#disclaimer i am NOT an expert

[picnokinesis]

hello taka,

I respect you very highly as a cherished mutual of mine. I’m on anon because I can’t trust people not to misconstrue me and paint me as something I’m not. I just want to express concern over your reblog of South Africa—people conflate the situation with them and with Israel in dangerous ways. the key difference is that the Hamas-run government’s mission is to kill all Jews and Israelis. This includes the Muslims and Christians living in Israel. They are not synonymous situations, because there has never been a precedent for what’s happening now. it is naive to think that there would be no risk to the Israeli citizens, because there is a genuine threat to all of their lives. I just wanted to share this with you because it is very painful to see misinformation like this being spread, and how it misrepresents the situation. You don’t have to respond to this; I am sympathetic to why you shared it. I am only sending this ask because I see that you care and I don’t want you to be misled.

Hi there!!

I actually really appreciate this ask, because it made me go and have a conversation with a good friend of mine who studies international conflict and relations, and has a much greater understanding of this sort of thing than I do. Which is gonna be the basis of my response here, but I just wanna clarify that I'm by no means an expert on any of this, or how this sort of situation can be resolved.

I think I get where you're coming from here! And actually, I fundamentally agree with you on a lot of things - you're right, there is a tendency right now for people to draw parallels between these other historical/current situations, which can lead to over-generalisation which isn't really helpful, as some things are a lot more complicated and less clear cut than others. And, also, every situation is unique. You're right - the solution to apartheid in South Africa, and the situation in Boliva are not the same as what's happening with Israel and Palestine. So saying these situations are exactly the same isn't helpful.

However - I do think you missed the point of that post. Or, at least, the point how I interpreted it. For example, I don't think that post was at all calling for a Hamas-led government - in fact, I don't think it mentioned Hamas at all? My initial reaction to your ask, I'll admit, was frustration, because it seems that every time people try and talk about what's happening in Gaza, people bring up Hamas, and whilst I know why, it comes back to the whole thing of like, if you're spending so much time explaining that, no, you don't agree with Hamas and you think the Oct 7th attack was wrong, then you are not talking about the bigger problem, which is that nothing that Hamas did could ever justify what the Israeli government is doing right now, or has been doing since 1948. I know that's not at all what you were saying, but it is really frustrating. I think you're right, I don't think there should be a Hamas-led government (thought, to be frank, it's not really my place to say who should or shouldn't be in charge). I don't know what the government of a free Palestine (presumably combined with Israel) would look like - and I know that building a democracy is very difficult and also dangerous. But we have to hope that it's possible to achieve something that would actually work, right? We have to believe that there can be a future where Israelis and Palestinians can live together, equally, and without fear, and without prejudice, for either side (and I personally think the risk is much greater for Palestinians not being treated equally, but at the same time I recognise what you are saying too). The fact is that historically, a multicultural Israel/Palestine has existed (albeit, Israel as the country state that we know it today didn't necessarily, but you get what I mean) - and so I think that post is a lot less about 'these situations are all the same and should be treated the exact same way, with the same solutions'. If it is about that, then I don't think it's correct. I think it's a lot more about solidarity, and the idea there have been all sorts of awful situations before, and that afterwards, when varying solutions were achieved, people were able to live side by side with each other. That it is possible.

That said though, I definitely didn't have all these thoughts in mind when reblogging that post - I just thought yeah I really agree with this! and reblogged it. So, I'll be honest, I didn't know or understand all of what you said here - so I'm really glad that it prompted me to go and talk to my friend and start looking more into things and learning more, which is never a bad thing. Because you're right, this is complicated. And it isn't black and white.

There isn't an easy solution to what's going on. And I'm not here to provide that solution anyway. But - I guess I come at this from a Disaster Management perspective, which makes sense since I studied that. And in Disaster Management, there's a thing very imaginatively named 'the Disaster Management Cycle', and basically it goes from prevention, preparation and mitigation > DISASTER > response, recovery, development, building back to a new normal where things are better, and cycle back into that initial prevention for future disasters. And so, when I'm thinking of response, I'm also thinking of what needs to come next - what comes after the ceasefire? What comes after the aid, the immediate relief? We've got to think about recovery and development, and what that new normal would look like. And I think, whilst I now see that making comparison the way that post did can cause harm in it's own way, I think that the core of it was that we want to work for a future in Palestine and Israel where there is no displacement of anyone, where people can return and have freedom of movement, where people are equal. And, sure, that isn't going to happen tomorrow, and it's not going to happen next week - because it takes time and it's extremely difficult. And I probably am naive - but we have to have hope, right? We've got to have something to aim for. We (or, rather, someone) has got to be able to sit down and say this is what we want a free Palestine to actually look like, and there will be things that are practical and things that will be idealistic, and things that will be a bit of both, but regardless...we gotta start somewhere.

And, of course, the worst part of this whole situation is that we're not there yet. We're not even in response. We're still in the disaster stage. And I think that is what we've got to be talking about the most at the moment because the situation is getting worse and worse, and I can go on about long term solutions all I like, but there are things that need to be done right now. And, unfortunately, neither you nor I have the power to snap our fingers and do that - but we do have the power to be as annoying as possible to the people who do. So, my friend - I have no idea which country you're in, but if you're in the UK or the USA or any country that's failed to back a ceasefire or has cut funding to UNRWA, and you haven't been annoying to your local official/rep/mp about it yet - give them hell. And then, when we're in the recovery stage, we can start talking about who should be in charge and making sure no one else ever gets killed or loses everything over all of this.

[evenlyevi]

👁️ Fortune 👁️

[wombywoo]

retro 🪖

[rorah]

Dimitriverse here. And I'll use it as pretext to talk about Hopes. 'In this essay I will ☝️...'/j I must be one of the few - if not, the only one- (who's not on board with the anti-church propaganda |Just in case: I grew up in an atheist house| and not a Byleth hater either) who actually liked hopes because it supports and enhances houses narrative view (contrary to the common belief that it's the opposite).

Hopes shows a constant comparison between both games. And we know that this universe plays a lot with the parallels between different characters, and relationships. Both similarities and contrasts. Hopes is a contrast, seen from Shez's perspective.

It is established from the beginning that they only see the superficial positive qualities of the leaders, just like general tone presented of this game.

Here I'm going to focus mostly on AM's goal and its contrast in AG.

In AM Dimitri achieves redemption and benevolence through forgiveness and acceptance. These lessons he learns from Byleth - the teacher/ the guide/ the enlightened one (the class enlightened one is mea to alude that who have more knowledge and greater understanding of something, who also aludes to the original aspect of the game. Nirvana. The JP Byleth class) in an indirect way. Byleth in turn gets it from the goddess herself but also their life lessons/experience from GM, and the people surrounding them. WC is an important and crucial stage in Byleth's development, as is the interaction they have with the diverse students they tutor.

The role of Byleth goes beyond a mundane "self-insertion" of the player. Byleth is meant to be a bridge between that goddess and humans: the path to Nirvana.

Both forgiveness and acceptance are mentioned in the game but can go unnoticed due to the level of subtlety they are mentioned, but they are core elements in Buddhism such as compassion and wisdom that serve as a path to inner peace and freedom (specially for the leaders who rule over big factions of people), and breaks the chain/cycle of suffering, anger, revenge, resentment, among others.

And that reminds me of Arval's constant words: "the cycle of this world". What does Arval mean? The cycle of this world… said by an Agarthan "deity", whose only role in the game has been to generate constant conflicts between the inhabitants of Fodlan and beyond perhaps? so that they kill each other. I don't know Joe, something here smells weird -wink wink- (Not to mention it also emphasizes the qualities achieved through Nirvana)

It's Important to understand the importance of Forgiveness and everything involved in the act. Understanding forgiveness, as a spiritual practice, goes beyond simply letting go of resentment. It involves cultivating mindfulness and compassion towards oneself and others. Since the game has heavily references and basis from Buddhism you can grasp it from there (more than Christianity, I'm sure different faits have somewhat different or similar approach to some concepts). But need to mention the act is also applied from a physiological and neurological perspective (in case you're not much of a "fait" person like me. I still like the Buddhism take tho, from a philosophical standpoint💖).

Anyway, Dimitri AM manages to learn those lessons and is not just "to learn to live for himself", which is also important, but it is only possible to achieve it through the through the acts already mentioned: forgiveness, acceptance, compassion, etc. Acts that acts that are practiced externally towards others but which are mostly an act towards oneself. Compared to Dimitri AG where the path chosen is revenge.

Misfortune always dogs the steps of one who gives way to the desire for revenge.

Does he get the answers he thinks he wanted? Yes Did it satisfy him? A Dimitri fan knows it didn't. Can Dimitri's friends help him? No, because they're in a similar situation or under similar believes, and this game displayed it.

Sopilers: No, they won't get anything from getting revenge and certainly doesn't help to move on. Much less Dimitri, who's mental health has only been addressed at the end of a couple of supports. Is Shez a bad person? No! but they help no one and just goes along with whatever the leader says. Is Arval/Epimenides a bad entity? This is where I think, the original concept of the game is applied, the one mentioning. There's no good or bad, only a matter of perspective. But of course, that's something arguable and extense that deserves its own analysis.

At the end of all 3 routes, the war continues (despite having finished off Thales in AG) because the cycle continues. The cycle of anger, of suffering, of revenge, of prejudice, etc. And in my opinion, I think that's beautiful (the comparison, I mean). Thanks for coming to my Ted talk

[telekitnetic-art]

Are there limitations on who's allowed to learn and draw formline art? Because it's always been a style I wanted to learn growing up but I'm not sure if it's a style from a different tribe that has rules on it.

So, technically formline art does not “belong”, per se, to one tribe. The title of formline is more of an umbrella term for the style of artwork that is common with PNW-based nations and tribes. Most artists I see either label themselves as formline artists or either use the name of their nation as the descriptor for their art.

Legally and culturally, most formline artists I’ve spoken to are open to the idea of people learning formline art, native or non-native. It’s jumping into making a profit off of formline art right away that is generally very frowned upon, especially with non-native people. Cultural appropriation is definitely looked on unfavourably with a lot of Indigenous artists and creators. Depending on your location and nation/tribe, some community centres or nations offer classes/courses revolving around traditional art and formline art, and I recommend checking out those resources if you can. The website Sealaska Heritage also has plenty of resources as well as video tutorials and it could be possible to find classes there as well.

Hope that helps!

[sunderwight]

Thinking about the absolute shitshow that is the Iron Throne and succession on this sunny ash-cloud filled morning.

So as I understand it, there are a lot of different potential inheritance structures for the Iron Throne to be passed down via, because the Targaryens can draw precedents from any of their subjects (Andal, First Men, Ironborn, etc) with varying degrees of viability, plus also Old Valyrian practices, and however they were actually conducting themselves on Dragonstone for the hundred or so years between the Doom and the Conquest. Right? But I think the relevant ones for HOTD are:

Primogeniture, Male Preference vs Absolute Male Preference vs Absolute Primogeniture, Heir Designation, Elective Succession, and Right of Conquest.

Primogeniture is the inheritance model where the eldest child inherits everything. Inheritance isn't divided between potential heirs upon the death of their parent, it's winner takes all. Or rather, eldest son does. This looks to be how most of Westeros operates by default, and how inheritance works according to Andal law. The eldest son (or daughter if there are no sons) gets the title and all the other properties held by his predecessor unless he's been disinherited, and then other successors are determined in a similar order along the family tree (i.e. your next eldest brother would be your heir if you didn't have any kids, then sisters, then first cousins, and so on). But this also applies to heirs themselves, meaning, if you are Jaehaerys I and your son Aemon is your heir, and Aemon's only child and daughter Rhaenys is his heir, then if Aemon dies, Rhaenys gets everything that belonged to Aemon, including Aemon's position as your heir. Which is why Rhaenys would have been the first ruling queen of Westeros, had Andal custom in fact been followed.

Then, male preference and absolute male preference are systems that determine how much sexism is in play when it comes to selecting viable heirs. Absolute male preference means that only men may inherit, and only through their male relatives. Male preference means that sons get preferential treatment, but in absence of them, daughters can inherit (and also that sons can inherit through their female relatives, if applicable). Most of Andal tradition falls under male preference, where an eldest daughter will not inherit before her younger brothers, but it's not absolute because a daughter with no brothers will inherit before her uncles or male cousins. Absolute primogeniture is, on the other hand, when the eldest child is heir regardless of gender. I think this is what Viserys was gunning for, since his negotiations with Corlys and Rhaenys for Laenor and Rhaenyra's children indicated that he expected Rhaenyra's eldest child to inherit the Iron Throne one day, with no stipulation on gender. This would also seem to be the system that Dorne uses.

Heir designation, on the other hand, is when the ruler has the right to personally select their heir from all viable candidates (typically, their children or perhaps grandchildren, or sometimes siblings or even more distant relations). Heir designation doesn't seem to be standard for Andal culture or even what we see of the First Men (hence things like Samwell Tarly being disinherited via the Wall rather than his father just naming his younger brother Dickon as heir over him), but could have been practiced by the Valyrians, and it is this possible precedent of Valyrian tradition which Jaehaerys uses (I think?) to declare his younger son Baelon (Viserys and Daemon's dad) as his heir over his granddaughter Rhaenys, before Baelon's death inspired Jaehaerys to call for the Council of 101 to decide the succession instead.

Which is where elective succession unexpectedly comes into things. I think the only Iron Throne vassal we see practicing such a thing are the Iron Islands, with their kingsmoot? But the Iron Islands are not generally popular or often emulated elsewhere in Westeros, of course, so in this case Old Jae's probably still taking his cues more from Essos or potentially also Old Valyria? The Council of 101 may or may not have been rigged, but at least by appearances, it allowed the lords of Westeros to elect their next leader from a limited pool of candidates (Rhaenys or Viserys).

The final succession structure relevant to HOTD, of course, is the Right of Conquest. Right of Conquest is when the realm will legally grant you the ownership of something if you have seized it via some kind of military might (usually with some stipulation that you have not only taken it, but held onto it for at least X length of time). In Westeros, the Right of Conquest was how Aegon I and his wives used their dragons to establish the Iron Throne, and as a rule it can pretty much overthrow all the other precedents (as it did for the conquerors). But I'm pretty sure this is also why the succession feud after Viserys' death is pretty much guaranteed to become a fight, and it's a major contributing factor to there being so many goddamn civil wars in Westeros. Can't beat your brother's claim? Well, try beating his ass instead!

So... basically, we have a giant, inconsistent mess that has been muddying the waters of the Iron Throne's succession pretty much from the beginning. The Iron Throne follows mostly Andal law and customs, except when the king doesn't want to, and then maybe it follows Valyrian customs or Essosi customs that might be Valyrian or some custom from some other group of subjects or the king just goes "I do what I want" and reminds everyone else (inadvertently, in the case of Viserys) that there is a legal Whoever Punches Hardest Wins clause baked into the system.

Which makes it nigh-on impossible to claim that such-and-such a candidate in HOTD (or even ASOIAF) is being robbed of their rightful inheritance, doesn't it? Whether it's Rhaenyra being the designated heir or Aegon being the eldest son, not just because it's all claptrap anyway, but because there is no stable precedent for who actually has the rightful inheritance even when you're trying to play ball with the existing systems. After Aegon I's death the throne passed to his eldest son, Aenys, but the throne then went to Aenys' brother Maegor instead of his kids. But ultimately Maegor was wildly unpopular and died childless, and so everyone decided that was an outlier and the throne reverted back to Aenys' line, and went to Aenys' son Jaehaerys. Which means there's no firm or stable ground to fall back on before Jaehaerys' own sexist farce of a succession, or the absolute hash Viserys subsequently made of the matter either. Andal law and custom would normally favor Aegon over Rhaenyra, that's true, but those same laws and customs would have also favored Rhaenys over Viserys, and the throne's predominantly Andal vassals voted against that. Which might seem to endorse heir designation, since that was how Jaehaerys selected Baelon and through Baelon, Viserys, as his own successors, but then again the Council was called on the premise that heir designation was insufficient, so perhaps an elective system should actually be in play? But Viserys doubled-down on heir designation and/or absolute primogeniture instead, without even really clarifying which he meant the throne to go by. If he actually filed paperwork beyond the sworn oaths (which he didn't even renew after Aegon's birth or in the decades after), it didn't survive to make into the historical record.

And of course, everything can be upended at any time by a sufficient show of force. Which is not only viable in terms of forcing the issue, but also legally valid, and thus less liable to prompt rebellions and strong rejections from the general populace.

Ultimately we know that the Iron Throne settles on absolute male preference and primogeniture, but all the characters trying to apply this standard to the Dance era are doing so in retroactive judgment.

[shoutsofmybones]

constant calls of "Jesus was a Palestinian" among progressive Christians despite the historical inaccuracy of the claim (Palestine did not exist in the 1st century CE) brings up many questions. Do we actually need to say Jesus was Palestinian in order to do something about their plight? Why insist on Jesus being Palestinian as somehow a prerequisite for Christians giving a damn about genocide? Can an inaccurate claim about Jesus's nationality be demonstrably useful for the Palestinian cause? Is it actually necessary to identify a nationality with Jesus in order for us to care about them?

[fmab]

Hi can I ask what’s a necron (irt your recent post)? idk what ur talking about but I want to be included 😅

omg yess i am always glad to talk about necrons 🫶 they are immortal alien skeleton robots from warhammer 40k! They werent always robots- its complicated, but the Extremely abridged TLDR of it is that back in the day, as flesh and blood they lived really horrible shitty short lives prone to cancer and early death due to their very fucked up sun. Their king made a Very Bad Deal with some ancient star gods for immortality of all his people. Unfortunately they had their souls stripped away in the process and very few of them retained their memories and personhood. They do rebel against these star gods, but afterward, at this point the damage is done, and they all go hibernate in these giant ancient tomb worlds for 60 million years to sleep it off. (the great sleep caused Other unforseen issues like further memory and function decay but thats another topic)

i rlly enjoy necrons because despite it all there are some really really unique characters out there.. Being immortal for that long with a finite number of peers means all sorts of interesting relationships and problems arise. Despite being soulless alien robots they have a lot of depth and many of the books and short stories humanize them and emphasize that love and hope can still persist even in the most bleak circumstances (Severed and Twice Dead King for example).

I also think theyre neat because they all suffer from turbo dysphoria about not having bodies of flesh anymore and will literally go mad if they focus on that fact for too long. Exploring the psychological impacts of losing their bodies & going from living extremely short lived lives to Literally Living Forever and carrying all their baggage with them through that is. interesting <3

[morethanonepage]

Do you have any opinions on modern day John's music tastes? I'm usually annoyed when they don't update them from the original time period. Like, sex pistols? Rly?

lmfao I actually think it makes sense, at his core John is a white english boy, ofc he'd be into the 'classics' of a genre* (and the Sex Pistols/Ramones era really IS the start of the punk genre) before being willing to explore anything more modern/of his own time period. like i would also believe him as a music snob who prefers vinyl to CD/digital music (i'm more 🙄 on him using the ipod in the Constantine show, for instance, but I also think it's implied Chas maybe have both brought and put it together for him).

of course i think comics hellblazer canon is that he's into the pistols' bc he was at that classic 1976 show in Manchester (I may have just made this up, it may just be *my* headcanon), modern john's backstory would probably be that he was a pretentious little weirdo rebelling against what would've been the most in opposition to pop music in the early 90s, got into local punk music, and then went looking for whatever ~the classics were. like i think he'd likely be a fan of local music/more modern punk as well but being a baseline Pistols' fanboy makes sense to me.

*also have to point out the most obnoxious show!john thing which is when he complains about reggae music when it's so closely tied to the history of punk. like, specifically with Johnny Rotten even. Bizarre writing choice imo, either the writers of the show didn't know that or they did and were making a real statement about John's white englishman blindspots of not knowing/respecting POC history & influence on stuff he likes [which is also supported by him being such a snob about the folk magic in the infamous mexico city episodes of the show, and the "magpie of magic" comment from Papa Midnite.] given his background i don't think it's shocking that john constantine is terrible re: intersectionality but it's worth remembering as one of his flaws (though: i think he's actually better about it in the comics).

[grunklestanofficial]

And also Sally, let’s talk about Sally in this update. I am staring heavily at @friendlyfrankenstein for the decision to make her costume an archetype in the Commedia dell'arte, and the potential foreshadowing that comes from her choice in character. Delving into information on what role Pedrolino typically plays in a performance, they’re a stock character of a lower class servant- though the sources I’m reading seem like they have some conflicting idea on the behavior connected to it? Typically they tend to be the butt of the joke in things (though they personally never seem to lose any sense of personal dignity from it- something that parallels with Sally’s performances not going to plan due to Neighborhood Shenanigan) but they could also be considered the “go-between” for the other characters and someone whose actions help to keep the plot moving. Again, Sally’s scary story establishes in lore that the Neighbors don’t  go outside at night, and think there might be a monster also fitting into that story role.

But despite the comic relief it also seems like Pedrolino can play clever roles within the stories as well, like in terms of setting up zany plots to help get lovers together or to fuck with people. Another aspect of Pedrolino is that they're romantically devoted to the character Columbina- which I would maybe parallel with Poppy, more for Colmbina's aspect as the straight man than her flirtatious and bold behavior. So possibly all of this might mean is maybe Sally is going to be the one that gets Neighbors noticing that the things around them are getting kind of funky? And possibly she might be the main vessel that Playfellows Workshop uses to insist that Frank and Julie are Very Straight based on the lovers thing. But y'know I think it also implies a general theme around Sally's character, where she feels that she has an important role to play, but in the greater meta-textual context is more of a joke.

[multi-lefaiye]

my spicy hot take regarding AI chatbots lying to people is that, no, the chatbot isn't lying. chatgpt is not lying. it's not capable of making the conscious decision to lie to you. that doesn't mean it's providing factual information, though, because that's not what it's meant to do (despite how it's being marketed and portrayed). chatgpt is a language learning model simply predicting what responses are most probable based on established parameters.

it's not lying, it's providing the most statistically likely output based on its training data. and that includes making shit up.

[ephemeral-antiquities]

In regards to the general headcanon that Vincent Sinclair communicates through sign language….

Here’s my idea, everyone…

Obviously, we know that Vincent is not deaf, he is hearing. The only chance I could think is if his hearing was somehow affected in the surgery separating him from Bo, which isn’t entirely out of the realm of possibility but still.

Though, that does not make it entirely irrational for him to communicate through ASL. However, there lies one problem in this headcanon, allow me to explain.

Sign language is more than simply hand gestures, and a lot of signs involve facial expressions. As my teachers always used to say about expressions, “if it doesn’t feel weird, you’re doing it wrong”. ASL relies on facial expression to indicate tone (among many other things) and expression is just as much a part of the sign as hand movement. A vast majority of the time, Vincent’s face is covered so his expression is not easily visible, and there’s the elephant in the room. Basically, to sign without visible expressions is.. not easy to put it simply, if not downright impossible.

I do believe that Vincent would communicate through sign though, at least partially. Without a doubt I believe a vast majority of his communication with others would be non-verbal. The method through which he would communicate I think would vary vastly depending on context and target audience. Signing to Bo and Lester is very plausible, in my opinion, or those he is comfortable enough to remove his mask around, but to others you may very well get a notepad or some other form of non-verbal communication.

But I also believe he would speak. It would be rare, though, as I imagine it would be physically painful for him, not to mention downright tiring (I get it). One or two sentences is the most (on a good day) you would get out of him, verbally. I have little information on this but I would imagine it’s not out of the realm of possibility that in the aforementioned surgery his vocal chords could have been somehow damaged, nevermind the scarring it left behind which could interfere severely with his ability to communicate verbally. Babies are small, after all.

I’m going off on a tangent now, though, so allow me to summarize and wrap things up.

Yes, I believe Vincent Sinclair 100% communicates, primarily, through non-verbal forms. Yes, I believe that part of that includes the usage of sign language in certain cases. But yes, I believe he will speak when absolutely necessary (in urgent situations, or when Bo isn’t listening or doesn’t care to pay attention to his signing) and it always catches Bo and Lester off guard. The two would be in the middle of a conversation, and out of nowhere they hear this scratchy, trembling voice (from severe lack of use + damage) from just out of their line of sight. I think they would never get used to Vincent’s voice, because it’s such a rarity and when it is heard it stops you in your tracks and makes your hair stand on end, just for a moment.

On a final note, while I do believe he speaks on occasion and communicates through different non-verbal means, I believe Trudy would have taught him sign first when she realized that speaking was more or less out of the equation. English is his spoken language, but in terms of communication, I believe sign would be the language of his heart.

🤟

[clairenatural]

Please do tell

ok so baseline is that the wagner group is a private military group linked closely (until now) to the russian state/putin himself, which was widely understood (again, until now) to essentially just be an arm of the russian military deployed to deny state culpability in various military interventions. like Russia will be like "oh we're not involved in [insert country or conflict here]" but then Wagner pops up there and we're all like okay yeah sure lmao

they rose to prominence in the 2014 invasion of Ukraine but have since been used by Russia to expand Russian influence and military presence across the world. basically they provide various regimes with military support/join civil conflicts on the side Russia wants to win to overall promote Russian presence, sphere of influence, etc.

What this coup means for Ukraine and the current war we have yet to see, wagner is NOT like. good. like they're a private miltary they're fascist and have killed many many civilians and committed many human rights abuses. so wagner taking control would not be good at all. but my understanding is that there's a very high chance this insurrection (not really a coup as they aren't technically state military) will fail, and if/when it does, that could be good news for Ukraine as they've been fighting as a major part of Russian forces in Ukraine and if they pull out it would destabilize Russia's attack. And it looks like Wagner is currently pulling out of Ukraine to head towards Moscow - and they're so closely linked to Russia's official forces that some people think other Russian military forces might just kinda follow them in confusion and/or just have nobody to command them without Wagner being there

(edit to clarify that I'm not saying here that I want Putin to remain in power, rather that we shouldn't be cheering for Wagner as any sort of "good guys." I do think any sort of destabilization of Putin is a good thing and that's exactly what's happening)

However I'm also concerned about what's gonna happen in the rest of the world - Wagner has been increasing their presence across Africa recently (since ~2017) which has widely been understood as a part of Russian foreign policy to increase their footprint/influence in the region (aka exploit the countries they operate in for natural resources), and they've also been known to operate in Syria and Venezuea. So if Wagner/Prigozhin (the leader) have broken from the Putin regime, will they still be carrying out Russian interests abroad? Whose Russian interests? will they just carry on as a mercenary group to hire unattached to a political regime? What damage will it have to Russia (or at least Putin's Russia)'s global influence if a major arm of their foreign policy/diplomacy strategy has broken from the government? etc etc

[losticaruss]

comparing the stats of l&co to shadow and bone (the most recent book-to-show adaptation that i can recall) it's genuinely amazing that l&co has the EXACT SAME rating as shadow and bone- literally the only thing that's up for debate is if l&co will stay in the top 10 for the next week or so.

BUT all this to say- lockwood & co has gotten basically the same reaction as the shadow and bone adaptation, which is even more impressive considering the size of the fan base prior to the release. if things stay the way the are now (keep rewatching the show people!) there is a pretty high chance that itll be renewed

[absolute-lithops-emotion]

reading a bunch of articles on phonics and whole word reading and listening to old vi hart videos in the background and realizing that if there's an equivalent to phonics for math, i don't think we get taught it

[anglerflsh]

re: your poetry post, can you give some pointers as to where to learn the rhyming patterns in poetry and the like? i only ever see poetry from the ideas/feelings perspective, but ive never learned the logic and structure behind it lol

I've learned most of it from my literature and grammar classes, it's taught in our school since elementary, so I wouldn't know of any books or manuals that talk specifially about it - but I can give you a rundown of how I do it, anon, if it counts for anything lol

Prefacing that this will be starting from italian poetica because that's what I know best: any poem, but specifically the pre-futurism/1910s ones (A Lot) will have some kind of structure aside from just the ryming scheme; The structure I am most familiar with is accentual-sillabic, so for example any single verso will have its stressed syllable in a fixed potision and occasionally a set number of sillables (eg. an endecasillablic metre means a stress on the tenth syllable, usually penultimate, equally to 11 total syllables), but there are also only accentual, or only sillabic verses, common in French poetry (?), all of which count as types of qualitative metre - as well as quantitative metre, which was more widley used in Latin and Greek poetry and which rather based itself on patterns of syllable weight (something that I know little about tbh; I think it's based on the lenght of pronunciation of the actual syllable).

this, of course, goes without even mentioning free-verse structure and less well-known ones.

Going back to the rhyming scheme, that also comes into play with structure in the sense that ... there are just a lot of them to pick from. The classic is the repeated AABB one, where each verse will rhyme with the one underneath (''kissing rhyme'' in italian), or the alterning ABAB, the crossed ABBA, the 'chained' or third rhyme ABA BCB CDC used for terzine, and plenty more! That's not all the ways to classify rhymes of course: you have plain rhyme between words accented on the penultimate syllable, cut rhyme between words accented on the last, sdrucciola with accents on the third-to-last, bisdrucciola on the fourth-to-last... etc etc

Then, of course, come the classifications in stanza lenghts! Groups of three verses are a terzina, well known for being Dante's favourite number (joke inserted to lighten this infodump), groups of four a quatrina, etc -

and depending on the number of single groups and on the type of verses in them, you have further classification as canzone, ode, madrigale, carme, filastrocca, ballata, sonetto... the latter for example is made of fourteen endecasyllabic verses grouped in two quartine, one in the beginning and one in the end, in crossed or alternate rhyme, and two terzine with any kind of rhyme structre.

this of course doesn't touch on the inner things and games of poem structure like the falling rhyme, spaces in between groups, enjambement, alliteration, allegorical figures, anafore, onomatopee, and all that fun stuff! Essentially when you see a poem look for the number of syllables in each verse, where the stressed syllable falls, how the rhymes are put, how many verses are in each stanza and strofa...