This might be a bit of a controversial topic so I understand if you don’t want to answer but who do you think was in the right between ghira and sienna? Specifically in the Adam trailer.
In the interest of fairness, I will be considering both perspectives here and the overall situation.
There are, roughly speaking, 9 racists shooting at The White Fang convoy passing through. With Sienna's blessing, Adam breaks cover and deals with six of them before the seventh guy frantically charges while firing and then Adam slashes him with Moonslice and kills him.
Putting the rest under a readmore, I go on for a while.
In Ghira's perspective, he only scolds Adam over the killing part. He got hit in the hand and his aura flared but didn't flicker or die. The rest of the Fang with them are likewise armed and could've shot back at any time/could've probably disarmed the racist when he got closer as he's running and firing blind. This does include Sienna likewise, and Illia who's there with them.
As he's lecturing and scolding Adam over how this is the very reason people THINK they can treat Faunus unfairly, Sienna interrupts. From HER perspective, Adam saved Ghira's life and is a hero for killing a racist. Nobody else, from Sienna's perspective, jumped to shoot back or otherwise to return fire when their enemy began firing on them.
In my humble opinion, they're both correct. In the short term, Sienna has the right of way: everyone else is armed, Adam was quick to action, and the racist was shooting at them and running toward them. To declare Adam a hero for saving Ghira's life is also a nice little ego boost for Adam himself, but that's another point.
In the long term, however, Ghira's correct. The violent actions of Adam's, including the assassinations and trying to blow up the train in the black trailer, and the fall of beacon and the MANY human lives he's taken and otherwise brushed off as accidents (including the DC comic where he even gloats to Blake about how he was crying when they first met over not getting to kill MORE humans, not over the Faunus dead) does end up damaging Faunus' perception with the overall public and the White Fang as a whole.
But what about Adam himself?
Rewatching the trailer, Adam deals with a total of SIX people (if my count is correct) without any form of lethal force. He comes close, but always knocks them out or otherwise sends them packing. He even snarls at the two calling them all "freaks" and seemed like he was going to go after them next, if Ghira hadn't interrupted.
If he's really THAT fast, there's no way he couldn't have just tackled the running guy down and disarmed him. The guy was running and firing blind, the rest of the White Fang is behind the truck, Ghira's aura didn't break cause of one gun shot, etc.
The trailer further demonstrates that "accidents" like that aren't uncommon with Adam in the field, and he gaslights and emotionally manipulates Blake when she calls him out on it. Sienna even has to call him off from executing an SDC security officer.
Of course, in the heat of the moment, there's usually no time to think about what's going on and what the best thing to do is. All that's left at the end of the day is the consequences of what is done. It doesn't seem like Adam himself lost any sleep over the racist being dead, and I wouldn't either.
But what's crucial to me is that nobody other than Ghira, Blake, Sienna (in V5), or Illia, questioned his actions...until he utterly fails in V5 with the Haven raid.
In that moment, he could've learned something about the proper application of force and why spilling blood isn't the way to do things unless it's absolutely necessary. Ghira never objected to kicking the racist's asses, just the killing part.
And we all see what feeding Adam's ego does to him. So, basically, I find Ghira's point to be valid had he had been allowed to deliver the whole lecture about how it'll be used to spread more fear and hatred. Because that's exactly what Blake's view, and the view of the White Fang and Faunus, end up being in places like Mistral and Atlas (and judging by idiots like Cardin and the casual racism spewed by Torchwick, Vale isn't immune).
Though, again, I agree with Sienna's call to send Adam in to deal with the situation since he was seemingly the fastest among their number.
Short term, Sienna. long term, Ghira. I swing toward Ghira given that Adam would repeatedly get into arguments with Blake about his number of "accidents". He needed a good scolding or a lecture at that point. If praise was to be given, it should've been for helping them out of that jam and worded as such. Not calling him a "hero" and inflating his ego.
Because if he's a hero for killing one auraless guy...then what else can he be called a "hero" for? What next, in other words? What else can he get away with, heedless of the consequences?
This isn't to say I'm not against lethal self-defense and niether is the show: Blake and Yang killed Adam after he refused to back off despite warnings, Ruby tries going for kill shots on Tyrian and slices his tail off, Jaune attempted to stab Cinder in the face, etc.
Unless you have the ability to otherwise disarm and make absolutely certain the lethal force coming at you is neutralized nonlethally, yes I do think lethal force can be used when met with lethal force.
Like I said earlier, however, the problem is optics. Who's using the lethal force against whom? Will this be seen as necessary or twisted? Is it survival or just revenge?
The court of public opinion unfortunately is real, and people defending themselves get thrown in jail a lot. People have also used Stand Your Ground and other laws to chase people down and kill them and then TRY to claim self-defense. Whether it works or not is up to the court and/or jury.
But it can be especially damning when one is part of a group demanding equality, as bigots will pounce on that and try to discredit a group of people (even going so far as to make things up). It's worse when they have power and the people fighting them don't, because the media can easily twist things to make them seem the villain (Queer rights, the Civil Rights movement, Occupy Wall Street, etc.)
In this case, however, we're dealing with people with superhuman speed up against relatively normal people. It's like Superman being threatened by a punk with a gun and killing them instead of the numerous ways he can disarm him...which, ironically, led to Justice Lord Superman in the old JLA animated series but that's a whole other story. Plus, the White Fang has more been compared to the IRA then the Black Panthers and that comparison makes more sense given the very real violence the IRA committed.
That's just me. I don't lose sleep over a racist being dead myself, just the optics and long-term damage caused by Adam afterward especially when he gained a position of power himself. It obviously wouldn't start there, but it's a neat way to show how things shifted toward where they are now.
TL:DR: I agree with both of them, though lean more towards Ghira given the events of the series and Adam's worsening violent antics. Nothing wrong with the lethal approach when confronted with lethal force, but there has to be a consideration of how much force is applied before one goes too far.
Even Ghira, IIRC, did say he learned a few things and fought against the White Fang when they were trying to assassinate him and his family and later at Haven. Sienna herself even spoke out against Adam's actions at Beacon too as being beyond the pale since he attacked a school. They’re both correct and should’ve worked together more in my honest opinion.
13 notes
·
View notes
stultifera navis rerun AKA thinking about Iberia hours again because a lot of the Iberians have such fascinating relationships with the concept of home but specifically Thorns and Lumen are eating at my brain. like where do you call home when the place that is your home Just Fucking Hates You? Elysium's rewinding breeze specifically makes a point to hammers home how differently Iberia treats its Liberi and its Aegir
(which is especially interesting since this comes right after a conversation where Purestream commented on how despite Leizi being a high ranking government official, there are still some experiences that are universal for all Yanese people - because the experience of what Iberia itself is like isnt universal for all Iberians)
But all that being said, Thorns also straight up states that Aegir is not his home, and yeah, how could it be? How could a place you've never been to, never truly known, ever be your home? How could it ever feel like a home?
so where do you go when the place that you are from hates your people and the place your people are from is completely unfamiliar and alien to you? Thorns' answer at the end of the conversation with Aya is: my home is where i chose it to be. my home is where there are people I care about and people who care about me
in the complete opposite direction, Lumen's oprec asks: why do you still stay in a place that wants you gone? because the people of Gran Faro like Jordi well enough but when push comes to shove, they will want the only Aegir in town gone
and yet, when Rald the messenger offers him a chance to leave Jordi turns him down and when he's forced to escape Gran Faro after the people there literally try to send him to his death (or worse) at the hands of the Inquisitors he keeps trying to go back because like everyone in stultifera navis, Jordi is clinging to his own dreams of a golden age
but the shape of that dream is unique to every character and for Jordi, his dreams are deeply, inseparably bound to the Eye of Iberia, the legacy his parents left behind
and it's this dream of becoming someone great, of bringing about that golden age that his parents devoted their lives to help create that ties Jordi to this nothing town because despite everything, despite the mistrust of the townsfolk and the hostility of the Inquisition and the danger from the ocean, he simply cannot leave it behind
(or, because i personally dislike the official translation,)
"I just see this place as my home"
so yeah. not sure what overall point i was trying to make here i'm just. deeply in love with these stories about chosing what is and isn't your home, of saying you will not call a place your home because it has given you no reason to or saying you consider a place your home even though it has given you every reason not to. deeply unwell about them <3
82 notes
·
View notes
For disability pride month, start amplifying disabled voices (you should be doing that anyway but especially this month)! There are a lot of people who try to be allies but end up speaking over us in quite harmful ways.
Like one of the things I've seen much of in the last couple days has been a lot of push for person-first language, that being language that centers the individual instead of the disability (ex: person who uses a wheelchair instead of wheelchair-bound). And I'm all for person-first language but keep in mind, that's an individual preference! Disability-focused language is actually preferable to a lot of people, myself included. The problem allies have with it is that it emphasizes the "problem" over the person, therefore it is "dehumanizing". However, for some, it is the opposite. Our disabilities are a big part of our lives, even to the point of practically controlling them. The focus on it helps push against the "it's not disabilities, it's different abilities!" mentality that is super harmful.
All in all, it's personal preference. If you want to use "person who uses a wheelchair" or "accessibility parking" instead of "handicap parking", that's up to you. Just be respectful of someone else's preferences, and if a disabled peer wants you to use certain language around them, do that. And remember to spread minority voices!
Oh and if I catch any of you spreading "it's not disabilities, it's different abilities!" I will tie you to a chair and force you to watch a sideshow until you learn the difference.
7 notes
·
View notes