#does roman even know what binary means

[flock-of-cassowaries]

Roman has many roles in the Roy family. Punching bag and peacemaker. His dad’s least-favourite child and most loyal servant.

Perpetually resentful of being in his older brother’s, and yet still said brother’s most consistent advocate.

The one role he’ll never be asked to play: guy who figures out what’s wrong with the printer / computer / cable box.

[politics-with-drakonix]

It appears that you're approaching the question of gender in good faith, so I'd like to help.

To understand gender issues you first has to understand that gender is a social construct attempting to map identity in the same way sexuality does.

A "Man" has meant different things to different societies for as long as there have been men. Socially speaking, I mean. Think of the manliest man you can think of in modern society. And then ask yourself, earnestly, if he would be perceived as manly in an earlier society or not.

And the answer is... Kinda? But not really, depending on the society.

In the same way a gentle and caring man in modern society can "Lose his man card" for being sensitive, respectful, or emotional, the modern 'Manly Man' would lose his in ancient times and different for myriad reasons.

For example in Rome it was considered the height of manliness and masculinity to weep, openly. To be emotional and strong enough to show the pain in your heart. Modern "Manly Men" aren't supposed to cry or show great emotion. In ancient Rome it was women who were unemotional and detached. That's why they would hire mourners to weep for them. Because it would've been unladylike to cry in public.

Does that mean that Roman women were heartless? Not remotely. Does that mean that Roman women didn't cry or show emotion in public? Not even a little. They were just disdained for it when they did.

But it does mean that there -were- Roman women who didn't cry in public. And they were valued and their personality and expression was considered socially important in defining what a "Woman" was. And all other women had to deal with the burden of that kind of woman's emotional expression being considered the default that all women had to conform to.

Because society didn't care that other women, dare I say most women, were more emotionally expressive than their ideal. And rather than develop language that covered various different kinds of women based on various aspects of their personality, they went with a binary of man and woman.

Humans -do- love a binary, after all.

But the point is: Those underlying differences of personality and perspective exist, regardless of what society would otherwise impose in it's broad binary. People whose identity and perspectives are more aligned with what is currently considered "Woman" do not always reflect the social ideals of what a "Woman" is.

And while that can be a biological difference, it can also be a purely social difference. That's why we have terms like Tomboy, Butch, Femme. It's why we have Goths and Punks and Nerds and Conservative and Liberal. I recognize all these things may seem separate from Gender because of our societal expectation of biology and gender lining up... but ultimately they're all identifiers of personality and perspective which inform how one expresses themself, or wishes to express themself, to society.

I'll send another ask to delve deeper into the biological aspect in a moment.

so gender as we know it in sociology is entirely disconnected from biological sex (apart from originating from it) and the criteria to fit into these classifications vary from different points in time and civilizations many of which are often contradicting

because humans preferred simple explanations over complex ones for a long long time and because a more constricting system makes it easier to control people , the gender binary emerged. but like all dichotomies this one is also false

gender projects itself onto the world and keeps expectations or gender roles upon people and their bodies like what to wear or how to behave and what to do

[a-student-out-of-time]

Even without the Tragedy, this shit still happens?!

_____________________________________________________

Unfortunately so.

You don’t think the Steering Committee are the only ones who have this ideology of talent vs. commonality, do you?

The Preservation Project doesn’t just share their ideals, but many of them, we’re certain, are in touch in the Committee even in your time.

They have to be. It’s the only way the Apothegem experiment makes sense.

_____________________________________________________

What do you mean?

_____________________________________________________ 

They had someone we only know as the Ultimate Psionic working alongside them. We’re not sure of the method, but they were able to subconsciously place the idea of joining the Preservation Project into the minds of people through visual and auditory cues.

They sent out invitations to promising Ultimates, brought them aboard their ship, and subjected them to numerous killing games. But games not like the ones you know.

The Apothegem’s killing games were instead arranged by groups of 10, all of whom were taken from countries the ship passed nearby, and their games each only lasted a week.

____________________________________________________

A week...

Wait, so, if it went down after 343 days, and each game only lasted a week, then that’s...

____________________________________________________ 

That’s fifty games, each arranged by Roman Numerals. They made it all the way to Game L by the time the ship sank. That’s about 445 casualties just from the games alone.

____________________________________________________ 

...

My god...

That’s...

____________________________________________________ 

To make matters worse, there was the nature of the games themselves. Each participant was fitted with a bracelet that would inject them with a poison if they violated the rules.

And then there was the matter of what became of them should they win one of these games. Simply put, they would become the next game’s mastermind...by force.

____________________________________________________

What the hell is wrong with these people?!

What...what did they even get out of this...?

____________________________________________________

We did manage to figure that out.

You see, the Preservation Project had a dossier on people they referred to as “Lusus Naturae.” Those who have abilities that make them stand out for one reason or another; the Ultimate Psionic was just one example.

That includes spirit mediums and those with abilities like precognition...like myself.

And that’s what they were trying to do: cultivate someone who would exhibit an ability like that, by subjecting a massive group of Ultimates to these killing games.

____________________________________________________

...Did they?

____________________________________________________ 

Amazingly, yes. But it wasn’t an Ultimate that awakened their ability; it was a normal person who got swept up in the killing game by mistake.

Thanks to that, we were able to rescue the six survivors of the final game, since they’d managed to evade the Preservation Project’s goons who’d come looking for them.

____________________________________________________

Alright, but...who are they?

____________________________________________________

The ones who tipped us off that something was going on were two Japanese students: Ota Kanon, the Ultimate Photographer, and Konno Sei, the Ultimate Watchmaker.

There was also Lyle D. Termina, the Ultimate Puzzlemaster; Missy Vesper, the Ultimate Tactician; Gaea Espère, the Ultimate Cartographer...

And the person in question here: Echo Pine, a non-binary Chinese-American.

And the one who awakened the power of precognition, just like Mikako here.

_______________________________________________

So...if you guys saved them, does that mean...?

_______________________________________________ 

Yes. Thanks to far more constructive research on our end, you have Pine-san to thank for the existence of our future’s time machine.

[thepurplethoughts]

Just something I’ve been researching for a while. Can’t find any answers. Just curious what any of you have to say about the subject of remarriage.

I am wondering why so many christians are not willing to say exactly what Matthew 19:9 says about remarriage? I can’t find one christian article, preacher, apologetic who doesn’t paraphrase this verse. They all change the wording in this verse to spouse, with the intent to claim that a man or a woman can remarry if their spouse is sexually immoral. But, it does not say that. It says, “whoever divorces his WIFE, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman, commits adultery, and he who marries a divorced woman commits adultery.” And Mark 10:12  says “if a woman shall divorce her husband and be married to another she committeth adultery.” This verse does not have the exception for sexual immortality. So, the only way a woman can remarry is if her husband dies. Romans 7:3 “while her husband liveth, if she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress... ” 

The Bible says God hates divorce and the only way it is acceptable to divorce and remarry is if the wife is sexually immoral. But, if a women is divorced for any reason she must stay single and celibate unless her first husband is dead. I can’t find anyone who is totally honest about this. Even gotquestions states it like this: “Most would allow for divorce in the case of unrepentant unfaithfulness on the part of one SPOUSE ” and also like this “if the marriage ended because of adultery, then the wronged SPOUSE may be free to remarry.” They say spouse when Jesus never said spouse. He is saying that the wronged MAN may remarry. He does not say the wife may remarry. So many Christian women get remarried and no one ever opposes it at the wedding due to the fact that they will be becoming an adulteress. And the men that are marry them are becoming adulterers, but no one says anything. If a man divorces his wife and gets remarried, and his 1st wife was not sexually immoral, him and his new wife both become adulterers. Christians always seem fine with this. Why is that? When they know this couple is making a legal commitment to commit adultery for the rest of their lives. Should Christians be voting to make this illegal? Christians go to the wedding and happily celebrate this sinful union. But they shouldn’t. Right? I mean it is one of the 10 Commandments. “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” The Bible says "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no man must separate." so to God you are always married unless the wife is sexually immoral or the husband dies and if you get a remarried, you are considered an adulterer and the adulteress and should be put to death. That’s how much God hates it. Why is this basically ignored? Why is it that those verses are always so softened? But, if you bring up a marriage between gay people, omg, they will NOT soften it at all. They are suddenly determined to quote the Bible exactly word for word even though Jesus never said a word on the topic of homosexuality. And if you want to talk about being non-binary or transgender, couldn’t we say that a eunuch falls in this category and Jesus had no problem with a person being made into a eunuch or choosing to become a eunuch. I did some research and it says that they would not produced testosterone and therefore would have more feminine qualities and voices compared to men who were not castrated. Anyway, I was just curious if anyone else has an opinion about this.

[sebens-writing]

Writing Afab Autistic characters!

Prerequisite: autism in females and males present differently. For the longest time, autism was considered a boy disorder and Asperger's was its own diagnosis. Now the term Aspergers is out of date. I personally am a diagnosed Autistic Afab person. This is here for other neurodivergent authors and neurotypical authors looking for a way to make their characters dynamic!

And remember Autism is a disability and like sexuality, it’s a spectrum some are more “autistic” than others. Some are better at “looking normal” and others need constant care. That does not mean you baby us, accommodation does not mean coddling!

Terminology:

Special interest

Autistic meltdown

Going nonverbal

Executive (Dys)function

Masking

Stim

This is a short list of what I think is the most important terms. Please be advised certain words have by co-opt by neurotypical people like “special interest” and “hyper fixation”. They water down the meaning of those words. Such terms like "Are you acoustic?" Or “they got the tism.” Are used by neurotypical people as a joke but sometimes it’s used maliciously. The term “Acoustic” was used by autistic with autistic as a joke before it was co-opted.

Mentality:

Most autistic people are wired differently from neurotypical people, we have more synapsids in our brain. This means we are receiving more information than the average person. Some autistic (myself included) are strong-headed and very single-minded. We like to learn our favorite things.

People with autism have a correlation with other disorders like epilepsy, OCD, and ADHD. PTSD is also common with autistic Afab people as they were probably scolded and berated for traits they have. Remember there is no such thing as an untruamatize autistic (society is not at a place where that is possible. If left-handed people have to struggle in a right-handed world ppl with disabilities won’t have great help).

Autistic people are usually blunt and straightforward at their core, but Afab people tend to mask more. Afab people tend to feel the pressure to mask. They usually develop with their peers until preteen and teen years when they begin to slip through the cracks (they are the “mature for your age” that turn into “childish adults”).

A lot of masking in autism is done by gender, race, and social standing. A lot of Afab autistic tend to land on the non-binary. As we learn to unmask we discover that most autistic people don’t align with their body or even feel human (I am personally agender and I don’t see myself as human),

One last thing a lot of autistic take things at face value. The rules and layout are our bread and butter. A lot of us take a while to form friendships as it takes us personally a while to recognize friendship.

Special interests:

Special interests are very important to autism. The common special interest of Afab people are:

History (specific time periods ie. Victorian, tutor, French Revolution)

Mythology (Greek and Roman)

Crocheting

Reading

Fandom (ie being into animal or TV shows)

These are the most common. My special interest is YouTube, I’ve been obsessed since I was 8-9 years old.

Special interests aren’t the same as hobbies. Special interest is like breathing, it’s something you have to do. A special interest can build an autistic entire being. For me watching YouTube isn’t an “Oh I’m bored let’s scroll TikTok” it’s an “if I’m not watching YouTube I am nothing”. It’s kind of dramatic but YouTube and the things I’ve watched and absorbed into me make me me.

Special interest can be anything!

But remember if you give them a unique special interest like decay, death, or magic you must actually know what you are talking about. Having a surface knowledge isn’t going to work.

A lot of autistic people lose interest in conversation if it’s not about their special interest. Some can't even hold a conversation outside their special interests.

Autistic meltdown

An autistic meltdown is not a tantrum. A tantrum is done deliberately, it is done to manipulate. An autistic meltdown is about being overstimulated to the point you feel like the world will never recover. An autistic meltdown can mean the person shuts down and becomes nonverbal or dissociates, or it means crying screaming, and harm. Usually the aftermath they are drained of their energy.

Going nonverbal

Is a phenomenon both chosen and sometimes it's not. Some people are just nonverbal and can't really speak or when they do speak the words don't come out right.

Executive (Dys)function

Usually, neurodivergent people will hit a wall when it comes to one of the Executive functions. One of the best ways to make your character dynamic is by giving them a dysfunction and seeing how that impacts their character and dynamic with others.

Masking

Masking is a technique done by Autistic and other neurodivergent people to fit into society. It's a way to keep oneself safe and accepted. A lot of neurotypical people don't like things odd and strange things that are too out of normal.

Masking can get so intense that the person who's masking loses their real self and struggles to be unmasked.

Stim

Stimming is an act that can soothe you, positively or negatively.

Positive/ neutral stimming could look like:

Listening to a specific song over and over again

listening to a specific section of a song over and over again

playing with hair

doodling

rocking back and forth

T-rex arms

repeating what others say

jumping

suck on thumb

Negative Stimming could look like this:

scratching

biting

head banging

hair pulling

nail biting

Also, consider adding!

Echolalia

select mutism

Overly expressive emotion

monotone expression of emotion

alexithymia

Aphantasia

Service Dog

Other resources!

How to write an autistic character

Writing Autistic Characters: The Do’s, Don’ts, and Maybes

Understanding undiagnosed autism in adult females

[edenfenixblogs]

I think about this a lot. And I think the White indifference to indigeneity is interesting. (Tone indicator: genuine) I’m genuinely unsure of what to make of Euro-American Christian Whiteness as it relates to indigeneity. (And yes, even former Christians raised in Christianity or atheists with a Christian familial/cultural background are included in this as a dominant culture). And I actually think that informs a lot of how I think and feel about Palestinian indigeneity.

Look, a lot of very educated Jews who I deeply respect and don’t entirely disagree with are responding to my post right now with the assertion that Palestinians aren’t indigenous to the Levant. I maintain that Palestinians ARE indigenous to the Levant, but not because I disagree with them on the facts.

It’s hard to talk about because Muslims and Arabs in European and American society are inarguably minorities who are treated poorly. And the last thing I would ever want is to have a statement of mine taken to mean that I hate ANY Muslim or Arab person, especially on racial or religious grounds. I do not.

But Arabs and Muslims have repeatedly colonized, abused, tortured, and ethnically Jews both in Israel and in many other nations around the world. This is a fact. Palestinians during the British mandate made it very clear that they despised Jews and would not tolerate the existence of a Jewish state when British colonial rule ended. The rest of the Muslim world exiled Jews to Israel as punishment for its creation.

And yet, the Naqba was indeed an ethnic cleansing. The violence against Jews by Muslims and Arabs does not erase violence done by Israelis against Palestinians. Neither justifies the other.

Like White Christians, Palestinian history is full of instances of systemic privilege and verifiable instances of violence against Jews. But the situation Palestine is currently facing is no privilege at all.

But here’s my hot take: we are all indigenous to somewhere. And I think that the idea that who is and isn’t colonized is the sole determinant of indigeneity is outdated and incomplete. Academic Discourse about what is and is not encompassed by the term indigeneity is still a relatively knew field of study. And I think it’s not so set in stone that we can’t interrogate the idea of indigeneity itself outside of a colonial context.

To be very clear: colonization is extremely important in terms of its impact on creating indigenous cultural groups. I don’t recommend or advocate for removing a colonial framework from the concept of indigeneity at all.

But outside of that, what are other frameworks that we can use? What else creates indigeneity? When does indigeneity begin?

I know that there is no timeline on when indigeneity ends. Jews are indigenous to the Levant. And we always will be, because our relationship to that land is inextricable from our identity.

But when does that relationship BECOME inextricable from other identities in other circumstances?

As a Jew, I am part of one of the very few cultures that predates most other cultures that currently exist. My culture has witnessed the birth of many indigenous groups and the fall of many cultures—both dominant and oppressed. Where were citizens of the Roman Empire indigenous to at the time Rome fell? Perhaps the answer there is easy: Rome. But it gets more complicated than that. Rome conquered Greece. Did the Greeks become indigenous at that time, despite being a violent colonizing force before that? I’d argue yes. And unlike Rome, Greek identity extended over many individual city states that previously had more unique identities and their own conquered territories.

For me, indigeneity has more to do with cultural relationship to place. The influence of place on food and language and customs. Oppressor vs oppressed is just a binary. And in the words of John Green, “Almost everything we think of binary is actually spectral.”

Sure, White Christian Americans may have been indigenous to England or Spain or France, depending on your location and family history. But now? Do those places still determine your identity? Your language? Your culture? Your food?

Quite possibly yes! But also sometimes no!

Also, as a Jew, I’m very familiar with the concept of a dominant culture coming to my people after a century or so of residence in a location and being told not so gently to “get the fuck out and go home.” Even now, even though I identify as American as well as Jewish, I know that this directive has always assumed that “home” is Israel. We never belonged here. We were never part of here. We were always perceived as unwelcome interlopers wherever we existed—no matter how long our people existed here. And so we never fully assimilated. We never lost our connection with the land of Israel. In our bones, we are from there, BECAUSE we have never been allowed to be from here.

But what about you? Where are you from? What is the place that informs your identity? Because you do have a cultural identity. You do have a language and a religious background (whether or not you practice that religion) and family recipes and history that has been passed down. And those elements of culture came very literally from somewhere. That is the place to which you are indigenous.

I think the other reason it is harder in the modern era to disentangle all this is because, in some ways, religion has replaced nationality in terms of a point of origin for cultural elements. Culture in Europe and America so many ways seems to originate from a Church. And I don’t think we’ve really begun to academically and socially engage in the idea of how that change in the organization of human society from land-based to religion-based has impacted concepts of cultural identity and indigeneity.

And Jews are caught in the crossfire about this. Because we are a religion and an ethnicity. We don’t have a central religious figure or group in the way Catholics have a pope or Shia Muslims have a Grand Ayatollah or Sunni Muslims have the Grand Imam or Mormons have The Church of JCLDS. We have the historical texts of our forefathers, which all take place in Israel and are about Israel.

But what about Palestine? Many Palestinians identify as Arab, but I don’t think Palestinian Arabs want to call the whole of the Arabian peninsula home. If they did, they wouldn’t be so upset about the tiny scrap of land that is Israel when they have a whole peninsula.

So, I want to examine why. I want to examine why Palestinians, unlike White Christian Euro-Americans, have decided to assert indigeneity now.

I know cynics will say it is because they hate Jews and wish violence upon all of us. And, OK, many of them really do. They proved as much on 10/7 and all the threats and bombs that they’ve launched our way since.

But I still hear the others. I hear the Palestinians who are saying they just want peace in their homeland. They don’t want violence. Their culture is tied to the land. And I want to meet them where they are instead of telling them their cultural identity is somehow a lie or false. It’s not my culture. It’s theirs. And an integral feature of indigeneity is the right to self identify.

So I’m here. I validate that self identification. I hear that you don’t want violence or to hurt/exile/kill Jews and that you regard yourself as indigenous to the Levant specifically. Ok! Let’s talk about that, then. Because I think that’s interesting and valuable that you have such a clear idea of who you are and where you come from when your Euro-American counterparts don’t seem to have that same clarity.

I think acknowledging Palestinian indigeneity is a very valuable thing for evolving how we discuss the concept of indigeneity in general. It doesn’t mean that we stop using the frameworks we have already. But it does mean that new frameworks might apply. Let’s figure out how all that works —together and peacefully.

I get that this topic is controversial and pushes buttons. But discussing it doesn’t actually harm anyone. And our discomfort in addressing it is key to why we must address it.

Reminder: Jewish indigeneity is not a threat to any other ethnic group. It’s just a fact. Acknowledging Jews as indigenous to the levant doesn’t actually harm any Palestinians. Palestinian indigeneity does not actually rely on Jews NOT being indigenous. Multiple peoples can be indigenous to the same place.

[iamfitzwilliamdarcy]

Lex Luthor: A Demonic Role

(Here it is, as promised!! It got VERY long but I think Tumblr cuts off posts now... if not I’lll edit in a read more (it’s nearly midnight and I didn’t proofread this so hopefully it is ok and at least a little insightful/interesting:) 

So as promised– my Lex Luthor and demons post!! This might go along with @catie-does-things Clark as a saint post from years ago that is still excellent (I am now also considering Clark as a St Michael specifically and in contrast to Lex but that needs more exploration) 

Anyway I was listening to this specific episode of the podcast The Lord of Spirits, where two Orthodox priests discuss…. spirits. As a general disclaimer I am not Orthodox. I am not even an Eastern Catholic, I am just a humble Roman and a Modern American laywoman at that. So that perspective colors my approach here a bit. As another disclaimer is that I did not re-listen to the podcast and it’s been about a week since I first listened– I did, however find the transcript and am referencing, likely quoting it– it can be found here, along with the show. I am also not an expert on ancient near-East cultures and so if my language is not precise, please forgive me. 

To summarize the episode (and I guess the podcast as a whole), they are discussing how we encounter the spiritual in the physical world, and that our term of “angel” is not entirely specific as “angel” is a rank (messenger). As English speakers, we kind of dance around the idea that there are other “gods” because we think that means we are talking about polytheism. But the Hebrew does not and is pretty clear there is only one God worthy of worship even if there are these other spiritual beings, lower case gods. For ease of this post, I will use gods to refer to named pagan gods, and angels/demons to reference spiritual beings– however, note that pagan gods and demons (that is, a fallen angel in the English sense) are the same. 

What does that have to do with Lex Luthor? I am getting there. This specific episode talks about pagans and pagan beliefs. Pagans were not dumb– they were experiencing the same spiritual reality that we are— but they were misguided and misled. Many of the demons who fell had been assigned to different natural phenomena or nations – the sun, the stars, storms, various nations or cities. They are supposed to direct worship to the only God worthy of worship– the Hebrew God, the actual Most High, but many began to accept the worship of humans and so this is part of their fall. 

One point the podcast returns to is these succession myths– that is, across various cultures, there is usually a myth of a son of god (or at least a new god) overthrowing the previous high god– Zeus overthrowing Cronus, Cronus overthrowing his father are common ones we know but there are two Mesopotamian/babylonian ones involving Baal as well, who we know is a frequent player in the Bible. This is essentially demon propaganda– the demons remember are spiritual beings who rebelled against God by rejecting Him and refusing to serve Him– but they could not actually overthrow the actual Most High God, so they tell stories to the humans of how they wish it had gone. For some more in depth, here is a quote from the podcast:

Fr. Stephen: The first of these probably is what’s referred to, generally by scholars, in all of these stories together, is you find in pretty much every ancient culture some version of what’s called the succession myth, which is, bare bones, the idea that there was a—we talked before about how there was the idea of a council of gods and sort of a divine father-type god, and then a divine son who was the head of the council. We talked about how in Israel that was Yahweh in both cases, so you already have [this binary] built into ancient Israel religion. But the idea in most of the other cultures of the ancient world, pretty much universally, is that there was an original most high god, who was overthrown at least once by a later god who rose up from among the council, by one of his sons in the council, who overthrew him and took his place, that of the most high god.

So the most common—you mentioned Baal already—this happens with Baal. The Baal cycle is primarily the tale of Baal’s insurrection. This happens twice in Babylonian mythology. It happens twice in Greek mythology, as people may be aware, when Chronos castrates his father, Uranos or Uranus, and becomes most high god, and then Zeus later kills his father Chronos and takes his place. So there are actually two successions there, as well as in Babylonian mythology.

So you have this story of a rebellion, but in every case in these other nations, that rebellion was successful, and of course the version that we are going to see in the Old Testament in the Hebrew Scriptures is going to be inverted in that this insurrection is going to have failed.

Lex Luthor, of course, buys into this. He projects his hatred for his father– who used his power to abuse Lex– onto God– and then onto Superman. He is attempting the succession myth – “and now god bends to my will”-- it appears to work too– he might be in jail but by the end he’s “killed” a god, he’s won. 

Another fall of the demons, however, is also giving humans knowledge and technology  they are not ready for– the podcast doesn’t get super in depth about that (or if it did, it was the part where I was driving in a congested area and I missed some of it lol), but they did specifically address Prometheus from the Greeks and alluded to other Sumerien myths. It’s a bit of a long quote from the transcript, but I think it’s worthwhile: 

There’s a narrative before the flood and then after the flood. Before the flood, that’s the time of the seven sages, the Apkallu, the first of which comes out of the sea, and as an Apkallu has one of these lesser gods who is advising him. Because of this advisor, the king is able to create astrology, magic, technology, all of these things, based on this knowledge that he’s given from these spirits.

The major figures in Cain’s line who are named, it talks about the technological innovations that they produced, which are weapons of war, all of these things. So this idea is, yes, these spirits gave technology to man, but it was not to benefit man; they were giving man technology that humanity wasn’t ready for, but for destroying themselves.

…

Fr. Andrew: Right, and this same story is played out in multiple other ancient mythologies. The one that probably most of our listeners are familiar with is Greek mythology, and you’ve got the story of Prometheus, who gives fire from the gods to mankind. But of course in that story, it’s depicted as Prometheus… It’s correct in the sense that Prometheus is sort of rebelling, he’s doing something he’s not supposed to be doing, but it’s presented as positive, like: look at this wonderful gift that he gave mankind.

But the problem, of course, is that, again, it’s propaganda. This is these demons saying, “Look at all these good things that we gave you. Why don’t you just go ahead and bow down and worship us?” … ​​There’s this promise of being great, being smart, being beautiful, being popular, being wealthy, being prestigious—if only you would serve whatever it is that you are asked to serve. It’s a trick. As you said, it’s for their destruction. Notice whom this technology is given to; it’s given to Cain, the first murderer, and to his descendants.

But the problem, of course, is like, you look at this stuff, and you’re like: What’s so wrong with iron-working and with music? What’s wrong with that stuff?

Fr. Stephen: Right, and it gets expanded firstly in the book of Jubilees, to include all kinds of things in terms of pharmaceuticals and sorcery and means of seduction of the opposite sex. But even if we’re just talking about raw technology, again, it’s not that it’s evil any more than the tree of knowledge of good and evil is evil in and of itself, but it was wisdom for which humanity wasn’t ready to use it appropriately. So it comes to these men as: “I’m giving you this knowledge so that you can use it to gain power and to conquer your neighbors, to set yourself up as a king, to seduce members of the opposite sex, so you will have this power and wealth and authority,” and that’s what humanity uses it for.

From the pagan perspective, kingship and these kings are these glorious beings; from the perspective of Scripture, they are these wicked beings who are destroying themselves and each other and the world around them. 

I bolded the parts that remind me of Lex in particular. We have talked before about how BvS, is, to an extent, entirely about  power (“men with power obey neither policy nor principle” “that’s how it starts the the fever, the rage, the feeling of powerlessness that turns good men cruel” “knowledge without power is paradoxical” “do you know the oldest lie in the book, Senator? That power can be innocent – good luck,” “if God is all-good, he cannot be all powerful, if God is all powerful, He cannot be all good… and neither can you be”)  

We see Lex is seeking power throughout the movie– he is projecting  his rage at his father, who abused his power and authority over Lex, onto both God and Superman. Bruce, also, feels powerless against the violence enacted upon him, but that’s a separate post, we are focusing on Lex, who is attempting to re-gain power he feels he does not have. Interestingly, when he confronts Superman on the rooftop, he has the Advantage– he is the wealthy, authoritative one, wielding all the power and yet…. Still casting himself as a victim. 

Anyway, back to the technology distribution –  Lex specifically mentions Prometheus– I just watched this scene– he says “Prometheus went with us and he ruined Zeus’ plan to destroy mankind… and for that he was given a thunderbolt! Zoom! Seems unfair.” Diana rolls her eyes at this, but it’s an excellent throw-away line about Lex’s perception of both himself and the world– he is viewing himself as a Prometheus figure.  

We know Lex is obsessed with power and knowledge– he has a weird breakdown over it at the Friends of the Metropolis Library speech immediately following his mention of Prometheus – “the bittersweet pain among men is having knowledge with no power because that is paradoxical”. – We also see Lex exploring technology he was not ready for – he tells Bruce ““My R and D is up to all sorts of no good” – which on the surface is bit of light hearted business Talk…but we, as the audience, know better. We know he is messing around with Kryptonite and with Zod’s body. We see him in the Genesis chamber, assuming command. The Genesis Chamber tells him it has knowledge from a hundred thousand different worlds and Lex says-- “good, teach me”. This concludes with him over-riding the chamber itself and participating in the creation of an abomination, an abomination he is warned against. He is using technology for his own gain, for his own power-- for evil-- he was not prepared for it and does not use it appropriately 

(We have talked before about how doomsday also casts Lex in a Creator and Father role, once more casting of himself as a mythological high god.) 

ANOTHER piece here– Lex messing around with alien technology, with things that were Beyond him and not made for him– at least not yet– leads him to contact with Darkseid. He knows Darkseid is coming – the bell can’t be unrung– and seems to be working in his service. Beyond that– he intends to distribute this technology –he wants to get an import license for the Kryptonite so we don’t have to rely on the kindness of strangers. Obviously he will still have control but…  he allows Bruce to take the Kryptonite because he wants Bruce to have it. He intends for Bruce to have it… as part of his plan to take down a god. 

So we have Lex actively casting himself both in a succession myth and as a benevolent, powerful being, providing technology to the simple folk (the way he says “kindness of strangers”-- the mocking of the Southern accent….). He is the type of man to enjoy a Good Narrative– his constant referencing of mythology and art and even his Lolita references– and so how he places himself as a god, not realizing he is only buying into propaganda, that he is orchestrating his own fall. 

His complete rejection of good has invited the demonic into his life. He’s unleashed something he is incapable of controlling and in fact threatens him— not just Doomsday but an old god beyond his control (in an act of seeking power and control for himself). In casting himself as a god, he has only given himself the role of a fallen god– a demon, who has no more power and authority over God than he did as a man. 

(There are similar ideas here also with Suicide Squad’s Enchantress – but that’s a different post.) 

[transfemlogan]

im new-ish here so sorry if this is an obvious question, but do you have trans headcanons for any of the other sides? 👀

HIII I have a million trans hcs always do not worry. I love talking abt trans sides

NOTE: i do bring up how i think some sides might not use prns or use neo prns or whatever, but i do still refer 2 them w/ he/him prns bcuz i might not have a set of prns i think theyd use. (Ex. I think roman uses neoprns, but I don't know which ones / my hc changes so I use he/him in this post. If that makes sense)

THIS GOT SUPER LONG SO IM PUTTING IT UNDER A READMORE !!!

I really like the concept of virgil being trans but not using a narrow label to describe himself. So rather than him identifying as a trans man or a trans woman or non binary, he just identifies as Transgender (or queer!). He doesnt use a specific label

I just feel like he either has so much anxiety abt his gender identity, he just doesnt focus on it at all & doesnt try 2 figure it out OR he has SO much anxiety abt his gender identity, he tries too hard 2 figure it out & has like a million labels he uses. No inbetween.

Roman TOTALLY hoards gender i bet that guy has like 300 genders & he doesnt stop getting more. I think Roman is just a very big hoarder of xenogenders & neo prns & even names. Like he gets a new name every month & with 3 new sets of prns. I feel like he has to scrutinise his gender & what it means 2 him & stuff bcuz he is the most insecure person on earth.

Patton & Janus 2 me r super chill abt their gender identity but in different ways

I tend 2 hc trans Patton as a gnc trans man. I think Pattons chill in the way that he knows what he is & he isnt worried too much abt if he "fits" that label. Like he 100% wears skirts & dresses & does his make up & does common "feminine" things, maybe still uses she/her prns, but isn't bothered abt whether or not that makes him a "real trans man." I bet this guy has ZERO gender dysphoria.

Patton sees someone talking abt what being a trans man "actually is" & hes like "i dont feel that way at all... oh well!" & moves on w/ his life. He is not worried at ALL. He is confident & happy w/ his identity. He ALSO def uses they/them prns (he/she/they patton REAL trust me)

Janus is also chill, but in the way that if he sees a label that fits him better he just changes to it without question. I dont have a stagnant trans label I give 2 Janus, i jump around a lot. I view Janus as like, "oh. I use the label (for example) demiboy, but I actually think trans masc agender fits me better. So i'm using that now" & then later is like "you know what? I think genderfluid fits me better, ill use that one instead" like he isnt freaking out if he relates to a different label or thinks hes something else. He's shrugging his shoulders & moving the fuck on. He also totally might use neoprns, i think he is a neoprn enjoyer. Janus changes his name 24/7, not due 2 gender rzns, but bcuz he is running from the police /j

REMUS IS DEF A NONBINARY PERSON. I cannot see remus as having a binary gender. This guy is genderqueer genderfreak agender gendervoid ANY OF IT. ALL OF IT !! Remus doesn't have a gender, but he definitely has a dead guy stored in the trunk of his car. He's too busy throwing bricks at people & going dumpster driving to have a binary gender. Roman took all the gender in the womb /j

Remus def doesn't use he/him or she/her prns but he either uses a set of neoprns OR doesn't use any prns at all.

And lastly, Logan, because u said "hcs for any of the other sides" which I am assuming means u already know what I tend to hc him as BUT!!! while I might change labels 4 Logan, I do tend 2 hc her as a she/her femme transfem genderfluid man. BUT i also really like genderqueer or xenogender user Logan!! I think Logan uses older terms 2 describe himself. Like rather than calling himself transgender, he prefers the term transsexual. He also 100% does so much research into trans history (OFC all the sides do but I think logan likes it in an autistic way) which is why he uses older terms.

ALSO LOGANS TOTALLY AUTIGENDER? I think he def has ASD & it affects the way he views his gender. Not in a "i dont get societal views about gender, so I don't understand my gender" but in a "i dont get societal views abt gender, so I understand my gender very well" (aka im projecting on2 logan) if that makes any amount of sense. Its more abt the fact that he wants to understand why people view gender a certain way & learning the "rules" around gender & making his own, rather than not understanding & rejecting the concept (which both r ok). He is a rule follower & a schedule needer what else can i say.

AND !!! JUST BECAUSE I CAN !!! I think the orange side is also very autistic but on the opposite spectrum from Logan (I JUST FEEL IN MY HEART THAT HES AUTISTIC. I KNOW IVE NEVER MET HIM BUT HES AUTISTIC TO ME. I can SENSE it.)

He 100% doesn't get the concept of gender so he rejects it completely. He doesn't get the "rules" & doesnt want to know them. Whether this means he is on the binary or nonbinary IDK i just know this man wants 2 fist fight the concept of gender.

[waxdream]

Okay so. Edwin Abbot often creates a level of continuity between dimensions - like how a line becomes a square, then becomes a cube. He does this all throughout the book, creating continuations between pointland, lineland, flatland and spaceland, where each seems to be 'more evolved' than the previous, but they're actually just different.

I'm going to do a modern interpretation of the text here. In our 3rd dimensional world, we use a linear number system the majority of the time. However, occasionally we also use Matrices- a two dimensional system, and even more rare we use high dimensions of matrices. Higher than our own dimension - the maths can have as many dimensions as you like. Now, assuming Flatlander mathematicians are on a level with spacelander mathematicians, we'd need something akin to a lower dimension of maths than our linear base 10. Now, I don't think this exists - after all, with the dimensions of maths, it doesn't actually matter what base you count in. You can have matrices made with binary (that's how computers work!).

So, are we stuck? I personally feel partial to the belief that flatlanders use binary. It makes sense to me. I want the flatlanders to have an 'advanced' mathematics that is literally just the way we teach children to do maths, and a 'basic' mathematics that's used every day by your average joe. And I want the basic maths to have a connection to the king of pointland, because our basic maths is connected to lineland. To continue the pattern, a 4th dimensional being would use matrices as their basic maths.

So if we're looking for a form of maths related to the pointland king, I literally can't think of anything better than binary. Mathematically, it doesn't follow my pattern, but symbolically? I think it would. The king of pointland believes he encompasses the entire world - he is the 1 in binary. And anything that isn't him is a zero.

Along with that, counting systems develop differently in many parts of the world. We count in bass 10 because we have 10 fingers, but that doesn't happen everywhere! Another alternative to my theory is the number system being based of how many sides a male has. So a line is taught base 2 or binary, a triangle base 3, a square base 4, all the way up to the class of mathematicians. If I remember right, the hexagons are normally mathematicians. Whoever the mathematician class is, I think the bases will stop there, and theirs will be the 'only accepted base of maths in scholarly songs' (because remember, flatlanders remember things through song). This would contribute to classism, essentially forcing the lower classes out of maths unless they were to learn a whole new system (which definitely fits the themes of flatland).

Though we must also remember that all mathematics in flatland must be sung to be remembered. Or recited. Personally this makes me think of a bastardised version of the oral traditions of Native Americans - I bet Native Flatlanders who are outside of this classist regime would be incredible Flatlandian mathematicians. If anyone has a story about a Native American coded Flatlander, that sounds so damn cool, that sounds like a great Idea for a story :))

I'd love to know how Native folk traditionally approach maths, not just for my silly flatland headcanons, I just would really love to know how learning through spoken rather than written means effects maths! I have a feeling it would make lateral thinking easier, making it great for engineers.

In conclusion, I think there's many different options! I personally think that isolating the lower classes by forcing them to use the base of their side number is pretty on theme for flatland. It would also make daily life ever so slightly slower for these classes - after all, asking for 1010 every time you want 30 eggs is ever so slightly more long winded. It's like if you were to only write with roman numerals - you'd get used to it of course, but it's still kinda long winded. Then again, the classes would adapt fully and be just as quick as we are at base 10, so yknow, it would just end up being a tool of division rather than a tool to potentially disadvantage lower classes by forcing them to use 'unnatural feeling number systems'.

What number system do you think they use in flatland?

[nerdygaymormon]

Hi, Uncle David. I've been out to my best friends as a lesbian for about a year now. A few days ago, one of my very best friends told me that she thinks she might be bi. We're both LDS and in high school. She was scared and unsure so I tried my best to comfort her and give her advice in the moment. I'm just wondering if you have any advice or quotes or scriptures that I could give her that might help her or comfort her and let her know that it's okay to be queer and that God loves her?

Congratulations to your friend! Accepting this is part of who you are is a big deal, a milestone.

I'm glad your friend knew you're queer and someone she could confide in. I'm sure your friend is dealing with a lot of things in her head as she is working through what this could mean for her life.

—————————

I think bisexual could be described as having twice the capacity to love, and I think that's a beautiful thing.

—————————

I have 2 scriptures I hope will comfort your friend

Psalms 139:13-14 - This beautiful psalm sings of God’s knowledge of each person and how we’re intentionally crafted together. Every crucial part of our identity was known to God as our bodies were woven together. God wove together our gender, our sexuality, and all aspects that make up who we are.

Romans 1:20 - This verse says that we can know the attributes of our invisible God by the things that God makes. Considering all we can see around us, it testifies that God loves diversity. God loves exceptions. God loves peculiarities. God doesn’t stick to binaries. God revels in variety.

—————————

If she hasn't done it yet, encourage your friend to be open with her Heavenly Parents. They already know her orientation and love her as she is.

Trust that God is bigger, more liberal, more loving & accepting than we’ve been taught and than you might possibly now believe. Give God a chance. Let God affirm you.

—————————

Studies show that LGBTQ+ people tend to be more creative, have higher IQ’s, are better at reading the emotions of others, have more compassion, are more cooperative and have less hostility. Those are some pretty fantastic gifts that come with being queer.

—————————

When I hear things at church that trouble me, I ask these questions, I hope you and your friend find them helpful:

1) Is this consistent with the God I know?

2) Does this fit with the great commandment to love one another?

Most of the things that bother me and which speak negatively of my orientation & my future fail these simple questions.

—————————

In fact, here's 4 main points the Church teaches regarding queer people:

Feelings of same-sex attraction aren’t a choice; they’re nobody’s fault

These attractions aren’t sinful

You don’t need to change your orientation

You are welcome in the Church exactly as you are

—————————

Life isn’t easy and especially not for LGBT individuals. I'm glad she has you, someone who is safe to talk to.

One aspect of the bi experience that's different from the gay/lesbian experience is they often don't come out of the closet. When they're with a partner, people usually assume they're gay or straight (depending on the gender of the partner). Bisexuals are the largest group out of LGBTQIA+, but they're often invisible. They're more likely to know people who are out as gay or trans than they are to know people who are bi. Even though they're the largest, it can feel isolating because they don't see others like themselves.

—————————

As your friend is just at the beginning of her journey, I don't want to overwhelm her with lots of advice and links. However, one link you may want to introduce her to is the Bisexual Resource Center.

Also, here's a little play on words you can use: Bisexuals are great. They aren't gay. They aren't straight. They're graight

[jewfrogs]

What was the place of trans people in Ancient Greece? I don’t mean myths, but accounts of irl trans people. I once read something about priests of Aphrodite whose initiation ceremony was castration and wearing women’s clothing, which could be reinterpreted through a modern lens as Ancient Greece’s version of trans women, so to speak. Perhaps even non-binarism, though I don’t believe there was basis for escaping the gender binary and the very much enforced roles in the Greek patriarchy.

this is another great question! i’m going to broaden our scope a little bit to include some discussion of rome as well, because there’s a lot of useful stuff there and the two are interlinked.

discussing trans people in any historical context is difficult, because the framework through which we understand it doesn’t exist. that isn’t to say that people who didn’t conform to their assigned gender didn’t exist (gender variance has been documented for about as long as history), but that applying modern labels and understandings to them doesn’t always work, and there’s a lot of overlap between some categories (e.g. could we understand this individual as a trans woman or as an effeminate [gay] man? what does that mean when neither of those identities are contextual during the individual’s time?). all that to say: there isn’t a lot that directly corresponds to trans people from antiquity, but there’s certainly not nothing.

one reference to trans people in ancient greece comes from lucian’s dialogue of the courtesans (c. 120-190 CE), where the character megilla/us seems to be remarkably like a trans man: “I was born a woman like the rest of you, but I have the mind and the desires and everything else of a man.” this is an excellent post that discusses this passage in depth.

according to pliny the elder, there was a noted phenomenon of women turning into men: “The change of females into males is undoubtedly no fable. We find it stated in the Annals, that, in the consulship of P. Licinius Crassus and C. Cassius Longinus, a girl, who was living at Casinum with her parents, was changed into a boy; and that, by the command of the Aruspices, he was con- veyed away to a desert island. Licinius Mucianus informs us, that he once saw at Argos a person whose name was then Arescon, though he had been formerly called Arescusa: that this person had been married to a man, but that, shortly after, a beard and marks of virility made their appearance, upon which he took to himself a wife. He had also seen a boy at Smyrna, to whom the very same thing had happened. I myself saw in Africa one L. Cossicius, a citizen of Thysdris, who had been changed into a man the very day on which he was married to a husband.” (Plin. Nat. 7.4) it seems likely that this is discussing intersex people, since pliny references them immediately before, but it is interesting to see evidence for at least some form of transition and for the acceptance of said transition—arescon has a wife! that’s pretty neat! these people seem to be fairly well-accepted, which does make one think about how transition in general might have worked or been seen.

with regards to the priests, i haven’t read about anything like that with aphrodite (although i would be remiss not to mention aphroditos here, particularly her mention in macrobius’ saturnalia), but i’m guessing you’re thinking of the galli, priests of cybele (a phrygian goddess, often correlated with rhea and with the intersex deity agdistis) as well as her lover attis (who was castrated as well—catullus 63, which i am going to write something about one day, is a retelling of their myth). they were castrated and generally wore women’s clothing, and many sources refer to them with feminine language. firmicus maternus (c. 4th century AD) said of them negant se viros esse, et non sunt <mulieres>: mulieres se volunt credi (“they deny that they are men, and are not <women>: they want to be believed as women”). there are certainly parallels that can be drawn here!

in addition, there can be a lot of blurred overlap between gay readings and trans readings. in ancient greek & roman thought, the categories of men-who-are-penetrated and women-who-penetrate (or, well... hump, since one of the latin words for these women is tribades, or “rubbers”) are almost genders in their own right, or perhaps the intersection of two genders: men-who-are-penetrated are like women but not, and women-who-penetrate are like men but not. (it can definitely be interpreted, to some extent, that these people want to be read as the opposite binary gender to the one they were assigned—which raises the question of whether we simply don’t know some of these stories because people did pass and therefore it wasn’t outwardly transgressive.)

this is probably best encapsulated by an excerpt from the fables of phaedrus (a first-century CE roman author who is supposedly adapting aesop’s work), where the question tribadas et molles mares quae ratio procreasset (what reason brought [lesbians] and [effeminate men] into existence?) is asked, and this is the answer:

The same Prometheus, creator of the clay crowd (which is broken the moment it offends fortune), had made those parts of nature which decency hides with clothing apart from the rest for the whole day. Just before he could fix the parts to the right bodies, he was suddenly invited to dinner by Liber; when he had watered his veins well with nectar, he returned home late at night on faltering feet. Then, with a half-awake mind and a drunken mistake, he applied maidenhood to a type of man and affixed masculine members to the women; thus desire now enjoys perverse joy.

there are different ways this can be read, because “applicuit virginale generi masculo” and “masculina membra applicuit feminis” can both be taken as an aetiology for either tribades or molles mares. take one: the first line refers to molles mares, making them men in body with women’s spirits, and the second line refers to tribades, making them women in body with men’s spirits. take two: the first line refers to tribades, making them men in spirit with women’s bodies, and the second line refers to molles mares, making them women in spirit with men’s bodies. these are both really interesting readings that both resonate to some extent with transness and specifically with the space in between gayness and transness.

as an example, take the figure agathon (a fictionalized portrayal of a real playwright) from aristophanes’ thesmophorizusae. agathon is notably effeminate—he’s first introduced by a character saying εγώ γαρ ουχ όρω άνδρ’ ουδέν ενθάδ’ όντα, Κυρήνην δ’ όρω (“I see no man, but I see Cyrene”, in reference to, as one commentary puts it, “a dissolute woman of the day”). that is to say: agathon is read as a woman. when another character in the thesmo needs to dress up as a woman, he doesn’t borrow a woman’s clothes—he borrows agathon’s. could we read agathon as a trans figure? perhaps! but his effeminacy is tied to him being, as the greek puts it, ευρύπρωκτος—literally “wide-assed”, but often translated simply as a certain six-letter word that starts with f. agathon isn’t a woman, exactly, but he’s not quite a man either. i wouldn’t necessarily call this in-between space trans, but i don’t know if i could call it cis either.

tl;dr: there are few depictions of people we might call trans as we understand it today from ancient greece, but there are a lot of interesting questions we can ask and consider with regards to gender that touch on transness and antique experiences analogous to modern-day trans ones. also gayness and transness are very much intertwined.

[samwisethewitch]

What does it mean to be pagan? (Paganism 101 Ch. 1)

That’s right, y’all! With Baby Witch Bootcamp officially wrapped, it’s time to jump into our next long term series! I put out a poll on Patreon, and my patrons voted for Paganism 101 as our next series. While not all witches are pagan and not all pagans are witches, there is a lot of overlap between the two groups. Both witchcraft and paganism offer practitioners a sense of freedom, a deeper connection to the world around them, and a greater awareness of their personal power.

I identify both as a witch and as a pagan, and I get a lot of questions about paganism. In this series, we’ll go through the basics: what it means to be pagan, the difference between a neopagan and a reconstructionist, and the role of magic in different pagan traditions. We’ll also talk about some of the most popular modern pagan traditions and how to find the right tradition for you.

Let’s start off by answering the question, “What does pagan actually mean?”

Defining “Pagan”

It’s important to remember that “pagan” is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide range of different faiths. Someone who practices Wicca, for example, will have very different beliefs from someone who practices Hellenismos. These different faiths are linked by a shared history, rather than by shared beliefs or practices.

The word “pagan” comes from the Latin “paganus,” which literally means “area outside of a city” or, to phrase it slightly differently, “countryside.” This adjective was used to describe people and things that were rustic or rural and, over time, came to also have the connotation of being uneducated. Originally, the word had no religious association, and was even used to refer to non-combatants by the Roman military.

From this definition, we can gain some insight into what makes a religion or practice pagan. Pagans feel a kinship with the wild or rural places of the world, and are comfortable waking “off the beaten path.”

But how did “paganus” come to refer to a type of religion, anyway?

To understand the religious meaning of “paganus,” it’s necessary to understand a little bit about the religion of Ancient Rome. Rome (the city) was built inside a pomerium, a sacred boundary that formed a spiritual border around the city and its people. Paganus folks were those who lived outside the pomerium and, as such, may not have been strict adherents of the state religion — they certainly wouldn’t have been able to travel into the city for every major festival. They may have gotten a bit more creative with their worship of the gods. However, as previously stated, the word paganus did not have an explicitly religious meaning in ancient times.

The use of paganus as a religious label began after the legalization of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine in 313 C.E. Christianity would not be adopted as the official state religion until 380 C.E., but Constantine’s conversion and decriminalization of Christian worship paved the way for Rome’s transformation into a Christian state. It was around this time, as Christianity was quickly growing in urban areas, that early Roman Christians began using the word “paganus” to refer to those who still practiced polytheism. Rather than referring to those outside the city’s boundary or to untrained civilians, the label now referred to those outside the Church, those who were not “soldiers of Christ.”

As Christianity spread in popularity throughout the Mediterranean, Europe, and Northern Africa, the pagan label was applied to all non-Christians in those areas. The word “pagan” became a derogatory label, implying an inferior and backwards religion.

So, really, the thing that makes a religion pagan is a historical conflict with Christianity. Pagan religions are those that were suppressed or completely destroyed after Christianity became the dominant faith in the region.

This is why Norse Paganism and Kemetic (Egyptian) polytheism, which are very different, are both considered “pagan” while Shinto, a Japanese religion that shares a lot of common features with many pagan faiths, is not. Because Christianity never achieved total dominance in Japan, Shinto was never pushed aside to make room for Jesus.

In the 20th century, people who felt drawn to these old religions started to reclaim the pagan label. Like many other reclaimed slurs, “pagan” became a positive label for a community united by their shared history.

What do all pagans have in common?

This is a tough question to answer because, as stated above, paganism is a historical definition, not one shaped by belief or practice. However, there are some things most pagans have in common. Here are a few of them, although these concepts may take different forms in different traditions.

Paganism…

… is (usually) polytheistic. Most pagans do not subscribe to monotheism, the belief in a single, all-powerful divine being. Some pagans are polytheists, meaning they believe in multiple divine beings with varying levels of power. Hellenic pagans, Norse pagans, and Celtic pagans are typically polytheists. Still others are monists, meaning they believe in a single divine source that manifests itself as multiple gods. Wiccans and other neopagans are typically monists. Many pagans fall somewhere in-between strict polytheism and strict monism. We’ll talk more about polytheism in a future post, but for now just know that the idea of a single, supreme creator is not compatible with most forms of paganism.

… is based in reciprocity. This is a concept that may seem odd to those who grew up around Abrahamic religions: the idea of engaging the gods in a mutually beneficial partnership, rather than one-sided worship. When we connect with the gods, we receive spiritual, emotional, and physical blessings. The gods also benefit, as they are strengthened by our prayers and offerings. (I like to think they also enjoy the company. It has to be lonely, having your body of worshipers supplanted by an anarchist carpenter from Palestine.) The concept of reciprocity is why most pagans make physical offerings to their gods.

Reciprocity also extends to our relationships with other people. Most pagan religions have a code of ethics that includes values like hospitality, kindness, and/or fairness with others. Depending on the pagan, reciprocity may even extend to the dead! Many (but not all) pagans practice ancestor worship, the act of honoring and venerating the beloved dead.

Reciprocity may even extend to the world at large. Some (but not all) pagans are animists, which means they believe that every animal, plant, and stone contains its own spirit. Animist pagans strive to live in harmony with the spirits of the world around them, and may make offerings to these spirits as a sign of friendship.

… embraces the Divine Feminine. Paganism acknowledges and venerates both masculine and feminine expressions of divinity. Polytheist pagans worship both gods and goddesses, while monist pagans see the divine Source as encompassing all genders. In either case, the end result is the same: pagans acknowledge that, sometimes, God is a woman. (Cue the Ariana Grande song.)

Paganism also acknowledges gender expressions outside the masculine/feminine binary. Many pagan deities, like Loki (in Norse paganism), Atum (in Kemetic paganism), and Aphroditus (a masculine aspect of the Greek Aphordite) exist somewhere in the grey area between man and woman.

… is compatible with a mystic mindset. Remember how I said there’s a lot of overlap between witchcraft and paganism? Part of the reason for that is because paganism is highly compatible with magic and other mystical practices. Most pagans believe that humans have, or can attain, some level of divine power. It makes sense that this power would manifest as magic, or as other spiritual abilities. Many of the ancient cultures modern paganism draws inspiration from practiced magic in some form, so it follows that modern pagans would as well.

… draws inspiration from the ancient stories. As we discussed, “pagan” originally referred to the religious groups that were pushed out by Christian hegemony. As a result, every modern pagan is a little bit of a historian. Because paganism was pushed underground, it takes a little digging to find myths, rituals, and prayers that can be used or adapted for modern practice.

Many pagans worship historic deities that you’ve probably read about at some point. Visit any pagan pride event, and you’ll probably find worshipers of Zeus, Venus, Thor, and Isis, just to name a few. Studying and interpreting ancient mythology and archaeological evidence is a big part of modern paganism.

… is a religion with homework. If you’ve read this far, you may be beginning to realize that being pagan is a lot of work. It’s fun, spiritually fulfilling, and very rewarding work, but work all the same. Because very few modern pagans have access to temples, priests and priestesses, or an in-person community that shares their beliefs, they end up having to teach themselves, do their own research, and guide their own practice.

This is incredibly empowering, as it means you are your own religious authority. It does, however, mean that you will occasionally have to open a book or slog through a dense academic article about the most recent archaeological find related to your favorite deity. Thankfully, there’s a growing number of accessible, beginner-friendly books, blogs, podcasts, and YouTube channels to help you in your research.

… embodies a deep respect for the natural world. While not all pagans are animists, most pagans do feel some sort of reverence for the forces of nature. Many pagan deities are associated with natural forces or use the natural world to communicate with their followers. Because of this, not only do pagans respect and love nature, but they’re constantly watching it for signs and messages. (Are you really friends with a pagan if they haven’t called you crying because they found a crow feather on the ground or saw a woodpecker in their backyard?)

Some pagan groups, especially neopagan religions like Wicca, have been classified as Earth-centered religions. Personally, I dislike this term. While it is true that many pagans feel a deep spiritual connection to the Earth and may even venerate local nature spirits, to say that these religions are “Earth-centered” feels like an oversimplification. Wiccans, for example, don’t actually worship nature — they worship the God and Goddess, who they see reflected in the natural world.

… is driven by individual spiritual practice. As mentioned above, very few pagans have access to an in-person community. Because of this, modern paganism largely consists of individual practices. Even pagans who do belong to a community still typically worship on their own sometimes. These personal practices may involve prayer, offerings to the gods, meditation, divination, astral travel, performing religious rituals, or countless other practices. Many pagans have personal altars in their homes, where they worship alone or with their family.

… is a celebration of daily life. One thing I love about paganism is how it makes every aspect of my life feel sacred. Many religions emphasize the spiritual aspects of life while deemphasizing, or even demonizing, the physical or mundane aspects. This can lead to practitioners feeling like they are spiritual beings trapped in a physical body, or like their physical needs and desires are something to escape.

Paganism allows practitioners to fully enjoy being physical and spiritual beings. Pagans reach for the heights of spiritual awareness, while also enjoying earthly delights — recognizing that neither is inherently more worthy than the other and that both are needed for a balanced life.

… is only one of many paths to Truth. Most pagan groups do not claim to be the only valid religious path, and in fact several openly acknowledge the validity of other religions. This is why you rarely see pagans trying to convert other people to paganism — it’s openly acknowledged that paganism isn’t for everyone, and that those who are truly meant to practice the old ways will find them.

~~~

Hopefully, this post has given us a good working definition of “paganism.” From here, we’ll explore some of these individual concepts in more depth and discuss specific religions within the pagan umbrella. Until then, blessed be.

Resources:

Wicca for Beginners by Thea Sabin

Wicca: A Guide for the Solitary Practitioner by Scott Cunningham

A Witches’ Bible by Janet and Stewart Farrar

The Way of Fire and Ice by Ryan Smith

Where the Hawthorn Grows by Morgan Daimler

Temple of the Cosmos by Jeremy Naydler

A Practical Guide to Irish Spirituality by Lora O’Brien

[nightshade-anura]

"if piper was experiencing compulsory heterosexuality then it stands to reason so was jason in this essay i will" WHERES THE ESSAY OP??

that wasn't me, and ik you probably meant it as a joke, but-

jason was born in 1994, which would've still been the tail end of the aids crisis. this meant that a lot of mentions of quietness in general would've been very quiet or even non existent. he was also only raised in a household till the age of 3; at which point he was abandoned in a park, and then, obviously, raised by lupa, and after, camp jupiter. even at a camp of roman demigods, the concept of queer people would've been very much erased.

when we first meet reyna, it's mentioned that she feels the need to be in a relationship with a praetor, and, i may be wrong here, but i think the implication is specifically of the opposite binary gender? either way, reyna's experiencing compallo here herself, which may rubbed off onto jason as comphet.

to the main point: jason was forced into a relationship with piper, after having his memory wiped, and being told by piper herself that it was genuine. with a lack of memories, he's already quite disoriented so any doubt of attraction he may have had would've most likely have just been put down to disorientation. piper's also dealing with dylan (the guy who was hitting on her), so, in a sense, he feels protective, which could be easily mistaken as attraction.

there were exclusively m/f couples aboard the argo ii. this means that, until hoh, he is not aware of any queer people around him. even if he does begin questioning, he probably tries to stash his sexuality somewhere in the back of his mind in an attempt to fit in.

however, at the end of the day, piper has a chance to explore their sexuality and gender, whereas jason doesn't- ahem, i think everyone knows by now, but if you don't have spoilers filtered and you somehow don't know what i'm talking about, this is a spoiler warning- as he dies. jason and piper presumably break up sometime during tdp, which was most likely only a couple of weeks inbetween that and his death to question his sexuality. (i do like to imagine that he has a bf whilst in college, but that's besides the point)

[lovelivingmydreams]

Paper Flowers: By any other name

Happy New year! I’m back with the fifth chapter. Other chapters are listed in the master post under Paper Flowers.

Thomas gets tmakes a fun youtube Video. Patton thinks there might be a breakthrough with Virgil. And Roman gets a surprise.

Thomas and Joan are sitting down at Joan’s kitchen table for a youtube video.

Earlier that week Thomas had sent out a tweet to ask the Fanders to send in questions and links for them to react to.

The video was a lot of fun so far. They saw cute dog video’s, inspiring coming out video’s, and then there was the artwork inspired by his vine stuff. Some fanders made misleading complement themed cards, and there were cute drawings of his teacher and dad character. And of course there was that stainglass/yingyang drawing of the Prince and his nemesis.

“This is just amazing, you guys are all so talented.” He gushes, not for the first time as he studies the gorgeous detailing on the latter. This must’ve taken hours and he can’t get over the fact that something he did inspired that.

The questions were fun to answer too. What subject is teacher’s favorite? What is Dad’s favorite cookie? What was the funniest interaction he’d ever had after a storytime? Some serious ones too. How did Joan know they were non binary?

What made him decide to come out as gay to his Christian parents? How did he know it was the right time?

Is it hard being out and proud while being a public figure?

Tips on how to handle social anxiety.

“Okay, final question, I peeked on this one,” Joan admitted, making Thomas let out a dramatic scandalized gasp. “I wanted to make sure we’d end the video on a fun note. Go on read it.”

Joan is chuckling already, so Thomas quickly reads the comment.

“Thomas love your content! But the people need to know. Is it Marcus or Kevin?”

Thomas frowns in confusion. There is a link and when he clicks on it he is brought to a long reblog chain on tumblr. He quickly reads through the first few posts and snorts.

“Oh My Goodness, that is just amazing!” he squeals in delight. He loves that the fanders are so enthusiastic about those two. And from what he can tell both ‘armies’ are battling it out in good fun.

“Well, I can’t confirm, nor deny either name at this time. But I think he’d very much approve of the one his faithful minions have chosen for him. Personally I do think Kevin would be hilarious though.”

Joan chuckles and nods in agreement.

“We might learn the dark overlord’s true name someday,” Thomas smiles. “But for now, take it easy guys galls and non-binary palls. Peace out!”

“Are you quite done Princey?” Virgil huffed. Roman had been laughing nonstop since Thomas heard about the debate going on in the Fanders comunity.

“Sorry. I’ll stop. Honestly it’s not that funny. Please do forgive me… Kevin,” And just like that he was doubled over again. Virgil groaned in annoyance.

“Okay, okay, I’m done. I honestly didn’t mean to. You can’t always help it when you laugh though. And you must admit it is a little funny,” Roman said once he got a hold of himself, whipping the mirth out of his eyes.

“What’s all this commotion about?” Patton wondered as he entered the commons.

Virgil tensed up. Patton had been… Different lately. He’d been checking if Virgil took enough food when he ate in his room, and that he ate everything when Roman coaxed him into eating with the others. He knocked more often to check if Virgil had laundry to be done, or to tell him that it was time for him to go to bed. He was taking this whole dad thing a little too seriously.

And some part of Virgil wanted to just accept and appreciate the effort, but the other kept wondering why Patton was doing all that for him when he clearly wanted him to just move back downstairs already.

It was in the little things. The way Patton would tense when he entered the room. How he would hesitate before smiling at him or greeting him. The way his voice wavered when he asked him stuff. And sometimes Patton would say stuff like “I don’t care how Deceit does things, but up here we…” Insert whatever rule Patton was trying to get Virgil to accept.

Honestly. He didn’t mind doing chores. Even if it was redundant when you can just will stuff to be clean. He didn’t mind making an appearance in the commons once a day either. Patton had just jumped from not involving him in anything into expecting him to fight him on everything.

Sure he’d roll his eyes and huff a little, but he wasn’t that difficult. Patton clearly expected him to be though. Perhaps even expected him to get tired of the rules and leave.

The problem was, Virgil had actually tried a few times in the beginning, and he couldn’t go back downstairs. Not really. Not for more than a visit when Thomas was asleep. The rest of the time, he was stuck in the in between only able to go to the upper commons.

Virgil’s best guess at how this worked was that Thomas had acknowledged his existence, but was still trying to push him down most of the time.

It’d been Janus’ decision to reveal this truth, when Virgil had been triggered into a panic attack one morning out of seemingly nowhere. Janus and Remus had been very calm that day and that had been exactly what had made Virgil worry that something big was coming. Janus realized this was not a healthy environment for him. So he lifted the denial on Thomas’ anxiety and told Patton and the others that Virgil would be living with them from now on.

Next thing Virgil knew his room was moved up, just not all the way.

He wasn’t sure, but he felt like he’d gotten closer to the upper level since he and Roman became friends. Logan didn’t seem to care one way or another. So that left Patton as the one to push him down right?

Virgil closed his eyes to calm his reeling thoughts for a moment. He couldn’t get swept up by his own head when in public. Princey got it by now, but how would he explain this to Patton.

“Oh, hello Padre. Kevin and I were just discussing the latest video and…”

Then Virgil found himself crouching on the kitchen counter ready for an attack. Patton’s high pitched squeal had been unexpected and terrifying.

Roman, once he recovered from his own surprise, moved a little closer to Virgil, putting himself in between him and the perceived danger. It helped calming him down a lot faster and adjust his position to look more casual and less terrified.

Patton was still squealing and clapping. It seemed like he had missed Virgil’s panicked reaction.

“Your name is Kevin?” he gushed.

“No,” Virgil objected immediately. Holding up both hands in a stop sign.

“That’s just one of the names the fanders gave the villain character. Princey thinks he’s hilarious for calling me that,” he explained.

Patton deflated. “Oh… Well, it’s nice the fanders enjoy your character so much,” he smiled awkwardly. Virgil suppressed the urge to roll his eyes. He wanted to get out of here, like now.

“Padre! You just must see the gorgeous artwork this fander did about the prince!” Roman declared as he grabbed Patton by the arm and led him away.

Virgil finally fully relaxed. Roman was really pulling through on every level.

Protecting him from Patton’s parenting, deflecting Logan’s tough questions, and even making Virgil feel appreciated. Whenever Virgil had had a rough day of keeping Thomas safe, Roman would come find him in the field and just hang with him, humming his favorite music, set up one of his favorite movies with him, telling him stories of his grand adventures. Just hanging out. Once they did each other’s nails. That was a lot of fun. Virgil had actually quit nailbiting  all together because he didn’t want to ruin them.

At first Roman had tried gifts and lavish praise, but that did not sit well with Virgil. He panicked over not being able to live up to the praise or give good gifts in return. And Roman listened and adapted.

Virgil in turn had been trying to give Roman verbal praise whenever he did something nice for him, or did a good job with Thomas. It was hard for Virgil to say this stuff out loud though.

Virgil entered his room trying to think of a way to thank Roman for today without making it awkward for the both of them.

His eye fell on some purple craft paper. One of Roman’s early gifts. He’d thought that maybe Virgil might enjoy creating things to take his mind of off his worries every once in a while.

Virgil had never really found a good project to use it for… But now.

When Roman got back to his room after bidding Patton a good day he could feel a slow rhythmic knock on his door. They never agreed on a code, but he could tell that this was just Virgil trying to get his attention, but that he could take his time if needed.

He decided to note down his new idea for a Vine first so he wouldn’t lose it. When he opened the door, Virgil was nowhere to be seen. Not that Roman noticed right away, he was far too focused on the purple paper rose hanging from the doorframe by a piece of yarn.

It was clearly hand crafted. Which must have taken Virgil quite some effort. He carefully untied the flower and brought it to his room where he put it on his vanity in a little vase.

He smiled softly at the little token of appreciation. A friendship with the emo knight wasn’t always easy to navigate. But it was definitely worth it.

He picked up the idea again, confident it would be another hit.

The dark overlord scowled at the bright morning sky. "Curse you, eternal sun." He turns his attention to the star map on the table in front of him "and every single one of you stars." He raised a picture of the solar system and glared. "And to hell with all you planets! I hate you all!" Then he dramatically turned and picked up a small ball resembling a certain non-planet. "Except for you,” he says softly stroking the ball delicately as if to comfort it. “You get me. You may stay."

Next: everyone falls

[stitched-mouth]

SEX EDUCATION SEASON 4 EPISODE 7

Don’t read if you haven’t gotten up to episode 7.

I’d say O just got her redemption arc and I was right, I still hate her. Wanting to fit in is understandable but I can’t forgive her for throwing Ruby under the bus to do so, especially since O still clearly hasn’t changed.

She is still willing to throw people under the bus to get what she wants, as seen when she made Otis out to be an anti-feminist and outer.

I know Ruby isn’t perfect but at least she’s shown some improvement, compared to O.

When O brought up Otis’s Dad I wanted to shoot her. Imagine bring up someone’s family’s red flags who they have no affiliation with and using it against them just for personal gain?

How did she not lose everyone right there? Otis has made it quite clear he doesn’t agree with his Dad or really talk to him.

I was shocked with how dark this episode was. I don’t know, not that dark but child molestion and domestic abuse wasn’t topics I thought the show would go into especially in the second last episode of the last season.

Not complaining though.

Maeve going back to America and breaking up with Otis feels…so right. I’m sad but happy to see it happen.

I was really put off with Issac x Aimee at first but I think it’s starting to grow in me. Their personalities fit so well.

I wish we saw more Erin. If they were going to make it so big that Maeve still loved her Mum so much despite everything, they should of showed us why better.

Also does Sean feel like a less iconic version of Klaus from TUA? They even look alike. Sean reminds me so much of my brother it kind of hurts. He raised me when he was a teenager and I feel like it kind of messed him up. Definitely played a part in him doing drugs and being so flaky… He has a kid now who he doesn’t see and his baby mama hates me because my big brother treats me (his little sister) better than his own kid. Maybe this is odd to put here but I just wanted to say it, I haven’t been able to speak about. It’s sad because she’s not wrong, I’m more like my brother’s daughter than my actual brother’s daughter.

I HAVE A BIG FAT CRUSH ON ROMAN, THEY ARE SO BEAUTIFUL.

I’m a little confused about their gender but it doesn’t really matter, I still have a crush on them.

I originally thought Roman and Abbi were going to be problematic queer people that we see so often irl, but I was very happy to be wrong (maybe I’m speaking a little soon since I still have one episode left but still). I wish the show did have some terrible queer people though, since they are so common nowadays.

Well maybe Cavendish is problematic queer. With they’re lack of regard for anyone who is a gay no-binary green non-disabled person, and how they so fast to call someone sexist even though “they don’t gossip”.

WAIT, O is the problematic queer. Just occurred to me now. Also shout out to her actor, Thaddea Graham, she did such a good job at making me hate O. I’m also so happy to see an Irish person WITH A REAL IRISH ACCENT on screen. Even cooler that’s she’s Chinese too. There are a lot of Irish Chinese people in Ireland you know, I feel like a lot of people who don’t know that.

If Eric and Otis don’t makeup I just might boycott Netflix.

If Connor somehow wins the election I also just might boycott Netflix.

Is it obvious I want Otis to win?

I’m really hoping Ruby gets a good ending, I’m really scared what they are going to do to her now.

IF JACKSON’S MUM IS HAVING AN AFFAIR IM SHUTTING NETFLIX DOWN.

I’m not so fond of Joanna, she reminds me a little bit of my little sister who I recently cut all ties with, but honestly just seems a little lost. Which is why she can be so annoying. And it’s not problematic annoying, she’s just got that naïve dysfunctional black sheep sibling energy.

WHERE ARE YAKOB, OLA AND LILY?!?!

Also Anwar and Olivia but I’m more upset about Yakob, Ola and Lily because they have an unfinished story from S3.

And I’m pretty sure Anwar’s actor has left for his new Netflix movie, which means Olivia has likely done the same.

I had a huge crush on Olivia back in S1 and S2.

ANYWAY, onto episode 8 the finale…

I’m so sad to say goodbye to Sex Education.

SEX EDUCATION SEASON 4 SPOILERS EPISODE 5

If you’ve not watched up to 25 minutes of episode 5 and don’t want spoiler, don’t continue. I don’t cover everything here but still.

Still watching Sex Education, on episode 5, and O just came out and I hate her even more.

I really hope no one says Otis outed her. And her asexuality doesn’t explain what she did to Ruby.

Fuck O, there’s no hope for me liking her now. I’m literally red in the face and getting a headache from anger.

If she’s supposed to make me punch my TV then the actress is doing a great job.

Also where the fuck is Lily and Ola? And are they trying to set up Joanna with Joy’s possible father? Is there going to be a big reveal? I’m scared about Joy’s father…

Also poor Yacob(?).

[b00t-s]

Characters Introduction

All characters belong to Thomas and crew, I just altered them for my au ^^

T.W: MENTAL HEALTH MENTION, DRINK (non alcoholic) MENTION, SOME¿ SWEARING, LONG POST, CAPITALS,TELL ME IF YOU NEED ANY OTHERS.

CHARACTERS (if I find motivation I will draw them)

Thomas Sanders, cis Male, he/him: [30]co-manager of "beans and co". He is a wholesome, good natured man and is a proud gay, and cares for others a lot. Thomas occasionly participates in the local theatre community, depending on his schedule and shifts. He is a HUGE fan of Disney, Harry Potter and all things cartoons. He is extremely partial to a certain regular customer, Nico Flores. Unfortunately, he is a pushover and listens to his employees and co-manager more than he should, and can overthink events repetitively, causing him to worry alot, causing him to trip up alot.

Nico Flores, cis male, he/him: [30]regular customer at Beans and Co. ,and a casual songwriter. Thinks Thomas is pretty cute and adores his feeble attempts at flirting. He's quite a cheerful and friendly dude, but doesn't give a fuck about what other people think. He and Joan have some playful banter, mostly to tease Thomas but their senses of humour just go well together. Has a simple coffee order and doesn't interact much unless Thomas/Joan have a shift.

Joan, non-binary, they/them: [30] co-manager of beans and co. They are as smart as they are funny, and can have a lewd sense of humour. They swear too much for a subtle coffee shop, so Thomas tries not to put them on counter jury. They enjoy art so they do latte art that the customers love and makes the Beans and Co customers regulars. Them and Thomas platonically flirt to confuse everyone often and it is a running gag for regular customers. They are the bestest of best friends. They are currently dating Talyn, who sometimes comes in for coffee but not often.

Janus Anguis, genderfluid, xey/xem: [28] been a barista at Beans and Co. for 5 years, mainly night-shifts. Xey have a dismal view and approach to life, as xey believe society is twisted to manipulate all it's inhabitants; in retaliation Xey lie too much and can be incredibly sarcastic. Janus can make amazing coffee if xey're in a good mood or like you, but if you've upset xem in someway, or xey just hate you for no reason, get ready to have the most bitter coffee ever. Xey hate paradoxes, optical illusions and people in general, unless you are one of the lucky select few. Virgil Frica was not in those few.

Virgil Frica, cis male, he/him: [27] barista at Beans and Co. He is stuck in his emo phase but the people in his life find it endearing, which he hates. He suffers from heightened anxiety which he attempts to disguise in a thick layer of sarcasm and dark eyeshadow. He has a hidden talent for poems, which he doesn't mention much. He regularly dyes his hair purple and doesn't give a fuck about the cafe's policy, so Thomas has just given up telling him. His coffee is medi-core. He constantly tells people he hates his job but he hasn't left for over five years and regularly makes banter with the customers. He and Janus have some sort of rivalry going on but the occasionally team up.

Patton Parvus, trans male, he/him: [29] barista at beans and Co. He is the softest little puffball they team has and all co-workers protect him at all costs. However, he does have a criminal record...and you know...depth....*cough cough spoilers cough cough*ANYWAY he has been working at the cafe for nearly seven years now, 3 years after it had opened, and has been the guide for the new recruits. He and Virgil are the iconic friends of the team, known for their playful dynamic.

Roman ‘Princi’ Realeza, demiboy, he/she: [28] regular customer at Beans and Co. ,and is Good friends with Patton and Virgil but hasn't met Janus yet. He is a minor actor in the Local theatre group, the same one Thomas attends, and is always over-dramatic. His coffee order is.....interesting.....and always angers the newbies, so she is generally directed to Patton, who has worked there long enough and is patient enough to deal with Roman. He is a strong feminist and will stand up for others....even if help is unwanted. She is a proud latino, his father being Spanish. His ego is huge but fragile.

Remus ‘Dukey’ Realeza, non-binary, they/them: [28] Remus is Roman's Twin, and gleefully torments him as much as possible. Unlike Roman, Remus took to more of the creative arts than the dramatic arts, and creates beautiful...or disturbing, depending on how you look at it....paintings. They have been married to Logan Realeza for 3 years now, even though them and him seem to be polar opposites. They mainly bond over medical shit as Logan is a brain surgeon and Remus has an unsettling fascination of gore. Remus is too horny for their own Good, and does not hide it, constantly embarrassing Logan. They may not have a fragile ego like Roman, but they do have mild abandonment issues and a disorder called Pica, meaning they crave and eat non-edible items. Only comes to the café when the know Roman is trying to do something important.

Logan Realeza, cis male, he/him: [29] Logan is a extremely talented Brain Surgeon, and has been presented with the Young Neurosurgeon Award at 24. He has autism but hides it well and is very well accustomed to it. He is married to Remus, something he wonders why he loves daily. They do help him alot with his autism, though, and as much as Logan ‘love is overrated’ Realeza will deny, he really does love Remus. A lot. He was the one to propose in the First place, and he does have a soft spot for romantic poems, and oh boy does Remus know that. He and Roman have a love-hate relationship. Logan doesn't understand why Roman must be so flamboyant, and Roman doesn't know why Logan must be such a buzzkill. Only comes in the café when one of the twins drag him there.

AND THAT'S IT FOR NOW! I am going to start working on a plot and things, but you guys are welcome to interact with the characters and the narrator (me), and ask if you want to be tagged, the usual. This can be interactive so again, feel free to give prompts, give tips, ask the characters questions, etc. I know it's kind of a cliché troupe, but this time it's different, I hope. Anyway, that's it! Thank you for taking the time to read this!