#converse off white

[invinciblerodent]

See, the Treviso vs Minrathous choice would be cool! It's a good choice on paper, but it's executed... not so great (the game's framing as "if you don't save this city it will have Political Consequences vs if you don't save that city All The Civilians Who Can't Flee Will Die because the whole water supply will get blighted" when you have to make your choice is kind of ass, as a baseline) and then it gets further undermined when the final battle is in Minrathous so the city gets fucked up and the venatori mostly take it over in the chaos anyway because Rook gets stuck in Fade jail for several weeks. It turns the decision into "do I want to blight one city or both?" on a second playthrough which does, indeed, have a 'morally right' answer.

And that's the problem with this 'complex and interesting moral question'. This is why people are unhappy with it. Because it completely fails to stick the landing.

See, this is nothing against you, but I knew I was going to get messages like this, even before I would have hit "post".

I'm not saying that either decision is "right". That's the point of it all, that there is no "right" answer, and arguments can be (and are, within the game) raised in favor of both. That's what it's supposed to be about, that from Rook's point of view (as a character, not your point of view, as the player), there are good, significant reasons to save both, but they can only aid one, because they are only one person. It's meant to make your character feel small, and to highlight the enormity of the foe that they are facing. Its purpose is to make Elgar'nan and Ghilan'nain feel like they have all the tools to win the war, even when they lose a battle.

Now, ngl, I'm just going to straight up ignore the "oh Minrathous gets blighted in the endgame anyway so there's no point" line of reasoning altogether, because Rook has no way of knowing that. That's metagaming, and if that's the way you want to play your game, you're obviously welcome to do so, it's no skin off my back, do whatever you want forever... but characters in linear stories should, theoretically, only be capable of acting within the confines of their narrative. If we want to actually talk about the ramifications of certain decisions, it doesn't make sense to me to act as if a character should have the ability to make a decision based on information that they have no way of having. I don't think that's productive to the conversation.

(plus, I would argue that adding that as a potential regret, the knowledge that them dooming Treviso ultimately didn't accomplish nearly as much as they thought it would, is far more compelling from a character- and a storytelling point of view, than going into it all with the intention of making All The Right Choices, with Rook secure in the knowledge that at least they are going to be proven "right" by posterity. That does far less for me, personally. I think your Rook is allowed, even encouraged, to have complex, contradictory feelings about the decisions they make.)

Second of all, for three games now, we have been told that Tevinter and the constant, decades-long war they have been engaged in with the Qunari is the only thing that stands in the way of the Qunari expansion towards Orlais, Nevarra, the Marches- there is a reason the occupation starts in Rivain and Antiva, the coastal regions of the mainland furthest from the Imperium.

For two games, we have known that the Venatori (due to many of them being old money, old blood, powerful magisters) have infiltrated the highest ranks within the Magisterium, that they are cunning and dangerous and lying in wait, and that they pull the strings from many directions, with not much besides a handful of Magisters (Dorian and Maevaris included), the Shadow Dragons, and the Archon (who, if the Inquisitor kept Radonis in power, is not only an ally to the Inquisition, but also vocally opposed Corypheus, and, by proxy, the Venatori) to stand in their way.

Yes, there are always many civilian lives at stake. Yes, Treviso is devastated in the attack and its aftermath (physically to a much more extensive degree than Minrathous), and yes, the immediate threat of the dragon causes more obvious destruction there- blighting the canals, causing a staggering loss of life, all of these effects will stretch far into the future.

But in Minrathous, the dragon is not the focal point. It's a distraction.

In Minrathous, the dragon is there to create chaos, to rampage and destroy all it can in order to sow discord and divert protection away from the Archon's palace (notably the place with the cannons that it very well can't turn onto itself), so that the Venatori can break through the Archon's guard, and successfully pull off a bloody coup that then puts them unequivocally in control of the capital city of one of the most powerful and influential countries of Thedas: military, magic, power all together.

And while saving Minrathous at that moment doesn't result in the city being perfectly peaceful, all fine, great and dandy, the Archon still dies as a result of the attack, it does at least ensure that their defenses are not stretched too thin, fighting on two different fronts at the same time. As a consequence of that, it ensures that the Black Divine, one of the pivotal people standing in the way of the Venatori expansion, doesn't contract the Blight. It stops members of the abolitionist group that's known- and respected for standing up for the needs of the disenfranchised and oppressed from being openly decimated, and strung up in the streets like Christmas lights.

It stops the Venatori, who then have next to no one to oppose them, from doing damn near irreparable damage, and tossing all the political progress of the last decade into the nearest shitter to catapult Tevinter back to times when nobody bat an eye to the rich and powerful using people as furniture.

(And, though this is pure speculation, this can be disregarded, however fractured the Antaam is, however many of their forces they have diverted towards Rivain and Antiva, I don't think it's such a stretch of the imagination to say that it'll likely only take them time to realize that with their allies now in control of Minrathous, they have an open avenue through Tevinter to enter Orlais, seize Val Royeaux, seize the Marches city by city, and force the Blight-ravaged south to fight on two fronts at the same time.)

I don't think any of these are things that I'm pulling out of my ass, or something that Rook isn't made aware of. Neve doesn't hammer it home quite so clearly, she also doesn't have the gift of foresight, but in the blind panic that she is communicating in that moment, she does say that her primary concern is the Venatori coup, and the player has been introduced to the Shadow Dragons and told of their significance before that, even without the context that Inquisition, Trespasser, and the comics provide. We've met the Viper, we've met Maevaris, we've met Dorian- we've talked to all of them, and we know what they're up against.

It's not an easy decision, and it's not meant to be one, or one you're meant to think about as "well you're either siding with X and are right, or with Y and you're wrong". This is not the mage uprising, where the choice falls flat because one side's point of view is "no genocide good", and the other's is "church-sanctioned genocide good".

I think that this choice is a relatively early game decision that is meant to make you think about whether your Rook, right then and there within their arc in the story, is the kind of person who would do anything to save even one civilian life even if politically it's devastating, the kind of person to think about the big picture and consider all the political ramifications even if it means a sacrifice of lives- or, alternatively, the kind of person who would do anything for a place that they call home, even if it means dooming another and letting down their friend.

You say that it fails to stick the landing. But that's very easy to say if you are the one yanking the mat from under its feet.

[not-a-matopoeia]

Dick: And nope means nope like you said

Bruce (sobbing)

Image Description:

Panel one: a young (robin) Dick Grayson and Batman are standing there, Bruce leans over and says “Dick…chum…where are your pants”, to which Dick says “Nope!” A giant shit eating grin on his face

Panel two: Robin and Batman, Robin has his hands in the air and looks excited, Batman, with the cowl on, breaking the forth wall while Jim Gordon in the very background says “Put some pants on that kid Batman.”

[beemovieerotica]

kicking the hornets nest but all the responses from people on tumblr of "everybody needs to whisper and be as quiet and invisible as possible on public transit" have really crystallized how and why white people call the cops on black women talking to each other on the train

[skunkes]

What are some of smunker’s favorite fits? :-)

im gonna add a few more after i eat dinner but here's what i have so far, of clothes in My Actual current rotation !

[coquettejohnny]

johnny cade would have those ellie williams type converse but worse. like they're fucking falling apart but he just walks it off

[actual-corpse]

Im pretty sure I just overheard a girl who plans to vote for Trump say, "Trump's been president for 4 years and nothing happened....."

Girl... you do know that it takes a few YEARS for us to see the effects of policies put into place by a president like...

Trump started removing policies that helped guarantee consumer and worker safety, and we JUST NOW felt the effects through the listeria outbreak.

PLEASE DO SOME RESEARCH PLEASE.

I'm fucking terrified. We either get one of the biggest acts of domestic terrorism to date, or we get 4 years of what could become a tyrannical dictatorship, which removes ALL OF THE RIGHTS WE FOUGHT HARD TO GET!

[eddiediazenjoyer]

can i speak. i think that eddie Catholic Guilt is hard to believe and dare i say. not real. for many reasons. one of them being Not All Latinos Have Catholic Guilt especially not in the way that white catholics conceptualize it. and TO ME it’s a bit of a cop out . and i don’t think we should believe eddie when he says that’s the reason for literally anything bc it’s a really convenient excuse for being insane and repressed but i just don’t think it’s true . and i think that something much more nuanced is afoot (aka a complex racial identity and relationship with expectation).

to me he was really like. barely raised catholic tbh. he was raised AROUND folk/cultural catholicism which ofc impacted how he was raised and his perspective. but this kind of catholicism is so different from institutionalized (and white) catholicism it's difficult to even compare the two. and i honestly don’t think that the catholicism is the main problem. like his parents just don’t strike me as being devout in the way that imparts guilt onto their children (they have fun OTHER ways to do this). i think they are traditional and crucially. catholic when it’s convenient and when it allows them an avenue for control (biggest example here is eddie getting pressured into getting married to the girl he impregnated as a teenager.) but to me. this stemmed from complex cultural traditions and beliefs. which catholicism is an easy simple explanation for . but isn’t really the root of the problem. it's a part of it ofc but honestly i think things are often ascribed solely to catholicism bc catholic guilt is a widely applicable perspective when it honestly doesn't make much sense. like i think that eddie being a mixed race mexican-american has more to do with anything than catholicism does. and again. these things are interwoven. but not in a way that it makes sense to blame capital c Catholicism for things where culture (and cultural catholicism) makes way more sense as an explanation

like ik that eddie talks about how he was raised going to mass every sunday etc etc. but even the way he says that he just... stopped... says so much. like the fact that he was even allowed to do that tells me that his parents honestly never really cared that much about that kind of devotion. and the way he talks about it really makes it sound to me like he was one of those kids that never really bought into it at all and so the institutionalized teachings of the church never really got to him. what did get to him however is the folk catholicism/mexican-american teachings of Right and Wrong (aka you get somebody pregnant you commit to them. you feel emotions you tamp them down in order to protect others etc.) and this is not necessarily Catholicism in it's classic conception.

i have no idea if this makes sense and it is really hard to explain how this interplay works if you haven't grown up in it but basically.... hegemonic constructions of catholicism are vastly different from the kind of "catholicism" that i think eddie was raised in. and bc of that i think that "catholic guilt" is a weak explanation for eddie's perspective and best and just. inaccurate at worst. and we should NEVERRRR listen to eddie when he gives too clean of an explanation for his repression. that man is a liar

[usercelestial]

i genuinely think i might kill myself

[dykeofmisfortune]

the thing about having a radical butchformation (like transformation but. butch.) is that people are starting to perceive me as a trans man and someone at the coffee shop i go to told me that they respect the LGBT but that boys trying to be girls and girls trying to be boys is too far and then she added that i'll always be a girl no matter what. like thanks? but also kill yourself

[mechazushi]

LORDS, LADIES, ESTEEMED HIGH MEMBERS OF THE KN8 FANDOM LANDS! I BRING ONTO YOU---

NEW HEADCANONS-

[butch-bakugo]

Oh my God a fucking " anti-transandrophobia truther" perisex fuck wrote word for word, in a massive fucking post " I wonder if intersex people know being Intersex affects your gender" (NO SHIT???)

And!

" I'm pretty sure all the afab/cafab (coercive meaning ya know ... GENITAL MUTILATION OF INTERSEX BABIES FORCING THEM INTO THE AFAB IDENTITY. The whole camab/cafab thing was stolen from the intersex community.) intersex people who claim the transfem title don't actually have transfem experiences"(regardless of the kind of the type of intersexuality they are?? You are just outting yourself as someone totally fucking blind to actual intersex experiences.)and! " They need their own term because they don't 'fit'". They tried to dress up the offensive bigoted nonsense they just spewed by trying to make it sound like they had our best interests at heart and "shouldn't be forced into using perisex language".... You are litterally trying to push intersex people you don't like out of our terminology to other them .... This literally reeks of literal terf rhetoric " most intersex lean one way and therefore shove them under that label" like...

Ur both intersexist freaks and bigots just in different ways. Imagine trying to claim you care about intersex people then try to determine our labels for us and push us in the way you think we should go regardless of our actual fucking lived experiences because you don't like sharing the transfem community with people who've experienced both transmysogny and transmascphobia. Not to even mention the fact the last time people tried to make a term to talk about their experiences, you've not shut up about it in years and called it a mens rights movement to try and silence an entire fucking portion of the trans community so you don't have to care about them. You literally fucking said " trans men experience both transphobia and mysogny but not at the same time (we do????) but trans women do" ok and ur blind to Transmasc issues because you think that nonsense and we are the same as cis men. Ur blind to our issues in the way you accuse us of being blind to your issues but only expect us to shut up and listen.

Anyway, denying that trans men can't face their own issues while also ignoring any trans man who disagrees with you and then attempting to delegitimize all intersex people who look you dead in the face in the transfem and Transmasc playing fields and tell you ur wrong...

Bro just say you hate Transmascs and anyone who might be slightly aligned with them and go home you intersexist piece of shit.

Also the whole " stop calling anti-transandrophobia truthers baddels! That's something specific"

My brother in CHRIST, THEY ARE LITTERALLY UNIRONICALLY IN THE USERNAMES OF THE PEOPLE YOU REBLOG FROM. BULLSHIT.

Anyway the fact y'all are all fucking white trans women and CONSTANTLY bring up black and indigenous people's experiences with gender while also being unironic baddels aka a horrifically abusive to trans men (including rape) and racist ASF movement within your community tells me everything i need to know as a native american two spirit intersex person with no "lean" whose experienced transmysogny and transandrophobia.

This is why they don't trust you motherfuckers, you got no class, just entitlement and weak ass attempts at silencing people you already hate and a weird trauma fetish for black and indigenous people. There is over lap between the transfem experiences and bipoc experiences but there is also an overlap between Transmasc and bipoc experiences, nonbinary and bipoc, like almost everyone can relate to our shit, ur not special 😭 leave us alone and don't use our oppression to try and legitimize your fundamentally transphobic views.

[ormymarius]

I speak for everyone when I say these are the worst Aquaman looks

[rjalker]

Enemy-viv for your free blocklist. Cyberstalking, misgendering, and literally transvestigating Aaron Bushnell, the man who self-immolated to protest genocide, because White Queer People cannot fucking show solidarity or care about anyone or anything unless they think they can relate personally.

Aaron Bushnell signed his pronouns as he/him in his message to the press. Twisting the conversation away from his sacrifice for Palestine to protest the active fucking genocide so you can cyberstalk him and misgender him and speculate about him secretly being trans as though he's a fictional character and not a real fucking person who made the ultimate sacrifice to try and stop genocide is fucking evil.

There is something deeply, morally wrong with you you cannot fucking bring yourself give a single shit about someone who publically sacrificed his life in protest of genocide unless you think you have something to gain by it by projecting a Queer identity onto him like he's your new favorite blorbo and not a fucking real person who died to protest genocide.

Stop fucking distracting the conversation away from the literal genocide he was protesting. Stop literally fucking transvestigating people. Learn to fucking care about people even when they have no Queer identity in common with you. What the fuck is wrong with you people.

[whaleofatjme1920]

i loved the write abt a reader w a small chest ! what abt a reader with like a bigger chest. like DD/E breasts ?

Thanks sm!!!

Sorry love bug, my requests are closed!

And honestly, I wrote from my perspective. I don’t have breasts like that, and I know I can’t do them justice. I wanted to write for women that have small, flat chests because I can relate to them and wanted to give them something just for them, and unapologetically in love with small breasts without feeling they have to compensate with something else to make up for a lack of tits. I was tired of people telling me my body isn’t good enough, and I want to focus on women that have non beauty standard features.

I don’t feel right writing for women with large chests because I don’t know that experience and can’t honor them the way someone who is living that experience might!

That’s all, lots of love ♥️

[coffeeandcalligraphy]

I was at an event recently celebrating the works of bipoc writers & something one of the speakers said stuck with me... they mentioned that so often we expect stories by bipoc writers to centre a culture/issue in order to "teach" something (usually to white readers) & this is something I've been talking about on and off for years... idk how to explain to white writers what it feels like to know that at least in this larger canon we call the publishing industry, bipoc voices *have* been "let in" (generalization) but mostly in a very specific way & with a specific purpose. the things I've been told/that I've learned... the way there truly is an expectation to "use my voice"--to do what? can my voice as a racialized writer not just... do what I want it to? is my voice not valuable if I don't "represent" myself? I LOVE seeing books that uplift & represent marginalized communities, that's not at all my issue, howeverrrr I don't like knowing that's the expectation of what I write just because of my skin. it makes navigating publishing even harder & honestly most of the time I feel doomed!! I'm relieved to hear more bipoc writers/publishing professionals talk about that because it's something I've silently been grappling with for years... I just want to write whatever I want to write & idk how to explain how isolating it is to know in the eyes of the current canon, it's bizarre that I'm not capitalizing on *my life* to make a literary impact...

[alteregomp4]

SOME fans of dungeon meshi on TikTok make me feel like they only consumed the show through clips of it appearing on their feed like it's Young Sheldon.

I'm not trying to knock anyone down here if that's how they got into it cause that's how I sure did but when I like something I actively try to consume all that it offers before I start saying stuff in posts I make about it, so it's just disappointing and honestly frustrating seeing that SOME fans of the show don't do the same which just leads to either pointless posts about small issues that have gotten explained multiple times over or just downright villainizing or babying certain characters despite most characters in this series being obvious flawed individuals who have complex feelings throughout.

Once again it's just deeply frustrating and I'm really not trying to single out TikTok here as it's an issue I've noticed not just on there it's just the most loud on that app especially in fandom spaces sadly from my experience.