#but i do genuinely believe that with all the rules antis are making up

[epickiya722]

As a bkdk artist who's been in the fandom since 2018, one thing that always annoyed me about antis is when I (and other bkdks) posted bkdk art back then, I'd see ATLEAST one comment saying "your artsyle is cute, but bakudeku is a terrible ship" or "I don't like bkdk but your art is so good. Maybe you could try drawing krbk next?" Or even "how could you even like this ship. Hori himself said that izch is canon."

The "your art is good but this ship sucks, draw something else" comments sounded like backhanded compliments. Like I'm passionate about the ship so I'll draw what I want? Thank you very much?!

It was so cool to hate on bkdk back then, they really acted like it was some illegal ship. I also had people say stuff like I didn't understand how bullied people feel or abuse victims like seriously what 😑

I feel your annoyance to the point. My sentiments exactly.

Going to sound mean when I say this, but antis have gotten so infuriating that I honestly stopped caring. Like anything they do just to hate on the ship is ridiculously stupid.

I refuse to believe they do all of that because "Oh, I mean no harm, I just want to express how I feel". No, they have been doing it for far too long and they do it on purpose.

They mask wanting to bother shippers but "sharing their opinions".

That's not how they really feel, that's not their opinion, so they can cut the fuckery. They just want to be an asshole.

Those same people who constantly bash on BakuDeku barely bat a lash at other ships that are worse if they gonna throw the "Bakugou is a bully card".

You're right and you should say it. When they say "art style is cute but..." it's a backhanded compliment.

Honestly, I wouldn't even call it a compliment because a compliment is meant to be genuine. If antis are being genuine about an art style being cool to them, they wouldn't follow up with some insult.

Now antis want to pull the "It makes no sense to ship them" card. Who cares about it making sense? You know what doesn't make sense to me?

If antis, those that ship Izuku and Ochako, want to scream about them being "canon" (I say more implied than canon honestly) then why talk about BakuDeku at all? Do you secretly ship BakuDeku and just want to deny it, resist it like "oh, no I mustn't! I shall not"?

Do you have just want to follow the crowd of haters? "I want to hate, too, yay!"

Do you just have a thing for "following rules" and try to apply it to anything? Because then why only single out BakuDeku? Why not other ships?

I don't know about them, but when I hate a ship I don't talk about it.

Antis be screaming "I see BakuDeku everywhere I can't escape it", but I had a totally different experience because when I first got into MHA and as the anime and manga went on, I didn't see BakuDeku content like that because I wasn't exposing myself to it. When I did cross the ship, my reaction wasn't to harass the shipper. Just shrugged and moved on.

So antis have no excuse at all for their shit actions. If you hate the ship, hate it.

Is like they want a cookie or something... "I'm a BakuDeku hater, I want a sticker!" That's what they look like to me.

Also, Anon, I thank you for being a part of the community. For anybody who reblogs your art with comments like that I'm a proud hater of them since they want to be proud haters.

[hurtcomforted]

"why are there suddenly so many proshippers?" we were here first. and we will be here longer.

[luminatricky]

Vampire? In Gotham! (part 3)

Summary: the batfam have a meeting, Constantine got a little too lost in the sauce when crafting Danny's sob story, and we find out what Dracula's been up to all these years. Oh and the DC version of Vlad is fully dead? More at 9

Relationships: the batfam

on god I spent too much time thinking about danny's vampsona. he's got two outfits so far. no I didn't make a concept board. no I didn't make a picrew. I don't know what you're talking about

(sorry if this is all horribly ooc I struggled a bit with making this intelligible)

Red Hood doesn't usually leave Crime Alley. That's a known fact. But Batman doesn't usually call a meeting that includes Red Hood. The old man learned years ago not to involve him unless it's important with a capitol I.

Pulling into the Batcave, Jason slows to a stop on his motorcycle. He follows the voices of his family to the Batcomputer. Everyone is in full gear, but not everyone is fully present.

Dickhead was ransacking the medical room for...blood bags? Barbie and Replacement carved out a corner to the right of the main computer. They'd set up a foldable table for their personal laptops, sitting side by side as they quietly schemed together. Damian was working hard on some sort of artwork with a similar table to the left. He stuck his tongue out in concentration. Adorable.

Bruce was pulling up a very old case file in the central system. It looked to be a string of serial disappearances.

Jason wasn't the last to arrive for once. The elevator to the manor dings behind him. Alfred and the rest of the brood step out into the cave, carrying weapons and gadgets by the armful. Old looking Batarangs, glorified flashlights, cases upon cases of the anti-toxin epipens filled with unfamiliar blue formula. And wooden stakes.

Like a good grandson he steps up to help lighten Alfred's load, but he only gets two steps in before the old butler gives him a very disapproving eyebrow raise. Jason retreats with his hands up. He turns back to Bruce.

"This better be a bloodsucker apocalypse or you won't see me til Christmas."

Bruce pulls up a detailed list of the weapons and their uses on screen. Everyone stops what their doing and takes a picture with their phones. Garlic Batarangs, flashlights with artificial sunlight, a cure for vampirism. Wooden stakes need no introduction or explanation, except for why his dad - who is very against killing to put it fucking gently - would be giving them a vamp equivalent of a gun.

"Potentially," Bruce says. "We need to draw up new contingencies. But we also need to debrief so we have all the facts to do so."

Surprisingly, both Duke AND Tim groan. Jason understands Duke. The teen does not have the patience - ahem, attention - to learn all the contingencies at once. Which Bruce recently subjected him to from what he's gleaned from the sibling group chat.

But Tim? Making and learning ridiculous lists is the guy's bread and butter, the freak. So why -

"C'mon Bruce. What we know so far about the guy makes it seem he might be genuine. We do not have to plan a murder yet. Murder is messy - and wrong, definitely wrong." Tim tacks the last part on way too quickly for anyone here to believe that's what he actually feels. Hah. Another one straying off the path of the No Kill Rule. He can't wait to hear the details when one of their siblings interrogates him about it later.

Bruce exhales through his nose. He puts the previous topic away in favor of pulling up a picture of a middle-aged man with glacial blue eyes. His face is long and angular, and he wears old style European clothes that screams 'I'm an old rich vampire, come stake me'. Jason snorts - something about his face is so punchable.

"Dr. Alucard seemed genuine at first, too." He pulls up a picture of the same man, but this time with sunken in cheek bones. His salt and pepper hair is fully bleached, and his eyes glow unnervingly. It's a candid of him mid-fight in the Batcave, a furious snarl on his lips, baring some wicked fangs at a young Batman. "Or should I say, Dracula." He's answered with a round of gasps.

Jason's starting to see how every single one of them ended up as (melo)dramatic little shits.

He puts the pictures away. "Around the time when I was first starting out, the Penguin accidentally freed him from where he was sealed in Gotham's cemetery." Bruce begins. Jason wonders with a tight chest just what was wrong with that place. Why do the dead keep coming back to life there?

If he had a nickel...

Bruce pulls up the headlines of the 'Lost Ones' case. Jason opens his mouth to comment, but Dick beats him to it. "They seriously thought it was Batman? C'mon! How incompetent is the GCPD?"

Jason scoffs. "Says the fucking cop."

"Ex-cop, thank you. And I worked in Bludhaven before I figured out they were just as corrupted and rooting that out from the inside was a terrible plan."

"Anyone coulda told you that," Duke snarks. Jason backs him up. "Your problem is you always want to give people the benefit of the doubt when you shouldn't."

"Boys." Bruce interrupts. They all stop at the tone he uses. Alfred clears his throat, and answers Dick's rhetorical question from earlier. "That was unfortunately a common occurrence when Master B was a young bat. It would do you all well to be mindful of keeping your reputations positive amidst suspicion."

Jason doesn't laugh out of respect for Alfred - he was so not talking about him. He needs to do the opposite of spit rainbows out his ass to be effective.

"Oh my God is that why Bruce keeps gatekeeping everyone he meets? He's hazing them like a vigilante initiation ritual?" Steph whispers to Cass. He hears her softly laugh in response as she nods.

"I agree with Grayson. The GCPD are fools to think that if Father were a serial killer or trafficker that they'd ever even know. He is better than that." The demon brat brags.

Bruce huffs fondly. "It's a good thing I'm not." He gestures to the weapons. "We fought. He'd started turning people left and right, making them mind controlled vampire pawns. The Joker got turned-"

Jason's vision floods green. "And you didn't fucking stake him? Even more fucking dangerous -"

"-and I managed to capture him at a blood bank before he could do more than destruction of private property." Bruce raises his voice over him. Jason clenches and unclenches his fists. He itches to shoot something, to break something, to get relief to this God forsaken green-flavored, rage-filled pressure starting to boil over in his chest at the reminder of his murderer.

Blessedly everyone shuts the fuck up as he tries to not blow his top. Bruce should've staked him. He had the perfect excuse all lined up, and the opportunity, and goddamit Barbara wouldn't be in a wheelchair and Duke's parents would be fine and Jason wouldn't have come back evil -

Bruce isn't and wasn't evil, he reminds himself. Not like Jason is. And it's not helpful to blame him for his nature right now when they need to fucking debrief. Woulda-coulda-shoulda's are for chumps.

When he blinks back the green, shoved it down to where it's there but managed, his family haven't moved an inch from where they had been. It's a small but meaningful relief to see that they hadn't taken defensive positions like they would've in the past. They just untensed as Jason's arms stopped trembling from supernatural rage.

No one calls attention to his near-episode further, and he's grateful. "I took him back to the cave. With his blood samples I managed to create a cure for the thralls. They all went back to their everyday lives without any memories of what happened. Joker is no exception."

Which is code for, 'I found a reason to bypass normal ethics and experiment on the Joker for the greater good and yes I still remember which cell he was in. It was the highlight of that week.' It makes him feel marginally better and worse in equal measure. Where the fuck was that energy when he kicked the bucket? (Superman, was where. They already had this conversation)

"At that time Wayne Enterprises had been taking it's first steps into solar energy. When Dracula invaded the cave, we were able to survive due to the stored sunlight that the proto-type gathered."

"Wait. No, wait. Hold on. The urn on the fireplace? Please tell me that's a grandma we don't talk about." Duke pleads. "Please. It's not Kentucky Fried Vampire. Please."

When Bruce doesn't say anything for way too long, Steph nearly chokes on trying to hold back her laughter. Alfred clears his throat. "Batman was rather hurt after the altercation. And Dr. Alucard was rather rude in how he barged in - uninvited! I found it suitable that if he insisted on destroying the decorations, that he should contribute."

Steph full out cannot stop once it begins. Everyone else stares dumbfounded either at Bruce or Alfred. Dick looks like he's about to have an aneurysm. Duke is regretting his life decisions, probably the ones about joining this family. Damian is not comprehending the issue with any of this, expecting a follow up anytime soon. Cass shakes her head, but Jason hears a quiet "grandma dracula is disappointed".

He doesn't know how to feel other than dear Lord please he cannot laugh. No matter how absurd this is. He sounds ridiculous in his helmet.

"...leaving the ashes unattended would spell disaster in the wrong hands," Bruce clarifies once the giggles fall away, "Dracula kidnapped Vicky Vale to use her soul in resurrecting his wife from her ashes. Letting Alfred hide it in plain sight didn't sound like a bad enough idea to try to stop him."

"Precisely, Master Bruce." The butler approves.

"Damn. That's just cold." Dick remarks. He pinches the bridge of his nose with his free arm. "I would ask what the hell he deserved that for but he's literally an ancient evil vampire, so." His older brother jostles the blood bags he's cradling. "Hopefully this guy's an unrelated friendly."

Duke whines in the back of his throat. Jason squeezes his shoulder in sympathy.

"Tonight?" Cass redirects.

"Tonight I came across the unknown on our usual route. I had Robin stay back when I spotted him a distance away. He'd been running across rooftops, watching the people below. I followed for half a block before he walked down the side of a building and into an alley right on the border of Park Row."

"Crime Alley." Jason corrects.

"Crime Alley," Bruce amends. "Once there, he paused for a moment, searching the crowds for something. He took out a clear canister filled with a dark red liquid. It had the same viscosity as blood."

"Where's he getting the blood from? There hasn't been anymore blood bank robberies, attempted or otherwise. And no one's turned up with weird wounds, dead or alive." Steph pipes up. Babs lifts her hand up as she adds her two cents. "Unlessss, mystery teeth here is using the same tactic Drac did. If he's just arriving then we shouldn't be noticing anything just yet."

Bruce holds up a gloved finger in a 'I wasn't done' gesture. "When I approached, the unknown claimed that the canister was a synthesizer when asked. I couldn't detect any lie in his body language or voice. He then introduced himself as 'Dante Nightingale', but asked to be called Danny, which either means he's a modern vampire or an old one who is familiar with the times. I then confronted him about stalking humans from an alleyway. He revealed intel that will be worrying if confirmed."

Jason hums. "Sounds like this guy might not be the supernatural flavor of creep, at least," he mutters under his breath.

Tim raises his hand next. "From what B told me earlier, Danny said that there was some weird ghostly-doppelganger-vampire activity that our suspect hasn't seen before. The behavior, not the creatures." Tim pushes up his blue light glasses as he takes a breath. "Anyways. The info on Shades checks out. The JLD records told me all about them. Show of hands if anyone's seen Appalachia Tik Tok?"

Oh Jason doesn't like where this is going. Alfred (surprisingly), Cass, Dick, Babs, Steph, and Duke all put their hands up too.

Tim goes on. "The mimics? Shades are like that, but with a life force sucking aspect. They're basically ghosts who never were alive and didn't form right, so they eat human emotions until they become fully sentient ghosts called Specters. In a really creepy 'I'm going to replace you' way. So. Bad stuff."

Jason shivers when Bruce nods. "Nightingale claims that they're walking the streets in unusual numbers. That he had just arrived and in Gotham and that he was exploring tonight when he noticed something off."

"Ohhhhkay! Just what we needed, yeah? Invisible monsters in Gotham!" Dick says. "Quick, scratch that off the bingo."

Tim rolls his eyes. "Do we have a description? Power set, background check? I need everything I can to narrow down which type of vamp in the database." He's tapping away at his laptop again, not looking up as he types.

Bruce motions for Damian to come closer. The demon brat hands off the artwork he'd been quietly working on as they talked. Bruce observes it, before nodding at where Damian stands at attention like a good little soldier. Damian preens.

Jason blinks away the green.

Their dad scans the sheet with a device, and the image pops up on the main computer. The man in the portrait has pale skin - obviously. Fangs - no duh. Although notably shaped differently from Drac's. Claws a good few inches long and white in color. Jason spies an interesting ring. It's crown shaped and encased in fake(?) ice. Freckles on his rounder face, framed by wispy-looking stark white hair. Skeleton earrings, black turtleneck, a white blouse with a ridiculously low vee neck tucked into green pants. A delicate chain in the shape of a spiderweb wraps around his covered throat in a pleasing contrast.

The man's eyes are a hauntingly familiar shade of green. He sees it often.

The pupils glow a lighter hue of lazarus, shaped like four-pointed stars. Jason would say the guy looks more like a fae took a dip in the Pits than bloodsucker. But what does he know? Guy didn't deny the blood drinking accusations for fuck's sake.

Babs jumps in again. "We had B give Robin a description because apparently his presence is a hell of an EMP. Video feed and coms went down as soon as Batman joined him in the alley. So a few feet away." She clicks a few things on her own screen, and then starts reading down some sort of list she typed up for herself.

"Dante Nightingale, aged nineteen. A farm boy from Illinois. Parents Robert and Jane Nightingale. No other relatives. Totally normal until he was struck by lightning at thirteen and his metagene activated, giving him minor power over ice and sensitivity to heat." She taps something on her computer and a young Danny Nightingale jumps next to Damian's portrait. The black haired boy has a big goofy grin on his even rounder face, splattered with freckles. In this picture, it's obvious that although he's trying to look happy for picture day, the kid had serious bags under his eyes, and a look in those clear blues that just screamed that Danny had seen some awful things. "Then at fourteen, the whole family got into a car crash. Robert and Jane died on scene, while Dante lasted three days in the hospital before going missing entirely."

Babs pushes up her glasses and takes a deep steadying breath. "The nurses on duty reported a change in hair and eye color, as well as strange dental elongation in the canines. Paired with uncontrollable ice stronger than recorded earlier, this led them to believe that Danny's metagene strained under the new trauma and started causing physical mutations alongside the modifications to his original ability. But I think we all know what was actually happening to him."

"...What else do we know about the kid?" Dick asks. Anyone who didn't know him would say that Dick was relaxed, but Jason and anyone else who knew him could clearly see that Danny's story hit a little too close to home. Dead parents in an 'accident' where the kid was there to see. Yeah.

Heh. This looks like a classic meta trafficking case, the more he follows that thought. Not the casual kind most parents have to fear - pick a kid off the street just 'cause they were there, someone will pay for 'em no matter if they're pretty or not.

No. This was targeted. Planned out weeks, months, years in advance. Someone wanted this kid for something specific - enough to murder his parents for and make it look like an accident. Likely, it was to have an ice meta under mind control, considering what Bruce said about Dracula and his thralls. If he's right, Jason might have to go all Buffy Summers and deal with them.

Jason reaches out to catch Duke by the shoulder again and this time he doesn't let go. His newest brother looks at him, big brown eyes wide and fearful. It could've been him, easy. They both think it. They both know it. Fuck, Danny was just a few years younger than he is now.

Jason squeezes. He whispers low to him. "I'd shoot them in the balls for you. Won't let 'em take you. End bloodlines if I have to, to get you back." Duke gulps, and nods. The teen squeezes his eyes shut and Jason pretends he doesn't see him quickly wipe his eyes.

"...Recently, he got legally un-declared dead, and opened a bank account. Looks like one very dead Vlad Masters left his fortune to him sometime earlier. Man owned a goddamn castle. They found a secret lab in his basement with strange equipment when they went looking for evidence. And. Oh. Oh that's not good."

"What is it?" He asked, not wanting to know the answer already.

"Police found a mystery green liquid they couldn't identify but put the composition on file. I just ran it through our systems. 70% match to lazarus water. What's more, there were blood packs close by that were heavily contaminated with the same substance." She looks like she was ready to throw up at the dots they were all connecting.

He might as well. "Alright. Meta kid's trafficked at fourteen and turned into a vampire. Spends the next five years caught by mad scientist vampires who poked and prodded at him like a rat. Then, he murders the assholes, runs off with their money, and moves to Gotham. Fuck's sake." Jason sums up.

Bruce makes a 'I'm not disagreeing with you but I have an opinion' grunt. "That's one possibility. The most likely one from what we know right now."

"But?" Someone prompts.

"But. He mentioned a term called 'Fraid'. He said that someone told him that myself and 'my Fraid' were good people. Nightingale claimed it was a cultural term for found family," Bruce explained. The man's mouth twitches into a frown. "If he was being held hostage all that time, would they have bothered to teach him that? And if they did, experimentation wouldn't be all they had wanted from him. No one would bother to teach someone disposable."

Tim stopped typing for a second, eyes widening and then blanking quick as a whip. Swallowed. Went back in with a vigor.

"So. Either. He got away from his kidnappers, and there's some found family out there somewhere. Or he never got away from them, but he was not expendable. His kidnappers may have forced him into their family." Steph reasoned out.

"Man. This is fucked up." Duke mutters. "You're telling me, kid." Jason whispers back.

Damian bristles. "Father. We have to interrogate him. Nightingale may have connections to the League of Assassins, or a similar organization run by vampires. The lazarus water is damning. We must make sure." The demon brat demands. Which. Fair. More unknown lazarus pits are just asking for evil to pull up with some friends.

Bruce makes an 'I agree with you but I'm thinking' grunt. But before he can respond, Tim cuts in. "So Fraid is definitely what he says it means. But according to the records, only the dead or undead use it. Obviously I did a little digging. Vampires don't count as either of those, even though some sleep in coffins and stuff. No, most vampires count as something called 'death touched'. Meaning they're still alive, albeit really in tune with the other side." Tim shifts, chugging a quick bit of cold coffee. "Only one match came up when I searched for undead vampire. The thing is, it exists, but the file is on the JLD's red tape section."

Which is code for 'don't fucking touch this dimwits if you value your life, call us for fucks sake'. Pleasant.

"Yes Father. If Drake is not once again wildly incorrect and foolish, Nightingale is undead. And it's obvious how." Damian presses.

"I will make the call. Red Robin, keep looking. I'll type up the rest of the abilities and send them to you all. Everyone working with me officially, no one goes on patrol alone. We work in pairs until further notice. Everyone bring with them the anti-vampire precautions we have until we have better options." Batman commands to the group. He zeroes in on Jason, and Jason gears up to rip Bruce a new one for treating him like he's still one his birds.

But that's not what happens. "And Red Hood. Just...be careful."

Instead of acknowledging the icky ooey gooey feelings, Jason snorts derisively. "I'll tell my guys and girls to keep a lookout. If anyone goes missing I'd bet ya a thousand it'll be one of mine. Everyone knows no one's gonna call the cops." He turns around and stuffs his pockets with the gadgets, and Dick threw him a blood bag. "Later assholes."

Jason revs his bike. Tonight, he'll make his rounds, doing what said he would. And hey. Probably hit up that rage room in Bristol he goes to in civvies. Crime's been real quiet recently, and he knows it's likely purposeful.

That pisses him off that they think they can hide from him forever in his own territory.

Tonight's been bad, too. He'd rather go beat up some stupid garbage than risk a pit rage on some numb nut that at most only needs a couple slices to catch his drift. Heh. He's gonna see if they'd let him tape a pic of Dracula to a TV so he can cave his face in post-mortem.

[jaijeijayjei]

I'm starting to realize people perceive Mel with the assumption that she has bad intentions, so that's all they see in her.

The writers have said Mel was written to seem as a one-dimensional manipulator, but in reality she is a multi-layered individual with complex motivations. Rewatching her earlier scenes with that in mind brings her into a completely new light.

(justification for these interpretations under the cut)

"Mel invested in Hextech for power and influence"

Or, she invested in them because she believed in Hextech's potential to change the world for the better?

"Mel pressured Jayce to reveal his new inventions so she can cash in on the profit"

Or, she understands Heimerdinger is stuck in the past and doesn't want him to hinder Jayce's progress?

"Mel sleeps with Jayce to make him more pliable"

Or, she genuinely admires Jayce and sees a way to be free of her family's bloody legacy by working alongside him.

"Mel turns Jayce into a corrupt politician for her own gain"

Or, Mel believes protecting Hextech's interest is more important than trade laws.

"Mel wanted Hextech weapons to make Piltover more powerful"

Or, she only wanted weapons as a last resort and for self-defense.

"Mel will do anything to prove herself to her family"

Or, Mel also wants to prove that ruling with diplomacy is superior to ruling with cold pragmatism and brute force.

Yes there are times Mel acts out of self-interest and a desire for power, but those aren't her only motivations. Mel subverts the "shady corrupt politician" trope, she is not defined by it.

I believe Mel is being genuine in her conversation with Jayce in S1 E5, about wanting to give back to the world. In her argument with Jayce in S2 E8, she explains why she invested in Hextech to begin with. She saw two brilliant scientists, capable of impossible things, rallying the hearts of a nation. Mel believed in Jayce and Viktor's potential to do good. Also, she has shown the wellbeing of Piltover (and in S2, the safety of Zaunites), are more important to her than personal gain.

Jayce specifically went to her for advice, and she gave it. Doesn't this imply Jayce views her as an ally or advisor as well as an investor? He clearly values her opinions.

During Mel's whole childhood, her family and homeland tried to shape her into someone she was not- a cold, pragmatic ruler willing to do anything to maintain power. Her way of ruling was scorned by her mother as "soft spined" and foolish, but with Jayce she found someone who believed in and appreciated her. Plus she was personally affronted when he left her in bed. It's more than likely she acted out of genuine attraction and admiration.

Side note: Jayce has already shown he's alright with breaking the rules for the greater good. He illegally experimented with magic, broke into Heimer's lab, and led an unsanctioned attack. Jayce and Mel are more aligned in this way than he realizes- Mel believes securing Hextech's future is more important than breaking a few trade laws. Jayce was in a vulnerable position, with a target on his back. She could have used that against him, but didn't.

Mel is a pragmatic pacifist, even from childhood. Mel is very much anti-war because she understands how destructive it is, having grown up in Noxus.

Mel's rift from her family is an ideological one- she values leading with diplomacy is disgusted by Noxus' brutality. If she can make Piltover successful, it proves that there are better ways to rule than what Noxus insists upon. Mel has also shown her morals are more important to her than power. She turns down opportunities to elevate her position tremendously by siding with her mother or advocating for an invasion because it goes against her moral compass.

[zedecksiew]

How To Play The Revolution

So: I do not like the idea of TTRPGs making formal mechanics designed to incentivise ethical play.

But, to be honest, I do not like the idea of any single game pushing any particular formal mechanics about ethical play at all.

So here I am, trying to think through the reasons why, and proposing a solution. (Sort of. A procedure, really.)

+

Assumptions:

1.

Some genres of game resist ethical play. A grand strategy game dehumanises people into census data. The fun of a shooter is violence. This is truest in videogames, but applies to tabletop games also.

Games can question their own ethics, to an extent. Terra Nil is an anti-city-builder. But it is a management game at heart, so may elide critiques of "efficiency = virtue".

Not all games should try to design for ethical play. I believe games that incentivise "bad" behaviour have a lot to teach us about those behaviours, if you approach them with eyes open.

2.

The systems that currently govern our real lives are terrible: oligarchy, profit motive; patriarchy, nation-states, ethno-centrisms. They fuel our problems: class and sectarian strife, destruction of climate and people, spiritual desertification.

They are so total that the aspiration to ethical behaviour is subsumed by their logics. See: social enterprise; corpos and occupying forces flying rainbow flags; etc.

Nowadays, when I hear "ethical", I don't hear "we remember to be decent". I hear "we must work to be better". Good ethics is radical transformation.

3.

If a videogame shooter crosses a line for you, your only real response is to stop playing. This is true for other mechanically-bounded games, like CCGs or boardgames.

In TTRPGs, players have the innate capability to act as their own referees. (even in GM-ed games adjudications are / should be by consensus.) If you don't like certain aspects of a game, you could avoid it---but also you could change it.

Only in TTRPGs can you ditch basic rules of the game and keep playing.

+

So:

D&D's rules are an engine for accumulation: more levels, more power, more stuff, more numbers going up.

If you build a subsystem in D&D for egalitarian action, but have to quantify it in ways legible to the game's other mechanical parts---what does that mean? Is your radical aspiration feeding into / providing cover for the game's underlying logics of accumulation?

At the very least it feels unsatisfactory---"non-representative of what critique / revolution entails as a rupture," to quote Marcia, in conversations we've been having around this subject, over on Discord.

How do we imagine and represent rupture, to the extent that the word "revolution" evokes?

My proposal: we rupture the game.

+++

How To Play The Revolution

Over the course of play, your player-characters have decided to begin a revolution:

An armed struggle against an invader; overturning a feudal hierarchy; a community-wide decision to abandon the silver standard.

So:

Toss out your rule book and sheets.

And then:

Keep playing.

You already know who your characters are: how they prefer to act; what they are capable of; how well they might do at certain tasks; what their context is. You and your group are quite capable of improv-ing what happens next.

Of course, this might be unsatisfactory; you are here to play a TTRPG, after all. Structures are fun. Therefore:

Decide what the rules of your game will be, going forward.

Which rules you want to keep. Which you want to discard. Jury-rig different bits from different games. Shoe-horn a tarot deck into a map-making game---play that. Be as comprehensive or as freeform as you like. Patchwork and house-rule the mechanics of your new reality.

The god designer will not lead you to the revolution. You broke the tyranny of their design. You will lead yourself. You, as a group, together. The revolution is DIY.

+++

Notes:

This is mostly a thought experiment into a personal obsession. I am genuinely tempted to write a ruleset just so I can stick the above bit into it as a codified procedure.

I am tickled to imagine how the way this works may mirror the ways revolutions have played out in history.

A group might already have alternative ruleset in mind, that they want to replace the old ruleset with wholesale. A vanguard for their preferred system.

Things could happen piecemeal, progressively. Abandon fiat currency and a game's equipment price list. Adopt pacifism and replace the combat system with an alternative resolution mechanic. As contradictions pile up, do you continue, or revert?

Discover that the shift is too uncomfortable, too unpredictable, and default back to more familiar rules. The old order reacting, reasserting itself.

+

I keep returning to this damn idea, of players crossing thresholds between rulesets through the course of play. The Revolution is a rupture of ethical reality like Faerie or the Zone is a rupture in geography.

But writing all this down is primarily spurred by this post from Sofinho talking about his game PARIAH and the idea that "switching games/systems mid-session" is an opportunity to explore different lives and ethics:

Granted this is not an original conceit (I'm not claiming to have done anything not already explored by Plato or Zhuangzi) but I think it's a fun possibility to present to your players: dropping into a parallel nightmare realm where their characters can lead different lives and chase different goals.

+

Jay Dragon tells me she is already exploring this idea in a new game, Seven Part Pact:

"the game mechanics are downright oppressive but also present the capacity to sunder them utterly, so the only way to behave ethically is to reject the rules of the game and build something new."

VINDICATION! If other designers are also thinking along these lines this means the idea isn't dumb and I'm not alone!

+++

( Images:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/developer-diary/victoria-3-dev-diary-23-fronts-and-generals.1497106/

https://www.thestranger.com/race/2017/04/05/25059127/if-you-give-a-cop-a-pepsi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WarGames

https://nobonzo.com/

https://pangroksulap.com/about/ )

[ziptie-bouquet]

Honestly I think most people on here are completely spineless and just listen to whoever can string the best sequence of progressive words along at this point. It's blowing my mind that people are acting like the new article's content is completely different from the allegations that came out literally half a year ago and that nobody believed. I genuinely think that most of the misconceptions and calls to not interact with the allegations back then came from intellectual laziness and refusing to listen to the podcast for more than 5 minutes.

The women recounted with their own voices the abuse that was done to them on the Tortoise podcast. It was just as graphic as the recent article is but with some of the new details missing. All it gathered was a post with 3k+ notes saying it was a radfem conspiracy to interfere with the UK elections and general indifference. I'm sorry but at some point you guys have to realize that bad people can still say and platform the truth and that being a leftist doesn't make you a good person. Treating SA victims like they were politically motivated liars or untrustworthy people for half a year and then doing a 180 about the exact same information is crazy.

To clear things up about the podcast:

- It is not true that the journalists support Neil Gaiman, distrust the victims, claim it wasn't rape or whatever theories came out about this. The reason they read the whatsapp messages and talked about contradicting testimonies, or if it was at all possible for Neil Gaiman to think the acts were consented, was to point out there are legally grey areas and how that plays into court rulings favoring men and why Scarlett's case was not taken seriously by the police.

- The journalists do not use this podcast to spread anti-bdsm views. They are very clear that bdsm is different from what Neil Gaiman did. The only instances close to this is when one of the interviewees says women agreeing to being degraded is a male fantasy. This is brought up by someone they interviewed for like 5 minutes total, and they then expand on that sentiment by saying it depends on the context and the power dynamics at play. The other time is in the first few minutes of the first episode when they bring up laws about bodily injuries during sex and literally say they do not want it to be about policing what people do in their bedrooms.

- The content of the podcast itself is not TERFy or transphobic and they do not even mention trans people in all this. They don't focus on anybody other than Gaiman and the victims too really.

I'm not saying people shouldn't be suspicious of news outlets just that at some point it'd be good to actually interact with what they're saying before claiming the victims shouldn't be trusted. You all really sounded like every typical twitter guy who is "scared to go outside because he might get falsely accused" but rebranded as a lefty by saying we need to wait for a trial and shit like this. Anyway we all know this will be quickly forgotten as is almost every sexual crime a famous man commits.

[lovemyromance]

How tf are there still antis saying they don't know how Elriel counts as a forbidden romance??

1. Rhys literally forbade Azriel from seeing Elain

2. Elain is mated to someone else. She and Lucien may not even want each other, but that bond is something that is highly regarded by many and rejecting the bond could come with political consequences

That is the definition of forbidden romance. When you have external factors preventing you from being with another 🙄

And I know the antis go around saying " Well, it's just Rhys nobody cares what he thinks" and "if Elriel got together it would be fine"

Rhys is a HL. He rules over the NC, including Azriel and Elain. I suspect they will disobey him, but their romance isn't just as cut and dry as if they simply decide to be together so there are zero consequences.

There is an explicit order, mating bond, and politics / blood duel at play here. All are consequences from their potential relationship.

You know who actually has zero consequences and the world would probably rejoice (minus Elain and Azriel... and Nesta) if they got together? Elucien.

Next.

Then there's the antis who go on to say "well forbidden romance is gross! If they aren't doing something wrong, then why hide it! It means Elain is cheating on Lucien!"

They're hiding it because, again .... Rhys explicitly forbade Azriel.

Elain is not cheating on Lucien because they are not in a relationship, nor have made any commitment to each other out of their own free will.

Next.

"oh but Azriel deserves to be loved and not have to hide it! He deserves a love he doesn't need to hide away"

Yes, he does. And one day, he and Elain will be together in broad daylight (in front of sunshine hehe) because they're endgame.

But right now, let me introduce you to my friend Angst. I'm sure you've met them before, when you make your headcanons about Elucien & Gwynriel experiencing obstacles because they actually have nothing preventing them from getting together! It's rude to pretend you don't know someone, especially Angst in a capital-Love Story.

Next.

"SJM doesn't write forbidden romance!"

Too late, she already did when she had Elriel almost kiss in the hallway and then had Rhys explicitly forbid them.

Next.

"Well I think forbidden romance is a childish trope and -"

Bp-bp-bpp imma stop you there ma'am. 🖐️😌

If you don't like it... don't read it! It's as simple as that.

I'm sorry to inform you that your personal opinions on tropes you like/dislike did not make it into SJM's editing room 😩. She's set up Elriel for 3 books now and until the BC, we didn't know what trope they'd fall under but after the BC, it's clear: Forbidden Romance is happening.

Next.

Don't believe me?

Read that again. Sounds like Rhys is forbidding Azriel from getting with Elain isn't he?

Now, just based on what we know about the Spymaster of the NC - do we think this man's is about to follow orders? Especially when he's disobeyed them before?

Show of hands please 😌 Anyone genuinely believe Azriel will tuck his tail between his legs and scamper off, following Rhys's order to the T and refusing to even speak to Elain forever until death?

Didn't think so.

[pessimisticpigeonsworld]

She is a white savior that Daenerys believes to be the Mysha of the slaves, in addition to her arrogance of thinking that she is the only savior, she has that hero complex like her brother Rhaegar had that caused a war for his prophecy, I saw the publication and it makes sense Aegon according to what he dreamed of in the long night, but for me the author invented it to make it seem like the foreigners subjugated Westeros, for me it is not fair that Daenerys and her fans believe that she deserves the credit of many people who also fight against the others.

I'm sorry, have you ever read the books? Or even seen the show for that matter? Literally none of this is true in either one.

Dany didn't create the title of Mhysa, the Yunkai'i slaves she freed did. Then the name was picked up by the slaves in Meereen and others all over Essos. It's a title; it's awarded by others, that's how they work.

Dany takes this title as a responsibility. She feels a level of responsibility and care for the slaves and freedmen that no other pov ruler does. She understands the weight of ruling as no one else does; it's a ruler's responsibility to care for the people and do justice on their behalf. She is motivated by her genuine care in all the released books and in the seasons when she's in Essos.

Where are you getting that she has a hero complex? I'm assuming since you're talking about the Others, you're talking about the events of the show's ending. Well, even with how D&D royally fucked up, Dany didn't believe herself to be the only person fighting the Others, nor does she begrudge other people their credit.

She's rightfully upset when all the Northmen choose to ignore the fact that she literally saved them. Dany brought her dragons, saved Jon's life multiple times, and brought a massive army. She did literally save their fucking lives. No, she wasn't the only one to fight, nor was she the only reason they won, and she doesn't think that.

As for the slaves, she doesn't liberate them out of a hero's complex, she does it because slavery is a horrifying institution and she had power. People who have power should feel an obligation to do good with it; Dany does. She chose to put aside her conquest for the Iron Throne for the slaves.

Rhaegar didn't start the war, nor did he do it for the prophecy. Again, I don't know where you or any of Rhaegar's antis got that. Rhaegar ran away with Lyanna because of a mutual love. GRRM literally calls Rhaegar "a love struck prince"; meaning he isn't really thinking clearly.

As for the prophecy, yes, Rhaegar knew about it; but we have textual evidence that he believes Aegon is the Prnce that was Promised. He literally tells Elia when Aegon is born that, "His will be the Song of Ice and Fire." Yeah, he said there needed to be a third child, but why logically wouldn't he choose to have a third child with Elia? Well because he's not thinking logically, he's "lovestruck", and because he didn't run away with Lyanna for a child.

No, GRRM didn't make the Targaryen conquest to reflect foreign invasion or colonization. They're literally a Westerosi house, they came to Westeros centuries before the conquest happened. It's literally a different concept all together, why is that so hard to understand?

Literally none of Dany's fans believe that she "deserves all the credit" for fighting the Others. We just want her to get the credit she deserves, which is that she saved the Northmen's lives and without her they would have failed. These are all just facts in the show. As for the books, we know she'll play a large role in fighting the Others because GRRM makes it pretty fucking clear.

[lastoneout]

Honestly the whole "trans men should start using women's restrooms in protest of trans women being forced into the men's because they're not in as much danger" only works if you believe:

All trans men are capable of and willing to 100% perfectly pass as a cis man at all times no matter what.

All trans men are big, tall, burly, and strong.

Any trans man is capable of beating not only any individual woman in a fight, but multiple women all attacking at the same time.

Women are incapable of directly or indirectly harming men.

Women never react violently when threatened, regardless if the threat was real or not.

A man being marginalized in other ways does not make him less safe around women or more vulnerable to transphobic violence and/or retaliatory systemic violence as punishment for trying to protect himself. (So a black or disabled or fat man's skin color or disability status or body type does not make him more vulnerable to violence and if a black/disabled/fat trans man beat up a white cishet woman who attacked him for being in the women's restroom everyone would take his side including the cops.)

A woman would never go and get her boyfriend or a manager or the cops upon seeing a trans man(or any masc person, even gnc cishet women) in the bathroom so they can enact violence against them for her. (I guess the long history of cishet perisex white women using their tears to get marginalized men killed was made up.)

Trans men are not, in fact, a vulnerable marginalized demographic that also needs protecting from horrific violence and should happily offer themselves up as canon fodder to protect other more feminine queers even if it kills them, and not complain at all when no one stands up to help them in turn. (Also that you think real men are always tough and strong and never need help or compassion.)

Trans men are always viewed as men by transphobes, and not as whatever gender will harm them the most at any given moment, which is typically either "dangerous insane woman" or "subhuman freak".

No masc person, including butch and gnc cis women and afab nonbinary people AND butch/gnc trans women, or anyone perceived to be trans or too masc like intersex cis women with facial hair, has ever or will ever face violence for using the women's restroom despite the copious amounts of documented proof to the contrary.

Bigots and conservatives are following any sort of logic and, like fairy tale antagonists, can be rules lawyered into giving up and are not actually fully willing to be as contradictory as needed to ensure trans people can no longer exist in public at all. (Like. Idk how to tell you this but very masc passing trans men using the women's restroom will result in MORE transphobic violence and stricter bathroom laws, not less.)

Again, not to beat a dead horse, but you somehow believe conservatives and transphobes will change their minds if they see someone who looks like a man in the women's restroom. Like you really think that will fix things. Really. You really think that will work. You think that will work. Genuinely, you think that will change their minds. Really. Really.

You think men are always inherently more dangerous and prone to violence than women.

You think we should normalize and accept sacrificing trans men's lives for the sake of trans liberation.

If you think this is genuinely a good idea then I'm sorry but you have not only bought into radical feminist ideals but you also have a lot of internalized transphobia, misogyny, transmisogny, anti-transmasculinity, as well as racism, fatphobia, and ableism you need to unlearn before we start coming to you for ideas on how to fight systemic transphobia.

Because this? All this will do is get people killed. And idk man I just think maybe you should care that trans men are getting killed, and not flippantly suggest even more of them step up to the chopping block like their lives only matter so long as they can be of service to the rest of us.

[winniefrezcomics]

Why does dev hate ved so much?

Also did ved have his own versions of dev’s au-pairs

No to the second part, actually! Ved lived a surprisingly quiet, humble life with his father Elad (who I’ll post some more info about in a different ask :3c)- he’s actually not even the prince of the anti fairies, Due to the fact that Elad simply isn’t that ambitious lol. (Unlike his dork-ass son, who is absolutely HELLBENT on taking over fairyworld, but keeps that on the dl uwu )

(Rough Elad concept, will finish later)

…The ruler of the anti faires in this au is actually still completely undecided tbfh, lemme know if yall have suggestions for who would make the most sense! :3c (it may have been Vicky at one point but her ass is for SURE in abracatraz atm)

As for the first part- Trust me, it is EARNED. The reason Dev’s hatred for his anti seems so blown out of proportion to everyone else is because Ved has INTENTIONALLY made it look like Dev hates him just for being an anti-fairy, to discredit anything Dev says to try and make Ved answer for the chaos he so loves causing.

(Longer explanation below)

(Dale is a WELL-KNOWN hater of anti-fairies, due to a certain experience with one named Vicky, so everyone just assumes that hatred was passed down, making Dev’s opinion very biased)

However, Because Dev is well aware he himself only PRETENDS to be mean as a defense mechanism , and actually cares very deeply for his friends and family, Dev can only assume that means Ved’s niceness is similarly fake, and he doesn’t really care about the wellbeing of others at ALL. Ved proves this to be true CONSTANTLY by harming and traumatizing bystanders of wishes- (always Indirectly enough to not break da rules) inevitably making Dev clean up his messes every single time. Aaaand As much as he hates it, Dev always does so, because if DEV messes up, he’s done with fairy godparenting for GOOD, and will have no choice but to crawl back to his dad (Perry is his “last chance” godkid, because he’s failed to help -or even just get along with- SO MANY in the short few years he’s been godparenting coughincludingIriscough)

Anyway, due to Dev and Ved’s mutual understanding of one another’s personalities (mostly through process of elimination tbfh) Dev is the ONLY fairy who has EVER seen Ved without his “mask”- something Ved has meticulously constructed to earn the trust of both faires and anti faires alike- saying and doing whatever he needs to in order to creep closer to his eventual goal.

But underneath all the fake niceness, all the goofy mannerisms, Ved has made it no secret to Dev specifically that he’s a MONSTER, and actively delights in the fact that no one will ever believe him.

Ty for the question! Lemme know if yall have anything else you wanna know about Ved lol- he specifically has been giving me TERRIBLE brainrot as of late ☠️☠️ (ngI Might eff around and rewrite set two and three so I can bring this freakass in early bc I’m honestly love him even tho he’s the WORST 😂 idk I like irredeemable villains I guess 🤓)

Sidenote: The first time they ever meet, Ved literally HUGS HIM as a power-move, looking to outsiders like a genuine gesture, but he was actually just getting close enough to whisper a taunt/ threat directly into Devs ear ☠️☠️ (will RB w that comic if I get around to finishing it lmao)

[yourgfdgirlfriend]

can we talk about how toxic this whole “that small thing gives me the ick” narrative is?

like, girl, him using a basket at the grocery store or bringing water to the airport gives you ‘the ick’, but him never doing a single chore or believing women are inherently better at cleaning, like it’s some instinctual level ability is fine!? you’re gonna deal with him actually thinking he’s superior to you, but don’t he dare pick up a ping pong ball or you’re out?

wanna know what gives me ‘the ick’? rudeness. sexist behaviour. selfishness. masculinity, that is so fragile wind could knock it over. being unable to give a genuine apology. those are things that make me wanna drop someone; not normal human actions.

can we stop picking on any even slightly feminine perceived behaviour in men and just let them live without this ginormous expectation to always be this strong masculine picture of a man that no one is ever gonna be able to fulfil? you’re creating the same pressure on them we as women get all the time. you’re feeding into toxic masculinity. stop. make an effort to end this thinking instead. all the ‘icks’ I see on social media are so fucking stupid and misogynistic in their core; usually accompanied with sentences like “well, if he’s gonna cry about a birthday gift, he’s not my alpha anymore” no, he’s not. he is a real person with feelings, you fucking brainwashed-by-the-patriarchy monster.

give me a fucking break; i’m so sick of seeing people pressured into these roles their whole life and being so unhappy and hold so much resentment. just stop. let men cry. let men think kitties are cute. let men dangle their feet. let men giggle and be silly. let men have genuine moments of happiness without thinking about whether or not they seem masculine enough. cut them some fucking slack. and maybe there will be fewer men hating women, because they always had to be a certain way to be accepted. every woman knows the feeling of all these expectations and rules you have to follow. we know how much it sucks; how suffocating it is. so let’s stop repeating this narrative and start breaking out of it. reflect on where you’re coming from before criticising someone’s behaviour. we’ll all be happier for it.

and don’t anyone dare to use this as anti-feminist. this is inherently feminist, because it breaks with the tale of women being poor innocent damsels in distress unable to harm anyone or anything; always the victims. perfect little dolls. we’re not. women are cruel and flawed. women are offenders. women are judgmental. women are cold hearted and shortsighted. women are petty. women are misogynistic. (not all women of course *cough cough*) women are not perfect. we are human. of course the “women are capable and smart. women are superheroes” side of feminism is widely preferred. let’s be honest no one wants to hear bad things about themselves, especially when fighting against your own oppression; but it’s therefore no less true. both are legitimate; they’re two sides of the same coin. deal with it.

and if I see anyone hurting a sweet boy’s feelings, because him owning a stuffy or something adorable like that gave you ‘the ick’ I’m gonna personally bitch slap you so hard, that looking in the mirror will give you the ick for the rest of your life. savvy?

[medusas-daughter]

Annoying live action cgi aside, the plot of Mufasa is genuinely really good. I had some aprehensions going in because fo all the critics against it, but it makes so much sense with the original story and it's hella entertaining, which are the two things I want from such a movie. The way Scar rules over the Pride after staging his coup against Mufasa in the Lion King is the exact same way his father ruled before Mufasa took over. The respect and love that all the animals showed Mufasa, is because Mufasa was raised by Queen Eshe to labour for the pride, hunt and respect and give back, and never felt entitled to any power over them. Scar being the prince instead of the stray like it was generally believed among fans before actually makes a lot more sense, because why would a stray be so entitled to power and feel betrayed by the mere presence of his brother when Mufasa was largely leaving him alone, allowing to be part of the pride yet expecting no contribution whatsoever from him and letting him do whatever he liked, and Scar saw this generous behaviour and thought it an insult. An orphan taken in wouldn't expect anything more, even if there's jealousy or resentment deep down, he wouldn't see it as a personal insult. But someone who expected to rule over Mufasa, even in the "i always a brother" song he calls him his right hand someone who will listen to him not an equal, of course he'd see the mere invitation to Simba's introduction as humiliation.

I think a lot of people expected Mufasa to have done something horrible to Taka to justify Scar's later betrayal, or maybe a subversion of who is good and who is bad like in Wicked. But sometimes, people do betray their loved ones for no reason other than their own insecuritues and shortcomings. Taka watched the stray he brought in, whom he felt entitled to, become a bigger person than he ever was, and took it out on him and everyone around him. And Mufasa looked at the brother who gave him a family when he had none, and gave him a second chance because that's who he is to his core, and it ended up costing him his life and the chance to raise his son.

Sometimes the villain is an anti hero and the hero is a bastard with good pr, and sometimes the villain is someone who had the opportunity to do the right thing time and again and yet repeatedly chose the wrong path and lashed out when the consequences of his actions came knocking, and the hero is someone who tried his best but couldn't turn his heart to stone even if he wanted to and pays the price for it.

[milomaxxy]

Something I wish I could vent about without IMMEDIATELY getting fucking dogpiled by people who have zero fucking critical thinking skills and automatically assume shit about me, is how covid (and having long covid) has affected my ability to mask.

I got covid (at least) twice- and that's what I tested positive for. I have long covid now, and that affects so much that I do. I can't walk as far, I can't tolerate the heat as well, I can't eat or drink some of the things I used to, my sense of taste has wildly changed, and more; but the worst part is how it affects my breathing. I can't breathe without basically panting anymore. Even lying in bed right now, I can't breathe properly and have to breathe through my mouth to get proper air flow. If I get too hot, or even too warm sometimes, I end up gasping for air like I'm actually choking on the air I'm breathing. My head gets light, my vision blurs and gets dark spots, my mouth gets numb, my limbs tingle and prickle, and I get an overall weakness. Hell, there's been times I've almost passed out from it and had to sit down bc I couldn't stand.

How does this affect masking, you ask? Bc with my regular breathing being hindered already, any kind of extra hindrance can really fuck me. Like, quick in-and-out, less than 5 minutes? I can do it, not perfectly fine, but not really worse off. If I have to actually take time somewhere tho? Like, if I have to do grocery shopping, or go to an appointment, or do my taxes? It has made me actually end up having AMR (the ambulance) called for me by staff before. Bc I basically fainted (for like 5 seconds), fell over, and looked like I was actively dying. I've had to take breaks while grocery shopping bc I have issues breathing as is, but wearing a mask makes it genuinely Difficult To Breathe to the point of hurting me.

And it fucking sucks, bc I DON'T WANT TO BE LIKE THIS. I don't want to sound like a fucking anti-masker who probably thinks covid was made by the U.S. government when I try to explain my health problems. I don't want to have to disclose the fact that, even tho I followed ALL THE PROTOCOLS, other people got me so sick that I can't wear a mask without hurting myself. I don't want to have to disclose my medical information to have a "valid reason" to "break the rules" bc I KNOW how important masking is. I KNOW what the risks are, and I DON'T WANT to take those risks. I'm basically stuck between the decisions of "wear a mask, but not be able to breathe and end up in the hospital *again*" or "don't mask, risk getting sick again, and deal with people who don't want to hear eXcUsEs". As if "I genuinely can't breathe even sitting down and resting, much less moving around with a mask on and I HATE that" is an excuse and not me trying to explain how much I don't want to have to even think about not masking.

I just really wish I could vent about how much I want to cry about this, without someone accusing me of lying about my health. Without someone accusing me of being a fucking fascist, anti-masker, antivaxxer, POS just bc they don't believe me. Fuck

[stilljuststardust]

Hey

Idk if you remember me but I sent you an ask before. Unfortunately i'm still miserable. I feel like the "you already have it" advice doesn't work for me, at least for shifting, and gives me mental breakdowns instead. There's so much stuff i'm sad about and idk how to get over the attitude that being sad = your manifestation won't happen.

I cry to myself about how much life sucks like once a week. I'm disappointed in myself that i've been on loa tumblr for like a year and seemingly learned nothing since I haven't gotten anything I wanted. Idk what the ppl that manifest easily are doing differently than me, or how to make what they do work for me. Idk what to do I feel like all the mainstream advice

I try to follow like "imagine it and chill out" or "you already have it" just give me mental breakdowns instead of success. Idk what to do i'm really tired. Please help

Hello again, I do remember you.

My perspective has changed a bit over this past year. I'm sorry that it wasn't what you needed then. You don't have to feel great, you don't have to feel anything.

It's not about doing everything right, you're just repeating something till your subconscious manifests it. You don't have to jump through hoops or suppress your emotions you just have to saturate your mind.

This is sloppier than I'd like. It's 3 am and though I've been thinking of what I'd like to say I'm a bit too out of it for it to come out how I need it. I don't want you to wait longer though so I'll post it anyways.

Similar post where I said all of this better

Also, I know you've read this before but you really should again:

It's ok to feel like shit

Your emotions don't manifest. If you just need to be told that I can say it as many times as you like. Half the stuff I've manifested I was cranky or anxious or mad when I did it. Half the time I didn't believe it'd happen and then it did. Half the time I felt how you do. You can do it. I promise.

I don't use fulfilment for the same reason you mentioned, stressed me out. For me personally it was vague and didn't allow me to anchor myself.

It's ok that you feel like shit. It's ok that you're scared. It's ok that you're hurting. You can still do this and I promise you don't have to magically defy your emotions to do it.

In terms of how to change the actual belief you just affirm the opposite. You learned it through repetition it's unlearned the same way. Anti-climatic I know. I used to have a rule that if I said something bad about myself I would repeat three things good. Maybe when you have that belief come up your repeat three reasons why you can feel like shit and still manifest.

Stop punishing yourself for having emotions. Suppressing emotions has never made them go away and I can tell you from experience it is a losing battle. You can feel them, it's ok.

In my opinion you need to take a break. Take that pressure off. Right now it's a burden of its own and it's just piling onto everything else you're feeling.

You need to take a couple days where you don't push yourself so hard. No methods or law or anything. Process your emotions and let yourself breathe for a bit.

Chill. Not as a method or a tool but just genuine mental health advice. I know taking a break won't solve the issues in your life but neither will beating yourself up every day. Ground yourself and let out everything you're pushing down because it is clearly weighing on you.

You have been putting near constant pressure on yourself for a year. In my experience the pressure you're putting on yourself is more suffocating than your actual feelings. The most painful thing is usually our refusal to feel it.

When I would suppress my emotions it felt like constantly running away from my life. I didn't feel better, the suppression just became an additional burden. We let out emotions because that's how they leave us. If we hold them in that's where they'll stay, inside of us.

Cry for an hour, throw a fit, write in a burn book. Give yourself permission to fucking feel. (You can do this even when manifesting something btw)

When you're ready to come back to manifestation don't return to emotional suppression. Feel what you feel just don't repeat the old story to yourself. What I mean by that is you are 100% allowed to feel like absolute shit just don't affirm for anything you don't want.

Get off Tumblr and get away from all the noise telling you what to do or shaming you for mistakes.

Stick to robotic affirmations instead of fulfillment . The only goal is to repeat a sentence/thought that implies you have it and avoid repeating anything that implies you don't.

Feel whatever you want, it's robotic because feeling is not a factor. It's a definable goal so you don't have to be constantly asking if you're doing it right.

10 minutes whenever you can just repeat what you want. That's your only goal do not add anything else to it. Don't try something new when you get anxious, stick to a schedule and take care of yourself. I say this because I think what you need is something solid to ground yourself with instead of a less defined goal.

Don't ignore your mental health in the name of living in the end. Living in the end is just refusing to affirm shit you don't want.

Your biggest obstacle is your self hatred. This is speculation but it sounds to me like when you waver or give into the 3D you respond to it by chastising yourself.

Maybe you have an unconscious belief that self discipline = scolding yourself or this is just your knee jerk reaction to mistakes. You can recognize the need for change without berrating yourself. Sometimes healing isn't linear, sometimes we slip up, that doesn't mean there is something wrong with you.

From a different post but I honestly don't think I can rephrase this better:

You cannot shame yourself better. Hating yourself, comparing yourself to others, being cruel to yourself because you "aren't doing good enough" has never helped you. If you only have one person in your corner it should be you. If you have only one person telling you to keep going it should be you.

On days when everything seems out of your control you can control how you treat yourself. You deserve kindness and patience too. It's ok if you have setbacks. It's ok if you got off track.

It's ok to trust yourself. It's ok to tell yourself you're good enough and that what you're doing is enough. It's ok to tell yourself that you're good at this.

You feel things very deeply and there is nothing wrong with that. Shame will not push you out of it.

You are consistently reinforcing the beliefs that you:

1. Are not good enough to manifest

2. Cannot change and

3. Will fail if you try again

Self defacing behavior is doing NOTHING but further a negative self concept/make you feel like shit.

You are good enough. There is nothing wrong with you. You do not have to become someone else to get what you want because you are enough.

Links

Manifest with anger subliminal

Manifest with sadness subliminal

Manifest with impatience subliminal

Success stories with robotic affirmations (aka without emotion)

My favorite manifestation video "you only have one limiting belief"

[error04landonotfound]

Before I begin, I want to make it abundantly clear: this post is not a hate post, nor do I wish for it to be perceived as one.

I keep seeing a lot of defense (and comments) of Max's moves post-Mexico GP, and some of the reasoning has been... interesting, to say the least. I've seen some along the lines of, 1. "funny how the fia cracks down on the driver with the wrong passport"; 2. "lando was whining on the radio too much"; 3. "10 seconds each is too harsh."

1. I've admittedly not been a Formula 1 fan for very long, but I've been one long enough to see that Lando has never (to my knowledge) benefitted from being British. Take a look at Austria and COTA (these are the ones I know), and tell me if you really think Lando benefitted there. I'm not saying that "British Bias" doesn't exist; it very well could! Just not for Lando Norris.

2. If Lando was whining, I'd sure hate to put a label on what Max was doing last week. What Lando said on the radio was, in his view, a statement of fact. He didn't "whine" about Max's moves; he said he was ahead at the apex and that Max's moves were dangerous, and as far as I'm aware, did not explicitly ask for a penalty.

3. 10 seconds is too harsh, you say? Think about this for a second: Lando's time penalty last week was DOWNGRADED to 5 seconds. The fia document noted it was originally 10 because Max left him no space. As much as I hate to admit it, I could see why the stewards ruled the way they did at COTA, but this week was far more blatant. Max was taking wider lines and had ZERO intention of making the corners. I'm sorry, but 10 seconds is more than fair, especially when you basically admit that your whole plan was to hold up Lando and ruin his race.

All this being said, I'm genuinely curious: would you still be defending these moves THIS HARD if roles were reversed and Lando had been the one to make them? Would you claim that there was "Dutch Bias" for Max? Or that 10 seconds per penalty was "too harsh"?

I know it's easier to say it than believe it, but I know for a fact that if Lando had pulled those moves, I wouldn't have defended them. I've said it before, I think Max is a great driver! There's a reason he's 3x WDC!! But he crossed the line in Mexico City, and I really wish more people would admit that. That was hard racing, yes. But it wasn't clean.

P.S. if you're going to hate on Lando for existing/having thoughts and opinions, at least put it in the proper tag (the anti tag). I'm tired of looking through the Lando tags and seeing hate. And this goes for all other drivers too, tbh, because nobody wants to see that in their fave driver's tags.

[artist-issues]

Was wondering what your take on this was. I have a Christian friend who's very anti-media, like he never listens to non-Christian music (even then enacting limits on the artists) and he believes all films are evil and stuff like that.

I believe his rationale is that it's all anti-Christian, making arguments like "Thanos is a representation of God in the book of Revelation and the film is therefore about killing God" or "Superman isn't a Christ-like figure; he's an antichrist figure because he points people's attention away from Jesus, the real Christ," and stuff like that.

Speaking as a Christian myself, I feel like that's a very extreme take to have when stories can always have Christian values to identify and distinguish and that even if he was right, it does no good to isolate yourself from those stories or to assume the worst faith interpretation of them.

Anyway, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on the subject. I know well from some of your posts especially that there are stories with very unhelpful or anti-Christian messages baked into them, but should we not still give those stories a chance? And is there not a much more forgiving line to draw before that point? If a story isn't directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ, does it have any value?

Well. I had a friend who was kind of like that, too, and over the years he’s softened up on that a lot. Sometimes people get really zealous and have these extreme convictions and it’s okay, if they’re really doing it because they genuinely read Scripture with a heart to do what God wants, not a heart to find a set of rules they can follow and find self-righteousness.

I think there’s two separate ways to answer this ask. One is:

How to Treat Your Brother in Christ Over This

which is the most important part, for you, like it was for me with my friend, personally.

In 2 Corinthians 10 Paul is talking about this with meat sacrificed to idols. Technically, you’re free to eat that, even though to non-believers it means something else. Because to you, a Christian, you’re not under the old Law, so it’s not a condemnable thing to take what non-believers are using for evil and just…eat it. For what good there is in it. Because it’s meat. So there is some good in it, and you’re technically free to enjoy that good. But this is what the Word of God says:

1 Corinthians 10:19–33 - What do I mean then? That a thing sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but I say that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. And I do not want you to become sharers in demons.

You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?

All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things build up. Let no one seek his own good, but that of the other person. Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions for conscience’ sake. For the earth is the Lord’s, as well as its fullness.

If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions for conscience’ sake. But if anyone says to you, “This is meat consecrated to idols,” do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience’ sake. I do not mean your own conscience, but the other person’s. For why is my freedom judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I partake with gratefulness, why am I slandered concerning that for which I give thanks?

Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.

Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God; just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many, so that they may be saved.

Paul also says, in Romans, “But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

(emphasis added)

The idea is, your convictions should be in place because of faith. So if, in Scripture, your friend is finding something that makes him feel convicted that watching these movies is sinful or distracting from Christ, and he really believes that’s how Scripture should be applied—this is one of those areas where you just shrug and be gracious and say, “he’s trying to act in faith.” It would be different if Scripture clearly taught about movies or even characters. You could point to a verse and say, “dude, you’re misinterpreting Scripture,” but this is one of those areas where God left it up to our convictions. So we have to respond in grace, even if what bothers another believer doesn’t bother us, because it’s not a “hill to die on.”

You can only control you. So obey God in how to respond to him, even if you don’t agree, and put him before you. If he won’t watch a Superman movie and it bothers him, don’t talk about Superman around him. Don’t invite him to movies like that. Consider him more important than yourself. If he can’t be convinced from Scripture that he’s free to watch that stuff and enjoy that stuff, don’t try and convince him. Just put his conscience in front of your preference for movies, on your list of priorities.

Maybe he is turning a grey-area into an area for self-righteousness. Or, maybe he is trying to live out his faith, even if it’s “extreme.” But the point is, you don’t know, and you don’t get to know. Only God knows. You just get to decide how to treat him.

BUT! I bet you’re already doing all that. I bet you already knew all that. And what you asked me was “And is there not a much more forgiving line to draw before that point? If a story isn't directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ, does it have any value?”

So Part 2:

What I Think/My Convictions on the Gray Area of Valuable Stories

Stories can have Christian values if there is anything “Good” represented in them. It can also have Christian values if there is anything “Evil” in them. There is no such thing as “good” or “evil” in a movie like The Joker. So that movie I would say has zero Christian values. They don’t call what is evil “evil,” and they don’t call what is good “good” in that story. So I’m just agreeing with you that not every story or every piece of media has a “nugget of something Christian” that you can pull out. Only in one sense do all stories have a grain of God in them, and that sense is, “it’s a story.” The same way you can speak blasphemies, because God created the tongue and invented language and communication—that doesn’t mean He’s in any way reflected or has anything to do with your blasphemies. But you wouldn’t say, “we should at least let the blaspheming guy keep talking, because God invented talking.” God invented stories and storytelling. That doesn’t make all stories worth a chance. If that makes sense.

Anyway.

That being said, I do think it is rare for you to be able to decide that’s worth giving a chance… until you give it a chance. ^^ Like, I watched The Joker. Now I know it’s godless. So I won’t be seeing the sequel.

The main answer to this is: yes. I believe there is value in a story that is not directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ. And here’s why, are you ready, here’s the reason I’m convinced, here’s the best card to play:

JESUS TOLD STORIES THAT WERE NOT DIRECTLY OR EXPLICITLY ABOUT HIS DIRECT AND EXPLICIT SELF.

The parable of the Good Samaritan is not about Jesus. You could make an argument that it’s got some Jesus-imagery mixed into the Samaritan character because of how selflessly and thoroughly he cares for others even though Jesus specifically framed the story like it was the answer to the question “who is my neighbor?” and it’s about “what a good neighbor is.” But hey, if you’re arguing, then guess what, it’s not very direct or explicit, is it?

Because that’s how stories work.

If I weren’t advocating for treating your brother in Christ with grace, if I were in my flesh right now, I’d say, “ask your friend if every conversation he has is directly and explicitly about the direct and explicit Christ. Is every single word “Jesus?” Is every single sentence about Jesus? Would you say all your communication is focused on Jesus 100% explicitly & directly? No? Then why does a storyteller’s communication have to be?”

Because that’s what a story is. It’s a uniquely compelling medium of communication. But it’s communication, that’s it.

I mean you know my understanding of stories. Stories are meant to be signposts that point you back to truth when you’ve wandered. Stories are meant to be a way for you to escape the specific imprisonment of bad ideas and lost wanderings, and you’re specifically escaping TO HOME: which is truth. Good ideas, and truth.

Well guess what? Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Every good and perfect thing is from above, coming down from the Father of Lights. If there is anything good, anything worthy of praise, anything excellent—we’re supposed to be thinking on those things, and associating them with Christ.

It’s almost short-changing Jesus or His relevance to say, “yeah there can be truth in stories but that truth doesn’t have anything to do with Jesus so it’s not worth my time.” What are you saying? He is the embodiment of Truth. If it’s true, then it’s His. In that sense. If it’s Loving, then it’s His. The idea of self-sacrifice, love, good triumphing over evil, truth triumphing over twisted-truth, is to do with Christ, because He invented those things and He’s their source.

My pastor likes to call this “plundering the Egyptians,” or “the world is tripping and stumbling into Biblical truths all the time.” They might not believe in Jesus but their story wouldn’t have anything worthwhile in it without Him. The writer of Beauty & the Beast might not be connecting self-sacrificial love to Jesus when she characterizes Belle, but guess what, she can’t escape it. Just because she didn’t make the connection doesn’t mean it’s not connected. You can’t say that all good and true things, even coming out of the foul mouths of humans, are no longer good and true simply because of the state of the mouths they come out of. Goodness and Truth is goodness and truth, and our brokenness can’t blot it out or stain it or ruin it. If it’s in the story, and it’s good and true, it’s good and true. Regardless of who we are or whether or not we attribute it to it’s proper Source.

Also, look at all of History. Jesus is woven symbolically throughout all of it, but He doesn’t “directly and explicitly” write Himself into the story of the world until the First Century.

But He was telling stories that had pieces of Himself and the truth before that. And He’s been telling them after that.

The Global Flood? Mankind is so wicked that God utterly destroys them—but He saves a small handful of righteous with a Vessel that only has ONE DOOR that they CANNOT SHUT THEMSELVES? That’s a story about Jesus. It’s not “direct or explicit.” God wrote it, that’s called “reality.”

The lamb in the Garden? Adam and Eve have something perfect and wonderful, and they can be exactly who they are and who they were made to be, but then they ruin it with sin, so God makes a way for them to be covered and protected—but it’s with the sacrifice of a Lamb? That’s a story about Jesus. It’s not “direct or explicit.” But God wrote it into reality.

Caterpillars? Into butterflies?? God invented a creature that starts out as a low worm in the dirt, then it goes into a tomb-like, death-like sleep and emerges a new creation that is beautiful and flies? That’s a story about Jesus, I don’t care, it’s not “direct or explicit” but it’s what God wrote into reality.

If it’s true and good, then the good and the true parts are connected to Christ. And it would be cheating myself of more ways to consider where goodness and truth and beauty come from to say that His direct and explicit incarnation in human flesh 2000 years ago was the only way I’m allowed to be reminded of Him.

I would never say any of this to your friend unless they asked. Because it’s not gracious to slam your friend over something that Scripture is not directly commanding, one way or the other, about.