#but if anon had to be put in their place

[xoluvx]

i’m not the anon who sent the thing but the ppl defending u r the biggest bum licks ever omg “dia this dia that” can u not speak for urself help😭 like no hate to u n stuff but like get a grip?😭 watch u post this now n everyone be like omg jealousy blah blah 🥱 she doesn’t even know u LMAO

"she doesn’t even know u LMAO" .. but actually i don't know you babe ? who are you ??

i don't need to defend myself bc i'm confident in who i am. simple. now if people wanna come to my defense then maybe we should reevaluate why that's making you so mad baby. is it .. because people wouldn't do the same for you? hm.

in the words of alyssa edwards ..

[saetoru]

something that’s always been funny to me is that long fics with smut tend to do better than long fics without but it’s like. if you write a longggg 10k+ word fic with a build up and plot and sprinkle in smut at the end, people will read that long build up and pay attention to the plot in order to get to the smut. and 99% of the time the tags and comments will talk about the plot itself and the way it was written as opposed to the sex and they will ask for more or for part 2’s and as annoying as the part 2 comments can be sometimes, it also means that they focused on the plot and not the smut. but if you post that fic without the smut—as in same fic and same build up and everything, but the smuts not there, a lot of those same people will simply not give the fic a chance. it’s just funny to me bc yes, a part of it is just horniness, but also i think it’s partly that there is also some conditioning to believe that a “perfect romance” or a “perfect story” of a romance is sealed with intimacy that’s more often than not sexual in order to actually be valid. and yeah. idk. it’s an interesting thing to see from a writers perspective

[shakingparadigm]

It's a bit silly that found it unlikely for Luka and Till to be the final match back then. The more that I thought about it, the more it made sense. Sure, Luka and Ivan are incredibly similar in terms of personality and image, but in terms of circumstance Luka and Till are opposite sides of the same coin. I really couldn't envision a better matchup.

[celestie0]

when ppl get too caught up in the accuracy of situations in fanfiction or if things are super realistic or as they should/would be in real life etc etc im like. my tumblr user in christ. it's fanfiction.

[imminent-danger-came]

do you think the writers are being too slow revealing what happened with wukong and macaque? like should the full story been revealed in s4

That's very subjective!

For me personally, I'm totally fine with how it's played out. We get enough tidbits every season/developments with their dynamic that I'm pretty content. I also just think that when the time comes, how they choose to reveal that information to us (and especially to MK) will have optimal impact!

Idk, I just think it's going to work out you know

[dragon-spaghetti]

So if Husk is a trans man, and his kid Violet is from when he was alive ... was he the one who gave birth to her? And does that mean that he wasn't out as a trans man at the time? And that his partner was a man?

He was in fact the one to give birth to her yes, but no one knew he was trans; he kept it hidden and bounced from place to place before anyone could start to question him 💀 he was on his own when Violet was born (terrible idea but he didn't want to risk being outed by going to a hospital)

Omg the partner thing is interesting; they split before husk realised there was a baby in the picture, and the partner never knew. Until me and albo accidentally made a whole arc of said partner wanting to get redeemed at the hotel cause they're also in hell, and now it's a whole thing because a big part of why they split was due to transphobia from the partner but since landing in hell they've realised a lot of that was actually internalised because they are also trans and it is a wholeass arc of this au now LOL

[thatbuddie]

I still can't get over how close they were sitting during the bachelor party. It's insane they really have no concept of personal space.

at the rate they’re going the s8 premiere is gonna have eddie sitting on buck’s lap and buck coming up behind eddie and wrapping his arms around his waist and no one in the 118 is gonna blink an eye.

[batsplat]

I think this should be a fun one for you: rank 00’s-early 2010’s spanish atp tennis players from most beloved/underrated/least beloathed to your most behated.

I love when you’re mean about atp 🥰

incredible hater ask. love to see that me just endlessly lobbing potshots at male tennis players has finally found an audience. the inclusion criteria for this list is extremely vibes-based - they need to have had some of their career-best results in the 00's or early 2010s and I can't primarily associated them with 90's or 2020's. so no moya or alcaraz... rba marginal inclusion but not pcb. (ramos vinolas would've come top but he just... didn't really get going until late 2010s.) cut-off is top twenty peak ranking. so let's go

MOST BELOVED/UNDERRATED/LEAST BELOATHED

bautista agut: horse girl!! horse girl!!! a bit of a journey of how I learned to stop worrying and love the pusher. I've occasionally had a slightly troubled history with the guy, not least because sometimes it does feel like he crawls out of the woodwork literally just to piss me off? like, I'm sorry, check out this string of results from last year (I've conveniently highlighted the irritating result)

first time since JANUARY he'd strung together back-to-back match wins. feels a little personal!!

beyond spawning out of nowhere to hand medvedev a yearly defeat, he has also been done a fair bit of torturing of murray. that 2022 match at doha with the foul scoreline... that being said, if you're a fan of a high-ranked player it is extremely poor form to be too annoyed by this kind of thing. medvedev should maybe consider stop losing to inferior pushers and even at the time I did find it pretty funny, rolled my eyes but fundamentally idc that much about how he does in halle. and I am obviously a big supporter of pushing... rba is quite an un-spanish players in some ways - doesn't play with a lot of spin, not bad at clay but it's not where he shines. idk I'm a big fan of pushers, rba has been a stalwart representative of the pushing lifestyle on the atp tour, he's kind of in that gilles simon camp where I was always happy enough to put on a match with them in it. and y'know, he seems like a nice enough guy. a fixture of the atp tour who I'm just kinda fond of

ferrer: always felt kinda sorry for him. destined to be #2 spaniard forevermore. thing is, with his game, you do have to say he didn't massively underachieve - like in a way a slam final is a pretty impressive showing. he's not one of the players TO ME where it feels super painful they never won a slam, even though arguably he's had a better career than some of the guys I'd put in that camp. funny how that works out!! I actually quite like ferrer's game, it's very bread and butter, spanish clay court style... and y'know, I grew up on clay, it's probably still my favourite surface all things considered, and we did always joke about the grinding from ten metres behind the baseline thing. I respect it. gets annoying when someone is nadal-levels good, but ferrer is very much not that so I quite enjoyed watching him play. idk, I did always vaguely like those second tier players during the big four era - childhood nostalgia of watching them in a bunch of slam matches without my negative feelings towards the big three. he's not my favourite of those, but he's all right. just quite inoffensive really

costa: oh man, I just don't really have any particularly strong feelings towards this guy. I think it's pretty funny how he won a slam and does just reflect where the clay game was at for a few years before nadal, like none of the post kuerten pre nadal rg winners were particularly serious characters. still, beating ferrero in that 2002 final is something I will gladly applaud, especially absolutely walloping him in the first two sets. this is very firmly before my time and perhaps a year or so before I even held my first tennis racquet as a kid, and while I obviously have quite a few past players I have strong feelings about... costa is not one of them. he is not actively offensive to me, let's put it that way (which I retroactively realised I'd put for two players in a row, but I'll leave it because it's funny that this is how I classify spanish players)

verdasco: now, look. verdasco doesn't hate nadal, but I am more than happy to do so on his behalf. I wasn't a sentient enough person yet in 2009 to have particularly sophisticated takes on the tragic inevitability of sports narratives, but if I HAD been I think I would've gone insane at some point during That Australian Open Match. basically redlined for hours and it still wasn't enough, never reached another slam semi, just kinda sucks man. (not that it matters but I'm glad he did at least manage to beat nadal in five at ao 2016 in the first round, just for the vibes.) I do also have a fair bit of sympathy for him over the two month doping ban he got in 2022 for failing to renew the therapeutic exemption thingy he had for his adhd medication - that was just so obviously a case of someone not really doping and tbh a lot of people (including some players!!) were pretty cruel about that shit

all that being said, can't say I've ever particularly been a fan. idk he was just one of those vaguely frustrating players to me who theoretically had a lot to their game but never was quite... on it enough. I do like some players who build their games around big booming forehands, but it's not really what I've ever gravitated towards. I think we have now reached the part of the list where most of these guys get a bit of a nadal tax. as in, I've seen them pal around with nadal, it has been forced in front of my eyeballs, and I simply do not support that kind of behaviour. (true of ferrer too but he has just about enough accumulated good will to be ranked higher up.) it's nothing personal, it's just that they're associated with nadal in my mind. I don't like it

robredo: is it bad if I say I got him confused with verdasco as a kid. too many spaniards. well, first off, go watch the valencia 2014 final against murray (I got a kia ad for nadal when I tried to open this video which ramped up my internal haterism for what is to come). what people sometimes forget about this horrifically painful final is that it was the second time in like?? a few weeks?? where he was playing murray in a final... I think he blew five matchpoints in both which. ouch. anyway the point is that valencia match is great - and unlike when the big three inflict horrendously painful defeats on their opponents, this was good and moral and fun. robredo was probably the most... invisible of this lot, if that's not too mean. his biggest contribution to tennis history is defeating federer once and only once at the 2013 us open, ensuring that federer and nadal wouldn't play - which ensured they never played at the us open which means it is an incomplete and quite frankly fraudulent rivalry. they missed out by one match on six occasions. the list of players who stopped them reads murray, djokovic, del potro and.... robredo. a hero tbh

other robredo thoughts... I mean, he was a bit top twenty filler if we're being honest. the thing where he won three consecutive slam matches from two sets to love down was pretty neat. he's basically ferrer but worse. I rank him at basically the same level as verdasco but I remember more verdasco matches than robredo so. there we are

ferrero: okay. look. I'm aware some of this might be coloured by my extreme irritation at his presence in alcaraz's coaching box these last few years. man will simply not shut up. I can't help it - sometimes this stuff colours my opinions on someone

(not a player but the swiftest downfall in this regard has been darren cahill, who had a base fondness for as 'notable agassi coach' that he's steadily pissed away in this sinner partnership. zero respect for how he dumped anisimova so soon after she hired him because he just couldn't handle the strains of travel, throwing himself a pity party... before almost immediately linking up with sinner. a tangent irrelevant to this post but I just needed to get that in there!!)

I get that coaching's legal now!! and I am NOT a conspiracy theorist about the timing of that change happening right during the golden boy's rise to the top, but!! it's still obviously been pretty convenient, like surely the umpires could not have ignored that for all that much longer lol. and I hate the rule change, idc how little practical use it is - it's antithetical to the spirit of tennis. I know coaching happened before then too but it makes a difference if you have to at least be sly about it (not that this guy ever really was). also beyond my principled opposition, he's just annoying. it's annoying. I'm sick of his face by now. get him off my screen

but to rewind twenty years, it's still aggravating that his one and only slam came at the cost of what would have been one of the all-time great slam fairy tale runs. it should have been verkerk!! ik that it wasn't even particularly close, I don't care. verkerk also just had a more compelling run to the final - sure jcf beat defending champion costa but he wasn't in particular good form, and verkerk took out both moya and coria. some random dutch bloke took out former champion moya in five sets... should have gotten the title. I'm sure you'll be delighted to know the match is indeed on youtube. isn't this cool:

don't you want to root for this guy!!

anyway yeah idk you're a top player for years you win one slam and THAT is how you won it? by stomping on a fairy tale? the counter-argument is that jcf SHOULD have won in 2002 but, well. just an awful performance wasn't it. like I know I said I like grinders and chokers but the first two sets of the first slam final you compete in being 1-6 0-6... hm. idk man. just don't think he was a good enough player to have earned a slam or indeed to have been number one, and in that case I would prefer the fairy tale slam. I will say he was an underrated hard court player, but yeah just didn't like his playstyle. a lot of these spaniards are way too big on their forehands. and I cannot forgive his role in blighting the game with another spanish prodigy. we're just never going to be free

lopez: okay, look, admittedly the fact that he seemed so close to nadal didn't make me particularly keen on him, but it's more than that!! another one where his activities post-retirement have hardly done much to endear him to me. I do unironically loathe this guy for his work running the madrid open, I think he's an incompetent sexist cunt who needs to be kept far away from women's tennis as possible. these last couple of years have made me more and more furious about the current situation with women's tennis - the game is in an excellent place but it might as well be being sabotaged by the people who are supposed to promote it. it's disgraceful he is still even in the job after the women's doubles finalists were prevented from speaking during the trophy ceremony, and it's as good a demonstration as you're going to get of the wta's luck of power. just makes me sad man

also, I never liked him as a player. idk man hating's not rational but I'm trying to come up with something I feel like I can defend a bit more than 'I was sick of people talking about how attractive this guy was to women'. but well, I was! oh wow, he's a heartthrob?? you think he's good-looking?? you want to make a joke about how he makes the ladies swoon?? original! never heard it before! look, I support straight women in their lifestyle choices even if they differ from my own, but more than anything else I just find this shit cringe. 'deliciano' is cringe. calling a bloke vain can be a pretty charged insult, but in this case I stand by it - shallow man with shallow tennis. just this gross macho energy that I personally have always found off-putting. he's also a commentators' pet where they want him to unlock his inner potential and become the player he could be with all that talent inside of him... literally shut up

nadal: if nadal has a million haters, I am one of them. if nadal has five haters, I am one of them. if nadal has one hater, that is me. if nadal has no haters, then I am no longer alive. if the word supports nadal then I am against the world

I ended up writing paragraphs and paragraphs worth of why I hate him for One Match Specifically but then I realised that wasn't really part of the remit for a jokey hater post and was also getting a wee bit TOO earnest and emotional. it has been cut out but lmk if you want to read an extended scream into the abyss I suppose lol

anyway! my number one enemy. djokovic might be the worst of the big three on moral grounds, federer's whole aesthetic and vibe is horrendous, but as an actual tennis player? oh, nadal, they could never make me like you. instinctively the least appealing playstyle... I love watching djokovic move around the court, even I can appreciate clean federer hitting. nadal is just... well, look, I'm not a forehand girl. and when I AM a forehand girl, I tend to like mine a bit flatter. penetrating. I can appreciate nadal's forehand is a great shot, but it doesn't really do much for me. all the good and appealing parts of nadal's game... low key are better from djokovic. the athleticism, the counterpunching, high margin game etc. if I want this stuff, I go to djokovic. also, look, I don't like the grunting - but what I really don't like is how completely accepted it is to hound wta players for grunting while nobody bats an eyelid when nadal sounds like a flock of seagulls is dying in his throat every single point. and I get that the double standards aren't exactly his fault, but you know what is his fault? his repeated and consistent opposition to equal pay in tennis! admittedly women's rights aren't exactly an issue you want to interrogate too closely with any of the big three, see the utter cowardice and moral void surrounding the zverev case

which I think gets to the part that really pisses me off about nadal. it's just... the hypocrisy. his pr is all about being this big fighter, big fighter, big fighter, he's so tough, he never gives up, what a fighter. such a big song and dance is done about what a great sportsman he is, him and federer obviously - how respectful they are, how civil and composed and isn't it great that we have two such great role models for the sport. people won't stop banging on about the fucking racquet smashing thing, as if we have to declare sainthood because a multi-millionaire tax evader has decided not to break a stick that clocks in at maybe a hundred fifty quid retail price. I'm biased in that I like racquet smashes, I think they're funny, they're ultimately not that serious - I don't particularly mind giving them a code violation but I do think it's remarkable that breaking a racquet isn't allowed but smashing up your own body with a racquet is. which is a separate issue! point being, it's one of those things that get used to paint nadal as the fairest most respectful most humblest bestest sportsman of all time. but he's not!! of course he engages in gamesmanship, of course he did some blatant time violations every time he could get away with it, of course he loved disrupting the rhythm of the other player serving, of course some of his medical timeouts were awfully convenient. of course it's pretty rich of him to complain about other blokes grunting

which I literally would not mind - I am a justine henin fan - if it weren't ignored due to this guy's insane pr. I also think it is awfully like tennis, in all its hypocrisy and fundamental conservatism, to judge someone's moral character over the number of racquets they have smashed - rather than literally anything else. this OBVIOUSLY isn't his fault, but I find the way many of his fans glorify the abuse his uncle subjected him to as a child beyond distasteful. federer fans are the cockiest and at times most fanatical (though For Some Reason they've quietened down these past few years), djokovic fans are the most flat out insane, but I find something about the conservatism of the nadal fanbase particularly pernicious. all in on the macho culture, endless wanking off to his masculinity and traditional values and whatever other bullshit

and to bring it back around - he's also fucking boring lol. like at the end of the day all this stuff just eats away at his appeal for me. so committed to never saying anything controversial he never says anything at all. I've already expressed this opinion before on this blog, but I firmly believe if you are an athlete that good and that dominant then you NEED to have more going for you. you need more character, more narrative juice, more interesting interpersonal relationships with your fellow competitors. tbh I think it's probably quite hard to keep me invested if you're THAT dominant, but let's be honest - men's tennis hasn't even been trying since agassi and sampras retired (rip to my men's tennis goats). serena on the women's side is way less annoying because she faced a changing cast of characters throughout her career, everyone in noughties wta had crazy narrative juice, and she is also exponentially more interesting than the big three combined. she really WAS an asshole at times, and I mean that in the most complimentary way possible!! all the gamesmanship people use to insult her honestly just makes me like her more. people complain about the chaos at the top of the wta tour but like... first of all, obviously we've left that era, and secondly I'd take that any day over stagnation at the top of the men's. the big three for all their incredible tennis have stifled the men's game, nadal's the worst of them, glad he's retired

MOST BEHATED

[fisheito]

You know who you remind me of? Helga Pataki.

Please tell me you (or somebody else) gets the reference 😂

anon u turned my world to static with that namedrop

on the list of things i did NOT expect to happen ,because hUH??: someone dragging [hey arnold] into my tiny nuca inbox

[randomnameless]

I mean… fire emblem shouldn't be taking in consideration when making points about representing real world issues or using it as a crutch for sociopolitical arguments irl. One of the best examples in this franchise of "culture bias" and "covet bigotry" is Fates, where Hoshido is too pure, too good, and Nohr is the bad, bad, evil barbaric nation. And this goes so far as to make birthright's story a more watered down version of blue units vs red units story from shadow dragon.

In 3H now the good, pure nation is Fodlan, and those who surround it are either filler to make the worldmap look prettier, or barbarians that like to hunt the good guys for sport (Almyra and Sreng, and possibly Dagda), with Brigid being a repetition of the noble savage trope. Just bc there's a poc guy that wants to unite people and get rid of prejudice in story, doesn't mean that the developpers agree to that or support that.

(Also, let's not talk about Hopes and how Claude's altruistic dream turns out to be unifying two different nations and make the cohabit by force with him as sole leader of both. AKA the typical fire emblem trope of uniting different countries under one ruler, something that's not progressive in the slightest)

Mmh,

Speaking on eggshells here because Fates isn't really my area of expertise, but basically, iirc you can thank Pat for scrubbing the worst of Hoshido!

Fates' best route is Revelation (rip izana) where both countries accept to set aside their differences to work together, meaning that, obviously, Hoshido wasn't only "blue unit land" against Nohr's "red units".

Even through Birthrout, you can catch here'n'there, even in the Pat version!, how Hoshido isn't roses'n'daisies, it's the land where Mikoto takes her niece "hostage" ffs as a measure against Corn's kidnapping (you can't tell me she never guessed Azura was Arete's kid!), where Ryoma (idk if you were the same anon as back then?) as the crown prince ignores the plight of the nohrians and why they were attacking Hoshido because life in Nohr sucks and they're starving (idk if, much like the Leonster/Thracia conflict, Hoshido refused to trade with them and let them starve instead), the fuckery with Mokushu and Shura's backstory, or Hoshido being Misogyny Land (tm).

Heck Birthrout has you march on Nohr's capital city iirc, and fight in the streets - it's in Birthrout that Corn's obsession with taking revenge/defeating Garon leads to Elise' death - so it's not the the "blue unit waltz on red unit lands, routs the enemy and calls a day".

So I don't think the Fates writers really wanted to push the "pure unproblematic land" card with Hoshido compared to Nohr, but rather depict them as both flawed - in different ways - and needing to work together.

Now, I wouldn't say the nations of Fodlan are good compared to the rest of the filler nations that make up this verse's world - after all it's Adrestia who starts hostilities against Dagda'n'Brigid and Adrestia who most recently flattened Brigid and made it its vassal! - but in a sense you're right calling them filler, the FE series in general don't spend a lot of time to depict nations in general, they're just "the place character X is from" and for all of its, hm, reknown writting, Fodlan is following the trend, Albinea is no less different than Cheve (wait, we have one map set in Cheve! kill that) so bar flavor text, they're effectively just "filler".

I disagree about Sreng and Almyra being filler though, if Sreng could be seen as a ref to the Thracia situation or Norh/Hoshido fight for ressources, Almyra?

Is basically Verdane all over again - with the dubious honor of having a Verdanite Lord who, unlike Jamke has some relevance to the plot bar his introduction, but most important, seems to appreciate and want to emulate/import the values/methods of his country to the cast/main plot.

Can you imagine FE4 where Jamke suggests to kidnap Deevtar to seduce lure Andrei in a trap and rekt him?

Of course not.

Just bc there's a poc guy that wants to unite people and get rid of prejudice in story, doesn't mean that the developpers agree to that or support that.

I guess they agreed with the "get rid of prejudice without dealing with the dragon in the room" idea, but the main issue I mentionned and talked about in the other anon reply was the how, and what, doylist wise, it conveys.

"I'll unite people and get rid of prejudice by busting open your country to my people who are as prejudiced as you supposedly are, and I will bring you new values"

That's... not a good way to bring people together lol.

Even in FE16 I found Claude and Almyra's writing a bit odd : why asking Timmy first to stop shunning Bob when Timmy started to avoid Bob because Bob keeps on stealing his lunch money? Shouldn't you ask Bob first to, uh, not be an ass?

In Nopes?

Bob ruins Timmy's house, hits Timmy's toddler sister in the face and still steals his lunch money - but now, Bob has the nerve to tell Timmy that he's doing this to "help" him.

Also, let's not talk about Hopes and how Claude's altruistic dream turns out to be unifying two different nations and make the cohabit by force with him as sole leader of both. AKA the typical fire emblem trope of uniting different countries under one ruler, something that's not progressive in the slightest

Hmmm,

I don't know if you played the older games (FE1 to FE10), but as far as I remember, bar Archanea verse, we have different rulers for each countries and the world is never an unified entity -

And even then, Marth doesn't unify the world by making people "cohabit by force", as forced as it is, everyone gives him their crown.

Sanaki doesn't tell Elincia to suck it as she annexes Crimea in FE10, ditto with Innes and Joshua, or Ced and Ares in Jugdral... I can see Leif's unification of Thracia falling under that criteria, but even then, it's not so much by force than Travant making suicide by cop because he wanted the peninsula to be united and understood he couldn't be the one to do it.

Uniting the continent by force is, on the contrary, what red emperors do, and in traditional FE games, red emperors are defeated.

To return to your main point :

I mean… fire emblem shouldn't be taking in consideration when making points about representing real world issues or using it as a crutch for sociopolitical arguments irl.

Of course, and I totally agree!

The FE series has always been, as its core, a series where a "rightful ruler" returns home to rule "rightfuly" and better than its predecessors, by acknowledging what they did wrong and what they can do now.

That being said, a game is never written in a vacuum : that's the doylist side of various discussions : "What were the devs thinking, was what their reasoning when they decided to make the game this way?"

In 2004, real world persons believed that putting Devdan in their game was okay.

You can give them some flak because different cultural references between Japan and the US world (hell, western world at this rate because damn if Devdan hit "international" racist stereotypes boxes!) - and yet, can you really suppose the devs wouldn't have known, in 2004, that those stereotypes are harmful to real life people and Devdan was basically an insult?

But Devdan was just a living (as much as a fictional character can be alive, but you catch my drift lol) stereotype, the issue was just with Devdan existing.

It was 2004, 15 years later, we expect of IS - not your backwater company! - to never ever fall in the same pits, right?

(well, we had FE13 with the Feroxi main characters who love to fight being dark skinned... so the Devdan dev might still have been there :/ )

FE Fodlan, let it be for design or even names, took some inspiration from RL (it was funny upon release to catch all those links and nods!), and while i appreciated the aesthetic, it was bound to create another "Devdan" issue.

You have Almyra, designed with several RL inspirations (they weren't being subtle with Claude's battalion called the Immortals lol), from design (Claude's clothes and braids!) to units (mounted archers!) to, well, names.

Okay, in itself, it's nothing as insulting as Devdan's existence. But taken with the context?

The devs wrote that Fodlan's aesthetic was supposed to be the Age of Discoveries (1500s and onwards?) so yes, during that Age, you had people who were prejudiced as fuck against people from other lands/different cultures.

But in 2019, we know that those prejudices were full of shit, and either fueled by ignorance, or just, the need to find a good "excuse" to get new lands/manpower/ressources.

Maybe the devs wanted to showcase this part of history : depict the characters being prejudiced against "foreigners" and have them later learn that their prejudice was unfounded !

But... they took the inverse path

Hilda's racist stereotypes? They're shown to be....

True through both games!

As you put it, Almyra are the "barbarians" who : attack the land the characters are from when they're at their weakest, for no reason than to get a good fight - even if it means dying which in turns create several orphans they don't give a fuck about - pillage and "rampage" in cities, let their allies die after accepting a "mutual support" alliance with them, and ultimately rave and scream at their "outdated" values and how you're going to bring them yours.

"You see those people who were derided as savages and barbarians back then in RL - and still are in some parts of the world because the early 2000s happened and in general because racism exists? - Well I'm going to base my fantasy "token barbarian country who is untrustworthy and backstabs everyone" based on them!"

:/

I know you can't compare tomatoes to watermelons, but the Baten Kaitos franchise also has a nation who's, more or less, full of assholes, racists and imperialist pieces of shit. But the devs in those games designed each island/country from scratch, there is no nation that immediately calls back to "RL country X or culture Y"!

you can make a farfetched point about the people wearing ceremonial masks and having totems being a mix of several RL inspirations or at least being a call back to them... but they're part of the most OP people of that universe!

So why? Why, doylist wise, FE Fodlan designed with care - you can't tell me those costumes and outfits were designed in 10 minutes! - Almyra and its characters... only to have them act out as what an english book from the 1780s depicted "oriental" people ?

Unlike Devdan, the racism doesn't ooze out from the way the characters/country was designed, but what role they fit in the story.

It's not a sociopolitical commentary or representing real world but more like another jab at IS for being as prejudiced against non western/japanese cultures and civilisations as they were when FE4 was released, which is problematic in 2019/2022.

(and then you have Square Enix giving us Hyzante in Triangle Strategy, which is even more in your face with the dubious parallels)

[thewingedwolf]

would love to hear your thoughts on the latest episodes of outlander, if you've seen them!

sorry i was going to wait until christmas when i was at my mom’s to watch it but then i decided fuck it and just watched it on my phone lol so that’s why this took so long. thank you for asking 🥰🥰

the jenny recast…hm. i don’t want to be rude. but hm.

loved jamie seeking out laoghaire. she’s completely right that he played her and i’ve BEEN saying that. jamie supposed to be this paragon of masculinity & he completely walks all over this girl for no good reason AND he has the audacity to be a good father to her daughters?? MEN ARE NOT SHIT!!!

i loved that she did not accept his apology until he did something for her MATERIALLY, i love that she moved on with her lil house husband, and i love most of all that jamie did this without any benefit to himself. he knows he did her wrong, he doesn’t know how to mend things, but he tries and that’s a very jamie thing - he always tries to be better than he was the day before, even if he doesn’t succeed. and he really reflects on what laoghaire said to him & what it says about him as a person.

i think they should have given claire & jenny a scene together alone first before she dropped the time traveler bomb. jenny has always been suspicious of claire (something she mentions) and their relationship has always been so layered, and i think it would have helped sell the recasting - jenny could have brought up the selkie stories about her mother to prompt claire to tell the family about her magic, for example. and then they just like shrug and make up. just felt like a miss when claire’s relationships with women are usually so rich, it was just like, idk, a bit odd pacing wise?

i loved the framing of jamie writing this lovely, poetic letter to brianna and roger like, speaking to jamie through time. i love how much jamie loves brianna, how highly he thinks of her intelligence, the way the two of them really indulge in the other’s more fanciful nature, more melodramatic behavior i guess? it was so sweet, when before we’ve only ever gotten jamie speaking to claire in his thoughts, hearing him write letters to brianna. and i love that in his lowest moment, roger is reaching for jamie. i think it really drives home that the ridge was his home, brianna’s family is his now. and i think it’s interesting that, i’m thinking so much about jamie, and jem, he winds up finding his father. the stones always leading back to those you love the most, and those bonds working better than blood sacrifice ever did.

clearly i am enjoying the roger story line but i am saying once again roger gets to Do Things and brianna gets to stay home and feel sad about it. tired of brianna never getting a pov.

i love that we finally, fucking FINALLY had lord john ask something of the frasers. not to say that the constant story line of john just writing a blank check every time these people show up in his life, like genuinely, i find the situation he is in kinda fascinating, like a really interesting way of torturing himself, but it’s nice to finally get a change up in the dynamic. and the way claire says no and JAMIE is the one who pushes her to go? delicious to me.

can i say something. john claire jamie is so real to me and people who deny it (98% of the fans) are nothing but haters. anyways.

i LOVED the entire thing with henry & mercy and john. i think when these types of scenes are written, people often forget that like, both gay marriage and interracial marriage were ILLEGAL until like, Really fucking recently (and that’s JUST speaking of the us 🤧). i liked that claire took him to task for being bigoted and obstinate here, and that john got to shoot right back that it’s not like HE is exactly free to love either. i like that john is just like, allowed to be an asshole here, and not the perfect martyr he usually is, engaging with his flaws.

can i dwell on the “i’m not saying you have to share my bed” moment because i screamed?? imagine you have to assure your wife that you’re gay and don’t want to fuck her (you absolutely want to fuck her) and you would never compel her to your bed but you DO hope that she stays to act like your wife in truth, and then she shows up wearing your wedding ring to save your party and it makes you both super horny about her dead husband. those two are freaks.

i think claire and john should have stayed married for longer.

the way william like GROWLS “and YOU” at claire, that was so fucjing good, and the immediate cut in tension with jamie holding the gun to john and john like “the AUDACITY you JUST GOT HERE” while claire is laughing. amazing.

ian murray best dad ian murray best husband ian murray best friend ian murray sexiest man i don’t know a jammf i only know IAN FUCKING MURRAY, SCOTTISH POET. REST IN PEACE TO A KING!

i wish ian would just shave the mohawk.

i think ian rachel and william should pull a lizzie & beardsley boys and just live in sin together.

also arch bug innocent

[dbphantom]

Listen if you're gonna send me an ask about why I shouldn't interact with a person, can you at least do it off anon so I can request actual proof privately? I'm not replying to these since the only way to respond to them is publicly and I don't want to contribute to an unsubstantiated rumor about someone. That's not fair.

[twig-gy]

q and # my dearest mutuals. my friends. i love talking to both of you you're so cool. also. we make terrible decisions together :D

i’m pretty sure there’s only one mutual this could be. hi!!!!!!! same!!!!!!! also we do !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

# hi!

[the---hermit]

Hello! I hope you're doing well.

With the new year (Does 4th of january still count as new year?) I just wanted to tell you that I really look up to you and that you are a bit of a role model for me. You just seem to have your life put together so well. I know one should never take things posted on the internet at face value and that lifes that look perfect on the internet are oftentimes not perfect at all, but I don't think your life is perfect, just that it's good. I would like my life to be a bit more like yours. I hope that doesn't sound weird.

So as my new years resolution I've decided to have a bit more discipline. To stop dreaming about all the things I could do and actually do them. I read more books and actually started gathering ideas for a novel that's been bouncing around in my head for a while now. I even want to start posting reviews of books that I read on goodreads!

So I guess I wanted to tell you thank you for being such a great inspiration and motivation for me. <3

(Also, I'm not sure how this could be taken, but please don't take this as pressure or anything. I don't know if this could be taken as pressure, but if it can, please don't! Just keep being you. You're great!)

💜

Hello anon! I was not expecting to get something like this happy new year to you too!

this was really sweet <3 but i feel like i need to address the fact that my life is definitely not perfect and i have very little control over it. I think i am pretty skilled at keeping in organized and have a good control over the small things like planning what i have to study and small goals, but i am far from having things figured out. What i mean is that we are all on the same boat of trying to do something we are satisfied with in our lives and also trying to be happy while we do that.

I am very happy to hear you are this motivated to finally get to your goals and i wish you the best of luck! those sound like really cool projects and i hope you will keep me updated in the future on how things go! in the years there have been a few reaccurring anons that felt like sharing the progress of their adventures and it always makes me happy when it happens!

thank you for taking some time off your day to write this to me, it was really sweet and it brings me a lot of joy that my tiny corner of the internet can be a happy place for others.

[embersofhope-if]

If MC was the one who got chosen for Ash’s game do you think Ash would have volunteered as tribute to save them?

...no they wouldn't

Ash had their family that they needed to take care of. Whenever they got reaped one of the first things they felt was the fear that their family was going to lose their home or starve to death since Ash was the main income in the Fairchild family. Ash loves Mc but their family is also very important to them and they can't afford to risk their safety by volunteering for the games

[giantkillerjack]

Your stance on the Dunmeshi queerbait stuff is a bit selfish. Wanting this one manga to go exactly the way you want is a dangerous path - the way you phrase it is so entitled, making it clear it's not about consuming media about lesbians, but making one specific work suit exactly what you want. So many yuri mangas are written by sapphic women. It's a shame your stance is how it is.

And bastardizing the term queerbaiting does no good, either. Neither does the japanese manga market. You should research more before making such hurtful posts.

Hope you have a great day anyway.

[Anon is referring to this post, I believe.]

I mean, one of us certainly IS acting very entitled and weird about the media they like, and it ain't me. Like, I think you just have associated this piece of media with your own identity in an unhealthy way that makes you react to criticism of it with intense defensiveness. You don't own Dungeon Meshi. You aren't Marcille. Dungeon Meshi is NOT a yuri manga; it's a beautiful manga with either sapphic queerbait or a woefully underdeveloped queer relationship at its center.

Maybe if you had an argument besides "it does no good" to criticize it, but you don't. So.

Smh, it's a "dangerous path" - I'm screenshotting that bc I know it'll make my wife laugh. Like, friendo, wanting a piece of media to be better isn't dangerous. But calling someone selfish and hurtful for criticizing media while offering no clarifications as to who I've hurt or how (any fellow sapphics bleeding out in here? Or is it just me with my bonkers-heavy period??)... it's overstepping a social boundary in a bizarre way.

Like, I'm sorry that I'm better at media analysis than you (not actually sorry - I am being petty! :D), but I actually have studied queerbaiting!! I am willing to bet I have done more research than you! (Are you from twitter? You have that vibe. - Again, pettiness.)

... and I spend every day with my wife (the best writer I know; I'm so honored to share stories with her), talking of nothing but our shared special interest all day - i.e. media analysis. (I honestly don't know what neurotypical couples talk about lol)

And I've done enough research to know that one of the side effects of queerbaiting is that fans are often in denial about it and then get REAL MAD when someone points it out. I was there for the Sherlock/Supernatural fandom. Shit was crazy. (Not saying Super-who-lock bc my man Russell Davies was like MAKE THOSE BOYS SMOOCH! 😎)

Also like, my apologies to Ryoko Kui - I really do love Dungeon Meshi - but like, I'm just better at writing and illustrating queer rep than she is. I make real gay protagonists who do gay shit and are gay, and I will never queerbait my audience. Womp womp.

Also, honestly, even if I turn out to be wrong about the queerbaiting by the end of the series, this message was still rude and entitled and weird. We have a lot of issues facing our queer community that endanger real people; someone calling a story queerbaiting mistakenly is not one of them.