#but academic research just doesn't exist about it

[tanadrin]

Can you explain in what what you think eugenics doesn't work? Does this basically boil down to skepticism about the accuracy of GWAS studies? My understanding is that academic consensus is "G probably exists, disentangling direct genetic inheritance vs genetic cultural inheritance is complicated but possible, we can identify a number of alleles which we're reasonably confident are directly causally involved in having a higher G factor"

when it comes to intelligence, its heritability, and its variation at the population level, my understanding of the science is:

highly adaptive traits don't, in fact, vary much at the genetic level between populations of a species because they are strongly selected for. in an environment where a trait is being strongly selected for, a population that failed to express that trait strongly will be rapidly outcompeted.

intelligence is probably the quintessential such trait for humans. we have sacrificed a great deal of other kinds of specialization in favor of our big brains. we spend an enormous amount of calories supporting those brains. tool use, the ability to plan for the future, the ability to navigate complex social situations and hierarchies in order to secure status, the ability to model the minds of others for the purposes of cooperation and deception means that we should expect intelligence to be strongly selected for for as long as our lineage has been social and tool-using, which is at least the last three million years or so.

so, at least as a matter of a priori assumptions, we should expect human populations not to vary greatly in their genetic predisposition to intelligence. it may nonetheless, but we'd need pretty strong evidence. i think i read this argument on PZ Myers' blog a million years ago, so credit where that's due.

complicating the picture is that we just don't have good evidence for how IQ does vary across populations, even before we get into the question of "how much of this variation is genetic and how much of it is not." the cross-national data on which a lot of IQ arguments have been based is really bad. and that would be assuming IQ tests are in fact good at capturing a notion of IQ that is independent of cultural context, which historically they're pretty bad at

this screed by nassim nicholas taleb (not a diss; AFAICT the guy only writes in screeds) makes a number of arguments, but one argument I find persuasive is that IQ is really only predictive of achievement in the sense that it does usefully discriminate between people with obvious intellectual disabilities and those without--but you do not actually need an IQ test for that sort of thing, any more than you need to use a height chart to figure out who is missing both their legs. in that sense, sure, IQ is predictive of a lot of things. but once you remove this group, the much-vaunted correlations between IQ and stuff like wealth just straight-up vanishes

heritability studies are a useful tool, but a tool which must be wielded carefully; they were developed for studying traits which were relatively easy to isolate in very specific populations, like a crop under study at an agricultural research site, and are more precarious when applied to, e.g., human populations

my understanding based on jonathan kaplan articles like this one is that twin studies are not actually that good at distinguishing heritable factors from environmental ones--they have serious limitations compared to heritability studies where you actually can rigorously control for environmental effects, like you can with plants or livestock.

as this post also points out, heritability studies also only examine heritability within groups, and are not really suited to examining large-scale population differences, *especially* in the realm of intelligence where there is a huge raft of confounding factors, and a lack of a really robust measurement tool.

(if we are worried about intelligence at the population level, it seems to me there are interventions we know are going to be effective and do not rely on deeply dubious scientific speculation, e.g., around nutrition and healthcare and serious wealth inequality and ofc education; and if what people actually want is to raise the average intelligence of the population rather than justify discrimination against minorities, then they might focus on those much more empirically grounded interventions. even if population differences in IQ are real and significant and point to big differences in intelligence, we know those things are worth a fair few IQ points. but most people who are or historically have been the biggest advocates for eugenics are, in my estimation, mostly interested in justifying discrimination.)

i think the claims/application of eugenics extend well beyond just intelligence, ftr. eugenics as an ideology is complex and historically pretty interesting, and many eugenicists have made much broader claims than just "population-level differences in intelligence exist due to genetic factors, and we should try to influence them with policy," but that is a useful point for them to fall back onto when pressed on those other claims. but i don't think even that claim is at all well-supported.

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

Do you have a list of good sex ed books to read?

BOY DO I

please bear in mind that some of these books are a little old (10+ years) by research standards now, and that even the newer ones are all flawed in some way. the thing about research on human beings, and especially research on something as nebulous and huge as sex, is that people are Always going to miss something or fail to account for every possible experience, and that's just something that we have to accept in good faith. I think all of these books have something interesting to say, but that doesn't mean any of them are the only book you'll ever need.

related to that: it's been A While since I've read some of these so sorry if anything in them has aged poorly (I don't THINK SO but like, I was not as discerning a reader when I was 19) but I am still including them as books that have been important to my personal journey as a sex educator.

additionally, a caveat that very few of these books are, like, instructional sex ed books in the sense of like "here's how the penis works, here's where the clit is, etc." those books exist and they're great but they're also not very interesting to me; my studies on sex are much more in the social aspect (shout out to my sociology degree) and the way people learn to think about sex and societal factors that shape those trends. these books reflect that. I would genuinely love to have the time to check out some 101 books to see how they fare, but alas - sex ed is not my day job and I don't have the time to dedicate to that, so it happens slowly when it happens at all. I've been meaning to read Dr. Gunter's Vagina Bible since it came out in 2019, for fucks sake.

and finally an acknowledgement that this is a fairly white list, which has as much to do with biases with academia and publishing as my own unchecked biases especially early in my academic career and the limitations of my university library.

ANYWAY here's some books about sex that have been influential/informative to me in one way or another:

The Trouble With Normal: Sex, Politics, and the Ethics of Queer Life (Michael Warner, 1999)

Virginity Lost: An Intimate Portrait of First Sexual Experiences (Laura M. Carpenter, 2005)

Virgin: The Untouched History (Hanne Blank, 2007)

Sex Goes to School: Girls and Sex Education Before the 1960s (Susan K. Freeman, 2008)

Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex (Mary Roach, 2008)

Transgender History: The Roots of Today's Revolution (Revised Edition) (Susan Stryker, 2008)

The Purity Myth: How America's Obsession with Virginity is Hurting Young Women (Jessica Valenti, 2009)

Not Under My Roof: Parents, Teens, and the Culture of Sex (Amy T. Schalet, 2011)

Straight: The Surprisingly Short History of Heterosexuality (Hanne Blank, 2012)

Rewriting the Rules: An Integrative Guide to Love, Sex and Relationships (Meg-John Barker, 2013)

The Sex Myth: The Gap Between Our Fantasies and Realities (Rachel Hills, 2015)

Come as You Are: The Surprising New Science That Will Tranform Your Sex Life (Emily Nagoski, 2015)

Not Gay: Sex Between Straight White Men (Jane Ward, 2015)

Too Hot to Handle: A Global History of Sex Education (Jonathan Zimmerman, 2015)

American Hookup: The New Culture of Sex on Campus (Lisa Wade, 2017)

Buzz: A Stimulating History of the Sex Toy (Hallie Lieberman, 2017)

Histories of the Transgender Child (Jules Gill-Peterson, 2018)

Revolting Prostitutes: The Fight for Sex Workers' Rights (Juno Mac and Molly Smith, 2018)

Ace: What Asexuality Reveals About Desire, Society, and the Meaning of Sex (Angela Chen, 2020)

Pleasure in the News: African American Readership and Sexuality in the Black Press (Kim Gallon, 2020)

A Curious History of Sex (Kate Lister, 2020)

Boys & Sex: Young Men on Hookups, Love, Porn, Consent, and Navigating the New Masculinity (Peggy Orenstein, 2020)

Black Women, Black Love: America's War on Africa American Marriage (Dianne M. Stewart, 2020)

The Tragedy of Heterosexuality (Jane Ward, 2020)

Hurts So Good: The Science and Pleasure of Pain on Purpose (Leigh Cowart, 2021)

Strange Bedfellows: Adventures in the Science, History, and Surprising Secrets of STDs (Ina Park, 2021)

The Right to Sex: Feminist in the Twenty-First Century (Amia Srinivasan, 2021)

Love Your Asian Body: AIDS Activism in Los Angeles (Eric C. Wat, 2021)

Superfreaks: Kink, Pleasure, and the Pursuit of Happiness (Arielle Greenberg, 2023)

[frostgears]

patience

She'd stayed late, and somehow gotten into an argument with the strangest specimen in their laboratory. It had started with a simple "Good news!" How could it have gone downhill so fast?

"—then you don't truly understand me at all. You see me as a human spirit trapped in a mechanical construct. A doll's body, imposing a doll's way of being on me. You think to enact a rescue."

"We'd thought about it, yes, at least around the intermagic disciplines table in the tavern at nights… but I'm so sorry, we still don't understand how your body works. It could be years or decades or even generations before—"

"Before you can rescue me."

"Well, yes!"

"Did you ever stop to ask if I needed it?"

The researcher wagged a finger at the doll construct, opened her mouth to speak, and lost her train of thought under the unblinking inhuman stare of two orbs of polished obsidian.

"Let me ask you something. Have you ever wondered what kind of spirit a doll would have, if it had one?"

"That doesn't make any sense. They don't."

"Imagine for me. You claim to be good at it, you academics."

"It… you… I don't know, dolls mostly just sit there. Even the articulated automata made for the children of nobles. They're decorative toys."

"So if it had one?"

"If you bound a spirit to it somehow, it'd probably go insane from boredom. Certainly nothing elemental, natural, or infernal would do."

"Imagine a class of spirit that did not."

"Then it would have to be very patient and almost desire-less, because it's going to be on a pedestal, or in a display case, for most of its existence."

"Not totally absent of desire. It might serve a mistress, mxstress, or master; in their absence, a mission. Its desires would be those of its mistress, those required to perform the mission. But so patient that patience itself is its organizing principle."

"Where would you find a spirit like that?"

"Perhaps a human's. One so dedicated to her mistress and mission that she would become a doll. One that sought to obtain the patience and calm of a doll through long enough in a doll's shape. After that, it would be a doll's spirit, do you understand? The appearance of humanity would simply be a tool that it used when necessary, and gratefully set down afterward."

The doll stepped down from its tiptoe pose on the plinth in the corner of the dim lab.

"Thank you for repairing my mechanical components. I'd ask you not to tamper further, but you're not the only one who wants to, are you?"

There was a lot of research ahead of her team. The obsidian eyes scanned her. She shrugged. "No."

"Then this is goodbye."

A pale porcelain hand came up with surprising force.

When she woke up, her cloak was gone, and the specimen's University asset tag was stuck to her hair.

Time passed. Civilizations rose and fell. Greater powers waxed and waned.

In a nearly magic-dead age, in a museum that shone dimly with ancient magelights and sailed sedately between stars on spells no one knew any more, a janitor swept a corridor with a static-broom in the brief dark between day and day, humming a little song.

She winced at the sound of breaking glass. But it wasn't even glass, really. It shouldn't be able to break. Certainly not to an errant static-broom handle. Was she hearing things?

A figure leapt through the very real break in the pane. A doll? The unfathomably ancient doll on display that she'd passed so many times?

"Mistress," it said. "I've finally found you again. It took some time."

It was kneeling. A pose she… remembered. Along with other memories not formed in this body.

"You waited for me to reincarnate."

"Of course. As long as it took."

"How long?"

It gave her a fantastic number in a unit of time that, like her, was long dead.

"It turned out to be a little harder than I thought," she said, sheepish.

"I will always wait for you, Mistress."

She was suddenly blinking back tears of joy.

"Thank you." And then, "This age needs us more than I'd thought possible. Such a span… such dissipation…"

The doll wiped away her tears with its sleeve.

"Yes. I lived it, Mistress."

"Beautifully, as far as I can tell. To work, then." She took its hand.

"To work."

And they began the work again. □

[feefivefoe]

I like you sahsrau 👀✨ can we have more of it?

I'll probably go in region order bc if I don't I will forget who I have and haven't done-

But if you want a specific character, just request some in an ask and I won't mind. Max of 5 characters though.

Herta Space Station. Where 2 individuals awoke and b̵̢̛̻̙̗͚̝͚̥̣͕̆̉̊̌͆́ę̵̮̲̺̘͖͖̦̫͗̅̏͌̀̃̀̀͘g̸̰̜̠̰̞̉̽̈́̅͂̄ä̴̧̝͇͇̝̗̩͚́͆͛͝ͅn̵̡̯̙͇̼̣͍̪͂͛̔̀̃́ their journey across the cosmos. A place very recently attacked by the Antimatter Legion, dedicated to the Destruction.

Perhaps this is why you also found yourself awakening there, though already aboard the parked Express. Perhaps THEIR theory had some merit after all.

Asta

The head of the station is a busy woman, constantly juggling the academic and social issues from the researchers, whatever work Herta deems below even her puppets, and even more so after the security breach.

It isn't until a while after your awakening that she manages to actually meet you. There was gossip, sure. That a mortal incarnation of the being that shaped the universe was found on the famed Astral Express, while ported in their station. As if she didn't already have a millions missives directed her way...

That being said, there is something celestial about you that puts any doubts the astronomer might have at ease. There's no fear in your eyes as you wander the station. Whether that's because you believe the threat has been eliminated, or because you don't believe even the Legion would harm you? It isn't clear. Asta isn't even sure you know.

Still, it isn't often she gets the chance to speak with you personally. Expect her to have either Arlan or Peppy trailing you whenever you set foot on the station. Expect welcoming gifts any time you visit, expensive enough to make you sweat a little. She won't even notice.

For a non researcher, she sure does seem to dissect you with her eyes from across the room. Hint, she's mapping out constellations on your skin. Be it freckles, pimples, moles...she doesn't care. Any mark or blemish is just an undiscovered star. And Asta has always wanted to find stars that haven't been discovered and named yet.

Arlan

As the one who feels particularly at fault for the invasion, he's constantly a little paranoid that you may be hurt by some straggler. Just one intruder he or his department missed, one enemy that attacks the first person it sees. After so long, would any follower of Nanook even recognize you before striking?

He can't take that risk.

Meeting you in person gave him the same crushing sense of relief and hope that he had experienced in his younger days. A hungry child that was willing to fight people he didn't know FOR people he didn't know if it meant earning something to eat. Asta and her family took a chance on him, and now he was someone the station trusted to keep them safe.

And he failed at that. Sure, he did everything in his power. He saved people, even was willing to sacrifice his life if it meant protecting what staff he could. But the fact remains that some people died, and even more were hurt in some way. He can't fail like that again.

He had a second chance, his new beginning. And he will die before he loses it. Arlan, the more he sees you as an Aeon and less as a human, will start fusing his perception of you with his gratitude for his place in life. If anything happens to you, he'll die at best, and lose everything at worst.

He cares about you deeply, of course. As much as idolization will allow. You're entirely perfect. Which is why, as someone who has only been able to fight and not learn like the others, he will dedicate every bone in his body to protecting yours.

Herta (puppet)

Really? All that fuss, and the Beginning is just a human? A squishy meatsack like the rest of them? Not even a bizarre size?

For a while she's unimpressed, even seeing your existence as less interesting than the prospect of a person with a Stellaron inside them.

Ah. But what if the two correlate? What if you only made your appearance because of an intact, contained Stellaron? Oh, had the Destruction found a way to place direct essence into a weaponization of matter???

This hypothesis needed confirmed before anything else. But even she doesn't have direct access to the Cancer of All Worlds...

Off you go on the Express now, go on. She's sure you'll come across one eventually. And you make sure to come right back as soon as you do, okay? She'll even let you have top priority when you return. No waiting, no leaving a message. She's even set your specific number to alert her immediately when you text, bypassing the bot that sends messages for her.

It's a very special privilege to be able to contact a genius so readily, so don't abuse it, okay? Though, if you sprinkle in discoveries you make about your existence, she may be willing to chat a bit. Only for you, remember.

The Herta

And just as she predicted, you have a much different aura about you by the time she meets you in the flesh. Perhaps it's the time in Amphoreus, a land filled with 'divinity', but you hold yourself with the presence of an Aeon, now.

Someone who knows their companions would slit someone's stomach open merely because you asked them to, just to see if they would, and feel no guilt.

Droidhead suddenly seems much less impressive. She's wanted the Aeons to ask a question of her for a while now, tired of constantly being the one to seek answers. Herta feels those questions in your gaze, before you even open your mouth. She feels dissected, rearranged, and put back together with a single look.

It's a bit addicting, actually.

Oh, and the way you listen when you ask her something and she answers! It isn't like her to get so excited. It's out of character. It's wrong.

And that is precisely what makes it so fascinating. Just how dangerous will your presence be if this is after only a handful of encounters with a Stelleron? This isn't even a percentage of what you once were.

She tried to recreate you in the Simulated Universe, sending the Trailblazers (as your constant leeches companions) through over and over again, just to see how your AI acts, and growing more and more frustrated when it doesn't live up to the real thing. Maybe she needs more time to study the original in person...

[synticity]

Can you please, pretty-please do a "3 linguistics papers to read" about neopronouns? I'd love to get some academic perspectives on them! :)

Ooh, yes, I can do this!

Three papers to read about neopronouns

The first one I'm linking is by Em Miltersen from 2016, which I am highlighting because the data comes specifically from tumblr!

Miltersen, E. H. (2016). Nounself pronouns: 3rd person personal pronouns as identity expression. Journal of Language Works-Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift, 1(1), 37-62. Open access to the paper here

Next, a very short paper by Rose et al., 2023, which is just looking at whether people even find neopronouns acceptable / grammatical:

Rose, E., Winig, M., Nash, J., Roepke, K., & Conrod, K. (2023). Variation in acceptability of neologistic English pronouns. Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America, 8(1), 5526-5526. Open access paper is here

And then finally, I'd recommend this super cool paper by Laura Hekanaho, 2022, looking at the metalinguistic commentary and ways people talk about neopronouns - overlaps a bit with Rose et al.'s paper, but goes into much greater depth:

Hekanaho, L. (2022). A thematic analysis of attitudes towards English nonbinary pronouns. Journal of language and sexuality, 11(2), 190-216. Author's copy of the paper here

One thing about neopronouns is that there's comparatively little linguistics research published about them, and what does exist is very focused on English. Part of this is because the ways neopronouns are cropping up in English speech communities (especially online) are different than in other language communities, and the other part of the reason is that they're just super rare -- best estimates of how many people use neopronouns are very very low (the US Trans Census and the Gender Census report numbers <10%, and that's out of only trans people), and their appearance in every day language appears to be very rare.

What this means (frustratingly! and I hope this is changing!) is that at best neopronouns are mentioned in footnotes of linguistics articles and books about other stuff. There's also Dennis Baron's 2020 book, What's Your Pronoun, which is a really thorough documentation of historical attempts to coin gender-neutral pronouns in English... but Baron kind of comes to the conclusion that singular 'they' has 'won' the competition, and that none of the neopronouns he tracks have become mainstream.

Anyways, my personal opinion as a linguist is that I get frustrated with linguists who dismiss neopronouns because they're rare. Just because something's rare doesn't mean it's not a part of the language, and therefore a real part of the phenomenon we've decided to study! Devil's hole pupfish of english, tbh.

(Previous "3 papers to read" post was "3 papers to read about singular 'they'." If you like these posts, you can request a topic in linguistics and I'll do my best to recommend 3 open-access published papers to read!)

[bberry005]

tbh to me what makes samira mohan and victoria javadi such good indian american representation is that they don't feel like they're just there to be indian american. yes, lots of indians in the US are doctors (and we see that accurately reflected in the pitt!), but a lot of the time, their stories are told in a one note way. you know, the stereotypical way you expect indian people to be represented in mainstream US television.

the thing is though, samira and victoria don't fall into that. you can tell that they're indian and that being so is important to their characters, but that's not the central factor. instead, cultural norms in indian american communities shine through in their essential character traits. hard work, respecting your parents, eyes on the prize attitude, a strong work ethic, and academic and professional achievement of the highest level are all things that indian americans value strongly, and you can see it in samira and victoria without it being handed to you. their cultural values and upbringing inform their characters, but its not so in your face it doesn't feel real. and mainstream american television always makes asians robots or messy failures, so just seeing two indian american women be so refreshingly real is so beautiful to me

also there's something wonderful in samira being the character with research focused on racial health disparities in the ER. when people in the US think about racialized healthcare, they don't often consider asians and asian americans in that assessment. the way we as asians face healthcare discrimination is different than other minorities in the US, but it does still exist and it's extremely prevalent. and samira studying that makes me so happy. and yeah, victoria is the progidal indian child, but her storyline frames it in a way that displays the way she (and many other successful indian american women) are at tensions with their family for pushing them so hard to be so successful and not allowing room for much else. it feels like victoria's story will play out with nuance rather than her just completely rejecting her family as many stories do end, and it's such a good way to subvert the genius asian character stereotype to me.

[linkons-most-wanted]

💫 Caleb's state of mind 🍎

Endless summer

Especially now that Decoherence is out, and I've done an Enneagram deep dive on Caleb, I wanted to spend a little time reflecting on Caleb's state of mind in the main story timeline. Decoherence makes more explicit a lot of the themes that the writers are exploring with Caleb's character.

Who am I? What am I for?

In both Decoherence and the main story timeline, Caleb knows more about what's going on than MC does. In both cases, Caleb's memories aren't wiped to the same extent. We get some hints that Caleb has had to introduce himself to MC more than once, especially when MC had memory problems after the chronorift catastrophe. During their "last escape" in Decoherence, MC only remembers his name, but Caleb remembers everything about her.

So, Caleb remembers being a test subject. He remembers Josephine choosing to take them in. He knows, more than MC does, that his origins are uncertain.

While MC's memory loss is almost a blessing and she's able to initially find her identity in her relationships to Josephine and Caleb, Caleb doesn't have that luxury.

In both timelines, his earliest sense of purpose is: My job is to protect her. Adults in his life specifically reinforce this. Decoherence makes this entirely literal--he is her battery. He heals her and repairs her. The entire purpose of his existence, from the perspective of the research institute, is to support her.

So Caleb doesn't want to protect MC "just because" he's her "older brother"--moreso, he identifies with the "brother" role because he already feels that his entire purpose in life is to protect her.

What is love?

The only thing young Caleb knows is that love means protecting someone and sacrificing yourself to do so. This is reinforced in him by the adults around him, and it gives him a sense of purpose.

So, when he hits puberty and those feelings start developing, he's at a loss. Is this familial love? Is it romantic love? How does one tell the difference? He identifies with the "brother" role because he wants to protect MC. But then he finds himself also identifying with the "boyfriend" role that he tries out when MC visits him at college and "pretends" to be his girlfriend.

Caleb doesn't have any male role models to lean on or reach out to for help navigating this, either.

A lack of support

As much as Josephine cares for MC and Caleb, she also probably wasn't the most equipped to be a parent. She abruptly took in an eight year old and an eleven year old when she was middle aged. As a scientist, odds are high that she focused on being rational. With two smart kids, she probably pushed them academically and assured them they were doing well--but perhaps could not always be there for them emotionally.

We see Caleb move through the world with this sense that he's on his own, that he needs to meet his needs and he can't expect anyone else to. He's usually in a role of helping and supporting Grandma/Josephine, as opposed to being supported by her. So, every aspect of his life reinforces that his role is caretaking.

One can imagine that if Josephine had been both equipped and very perceptive, she could have helped Caleb navigate these confusing emotions, and assured him that given how atypical his childhood was, the important thing is that he and MC are honest with each other. But since Josephine can't even bring herself to tell MC her own origin, Caleb is at a loss.

The "protector" role

Decoherence makes this literal, which I think is very helpful. Caleb does not want to keep MC out of danger for misogynistic reasons, or because he doesn't think she's capable--he does it because the only role he knows is as "protector".

He doesn't know how to relate to MC, how to feel accepted by her, unless he is fulfilling this role. We see it in Decoherence so clearly with how he swaps their power and attempts to sacrifice himself. He consistently misunderstands the reasons MC loves him, and underestimates the magnitude of that love.

In Hidden Waves he specifically expresses that he believes if he shows any weakness, MC won't feel like she can rely on him. This is not machismo, it ties back to his childhood trauma and the message he received that his entire purpose in life is to support her. If she doesn't need him, it's not a wound to his pride--it's something that shakes the very foundation of his identity.

In Lucid Dream, Caleb's emotional crisis that triggers the Toring chip is realizing that he doesn't know how to take care of her anymore. Which, I want to emphasize again, is his entire purpose in life.

Head in the clouds

One of the interesting elements of Caleb's character is that while he believes his entire purpose is to protect and support MC, he's constantly leaving her--packing off to Skyhaven, joining the DAA where he's frequently deployed, etc. How can he be so obsessed with protecting her if he's constantly leaving her unprotected?

This is because he perceives that the only way to accomplish his goal is to find somewhere that's safe for just them. Caleb mentions that "if the world was destroyed once, it can be destroyed again"--in the modern timeline, this references the Chronorift Catastrophe, but we know that on some level he's actually aware that not only with Earth be destroyed and become Philos, but as we see in Decoherence, even Philos will also be destroyed.

He becomes a pilot (even though it means leaving her) so that he can have the skills to keep her safe even if the planet itself is destroyed. But this goal is ultimately misguided--one of the most tragic aspects of his character is that he keeps getting in his own way. MC needs him to confront the reality of their situation--the Toring chip, the Fleet--but Caleb is unable to confront those things in himself, creating more distance between them.

Living in the moment

I don't see Caleb as lying to MC's face intentionally--or, at least, not maliciously. It's less that he's being calculating and manipulating her, and more that he's desperately attempting to put his "other life" out of his mind. He pretends that the diversions, like finding someone following them, don't exist because he desperately wants them to not exist. He wants, as much as possible, to live in this fantasy world where they are safe and together.

Caleb makes a lot of promises he doesn't keep, and he feels terrible about this (which we see explicitly in Decoherence). Again, he's not trying to manipulate--he's caught up in the moment and impulse. He believes, when he makes those promises, that they are possible to keep. And then he's forced to confront his failure, again and again.

Each time he becomes more and more adamant--this time I'll keep the promise.

Shame spirals

Caleb hides from his "negative" emotions because they're overwhelming. He either puts them out of his mind in a practical way (running the fleet with a cold precision) or in a whimsical way (focusing on entertaining MC and keeping her happy). But, either way, he's hiding from them.

Because Caleb was never taught how to manage or understand these emotions, he feels intense shame for his romantic feelings towards MC. This shame only intensifies the yearning and the craving, which triggers even more shame in a vicious cycle.

It's not really the circumstances themselves that make MC the forbidden fruit--they more or less grew up in an orphanage together. The EN localization isn't wrong that they're essentially best friends since childhood navigating romantic feelings. It's primarily how Caleb feels about the situation.

He internalized the "brother" role, and isn't sure if he can continue to uphold his "protector" role when stepping into these feelings. He's similar to Zayne in this way, deeply fearing the intensity of his own affection for and attachment to MC. This conflict is primarily internal.

One of the most frightening things to Caleb about romantic love is that it requires him to show up as himself, not just to fill a role for MC.

Do I deserve love?

On a fundamental level, Caleb does not feel that he deserves love. He feels that he has a function to fulfill (protector, entertainer) and his value is entirely tied to that function.

This is part of why he's so willing to leave her behind when he goes to fulfill that function--he doesn't understand that leaving hurts her, because he doesn't understand that she loves him for more than the function he provides. Decoherence makes this so clear with Caleb trying to sacrifice himself, then MC insisting, "I don't want to live in a world without you."

So, when MC asks him to step out of that "function" and simply relate to her as himself--like she does in Hidden Waves--this is both extremely challenging for Caleb but also profoundly healing. It's not the world he makes for her that she wants, it's a relationship with Caleb himself.

This inner conflict is intensified by the Toring chip, and his deep fear that what it's doing to him makes him unlovable. This is his core conflict in the main story timeline--can you love this "new" me? Or am I too monstrous? If I can no longer hold back how I feel about you, will that ruin everything?

Both sides of the caretaking coin

Especially with the military theming and initial focusing on physical control and protection, Caleb can initially present as leaning into masculine stereotypes. However, especially as you see their "Old Days" memories and the newer current day memories, it's clear that Caleb is attempting to care for MC in every possible way, far beyond gender stereotypes. He cooks for her, cleans for her, does her laundry, etc.

In this way, Caleb can also be very directly relatable for people who've been expected to become caretakers. For people who have a history of caretaking (such as eldest daughters, shout out) Caleb both represents someone willing to take care of you for a change, and your own internal conflict with regards to that caretaking role. Not only is Caleb's presence assuring, but his own internal development touches on those notes of letting love in and letting yourself be taken care of. This layered experience ends up being really compelling.

You are the trigger

There's an intentional parallel between the "interference module" used in Decoherence to cause MC and Caleb to kill each other if they get too close to each other and the Toring chip in the main story timeline. When Caleb actually begins to confront reality, when he's attempting to deal with his actual emotions, the chip kicks in and makes him even less human--it makes him forget his relationship to her and makes him more likely to hurt her.

This is another reason for Caleb's hesitance, distance, and yearning in the main story timeline. He has a very good reason to believe that if they get too close, they'll both be destroyed--and yet, it's the thing he wants more than anything. This intensifies the feelings of "forbidden romance", making them even harder to resist.

Endless summer

The idea of endless summer poetically encompasses both Caleb's greatest weaknesses and his greatest strengths.

On the one hand, "endless summer" captures the idea of focusing on the future with your head in the clouds. It's a fantastical, unrealistic ideal that distracts Caleb from the opportunities in front of him. It can't always be summer, just like he can't actually achieve these lofty, perfect visions of his life with MC.

But, on the other hand, "endless summer" captures the quiet enthusiasm for life that comes from deeply cherishing every moment. When you are truly present, those moments can feel endless and profound. "Summer" becomes metaphorical, representing the calm and warm state of mind that Caleb himself brings. (In CN, his name means/sounds like "Summer Day" 🥹)

In conclusion

Caleb is extremely well-written as a traumatized character. His fundamental false beliefs about his own worth and role in the world create excruciating internal conflict, which interferes with the one relationship he cares about the most.

Letting MC stand beside him isn't about her convincing him that she's strong enough--it's about him learning that he deserves love, he deserves to get to be a human, he doesn't just have to perform the functions of caretaking and protection to be wanted by MC.

Caleb's shame and rejection around his feelings for MC ultimately reveal his deep fear of his own humanity. If he can't control these emotions, then how can he be her protector?

On some level, he believes that MC also needs him to be a disposable, powerful weapon. But then she asks him simply to be himself. <3

[genericpuff]

I am relatively new to Greek mythology, and I thought I'd start from a few somewhat lore accurate retellings [even if it is a retelling of a retelling lol (LR is amazing btw, it's always so great to anticipate the episodes!)] and I wanted to ask for clarification on the timeline (despite it ambiguity). Khione, goddess of winter time (as far as I recall, please do correct if I am wrong) existed during the titans as she was classified as a titan (in my memory!) however, winter was brought upon the mortal realm when Demeter's rage and sorrow manifested. I'm still rlly confused on that. Thank you btw!

aahh so. Khione is. one of those goddesses who kinda sorta doesn't exist lmao at least not in the way people talk about her as a "goddess of snow", the same way Despoina didn't exist in much of the same ways (like, she's also commonly referred to as a goddess of winter and frost despite those terms NEVER showing up in official sources about her.)

I will go on to explain BUT as always - I am not Greek, nor am I a trained academic on Greek myth material. This is largely my own speculation and current beliefs based on the research I've done over the years, which is always subject to change and grow. I do realize the irony that this post is gonna contain my own analyses and criticisms of misinformed beliefs about certain Greek myth deities from people who are just as formally educated as I am on the subject. If you disagree with any of my points or have anything to add that I overlooked, by all means please feel free to discuss in the comments. Otherwise, take everything I have to say here with grains of salt, remember to do your own research so that you're not making the same mistakes as the people I'm subtly criticizing by relying solely on one source of information.

There are a lot of mixed sources on Greek mythology, on account of both the cultural and political mixing that was happening during the time of Greek antiquity (the largest of which was the adoptions of many Hellenic myths by the Romans, which is why there are Roman counterparts of so many stories and Gods, ex. Hades = Pluto, Poseidon = Neptune, Ouranos = Uranus, Aphrodite = Venus, etc.) but ALSO because a lot of general understanding of Greek myth nowadays exists solely through the filter of pop culture adaptions and, well, the Internet, where people do in fact tell lies, even if they're rooted in some amount of half-truth 😅

Regarding Khione, she's more alike to that of Despoina, where the actual sources regarding her existence and role are very limited and, due to how others interpreted and misinterpreted those sources over the years, has resulted in "fake" versions of them being popularized and accepted as cold hard truth.

I've talked at length about Despoina before, there's a lot of debate over whether or not she was a goddess or simply an epithet which could refer to any other number of goddesses, including Persephone, Demeter, and Hecate. Her existence was largely sworn to secrecy as she was worshipped through The Eleusinian Mysteries, a cult of worshippers devoted to Demeter, Persephone, and god knows who else (they did in fact live up to their name, we still to this day barely know anything about them or what they did, they are a mystery LOL)

That said, a lot of people still run around with the singular committed belief that Despoina was the "goddess of winter and frost", a sister of Persephone, because... I actually don't know why, but I'm sure it started from some popular adaption that chose to depict her that way. Or maybe this singular belief just comes from Quora threads and misinformed strangers telling other misinformed strangers things that aren't wholly true but citing it as fact anyways.

Khione's affiliation as a goddess of snow kind of falls into the same camp of "yes, but also no". She's not a singular "goddess of winter", she certainly was NOT a Titan according to any of the limited sources that exist, and she didn't have any sort of "domain" over winter in the same way Demeter did over the harvest or Hades over the dead. Any claims as such are merely loose speculations with words like "probably" and "maybe".

At best we know she was a nymph associated with snow in some way that isn't 100% certain, either as a daughter of Boreas (the north wind) or as his consort. In some theories, she was both, as there could have very well been two of them, possibly mother and daughter, sharing the same name which is - surprise - just the Greek word for "snow", hence why people often default her as "the goddess of snow" and not simply what she more likely was, a nymph or deity associated with snow simply through the translation of her name and relation to the north wind.

(it should be noted btw that Greek deities and heroes sharing the same name happens a LOT and it's why it's always important to not stick to any singular "canon" as oftentimes all the various sources of culturally and politically relevant information are muddied by the game of Internet telephone and popular adaption.)

And all of that isn't even getting into what "winter" even meant within the context of Ancient Greece. I've also gone into speculative rants about this, but a "goddess of winter" by all accounts probably didn't even exist, because "winter" in Ancient Greece very likely wasn't the way we tend to envision it - an annual season of snowfall, holiday cheer, etc. - but was instead a period of drought. Demeter wasn't necessarily literally creating 'winter' through the manifestation of snow and ice, she was instead creating a period in which crops couldn't grow by not fulfilling her duties as the goddess of the harvest (after all, if Demeter was literally capable of creating snow and ice, why wouldn't we refer to her as such? As you said yourself, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for someone like Despoina or Khione to be the goddesses of winter when Demeter presumably already had control over that domain.)

"Harvest" and "drought" are both seasons in and of themselves, and the story of Demeter and Persephone was to explain the fluctuations of those farming seasons, not necessarily the definitions we rely on today where winter = snow. Persephone, by extension, wasn't necessarily the Goddess of Spring because she could directly create flowers and sunshine and rain - it was because her return to Demeter brought about the end of the drought, when Demeter would allow the harvest to continue, which served as our simplified understanding of 'spring'.

And if you need more proof of this, well, just go read the actual Hymn to Demeter. The word 'winter' is not mentioned once.

As for Khione, well... it's not that she didn't exist, there is source material about her, but it's incredibly minimal and, at best, just serves as a part of the overall picture, not the singular source. "Winter" - and all of the other seasons to boot - as the Ancient Greeks clearly tried to understand it wasn't through one single god, but an accumulation of many, across various communities, religions, and cultures that shared and adopted many beliefs from one another built on abstraction of thought and divine attribution for lack of clearer explanations at the time - through Demeter, who robbed them of the harvest and plunged them into famine for months every year; through Hades, who indirectly triggered these famines in his kidnapping and marriage to Persephone; through Zeus, who gave Hades his blessing to marry Persephone; through Boreas, one of four deities of the wind who specifically brought about the cold winds from the north; and through Khione, a nymph who was the consort and/or daughter of Boreas, whose name means 'snow' and who possibly had some affiliation with the cold and snow through her relation to Boreas who was linked to the northern regions of Greece which traditionally experienced the harshest winters and heaviest snowfalls.

phew

I realize that was a lot but I hope it helps clear up some of the confusion! And like I said in my above disclaimer, you def don't have to take everything I've said here as law or fact, more so another perspective on the matter that will hopefully at least lift the fog of confusion a bit. Being new to Greek myth can definitely be overwhelming on account of just how much there is to read and dissect, there are so many sources, articles, creative interpretations, and debates over these historical puzzles we don't even have all the pieces to because we're analyzing all of it in hindsight.

That said, it is still a lot of fun and I hope you enjoy the process of discovery and learning! I highly recommend also checking out /r/GreekMythology, Theoi, and the various translations that exist from authors like Robert Fagles, Robert Fitzgerald, and Emily Wilson :)

Good luck! <3

[andy-wm]

the mental gymnastics in some of your posts, oh dear

Don't be hard on yourself anon, not everyone is built for gymnastics!

Yeah i know that's not what you meant 😉

The analysis i do doesn't really require a lot of effort for me, but i guess i am practised at critiquing visual arts. Having an academic art criticism and fine arts background has been very useful in that regard. And being a librarian I'm experienced in analysing text and looking for answers amongst a myriad of questions. The combination of those skills means I am pretty good at a picking up symbolism and reading the subtext in media.

But I get that many people don't do that. They don't automatically think about theme, concept, and narrative design when they come across a MV or a song or portrait. They just think it's nice or it's pretty - or it isn't. That's fine too. Everyone is free to engage with the world around them to whatever extent meets their need.

I need to understand, and that's what drives my passion for analysis. That's why I spend my weekends reading about language analysis, literary theory, aesthetic conventions, semiotics, reception theory (you'd love that one), post- colonial critical theory etc. etc.

If you don't need to understand, kudos to you. Embrace your own experience and be happy, but please don't fool yourself. Meaning does exist whether you search for it or not.

Any language can be understood if you choose to learn it.

💜

If you have an opposing view to mine, feel free to present it. I'll happily engage, but do your research and bring your A game because I won't go easy on you. And for the love of jikook, use punctuation.

[historicity-was-already-taken]

Hi! I really appreciate your nuanced and informed thoughts. Apologies if you've already answered something like this somewhere, but I'm only occasionally on Tumblr these days.

My question is what do you think about calls for academic boycotts as a means of protest? (Against Russia and Israel, most recently - curiously, I've never seen any suggestions for an academic boycott against, say, China, due to persecution of Uygurs and Tibetans. Cynically, I'm guessing this is because Chinese academia is simply too big and too financially integrated into global academic publishing profits for anyone to imagine a boycott, whereas Russian and Israeli academics are much less visible and much less profitable.)

I often sympathize with the feelings of those calling for boycotts, but it feels like it's useless at best and counterproductive at worst to cut off potential regime critics from international support, making them more dependent on keeping the regime happy for funding. I've seen some of what happens in an academic community (Hungary) that is poorly integrated with the international academic community when a repressive government start going after insufficiently nationalist research, and it's not great - entire fields of study the government doesn't like pressured out of existence, or only hanging on because of external EU funding. I have trouble seeing how essentially helping a regime stamp out dissenting voices is a good way to protest that regime. I also fear that if dissenters feel that the international community rejects them and views them as no different from the regime that they will be more likely to embrace apathy for survival.

I'm not sure how to respond to calls for academic boycott in a way that opens dialogue about these concerns, and I also recognize that I may be missing something. I'd love your thoughts on this issue if you have any!

imo academic boycotts are the political equivalent of punching parallel/down.

especially, since, as you pointed out, many academics in the boycotted nations are already dissenters. that said, i do think it's bullshit that these calls for boycotts aren't extended to china.

there's another aspect here, though, which i think was best presented in The Good Place: in a globalized economy, such simple measures as not buying that tomato or using that app or talking to that one israeli medical researcher don't have the impact we'd like to think they do. everything is soo layered and interwoven and codependent and opaque, that we can't truly know what decision we're making and what kind of impact it will truly have without expertise in international finance and tax law and supply chain ethical management.

in our world, as it exists, money and hard power are the only things which will effect change. they're the only things that matter. shitting on some russian grad student who just accessed the closed soviet archive of Khanate-era mongolian literature, or the israeli social scientist researching the intersection of public health and addiction won't do anything, except keep the West in the dark about Mongolian literature, and blocking findings valuable for public management of those struggling with addiction.

if universities and 18-22 year olds want to effect change, go for the wallet. research which defense contractors give money to which university labs/departments, target the administration of those departments, and make as big and loud of a stink as possible. i don't think the individuals calling for these boycotts want to do that though. it's dangerous and scary and requires them to actually put themselves at genuine risk. it's easier for them to just attack academics living under shitty governments, harass jewish students, and call it praxis.

but that's just my (cynical, lowkey depressed) take.

[whereserpentswalk]

It's a debate amoung many scholars if humans ever got a chance to explore their moon.

Since it's been hundreds since any sovereign humans state has existed, and almost all humans were expelled from the sol system only a few generations after the conquest of earth, outside scholars didn't have as much of a chance to see humans in their native environment as they wanted to. So for those who are studying the sol system after its resettled (useally referred to as auxus by the new settlers) they have mostly archeology to go on.

Now, some have tried to consult the humans for their own cultural memories of such things. And though the human diaspora is very large, serving the role of "middle man minority" in a lot of planets, and taking especially well to spaceships, that doesn't mean anthropology should trust their history as they tell them. Because of how primitive humans were at the time of the conquest, their history as they wrote it is thought of as more of a mythology then a history, important for analyzing the character of humanity, but not an objective account. And unless archeological research backs something up, human primary sources are assumed to be myth.

Now. There is archeological proof that someone was building spacecraft in the sol/auxus system around the time of conquest. We've seen examples of the human homeworld Nexcur (called earth in the human's language) having strange and unknowable machines orbiting it as artificial satellites. And Nexcur's moon has objects such as a flag planted on it, and the closest planet to it has some small unmanned vehicles. It's unknown who made these and why, and has been a mystery since its discovered. Some people think the nearby gaetgians or trinurians built them, others think that the iiriu built them long before the humans evolved. There's even some theories that the yethyy empire built them in preparation for the conquest of earth. There's even more crackpot theories about divine beings or ancient interdimensional entities making them on some corners of the internet.

Of course. The humans almost all claim their ansestors made them, pointing to their own myths. Scholars are just starting to take it seriously, though many remain rather skeptical. The humans were known to be a primitive and warlike species on their homeworld, with no ftl capabilities, the idea of them sending anything to space is laughable to a lot of academics. And it very much differs from the image of humanity that most people have when the think about that time period. Humans have a reputation for taking their mythology a bit too seriously, such as claiming heritage from mythical kingdoms such a King Arthur's Britain, the Odyssey's Greece, or Journey to the West's China.

There is also the obvious problem with any archeological research around what is now auxus which is its religious significance to cultures such as the yethyy and aeretiel. While we try not to offend their religious ideas, and treat them with respect, it is often a problem when their religious ideals of an ancient significance in auxus clashes with the archeological reality that before 1458 SD there is no evidence of non human civilization. For example the mummified body that many yethyy claim to be their prophet kkayykar (despite not even possessing the right amount of eyes or arms to be a yethyy) was recently identified as the mummy of the human king Lenin. However, it's still in a yethyy temple, and still in the power armor the yethyy added to it (partially to make him look more like their own race), as archeologists don't want to offend yethyy heritage.

Still, as no religion has fully claimed the ancient evidence for human era space travel as their own, now is the perfect time for archeologists to learn more about them. More and more of human mythology is being proven plausible, especially as the human mythological creatures known as "dinosaurs" have finally been proven to have some basis in paleontological reality in recently. Science still waits to find out more about auxus's fascinating history and prehistory.

[matrixbearer2024]

I had an ask about this regarding my AU but I don't know what happened to it after I saw it in my inbox cuz it might be tumblr being funny but essentially it was just:

"Does West Coast Tech still exist? Why didn't Ford go to West Coast Tech?"

Short answer is, he simply didn't want to in this AU. West Coast Tech is among the Ivy Leagues in my AU and BMU still exists too, it still has the prominent reputation of being a back-up university.

In this AU ultimately Ford never really developed the mindset that he was "special" and had to make a point of it or prove that he was somebody. Because of their upbringing, there wasn't a "preference" others had towards either twin because Filbrick disliked them equally and their academic and extracurricular skills basically made them break even. There wasn't a stupid twin/smart twin between them and Caryn made damn sure about it.

Possibly the only thing that most people say about the two is that they're "smart but stupid" because of all the trouble they get wrapped up in doing whatever or being too curious for their own good.

The teachers or coaches didn't favor one twin over the other either and they were generally liked by their peers. Ford didn't end up with that sense of arrogance that you can typically see in canon where he believes he is above the rest and he has to be and Stan didn't develop that inferiority complex compared to his sibling.

In this AU, Ford had the option to go to West Coast Tech but even throughout senior high he already knew that a good university could really only get you so far. He was a sharp tool yes, but... he didn't think that edge would really push him far. He had an edge, but it wasn't much.

There's a lot of gifted people nowadays and even good credentials aren't going to guarantee a decent job or a stable career, that's if you can even get a job right away.

The science project and everything was still what gave him the opportunity and Stan even congratulated him for scoring that high but Ford wasn't really pleased? I'm not sure with the word but he wasn't exactly happy with the circumstance. They didn't fight over it considering all throughout highschool they kept talking about potential careers and whatnot.

It didn't help that Filbrick encouraged the idea of West Coast Tech because of how much money Ford could potentially make. Even so, Ford was stupidly skeptical after seeing the pamphlet and researching online. Realistically it seemed too good to be true, and he couldn't even sleep on it from how much he kept thinking.

Stan knew he would likely take longer to figure things out but he'd get there, and he was willing to let Ford just reach for the stars as he always did. They still have that dream of sailing around the world as adults but it's a lot more defined and realistic compared to how they planned it in canon. They're thinking, work hard, get rich, then retire early to sail and travel around the world. If their paths split early, they'll find a way back when they grow up. They always do.

It's something they constantly talk about because they both desperately want to move out after graduation just to get the hell away from Filbrick. It doesn't matter where they end up they just need to get away.

Even so, Ford mulled over the offer and decided to visit the university before making his decision. His gut feeling was both parts right and wrong, sure— what he thought was too good to be true was the actual reality of the school and it's pursuit of academic excellence, but he was right to be skeptical after he noticed the snobbish and arrogant nature most of the students have. It's a common thing for ivy leagues to have that mentality that they're the cream of the crop. The best there is. Not everybody is like this of course, but sometimes the loudest crowd doesn't always have to be the majority.

It does take a lot of work to get to their level and to stay at that level but Ford couldn't see himself in that school. He didn't want to allow himself into that crowd where he knew it would potentially make him worse off as a person. Also, he had the entirety of undergrad to get through, if he so much as wanted to transfer to an Ivy League to get his masters or doctorate he knew he could! So what was the rush?

University was a stepping stone and he had time, he knew he could do a lot but he didn't need to rush. So... Ford turned down the offer.

Sadly, it was pretty much as chaotic(bad) as you'd think.

Of course, that meant looking for another university instead and it was mostly Stan who did the research this time because Ford was too burnt out and sulky after everything. He knew he made the choice that would inherently grant him more happiness, but it doesn't always feel like that right away and it didn't help that the walls were paper thin. It's hard to fall asleep to your parents yelling and throwing things around in a fight because of a decision you made.

Both of them had generally pretty good track records academically and a long list of achievements to follow it so it wasn't hard for them to find universities either. That's how they ended up with Graviton University in Oregon, it's not an Ivy-league but it's not as bad as BMU either. It really is just a stepping stone in the middle, your performance practically shapes the path you walk on.

The Stan twins have a choice in this AU mostly because they could also afford it, take note- the family is financially comfortable in this AU because Filbrick is one hell of an unscrupulous businessman but very successful. They're not rich but they're comfortable, and that's a lot in the state of the economy nowadays.

Ford has choices in this AU and it's also a very big part to play in why he could turn down the offer at the time and not look back at it with regret. Stan also being on even ground beside his brother is why they don't ever fight about such topics either, he's not ever chasing after Ford— he's standing right next to him.

The subtle differences from canon can genuinely just make a world of difference in the bigger picture. But yeah, it's why I had them go to Graviton University instead. It's a middle-ground and it's also how I can essentially get them to stay in gravity falls instead of ending up elsewhere when I cranked the "weirdness" level pretty low. There's still bits and bobs of it around, but not to the degree of the canon show I would think.

I hope this generally clears up how I wrote or my thought process as to why I didn't have Ford reach for the stars despite having that option and why the Stan Twins are generally this tight knit in my AU.

[fafodill]

Helloo, I love your takes on Snape!!

What's your opinion on the Xenophilius/Severus crackship? For some reason Ive completely fallen in love with the concept. They're quite the opposite in many regards (grumpy/sunshine, goth/hippie, weed/nicotine lmao), but I think it could honestly be so cute in a post war setting. Xeno might be a conspiracy theorist - they'd bicker soo much about this - but I don't think he's academically unintelligent. I think his creativity and thinking outside the box could inspire Sev in his potion making and inventing and stuff. And I don't think he'd take Sevs tendency to be quite mean/lash out very personally, might even laugh at it. And they'd both like flowers 🥺 I could write an essay about them.

Also it's peak comedy potential.

Thank you! <3 Now, wouldn't that be an odd pair?

I see where you're coming from and I agree that there's cuteness in the contrast of their aesthetics. Opposites are nod-approving.

This being said, I think they'd be a huge mismatch intellectually speaking. Not necessarily because Xenophilius is inherently less intelligent than Severus (though if I had to take a stance I'd say he is) but in the way their minds work.

Severus is a pragmatic and a scholar. He'd get so annoyed so fast at Xenophilius's antics. The problem isn't that the other man is a mad conspirationnist, it's that he's not backing his claims with hard evidence! And this would be totally unacceptable for our Potion Master. Severus has a curious mind and loves to experiment, yes, but he is set on method, prudence and does a lot of researches beforehand.

We also know Xenophilius is ignorant and reckless. When gifted an Erumpent horn - a highly dangerous object to have in one's house - he wasn't able to recognize it and believed wholeheartedly the lie he had been fed by the person who gave it to him. We can be nice and say he's a bit candid, but Severus would absolutely loose his shit over stuff like that. This story alone makes us wonder how the hell that man hadn't killed himself and his daughter years ago.

Can you imagine Xenophilius in a potion lab? This would be a total nightmare! He'd take jars, not put them back, scatter volatile or dangerous ingredients everywhere, inhale stuff, spill stuff, even maybe 'try to help' and put something in Severus's cauldron because 'it felt right'. No, honestly, pretty sure Severus would prefer to be locked in with Neville any day in comparison. He'd get so many grey hair so fast.

He is intelligent, that's for sure, but people have outwardly described him as 'unbalanced' and we have seen in text their claim wasn't unfounded. Sure sometimes he'd get a genius idea because he totally thinks out of the box and that's his greatest strength but he also seems unable to use critical-thinking about himself.

Honestly, as hard as it sounds, I think Severus would be embarrassed to be associated with him.

This being said, when faced with evidence of Xenophilius being right about something, Severus would be very puzzled. It's just hard to say if that man has a good instinct or if he's just weirdly lucky sometimes. Unfortunately, looking at canon events, the odds aren't in his favor.

Xenophilius is a very volatile ingredient, which doesn't feel to me like what Severus might want in a post-war life. He's been through so much stress, all he'd want is peace.

Unless he can't deal with peace and unhealthily seeks chaos. Then maybe? But I don't think it would last. At best I can imagine them going on a few dates and Severus going a few times to his house and every time he'd leave swearing he'd never go back to this madhouse ever again.

One thing Severus would appreciate though, is that Xenophilius wouldn't be prejudiced against the Dark Arts. It feels like he's got a broader view on magic than most and would just consider it... well, magic. And that would be very refreshing to Severus. Also Xenophilius would tell him about non-existent Dark Creatures and Severus would sigh but entertain him and be patient until Xenophilius hits him with the 'But can you prove it doesn't exist?!' and then he'd get a teacup smashed onto his head.

So I agree, there's comedy potential in here.

Also, imagining gothic-looking-Snape beside omelette-yellow-Xenophilius is quite a mind treat.

Part 2 of this ask

But I'd be curious to hear your counter-arguments if you care to share them with us.

[not-poignant]

Potentially an odd question, but is there a specific site or method you use for research for your writings? Researching medical/legal/similar procedures is the bane of my existence because I can never seem to find an explanation I understand well enough to then write about.

I recently caught up to Stain, and while reading it struck me how you put a lot of detail into a wide variety of topics (the medical part of Alex’s injury at the start, therapy, Alex’s eye examination, Sebastian talking about his boss trying to underpay him, among other topics) (HUGE kudos about that by the way, it adds another layer of realism) and it feels like there’s no way one person can have firsthand experience/knowledge in ALL these things unless you’ve lived an extremely varied life.

I was just hoping you might have some pointers about how to go about researching basically anything because I feel like I’ve GOT to be missing something.

No worries if you can’t/don’t want to/don’t have an answer, I just thought shooting an ask your way is worth a shot haha.

Hi anon,

Researching is its own skillset, like writing or editing, there's no one specific site to go to, to make it easier, it's more like...taking the time to learn the constellation of ever-changing sites, books, and more in order to best learn how to learn. Because that's really what it is about: Learning how to learn.

On learning how to learn (I should say, I'm not very good at teaching, so some of this stuff might not be helpful to you, please ignore it if it isn't!):

But I do have some things that I do which might help. And some that might not.

The first thing that won't really help is I have led a varied life in a way that is convenient for the content I write, lol. The medical part of Alex's injury - I've been badly injured. The eye examination - I have astigmatism and was diagnosed late and blamed for my own eyesight issues which I didn't realise were eyesight issues. I've seen over 19 therapists in over 25 years. I've talked to bosses about pay and I've had lots of friends that have too.

Tbh the things I've had to research the most in Stardew Valley have been:

The intersection of astigmatism/myopia/dyslexia treatment and the best order in which these things should happen.

Stardew Valley - literally the calendar, the schedule, liked gifts, disliked gifts, favourite meals etc. Some I know off by heart, others I don't really remember at all.

The best way to clean a house (though my mother was a professional cleaner for most of my childhood, I just wanted to revise and see if anything had changed since then)

Cleaning standards for home laboratories

The colours that sweetpea flowers come in etc.

It's always random stuff. And to be honest, a lot of this doesn't happen in much detail in the story. The colour of sweetpea flowers was for the bouquet, and I think it was one line. The best way to clean a house has accounted for very little actual writing.

Now for actual helpful stuff:

Wikipedia is your friend. My browser search bar goes straight to Wikipedia, not google. It's amazing how much Wikipedia will explain a ton of different things these days. It's true some concepts might be hard to understand, you might need to spend more time Wiki-ing / googling / using a dictionary to start understanding those concepts.

When it comes to writing trauma, for example, I've read upwards of 20+ academic books (i.e. the kind psychologists study at university or after university in postgrad) about trauma. I wouldn't expect other people to go that deep, but other folks aren't writing trauma like I am in every single story, and it's a special interest of mine. But it kind oh illustrates that I'm not going to a single site about something.

But you could get a deeper understanding by just looking at the PTSD and C-PTSD and trauma articles on Wikipedia, and slowly reading them.

The second is that medical sites can also be your friend.

The third is that Reddit is amazing for lived experiences, with a grain of salt that some people are lying for clout. But 'what treatments helped best with your dyslexia reddit' as a search phrase is going to be way more helpful than whatever AI bullshit the google search line will give you otherwise. Deep diving into reddit threads can be super helpful for stuff that I used to find out previously on personal blogs (it's amazing how much 'what's life on an oil rig like blog' used to turn up a ton of lived experiences from firsthand encounters for example). I don't use my Reddit account for anything other than research, lmao. It's a hidden gem for lived experience and human interpretation of complex issues. It can be especially helpful for legal / economic matters, but honestly, I mostly just handwave legal stuff with caveats/disclaimers. You can do an undergraduate degree in law, and a lawyer is still going to painstakingly point out all the ways you're wrong about something. It's just better to tell the lawyers in advance that you know you can't compete with their knowledge base lmao.

(Though it can be worth looking up regional differences, because if I see another Australian writing Australian legal procedures into US law (or vice versa) I will scream - like no, Aussies, we do not have BOLOs here, we have KL04, LOTBKF and BOLF depending on your state).

A good way to start learning how to learn is to actually start outside of your stories and start with things you already love. Plug your favourite movie into Wikipedia and learn about how it was made, or what the production was like. And when you find something mildly interesting, say, about film lighting, open up those Wiki articles or plug 'film lighting process for (insert movie here)' on google, and have a look at some of the results. Learn how to learn, how to go deeper, what seems to be helpful, and what isn't. Consider making a list of articles you really enjoy - I love a website that aggregates all the different odours and flavours in the world and their chemical compounds which has been incredibly helpful for Palmarosa. The website is a bit hard to navigate, but if you plug something like 'spearmint' into the search, it'll help.

If you don't already have it, put Wikipedia on your phone. It's free / ad-free. I have my own personal server on Discord that I use to house a lot of resources (for everything, from my business, to health records, to writing resources). If you use Discord already, I highly recommend the 'private server' as a great way to aggregate everything together.

If the article formatting of online articles doesn't feel good, you can do text-to-speech, or use the little 'reader' symbol to make it more reader-friendly.

Books are also not to be underestimated for how helpful they can be (I find too many people are website focused these days, but actually, not everything can be found on websites, a lot of the best niche knowledge is still in books when it's not in lived experience tellings). Find out about your local and online libraries. A lot of people (especially younger folks) don't realise just how much information they can get access to, for free. Librarians themselves are gifts from god, who will literally help you find the books you need for whatever subject you want to learn more about, and if they don't know, they will often personally take it upon themselves to look further for you. 'I want to learn more about German composers' is - for many librarians - a very exciting question that they will want to help you with.

Outside of that, niche websites (like the odours one I mentioned), sometimes just finding sites where asking research questions gets answered. For example the free blogging site (with no ads), Dreamwidth, has a community called little_details where you can ask your niche question and people will answer and say what their expertise is in that subject. It's incredible and active enough to be super helpful. In some cases it's completely changed the course of a story.

Over time you'll also learn what's less helpful. Some articles are clearly ChatGPT written or written for ads and not accurate - so if you can get the same information corroborated at multiple sources, that will help.

And don't forget the value of just listening to people online and irl regarding their experiences. As a writer, I feel like an 'experience collector.' I like asking friends, strangers, family, etc. all kinds of questions because I think a part of my brain is always aware that something they're sharing could be a vitally grounding element in a story and it's also just interesting and people like sharing about their lives. Whether I'm asking my roommate about the process of getting a government evaluation approved, my architect friend about drug use in Australian architecture, or a friend from Bali what sort of foods he grew up with and what his comfort meal was when he felt sick, etc. Writers collect experiences, not just their own, but those of others. The greatest tools a writer can have in their toolbelt are knowing how to listen, learning how to learn (and how to love learning), and knowing what the right questions are.

None of those things can be gained with one or two websites. But they can be gained with time and curiosity, and well, that helps with your whole entire life, and not just writing. :D

[redpenship]

As requested, here is an edited version (although I left some stuff in that doesn't really need to be there, like the whole section on the NPT) of my paper on nuclear strategy in the Sonic Adventure series:

None of this is good, Vector. That’s why it’s called war. 

- Knuckles the Echidna, in Sonic Forces (2017)

Sonic the Hedgehog is a very weird video game series. 

(Author's note: the quality of this paper does not reflect the majority of my academic writing. It was for a 200-level (beginner's) English class wherein I was encouraged to do whatever I wanted and not worry about tone, topic, etc. I also wrote it in less than a day after having written 3 other papers the same week, and was suffering from sleep deprivation and brain fog while writing it. I have not included my references in this post because they were done in Chicago footnote format and don't paste into Tumblr well. If you want more info on anything I mention, I will gladly provide sources on said topics! Ty ty)

---

Sonic the Hedgehog is a very weird video game series. 

This statement has nothing to do with its varying quality of gameplay. Sonic the Hedgehog is weird because its surface presentation as a colourful, furry-adjacent Dragon Ball rip-off disguises its extremely fascinating perspectives on warfare. The games frequently feature weapons of mass destruction in its stories, which allows for interesting analysis on the strategies used in-game and how it relates to American perspectives on nuclear war. The first game analyzed will be Sonic Adventure, which depicts an attempted nuclear strike on an American city. The second game analyzed will be Sonic Adventure 2, which features an attempt at WMD-boosted bargaining. These games will be used to answer the following research question: which side does Dr. Eggman take in the Borden-Brodie debate on nuclear weapons strategy? 

As a brief explanation, the Borden-Brodie debate is about how nuclear weapons will actually be used in a nuclear war between two states. This debate emerged in the late 1940s and early 1950s, as theorists attempted to predict the future of war after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Borden predicted that nuclear weapons would be used as “big artillery” to support regular military attacks, whereas Brodie predicted that the devastating effects of nuclear weapons would make war between two nuclear weapons states (NWS) inconceivable. Brodie appears to have won the debate as nuclear doctrine shifted to favour deterrence during the Cold War, but we must consider the following idea: perhaps, in the grand scheme of things, there has not been a conflict worth using them for just yet.

What is the geopolitical situation in Sonic the Hedgehog? Technically, the series takes place on Earth, but it’s a little different. Instead of the United States, there is the United Federation, instead of Greece there is Apotos, and instead of Africa there is Mazuri, because even the fun cartoon animal game cannot keep itself from generalizing the entire African continent into one entity. These countries are predominantly inhabited by humans, who live on the continents, and the animal-people (like Sonic and friends) live on small offshore islands. There has never been an explanation for why this separation exists, and while it could be fun to explore potential reasons, that is not the point of this paper!

Dr. Eggman typically begins his campaigns of world domination on these islands. He captures small animals to be used as batteries in his machines and builds extractive industrial plants, such as oil refineries and chemical plants. Sonic opposes him in the earlier games because he is harming the environment, and this has turned into a standard rivalry as the games have continued and Eggman’s evil plans have grown in scale. As soon as the games give the characters spoken dialogue in Sonic Adventure, Eggman’s schemes move away from resource extraction and towards using huge weapons and awakened ancient gods in order to conquer the planet. This is where the weapons of mass destruction come into play.

The first depiction of a WMD in Sonic the Hedgehog is in Sonic Adventure, where Eggman attempts to murder-suicide Station Square (in-universe San Francisco) by firing a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) at the city while he is still in it. He does this because he is upset that his plan failed, although perhaps he was attempting to show us mercy by wiping all the Silicon Valley bros off the face of the planet. Regardless of exact intention, his attempt to nuke Station Square says a lot about his perspective on nuclear war, which will be discussed below. 

When dealing with an enemy, their perception of you and their own weapons are crucial to understand. The norm in nuclear doctrine is that nuclear weapons are used in retaliation to extremely high levels of threat. However, this has not always been the case—in the 1950s, they were generally perceived as really big bombs that could be used in combination with normal artillery. This theory was emphasized most by the radically anti-communist William Borden, also famous for testifying against Oppenheimer in his security clearance review, who argued that nuclear war will target military infrastructure and end when one side in the conflict has run out of weapons. Therefore, it is in the best interest of the United States to possess as many weapons as possible because it is the quantity they possess that will render them victorious. City-busting occurs after the war, when you are free to hurt your enemy’s civilian population without fear of retaliation. Or, perhaps, when you have nothing left to lose—which is exactly what happened in Eggman’s case. 

Borden predicted that nuclear weapons states would disperse their launchers and military bases to make them harder to strike. He likewise predicted the use of nuclear missile-equipped submarines (SSBNs), which are used strategically for second strikes; submarines are hard to find, and can be positioned close to the enemy, making them very useful for retaliation. This is precisely in line with Eggman’s attack in Sonic Adventure 1, which used an SSBN close to the enemy’s civilian population as a last resort punishment after he incurred heavy losses. Whether or not this was a smart thing for Eggman to do is up in the air—the SLBM appeared to be an attempted surface burst on a city, which would actually minimize casualties when compared to an air burst detonation, so it is very likely that he cares more about building cool bombs than understanding how to use them properly—but it is clear that he is a champion of the Borden expectations of nuclear warfare nonetheless!

Eggman’s arguably insane, vengeful attack on Station Square stokes fears of nuclear armageddon that were hyper-present during the Cold War. Although he has been referred to as Dr. Eggman exclusively so far in this essay, this is not the case in Sonic Adventure—Tails, the character present in the city while the attack happens, refers to him as “Dr. Robotnik”. The character’s “real” name is Ivo Robotnik, which was given to him by American translators in lieu of “Eggman” when the classic games first released. It may not be surprising that American translators at the end of the Cold War decided to give an industrialist who primarily wears red an Eastern European sounding name. Russians are disproportionately featured as enemies in video games, eclipsing both the Axis Powers (typically Germany or Japan) and Arabs (as terrorists) in studied games. In wartime, framing one’s enemies as irrational is a core component of propaganda. Depicting someone named “Robotnik” as a self-driven madman who is willing to nuke an entire city when he loses feeds into assumptions that the enemies of the United States are not rational, which is then used to justify US hegemony on the international scene—someone has to keep these unruly states in line! This is especially true for the non-proliferation regime, which has been regarded by some states as neocolonial. India, a nuclear weapons state, has argued that the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is discriminatory because it does not ban vertical proliferation. This stance generally purports that non-proliferation treaties are used to keep nuclear weapons out of “undesirable” hands while allowing nuclear weapons states to maintain and build on their own stockpile (vertical proliferation). Fears of certain states (such as Iran or North Korea) acquiring arsenals are presented as imminent dangers because enemies of the United States are always inherently irrational, and therefore cannot be trusted with such powerful weapons. The idea of “rationality” has been weaponized in service of white supremacy—and to a lesser extent, the patriarchy—for centuries and it should surprise no one that an international nonproliferation regime, largely built by and for states who were founded and are sustained on the premise of white supremacy, would prop up inequality and keep nuclear weapons only in the hands of those who “deserve” them. Although Russia is not a victim of this regime, it is frequently depicted as irrational and untrustworthy with nuclear weapons. Robotnik’s attack on Station Square is reminiscent of this rhetoric. 

Of course, Sonic is a Japanese video game, which should grant it some leniency in the depiction of a nuclear attack as inherently irrational and violent. But for American players, who are meant to perceive this as an attack on a fictionalized version of their country, the implications are more specifically anti-Russian.

Sonic Adventure 2 flips this script a bit: as it would turn out, Eggman is American, and members of his extended family were killed in a coverup operation by the Sonic equivalent of the US military, Guardian Unit of Nations—typically abbreviated to GUN. His grandfather, Gerald Robotnik, was commissioned to research immortality and weapons of mass destruction aboard the space colony ARK. One of his creations was the Eclipse Cannon, a giant laser capable of destroying the planet. 

Between games, Eggman has seemingly underwent the same attitude shift as every other NWS during the Cold War, because he has now discovered that WMDs can be used to threaten your enemies into getting what you want. On the ARK, Eggman activates the Eclipse Cannon and does the following:

1. Uses its laser to destroy part of the moon in a show of force; 

2. Threatens to use it against the Earth unless he is crowned emperor of the planet; 

3. Gives Earth 24 hours to accept. 

Did Bernard Brodie predict the plot of Sonic Adventure 2? In his earliest work The Absolute Weapon, he argued that the absolute power of a nuclear bomb would make wars too costly to fight. The primary purpose for governments would therefore be to avoid war at all costs, since any of them could result in devastating nuclear war. Brodie also wrote many pieces laying out strategies of nuclear deterrence, which continue to be used to this day. 

There is a common knee-jerk reaction to Eggman’s story that I see in fan discussions of the game. Many comments feature the following logic: “Why would Eggman blow up the planet he wants to rule? Either the writer is stupider than me, or Eggman is lying!” This is a very understandable way to perceive his threat with the Eclipse Cannon—why would someone make such an unreasonable threat? Does he really expect it to work? Who is going to buy this?

The game provides no insight into the general reaction to this by the world’s governments. However, Sonic and friends believe his threat right away, and race to the ARK to stop him. They are correct to do so—Eggman does end up trying to use the Eclipse Cannon against the Earth, but it does not work because Gerald Robotnik programmed it to fail if ever used. Therefore, we know that Eggman was not bluffing about his threat to destroy the planet at all. We know that he was actually going to do it. So, why do fans of the game continue to argue that Eggman’s threat was pointless? 

Bernard Brodie’s concept of the absolute weapon has become the mainstream view of WMDs in the public consciousness. We fear nuclear weapons because of their destructive power and believe that no conflict could ever require their deployment. We believe other NWS hold the same concerns. This perspective is then projected onto Eggman by fans, who mistakenly assume he should foster the same feelings about WMDs. The assumption that Eggman was not willing to go through with his plan, or that the world’s governments would not surrender to him, requires Eggman to value his own life over the success of his empire. The first Sonic Adventure game has Eggman attempt to nuke a city he is standing in. A suicidal, last-ditch plan to take over the world is perfectly in-line with his character. What is the point of living if he cannot have his way? What is the point of a planet’s existence if he is not the one in charge? These are the questions driving Eggman’s decisions in the games. 

Sonic Adventure 2 does not reject Brodie’s theories, but does provide a counterargument: deterrence breaks down when one’s ambitions outgrow the potential retaliation for acting upon them. Eggman’s dream of ruling the world was stronger than his will to live. Mortal terror was not enough to curb his imperial ambitions, and the Earth was almost destroyed as consequence of this perspective. 

When the two games are measured against one another, it becomes apparent that Eggman has taken a very clear stance on the Borden-Brodie debate: he is a supporter of the Borden perspective on nuclear war! He does not believe in absolute deterrence and treats WMDs as usable tools in his arsenal, even at a potential detriment to himself. His actions in Sonic Adventure 2 align his views with one of Borden’s biggest theories: the winner of a nuclear war will not be the state who inflicts the most damage on their enemy, but rather the one who does not run out of nuclear weapons first. Eggman is determined to be the last one standing—even if it means standing alone atop the ashes of the world. 

[chaifootsteps]

Sorry this is gonna be long. Vivziepop doesn't understand the gravity of sin and hence cannot comprehend the idea of redemption.

It's so obvious Viv has had some bad experiences with the Christian church, but she is also totally unwilling to research the philosophy behind the religion. There are reasons we believe what we believe, and reasons why what we believe gets twisted and used to hurt people, and even reasons why our beliefs in their truest and purest form can STILL hurt people. But regardless of their effects, whether good or bad, there are REASONS those beliefs exist, reasons backed up by literal millennial of theology and historical/academic study.

The idea that her characters don't even understand HOW someone gets into heaven just proves she gave no thought to the other side of the argument. The premise of Hazbin Hotel is that people can change and deserve a chance to be redeemed, but she fails to illustrate any actual change or redemption.

Redemption is predicated on the recognition of what you've done wrong and the desire to do better. It is an internal battle of constant self-examination and dedication to improve. The people that make up her main cast are sinful. Whether or not their sins mean they deserved hell is up to interpretation. I'm not asking her to follow the Catechism of the Catholic church. But if these people are to be redeemed, they have to acknowledge themselves as full of fault.

Husk was a gambler. A gambling addiction is not a fun or quirky hobby. It, like any addiction, is a complete loss of control and subservience to a vice that destroys your life and relationships with other people. Alastor was a cannibal and serial killer, who took the lives of fellow humans and desecrated their remains for his own pleasures, showing a complete lack of respect for the sanctity of life. Angel Dust hurts himself over and over and over again through his addiction to pleasure and narcotics. Sometimes sin doesn't hurt other people as much as it hurts us, but it's still a sin because we are supposed to treat our bodies as temples. These are all massive flaws of the characters, sins that have overtaken their personalities and lives, and yes, they may be interesting and fun and entertaining, but that doesn't change the fact they did bad things.

Vivziepop can't redeem anyone, because she fails to set a standard of righteousness. Sin is just a mutation of virtue. It's taking prudence and turning it into greed. It's taking humility and turning it into self-flagellation. It's taking love and turning it into lust. Because of her, I'm sure, completely valid religious trauma, she fails to recognize the humanity of the people that hurt her. That they too are just people who struggle with their own sin and vice. She can't comprehend or give the benefit of the doubt that religious people have valid explanations for their beliefs.

She seems to think of heaven as just a place of stuck-up hypocrites who don't know how to have fun. She seems to think the rules and regulations of religion are just arbitrary rules someone made up for a power grab and not a detailed and dedicated attempt of humanity to understand God and his desires.

Viv's understanding of redemption is likeability. It's illustrated in Angel's scenes in episode six. Yes, Angel is being nice and kind and caring about people, but his problems were never a lack of caring about people. His problems were using substances to deal with his problems, and yes he did deny the drugs Cherry offered him, but there was no moment of reflection as to why he no longer wanted to take them. It seems more like he wants to make Husk happy with him than he actually wants to form better coping mechanisms or even a recognition that he doesn't need the drugs to numb the pain anymore now that he has a support system.

She seems to think that if a sinner is likeable, they don't deserve eternal damnation. That's why she woobifies every character she grows to like, because being a good person and sin cannot co-exist in her mind. People who are likeable cannot be bad people and thus a system that would put a likeable person in hell is rigged and stupid. But that fails to comprehend the multi-faceted of humanity and sin.

Sometimes people you love, people who are good to you, are bad people to others. Child molesters can be good friends. Rapisits can advocate for animal rights. Murderers can be good parents. A person who abused you could be someone else's best friend, and a genuinely good friend at that. A failure to recognize the complexity of virtue and vice is a failure to understand what redemption means.

She can critique the idea of perfection. She can critique the hypocrisies of the church. She can critique the tenets of religion. She can even say the things I believe in are unfair and nonsensical and evil. But she cannot make a good critique without understanding the other side of the argument. Because without that, she herself has no counter argument!

The plot of Hazbin is no longer that people can be redeemed, but that redemption is not necessary, because the rules that government heaven and hell make no sense. And that's a COMPLETELY different argument to be making.

I apologize for the length. I hope I've made some semblance of sense.

No, no apologies for the length. It was an interesting read!

Some would argue that all religions are nothing but arbitrary rules someone made up for a power grab, but it's true, there's at least supposed to be some kind of rhyme and reason to it all. In theory at least, it's supposed to improve yours and everyone else's quality of life, but that goes against Viv's theory that the only thing that matters is doing whatever you want all the time. Viv doesn't have to side with Heaven or go full blown scripture, but you can't tell me that Heaven doesn't even know what it takes for someone to get in.

Thanks for your thoughts!