#esp when you compare it to actual people and history

[constantvariations]

Man I wish the White Fang had numerous community programs like the BPP did. It would've been super cool to see Adam and Blake interact with other faunus outside of missions and the WF. I like to imagine Adam volunteering to teach people self defense while Blake spends some down time teaching people how to read and maybe they're both banned from the kitchens because they accidentally started a small grease fire because they're used to cooking on the road and not with fancy dancy equipment

[communistkenobi]

could you expand / share reading materials on "gender is a structure that mediates access to personhood"? i feel like that's an important point that i don't fully grasp. especially because it is my understanding that until relatively recently even white, bourgeois, cis-heterosexual, perisex etc women were also denied personhood, but were already gendered as women, right?

thanks in advance!

I’m so sorry you sent me this ask like three months ago and I’m only getting around to it now lol

This is going to be a long post. I will be talking a lot about citizenship and rights in this post. I’ll include citations, but two overarching texts I will be engaging with a lot are Unequal Freedom (2004) by Evelyn Nakano Glenn and The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (1989) by Gøsta Esping-Andersen.

This is also not meant to be a comprehensive answer to your question. I am much less familiar with migration & refugee scholarship, which is obviously deeply engaged with the concept of citizenship as an apparatus for granting rights. I’m flagging this because my answer has a particular focus that is not generalisable. Everything I say is not “the answer” to your question, but an answer informed by specific domains of scholarship.

First, I think a good place to start is that when we talk about ‘personhood’ as a status that a human being can or cannot possess, we are often talking about a status that is realisable through citizenship. ‘Personhood’ is itself a legal term, and we can see this in how stateless people (i.e. people with no citizenship) are treated - because rights are granted by and administered through states, being without state citizenship means you are unable to realise any set of rights, and therefore, you are rendered as a non-person. The UN has two separate conventions on the rights of stateless people for example, as being stateless is necessarily an international issue. I think this approach helps makes sense of why “human rights” is a popular framing in discussions of how to remediate inequality (e.g. “trans rights are human rights”). The “human” part of that equation is only realised through the attainment of “rights,” i.e., through citizenship. Citizenship = personhood can also be seen when people invoke “second class citizens” as an articulation of legal, political, and societal discrimination - i.e., groups of people who have less/no access to rights compared to other groups within a state. Systems of classed citizenship often emerge from regimes of settler colonialism, slavery, and apartheid (Glenn discusses this in her book).

The basic Marxist intervention in this discussion is that this class system still exists even in places that have abolished slavery, abolished apartheid, and/or gone through formal decolonisation, because state law under capitalism is fundamentally unjust. Marx calls law the “mystification of power” (I believe he says this in The German Ideology? I'm rusty on my Marx readings lol) - he argues that law is a bourgeois system of justice that caters to the wealthy and powerful and disenfranchises the poor and marginal, but appears as neutral and fair through a liberal “theater” (Marx’s term from The 18th Brumaire) of equality and democracy, mystifying its actual effects and purpose (The Red Demiurge (2015) by Scott Newton is a book about Soviet legal history that goes into some of this. His focus is on the evolution of the Bolshevik relationship to law as the USSR developed and encountered quite literally new legal problems that emerged as a result of the formation of a socialist state). This is also part of the Marxist critique of nationalism - if state citizenship is what grants access to rights, and citizenship is classed (through your relationship to production, through white supremacy, through patriarchy, through colonial status, through religious status, through etc), then equality does not legally exist, that all equality is bourgeois equality, i.e., not universal, not equal.

Gøsta Esping-Andersen provides a really helpful theory of thinking about citizenship rights within a capitalist state (his book only focuses on Western imperial core states, so just flagging that lol). He begins by arguing that:

all markets are regulated by the state, there is no actual “free” or anarcho-capitalist market,

because of this necessary regulatory function provided by the state, the commodity of wage-labour (i.e., the process of selling your labour-power as a “good” or commodity on a market in exchange for money in the form of wages) is likewise always regulated to some degree, and so finally,

welfare should be understood as the regulatory system of the commodity of wage-labour.

This regulatory apparatus is what grants people “social citizenship rights” - sick leave, pensions, disability and unemployment insurance, welfare payments, food stamps, tax bracket placements, childcare, healthcare, education, housing, so on and so on. Within this framework, Esping-Andersen demonstrates that various welfare regimes produce different citizenship classes - Canada, Australia and the US, for example, explicitly reproduce an impoverished “welfare class” through a marginal, means-tested welfare regime that only provides benefits to the very poorest. Various European countries by contrast tend to have what he calls a “corporatist” welfare regime that often grants different social citizenship rights based on which occupation you have, which he argues emerged from feudal and pre-capitalist religious (esp. Catholic) social forms of organisation.

ANYWAY, the purpose of doing all that set-up is to contextualise how we arrive at the question of gender. Feminists make the basic point that citizenship is also classed by gender - in Unequal Freedom, Glenn talks about this in the US, where white women were legally treated as extensions of their husbands and had no access to property rights, voting rights, and so on. Black women, in contrast, were treated sexually as women by slaveholders (i.e., raped and abused) but denied any and all personhood on the basis of their slave status. Citizenship in the US was historically based first on your ability to hold property (reserved for white bourgeois men), and then on your ability to “freely sell” your labour-power on the market - white women were denied citizenship on this basis because they were consigned to managing what was defined as the “private realm,” i.e., the realm that houses free labourers (white men). This public/private distinction emerges through capitalist markets and the commodity of wage-labour, which produces a sharp distinction where productive labour takes place “out there” (paid for in wages by the capitalist class) and reproductive labour takes place “in here” (i.e., labour that is not paid for in wages* by the capitalist class and forms the social basis of reproducing the public labour pool). 

*for white women. see below

As Glenn argues, this public/private distinction in the US is fundamentally racialised. We can see this difference in the emergence of the suffragette movement, where white women appeal to their whiteness (i.e., free labour status) as the rationale for being granted the right to vote. Black women were disqualified from this movement, and did not benefit from white women’s demands for equal citizenship on the basis of them providing all this unpaid reproductive labour to their white husbands, as Black and other racialised women often provided domestic housekeeping labour for white women (unpaid during slavery and for indentured servants, for wages after its abolition). This leaves Black women without a private realm, subjecting them to a “purely public” arena that is uniquely difficult to organise for unionisation and/or improve working conditions (Deborah King talks about this further in Multiple Jeopardy, Multiple Consciousness (1988)).

Trans-feminism explicates this further - coercive sex assignment at birth classes people on the basis of reproductive capacity. “Females” are impregnated, “males” do the impregnating. This particular system of sex assignment is deeply tied to colonial population management concerns, where measuring the labour capacity of colonised subjects was a matter of managing white wealth (as well as making sure “there weren’t too many of them” compared to white people in colonies - this was especially a major white anxiety after the Haitian Revolution at the turn of the 19th century, the largest slave revolt in history. See Settlers by J Sakai). You can read Maria Lugones’ papers The Coloniality of Gender (2016) and Heterosexualism and the Colonial/Modern Gender System (2007), Alex Adamson's (2022) paper Beyond the Coloniality of Gender, and Guirkinger & Villar's (2022) paper Pro-birth policies, missions, and fertility for some introductory reading.

(Note: patriarchal gender hierarchies predate and exist outside of European colonial domination - it is a popular white queer talking point that Europe invented gender, that indigenous peoples actually all had epic radically equal genderfuck systems that were destroyed by Europe, and this is a very patronising and racist historical generalisation that I want to avoid making. Third World/Global South feminism is a necessary corrective to this - an arena of scholarship I am sadly not well versed in. Sylvia Wynter is the only scholar I’ve engaged with on this topic, which again, is a very limited slice. I welcome reading recommendations in this area).

While sex assignment is coercive for everyone, it is a particular problem for trans people, who are accused of impersonation and ID fraud if our sex markets conflict with our gender presentation, or we don’t ���look like” our sex marker to cis people. Because you need a government ID to do basically anything - getting a job, applying for an apartment, getting a driver’s license, going to school, buying a phone plan, being on unemployment, applying for disability, filing an insurance claim, doing your taxes, opening a bank account, getting married, going to the hospital, buying lottery tickets at the corner store, etc - and sex markers appear on basically all government ID in many countries, trans people are systematically denied a whole range of citizenship rights (and thus personhood) on the basis of this sex assignment. Trans people are not merely treated as the wrong gender, they are ungendered, and by this process, rendered ineligible for personhood. Like just as an example, gay marriage is a luxury to trans people, as gay marriage is based on the state recognising both you and your partner’s gender in the first place. (See Heath Fogg Davis’ paper Sex-Classification Policies as Transgender Discrimination (2014) for example. Butler also talks about this on a more fundamental level in Bodies That Matter (1993), and Stryker & Sullivan also discuss this in The Queen's Body, the King's Member (2009)).  

This is likewise the impetus behind anti-trans bathroom bills and sports bans - citizenship guarantees, among other things, a right to public space, and these bans are meant to deprive transgender people access to those spaces. These bans should be understood as a way of circumventing the much more difficult process of revoking the citizenship of trans people outright by using a component of citizenship (sex assignment at birth) to impoverish the quality of citizenship that trans people have access to. This is why bans on medical transition are not actually just about medical oppression, but the oppression of trans peoples’ abilities to live in society in general. An instructive parallel is abortion bans for pregnant people, who, in addition to facing medical oppression and violence by being denied healthcare, are likewise systemically marginalised through being forced into the role of “mother” (again we see how cissexualism reduces people to reproductive capacity), economically marginalising them by reducing their capacity to earn a wage, tying them to partners/spouses that now have greater economic and social leverage over them (and thus have greater capacity to assault, rape, and murder them), depriving them of the choice of alternative life paths, and so on.

It’s generally much more difficult to get the state to sign off on unilaterally oppressing a group of citizens by depriving them of citizenship completely, so attacking a group through more narrow and particular policies like healthcare or the use of public space (with the ultimate goal of depriving them of their rights in general) is often much easier and more productive. See Beauchamp's 2019 book Going Stealth: Transgender Politics and US Surveillance Practices, who talks about this in the context of anti-trans bathroom bills in chapter 3. This is also a common thread in disability scholarship, as disabled people are likewise denied much of the same citizenship rights through similar logics - the book Absent Citizens (2009) by Michal J Prince talks about this in the Canadian context. To give an example he uses in the book, in Canada, accessible voting stations were only federally mandated in I believe the 90s, meaning that disabled people were practically disenfranchised until about 30 years ago in Canada, even though there were no laws explicitly banning disabled people from voting.

As a result, any barriers put in place by the state to change your legal name and sex marker should be understood as a comprehensive denial of personhood, not only because we as trans people want our IDs to reflect who we are, but because those barriers make it difficult to do literally anything in civil society. This the basis behind the cry of “trans rights are human rights” - taking away our healthcare rights also fundamentally denies us equal citizenship (and thus personhood), because healthcare is where we get all those little permission slips from doctors and psychologists to change our name and gender marker in the first place. This is of course not remotely the same as being made stateless (trans refugees are placed in a particularly harrowing and violent legal black hole, for example) - I as a white trans person living in the imperial core still benefit from a massive range of material, political and social privileges not afforded to many others, but my transness positions me at a deficit relative to cis people who have the same state citizenship as I do. As I hope I've made clear, it's not a binary case of either having or not having citizenship, but that citizenship is classed, and the quality of your citizenship is heavily dependent on a whole range of social, political, legal, economic, and historical factors that are all largely out of your control.

So not only is gender a barrier to citizenship, it mediates access to realising the full range of personhood within a regime of state citizenship. Trans people are not the only group effected by this, as I described above, but trans people are a group that makes obvious the arbitrary, coercive, and unequal nature of sex assignment through its connection to state citizenship.

[caitlynspistol]

watching ror again (this time with more attention to detail), and here is what i've newly picked up on/noticed/want to point out again:

red doesn't want to be queen, doesn't like to be called princess

chloe has a very high sense of duty and honor to her family ("but when i'm out there i'm not just another competitor, i represent cinderellasburg" when talking about her dad signing her up for sns and reminding her that it was supposed to be about having fun)

chloe is part of the auradon historical society??

"and why you'll make a great queen" what about chad??

queen of hearts= empress of wonderland (ie. higher title than chloe should red take the throne)

"get it right or i'll show you punishment!!" yeaaa red had a SHITTY and traumatic childhood under a controlling and abusive mother

"im just a girl, arms open wide, looking for kindness, somewhere in your eyes" soooo even after all that red just wants her mom to love her and accept her and show her kindness! she was never a villain

wait. how does bridget know what red was thinking/singing about if red hadn't opened her mouth? this might just be a musical thing but hm. ability to detect emotions? they somehow connected in a way?

"rule a million years with you right next to me" okay so they probably live longer than auradonian people

og bridget doesn't allow red to eat sweets but red likes them

so qoh's cards have magic that connect directly to wonderland and can summon guards out of thin air, be used as ninja stars (strong enough to break fg's wand in half) and enlargen to create obstacles

lmao without mal as security auradon prep has none (substantial enough)

"everything i do is for you" qoh loves red in her own twisted way

umm i do think cinderella was (intentionally or not) involved in the prank. bridget directed the "humiliating a girl at her first dance, turning her into a monster in front of everyone" at ella and ella just said "you're right" ("you didn't care then, you were off with your prince")

"now make me proud, for once" red only indirectly sentenced ella to death to satisfy her mother and gain acceptance 🗣🗣 bottom alert (and bc ella indirectly challenged her lmao) also what she actually said was "treason. she's guilty of treason" qoh actually called the beheading

qoh kissed red's cheek when she did what she wanted (ie. physical affection as a reward??)

CHLOE WAS PULLING OUT HER SWORD AND WAS ABOUT TO CHARGE AT HER MOM AND THAT WAS WHY RED CHARGED AT HER AND ACCIDENTALLY PULLED HER ALONG THROUGH THE TIME TRAVEL

wait red is actually pretty good at fighting/athletic/stealthy. she held her own against a charming with skilled swordsmanship

("you're not gonna catch me when i fall" "maybe" with the lil up down checking out red look, chloe PLS)

("princess, goody two shoes, boo" just throwing nicknames are we)

"and if i'm the next princess of auradon, it's only a matter of time before she tries to turn me into a mini-me. i'm not gonna let that happen" okay so that's her worst fear. of turning into her mom

"okay i accept your mission" very knight-ly behavior much?

"i love history! don't you?" "uh uh" help-

whoa merlin academy has a lot of wands and magic around, esp compared to auradon prep

awww hades holding maleficent's hand

it looks like red's never seen musical instruments before with the way she looking at everything and picking them up lmao

bridgella <33

red's reaction to ella's punishment and grounding by her stepmother shows that she's experienced the same thing and is Traumatized

red comforting chloe after they look through the looking glasssss

okayy so chloe thinks red is a bad person just bc she wants to "break in and steal" even though that's like the only option?

gay conversation about red being a good person, "your own person" in front of the frozen vks

red believes she's a bad person herself, "a lost cause" bc she "lie, cheat, steal"

chloe believes she's a good person bc she stood up to a bully and "risked your life to save mine"

okay so morgie was the only one not with uliana and her crew bc he was on the lookout... which i think is an important detail that is different from the og timeline... and he seems nice... maybe he was the one who helped uliana actually open and read the cookbook instead? for the prank? hm

[septembermonologues]

i am so fucking terrified, i don't know how to get through this waiting

I guess I'm asking if there's any hope left to be had

the wait is so brutal but yes, i firmly believe that there is always hope!! some things i'm trying to keep in mind are:

- the red haze-- early results seem widely red because in-person votes lean republican. those votes are also counted first and faster because they're smaller counties compared to denser ones that lean democrat. make sure you're looking at the % of ballots counted because projected results aren't true results. the race won't start to actually solidify until tomorrow morning.

- keep an eye on your state and local reps! the nitty gritty stuff can be more positive than the national (i live in a pretty rural area but i just happily voted for rep underwood--a younger progressive black woman--a second time).

- just because results come short of what we hoped doesn't mean they represent popular opinion. in florida, marijuana and abortion rights have fallen short even with a 50%+ majority because they require a 60% majority to pass. i know it's incredibly disheartening to not see popular opinions supported by law but i also believe that you have to remember that people, especially people in historically red states, don't necessary tow the stereotypical line. there is room for movement and change.

- there are ballots that currently aren't being counted because they have errors that are CURABLE and CAN be counted if corrected. i already reblogged something about it but if you voted (esp if by mail) please answer unnamed calls because it could be about your ballot. if you go here at vote.com you can also track your ballot.

- there are always, always things for us to do between elections. encourage your friends and family to look forward at the 2026 midterms (they can have huge effects on congress) and start planning, see if there are any campaigns that could use your help moving forward, look into working polling stations in the future (i did it in 2018 and it was a long but fulfilling day), get the fuck outside and moving around. find out where you can volunteer around you- homeless shelters, food banks/kitchens, community events. read some history and some theory-- we aren't actually in completely unprecedented times and it's important to remember where we've progressed from.

- honestly? stop giving batshit crazy people the attention they want. no rage engagement. its what they want. focus on raising awareness without directly interacting with them.

- it fucking sucks ass that its this close and that extremists win. i will never ever say that it doesn't. but it will not be the end. it will be hard but thats when we have to lean on each other. we can't be afraid to ask each other for help and we have to find things to be excited and hopeful for. there is some truth to "other people have it worse so i have to keep going". who are we to give up on the whole?

maybe im just tipsy but i just find so much hope and inspiration in the work so many people put into civil service. people want better than what we have and are fighting for us. i can't let myself get too negative because it doesn't do any good to wallow. just in general i love humanity too much to let the bad win.

[brucewaynehater101]

HELLO LOVE <3333 kissing all ur posts on the head I'm loving loving the things u do on here !!! WOAHS !!! LIKE U ARE SO CREATIVE AND COOL bringing u silly flowers !!! Getting u a silly bouquet bouquet

:0 actually, I also wanted to hear what make you like Tim !!! What specifically makes him tick for you, what nuances you'd like people to understand about him and his story etc etc !!! I love hearing ppls interpretations (esp since I... myself am not particularly fond of him ;-; but !!!! I do do want to understand what makes people love him) so if you wouldn't mind :D that'd be swell to hear !!!! THANK U DEAR

You're so sweet, my lords. Thank you ^^ I appreciate the bouquet 💐

Also, I completely understand why some people don't like Tim. His 90's era chaotic self is fantastic, but also a bit misogynistic. DC also likes to throw him in every comic that has a Robin in it and try to smother him back into that role. I haven't seen this happening, but I've also heard that Tim fans can be assholes.

So yes. I 100% understand why some folk aren't the hugest fans.

Tim, for me, though, is so dear. Few reasons why:

His story is so fucking sad, my lords

His attitude is hilarious

He's badass and chaotic

He reminds me too much of my younger self

All the Bats are tragic. Ain't a single one who isn't. I typically like BAMF tragic characters.

Tim's story as Robin is fucking devastating. Hit after hit after hit he takes. Yet, he keeps going. I would not have survived what he did.

All the other batkids have sad stories, hilarious wit, are badass, and cause chaos. They share those wonderful qualities with Tim.

I also just really love how Tim's relationship with Bruce is different during his initial years as Robin (with only Steph and Duke being comparable). He wasn't Bruce's kid first. Tim didn't want nor need a parent. He also felt like he had to help Bruce (when a kid shouldn't be taking care of adults. Parentification sucks ass).

Tim became Robin for Bruce. The other Robins became Robin for themselves (which isn't bad! It's actually really rad how Robin helped them [and cursed them but whatever]).

Just... Tim didn't want to be Robin initially, and that strikes a chord. Then there's him working his ass off for that mantle. He's a little shit, but he's Tim.

There's also how YJ is treated by the other heroes.

There's Tim living in Jason and Dick's shadow.

It's the likeness to my younger self that really hits home.

If you don't want any personal details, the bottom line is that a lot of his history/characterization hits home.

Now... Tim is dear to me due to how much he resembles my younger self. I love Jason as well due to him representing more of my older self. However, Tim's thought processes are closer to mine. I also tend not to get angry often.

For history, my parents consistently chose work and alcohol over family. I had to take care of them. I often played mediator, family clown, or scapegoat (which is why I also relate to Jason [I go feral at those horrendous lines Bruce says to him. Have your parents ever stated regret for how they raised you? Have they ever hurt you and demanded you thank them? Fucking hell, Jason. I may not have died, but your relationship with Bruce is killing me]). I was considered "gifted" or smart in comparison to my siblings, despite them being extremely intelligent (they were in honor classes as well). I'm the middle kid, but I emotionally took care of my younger sibling after I turned fifteen (even though we used to get into horrendous fights).

Anyways, Tim has a pathetic mess of a background, but he's badass as well. He's self-sufficient because he had to be, and he's good at it.

I like smart characters that outwit their opponent. I like seeing Tim win.

[theorahsart]

Would you happen to be able to compile a list of all the evidence/mentioned traits you know of that point towards Robespierre having autism, possibly with some sources of said evidence? You have my deepest gratitude if you do happen to be so kind as to take the time to answer this ask.

Hello! I'm sorry for taking a while to answer this- it of course was the kind of ask that requires some time to write! I'm gonna break it up into two posts, I hope that's okay. I'll just @ you when I do the next part.

I feel like I should start with saying that I'm not an expert in history (feel like I have loads to learn tbh). But I am an expert in autism, as I'm autistic, and know the topic thoroughly from cultural/social/medical perspectives- several of my educational comics are used in training programs by doctors and diagnoticians. So, you can trust everything I say about autism in this post.

You probably can't trust everything I say about Robespierre though lol. Compared to some actual historians I've talked to here, I haven't developed the skills of being able to discern when the info I get in books can be fully trusted, and the more I study Frev the more evident it is that just because I've read smth in a book, doesn't mean it can be trusted as fact haha. I've read 3 different posts from different historians in the last year that've debunked several 'facts' presented to me in published books loool

But anyway! I still personally think Robespierre was autistic, and I'll lay out why in the 2nd post.

I think it would take me more free time than I have to list *all* the evidence I've come across, so it seems best to break down how you diagnose autism in modern day, and then put that in context to some examples.

So this first part is just explaining *one way* in which medical professionals break down autism and the traits. Then in the next post I'll explain how I've applied those to Robespierre specifically.

How we think about and diagnose autism from modern day pov

I wanna start by breaking down how diagnoticians think about Autism specifically.

Autism doesn't encompass a specific set of traits that every single person must have in order to be diagnosed, because autistic traits vary so much from person to person.

Instead, you break down a diagnosis into different areas of life in which someone might be struggling. How this is broken down can vary a little between tests, but it's generally split into these areas:

Social

Social reciprocity (how sociable you are with others)

Non verbal comminication

Verbal communication

Maintaining relationships

Restrictive and Repetitive behaviour

Repetitive speech or movements (basically stimming)

Routines and change

Highly fixed/intense interests

Hyper or hypo reaction to sensory input

And then basically, if enough of these areas are having a significant impact on your life, you're dx'd as Autistic.

You can see when broken down in this way, that:

You can be doing fine in some of these areas, but still be dx'd if there's a lot of other areas listed you're struggling in.

A NT person will likely have some sort of trouble in one or two of the listed areas (because we all have strengths and weaknesses). That doesn't mean they're autistic.

An autism dx is concluded from two things- if you struggle in more of these areas than less. And if those struggles are significantly impacting your life.

Just to note, I'm only talking from a diagnosis pov here, which is wrapped up in cultural contexts and the reasons we decided to give this way of being a label. Theres lots of traits we can also break down that aren't based around what you find difficult.

You could be autistic and go your whole life not knowing or needing a diagnosis, if say, you lived a lifestyle where you could avoid people and situations that are making you suffer. Your autism might make you excel in life, depending on your life.

But just esp in modern day, many of us dont have that luxury.

I'm using this type of dx in the context of Robespierre because I believe he did have difficulties that impacted his life and career, and it's significant to me to compare his behaviour and health to other politicians working in the same stressful circumstances.

But yeah I'll write this in a second post. Thanks for your patience!! 🙏

[blade-liger-4ever]

Airborne - One of the Best Supporting Joes, and a Great American Indian Character

So, by now, I'm pretty sure everyone knows I love Airborne, at least if you typed #airborne, #gijoe airborne, or #gi joe airborne into my search engine. Admittedly, I first fell in love with the character through being a fan of Peter Cullen. He brought Airborne to life in a way that made the character approachable, endearing, and familiar to me, given he used a voice that, to my ears, sounded like a cross between Optimus and Ironhide.

But upon my (many) rewatches of Airborne's debut, Operation: Mind Menace, and his other guest star roles, I've come to love him for who he is as a character.

To summarize his history, Airborne, birth name Franklin Talltree, was born in the Navajo Nation. His parents were oil rich, often indulging him with skydiving lessons from a young age. Despite this love for the air he nurtured, Airborne, as he was later known, decided to at first (I believe) take classes to become a lawyer. He passed all the exams, and would've gone into the business except he didn't like the idea of signing legal papers day-in and day-out. Instead, he enlisted as an airborne infantryman/paratrooper in the Army, hence his call-sign when he transferred to G.I. Joe.

What really makes him stand out, especially compared to the more common Native representative Spirit, is how Airborne is such a fun personality. He makes jokes, he teases his fellow Joes, and often approaches life with a smile and a quip. It makes him feel down-to-Earth in a way that Spirit usually lacks [except Spirit's appearance in Sigma 6; that was a good spin on his usual characterization.] Seeing an American Indian with this relatable, relaxed manner about him makes Airborne stand out and feel like someone you could be comfortable around.

Despite his "normality", though, Airborne actually has a more serious side. One paired with a trait that Spirit seemingly lacks:

He has telepathic/ESP abilities.

Airborne has a younger brother, Tommy, who's roughly ten to twelve years younger than him, given that he was a teenager in Airborne's debut. Because of this strong familial tie, Airborne and Tommy share a psychic link that allows them to be aware of where the other is and what's happened to him. Additionally, Airborne can sometimes experience remote viewing, which allows him to see where a person - regardless of their personal meaning to him - is and what danger is threatening them. Obviously, this is a trait he keeps under wraps, as too much talking about it either "spooks people" (especially if he appears to be randomly staring right into your soul), will get him pulled into a psi-ops division rather than the frontlines, or have him become the target for some testing due to his powers and their unpredictability. It's no wonder why he hardly talks about his gifts.

Combining all of these traits, Airborne manages to be a fun, interesting, and friendly Navajo character. He's never seen being a "stereotype", or harping on his special shaman powers like Spirit does. Merely, he's an "ordinary Joe" who will get into the thick of a fight with his friends, or wrestle with them for grins and giggles. And if there's an apt joke to be made - whether about his powers or something else - you can bet your back pocket dollar Airborne will jump to make it first. He's just truly fun and underrated, and I wish we had more content with Airborne. He's one of a kind in the American Indian representation department, if you ask me, and I wish we had more guys like him in media, who's heritage just happened to be Native.

That's all I really have to say about him. Airborne deserves more love, especially since his old Wikipedia file has been deleted. I hope you enjoyed this, and that it inspires any artists who find it interesting to draw him some more.

Til then -

"Yooooooo, Joe!!!"

[hindulivesmatter]

I am a proud hindu so i was angry about what happened to kashmiri hindus. but after reading up on it and the history of kashmir in general, one thing is really obvious: india failed kashmir (all of them not just hindus). It’s why I support their right to self-determination. I am based in America and I know several punjabis here who don’t consider themselves indian because their family/community was directly impacted by the 1984 anti sikh pogroms. ig i’m saying india has failed a lot of people (esp minorities) so if we are not from their ethnic group, we don’t get to selfishly claim them or impose our will on them. like i’m a kannadiga and i hate the imposition of hindi in my home state and while this is not even slightly comparable to the violence and trauma faced by kashmiris, punjabis and other groups, i would hate for a non-kannadiga (esp a hindi speaker) telling me how to feel and having the final say in the matter so kashmiri self determination just makes sense to me.

this just my two cents hope this didn’t sound rude because that’s not my intention.

I know you didn't mean to be rude here, but what you're saying is actually really out of touch.

I hope you're aware of what happened in Kashmir to Kashmiri pandits. Pakistan has dreamed of Kashmir since it was formed. That's why they wrongfully attacked India the first time, securing only POK which sadly was due to the UN, and weak Indian political power. Since then, they have infiltrated our country, and approximately 300,000 Kashmiri Pandits are reported to have left the region due to constant persecution from the Jammu Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) and other militant groups, like Hizbul-Mujahideen (HM). In 1989, radical Islamists initiated an insurgency, fueled by covert support from Pakistan.

The party at the time did its best to hide this, and stifle it as much as possible, this got an ounce of coverage and light when The Kashmir Files was released

Hindus have 5000 years of recorded history with the land, that Islamists claim has “always been Muslim land”. "Kashmir" is literally named after Rishi Kashyap, if you're aware. On 19, January 1990 mosques blared out the infamous "convert leave or die" and finished their mission of converting the entirety of Kashmir to an Islamic state. Our pandits were told to leave their wives and daughters behind if they wanted to escape alive.

They're still living like refugees in their country, and now thanks to the scrapping of sec 370, things have taken a turn for the better.

Many Muslims of Kashmir still retain their Hindu surname. It was a deliberate attempt to wipe Hindus out that Islamists achieved and now THAT'S the free Kashmir they want, this slogan isn't promising actual Kashmiris that were displaced from their homes back, this slogan is furthering the agenda to chew Kashmir off India's map - the one true dream.

A similar approach is taken by Khalistanis, they aren't asking for Lahore, you know, the capital of Maharaja Ranjeet Singh, they're demanding INDIA to give Punjab away. They are funded by Pakistan as well that's why they can't say anything about Sikh treatment in Pakistan. That's why they can't say anything about Gurudwaras converted to garbage bins. You obviously, being far away, aren't aware of what's going beneath the surface, they have vandalized various Hindu Temples.

They take the name of their Guru who sacrificed his life for India, while they stomp on the flag of India.

In theory, I guess it sounds easy to say "Well, disagreements are flaring up, so let's just split and give them their own thing". But this isn't how it works. Compromise and collaboration is how decisions are made in a democracy. This is our motherland, the last time we split was painful as fuck. The only reason India didn't fall apart after Independence is because of the formation of linguistic states.

I lived in Bangalore for the majority of my childhood, and I left 2 years before the entire language debacle began. I don't know if you know, but now Kannadigas are getting violent if anyone speaks Hindi. They demand you to speak in Kannada even if you don't know how.

You're based in America, so I'm not holding this against you, but I'm begging you, please do more research.

[Exhibit 82]

[zayns-beer-can-gainz]

RANKING INVINCIBLE!!!!

16. invincible— ironic how the title track is actually my least fave off the album. i dunno. it lacks a lotta substance. that 🤌🏻michael🤌🏻 substance. if ya know what i mean. “why ain’t ya feelin’ me?” sorry love, i ain’t feelin’ ya. OOOHHH BURNNNN

15. privacy— the only thing i like about this song is the message. that’s basically it. oh, and slash. yeah. slash and the message. the message and slash.

14. two (two) thousand (thousand) watts (watts)— the voice ain’t that distinctive mj falsetto i’m used to… sorry. but the beat is sick, i must say.

13. threatened— YOU SHOULD BE. WATCHIN’ ME. YOU SHOULD FEEL. THREATENED. ahem. yeah, this song’s alright! i gotta give it to sony for pissing mj off enough to write a whole diss track about ‘em! this song kinda also sounds like if unbreakable had a b side!

12. butterflies— don’t hate me for such a low ranking! compared to all the other slow, melodic tracks on the album, this one just kinda sounds like a lullaby. okay, well, they all do, but this one would put me to sleep the fastest. but i absolutely love the vocals in this one. superb and supreme mj right there!

11. cry— invincible’s man in the mirror. great empowering track! though if i had to choose between this, heal the world, MiTM, and, well, all the empowering tracks on HIStory… all the others would win, hands down.

10. you rock my world— only because i’ve heard it so much, so it’s a smidge overplayed in my book. kudos to my local roller rink for playing it! they’re cultured folk i fear 👀

9. don’t walk away— this is where it got SUPER freaking hard for me to rank. i absolutely adore this song with all due respect, but out of all my top faves on this album, this one didn’t quite have enough substance to it as the others further up on the list, such as…

8. speechless— speechless, that’s how you make me feel, though i’m with you, i feel far away, and nothing is for real… ahem sorry! holy cow talk about melodic and YES THIS IS A TOTAL LULLABY FOR ME!!!! i love how half the tracks on this album could double as lullabies for kids, it’s super kid friendly, and i felt like michael took that into account when making the album, did he actually, i dunno. just my perspective!!

7. you are my life— what did i tell you? michael literally wrote this ABOUT his kids, FOR his kids (to have and to look back on when they got older, cause y’know, they were only three or four back then). i absolutely adore every single aspect of this song.

6. heaven can wait— right away, with that opening couple of notes, it sucks me riiiight in. and then it hits you with those melodic AF backings. and then michael’s voice comes in being all romantic and shit AH got me blushing like the HELL and then his voice coupled WITH the backing esp in the bridge got me like… DA. FUCKIN. HELL. NAH. this song has no right to be THAT good like BRUH. okay i’ll stop before the cringe meter flies off the handles.

5. the lost children— holy CRAP i close my eyes and listen to this one, and it almost feels like i’m being whisked off to a magical fairyland, one where nothing or nobody could ever hurt me. that’s the type of sensation i always wanna feel! and the children’s chorus at the end… gives me chillsss… michael wrote this with children in mind, and he once said this was one of his faves off the album (god i love that man). and i can totally see why!

4. break of dawn— oh my god. every time i listen to this one, i close my eyes and imagine michael and i on the most PERFECT PERFECT PERFECT romantic date like EVAAA!!! he’s such a romantic ham and this song clearly displays all his TRUE intentions! and people labeled him like they did… the fuck bro?!?! he just wanted to be a decent dude and take his love out on a picnic!!! he certainly had the money to travel all across the world and picnic on every hill and valley across timbuktu! idk if i even spelled that right but you get my point! bottom line, can michael please please please be my husband/lifelong partner please and thank you. it’s a simple request!!!

3. heartbreaker— hot take: michael walked so skrillex could run. don’t come @ me!!! fr tho, this song straight up SLAPETHS harder than… harder than… well y’all get what i’m tryna say here! holy fuckballs. holy shit. why is michael’s whole album so bleeding dope? and for what? what did we do to deserve this ??? straight up MASTERPIECE. of an album?!?!?! *takes deep breath in* and seriously, i don’t think a better track exists on this album.

1. unbreakable— oh wait, it’s the first one, SILLY! michael really started this album out with a BANGAROO, i love how four of my favorite tracks on the album are part of the first five songs you hear… and then the rest of the album straight up bangs! (like i wish mikezilla would do to me some day) AH WELL A GIRL CAN DREAM…

i hope you appreciated my chaotic review of invincible @someone-put-your-hand-out @applehead1988 @histendercaress LOLOLOL…

lmk if you want me to review more albums!!!

[goitale]

ii NNEEDS TO GET THISQOUT OF MY SYSTEM

i havve been in þe mcsm fandom for 6 monþs. ive been obsessed w jesstra for 6 monþs. ive noticed people around me change interests MUKTIOLE times but im stuck in mcsm but heu þats not what i need to say

AHEM. this will be long.... yap incoming. jesstra. analysis. jesstra clicking in your head after an excruciatingly long explanation, wiþ þe satisfaction of knowledge after. it's yours to read... only if you have an hour of freetime

im replaying s1 on my switch- got it for christmas, im collecting new info- as you do. finished ep4.... and questions hit me like WATERFALL. why in þe world does petra say hello to jesse first, aswell as say "your gang" n stuff? what is þeir history? þeir history as friends isnt close eiþer, þough, considering how jesse gets super giddy about even seeing petra (synonymous to petra being excited over jack but shh later). þough, petra exclusively trusts jesse over everyone else if you save her from þe witherstorm (wouldn't know about amnesia petra, because i cant faþom playing 2 episodes without petra). and þen when lukas realizes, petra still only really prefers to trust jesse..... AND WHY????? like . þeres no reason for her to be open about it at all to jesse. jesse becomes essentially þe grouo leader by general consensus ig but also like lukas is tryna be 2nd leader and kinda bitches about it (sorry lukas s1 enjoyers. switch remake made him mean) and she confides in lukas þen ig???? but also shes not þe one to listen to leaders. petra is almost exclusively shown as a loner in þe first 4 episodes, hiding absolutely anyþing she þinks would make her look weak. AND WHY WOULD SHE LET GO OF SOME GUARD NEAR JESSE????? like i need to know. i do. "oh yeah let me be honest with the dork over þere" LIKE EXCUSE ME I WANT ANSWERS!!!

alas. moving on! ep5 when jesse and gang are adventuring to þe temple ivor tipped, petra once again confides in jesse, mentioning how she's still getting used to friendships and having people worry about her. and yet she smiles, knowing jesse is þere, appreciating her existence ISNSKDKDDK i þink þis is when petra starts falling for jesse ngl. like. petea originally pulling jesse off to þe side to show wither sickness is secretive and a skittish topic for her- alþo mentioning her worry about it- compared to her more expressive self as she bares armor and a sword laced with deaþ. not to mention þe "warrior whip" move þey do later on which will start a new paragraph.

what do we know about prior-e1? dumbfoundingly noþing aside from s2 lore. between ep4 and ep5, we actually know more þan one may consider. þink about it; þe gang just defeats a witherstorm and find beacontown to reside in. (still unsure of how in ep4 þey just Have A Town Now And Jesse Leads It but sure.) þe gang- enjoying spending time togeþer and looking to further þeir heroic ways- begin training for adventures. we know þis because each friend of jesse has þeir own duo move, showing coordination. no coordination in þe world was shown in the disaster prior likw þis!!! aside from lukas being hella good w a bow tho and ofc petra always leading in combat. safe to say, þey had to train w eachoþer for þis!!! combat skills dont happen overnight or during super stressful world ending situations. like, yeah sure, maybe jesse got better at combat gradually þrough s1 (its a literal mechanic; she swings faster the latter episodes!) but ep5 combat just feels so.. fresh. and esp considering s2 combat being so nice and fluid, she definitely consistently trains w people. but wait, you dare say. how does þis relate to jesstra???

well. guess who knows up-close combat? petra. guess who has a sudden jump from "i feel terrible yucky because people care about me" to "maybe having a friend or two is fun!"? petra (only when youre killing þe witherstorm does petra show true honesty, not gonna lie. she admits her weakness and does nothing. þen is happy to be alive when she's. well. alive bur its short ngl) SO I DARE ASK!!! how would she be friendly w jesse?

þey trained togeþer, awaiting adventures...... and þinking of nibo fanfic snippets i þink þe two would've had quite a few more intimate moments where jesse is learning how to dodge and roll and petra can admire jesse without her vision shaking from withersickness (she mention's it :3). like imagine a training montage but þe longer frames is like,, petra holding jesse by þe waist correcting her fighting stance eeehhehe NOW DO YIU SEE???? its falling into place!

now cut back to ep5, in þe temple. jesse and petra talking. suddenly ir makes sense- petra appreciates jesse for being tbere as a friend and also for þeir time just generally spent togeþer! and as þey travel þrough þe portals, jesse and petra see þe bad sides of eachoþer- but also have an undying care for eachoþer. arguing. near-death. jesse wishing a pama'd petra didnt die. ... can i ask how gay this is?? id say like, maybe 7/10. ywah. BUT THE IMPORTANT PART IS rhey learn sm about eachoþer! þey go þrough hell but as petra puts it, she's still glad to be by jesse's side!!!! and þats what i call inseparable besties!

which is why jesse going w petra in s2 ending makes þe most sense to me. they experience so much togeþer. jesse gets to see petra meet her favorite legend, happy and giddy. realize how far apart þey really drifted. THEN RECONNECT!!!! like hello...þey want eachoþer!! þink about it! between s1 and s2, gang really settles down in þeir lives. jesse, lukas, axel and olivia- rhey all reside in þeir homes, going out less and less often. jesse is þe last to really fizzle out of petra's nonexistent home.

yeah, you heard me right. noþer side tangent, PETRA HAS NOWHERE TO GO WITHOUT HER FRIENDS AND THATS AO FUCKING LONELY LIKE HELLO??..... her þing is to adventure. not stick in one place. she goes to champion city looking for somewhere to reside in but she's stuck on þe low end of being a "champion" to bitch stella. do you know how lonely she is? no. can we assume þat her friends leaving her makes her repeat cycles she did prior-s1? yes, yes we can, because it's petra, petra þe "i dont know how friendships work but i miss jesse" petra :3 (GO MY ANGST WRITERS... WRITE!!/j)

ikay so back to jesstra. when jesse finallay meets w petra, its like a reintroduction almost. not only for player's sake but because its þe truþ- jesse and petra have changed. you can tell immediately, petra þinks of jesse dearly- yet feels like she's being left out. props to her for honesty!!! and þis makes jesse wanna hang out w petra more as to fix that. and ao rhey adventure. and get caught in trouble regarding a gauntlet. and þe season plays and CAN I JUSF SAY IR ALREADY???? þey yearn for eachoþer so bad when times get tough. like. after jesse gets þe gauntlet, þeyre inseparable- not to mention þey BOTH freak out and need to stop themselves from worrying. but also jesse feels left out when petra and jack talk about adventures- petra still doesnt expect jesse to come wiþ. jesse yearning is ON....and my heart is tearing apaet so naturally romeo comes in and makes þem scared shitless AGAIN and þey fight him again and again meanwhile during þis, never wanting to part. i feel þis is because of fear- þey have unsaid worries about eachoþer. þe þought of þe oþer dying already spooks petra at the water temple, so its safe to assume þe latter adventures she would protect jesse from everyþing and anyþing. which she does! actually! whole noþer post but HOO WEE.

and þen þeyre in admin story learning mode and just. jdjsonsaodkdskndk. þey realize þeir lives kind of mirror þe admin's, growing apart (as if þe old oots wasnt enough of a parallel) and petra fears being alone. boþ of þem do. its not very explicit, but jesse does rely on petra. þey immediately find eachoþer in þe ice tower, uhh,, oþer places, and þe jail institution, all þat jazz- so reflecting on þem drifting apart makes one.. cry. and petra does cry, for þe first time, infront of someone, honestly. and jesse is SO ACCEPTING OF THAT. i could gonon foreever about þis but like. HELLO. ITS. YHEYRE SO. THWIR WORLDS REVOLVE AROUND eachoþer AND þey CANT faþom A LIFE WHERE þeir BESTFRIEND IS GONE. AND þat MAKES ME BAWL. þeir relationship is so, so twisted and complex and beautiful. i could talk about it for hours!!! i say typinf about it for .. about 2 hours

anyways. þats þe end. if you really read it all HELLO YOURE SO COOL!?!???? i hope you see rhem in a new cooler ligjt or someþing idk. have fun þo! stay safe! aaand dream yuri!

edit: were my questions answered by the end of this? maybe. but i do know þey appreciate eachoþer sooososoo much!

[allyriadayne]

why do you think alicent is afraid of aemond? i didn't get this vibe from their interactions so far, but after the storms end i expect her to say I raised you better than that. i think she will wonder where aemond got this bloodthirstness from because neither she nor viserys were like this. listen, i love alicent but she has misconceptions about her children. just like dumbledore said to snape regarding harry. you see what you want to see. the thing is alicent overlooks aegon good traits like cunning (he convinced people living for years at dragonstone to follow him without bloodshed so itmeans he convinced them. My headcanon is: aegon is far more diplomatic than aemond even though aemond brags about studying history and philosophy so one can expect aemond to be more polished, diplomatic, but guess what all his knowledge goes out of the window when he's angry) and resourceful while she is too preoccupied with aemond not causing problems compared to aegon that she paints aemond as some sort of golden child. this, and aemond actually never comes back. aegon does. alicent was so wrong about both of her children. had alicent really understood aemond she would have never loved him because he represents everything she despises thirst for blood, war, violence. had she really understood aegon she would have truly loved him because they are very similar doing their duty and fighting till the end. alicent never understood her children. that's all. she was stuck up in childlish fantasies about both of them

why is alicent afraid of aemond? i agree this is not the vibe of their interactions but olivia cooke has a good nose on this characterization. the thing is, the studious, quiet, dutiful aemond is a cover for the real aemond, this is how he wants people to see him, esp how he wants his mother to see him because it means he gets recognized above his siblings, esp aegon. but he's not like this at all lol and i think in some level alicent understands this and it's afraid of this unleashed self (like she is of herself!). we saw a little bit of this dynamic in ep 8 when she tries to stop aemond from hitting jace and he snaps and snatches his arm from her. it's the moment she realizes she can't stop aemond anymore and it frightens her. and it's funny because she more or less makes aegon keep peace with rhaenyra on eps 9/10 by sending terms instead of an army but her favorite son is going too out of her reach. i don't think it's necessarily the violence but the lack of control she fears, esp when aemond is such a dangerous weapon.

i agree alicent overlooks aegon's good traits but only because aegon was uncontrollable since the beginning. what good is aegon's charm and charisma if he's not doing what alicent and otto tell him to? he's worthless because he can't follow instructions or at least pretend to, to me aegon has always been an honest kind of character and that kind of....let's say transparency is what disgusts alicent because she herself has learnt to suppress her own. the fantasy of difference is very strong with these two.

not loving her sons is something that was never in alicent's cards, i don't agree with what you say about that if she knew the real aemond she wouldn't love him or that she's "stuck up in childlish fantasies about both of them". she does love aemond knowing it! he razes the riverlands and executes the strongs and she's still wishing he was back in KL; she loves otto in spite of all the things he's done to her and the same happens with aegon. it's not a childish fantasy, i think alicent is just maybe too well versed in loving this sort of men, she does see them but wishes she didn't and wishes they were different.

[roobylavender]

This whole thread is so....

https://twitter.com/orikkunn/status/1754831427903074488?t=WbVE9Fu585pxZFXPbr_JlQ&s=19

It's pissing me off actually and I search the word hijab on their account and in one of their tweets they said "I think hijab is a bad thing" ??? I need non-muslims who speak on Islam without any knowledge to stfu

i'm going to apologize beforehand if this is upsetting in any way bc i'm sure you were expecting a different response but while i feel like op's wording could have been better in this thread specifically—i like their wording in this thread more—i do generally agree with them. i definitely understand there's a gut reaction to any critique of islamic practices esp in the context of modern orientalism and islamophobic sentiment, but i also think that muslims (and people of any religious faith, really) can simultaneously acknowledge that some criticisms of faith, while driven by racism and/or xenophobia, are also validly driven by a worthwhile contention with women's material circumstances over the course of history. in the other thread i linked above i think op is very much correct in that it's not constructive nor useful to criticize individual people. many individuals do choose to dress more modestly of their own volition and are privileged enough to have that available to them as a choice and nothing more bc of the environment they grow up in and the familial interpretation of religious tenets they're taught. but i don't think people are wrong when they acknowledge the larger context within which women are advised to dress modestly and how those standards of modest dress compare with those imposed on men in comparison. there's an undeniable dichotomy there and at least in my islamic upbringing i've been taught that the way some of these things diverge along the lines of gender is preordained and not meant to be perceived as inherently oppressive towards one gender or the other. a thing is simply bc it is. but religion isn't really something you can view within a vacuum much as that would be ideal. it is connected to the material circumstances of women in the real world and i do allow myself to sit with that reality even if it's weird to process at times bc i still consider myself a muslim and have no plans on ex-communicating myself

personally i like to dress modestly in the sense that i don't wear very exposing clothing. i've grown up wearing pants for my entire life. my parents are lax enough that i'm allowed to wear t-shirts but i can't wear anything where my armpits are directly exposed so that means no sleeveless tops. i can't wear anything with a deep neckline either unless i have a higher positioned undershirt on underneath. and again, i'm not particularly bothered by any of that. i do toe the line on a few occasions but generally i'm ok with how i dress bc by now i'm used to it. that being said, i know the reason i've come to be okay with dressing this way is bc it's how i was taught to dress, and towards the specific end of maintaining modesty and emphasizing on the shape of my figure as minimally as is possible without having to outright wear a bag lol. that is at large a structural reality of muslim practice towards women, regardless of what individual women choose to do in their own homes where they have the liberty to choose. and as i mentioned above, i do think we have to sit with that reality even if we acknowledge it opens us up to abuse by other people who may not have the best intentions. this is why, for example, i've really come to frown upon the way ex-muslims (esp when they're women) are almost mocked by the extant muslim community for logically reacting to patriarchal oppression under the guise of religion. bc at the outset, materially, there is no choice presented to these people. and even if there is ideologically a choice within the tenets of the religion itself, with respect to women in particular, there is still a defined gender dichotomy and hierarchy that cannot be denied and that is quite regularly used to perpetuate the oppression that many of them try to escape

what's hard to do and what requires a knowledgeable, concerted effort on our part as muslims is trying to balance the nuance of the oppression we are accessory to against the nuance of our own oppression for who we are. it's certainly cruel that we have to do so much to parse all of this because racist, xenophobic imperialists are incorrigible people who will co-opt anything if it's beneficial to them. but all the same, we do have that responsibility at minimum. we have to learn to sit in the uncomfortable reality that while many of us as individuals may choose to practice the way we do, that choice may yet be colored by how we grew up within organized religion, and it obscures our ability to recognize that while we think it's a choice for us as individuals, it's certainly not a choice on a structural level, and that's something we should vehemently argue against maintaining the status quo of

[jamesintherye91]

Personal Hot Takes on the Sonic Franchise.

Something I felt like sharing on here, my personal hot takes of Sonic The Hedgehog that I'm sure will rankle some but I've deeply felt over the past year or so having researched and examined most things revolving around the titular speedy blue hedgehog.

I think Ian Flynn is simultaneously overhated and overrated. He has contributed for almost 20 years as one of the main writers of the spin-off comics and most recently the games but honestly I again think he's not that great nor do I think he's terrible. To me, he's just a name and that's it.

Pontaff (Ken Pontac and Warren Graff) aren't that bad but how the fandom treated them is much worse than their contributions. Yes, their writing was more kiddie style but Sonic Team/Sega signed off on this direction and Pontaff were for the most part localisers as Ian Flynn currently serves as a games writer. I know Lost World and Forces are often derided for their respective story problems but personally I think they've got at least the right ideas in terms of what the Sonic characters represent thematically and I genuinely like aspects of them (the scene of Eggman violently snapping at Zavok and Zazz is genuinely great and I think Infinite as a character idea for a new Sonic adversary is what I prefer to see the franchise do more off rather than a series of giant slobbering lovecraftian creatures) but I agree that they're charitably speaking deeply flawed as stories. But the blame should be laid at the feet of Sonic Team/Sega than just at Pontaff personally.

IDW Sonic is just mediocre at best, often full of filler, drawn out story arcs and having a distinctively underwhelming set of new villains that really aren't that interesting or compelling. Honestly it feels like a waste and I'd be up for a proper reboot series that potentially hues much closer to the spirit of the games. The actual art however is often excellent. It's a shame that such great art is saddled with the mostly mediocre of stories...

Satam is fine but overrated by nostalgic older people who loved it as kids back when it was first on. Compared some of the best 90s animated shows of that era, it's not even close to them. It's just a in-name-only animated spin-off that honestly if you strip all of the Sonic related things from it, it further reveals just how mid it is. It's just a series that's been propped up by 90s nostalgia but to me who grew up on that stuff, it's nothing that great.

Adventures Of Sonic The Hedgehog is fine and in it's own way captures aspects of Sonic and his original influences (albeit his 90s American persona) that actually feels somewhat more respectful in it's own way. Sonic in this feels less like of an obnoxious little jerkass in this compared to him supposedly more "serious" counterpart in Satam (where his snarky tone often clashes with the more serious bent of that show whereas AOSTH, he's yes snarky but in a more cartoonish environment where it feels more appropriate).

Sonic Underground for all of it's issues with it's ugly animation, designs, vapid pop songs, the ridiculous mythos etc is really not that bad. I just think thanks to memes and certain internet "critics", it's become a joke but honestly I believe there's much worse cartoons out there. But it's certainly the weakest Sonic related cartoon to date I'll concede. But you gotta admit, the theme song is one hell of a banger...

But here's the big one and despite what I've said, I believe that pretty much every bit of American Sonic lore (Mobius, chilli dogs, Sonic's Bart Simpson-esque personality and 90s AF catchphrases, the Archie comics, DiC cartoons etc) that has influenced the franchise since should be dropped and consigned to the waste bin of history, finally allowing the games universe to be the defacto one. Blame Sega of America's marketing that whilst it did legitimately made the hedgehog a serious competitor against Nintendo's Mario, I really think we don't need that version anymore especially as aspects of this original American version still inform aspects of Sonic's current characterisation in the West. Watching that terrible Eddie Lebron Sonic fanfilm just put all of that in sharp focus (the scene where "Kintobor" announces to the world that he's rechristened himself as Robotnik because that's his fucking name spelled BACKWARDS is just fucking stupid in so many ways which was derived from that juvenile backstory between Sonic and the evil doctor made for the American lore and was later appropriated by the British Fleetway series) and despite some aspects I'd be willing to personally save (ie Freedom Fighters, Naugus etc), I'd still be willing to throw all of this American lore in the trash otherwise and replace it with the Japanese games lore and recontextualise various aspects that I would save from the original American lore to better fit the games one. This may sound like fanfiction style wish fulfillment but it's something I would consider personally as much as I greatly dislike the American lore, I'd be willing save certain aspects of it that may be applicable to a potential rebooted canon. But otherwise, I'd pretty much stick to the world, lore and characterisations from the Japanese developed games.

And despite the aforementioned American produced cartoons and comics, I'm really not a fan of giving Sonic actual parents and/or siblings. He really doesn't need a mum, a dad, an uncle, a brother and a sister, a queen mum etc. I like the idea (and Sonic's original creator Naoto Ohshima has conceded on Twitter about this) that he's an orphan and still being someone willing help those and with his friends like Tails, Amy, Knuckles and the rest, build a strong personal connection with each of them. It's just another example of the American interpretations trying to create something that I don't think was really needed personally. He doesn't need to have actual hedgehog parents for him to be who he is imho.

[cryingforhyo]

i guess it's safe to say that I'm one of your old readers in this fandom. 😅 I've been a reader since you drop Push and Pull out on that holiday night.

I read most of your fics too. there's only one or two fic that I haven't read in the past year because life is a bit hectic now.

this is not a subtle request btw, but I'm curious if you have a 'verse focused about coming-out or realizing one's sexual orientation. I don't exactly remember every detail but, iirc, most of your fics' characters have implied sexuality which are lesbians.

It will be cool to know how you guys write about the experiences of coming out from your time period. ( I don't mean to make you feel so old 😭 but I know you two are in your 30s and are wiser and more experienced than we are (early 20s) ) I remember reading a post that it was really a different social scene compared to now.

maybe I'm also curious how you two became friends, then roommates *cough* *coughhhhh* and then wives because tbh I'm surrounded by hetero couples irl that reading about you two fascinates me.

I'm sorry for this ramble. feel free to ignore it too if it's borderline invasive. and sorry if you'll see this on a Monday morning

first off, thank you dear reader for being with us for so long! time surely flies when you're having fun, because wdym push & pull is approaching its 3rd anniversary??? creating for this fandom has been such a joint delight for the both of us, and we're just happy to share the journey with friends like you :) take your time re the new fics, esp if they're wips! we're working on them relatively slower, because life has also been hella hectic hereabouts.

onto your second query: i think this question is very interesting, actually! to address it head on, for this particular fandom i don't think i've written a 'verse where the specific challenge for any of the characters is coming to terms with their sexuality. i quite like living in this fantasy world where people are simply as-is-where-is lesbians haha. for example in our childhood best friends to lovers stories, when someone realizes their attraction, the realization is not so much about falling in love with another woman, but about falling in love with this specific person.

this way, it's the characters' shared context and history that makes their dynamic compelling, instead of the much more global milieu of lgbt relationships existing alongside all these issues and history, etc. which i also think are interesting stories to tell! but for purposes of this fandom in particular, which i think exists in a sociopolitical context that is beyond my expertise--i leave those stories to better-positioned storytellers :) in the true spirit of creating in this era, i do not want to get anything so egregiously wrong it will detract from the reader's experience.

but seriously, i have been obsessed about writing coming out/ coming of age stories for the longest time, mostly for my original work, which are set locally with local OCs. they were all i wrote about back in the day, so i guess for fanfic i figured i could instead try all the other tropes that weren't so close to real life, where coming out can be fraught and complicated. it's for the same reason that i don't write compulsory heterosexuality (comphet) or i avoid writing men as third parties in general... i've already spent a significant chunk of my writing life writing /that/ story, or at least that’s how it felt like.

but you make a good point! i'd love to try revisiting that coming out/coming of age trope and give it some aged-up flavor. let's see about that :)

on a personal note, many times when i look at today's digital landscape, I often go, thank god [this or that] did not exist just yet back in the day [or at least not in this manner] when i was figuring my shit out, because oh boy. the clout i could have chased and cancellations i could have booked haha.

suffice it to say i'm happy the digital footprints of past egregious mistakes are now buried with the deaths of old platforms. we were very lucky to have lived and loved and lost in an age where the internet could still afford some measure of forgetting.

(i know there's probably no going back to that kind of landscape, but i hope it's not too late for us to be a little kinder to each other, and definitely more forgiving of ~youth and elderly~, given how fast information cycles around these days and how wide the age range of users concurrently using the same digital spaces right now can be. it's NUTS.)

that said, c would like to clarify she is still in her twenties! hahaha. i confirm this. i also confirm that you're right to say i (k) am already out of my twenties haha.

we actually became friends through fandom! we met on tumblr lmao because that's where you met other wlw back in the day (idk if that's still where people are, istg i would not survive the current dating landscape either!) so i would not be exaggerating when i say fandom brought us together, and we're still cycling through fandoms together, having been to various ones in the past handful of years. that said we look forward to more fandoms to add to our list lol.

thanks for this ask - it's actually the PERFECT thing to see on a monday morning, in fact. hope your week goes well!

[vacantgodling]

Writeblr Interview

On the Tumblr Writing Community

How long have you had your writing Tumblr/Writeblr?

been on tumblr in some way since like 2013. been on writeblr specifically since like 2020-2021... ish?

What led you to create it?

ended up leaving twitter (back when it was still twitter) around the time the pandemic happened. i wanted to get back into tumblr because i'd been focusing mostly on twitter for awhile and the yeehan community/my old friends kinda weren't doing shit for me so i wanted to focus more on my original stuff. so i ended up making a writeblr when i heard that was a thing.

What’s your favorite thing about the Writeblr community?

how we really do just be on here talking about our blorbos and having a good time. its nice to have a place to escape with people who also get the importance of not being connected to reality at all times.

Is there anything you’d like to see more of on your dash?

i feel like ask games have kind of died down compared to how they were a few years ago so it'd be nice to make a resurgance of that.

What tips/advice do you have for someone who made a Writeblr today?

honestly just post what makes you happy and actually interact with other people. just trying to promote your own stuff doesn't really work (unless you're an artist tbh) but interacting with other people and making posts talking about what you're making with enthusiasm instead of the "woe is me idk how to talk about my wips but i hope someone will talk with me... :((" like bro idk just talk about it. have a good time. you don't have to follow for follow or follow someone just bc they're a writeblr either i kinda hate that shit. like only follow me if you're actually interested in my shit and vice versa. but that's just a pet peeve. tumblr isn't twitter we are about having a good time here not about promo.

WIP it Good

Which Works-in-Progress (WIPs) or writing projects are you noodling about, lately?

that's a funny way to put this. rn its mostly been tcol just because i've been on a worldbuilding history kick because i've been cramming my brain full of a fucking alternate history youtube channel that my brain is mildly hyperfixated on. but my brain kinda flip flops around to any of my main wips when its convenient.

How long have you been working on them?

tcol's a wip i've had since i was 12 so like. pff 14 years at this point? jesus it sounds so old when i put it like that. paramour just had its 3 year anniversary on 6/19. vdtrt i've also had since 12. btaf is a couple of months old. like. maybe 2 months old lmao.

Do you remember what inspired them/what got you started?

tcol -> the video game etrian odyssey, lotr, history (in general) paramour -> there's so many influences frfr. but the original start was crimson peak and wanting to make something like that but also beauty and the beast and goth lit or whatever vdtrt -> percy jackson btaf -> twilight, but specifically the bella pregnancy arc

How much time, in your best estimation, do you spend thinking about them?

literally all day every day in some capacity

When someone asks the dreaded, “What do you write about,” question, what do you usually say?

"fantasy" i don't really talk to people about my writing at all in general irl anymore tho. just sets up for annoyance and disappointment.

What do you want to say (if it’s different from what you do say)?

"fantasy" like. i really don't like people knowing about my wips esp if i don't think they have the bandwidth to appreciate them. not to sound uppity but like ik the people who i'm around and the shit that intrigues them is just worlds away from what i'm writing whether it be because its fantasy, because it's horror, or because it's queer.

Let’s Rotate Blorbos

Name any characters you created.

so as of counting (and not counting the plethora of flesh blood recently added to tcol) i've got 419 characters and counting. this also doesn't include any of the ocs i have with my partner which is a decent amount. i'll just stick with the mcs of the main wips. so those would be:

hyacinthus, amon, darren, sjaak, biscella, azelie, piper, forte, deux, san, clear

Who’s the most unhinged?

least to most hinged of this list:

SJAAK -> amon -> san -> piper -> hya -> clear -> deux -> biscella -> azelie -> darren -> forte

Who comes the most naturally for you to write?

hya and amon are the easiest to write because i've written them the most. darren is a close second but not first because his whole thing about not using adverbs really trips me up.

Do you ever cringe at them?

nah. i don't cringe at them. i disdain at them. but not really cringe. i get really bad secondhand embarrassment so i don't tend to make characters that make me have that actually cringe reaction.

How much control do you feel you have over your characters?

kinda a weird question for me but tbh i feel like its sort of a 50-50 situation. i tend to make characters firstly out of some utility (aka i need a character to fulfill this role in the plot) and then as i develop them its like the two of us become collaborators on writing the story together. sometimes characters can be a bit stubborn about what they do or don't tell me about their backstories (hya is notorious for this) but for the most part they can't really "hide" things from me or wholly not do what i want them to do. a lot of times i'm going to put them in a situation anyway, they just need to tell me how they'll react to it. if any of that makes sense.

Do you enjoy people asking questions about your characters?

of course :) i sound kind of dead in this questionaire because i'm at work ready to kms. but, sending me asks or talking to me on discord/tumblr messages about any of my idiots is always loved

On Writeblr Engagement

What makes you want to follow another Writeblr account?

i look at the vibes of the account, who they are, if they have an intro and what kind of wips they're writing. i mostly only follow people if i see that their wips interest me. some exceptions can be made, ie: if they interact with a lot of my stuff first and we become friendly and i'm not following them i'll follow after the fact and then get invested in whatever they're doing. but on initial contact i like to see who you are and if your wips are interesting to me.

What makes you decide against following?

wips don't interest me or have things in their wips/in their sphere of focus that i just don't care about or aren't really my cup of tea. like let's say someone puts in their wip/personal intro that they hate fantasy. i write fantasy all the time. so like. probably not gonna follow you. that kind of thing.

Do you interact with non-mutuals often?

not often? i wouldn't mind it bc i actually don't follow that many people (always under 100) but this is bc i can't keep up with people that much and i want to make sure i properly give attention to others if i'm going to be invested in them. but like. i enjoy talking to people about my shit so like. /shrug. i have way more followers than i follow which is why i mentioned i hate when people follow me just bc i'm another writeblr lol. i'd much rather you follow me because you have interest in Me but like, i can't control people frfr.

Do your mutuals’ characters occupy space in your noodle?

yeah! that's why i try to keep who i follow kind of in lower ranges. i have bad memory and it takes me awhile to warm up to people, but when i follow someone its because i want to be friendly and get invested in what they do. so like, i try to do that. i'm not the best but i do try.

[peonycats]

tbh. I feel like framing is the issue. You hc China AND other non-Asian characters as gnc? That's really cool. Great. I feel like the main issue arises when people make China (and even Japan) effeminate and submissive or in a subservient position compared to the white male characters, which happens A LOT in my experience.

While I'm not Chinese myself, I am 100% east Asian, and growing up in a predominantly white community I was subjected to anti-Asian racism including the feminization of Asian men compared to other non-Asian men. Which is the reason why I'm personally uncomfortable whenever people portray Yao as a "cute little uke" to mostly if not all white characters, because it's kind of a reflection to the racism I experienced growing up.

Hi there anon! I feel it's important to contextualize and bring back up some things about my prior post to properly answer your question-

I myself am also a full East Asian who grew up in a predominantly white community, and am very aware of the issues of the feminization and demasculinization of Asian men, esp easian men, in the western mainstream.

In fact, I actually strong dislike most depictions of gnc/feminine Japan partly for this reason, and partly because it and the wider "woobification of Japan" plays into Japan's own rewriting of its role and history on the global stage and erasure of its darkest deeds.

(also, though androgynous/gnc china is something near and dear to me i dont like it when that's paired with a more masc white partner 🤢)

(Also if you make all of the Easian countries gnc/feminized......🤨)

Additionally, I do touch on in my post about how a lot of popular fandom depictions of China fall into the Orientalist tropes of feminizing the colonized man, I make the point that in the effort to reject femmephobic masculinizations of China (Tianshii brought up a great point I wish I remembered to bring up about how a lot of these "masculinizations" make China adhere to Western standards of masculinity) people uncritically embrace Himaryu's feminine/gnc China as some progressive inclusive depiction of China, when... it's a product of orientalism too, albeit from another perspective.

The main point of my post was advocating foreigners to be careful not to lean into either side of this too hard, because even though Chinese people can really do whatever they want with their country, foreigners can inadvertently end up reproducing these pernicious Orientalist tropes (whether they be by trying to make China fit western standards of masculinity bc "Chinese standards arent masculine enough" or by uncritically replicating orientalist depictions, whether it's by Himaryu or the western mainstream) by their very nature as outsiders.