I understand they wanted to see it, even that Thingol had seen it, but yearning and a glimpse is different to building your entire lives and civilisation around it for thousands of years.

As for the lands, Thingol ruled over Doriath and surrounding areas, yes, but it’s safe to say there were vast areas he had no real reign over, and those were mostly the ones taken by the Noldor. Whilst he might claim ownership, it’s a bit of a flimsy one and feels more like he’s saying it out of spite than real feeling. Not to mention I’m pretty sure there are green elves who don’t see him as king but own their own lands. At least that’s how I feel, you can say otherwise and wouldn’t be wrong.

I didn’t mention Thingol giving the quest because I agree with you there. It was meant to be an impossible ‘task’ and he was left with this shiny stone confused how on Earth Beren had managed to fulfil it 😂

But I still feel like if he didn’t really want it, why not give it back? As in what harm would it do. There’s definitely pride and arrogance there. Infringing on his rights doesn’t mean he should be doing the same. (And I’ll happily admit the Noldor have this in spades and severely messed up because of it, but I’m just talking Thingol here.)

Even further down the line it doesn’t matter how many generations it passes through, if the original owners are still out there and want it back (as can be the case with elves) they’re in full rights to demand so. If someone stole from me, someone else stole from them then publicly passed it to their children, ignoring that I’ve been searching for it a long time and am *right there* I’d be pretty irritated too.

In all honesty the Feanorions don’t need to be nice about it when to their eyes it probably looked like Thingol was flaunting it. Did they go to the extreme? Absolutely. And it wasn’t right. But you can kind of see why. I’m gonna ignore Celegorm and Curufin here because honestly by this point they deserve what they got 💀 But there’s still five other Fëanorions to consider.

The Sindar might associate it with home later down the line, but that came after because it wasn’t originally returned as it should have been. And it still doesn’t make the silmaril theirs.

Um… I think that’s the main stuff? 😂 Sorry if I’ve missed anything, super interesting discussion, thanks for replying!

I’ll also add I just generally don’t like Thingol or Dior for some personal associations and reasons, and I don’t think I ever will… so there’s that too 😅 Elwing sits in an ‘eh’ area.

No hate to anyone who loves them though, and I’m always open for discussion :)

Thingol, Luthien, and Dior’s claim to the silmaril bugs the living daylights outta me and I’m gonna break down why. This goes a bit beyond ownership laws.

Starting with basics. What are the silmarils? Gems created by Fëanor that hold the light of the Two Trees. Who in Beleriand saw the light of the trees and no doubt misses it like a limb? Are here in part to avenge their destruction? The Noldor.

The Sindar never went to Valinor. They might find the gems beautiful but that’s it. There’s no cultural or emotional connection to them beyond ‘pretty stone, look how awesome our princess was.’ There’s no appreciation for what they hold. No understanding that this stone is one of the *last* things that holds the ancient light of the Trees.

The Noldor meanwhile not only saw the Light, they had entire festivals surrounding it. Grew their entire culture, their lives, under and around it. Now the trees are destroyed, their king killed defending these jewels. And this last beacon of hope, a piece of the home they can never return to, a piece of light that will never come back, is being kept by people who can’t even begin to understand the significance of what they keep.

Now imagine being the sons of the one who made this jewel from a culture of people who value craft above all else.

Not only is it light, it’s the result of years of toil and experimentation of your father, the one who managed to do what no one had ever even thought of. Fëanor’s sons would have been the first to see these jewels, probably saw him make prototypes, work equations whilst they worked on their own crafts. Provided what relief they could to his ever working mind and inadvertently gave him ideas that helped solve problems he encountered along the way. Suddenly it’s not only a key part of their culture, it’s something core to their family.

Then Fëanor is killed and in many ways it’s the most important thing they have left of their father. Now it’s a source of memory too, for someone doomed to the Halls for eternity. Who they’ll likely never see again unless they’re killed.

Now from what I’ve heard, Tolkien says the Fëanorions lost their right to the Silmarils when they killed for them. Which makes no sense considering the Silmarils were *created* by Fëanor. Yes the light was created by the Valar, but what, you’re gonna say ‘I created electricity so that lightbulb you made is actually mine.’ That’s not how it works. Fëanor made the casing for the stones and figured out how to hold the light, without aid from the Valar. It doesn’t matter what actions they take, the right to the Silmarils remain theirs and theirs alone. The jewels hold no power of their own, they’re literally objects. Healing objects at most. Morals do not dictate their ownership, hallowed or not.

Tolkien going on to say the right of Doriath’s Silmaril actually goes to Beren and Luthien for taking it from Morgoth gives me frankly coloniser vibes.

‘Oh this thing I stole was originally stolen from you? Too bad. I took it so it’s mine now. Don’t care how important it is to you, your entire culture, and your people.’

Get where I’m coming from?

All in all the whole situation gives me Bad Vibes and I really don’t like the attitude the Sindar have to the Silmaril. In terms of Elwing, I can partly forgive her purely based on trauma response. Fine. Doesn’t make it right, but I understand. But that never would’ve been a problem if her father, grandmother, or great grandfather had the sense to acknowledge the silmaril was never theirs to keep. Don’t like the Fëanorions, (too bad) at least give it back to the Noldor.