#catholocism is responsible

[urcatisacunt]

Never met a catholic that wasn't also a time traveling cyberwhore

[silmarillion-ways-to-die]

This is a subtweet. Submeme? This is a response to certain specific individuals on Tumblr who will know who they are.

[ID: The four-panel meme comic of one bird trying to speak, but being interrupted by a crow who drowns them out.

The bird says, "I like Lord of the rings.", then starts to say, "Frodo's my f--"

Then the crow interrupts, its larger speech bubble covering the other, saying loudly, "Did you know Tolkein was Catholic?"

The crow continues drowning out everything while the smaller bird stares at it from a distance, showing how loud it is, "He was a very religious Catholic conservative who was very, very Catholic in his Catholocism".

The last panel shows the smaller bird staring in silent anger into the camera as the crow continues, "The Lord of the Rings is a fundamentally Catholic work, and you can't understand it unless you're Catholic".

End ID.]

[christmasintheloonybin]

I'd consider converting to Islam but I think it would be kind of weird for me because it's not my sort of lineage or tradition. I think it would be equally weird I guess if I converted to Orthodoxy or even Catholocism, because Christianity at its root is not part of my lineage, but it has had such a root in Europe and just the kind of western consciousness which I am a part of, so it feels less weird. also I undoubtedly believe in the one God, and I have a theory about this as, beyond culture, a more advanced understanding of reality than polytheism. I mean to say for primitive people who live in one place you see the river running and don't understand why the river runs so you say "there is a God of the river." you see a fire burning and don't understand why so you say "there is a God of fire." you explain everything in the world through various Gods who are responsible for different things. Monotheism understands that the entire universe is one whole and all things are related to each other. everything in the world is interconnected, they understand past, present, and future and if you trace everything back the only logical conclusion is that there is one God who created everything. it's really the only thing that makes sense, even atheist science types cannot explain the big bang they cannot explain why anything exists at all. so I think it perfectly reasonable to say that there is one God and he created the universe.

I'm considering all of this because of a minor miracle last night, at least something surprising. I was reading some hadiths and I got to the one I posted where the Prophet says be dutiful to your mother three times before saying be dutiful to your father, and out of nowhere my Mom randomly texts me saying how thankful she is for me and how she appreciates how much I have done for her. Allah? it was really wild. I have had moments like this with Christianity but nothing so direct and obvious. I was shaken by it seriously.

[papirouge]

1. It's possible to be badly educated. Spending your primary years learning bad catschesis is not the same as doing rigorous study of history and theology to get answers people spend their lives looking for.

2. There are plenty of people who practice witchcraft and voodoo that call themselves Christians that say exactly what you said they don't.

3. The Catholic Church can't be heretical as it is the Churh of Christ as is the sole arbiter of interpreting the Bible, correctly. YOU are the one with a specific interpretation that goes against what the Church teaches.

I never accused you of saying Catholocism is white washed. I said you have an aversion to European Culture. Which is obvious in how you talk about Europe. The Church is full of people from all over the globe and you can find theologians of any race. I'm not really sure why you would be mad that Christians were able to take over the most powerful empire and then use that position to spread the message all over the globe , but if you're a Christian that would be a very weird thing to be mad about. Since you should want that message spread.

You can disagree all you want, but until you know what the Church actually says and teaches on something, not what you misinterpret from random Catholics on the internet, then you can't speak to Catholicism.

1. Ah yes, the typical "you weren't truly Catholic because you had to Catechism education". Sorry but you sound as delusional as those Christians saying "they left Christianism bc they weren't really Christians". Lack of knowledge isn't what made me leave Catholicism, it's actual knowledge of what it is, and that I confronted with what the Bible actually said. The very existence of Catechism contradicts the Bible by being a whole body of literature additional to the Bible (which is strictly forbidden - Deuteronomy 4:2)

I literally started to look critically into Catholicism waaaay before i started engaging with Catholics online (FYI it's during a volunteering travel in Kenya conversing with an humble preacher in a village so poor they used a classroom with no door or windows to gather the church that I got this awakening, not bc of the stupid takes of sheltered terminally online Catholics) so no, online Catholics take aren't responsible of snapping out ; they only confirmed I was right leaving this sect (lol)

You really should stop trying to downplay my existence as a Catholic to argue I have no room to speak on Catholicism. I actually do have eeeevery room to talk about the religion I was born into. Cope.

2. Most Christians practicing witchcraft are smart enough to do that behind corners and not elevate it as aKtcHualLy Christianism. Christians witches are a minority. Even in Africa there's an endemic of false teachers who are still practicing witchcraft and they hide it. Many preachers ask for "spiritual gifts" to witch doctor they pass as gift from the Lord to their clueless followers. They hide their witchcraft because they know they'd be called out by professing obvious heresies. Unlike Catholics, they aren't out there elevating those heresies as a para religion complementary to Christianism. And when they do, they are called what they are : sects.

3. What the heck are you even talking about? What interpretation? Bestie YOU Catholics are the one championing outlandish biblical interpretations, not me. If you want to accuse me of false interpretation, the burden of proof is onto you. When I do accuse Catholics of making stuff up, I do actually have things to back up me claim : Please tell me where in the Bible the papacy is established? The compulsiob of praying/worshipping/aSkInG fOr iNtErCeSsIoN/whatever/ to Mary? calling church leader "Father" when the Bible says to NOT TO??!! (Matthew 23:9) ? Write a whole another body of literature additional to the Bible ? Praying for the dead? (literally every week there's a creepy post floating around with some Catholic asking for prayers for a lost one...)

And also, I really need you yo give me evidence of me hating on European culture?🤔 Every criticism I addressed on European culture was how it was shoehorned onto Christianism/Catholicism and how you guys considered your culture as a standard for all Christians accross the world (I have the same criticism for the brain dead USAmericans protestants using their country stupid amendments to argue gun violence is actually biblical). You Europeans have the thinnest skin, that's quite incredible lol Yall truly wouldn't survive as a non Westerners who literally have to grow up being told their culture are inferior and savage (offensive stereotypes that are often perpetuated by *ding ding ding* Catholics lol you know, these #happycolumbusday demons raving about colonization and how everyone beside Catholic Europeans were uncivilized savages 🙃) - it only takes a nobody like me to say "Catholic is a White washed cult that's straying from (universalist) biblical teaching" and yall freak out and starting talking about "hating European culture" lmao 💀 BYYYYYE

Read my post again and stop putting in my mouth things I never said: my criticism was targeting the concept of CHURCH FATHERHOOD. What you're talking about is missionaries, which is a ministry I actually defended in several of my posts.

Church fatherhood is yet another Catholic unbiblical invention reeking for cultural supremacism (yeah bc unsurprisingly they are in their vast majority all European). Meanwhile missionary is an actual BIBLICAL ministry (Matthew 28:16-20), and as you said yourself perpetuated by people of many races accross the world - which btw actually confirms Jesus prophecies of people from ALL NATIONS (so not only Europeans) evangelizing the world. It was a way of Jesus to include everyone in the world and how he made no distinction based of geography, race, nation or language.

The Gospel is extremely universalist (the Pentecost, the Ethiopian eunuch, etc.) yet Catechism is hyperfocused on Europe and European culture (masses in latin, etc). That's demonic.

[rotzaprachim]

Hi!! So I'm here about the yt comments,I didn't read them but if people are commenting those things they are idiots. I like the idea that Nicky is behind the 100 years but even if Joe had come up with it, so what?? It doesn't mean he doesn't love Booker. The reason why the betrayal hurts is because they all love Booker!! Joe has the right to be hurt and angry! And if they think like that then they also have to blame Andy. The only person that was willing to forgive him right away was sweet Nile.

Yeah I personally didn’t read the yt comments either but there sure is a Lot of that kind of thing going around and to be honest having rewatched the film a couple times my position has.... kind of changed. In that with a few caveats i think getting some space for them is a very good idea, and that even if Joe came up with the 100 years, i agree with you, so what? And that it’s blatantly clear from the start of the movie how much Joe loves Booker, and smiles so broadly when he sees him again after a year! There’s definitely like, a lot to Discuss about how Joe’s extremely relatable, justifiable human emotions are boiled down by fandom in a very racist way, especially since Joe + the rest of the team don’t hurt Booker and in fact physically yank him out of staying behind (thanks Nile) and fight with and for him to get them all out, and really are mainly asking for some space. So yeah! 

And on the other hand, I think Nile was also very valid in her approach, because yeah, it’s also hard to see how one hundred years of solitude will demonstrably deal with Booker’s depression (not by the way that it is anyone else on the team’s job to shoulder his pain and fix this Broken White Man). She has less experience with being immortal- Time means something very different to her, and she’s also gone through the experience of losing her father and understands grief on a very intimate scale within her own family with how things “could have gone left” after her father died. Nile is not and should not be written as his therapist, but from her own experience with depression and grief (including also likely with squad mates in the military) she also probably reasons that isolation will not deal with the root causes of the problem in any way. 

(And on the Andy side of things- She doesn’t get nearly enough discussion in fandom (including from me!) for being a co-lead but it’s worth pointing out that Andy might just be the person hurt the most from all of this, given that she will most likely never see Booker, someone who even with their messy relationship she is clearly very close to, again. In her life! (Although her have a little faith line is. certainly Interesting.) You could definitely interpret this as the equal and opposite reaction to Nile- that even if Andy Knows on the practical level that she will die before the century is up, she’s still six thousand year old and what Time actually means for a mortal hasn’t sunk in to her yet. So yeah, actually my biggest issue with the 100 years thing is what it means for Andy. And Nile, who clearly had a bond with him, and for whom he could show her the ropes more.) 

So sorry for rambling but suffice to say again that it’s good writing because it’s messy and humans are messy! And familial relationships can be very very messy! Both Nile and Joe and their reasoning and their emotions are Valid and I will take slander against neither! Not to be a Tumblr Blog on Main, but it really does kind of remind me of  Imagine a story, not of good against evil, but of need against need against need, where everyone is at cross-purposes and everyone is to blame.” Except of course that really only Booker is to blame. 

(And as a final note: I think the old guard is about the only film i’ve seen in which the Sad Broken White Man actually has to face consequences for the way he hurts those around him, which! Was actually cathartic to watch, and as much as maybe Booker Discourse has gotten to be a bit Much in fandom, it’s certainly a good direction that we’re having these conversations AT ALL, because most films wouldn’t really bring up this kind of messy complexity of HOW we actually DO deal with the Sad Broken White Man that hurt us all. So, Booker. ATONE BITCH.) 

[dragynkeep]

honestly these two responses to our ml critical posts sum up exactly the apologism that allows astruc to get away with his islamaphobia in regards to the show & how french society can be incredibly disgusting towards religious people at times. so let’s break this down.

1. christmas is absolutely a christian holiday, despite the pagan traditions that were stolen by the catholic church to further their dominion over europe. it is a celebration of christ’s birthday, that is the long & short of the holiday & it’s had such a widespread reach that even other religions have had minor holidays take prominence around christmas time due to the christian centric mindset of these countries. jews & hanukkah is one; this was a minor holiday that rose in prominence due to it’s closeness to christmas & the incorrect views from misinformed goyim that it’s “8 days of christmas & presents.” also, the dominant religion in france is christianity, specifically catholocism. non christians celebrating christmas, however they choose to do & for whatever reasons, doesn’t erase the religious aspect of the holiday. my brother & i celebrate christmas with our christian family, however we are still wholly jewish, observant & agnostic. sounds like the only one here who needs to educate themselves is you, wmowl.

2. featuring religion in a show is not religious propaganda, you sound like a 4chan atheist neckbeard. there are religious people all over the world, including in a country as backwards & oppressive towards these people as france. the second most practiced religion in france is islam. there are religious children & there is nothing wrong showing the reality of children being raised in religion when this show has given a breadth of storylines including ones about ecoterrorism, abuse & brainwashing. your issue isn’t about protecting children otherwise they wouldn’t even be allowed to watch the show in the first place; it’s that you have an inherent discrimination against religion & religious people & revel in france’s own backwards mentality towards minorities in their society. it’s repulsive & you are no different to christian conservatives who wail & scream to ‘think of the children’ whenever queer material is present in media. it’s pathetic.

3. you should probably learn what propaganda is. hint; it’s not people just existing. again you’re borrowing an awful lot of mentalities from conservative christians towards other marginalized people & isn’t that just interesting.

[knoxia-seraphima]

FUCK GIOVANNI GASPARRO !!!

His art is terribly anti Semitic and so derivative of Caravaggio it’s almost like he’s doing academic master copies!

This aryan Saint Michael is “defeating” a devil who is depicted with dark hair, a very pronounced nose and hella Semitic features.

This isn’t new to European Christian art . Anti blackness and anti Semitism were themes when depicting the diabolic. The devil is usually depicted with dark skin,

Or otherwise the demonic have faces which are overtly based on anti Semitic stereotypes

I was raised Catholic and the Catholic Church is notorious for turning a blind eye to racism in the modern/contemporary era. But before that they actively produced a lot of these ideas from within their own culture. This isn’t news to a lot of people but when your raised around images like this

And you’re told that it’s “right and just” and you look more like the devil than you do the angel 😐...what am I supposed to do with that? 😑

I’m not excusing it however and I’m only pointing this out because GIOVANNI GASSPARO AN ANTISEMITE WHOSE ART HAS BEEN HONORED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ,a contemporary artist seems to go out of his way to depict evil characters with very very stereotypically jewish features. RECENTLY, he unveiled a very disturbing piece entitled : “The Martyrdom of St. Simon of Trento in Accordance With Jewish Ritual Murder” ⬇️

It’s disgusting but it shows that the faux progressive face the Catholic Church put on with that Papa Francis after the pedophile protecting nazi Benedict “special-retired” (which like never happens) is just that...fake.but I digress. NOW For those that don’t know the story of “Saint Simon of Trent” is a very complicated one but shows evidence of the Catholic Church’s very long tradition of so-called jewish “blood-libel”basically a sick and violent lie spread about jewish people which states that Jews require human blood and the desecration of Christian sacrament and sacramentals as part of their traditional or otherwise secret religious rituals. An episcopal bishop apparently publicly condemned the image but I have yet to see ANY type of response from the Catholic Church on the matter . Jewish blood libel isn’t something that the church normally teaches and more than likely the average catholic probably won’t buy into it....maybe...but the church’s silence says a lot . The fact that St Simon is still canonized and nothing has been said or done to even “revise” the narrative of an apparent “historical” event (something they’ve been known to do) is just 😑 MY POINT IS GIOVANNI GASSPARO IS AN ANTISEMITE. And he and his art should not be supported in any way. SIMPLY BE AWARE. Remember, he’s been honored by the church before and this is the type of very very clear and obvious message he promotes very very loudly in his art:

THIS , this very obvious and very hateful portrayal shows exactly how deep antisemitism is rooted in not only this individual artist but European Christendom as a whole. Anti-Semitism which is itself rooted in anti blackness all of which directly dehumanize non-Christian non-Europeans. This along with the hate for the indigenous (heathens and pagans) all contributed to actions like the “conquest” of the americas and manifest destiny and the like. These violent actions and ideologies all are leaned on a sense of Christian moral warfare which goes back to blaming the Jews for the death of Christ among other things. THIS PAINTING IS ESSENTIALLY A DOGWHISTLE. The catholic church’s silence on the matter while things like this just happen says a lot. Remember Mel Gibson and the Passion of the Christ? Remember how it clearly portrayed the Jews in a negative light? The thing is, it’s basically the canonical gospel story told exaclty fleshed out with bits of the visions of Anne Catherine Emmerich . And WOULD YA GUESS WHAT THE HECK WAS SAID ABOUT HER :

(From Wikipedia)“Emmerich said she believed that Noah's son Ham was the progenitor of "the black, idolatrous, stupid nations" of the world. The "Dolorous Passion" is claimed to reveal a "clear antisemitic strain throughout", with Brentano writing that Emmerich believed that "Jews ... strangled Christian children and used their blood for all sorts of suspicious and diabolical practices"

The Church hasn’t canonized her as a Saint but her official status is Blessed. Which is in and of itself a high titled one and implies Gods own approval. The church is basically saying it’s okay to pray to her. The canonical gospels themselves were edited and rewritten (a bishop had authority to simply change something in a text in the early days depending on the text to reflect their own ideals, they would say the Holy Spirit inspired them so how can you argue with that amirite?) in a way which puts the romans (the ppl with the power to actual execute ppl and who themselves decided who was crucified an who wasn’t) in a sympathetic light, Pontius pilate is pushed into killing Jesus. He argues with the angry blood thirsty Jews who want Jesus dead until he gives in. The Jews in the gospel have waaay too much power all of a sudden and can seemingly get someone who the romans apparently didn’t care about executed. The romans were an occupying imperialist force, imposing their rule on the people who are apparently chosen by god. They were notorious for crushing political dissent and would probably have crucified a jewish revolutionary anarchist rabbi with a big following telling people not to respect the Roman rule. That historically just makes more sense but I’m not here to argue the historicity of a story which is very much written in the style of grecojewish historical fiction (the oldest canonical gospel is heavily edited, anonymously penned, written about 70-100 years after the apparent historical event happened with no real jewish, Roman or otherwise ancient historian mentioning ANY of the events described in the story)

IN THE END, this sort of pro Roman, pro oppression, pro authoritarian, pro imperialism, pro white, and anti Semitic culture is a long standing part of European Christian art and iconography. I’m not forgiving GIOVANNI GASSPARO :ANTISEMITE and blaming the Catholic Church instead I’m pointing the blame at them both. As the both are product of a culture which will not die and which fuels the fires of hatred and acts of violence perpetrated against jewish/Semitic people the world over. (Btw islamaohobia is part of the culture too....just look into the etymology and origins of the name “Baphomet “)

Sorry for the high jack but not sorry for the rant.

IF YOU SEE GIOVANNI GASSPAROS ART IGNORE IT

Saint Michel Archange bat le diable (Saint Michael the Archangel defeats the devil) Giovanni Gasparro, 2018

[ms-demeanor]

It’s always interesting to me when “argumate is antisemitic” callouts circulate because they’ll include 5-year-old “whatever the good fuck this is” (that’s how the callout described it, not me) links that, from the outside, appear to be a nonreligious person discussing a variety of different religions in a way that is generally callous, but in order to find that on argumate’s blog you have to scroll past years and years of posts like this:

(also I skipped over the anti-antisemitism posts for 2019 and 2020 because I didn’t want to include posts that might make someone say ‘well that’s just to respond to accusations of antisemitism’ - these are all from before the first callout started circulating)

So people who are claiming that argumate is antisemitic are saying “calling the theological history of my religion and of catholicism irresistible nerdbait is specifically antisemitic” which seems like kind of a reach while they scroll past and ignore the dozens of easily findable posts where argumate makes very clear and obvious statements on how reprehensible antisemitism is.

The callout says things like “argumate is saying that jews proselytize” about this post:

where argumate is specifically talking about a goyish person who was (in addition to describing themselves in terms of loaded jewish stereotypes), at the time, talking a lot about why people should convert to Judaism.

The callout is saying “argumate agrees that Judaism isn’t an ethnoreligion and says that Jews can’t self-determine on this matter” about a post where an anon and two other people are talking about Judaism as an ethnoreligion and argumate simply says “many religions want to be ethnoreligions and institute religious practices to try to achieve this” which A) isn’t denying that Judaism is an ethnoreligion and B) if anything the response *disagrees* with the post claiming that goys don’t have to respect Jewish identity.

Also here are all the linked examples of “calling xtianity judaism but with jesus”

1 - someone else makes a comment on Christianity as a Jewish sect AND as a Jewish heresy and Argumate comments with a pun on the word “Pharisee” while making no comment about any relationship between christianity and judaism

2 - describing Jesus’ beliefs (not christianity as it exists now) as a “sect of Apocalyptic Judaism,” which, so far as I can tell, is theologically accurate

3 - a very clumsy hipster joke where an anon calls Judaism hipster christianity and argumate makes a pretty bad joke about the taboo on saying the name of god. (of all the examples linked to in the callout this is probably the example that is easiest to interpret as antisemitism and it is clearly a joke, not a claim on argumate’s part that christians are basically jews)

 4 - a joke about Bee Movie that includes the claim that Christianity launched from Judaism (which seems kind of impossible to deny as the former wouldn’t exist without the latter) and that the two religions were then separate for two thousand years until Bee Movie brought them together.

I don’t know that any of these can be fairly described as “calling xtianity Judaism but with Jesus“ but it seems ESPECIALLY ridiculous to take an absurdist joke about a terrible movie uniting two separate religions as “claiming that christianity and Judaism are the same thing.”

Also the callout says that nearly all euphoric redditors are white supremacists:

Over this post:

And buds, I’m tired.

Every time the callout starts circulating again I get anons in my inbox criticizing me for following and being friendly with “known antisemite” Argumate.

Calling Argumate antisemetic over these posts seems like a hell of a reach and looking through 100 posts where argumate talks about the harms of antisemitism then looking at someone saying ‘you should stop talking to your friend because once they said that the theological history of judaism and catholocism is irresistible nerdbait to a certain kind of rationalist thinker and is therefore antisemitic’ just kind of makes you look silly.

If you think my lack of concern over this is antisemitic I invite you to curate your tumblr experience and unfollow me instead of sending me more asks about it.

[super-s-rtman]

FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF CHRISTIANITY!

FINAL NAIL IN THE COFFIN OF CHRISTIANITY!

I spent about 6 years researching to prove the Bible to be the Greatest Lie Ever SOLD! The following verse in the New testament, right under my nose, and just connected within the last week. John 14: 13-14  and whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.  If you shall ask anything in my name, I will do it. Picture me cupping my hand together to…

[daredevil-podfic-community]

[Image ID: a screenshot of tumblr tags from tumblr blog catholocism-and-comics in response to the Daredevil Podfic Community announcement post. Tags read “#i am interested #just hate my squeaky voice”]

Thanks to @feenyxblue​ for giving me the go-ahead to screenshot this, because I hear this hesitancy about podficcing all the time! “I would, but I hate my voice,” “but I have an accent,” “but I’m not charismatic,” “but I have a lisp,” “but I’ve taken a vow of silence” – okay, maybe not that last one. Let’s tackle some of the common hangups:

Many people hate hearing recordings of themselves or find their voice sounds squeaky, and there’s a simple explanation for this! When we speak normally, we aren’t just hearing the sound waves that come out of our mouths and enter the air. We are also hearing the vibrations of our own voices traveling along our jaw bones to our ears. This means that we normally perceive our voices as deeper or different than they actually sound. Hearing a recording of yourself, then, can be a jarring contradiction of how you perceive your voice!

If you’re concerned because you have an accent, I have great news for you: everyone has an accent. And, sure, your accent might differ from the characters in the source material, but so what? There are plenty of Americans who read podfic for British series and vise-versa, so why is it you think your accent isn’t good enough to cross that line? The only concern you should have is that your accent is understandable to people who speak the language you’re reading in. That goes for speech impediments, too. The pressure to speak “perfectly” is largely overblown. Studies find that there are a few sounds which cause misunderstandings more frequently (F/P mixups, for instance) but that others (like how you pronounce ‘R’ or ‘TH’) make almost no difference in comprehension. And, in any case, people can generally adapt to understand an accent or speech difference, given enough exposure to it.

If you still need a confidence boost, keep in mind what your competition is when making a podfic. Because, 99% of the time, you’re not competing with another podficcer. The amount of podfics created has been in a massive decline in recent years, so your real competition is a screen reader. And screen readers? Kind of suck! They’re not emotive, they screw up non-dictionary words, and they read out formatting in awkward ways. You’re way better than that!!

And if anyone still feels they need to improve their reading style or needs help with accents, please come visit us in our DDPC podfic section on Marvel Dumpster (that’s a link to a server invite) or just send us a message. I (luulapants) coached speech and voice acting in my younger years, taught ESL with an emphasis on pronunciation correction, and have a degree in linguistics. I’m more than happy to give your voice a listen and offer reassurances or suggestions for pronunciation exercises, if you want.

[the-eldritch-it-gay]

If you don’t mind, and whenever you’re able to, I’d love to hear your thoughts on the whole of inquisition especially the whole forcing your character to take on the role of being the herald of andraste. Provided this isn’t a weird or too much ask!

It’s not too much, I appreciate any excuse to be able to yell about the problems I have with the games.

I hate it! I mean, I already wasn’t expecting much when I was going into the game but god the vibes of playing DAI (especially as an elf, though any non-human inq has it rought). My first playthrough was an a Lavellan (my Inq Badr al-Din Lavellan) and I opted for elf because: I think elves are neat, I can relate to many of the experiences an elf in DA endures (racism, complete ignorance about culture/faith and constant disrespect of culture/faith, I related my hijab to Vallaslin [post about that, angry meta post ref’d in that post]), and while none of the games have been kind to elves, Dragon Age: Inquisition really took the cake on being the worst. Just, personally, the colonialism vibes are just off the chart for me and it’s super uncomfortable. And even aside from that, the pc being forced (I suppose you could go along with it, but I’ve never done that) to be a Herald of Andraste is just…. Yikes.

The TL;DR is: I hate it, it’s incredibly upsetting to me, as is the whole game, honestly.

But if you want a more in depth look at my thoughts, you’re in luck because I wrote quite a bit about this (this whole thing is 1.3k words or so). Also as a preface, I’m going to be looking at Inquisition from the point of an Elven Inquisitor, as it was my first playthrough and the most upsetting. Also apologies for any language issues or if things seem disjointed, I’m trying my best. [Also yes, this post is okay to reblog]

While every game needs a Hero pc, regardless of Origin (at least in Inquisition in Origins, DA2 you have absolutely no choice in your Hawke’s history or race but that won’t stop me from using mods to have an Elven Hawke), so I knew my character was going to be some sort of leader, but making the PC an Inquisitor? I’ve always had a negative association with words relating to inquisition, what, with you know, Catholicism and myself being a Muslim. But not only are you a leader of an Inquisition, which historically in the real world was a Catholic institution to combat “heresy” (the Spanish and Portuguese Inquisitions primarily targeting Jewish and Muslim people by forcing them to convert to Catholocism under threat of death!), but the PC is also labeled as a Herald of Andraste, regardless of their own faith. Even though the PC wasn’t actually saved by Andraste and given the anchor from her, they still have to spend the game where people across Thedas see them as such.

The game really gives of Bad Vibes from the moment the talk of an Inquisition starts, whether it be Cassandra’s disapproval if you try to say you’re not the Herald of Andraste. Right from the get go you get ignored and no matter what you say, you will still be the Herald. There’s also the matter (which blends into the being labeled Inquisitor) that if you ask Cassandra is she’s starting a holy war, her answer is less than reassuring. I believe her response is something along the lines of “There’s already a war, whether or not you want to be a part of it. As to if it’s holy, time will tell”. And like any fucked up interaction in the game, there’s no option to say “Hey, what the fuck??”.

While I often struggle with empathy, I have no issue feeling how horrifying and heartbreaking it would be if I were in Lavellan’s shoes. You leave your clan for an important mission, things go to shit, you wake up in prison and everyone wants you dead. But wait! Not everyone, some people have decided you are the Herald of the Prophetess of the religious organization responsible for the continued oppression, slaughter, and erasure of your people and their culture. You end up not being killed because of this, and then are given no other option to join an inquisition, of which you are eventually labeled inquisitor, whether you like it or not. I literally don’t like to think about it, it’s such a legitimately upsetting thing to think about. I suppose metaphorically, if I, a non-white Muslim, was labeled as some figure in Christianity and the Catholic Church picked (forced) me to lead an Inquisition, it wouldn’t be too far off from essentially what a Lavellan goes through, no?

I think what is especially upsetting, is as we see in the Jaws of Hakkon, the previous Inquisitor was also a Dalish elf, though his race and culture were completely erased from the Chantry’s history (the Jaws of Hakkon is a whole other think I hate for many reasons, namely stuff with assimilation, also having the Inquisitor of old be a Dalish elf is certainly… a choice. I’ll admit I know little of the timeline in DA and the history of things, but just by the pure nature of what an inquisition is I can’t imagine it was a good thing in any way. An inquisition lead by a minority is still an inquisition. I dunno my feelings are complicated). So Lavellan can probably feel that their race and culture will be erased, their name might live on but it might be used to justify violence. I always when playing get this sickening feeling that I (my character) has been forced to joined the side of their oppressor, and it brings my heart and soul much pain.

I said at the beginning, none of the games have been great with elves (or let’s be real, any non-human race or culture). When I first played Dragon Age: Origins, I remember I humouresly said in the live-reaction messages to my friend “I already experience racism, I don’t need a video game to supplement that” and “Do white people know they can write a story with conflict that doesn’t involve racism?”. I played through it and grimaced my way through microaggressions my character had to endure, the sexism, the slavery. I white knuckled it through the sexual assault and r*pe in the city elf origin and Cullen’s upsetting feelings towards f!Surana. In DA2 I winced at how much slavery was involved (my father told me one, “You shouldn’t gamify racial atrocities” and honestly he not wrong), at the way mages were abused and still framed as just as bad as their abusers, and people that were pro-mage framed as crazy. I struggled through the Chantry Explosion and MotA. But at the end of the day, I could still think the games were fun, at least Origins (DA2 gets dicey and the game mechanics aren’t as fun, but I like the characters and some of the game).

Dragon Age: Inquisition, however, takes the “uncomfortable to play” knob and turns it up to 100. Sure the graphics are shiny and it can be fun to trapeze around the Hinterlands and the Storm Coast gathering elfroot and riding a Hart or a War Nug, and WEWH is kinda fun when you know how it works (otherwise it's a nightmare). But the name says it all, Inquisition. I didn’t have high hopes for a game named after such a horrendous event in history (though also I know a lot of people don’t know too much about Inquisitions in history).

I really could analyze a lot of Dragon Age: Inquisition and the choices the Inquisitor makes, but when looking at tought or dubious choices in the game, I can’t ignore the fact that the entirety of the game and it’s choices were written by (white) people who choice to make this story. (This also comes up when I was talking about how uncomfortable some companion dialogue made me, people pointed out the character making the dialogue didn’t know better, but the writer of that dialogue did, ya sabes? but back to the issue at hand.) They chose to have all the racism, they chose to have it be an Inquisition, they chose to have Elven gods to be revealed as just sadistic magister slavers, to have elves slaughter and holy ground desecrated (some thoughts about that trope here). Every microaggression or macro aggression was written because someone wanted to include it, every reference and parallel to Inquisitions was because they wanted to include it. The lack of basic respect and sensitivity for the cultures and peoples that have faced atrocities as racism, colonialism, genocide, slavery, and Inquisitions and the ripples that affect people in even the smallest of ways is truly upsetting and speaks volumes.

[partywithponies]

i was the catholic school anon who commented on ur fic and lemme just say to @/beesandwasps uhh get Fucked. that fic was genuinely the most accurate fictional portrayal of catholocism i’ve ever read. i work with theological fiction a lot (like, at a professional level), i’ve had 13 years of intense catholic education, and nothing has come close to ur level of accuracy without serious plot sacrifices. gk chesterton’s “ten thousand word response” would either be a rave review of ur fic or gk chesterton can also get Fucked. have a lovely day!

ANON I LOVE YOU 💖💖💖💖💖

[womenandfilm5]

The Virgin Suicides (1999) is Sophia Coppola’s adaptation of the novel by Jeffery Eugenides, also being her first feature film. The inspiration for the film came from her discovery of the novel in her mid-20’s. Despite being told from a male perspective, the story still seems to be an extremely feminine yet morbid coming of age tale. Coppola never imagined becoming a filmmaker, with a focus upon fashion in her late teens into her 20’s. In an interview, she says how she wanted to make a teenage film unlike the others. “There aren’t alot of quality art films made for teenagers,” she said, which she effortlessly did, portraying themes of teen angst, sex, boys, a desire to break away from societal norms, and family. The film also was low budget, as the budget dissolved a week before filming. Coppola gives credit to the novel for inspiring her film career. Her herself was in her early 20’s, which is a period of time in which you are still trying to figure yourself out as you do in your teenage years. Reflecting upon the film 20 years later, she had came to the realization that despite the male focus upon the Lisbon girls, the film felt so personal and feminine as a reflection of her life growing up. She was always surrounded by men with all brothers and all male cousins, so she found solace in grasping to femininity. This being said, it reflects the personal touch the film has, almost bringing the viewer back to reminisce in their own days of teenage angst.  .

.

The film encompassed everything a teenage girl experiences, but brings a situation that isn’t exemplified in the typical coming of age film. The Lisbon girls, 13 year old Cecilia, 14 year old Lux, 15 year old Bonnie, 16 year old Mary, and 17 year old Therese, lived in a home of a scholar father, and a mother who was the obvious source of dominance and constriction in the house. The girls lived an extremely strict lifestyle, never being able to have interactions outside of their home and school life, never to dress in any manner that wasn’t conservative, and especially no romantic relations. The setting of 1970’s Michigan in an extremely tight knit neighborhood made their situation stand out from the other children in the neighborhood. Everyone knew one another, even if they had never interacted; and everyone knew the mysterious Lisbon girls. The film also visits religion quite frequently. The mother, Mrs. Lisbon, is a very high strung catholic. In many scenes, starting from the very beginning there is imagery of the Virgin Mary and sigils placed seemingly everywhere. A notable symbolic image is a card of the Virgin Mary, which we see in the opening scenes as Cecelia lays unconscious in the bathtub after her first suicide attempt. The card lies on the floor, splattered in blood. The themes associated with religion seem to be displeasure and breaking away. The theme of femininity also ties into the religious aspects. Despite the girl’s disapproval yet lack of voice upon their mother’s strictness and beliefs, every religious image is very feminized. Every time we see a rosary, or crosses, they are always surrounded by jewelry, flowers, perfume, intricate glass wear, makeup or small trinkets. The ratio to these objects is usually many feminine items with just one or two religious symbols, which displays an overpowerment that they could never express themselves. There is a profound sense of freedom the girls display, yet having no freedom at all. They are restricted by the boundaries of the religious values their mother follows, yet still embrace their girlhood and find ways to enjoy their femininity despite this. 

.

. The most profound technique I found in the film was the use of the soundtrack in accordance to each scene. For example, in this particular scene, the girls had begun to communicate with the boys through morse code; due to Lux not coming home on the night of prom, the girls were under house arrest. Lux was forced to burn all of her records, so the boys spend hours upon hours playing music through the phone for the girls. In this scene which shows a progression of the boys projecting the music overtime, and the girls listening, the song “Alone Again Naturally,” by Gilbert O’ Sullivan. Although the boys never personally knew the Lisbon girls, and had had only one interaction with them at most, there was a sense of loneliness coming from the boys as they dedicated so much time to please the girls. The girls had been granted the slightest amount of freedom to attend the dance, and because of Lux never returning home that night, they had once again returned to seclusion, but even stronger than before. In another scene, during Cecilia’s party, as she excuses herself, the song “The Air that I Breathe,” by the Hollies plays. In some sense, it acts as very ironic foreshadowing. For the entire duration of her party, Cecilia sat alone in the corner, while all of the other boys socialized with the older girls. Joe, the boy with special needs, was the only one kind enough to say hello to Cecilia and give her attention. The music abruptly stops when a sound is heard, and the father is found standing outside with Cecilia’s lifeless body impaled through a spoke in the fence.  .

.

This scene in particular occurs directly after Trip leaves the Lisbon household after spending time with Lux as the mother sat in between them. Trip goes to his car, flustered and sits back in the seat with his head back and eyes closed, visibly flustered. From his body language, you can assume that this response was due to the lust from Lux’s embraced sexuality that she displayed very quietly so no one would catch on besides Trip. Through his car window we see the upstairs middle light turn on, which we can assume to be the parent’s bedroom. The car door opens, and Lux jumps in and immediately begins to make out with Trip. At the same time, the song “Crazy on You,” by Heart plays. The dynamic in this scene has clear sexual tension, and also highlights the theme of disobedience and teenage angst. Trip knew what he was getting himself into by trying for a girl in such a reserved family, but also with the knowledge that Lux had a personality unlike her sisters. In the reading “Pleasure in Looking/ Fascination with the Human Form,” the term scopophilia is brought up, which is the pleasure of looking. In Freudian theory, humans enjoy viewing things that bring them pleasure, and the idea of voyueristic viewing enhances this pleasure further. Cinema essentially fulfills every aspect of scopophilia; we as the viewers are watching Lux and Trip has this passionate moment, and as a viewer of two subjects within a scene, there is no possible way for them to have any knowledge of this. Having insight into an intimate moment reflects upon the viewer, and you can almost relate the the sexual tension from a personal reflection of your own experiences, and from your own teenage years.

.

.

The film definitely acts as the most absurd coming of age movie you can get. In comparison to a film such as say, Sixteen Candles, there is no existential crisis that is met with a resolution that acts a life lesson. The boys are under the impression they will final have the moment they craved since the beginning of the film; to take the girls and run off and have what they imagined to be the time of their life. Instead, the girls had other plans the entire time. As the boys wait, each girl meets her demise. Bonnie was hanging, Therese overdoses on pills, and Lux is found with her fingers still clutching a cigarette, dead in the garage from carbon monoxide poisoning. If anything, the film is an anti coming of age film, yet the strong vibes of femininity and softness make the viewer feel as if it’s the complete opposite. Surely families exist as the Lisbon’s, yet the strong theme of escapism through death is hard to tell as the movie progresses. 

.

.

The tile of the film itself relates back to the major theme of religion. This theme doesn’t feel so prevalent aside from the imagery, but breaking it down becomes more understandable. In Catholocism, a virgin is a figure of purity, free of sin. The Virgin Mary was a saint because she was so pure, and conceived a child while never having sex, upholding her virginity. Despite Lux losing her virginity to Trip, the girls were viewed by everyone around them as completely pure girls who were perfect from their blonde hair down to their mysterious nature. All of the sisters met their demise through suicide, Cecilia being the first and the rest through a suicide pact. The title has two contradicting topics in nature; virginity and suicide. Maybe this acts as a not so gentle reminder that absolute purity does not always equate to perfection, as the matriarch mother believed. In fact, she believed that she raised her children perfectly and never did anything wrong. The film makes you question where true happiness actually comes from. In the mind of the family, upholding perfect standards of purity and Catholic values, and sheltering the girls from anything that could harm them, was the best way. The girls always wanted freedom, even if Lux was the forefront of breaking away from her family’s expectations. In the end, there is no perfect definition of what true happiness is. Everyone will always want what they truly desire, not what others confine them to. – JA

.

https://theplaylist.net/sofia-coppola-criterion-virgin-suicides-20180502/2/

. Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema” [1975]. Feminist Film Theory: A Reader. Ed. Sue Thornham. New York: New York University Press, 1999. 58-69.

. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2018/jan/25/sofia-coppola-on-the-virgin-suicides-director-debut

. https://thedissolve.com/features/movie-of-the-week/1076-the-virgin-suicides-is-a-window-into-sofia-coppola/

[alongthewithywindle]

In 1610, Thomas Milles, champion of exhausting exhaustive titles, wrote The Catalog of Honor; or, Tresvry of Trve Nobility, Pecvliar and Proper to the Isle of Great Britaine, or, Tresury of true nobility : peculiar and proper to the isle of Great Britaine : that is to say, a collection historicall of all the free monarches aswell kinges of England as Scotland (nowe vnited togither) with the princes of Walles, dukes, marquisses and erles, their wiues, children, alliances, families, descentes & achievementes of honor : wherunto is properly prefixed, a speciall treatise of that kind of nobility which soverayne grace and fauor, and contryes customes, haue made meerly politicall and peculiarly ciuill (neuer so distinctly handled before) / translated out of Latyne into English. It was published by William Jaggard, a printer and bookseller in London between 1594 and 1623. He published many religious commentaries, books on British heraldry, essays, and histories. Jaggard printed eight other of Milles’ works.

Milles, a customs official, bailiff, and intelligence agent, was born in 1550(?) in Ashford, Kent, England. An avid advocate of mercantilism and free trade, Milles authored at least twelve printed titles between 1599 and 1617. Many were concerned with influencing economic policy, critiquing Catholocism, and documenting royal lineages.

Milles seems to have been concerned with accurately documenting the histories and lineage of Great Britain’s “True Nobility” in The Catalog of Honor, perhaps in response to a century with multiple royal lineage disputes, rife with political and religious upheaval. The 16th century saw the rise and fall of Mary I, Elizabeth I selling much of her holdings to finance foreign and domestic wars, the failure of the Tudor government system, and the 1690s depression.  In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I died without an heir and was succeeded by James IV of Scotland, her closest living relative (and son of Mary, Queen of Scots).

The Catalog of Honor documents the titles and lineage of nobility, complete with engravings of their sigils. The first portion is a translation of Robert Glover’s Nobilitas politica vel civilis, with a title page engraving by Renold Elstracke.  The widespread concern with accurate lineage is evidenced in the multiple copies where Charles Bount’s illegitimate son Mountjoy Blount. He was later recognized and bestowed with the title of Baron and Earl a year later. In UWM’s copy, a paragraph referencing Mountjoy was cut out and later restored in manuscript.

A later book by Ralph Brooke, A catalogue and succession of the kings, princes, dukes, marquesses, earles, and viscounts of this realme of England…discouering, and reforming many errors committed, by men of other profession, and lately published in print; to the great wronging of the nobility, and preiudice of his Maiesties officers of armes, who are onely appointed and sworne to deale faithfully in these causes., was written in part to correct errors made by Milles in The Catalog of Honor.

[rotzaprachim]

.

[strawberry-milktea]

I looked into Christian whitchcraft recently and I can guarantee it is not Christian at all. It is a combination of occult powers with the idea that using it "for good" makes it good. These people worship Mary as a goddess and Jesus as a god, supposedly calling on them and the angles and saints to grant them power to cast spells and potions, as well as make magic circles. Overall it seems steeped in catholocism. Anything occult, whether used "for good" is working with the devil and not of god...

..As God’s gift of power to us is the gifts of the spirit through Jesus and the Holy Spirit himself, any combining or conforming with occult culture is sin, and not of God  —I agree.. it’s an attempt to merge the occult with Christianity, when both are complete opposites to each other. Embracing the occult/witchcraft and simultaneously claiming to follow Christ is a contradiction, and I firmly believe this practice is the result of delusion put forth by the enemy. People who practice these behaviors outright ignore what scripture says about witchcraft being a sin, and I’m guessing many individuals identifying as Christian witches don’t acknowledge the Bible as the Word of God/read it yet claim to worship Christ when they don’t actually know anything about Him or what He taught.. A person identifying as Christian who doesn’t follow the Bible is something that makes no sense because if the Bible isn’t your foundation, then what is your claim to identifying as a Christian based on? What the world says about Jesus? What you guess Jesus might have said or did? It’s very sad and upsetting to witness, and yet another example of just how deceptive satan is.Based on the different responses I’ve been reading since I have been getting asks about this topic, I’m sure there are many variations in the practices of those who identify as Christian witches (and all are equally sinful), but I am not surprised to hear that worship of Mary, saints, and angels has been mixed into it in certain instances.