#for the sake of science I will not be stating my opinion in this quite yet

[turquoisedragonmaster]

Aight my gremlins I have a question for you

[narcoticwriter]

My Rankings of the Guilty Gear Strive Cast: Contextualized as Hell Edition (In No Particular Order)

Given the previous tier list where I didn't have many opinions on some of them, I have read the wikis, watched some videos, and have done my due diligence. Note how I didn't say I disliked any of them as the writing for this franchise is superb.

I believe that I have at least made a valiant attempt to atone for my previous sins, so I make this in good faith and genuine appreciation! I will ask again not to be stoned but this time, I can dodge. Friendly conversation, however, is more than welcome.

My yapping is underneath the cut:

They're Alright -

Ky Kiske: Firstly, I don't hate him at all. I just need him to apologize to his son because what in the Catholic guilt is his name? Really man? Really? He was really going through it, huh. The character arc of him being able to recognize this and make active steps to fix it is quite nice and I hope he succeeds for his sake.

Faust: His backstory is tragic in the way that it wasn't even his fault. The rampage after he snapped? Sure, he can take responsibility and atone for that, but the event itself that caused it? Entirely out of his hands. His character of seeking out truth over most other things and circumstances is also admirable.

Goldlewis Dickinson: From what I understand, he's a relatively new character on the scene and there's not as much stuff on him as for some others. However, I will give him this: he's the level of delusional about cryptids that you can chuckle at, but if he ever wants to go private in his business, it wouldn't surprise me.

Bedman (?): I am a simple person with simple likes and dislikes. It is heavily implied that Bedman (?) in his current state is precisely because of Delilah and the disjointed scrambling of the inner workings as a result. The story as to why hurts me and fuels the kind of emotion in me that reminds me that I'm a human being.

Asuka R. Kreutz: Oh brother... where do I even start? Not only is he the reason that this entire story exists as it is, but he's also trying to fix it... because he's (rightfully) guilty over what he's done. What the hell? Like, what the actual hell, man? I am genuinely befuddled by this man and the real kicker is that so is everyone else. And apparently, he's on the moon now. Absolutely insane to me.

These Guys Are Pretty Neat -

Sol Badguy: It continues to baffle me how he was apparently a man of science at one point in his life and also responsible for a good chunk of the cast implicitly. If there is anyone in this story who deserves a break, it's him, but unfortunately as the protagonist, that is a luxury that he cannot afford.

May: If I ticked her off, I would run. What business does she have slugging around an anchor like it's nothing? Also, I completely understand her deal with Johnny, but the instant she understands how he sees her, I don't know how she'll cope. Maybe she'll get it when it happens. Great personality though.

Zato-One: I've got one word for his backstory and entire deal: Jesus. So yeah, he and Eddie are pretty neat. I don't know what else to say. If I think any more about it, I don't know if I'll have the strength to go on.

Leo Whitefang: The trope of the loud boisterous personality hiding a bunch of self-flagellation and self-criticism due to heavy responsibilities and realizations is one that I have always been a sucker for. And how he thinks about it? Another part of why I think he's pretty neat. So sue me, I have distinct types.

I-No: She has a pretty abrasive personality and after reading her voice lines, I have to begrudgingly give credit where it is due. Some of those double entendes are pretty damn clever. I will also argue that she was never even given a proper chance in the first place, so she is warranted to pop off like she did. She also scares me. Do with that what you will.

Johnny: The man, the myth, the legend... and apparently the golden-hearted. Somewhat. The man's a womanizer, but he also takes some girls in for arguably decent reasons given the absolute state of the world at that time. And quite frankly, the unexaggerated swagger of the gambler is a favorite of mine.

Quite Likable and Mostly Enjoyable -

Axl Low: From what I've seen, this is a man that is simply trying his best with the somewhat shitty hand of cards that he has been given and somehow, he has not turned into a shitty person because of it. From what I've found, at least he got his happy ending with the person he loves the most, and that's enough for me.

Potemkin: I despair for Potemkin because he does not despair for himself. (A bomb collar? A fucking bomb collar? What the fuck?) He believes, but he also knows how hollow it is sometimes. He's a gentle giant who was forced into this whole thing and while he's taking it in stride... it hurts. It hurts.

Millia Rage: For starters, there are a lot of victims of the Crusades and I'm very glad that the story has shown how this can affect some of the characters in certain ways. Millia's ultimate choice of choosing a sense of inner peace (as well as herself) and sticking with her ideals resonates deeply with me.

Anji Mito: Anji is like me in certain ways, as I too have poked around in different places trying to find answers in ways that some people would call my methodology 'unorthodox'. However, my favorite thing about him is that he's also quite 'inconsistent' in the sense that his intuition and emotions have gotten him into less-than-desirable situations with those he cares about. He makes it work, but it's a breath of fresh air to me.

Bridget: I will say that while not parallel, the war within and the disassociation she felt on a somewhat regular basis is extremely relatable because I went through an experience like that. I also appreciate the self-discovery that has taken place within her arcs as well as how she seems to have finally rediscovered herself. It's nice to see.

Elphelt Valentine: There is an undeniable charm in the purposeful and genuinely authentic exaggeration of one's personality traits to the point of cartoonish and almost comical lunacy. There was going to be a pick like this for purely personal reasons as for taste at some point. I find her absolutely adorable with those antics. However... what the hell happened to her first husband?

Queen Dizzy: She has every right to hate people, but she is a ray of sunshine and genuinely? I would have tea with her. Period. She deserves everything that is good and kind in this world and more. Ky may have made their marriage public, but (in my mind) he has a lot more work to do to make up for a good chunk of what happened to her.

Cool to Me and in Their Own Rights -

Chipp Zanuff: I really know how to pick them, huh. For all intents and purposes, this man is in the wrong genre. Put him in a shounen and he will rise above some of the current game in that sphere. But here? Nah. Regardless of that, I find his attitude to be one that inspires people to not only do better but to find themselves at a higher station. Is the way he goes about it completely half-baked and hare-brained? Arguably. But is he trying? Yes. He's cool in my book.

Ramlethal Valentine: If all it took for her to say 'you know, people aren't really that bad' was taking a bite into a fast-food chain burger —that probably started off frozen and was made with some of the cheapest things that the chain could get away with— and immensely enjoying it, then clearly, she is going in this tier. I am also excited to see her live as a person and not a weapon. She rocks.

Giovanna: Alright, alright, it was the dog okay? It's the dog. That's why she's here. That's why she's in the tier. It's not because of her attitude about how other people think of her conduct, it's not because of how unapologetic she is about what she wants, it's not because of the potential backstory and lore, and it's definitely not because of how sick her entire movesets are in game.

Jack-O' Valentine: I could go into her backstory, I could gush about how adorable she is, and I could even profess my admiration for her zeal for life but... I find that I really don't need to justify this one. Besides, this says everything I want to already:

Sin Kiske: My boy, I know you were holding back when you called your father a 'shitty king' and I don't blame you at all but he needs to hear it all. However, this ain't about him, so I will say that Sin is a better person than me. If Chipp is fueled by determination, then Sin is fueled by unrelenting optimism and genuine empathy for everyone he meets. Even with the strained relationship with his father, he's still open and willing to have it work out! Sin, don't let the world snuff that out. It's a good thing to have.

Slayer: I love seeing married characters knocking it out of the park with the combination of an eternal lifespan, a lovely doting wife, plenty of projects and interests to speak of, and god-class powers in their own rights. Slayer ticks off all of those boxes, not to mention how fun he is... and surprisingly? I don't really mind him being a vampire. I would love to chat it up with him and Sharon over tea sometime.

Undisputed Favorites -

Nagoriyuki: Finally, some proper goddamn adaptation of Yasuke in the 2020s that isn't some sort of caricature or badly executed take, and this time, he has an inner struggle within him as someone out of time and fighting his urges to stay true to his beliefs and ideals. It certainly doesn't help that his disposition is rather calm and composed. Did I mention that he's a vampire samurai? I feel like that's also very important. So yeah, one of my favorites!

Happy Chaos: Folks, please understand that this man has had me passively gripped by the throat ever since he was released. He was going to be here regardless of what I've learned about him, and what I have learned is that the man at his core is hilarious. There's a difference between characters that 'instigate' in ways that hurt others in some sort of subtle and a man who genuinely fucks around and finds out with pleasure, and I am glad to say that Happy Chaos is the latter.

Baiken: To start off, I-No scares me, but Baiken terrifies me. I would not want to be on a bounty, I would not want to be within her living radius, I would not want to be around her when she's pissed off. This is a woman who has nothing to lose and virtually everything to gain. This is not to say that I dislike her though, quite the contrary actually! She has easily one of the most conclusive and well-done development arcs I've seen for a character ever and to be frank with you, I would love to see where she goes from here.

Testament: Testament fucking rocks. Now this is a character that I can relate to heavily. Testament has been through the highs and lows of the uniquely human experience and despite becoming a Gear and loathing humanity, has somehow managed to circle back to precisely what that is. They are everything I want to be in how I pursue my interests, treat others, and simply live life while also confronting the past and making peace with it. 'Testament' is quite apt of a name, if I say so myself.

A.B.A: Too many people are afraid of genuinely unhealthy, unhinged, and unwell women. I am not one of those people. Her entire isolation from birth aside, there is something admirable about her relationships with others. While it is not perfect nor seamless in execution, there are attempts made to not only have other meaningful attachments to others but to also improve her own very warped relationship with Paracelsus. The both of them have agreed to try and have committed to attempting it together, and this gives me a strange sense of hope in how perhaps I can do the same for myself.

Conclusion -

I've said it before and I'll say it again: You guys have something really special with the Guilty Gear franchise. The characters are a breath of fresh air in comparison to some of my other experiences, and the way that they are weaved and accentuated with music, art, and the care poured into them by their creator is nothing short of beautiful to me.

And to believe that this is a fighting game! Crazy. Anyway, like I've said, any and all friendly discussion is encouraged. I'm more than down to hear it.

[sixty-silver-wishes]

Okay I Could do work but instead I'm going to write about the time shostakovich had the worst time in america

(So, despite the clickbaity title, this will be more of a serious post. I wrote about the topic a few years ago on Reddit , and I'll be citing a lot of the same sources as I cited there, because there are some good ones, along with some new information I've gathered over the years. This was going to be a video essay on my youtube channel, but I sort of kept putting it off.)

The Scientific and Cultural Congress for World Peace, held in New York in 1949, is a particularly fascinating event to study when it comes to researching Shostakovich because of just how divisive it was. True, the event itself, which only lasted a few days, doesn’t get as much spotlight as the Lady Macbeth scandal or the posthumous “Shostakovich Wars,” but you’ll find that when reading about the Peace Conference, as I’ll be referring to it here for the sake of brevity, many of the primary accounts of it never quite tell the full story. The Peace Conference was held during a volatile time, both in Soviet and American politics, as Cold War tensions were on the rise and an ideological debate between capitalism and communism gradually extended to become the focus of seemingly every factor of life- not just politics and economics, but also the sciences, culture, and the arts.

While artists on both sides were frequently cast in different roles in order to create or destroy the image of Soviet or American cultural and ideological superiority, the image either government sought to cast was sometimes contradictory with the sentiments of the artists themselves. For instance, while the CIA-founded Congress of Cultural Freedom (CCF) sent African American jazz musician Louis Armstrong on various tours around the world to promote jazz as American culture and dispel perceptions of racism in America, Armstrong canceled a trip to the Soviet Union in order to protest the use of armed guards against the integration of Black students at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas, in 1957. Meanwhile, the Soviet government’s use of international diplomatic missions by artists as cultural warfare also reflected a desire to portray themselves as the dominant culture, despite the tensions and complications that existed for artists at home. When the Soviet Union sent Dmitri Shostakovich to New York in March 1949 for the Peace Conference, such cultural contradictions are why the conference occurred the way it did, and why Shostakovich’s image has received so much controversy, both in Russia and in the west.

If you’re familiar with Soviet history, you may be familiar with the term Zhdanovshchina, which refers to a period of time between 1946 and 1948 in which Andrei Zhdanov, the Central Committee Secretary of the Soviet Union, headed a number of denunciations against prominent figures in the arts and sciences. Among musicians, Shostakovich was one of the most heavily attacked, likely due to his cultural standing, with many of his pieces censored and referred to as “formalist,” along with his expulsion from his teaching positions at the Moscow and Leningrad conservatories. During this time, Shostakovich often resorted to writing film and ideological music in order to make an income.

Meanwhile, in the United States, as fears of nuclear war began accumulating, peace movements between the two superpowers were regarded more and more as pro-Communist, an opinion backed by the House Committee of Un-American Activities (HUAC). The Waldorf-Astoria Peace Conference, to be held from March 25-27th 1949, was organized by the National Council of Arts, Sciences, and Professions, a progressive American organization, and was to feature speeches held by representatives of both American and Soviet science and culture. Harlow Shapely, one of the conference’s organizers, stated that he intended for the conference to be “non-partisan” and focused on American and Soviet cooperation.

On the 16th of February, 1949, Shostakovich was chosen to be one of the six Soviet delegates to speak at the conference. This was largely due to his fame in the west, where both his Seventh and Eighth Symphonies met a mostly positive reception. Shostakovich initially did not want to go to the conference, stating in a letter to the Agitprop leader Leonid Ilichev that he was suffering from poor health at the time and wasn’t feeling up to international travel and performances. He also said that if he were to go, he wanted his wife Nina to be able to accompany him, but he ended up being sent to New York without any members of his family- perhaps to quell concerns of defection (recall the amount of artists who defected around the time of the 1917 revolution, including notable names such as Rachmaninov and Heifetz).

Stalin famously called Shostakovich on the phone that same day to address the conference, and again, Shostakovich told him he couldn’t go, as he was feeling unwell. Sofia Khentova’s biography even states that Shostakovich actually did undergo medical examinations and was found to be sick at the time, but Stalin's personal secretary refused to relay this information. Shostakovich's close friend Yuri Levitin recalls that when Stalin called Shostakovich on the phone to ask him to go to the conference (despite the fact he had been chosen to go in advance), Shostakovich offered two reasons as to why he couldn't go- in addition to his health, Levitin claims that Shostakovich also cited the fact that his works were currently banned in the Soviet Union due to the Zhdanov decree, and that he could not represent the USSR to the west if his works were banned. While accounts of the phone call vary, the ban on Shostakovich's works was indeed lifted by the time he went to New York for the conference.

When Shostakovich arrived in New York, general anti-Communist sentiment from both Americans and Soviet expatriates, as well as media excitement, resulted in a series of protests in front of the Waldorf Astoria hotel where the conference was to be held, with some of the protesters directly referencing Shostakovich himself, as he was the most well-known Soviet delegate on the trip. In 1942, Shostakovich's 7th ("Leningrad") Symphony was performed in the United States under Toscanini and the NBC Symphony Orchestra to high acclaim, helping to promote the idea of allyship with the Soviet Union in the US during the war, and Americans were aware of the Zhdanov denunciations in 1948, as well as the previous denunciations that Shostakovich had suffered in 1936 as a result of the scandal surrounding his opera "Lady Macbeth of the Mtsensk District." So by 1949, many people in American artistic circles had a sympathetic, if not completely understanding, view of Shostakovich during the birth of the Cold War. They viewed him as a victim of Communism and the Soviet state, who was forced to appease it in order to stay in favor, and as a result, could potentially voice his dissent with the system once in the west. Pickets visible in footage from the protests outside the Waldorf Astoria carried slogans such as "Shostakovich, jump thru [sic] the window," a likely reference to Oksana Kosyankina, a Soviet schoolteacher who had reportedly jumped out of a window in protest (although the details of this story would be found to be highly dubious). Meanwhile, another sign read "Shostakovich, we understand!," a statement that would prove to be deeply ironic. At the conference itself, Shostakovich did not jump through the window, nor did he attempt any form of dissent. Instead, an interpreter read through a prepared speech as he sat on stage in front of a crowd of about 800. The speech praised Soviet music, denounced American "warmongering," and claimed that Shostakovich had accepted the criticism of 1948, saying it "brought his music forward." Many in the audience could see that Shostakovich was visibly nervous- he was "painfully ill at ease," and Nicholas Nabokov (brother of the writer Vladimir Nabokov) remarked that he looked like a "trapped man." Arthur Miller recalled he appeared "so scared." As they noticed how nervous he looked, some of those in attendance sought to make a demonstration of him in order to illustrate Soviet oppression in contrast to the freedoms supposedly enjoyed by American artists, asking him intentionally provocative questions that they knew he would not be able to answer truthfully. From Nicholas Nabokov:

After his speech I felt I had to ask him publicly a few questions. I had to do it, not in order to embarrass a wretched human being who had just given me the most flagrant example of what it is to be a composer in the Soviet Union, but because of the several thousand people that sat in the hall, because of those that perhaps still could not or did not wish to understand the sinister game that was being played before their eyes. I asked him simple factual questions concerning modern music, questions that should be of interest to all musicians. I asked him whether he, personally, the composer Shostakovich, not the delegate of Stalin’s Government, subscribed to the wholesale condemnation of Western music as it had been expounded daily by the Soviet Press and as it appeared in the official pronouncements of the Soviet Government. I asked him whether he, personally, agreed with the condemnation of the music of Stravinsky, Schoenberg, and Hindemith. To these questions he acquiesced: ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘I completely subscribe to the views as expressed by … etc….’ When he finished answering my questions the dupes in the audience gave him a new and prolonged ovation.

During the discussion panel on March 26th, music critic Olin Downes delivered yet another provocative statement towards Shostakovich:

I found both of your works [the 7th and 8th Symphonies] too long, and I strongly suspected in them the presence of a subversive influence—that of the music of Gustav Mahler.

For Shostakovich, and anyone knowledgeable of Soviet politics and music at the time, it's not hard to see why Downes had explicitly mentioned Mahler. Gustav Mahler (1860-1911) was a highly influential composer when it came to 20th century western music, particularly with regards to the avant-garde movement pioneered by the Second Viennese School- Arnold Schoenberg, Anton Webern, and Alban Berg. Shostakovich was also heavily influenced by Mahler, but such influences were frowned upon in the mid-30s to 50s Soviet Union. Mahler's style was decidedly more "western," and it's potentially for this reason that Shostakovich's 4th Symphony- perhaps his most "Mahlerian," was withdrawn from performance before its premiere in 1936, having followed the "Lady Macbeth" denunciations. To tie Shostakovich to Mahler would be to point out his direct western influences, while he was being made to issue statements that rejected them. During his speech, Shostakovich made statements criticizing Stravinsky and Prokofiev- two composers who had emigrated and adopted western-inspired neoclassical styles (although Prokofiev returned to the Soviet Union in 1936). Stravinsky had taken insult to Shostakovich's comments against him, and carried an animosity towards Shostakovich that appeared once again in their meeting in 1962, according to the composer Karen Khachaturian.

On the last day of the conference, March 27th, Shostakovich performed the second movement of his Fifth Symphony on piano at Madison Square Garden to an audience of about 18,000, and had received a massive ovation, as well as a declaration of friendship signed by American composers such as Bernstein, Copland, Koussevitzky, and Ormandy. He returned to the Soviet Union on April 3.

In addition to the 1948 denunciations, in which Shostakovich was pressured to make public statements against his own works, the likely humiliation he endured at the 1949 conference played a role in cementing his dual "public" and "private" personas. For the rest of his life, Shostakovich displayed mannerisms and characteristics at official events that were reportedly much different from those he displayed among friends and family. For the public, and for researchers after his death, it became difficult to determine which statements from him reflected his genuine sentiments, and which ones were made to appease a wider political or social system.

Both the Soviet Union and the west had treated Shostakovich as a means of legitimizing their respective ideologies against one another, a trend that continued long after his death in 1975 and the fall of the USSR in 1991. The publication of his purported memoirs, "Testimony," allegedly transcribed by Solomon Volkov, fueled this debate among academics and artists, becoming known as the "Shostakovich wars." The feud over the legitimacy of "Testimony," however, stood for something much larger than the credibility of an alleged historical document- as historians and musicologists debated whether or not it was comprised of Shostakovich's own words and sentiments towards the Soviet Union, its political systems, and its artistic spheres, they were largely seeking to prove the credibility of their stances for or against Soviet or western superiority. "Testimony" helped evolve the popular western view of Shostakovich as well, from a talented but helpless puppet at the hands of the regime, to a secret dissident bravely rebelling against the system from inside.

Modern Shostakovich scholars, however, will argue that neither of these views are quite true- as more correspondence and documents come to light, and more research is conducted, a more complete view of Shostakovich has been coming into focus over the past decade or so. Today, many academics tend to view Shostakovich and the debate over his ideology with far more nuance- not as a cowardly government mouthpiece or as an embittered undercover rebel, but as a multifaceted person who made difficult decisions, shaped by the varying time periods he lived in, whose actions were often determined by the shifting cultural atmospheres of those time periods, along with his own relationships with others and the evolution of his art. We can be certain Shostakovich did not approve of Stalin's restrictions on the arts- his posthumous work "Antiformalist Rayok," among other pieces of evidence from people he knew, makes that very clear- but many nuances of his beliefs are still very much debated. There has also been a shift away from judging Shostakovich's music based on its merit as evidence in the ideological dispute, and rather for its quality as artwork (something I'm sure he would appreciate!). As expansive as Shostakovich research has become, one thing has become abundantly clear- none of us can hope to truthfully make the statement, "Shostakovich, we understand."

Sources for further reading:

Articles:

Shostakovich and the Peace Conference (umich.edu)

Louis Armstrong Plays Historic Cold War Concerts in East Berlin & Budapest (1965) | Open Culture

Biographical and Primary Sources:

Laurel Fay, "Shostakovich, a Life"

Pauline Fairclough, "Critical Lives: Dmitry Shostakovich"

Elizabeth Wilson, "Shostakovich, a Life Remembered"

Mikhail Ardov, "Memories of Shostakovich"

HUAC Report on Peace Conference

Video Sources and Historic Footage:

Arthur Miller on the Conference

"New York Greets Mr. Bevin and Peace Conference Delegates"

"Shostakovich at the Waldorf"

"1949 Anti Communism Protest"

"Battle of the Pickets"

[turnthepagevn]

Dev, can you help me out. I was planning to go into pharmacy and become a pharmacist only to realize that I never liked the work and mostly did it to make my parents proud. I know you're a mortician and was wondering what your education and career path and what the job was like? and was it hard to find a job that paid you enough to live?

Hi, hello! As far as my education goes, I went to college and went through a two year program (plus a couple of years to get pre-reqs out of the way) to get my associate's in funeral service education! That wording is used pretty interchangeably with mortuary science, so for the sake of clarity, I'll refer to it as mortuary science from here on out.

School was. Hard. It's a LOT of information to take in all at once, and you end up learning a wide variety of skills, ranging from the expected skills, like anatomy and physiology and cosmetology to some that most people wouldn't immediately think of, like business law and accounting. It can get really overwhelming to try to get through all of that.

I mitigated a good chunk of the sense of being overwhelmed by immediately making connections with my cohort; at the college I attended, we used a cohort system, so we'd have the same classmates for the entire two years, provided they stayed with the program. I'm going to be honest; we started with thirty people; about 14 graduated. The course is partially designed to weed out people who aren't completely certain about this career path, which i have Opinions about, but that's me.

As far as career path, I started as a funeral director apprentice, as in the state of Washington, you gotta do your apprenticeships to get licensed. It wasn't a great fit, in all honesty, however, I stayed with the company, and switched to working as a part time funeral attendant for a bit, and now I work as a transfer specialist while waiting for an opening on the prep team so I can start my embalmer's apprenticeship. I prefer embalming to funeral directing, mostly because I don't like trying to sell people stuff while they're grieving, but good funeral directors are worth their weight in gold.

As far as what I do to make ends meet, I'm the one who shows up when your loved one passes away, and I bring their body with me to the funeral home they need to go to. I also transport people from morgues and nursing homes, in addition to people's houses! I'm also responsible for ensuring that caskets and decedents are delivered and moved about as needed, whether that be for their actual funeral service, or taking them to a crematory for their cremation. I enjoy what I do, and I'm generally quite fond of the midnight shift.

If it sounds like it might be up your alley, then by all means, go for it! I'm cheering for you!

[ask-captain-keating]

O Captain, my Captain!

This world is very money-based, unfortunately, and writers, teachers, artists, etc. have a harder time supporting themselves compared to the sciences, medical careers, and law. What are your thoughts on this, and do you have any advice for people who are struggling to decide who they want to be because of it?

Toddandersonsyawp,

(ooc parentheses: sorry dude idk ur name LMAO)

Ah, unfortunately this is a question I am all too familiar with. Without delving too much into my opinions on the economical state of society, I find it quite sad, scary, and dystopian that a majority of people are forced to choose between a passion that makes them happy, and living. The creative industry (as well as the teaching industry) would greatly benefit from those who participate doing so out of passion, rather than the desire to turn a profit.

As for my advice in regards to the matter, unfortunately I don't have a solid answer for you. The best I can offer you is to try and find time to pursue those fields as a hobby/ second source of income if you are in a situation where you need solid ground to stand on financially. If you are able to succeed, and make money doing so, then fantastic! If you are not, then there is nothing wrong with doing something you enjoy simply for the sake of it. However, if you are adamant in your want to have a career in arts/teaching, I would be a fool to turn you away from pursuing what makes you happy. I see no fault in prioritising creative happiness over turning a profit, as long as you know the risks behind it. Please do take this advice with a grain of salt though, as I am not a financial expert, nor do I have any knowledge of your financial situation, or the stakes of what the lack of a potential stable income are for you as an individual.

Best,

John Keating

P.S. Look into mutual aid if need be! You'd be surprised how many members of your community are willing + able to lend a helping hand.

ooc P.S. TAKE THIS WITH ANOTHER SPOONFUL OF SALT BECAUSE I AM NOT EVEN 19 YEARS OLD YET AND AM VERY MIDDLE CLASS. also anti capitalist keating is sooooo very real to me. keating for class solidarity!!

[khorneschosen]

Its an discussion about abstract ideas. You know like the scientific method, laws of logic, standards of proof, and the law of identity.

I can see why, having abandoned abstract ideas, like truth, justice, morality, happiness, joy and brotherhood you'd worship men you believe produce the products of the values you damn.

Only, how horrible would it be for those better men to agree with you.

How horrible would it be for them to sink to your level.

They do, as do you. You may state otherwise but elsewhere you will contradict yourself. Turns out being logically consistent was also dropped.

The part you dropped apparently. The part where you took liberal only to mean they particular group of people who call themselves liberal rather than the ideology. It's funny how you call yourself a liberal but don't know the first fucking thing about it.

Consensus. What a wonderful fucking phrase So long as all men agree it is true does it matter if their actual proof work is something objectively awful incorrect and fabricated. It is true because many men say it. What a wonderful fallacy a wonderful fallacy that science was meant to deliver us from. And you in worshiping it deliver us right back to that ancient standard consensus.

Doesn't even matter if not a singular one of them actually know or have tested what they are agreeing to.

You place too much value in the peer review and nothing in the repeatability.

Also I got the lower ape thing from how you talk about man. Apes are quite willing to be in harmonious union with each other most of the time. Mankind however left to its devices left to deal with each other as apes do apparently is the source of a great deal of evil. In your own opinion as I said lower in your standards than apes.

And I have to ask what is your actual protection from them dropping the standards The idea that the rest will condemn them why no because if they condemn them they are outside at the consensus and therefore wrong. Therefore they are pseudoscience. One does not need to form a consensus by the basis of its evidence One can ideologically create that consensus and then fudge the numbers to support it.

You point to standards that were destroyed for the sake of the consensus and then think that those standards will remain in place. For example in the '80s there was a big push or environmental scientist to drop academic standards in order to ensure that possible problems could be headed off before they became problems alarmism was more important than proof.

And again if what I am saying is wrong then with each of my examples they should not have ever existed. They should have been crushed in the crib before they were born we would not even hearing about them and yet they persisted.

As has been the case for a very long time. Such a scientific journals claiming they had proved the metaphysical positions of people like Marx. Only for the person who wrote the entry to reveal it was a entire fraud. And this was not a recent phenomenon but a very old one.

Darling I'm more accurate than you even know at present.

[skepticalarrie]

Hi Allie, just want to get this off my chest. I think some people here should admit that Twarries exist is because of Tumblr Larries and it is true. From making up theories and outright telling people close to H and Louis that theyre xyz. If we're gonna be honest some tweets are just copy pasted from here and vice versa. It's quite fuck up tbh when some things are taken out of context and people then believed that said context rather than researching the full thing. Tumblr is literally the main source of Twarries, let's be real. For example: a blog here *claims* that Louis likes to get choked, then twarries spread that info that Louis confirmed that he likes to get choked BUT reading the whole context of the Zac Sang interview, he never stated that he *likes* to get choked. See how that works? Another example is this one blog who posted a certain magazine article of Louis (this was YEARS ago) stating he feels like a "mother/sister" and every twarrie and blouie uses that as proof that Louis is quote on quote " a woman like Harry " . Yes, I didn't post the blog's name cuz theyre "popular" here but that being said some statements are literally out of context and some blogs here should be careful on how they word their posts. Also, about the "debunk" issue that's been going around, I feel some people just don't accept the truth for their narrative to be correct. Like this thread is all facts but some people here tend to say it's fake. We have dozens of facts already, some shit is fake, tumblrinas should lower their superior complex and accept that fact. From said blog, doesnt like to accept it due to the "versatality" thing but we have to admit, those back scratches are fake/photoshopped and it's okay.

Anon, I don't like your tone and I don't like your opinion either if I'm being honest. First of all, if you have some sort of issue with a certain popular blog go talk to them or I don't know, or stop following them or whatever. You're going to find people you agree with more and people you agree with less and that's fine. I feel like you're being kind of a dick with this. I have no idea who you're talking about and I'm not particularly interested in this kind of drama on my blog.

As for the tumblr x twitter dynamics, I think all platforms feed from each other, twitter, tumblr, tiktok, instagram... and people will engage with whatever makes more sense to them. I'm on tumblr because I feel like this platform is superior for the kind of discussions and experiences I'd like to have about this. We have the ability to talk about facts, timelines, and context much better because we have archives and tags to check. It's that simple. Now, if people are taking something from my blog - what is supposed to be a "safe space" - and putting it out there with no context, it's their problem. I can't be responsible for someone else's interpretation of my words and what they're going to do with them. I can talk about whatever I want here and I trust people to have a drop of critical thinking to take away something reasonable from it. People need to think for themselves, for fucks sake! Maybe some people lack the ability of being truthful with themselves and others, and that's a shame. But it's not my problem, if they like running around like a headless chicken completely unaware and uninterested in what is really happening, I don't want anything to do with it and I don't want anyone bothering me about it.

I don't know what this "debunk" talk is about, I feel like I'm missing something, but I've ranted endlessly on my DEBUNKED OR NOT DEBUNKED tag. And the thing is, we're not talking about science here, we're talking about something that is incredibly subjective, it's someone's opinion/point of view on something. So what you can do is try to find the most reasonable explanation and with that try to figure out if something is real or not real... but people are going to believe whatever they want to believe. So like I said, I like interacting with people that are worried about making sense of things and finding the most truthful explanations, I don't want to believe any lies. But if someone is more interested in feeding something they already made their minds about and that makes them happy, I mean- that's fine. As long as they're not bothering HL in real life, or bothering me... nothing wrong with it. And I wish it was that simple lol But unfortunately it feels like they're not the ones responsible for the consequences when they do that. All the larries suffer from it. I get hateful messages because of something that is being said on twitter and that I don't even agree with. So I don't think people need to accept anything if they don't want to, but I think people need to take responsibility and most importantly I think people need to stay in their own lanes and stop bothering people on other sides of the fandom.

[vampireinterview]

It has come to my attention that some of you have not been made aware of the fact that Plato was well known for being a Destiel shipper, in addition to the fact that he also wrote some philosophical works on the side. Let me explain.

Plato was an Athenian thinker whose real name was Aristocles (Plato most likely comes from the Greek word for ‘broad”, he might have been so jacked that people nicknamed him for his wide shoulders, which is irrelevant to the topic at hand but I’m collecting receipts on my hypothesis that all hellers are physical beheamoths). His work regarding the philosophy of love can be interpreted through the lens of the Deancas love story, which can potentially lead us to discover the very essence of what makes Destiel so impactful and universal, so bear with me, I’ll make it as introductory as possible.

Plato’s Symposium is a dialogue which contains the philosopher’s basic view on what love can be. The influence of the aforementioned text has been so strong that even those of us who are blissfully unaware of its contents have heard of the concept of “platonic love”. It is with great disappointment that I have to inform you about the fact that the way in which the term is colloquially used can be considered quite removed from the core idea of what Plato’s love is supposed to be about. Commonly people utilize it to refer to a non-romantic and non-sexual emotion towards an individual. However, even though the extrasensory love was the end goal, it was never too far distanced from the earthly, carnal desire that was supposed to lay the foundation for greater experiences.

One of the most illustrative elements of the Symposium is no doubt the Love Ladder metaphor (also known as Diotima’s Ladder of Love, the Scala Amoris); Plato believes the act of loving to be a part of the process of initiation into the non-material world of ideas. Every step of the ladder helps one approach the transcendence of one’s soul, and so we can single out six steps to immortal absolutes:

1. The first step is developing an appreciation for a particular person. It’s a very much carnal (though not necessarily conventionally sexual) desire for beauty of a specific individual. According to Plato only through the love of the physical can one love the non material. The visceral infatuation with another’s body is often strongly rooted with the self-hatred of one’s own aesthetical poverty: within the carnal love we seek to find that which our own body lacks. The desire between Dean and Cas doesn’t have to be seen as strictly sexual, as the appreciation of beauty does not warrant a conventionally erotic subtext. This sort of fascination with the flesh is most noticeably highlighted in the many “eye sex” scenes in seasons 4-5, and is later brought up by Hester:

The very touch of you corrupts. When Castiel first laid a hand on you in Hell, he was lost. 

2. The second step stems from the appreciation for all physicality derived directly from the love one has for the lover’s form. It’s fleshed out any time Dean finds beauty in the dark times, where he would have never found it before or when Cas sees humanity through the lens of the love he has for the beauty within Dean Winchester. This step is all about finding the allure in everybody, not in spite of but rather because of having fallen for a specific person’s material form.

3. The next step is a love which transcends the physical and teaches an individual to feel affection towards the souls. The attraction one can experience in relation to that which is non material is precisely what takes the function of the driving force behind both Castiel’s and Dean’s decisions in season 6 and onward (arguably even much earlier for Cas? or even Dean? Maybe we’re talking about season 4?). As evidenced by the apparent lack of attraction Dean experiences towards Jimmy himself, he must have already moved on to this stage (the Cas he loves is not just the vessel he inhabits). Castiel on the other hand feels heavily infatueted with Dean’s spiritual allure (even when he’s physically on the verge of a breakdown, he’s still beautiful, still Dean Winchester). 

4. It is only then that one can find love for the institution. If one worships souls, then one also has to worship the product of those souls: and, sure enough, loving humanity led Castiel to love its structures and ethical systems and be willing to die fighting for them. In the later seasons he exhibits fascination over all the little rules that guide an average human’s life (which is especially fleshed out in his season 7 dialogues, where he contemplates all the small details of the societal structure, ie: how important is lipstick to you?, maybe the human institutions should ban its production). Same can be said of Dean: the customs and traditions of other people are subject to his affectionate protection in the later seasons, which sets s6 and onwards Dean apart from the early seasons Dean who cared mostly about his blood relatives. The found family arc was for him a process of growing attached to the order of life which was previously foreign to him, and him learning to navigate functioning within a big family structure and an organization (the last one is physically manifested by his move from a chaotic life spent at random motels to living at the bunker, property of the institution of Men Of Letters).

5. Then comes the deep appreciation of knowledge. Now, it is widely disputed whether what Plato meant should be strictly narrowed down to just one kind of knowledge (in many English translations you might encounter the word ‘science’, though used in the ancient sense). The process of gaining knowledge is often equated with the understanding of ideas in Plato’s work, therefore we’re going to stick with that. The act of loving the process of discovering both the external and the internal world is a strong factor which pushes Dean to self examination, or the examination of the inner psyche. It is that pursuit of knowledge that is the very coronation of his entire character arc: the realization of his role within the story (”I’m not the ultimate killer”) which was directly derived from the act of loving Cas.

6. The final stage of platonic love is reaching the love of the very concept of Love. Once again, interpretations vary, but for the sake of the argument, I’ll clarify that: the discussed kind of love transcends both the body and the soul. An individual is in love with Beauty, not just one of it’s physical or spiritual manifestations. In my opinion, this stage is extremely well depicted during the 15x18 confession scene, for it is a kind of love achieved by Castiel. He is no longer just in love with the body or soul of Dean, he’s also in love with the sole idea of loving him. He quite literally states that he’s fallen in love with the idea of just being, just saying it, just falling in love. 

Upon achieving this state, he transcends his material conditions both by leaving the human world (his move to another dimension - the Empty - could be just an illustrative manifestation of the transcendental move of his essence) and giving birth to a new world order. The way in which he later on goes to rebuild Heaven and give birth to a completely new, structure of the universe is in line with a concept that Plato ties into the finale step of the Ladder - pregnancy of the soul. At one point in Symposium he describes Diotima saying that:

That in that life alone, when he looks at Beauty in the only way that Beauty can be seen--only then will it become possible for him to give birth not to images or virtue (Because he’s in touch with no images), but to true virtue (Because he is in touch with the true Beauty).

What is the christian equivalent and personification of the true idea of Virtue if not the abstract concept of Heaven? The moment Cas creates a new portrayal of Virtue he finishes the Ladder. It could also be argued that the true pregnancy of the soul was actually finished when Jack ascended to the status of God: an entity which belongs to the realm of ideas and is perfect by its very nature is birthed through Castiel’s love (which can be traced back to the feelings he has for Dean Winchester).

And it is the fact that Dean’s arc got stuck on the fifth stage of the Ladder that causes me so much pain. He dies before transcending and experiencing the non-temporal and non-relative feeling of love that one can gain only through the admiration of beauty itself. His life was cut short and his soul has already left the mortal, physical world, therefore he is forever unable to experience the feeling of loving Love and Virtue so much that his soul gives birth to an unbreakable idea.

In conclusion: if you ever see somebody say that Dean and Castiel’s relationship is platonic, just agree. It is very much so platonic in the sense that through their carnal and spiritual desires they’ve manged to (nearly, in Dean’s case) transcend their material conditions and reached the divine aspect of ideal Beauty and Virtue, rooted in a love that’s so deep that it’s perfectly able to redefine the structure of one’s existence.

tagging some people who have vaguely expressed interest in acquiring the third eye:

@cryptcas​ @futureheadnerd​ @doctorprofessorsong​ @sinnabonka​ @theangelwiththewormstache​ @absoluteheller​ @fivefeetfangirl​ 

[nagisasstunningpersonality]

About Assassination Classroom Characters- Akabane Karma

Oh look it’s finally time for demon boy

Look I’ve honestly done so many previous rants about how this fandom really messes up with Karma as a character, I’m going to TRY and keep it brief. 

So the first major character point we have for Karma is his genius. Though he’s naturally very intuitive, as well as at least to an extent book smart without effort, he has to (and does!) put serious effort into studying to actually refine himself and get those top results. 

His intuition is somewhat what separates him and Gakushuu, as we see in the final math problem. He has slightly more ‘natural’ intelligence, where Shuu has more booksmarts.  

He can learn just by watching, such as Karasuma’s defensive techniques. 

The next major thing is Karma has a tendency to lash out when angry, sometimes without really thinking. It’s even worse when he actually thinks about it. Though he starts to develop from this, this gets him into trouble and him losing it is ultimately why he ended up in 3E. 

Karma’s also for the most part a very lazy person. He doesn’t want to do their assassination lessons, or even show up to class, if he thinks there’s nothing in it for him. Again, we do see him develop from this. 

This also leads to a bit of arrogance. 

He’s actually kind of... nerdy? Like he really likes movies and video games for example. He even fanboys over his favourite director. I guess this isn’t the most obvious side of him though. 

The boy is also high key sadistic like the things he comes up with, enjoying torture with both physical and verbal actions. 

Look for the sake of fandom peace I’m only going to bring up the cross dressing/gender jokes briefly in that he’s a 14 year old boy and doesn’t deserve a cancelling hate campaign for a series of (admittedly terrible) jokes that don’t really impact the series as a whole that much. It’s my personal opinion that they largely were toned down after the whole Hiromi arc as it was, and Nagisa himself said he could cope with it coming from him. 

Karma lives mostly alone, since he has weird India obsessed parents who are constantly travelling. Matsui states that this makes him generally more mature. Karma never expresses being upset with his parents, but I imagine it gets a little lonely for him. 

Actually, he’s a really great leader. Though he doesn’t show this side of himself for a while, he really steps up and is at least somewhat on par with Isogai by the end of the series. 

Though it takes him some time since people are kind of wary of him, he does make some friends. Notably would be Sugino, who eventually he started to hang out with due to Nagisa, though I don’t personally see them spending time one on one. 

He also spends some time with Itona, when he properly transfers into class. 

I wouldn’t call Terasaka a friend at all... more of a lacky. 

Karma’s a little put out when Isogai interacts with him in a friendly way. Unfortunately, he’s not used to it (poor Karma honestly). 

He and Nakamura are to be feared when they work together on something. Since they’re both very intelligent, their conversations can be a real mixed bag. He really does trust her, though, enough to make her second in command. 

It should be mentioned that Karma absolutely has trust issues. I could write like... a whole meta about just this, but in summary it means that he rarely opens up to people, and when he does he needs to really trust them. 

This is why I think, along with her science capabilities, he finds it easiest to talk to Okuda out of the girls. Because she really is genuinely so honest, Karma can be relaxed around her. Whatever your ship, their friendship is a very great concept (even though Matsui like... never went into it). 

Now, Nagisa. Well, from Karma’s POV I think the angst was definitely a lot heavier. Originally, Nagisa was harmless and a person Karma could easily trust. But when he first saw Nagisa’s bloodlust, he freaked out. He was scared that something so dangerous could slip through his defences, so he put up every guard and forced distance between them. Even though Nagisa is his closest friend when they reunite, they still keep those walls up with each other until civil war. It’s kind of this awkward contradiction that was going to boil over no matter what. Though they do eventually get over it when Karma admits defeat, and we see them both drop those roles so they can be the good friends they really are. It’s a big moment for him. 

Again, I’m not trying to write a whole karmagisa essay here, however his feelings with regards to Nagisa are a very interesting part of his characterisation. 

In summary, yeah I went on a bit. Whilst I wouldn’t say Karma’s my favourite character, he’s definitely the most interesting for me, and absolutely has the most complete character arc in the series. I could talk for pages and pages, but I’m trying my best to keep this down to a reasonable length. As such, I don’t have any development notes, aside from continued maturity. 

What I will repeat: KARMA IS NOT YOUR EDGY BAD BOY SUAVE EMO OTOME GAME PROTAG BOYFRIEND. Honestly, just make your Maehara/Chiba/Hazama hybrid oc at that point. I’m all for interpretation, and I admit he’s quite hard to write and I don’t claim to do it perfect, but it almost feels... so off it’s kind of insulting to his character? I get that a lot of people stan his vibe, but at least stan real Karma and not some distorted fanon of him. He’s also not like, evil. He’s 14. 

I appreciate that sounds like a Karma stan going off, but it’s really because I see him being taken VERY ooc the most out of any character, aside from the people who genuinely think Nagisa is a submissive maid girl. 

MASTERLIST

[veryvincible]

Hey! 👋🏼 I was looking at Tonys panel with Carol and his AA panels. It got me thinking how can a person like Tony .. who is an atheist, a believer of science and a confident engineer rely on AA which has a religious foundation (the 12 steps) and place so power on God. I know secular AA have different takes on it and encourage a personal definition of God as any higher power the person may choose. But doesn’t that defeat Tonys belief? Because I don’t think he believes in a higher power regardless if it’s a deity or not.

This is a wonderful question. There’s a lot of nuance to the answer, in my opinion, because I think there are some things called into question here that Tony (very realistically) treats with a lot of complexity.

Firstly, Tony’s atheism is kind of... I don’t want to say it’s up in the air, because at this point, I think it’s kind of made its place in canon and fanon both. But, most likely as a result of the times in which he was created, he has been shown in canon (at least in the early stages of his life) to follow some sort of organized religion. This is from Iron Man Vol. 1 #164, and it’s... not strong evidence for him being a spiritual man, as most people who call themselves “not that religious” tend to be religious by way of traditions, but. You know. It is what it is.

Of course, we could dismiss this as yet another thing that early canon imposed on a character who wouldn’t be like that at this point in time, but I think it brings up interesting beats in the way Tony’s character has progressed over the years.

Considering him as someone who may have been raised as traditionally religious makes sense in the context of defining events, as well, given that we watch him pray the Lord’s prayer in #14 of Iron Man Vol. 4, one of his Civil War tie-ins.

Given the proximity to the alcohol (and the point he’s at in the timeline, here), one could also easily assume that even if he had no religious background, the very presence of the Lord’s prayer in AA meetings could have formed a connection in his head between this “worship” and sobriety-- at the very least, enough of one that the prayer strengthens the effectiveness of his willpower. It seems the little push he needs to pour a drink down the drain is borderline Pavlovian.

There’s actually a lot of religious imagery in Tony comics in general. He’s a man with a suit facing conundrums of cosmic proportions. It’s difficult for him to keep rationale exclusively within the range of earthly probabilities.

Point is, his atheism doesn’t come from his disbelief in a higher power. It’s quite the contrary, actually. His atheism comes from a belief that there’s no single entity that could claim the title of God, that any being willing to try has, just by being, already forfeited the title.

Which is a fair assessment to make, given that he’s fought many people claiming to be Gods, and they’ve all bled. He’s also watched people worship Gods that turned out to not... really be Gods, whether they were otherworldly beings, his buddy Thor, or, uh, himself. The idea of him, at least. In space.

Because of course that happened.

But Tony actually does have a higher power to give himself up to in these meetings. In Civil War II #1, he very explicitly states it:

“I respect the future. I believe in the future. I worship at its feet.”

“The Future” to him is something he can affect, certainly, but he’s aware of just how massive it is, just how massive all of time is compared to the few decades he’ll spend on earth. This is his higher power, his cosmic deity of choice.

It can’t bleed. It can’t falter. It’s inevitable.

And this mindset is... pretty in line with everything else he’s done. He’s referred to himself as a “necessary monster.” He’s implied many times over that he thinks he’s rotten and potentially dangerous, but he’s also intelligent and capable and he wants to do the right thing, even if he doesn’t always know what that is. 

If you’ve ever been in a religious environment, you’ll probably recognize his mindset going into any problem: there’s always a solution, always information he’s missing, always a “right choice” he’s looking for with a domino effect that’ll be as favorable as possible for future generations. He trusts in the future the way people trust in God, with an awareness that he’ll never have all the pieces to make sense of everything, but he can have enough information to act. And he must act, or else his worth, his right to be alive, even, is at stake.

So, needless to say, he’s not praying to a mainstream God. But religious imagery isn’t and has never been off-putting to him, and though he certainly could seek out unreligious (is that a word?) alternatives to AA, I find it hard to believe that he would, given just how influential his higher power of choice is as it guides him through life. He puts everything at stake for it, going so far as to make choices that will destroy not only himself, but also his relationships with his loved ones if it means he’s doing what he perceives to be the right thing.

Secondly, even if he were a man who had no belief in any form of higher power, not even a stand-in for it, AA still might not be something he’d discard in favor of an alternative.

Religion serves as a guide. Most often, it has “do”s and “do not”s, certain beliefs it supports, and a kind of... basic explanation of what human life is and how it should be treated. One of the more common threads among most religions that I’m aware of (I am not an expert in religious studies; please don’t @ me) is the idea that human life is generally sacred, and as such, people should treat each other with respect. Yes, some texts can contradict this, but the general rule is “be nice to each other!” when you really look at the basics of what people are trying to teach. At its core, religion is linked to what we as humans already tend to for the sake of survival: compassion.

As such, though we might not always identify with religion as a concept, it’s not difficult to identify with some religious morals and teachings. Some people take to certain teachings better than others-- it’s super case-by-case-- but if you’re stuck in a religious environment listening to some preaching or anything, there’s probably going to be something you can relate to, and some way you can morph and adopt the message. This isn’t, like, all-encompassing, by the way. Of course there are some things that atheists and religious folk will never be able to relate to within each other, but.

You get what I mean.

I’m an atheist myself. I spent a chunk of my schooling at a religious institution. At best, there were messages that affected me deeply (as they were hard-hitting even when I stripped them of the God-worshipping aspects). At worst, I had to grit my teeth through some assignments, though I felt mostly indifferent (if slightly resentful at times, more out of frustration with the closed-mindedness of the administration than with the concept of religion itself). My experience isn’t universal, of course-- some people in my shoes were more frustrated and angry than I was, and I can see why. But my point is, being an atheist in and of itself (even one as strict as Tony) doesn’t render religious imagery useless.

For example, if you happen to pass by a pastor preaching about struggles with guilt, you might not identify with the sentiment of “Give your worries to God and know He’ll take care of you.” However, you could identify with the sentiment of, “Those little things, those side effects of decisions you’ve made? They’re here. Those decisions have been made. You’re allowed to swallow past the reality of what it is that’s passed and move on. You’re allowed to let go of it, so long as you’re better today than you were yesterday.”

It’s especially easy to do this if you’re listening to or being exposed to content from a religion you’re already familiar with; in Tony’s case, if we assume he was a Christian at one point or was raised with Christian ideals (not unbelievable in the slightest, given his circumstances and upbringing), then he wouldn’t have to do a lot of heavy lifting in order to get to “core messages” of certain Christian teachings that he could still identify with. Couple that with the higher power mentioned before, and... it’s not hard to see what might be appealing to him about AA, and it’s not hard to see why it was so effective at sticking in his mind all the way through his darkest periods in life.

Now comes the less healthy part.

There’s also an aspect of self-flagellation to it that I feel Tony might identify with on a deeper level. We’ve seen him hate himself openly, and we know how he regards himself. Even if he managed to find himself in a courthouse-like environment where the religious undertones were more about judgment than recovery, I don’t know that that would necessarily... push him away? He’s already told himself there’s something rotting and evil at his core many times over. He’s already committed himself to a lifestyle of atonement and progress, punishing himself when he fails to accomplish things no human reasonably could and barely praising himself when he doesn’t fail. Do I think these kinds of meetings would be totally sustainable for him, given that he clearly needs to feel pride or relief on some level for conquering his demons? No, not really, but. I don’t think he’d abandon them straight away.

Besides, every healing environment he’s been shown in has been more on the welcoming, open side, even if we only get to see a bare bones interpretation of AA (with deeper exploration happening more with Tony’s response to it, or his and Carol’s responses to each other) in canon. He’s in a good place with it, and it’s very nice to see.

Tl;dr: Again, great question. At the end of the day, I think the combination of self-loathing, his desire for progress, and his conceptualization of “the future” as his higher power makes AA a good fit for him despite his lack of a belief in "God” as an entity.

[dreamersleeps]

Hey, have been reading your blog and it is the kind of goldmine I’d brave the dangers of the Klondike for. It is SO GOOD. But I’m also curious on your thoughts on Endeavor playing god, but not understanding the science behind his creations? He seems to think Shouto has an Icyhot Quirk when it’s more likely Shouto is a Chimera. He has two phenotypes, thus one side can only use Icy and the other can only use Fire. Shouto like has TWO Quirks instead of a combination of both. And Enji seems to think Touya inherited Rei’s constitution, yet that might not be the case as according to the Singularity Theory, humans’ Quirks are evolving at a faster pace than the body can keep up with. So Touya might not even HAVE his mother’s constitution but Endeavor just THINKS he does. Also, there is his rivalry with All Might that is completely one-sided. Allmight as All For One which is the Quirk of not a single person but more eight Quirks in one. Endeavor thinks he’s going up against a single man when in reality he’s facing eight men in one.

Hello! First of all I’d like to give a huge apology for how late my response is. Due to the start of the spring semester and some other unexpected life events, this took way longer than expected. 

Thank you so much for your kind comments! 😩💕 It really did put a huge smile on my face and it made my day! It makes me feel very giddy~ When I first started posting on Tumblr, I wasn’t expecting people to actually like or even read the stuff I was writing about or send messages to my inbox since most of my posts kind of make me look like the guy in this meme here: 

I very much appreciate all the comments and asks I receive in my inbox, so thank you for sending yours in. 

Anyways, I’d like to address this from the beginning but, unfortunately when it comes to quirks and how they work, I’m not too sure if I will be able to answer your questions properly. For example I am aware of the Quirk Singularity Theory but I don’t know if I have a good enough understanding of it to form a response I am confident in.. That being said, I will try to answer your other questions and comments the best I can. 

Endeavor Playing God

So, what are my thoughts on Endeavor playing god, but not understanding the science behind his creations? Back when we had the Touya reveal and we got more information about the Todoroki household from the perspective of Todoroki Enji, there were a lot of differing thoughts and opinions about the flashbacks that were floating around Tumblr. I think if I were to give a simple answer to your question, I’d say it was Endeavor’s youth and stubbornness. Looking back at Chapter 291, we can see that Endeavor looks quite young in the flashbacks with Touya, but I’m going to attempt to do the math. 

Seeing that we know that Fuyumi is currently 23, and that Dabi is older than her (I suck at guessing ages) and I’m guessing here that he’s going to be four years or older, since quirks normally manifest around four years of age. That being stated the youngest age Dabi may be currently is 27? Maybe 26.

Keep in mind that I may be off with the “math” I’m doing here but let’s guestimate Dabi’s age as being 26 or 27. Endeavor is currently 46 years old so that means he was 19 or 20 years old when he had Touya. For comparison, Natsuo is currently 19 years old as well. 

At that young of an age, he already had his eyes set on wanting to surpass All Might. His hero name, Endeavor, summarizes his career pretty well: an attempt to achieve a goal. 

With the hellflame quirk he has, and the wealth and power that came with his family name, he really was given a position to act as a “god.” For the sake of his ambitions, Touya, Fuyumi, Natsuo and Shouto were born, as his “creations.” 

Touya’s “Weak Constitution” and Shouto’s Quirk 

I’m not going to say that his youth was the main factor for why things happened the way they did because the answer is more complex, but I do think that a combination of his youth and stubbornness fueled Endeavor’s recklessness. He essentially bought his marriage with Rei in order to pass down some sort of combination of the hellflame quirk and Rei’s ice quirk to his children. I think when it comes to the question of whether he understood the science behind what he was doing, I think I can confidently say that he didn’t know in the beginning, or at least it was not something he really looked in to. I think he just saw it as hellflame + ice quirk = child with both quirks as we kind of see in the panel below. 

As you state, Endeavor does see the combination of the two quirks as one. We can see below that he refers to it as, “the ideal quirk.” 

I think that it is also important to point out that Endeavor was, I guess you could say, content when Touya was born even though he only had the hellflame quirk. From the first panel, Endeavor states, “the fire power he possessed was greater  than my own.” 

He continues to say, “He didn’t have a way to overcome the inescapable downside of overheating but... I nevertheless sought to raise the boy to be a hero.” 

That was until it was revealed that Touya’s body could not handle the extreme heat which came with the hellflame quirk. This is when Endeavor began to refer to Touya’s “weakness” as inheriting Rei’s weak constitution. 

Now, the Quirk Singularity Theory and just the genetic science behind quirks has always been kind of difficult for me to wrap my mind around so because of that I do not think that I will be able to give an opinion on it that I would be confident in. However, @/redphlox has a post which has some opinions that I agree with that have to do with Endeavor’s belief that Touya had “a weak constitution and Shouto’s quirk. I will link it here. 

As for Shouto’s quirk, unless the actual meaning and its nuances was lost in translation, his quirk is referred to as “Half-Cold Half Hot” in the English official translation which I think further reinforces the idea that it is not really a singular quirk but a combination of two separate quirks. I agree that Shouto is most likely a Chimera. 

According to Britannica, a chimera is: 

In genetics, an organism or tissue that contains at least two different sets of DNA, most often originating from the fusion of a many different zygotes. 

The term is derived from the chimera of Greek mythology: a fire-breathing monster that was part lion, part goat, and part dragon. 

As seen below we can see the white hair, gray eye and ice quirk on his right side (our left) that he inherited from his mother Rei, and then on his left side (our right), the red hair, teal blue eye and hellflame quirk he inherited from his father Enji. He can only use his ice quirk on his right side and his fire quirk on his right side. 

Shouto’s appearance reminds me of a particular tortoiseshell cat named Venus from a while back. You may have seen her back when photos of her went viral. Tortoiseshell cats are usually chimeras, however Venus was nicknamed the “Chimera Kitten” or “Chimera Cat” even though it is most likely that the chimera mutation isn’t the cause behind her unique (and cute!) appearance. 

Another definition of a chimera is: 

“A chimera... is a composite individual that was made up of cells from at least two different original embryos. If they fuse together early enough, they will become a single organism whose genetic input is from two completely different individuals. In a mosaic, there’s only one individual and it just happens to have different genetic components active in its cells. A chimera would be a much more unusual and unlikely event. - Columbia University Professor of Genetics and Development Virginia Papaioannaou 

The image above depicts Venus the cat however the original source of the photo is unknown. 

Considering that in real life, a chimera is an individual made up of cells from at least two different embryos I think we could kind of apply that sort of argument to Shouto although this is all speculation. To our knowledge, the other Todoroki children were born with only one of their parents’ quirks while Shouto was born with both. 

On Shouto’s fan wiki page, it states: 

If he overuses one element without utilizing the other, then his own body temperature will suffer; the ice half will cause frostbite and the fire half will cause heatstroke, Until his bodily limit is reached however, neither has any visible effect on his body. Shouto can easily negate his weakness by alternating between ice and fire. 

Endeavor had been training Shouto to use his fireside and I think he mostly saw the ice quirk as something that could be used for temperature regulation however, as you suggest Shouto has two separate quirks, both equally strong in their own right. If he used his ice quirk too much, he may have to rely on the hellflame quirk to regulate his body temperature. Both quirks have very high potential on their own and with the aid of the other. 

Anyways going back to the Chimera stuff, I think that although the movie, Heroes Rising isn’t canon, I do think that the inclusion of the villain, Kon Chojuro going by the name of “Chimera” with the quirk of the same name was interesting. He also fits the second definition of the Greek mythological chimera that we had above. 

Even more interesting was that it was with the team of Tenya, Kirishima, Asui and Shouto that took Chimera on, with Shouto making the last blow using his ice quirk. He takes his ice quirk to the extreme and we see his body covered in ice (frostbite?) as a result before he passes out. 

All Might and Endeavor’s One-Sided Rivalry 

Whenever I write about this particular character I feel that I must include a little note like this but everything you see above is not an excuse for what Endeavor has done but a little exploration in to the complexity that is Todoroki Enji. I personally think that he is a very interesting character to look in to.

As you mention, the rivalry between Endeavor and All Might was completely one-sided. I think a large part behind it had to do with their differing ideas of what it means to be a hero. It is from All Might where we tended to see the more ideal-focused concepts of a hero. He was the symbol of peace, the light of hope and an inspiration for children and people all across Japan. In simple terms, a hero is someone who saves, kind of like how we saw Midoriya throughout most of the series. 

As for Endeavor, he fits more in the role of the concept of a hero being an occupation. He had a hard time trying to figure out how to portray himself to the public after All Might retires and even asks him for some advice of what it means to be the number one. Endeavor wanted to be the number one because that meant he is the strongest man/person in Japan. He was constantly training and he was so focused on wanting to achieve his goal that if he was not able to then he wanted to make sure that his own blood would surpass All Might. For him, simple terms a hero meant someone who surpasses and wins. This is kind of like how we saw Bakugo throughout most of the series until recently. 

(I’m not going to go too deep in to this as many other blogs have written amazing analysis and meta posts on Tumblr already but the adults they are often compared to Midoriya and Bakugo’s storylines have been slowly changing to incorporate both saving and winning in to what it means to be a hero.) 

With this one-sided rivalry came Endeavor’s recklessness. I do not think that before and early stages after Touya was born that he really considered the science behind his “creation.” However as soon as it was revealed that Touya could easily get harmed by his quirk, Endeavor definitely should have recognized the consequences of his actions. 

As his hero name suggests, one of his main goals and purposes of being a hero was to accomplish his greatest endeavor, to surpass All Might, which he calls his “eternal goal.” There is an implication here that at the age of 19 Endeavor already believed that there was a good chance that he may not be able to surpass All Might with his own quirk and strength. That is why he sought out a Quirk marriage. 

“Because Toya had more potential than me... I placed my ambitions on his shoulders.” 

Endeavor has a bias towards his own quirk as he wanted an heir with his quirk and blood to become number one. Fuyumi was born and she had inherited Rei’s ice quirk but unless we get some sort of explanation, I think we can assume that Endeavor did not bother trying to training her. I think the same can be said about Natsuo. 

Then Shouto was born and this changed a lot of things. It seems that there was a highly likely chance that Endeavor either greatly diminished his focus on or halted Touya’s training and turned his attention towards Shouto. After all, he was born with what Endeavor believed to be “the ideal quirk.” He probably saw more potential in Shouto carrying his legacy than he did in Touya to become number one. It is likely that it was during this time that Touya “perished” in the fire. 

Now that Endeavor had lost Touya, he was only left with Shouto. Driven by grief and desperation he put everything he had now onto Shouto. Looking back to Chapter 252, Endeavor tells Natsuo:

“Believe it or not... I was never trying to neglect any of you. But... all I could do was blame others and dodge responsibility.” 

His actions and the past state otherwise however if we take his word, then I kind of visualize a man who was aware of the consequences and hurt caused by his actions and cruelty but had refused to actually acknowledge it: whether it was because he was afraid to confront reality, a mix of his stubbornness and desperation, the desire to become number one surpassing every other desire or a combination of all of this.

I always got a feeling from his character that he was someone who chose to believe that “the end would justify the means” as he “lost more” if that makes sense. “Everything that happened could not be all in vain” (although I’d like to point out that acting in this way is very selfish of him) which is why he continued to keep his eyes on the horizon at his goal instead of towards his family. 

As you state, Endeavor was going up against All Might, the carrier of the One for All quirk, and yes, it is interesting that kind of like All for One, it is the carrier of multiple quirks. One of the main differences between how the two quirks function is that one has the ability to pass on quirks and power while the other is the ability to take other quirks and powers. Unfortunately, unless the secret of AFO and OFA come to be known to the public, Endeavor would have never known what he was truly up against and in a nihilistic view, one can say that everything he was and did ended in vain. 

Although I would argue otherwise as this implies the assumption that the birth and existence of the Todoroki children would then had also been “in vain.” This is not true. This would imply that they would only be an extension of his legacy. We see the struggle to separate ones’ identity from their parent and their “destiny” through the contrasting stories of Shouto and Touya. 

In the end, Endeavor did become the number one hero although it was not in the way he envisioned it to be: it was given to him as he was the next in line as the number two hero due to All Might’s retirement. He didn’t win the position by surpassing All Might hence the embarrassment and anger he may have felt when the news was announced. Now that he is (ehhh maybe was? considering where we are in the manga) the number one hero, it seems like that everything he’s been doing and thinking keeps going back to the thought of “because I am the number one hero.” The position he worked hard for, trained hard for and hurt his family for across the decades of his life, forfeited to him by the previous symbol of peace. 

I always return back to the High End vs Endeavor fight whenever I talk about him but that is because there are great symbolic and narrative points that are made during it. Again, it is what establishes him as the number one hero but this is also where he acknowledges the past (however to what extent is debatable). 

I remember when the episode first came out back in 2020, anime watchers were going crazy. It felt like with some viewers, they focused more on the action than the narrative that was taking place. The reason why Endeavor flies so high and captures the hearts and support of the people of Japan in BNHA and a wide majority of us, the watching audience, is so that we can feel the blow later on when he plummets down. Even when I was watching it, I couldn’t help getting goosebumps while listening to the ost and seeing the way the manga panels were interpreted and animated. 

While I had been reading the chapters which I did first, I did not even really care about what was going on. I just kind of brushed Endeavor off to the side at the time. However when I was watching it I even got a little emotional, although I’d like to blame that on the fact that I had just finished a really difficult semester and watching the episodes felt like a cathartic release of stress (hahaha). It was only afterwards I went back to actually re-read and look at what was going on in the manga.  

I hope that I gave the answers, thoughts and opinions that you were looking for. Again, huge apology for answering your questions and comments really late. Thank you @thewilderstorm for sending your thoughts in, I truly appreciate it and loved responding to them!

[amphtaminedreams]

COVID-19, Negligent Manslaughter, and a Timeline of Tory Indifference

“I feel sorry for Boris Johnson. He is doing the best he can in the situation and I don’t think anybody else could have done a better job.”

[exhibit A: a gem somebody that I’m Facebook friends with reposted earlier]

It’s a sentiment that I cannot quite wrap my head around. I sit here hopeless and furious and trying to hold back tears because it’s been almost a year since England first went into lockdown and yet here we are, almost 100,000 dead, in an even worse position than we were before whilst other countries begin to slowly return to normality. It is clear to me who is to blame for this, however there are a large proportion of people who don’t want to “politicise” the actions of the PRIME MINISTER with regards to his approach towards handling a virus sweeping the country he GOVERNS. 

Typically, these kind of posts making the rounds on social media will be accompanied by some kind of photo of Boris Johnson looking somber as if to suggest that the way things have played out were beyond his control and that he is some kind of broken man beleaguered by the suffering he has, despite good intentions, inadvertently caused.

This one in particular of Johnson with his head in his hands is a staple. In reality, this is a photo taken back in 2018 whilst he was receiving flack from party members for comparing Theresa May to a suicide bomber (for her handling of Brexit, ironically) as well as from the papers due to his rumoured (now also proven, in a completely non-surprising turn of events, to be true) affair with his former aide, Carrie Symonds. 

So let’s shut this narrative-where we should feel for Boris because he’s doing his best, and apparently a better job than anybody else could’ve done in his situation- down right here. In a supposedly developed country with one of the world’s largest economies, if we’re talking by proportion, our COVID-19 death toll is up there with the worst of them. It seems that every other state figurehead (bar a small handful), and I mean almost every single one of them, is doing a better job. People love to throw figures out there about how densely populated we are to combat damning statistics as if we haven’t got just as many factors playing to our advantage, as if it’s unfair to compare our response to Germany’s or Japan’s or Singapore’s (both of which are far more densely populated) or New Zealand’s or Vietnam’s, but we are an ISLAND with world-leading technology and infrastructure and healthcare equipment and professionals and a relatively high standard of living. In what world is almost 70,000 dead in a country with abundant time and means to prepare a response reflective of said country’s leaders doing a good job?

Apparently we’re supposed to believe that Johnson feels some sense of moral responsibility for this astronomical failure. A man who refuses to acknowledge the multiple children he has fathered outside of his marriages and who has had repeatedly engaged in affairs and one-night stands throughout said marriages. A man who continued to cheat whilst his most recent wife was receiving treatment for cervical cancer, for fuck’s sake. Yep, a real stand-up guy. 

So where does this idea that Johnson must feel remorseful for this catastrophe come from? We haven’t seen a second of remorse or a hint of accountability for the lives lost from him nor any members of his cabinet. That much is really no surprise; I have this hypothesis, and it’s not a stretch, that these people do not have an ounce of empathy in their bodies. These ridiculously privileged, privately-educated individuals who have had everything handed to them their entire lives simply cannot put themselves in the shoes of the average working person and that is the problem. Unable to recognise that what distinguishes them from most others is little more than the luck of being born into wealth and the abundance of recourses and connections that has entailed throughout their lives, they see us as beneath them-as less intelligent, less driven, and thus less deserving of the status and respect they enjoy. They see us as a bunch of whining, unmotivated idiots who do not recognise the chokehold they have over our media nor the fact that everything they do is a desperate grab to keep money and power within the hands of a select group of people, an exclusive members club from which most of us are barred (just take a simple Google search and watch Jacob Rees-Mogg’s opinion of the Grenfell victims or the buried Johnson speech where he talks about how inequality is essential). They know that we will squabble amongst ourselves about who is to blame rather than wising up to the truth which is that every decision they make is fuelled by cronyism and the inability to make and follow through with difficult choices, the pandemic being no exception. The supposedly self-made elite see the life of the average working class person as having far less value than their own, and their parties actions over the last 10 years have made that very clear. 

It was in December 2019 that the first case of COVID-19 was declared to the World Health Organisation and on March the 11th that they announced they considered it as a pandemic. In Wuhan, people were dying of pneumonia in their clusters. And what was Boris Johnson doing in this time? Well for starters, here in the UK we didn’t even have a pandemic committee-Johnson had scrapped it six months before. If years of benefits cuts and defunding of the NHS in favour of funding nuclear weapon programs, keeping British troops on other people’s lands, and tax breaks for the mega corporations that donate to their party didn’t convince you that the Conservatives have little regard for human life, them getting rid of this committee-whilst a pandemic has been declared year after year as the greatest threat to mankind-should have been the first sign of trouble. As if that wasn’t enough, he also skipped five of the COBRA (meetings are made up of a cross-departmental committee put together to respond to national emergencies and PMs routinely attend those pertaining to crises on the scale of COVID-19) meetings addressing the situation. Whilst other countries were closing their borders and stocking up on PPE, Johnson and his ministers were selling PPE abroad and simply telling people to wash their hands to the length of the tune of happy birthday. Their only policy was one of “herd immunity”, which was in fact not a policy but just an abandonment of their party’s public duty disguised as one, intentionally obfuscated with pseudoscientific jargon.

Even thinking the absolute worst of politicians you would hope that when it came to the point where the UK’s non-response to COVID-19 was becoming an international disgrace, Johnson and his ministers would take proper protective measures if only to save face. But when they eventually seemed to do so, it became clear that the priority was not the safety of the ordinary people affected by the virus. Outsourcing their test and traces system to companies such as Serco, Sitel, Deloitte and G4S rather than public health services, Conservative ministers could not resist attempting to line the pockets of their friends and benefactors in the process. According to the Guardian, instead of reaching out to the experts or using publicly funded services to handle COVID containment measures, the Conservative party has awarded a disgusting £1.5 BILLION WORTH of contracts to businesses with explicit connections to its MPs and donors, the majority of which lack any relative experience of the tasks they’ve been trusted to carry out. Unsurprisingly, the National Audit office found that when awarding contracts relating to the production of COVID-19 protection measures and treatment needs, there was a “high-priority lane” for suppliers referred by senior politicians and officials; companies with a political referral were 10 times more likely to end up winning a government contract than those without. On top of this, it is not hard to draw a link between the late initiation of lockdown measures and preemptive openings of pubs and restaurants against scientific advice to the interests of frequent donors such as Wetherspoons owner Tim Martin. Even if one chooses to ignore the blatantly obvious correlation between the owners of the businesses whose profits were prioritised over safety concerns and the number of those owners who donate to the Conservatives, party officials at the very least were reluctant to follow the lead of many other countries in financing furlough schemes themselves and instead avoided this responsibility by using loose lockdown measures to leave it down to the discretion of small business owners, who couldn’t themselves afford to furlough staff, whether or not to stay open. 

Time and time again, as the government flounder and fuck about, favouring personal desires to keep their powerful, high-paying jobs and to satisfy the corporate allies who make this possible, blame has been shifted from the public to care homes to NHS workers and back again whilst we, the public, make the biggest sacrifices of all under the illusion that we were being guided out of this pandemic rather than lied to and thrown under the bus. Whilst the elite continue to pick and choose what rules apply to them, it’s students and the elderly and the vulnerable paying the fines and scrabbling to afford basic living costs and hoping that they don’t lose someone dear to them.

Don’t get me wrong, a large proportion of the public have contributed to the spread too with their selfishness and entitlement and the arrogance it takes to develop a sudden refusal to acknowledge basic science from experts who have studied in the field their whole lives so that they can justify their need to go to the pub (speaking of, it’s absolutely HILARIOUS how many “mental health advocates” are suddenly coming out of the woodworks on football avi Twitter after they’ve spent years calling people on mental health Twitter attention seekers). And don't get me wrong, there were inevitably going to be casualties of this pandemic. But it didn't have to spread to this many people, and there didn’t have to be so many deaths due to a lack of preparation, and this wouldn’t have been the case if it weren’t for the inherent apathy of the Conservative party towards the lives of people of lesser status than them, the reluctance to put those lives before party interests. I wish I felt like there was an end in sight, I wish there was some positive takeaway from all of this, but even now, we continue to see corners being cut with the vaccine lauded as our saving grace and anti-maskers gathering outside hospitals to chant about how “oppressive” it is to be urged to wear a bit of cloth over their faces for the short periods of time in which they leave their houses and all I can think of is the selfishness that runs like poison through our country. It makes me sick and leaves me to question desperately where we go from here. I don’t like unanswered questions, I don’t like feeling politically directionless, and I don’t like the growing fear I have about the state of the world which seems to intensify every single day. In the UK at least, it’s starting to feel like nothing will ever change-we’re told we live in a democracy and yet mainstream media is owned by the people whose interest is to keep their Conservative friends in power. The stronghold they have over print media in particular allows them to continually get away with smearing and defaming every person who comes along and seems to want to actually help ordinary people, without being challenged, to the point where the only kind of “opposition” we’re left with promises nothing but a big boss approved tactical reshuffling of the status quo (which they call “electability”); it doesn’t feel like democracy when the majority of the country are being fed misleading information and convinced against voting in their best interests. 

This is the result of that. The state we find ourselves in is the inevitable result of being manipulated into helping the elite build their protective wall whilst the rest of us scrabble to get in and step on each others heads along the way, the people inside shouting over that it’s those even more vulnerable than ourselves that are taking our places. Outside the wall, the earth is falling from beneath our feet, and instead of throwing over the ropes to help us out, the people inside are stockpiling them so they can secure their firm place above ground and then later flog the rest. How many more people have to die before we reach some kind of widespread realisation of that? Where do we go from here and what do we do? Well for one, we can stop spreading those god-fucking-awful textposts on Facebook and get our heads out of our arses. Wear our masks over and wear them over our fucking noses. Have some fucking consideration for others. Don’t wait til an issue affects you personally to give a fuck about it. AND START HOLDING THE FUCKING PRIME MINISTER AND HIS MINISTERS AND HIS ENTIRE PARTY AS WELL AS THE OPPOSITION MPS THAT HAVE SAT BY THE SIDELINES AND ALLOWED THIS TO GO ON WITHOUT PROTEST ACCOUNTABLE. That would be a good start. 

I’m so tired. Things didn’t need to be this way, and yet because of the selfishness of the few, thousands upon thousands are dead. It’s not about “throwing around blame”, it’s not about “throwing around” anything, it’s about expecting a leader to do his best to protect lives. If that is “throwing blame”, let’s get things clear, I have no issue with hurtling it torpedo style at those who handed out a death sentence to so many in this country rather than do anything that might compromise their own privilege. Honestly, pass me the shovel after and I’ll happily bury the wreckage in the ground. Who wants to join?:-)

[empressxmachina]

Sideline - “iv.”

“Uh, h-hi, Jake.”

Just by looking at each other, they both knew the same opinion was going through their heads:

‘This was fucking weird.’

Despite that, neither of them lost sense of their humanities, and Madi didn’t appear physically hurt as a cherry on top. They solely changed sizes comparatively and nothing else, as far as they could tell. But for the smaller half of the pair to get even tinier at such a large scale was ridiculous, more than either of them ever imagined. Nevertheless, they tried to keep it together for both of their sakes.

Jake slowly continued to unravel Madi from her textile prison, eventually smoothly transferring her from fabric to flesh and feeling her skin and scarily little weight on his palm. The visual of his long fingers towering above and able to curl over her was also quite nauseating. But chundering by a friend, especially one as close to him as her (in every sense), would not be a good look.

For this to happen to someone as sweet as her and it being possible at all just made him sick and confused.

“Holy shit, Madi,” he breathed, blowing her hair back with his voice. For once in his life, he was glad to have chosen water over a soda earlier. Even if it wasn’t the same kind – the one Madi had wasn’t a favorite of his from the get-go – spreading anything across her that would drill this in her more than it already had would’ve shot his already high guilt and pity further into the sky. “How in the fuck—?”

“Ugh, do I really need to explain this again!?” Madi exploded, now second-guessing her assumptions of Jake’s intelligence. Perhaps he was more the jock stereotype than she thought with the flinching and look of astonishment by which he reacted to her, both of which shaking her as well. “What part of ‘A fucking soda did this to me’ did you not understand? If you didn’t get that, then why in fuck did you pull that shit? Did you really just want to get it off me? Did you think you’d get me off by getting it off me? Did you make me wet to get YOU off!?”

“Jesus Christ, Madeline. Chill,” Jake shushed her in a fruity voice, putting his snake-like finger up to his mouth before bringing it close to hers – his fingertip eclipsing her entire head. “I know the fucking soda did this to you; I want to know why. What kind of chemical makes people shrink and shit?” Madi couldn’t help cringing, curling into herself, having overreacted for no reason. However, her cowering soon became a cover for the blushes that Jake then caused to appear. “As for the, uh, ‘getting off,’ you’d have to be some kind of freak to get off to a doll or, I guess, being a doll, in your case. Though I’ve got to say, you are pretty adorable, Mads.”

“Please, no,” she pleaded, slumping her shoulders with her face still in hiding, knowing that her smallness was now a large part of her, despite how much she wanted it to be otherwise. “I know I probably don’t look so human, but I’d still like to be treated like one, ass wipe.”

“‘Look’ is just the tip of the iceberg. I’m not the biochemist here, but I think I know enough science to know that you shouldn’t even be functioning fully: talking, hearing, seeing, and all of that good shit.” Jake brought his Madi-holding hand closer to himself as he extended his syllables and examined her in astonishment. “What. The. Fuck?”

Meanwhile, Madi instinctively scooted further and further into the flesh wall Jake’s fingers made behind her, even though she couldn’t go anywhere else without falling to her demise and knew it, too. The thought of being overtaken by his battering ram nose or brushed by his enviable eyelashes without him even trying was just too much for the little lass.

“Yeah, uh, could you, like, not with that? ” she attempted, nearly meeting the stubble surrounding Jake’s lips and chin before he looked down at her, noticed her apprehension, and backed off, bringing her to a somewhat distant, somewhat calming eye level. “Thank you. Being comparatively short to most people in normal life was hard enough, even though I was supposedly average on charts. The last thing I need now is a close-up, okay?”

“Right. Sorry,” Jake apologized, even noting to talk more sotto voce.

Just because she wasn’t flinching at his volume for whatever reason, that didn’t mean that he wasn’t still loud. Sure, the packed stadiums and arenas for games and competitions with their high volumes probably set a standard for her, but Jake knew that this could’ve been another type of noise, and then one could add all the nonsense the body does on its own to make it even louder and more detailed. He wondered how much she could hear and see now.

“It just makes no sense how you’re like this,” he reinforced. “You’re fucking minuscule.”

“No shit, Sherlock,” Madi scoffed back, also lowering her own voice but still audible to the relative giant’s ears. “I think that’s been stated enough.” Her tough outer shell hid how hard the truth just kept hitting her. Seeing nearly all her curled-up frame in her reflection in Jake’s eyes was almost vomit-inducing, especially when he rolled them in response to her sass.

“Yeah, but do you really know how tiny you are? Do you know what could happen to you like this or what could’ve happened? Hell, I don’t even know how that fucking phone of yours called me,” he said, lightly nudging it out of Madi’s grasp onto his palm next to her, somehow also muting it in the process. “I can barely see the thing. I could barely see you by that can. But I did, so everything’s pretty much going in your favor so far, huh?”

“How about no? I’m still like this, and it’s not like I didn’t already have enough stress going on in my life.”

“Well, I’m sure there’s a way to fix this, probably one as quick and obtainable as whatever in that drink caused this. We need to get you out of here, first.”

“And, exactly how did you plan on doing that?” Madi pondered aloud, noticing how Jake had nothing with him, aside from his clothes.

“Oh, uh, er—” Jake struggled to come up with an answer as Madi’s scenario hadn’t been a possibility that he had or would’ve considered. Since these were the cards he was dealt, he wasn’t sure what to do with them. “Shit, what are we going to do?”

“‘We?’ Why are you asking me? Jake, you know I can’t do anything! Look at me!”

“Don’t blame me for that! This is a two-way street, and you could’ve fucking warned me about this!”

“Are you saying that you would’ve believed that a fucking soda fucking shrunk me to…” Madi paused to estimate her new size. Through all the time she had had to adjust to it, figuring a number for it never came to mind. However, remembering how much of a mountain Jake was to most people, she soon realized that basing her little length on his large one was futile. “…whatever size I am now? You barely believed that I was here full-sized when you walked in! What the fuck would you have done differently!?”

“Oh, I don’t know, maybe brought a fucking bag or some shit?” Jake countered. “You didn’t need to open the fucking soda, Madi!”

“Are you blaming me for this!?” Madi shrieked, not wanting more negativity placed on herself. She ran her hands through her hair before setting them on her face and continuing, muffled, “What did I do to deserve this!?”

“This wouldn’t have happened, otherwise, would it!?” Jake barked back before immediately regretting what he said – it made evident by his elongated face and Madi’s trembling. “No, I-I didn’t mean that. Well, I kind of did but not to hurt you. This… This is just crazy, alright? I don’t even get why a recalled drink was even still available to you so late in the game, literally.” He then attempted to console her, curling his free hand directly behind her back as an assuring gesture, mostly because he was sure anything else would damage her. “I know you did nothing wrong. This probably could’ve happened to anyone, and don’t you worry. This will pass, and, just like you wanted, I’ve got you.”

Although she was unsure of whether or not that was meant to be an apology, Madi pulled her hands away at his sweet remarks, and for the first time since they had first met, she saw Jake with not only beauty but also novel capability. He hadn’t been so profound with her since their one class together way back when. Any overshadowing thoughts she had about him being a typical jock went right out the window, and she had never felt more blessed to have a friend.

However, she wasn’t as appreciative of his following comments, and the smile that shined on her face soon vanished.

“But, really, how do you want to do this?” Jake inquired. “I ask because I, uh…” He paused with a groan, not sure how to explain himself without making their scenario any more dramatic than it already was. “…I have one idea, but I think any of yours would probably be better.”

Madi, having watched him remove the hand behind her and slide it down from his nose to his chin, sensed that his something, whatever it was, might be bothering him but couldn’t tell why or be sure. Yet, knowing that the time without being noticed by nasty Nash outsiders was running out, she just went with it.

“Okay?” she accepted cautiously. “Well, I really don’t want people to know about this, so the safer and more hidden I am, the better.”

Jake attempted to hide his discomfort with her answer. His idea had technically aligned with her wants, but he had this feeling that she was not going to like it one bit.

“Alright,” he could only sheepishly respond. “Well, um, you’re the science major, so you, er, go on and figure out what’s best for you, whatever you want to do.”

“Sure.” Her reply was positive, and now she was just as positive that Jake had not only a bother but a problem. Another big problem within her oversized insanity; how wonderful. But rather than letting it boil over, she let it simmer in her subconscious, followed his suggestion, and began thinking of places to hide with him.

It took an uncomfortably short period to realize hiding with him more so meant hiding on him. Madi managed to keep a cringe inside and prayed Jake’s notion had nothing to do with that via some trap card out of his ass. Still, despite her ingenuity, she couldn’t think of one, and, like with all those math proofs from last year, she could only work with what she was given. In any other circumstance, having Jackson Averill at her will would be a dream, but the fairy-like femme floated in a nightmare… or purgatory… whichever was worse.

No possible, present view gave Madi a full vision of what or, more validly, who to plan from. He was so much to take in at once, so she asked to better see it all.

“Um,” she beckoned, “can I check out the vehicle provided for me?”

Initially, Jake didn’t catch her drift, but it didn’t take him long to click and nearly blush at her wording. It wouldn’t be the first time she called him a ride, and while this was something else, her maintained humor was a relief.

He gave her in return a prying smirk as if to ask ‘How?’, and all Madi had to do back was a couple of motions for him to become a model. She fluttered her hands his way to get him to back up, stopping when he reached the end of their row of benches. A lowering motion then directed him to set her down on said end bench. Words couldn’t describe her gratitude in knowing that if her voice or any tiny sounds she made went inaudible to his ears or any normal-sized ones were too much for her, then they would still be able to communicate somewhat.

If he stayed alert for her. God forbid him from getting distracted.

As she shook that fear out of existence, and once she and her things were gently set onto the hard surface, Jake gave her a bit more space and took a few more steps backward so that she could see him all at once. With her new perspective, really trying to not depress herself over her lack of creaking and noticeable shadow on contact, her primal instincts kicked in, unable to handle the visage of an Adonis in front of her.

Like his facial features, the years of football and weight training had done wonders for his physique. While Madi had already seen sides of him that only a few were blessed enough to observe, seeing their outlines and envisioning them bare and visible at this scale gave her chills.

Madi gestured for Jake to spin around to check if he genuinely had no pockets. Upon one rotation, especially with his phone snapped to his pelvis under his waistband, she sadly confirmed her hypothesis with a sigh – a bitter contrast to the gasp she gave to the sight of his global glutes. He truly lived up to his tight end position in and out of sports, and Madi would need a thesaurus made for a postdoc to describe his front side. The things his body had done to hers were incomparable to present possibilities, and she didn’t know how to feel.

Little did she know that Jake was pondering the same thing.

When the giant jock came back around from his turn, rather than seeing an inquisitive Madeline, he found a disgruntled one instead, and the smug look on his face fell off. Jake could only figure that her suspicions had finally meshed with his, and thus he slowly crept up and knelt on one knee before her to not frighten her even more.

“Have you come up with anything?” he asked timidly, resting his forearms on his level thigh.

“Only if your teammates aren’t as rowdy on a bus ride as they are on the field,” Madi remarked, looking up at him in bittersweet wonder, knowing fully well that if someone shook him around while she was on his person, then she’d be in deep shit. “What chance do I have of getting back to Kingston alive if I went under your hat or by your collar or something?”

“Uh, well, if we had lost tonight, I’d guess 75% or so?” Jake calculated, rubbing his chin in thought. “No one would probably want to talk about it, and they’d keep to themselves unless Coach decided to bag on everyone, which would only get them even more in their feelings.”

But they didn’t lose. If Madi hadn’t been following the score while caring for Cari, the Knights’ sore losers’ chaos she ran through that erupted afterward was enough of a tell on its own, and the look on Jake’s face made her brace for the celebratory yikes that was likely the Royals on their side.

“But the bus was lit as all fuck when I left it,” Jake continued, “and I can already envision Coach or Big Q tousling my hair or Chad going in for a chest bump once I get back. Hell, he gave me three on the field after my scoring play alone, so, uh, I’d rather not risk it.”

“Well, fuck!” Madi cursed herself, kicking her bag off her ledge in anger. Luckily, Jake was watching her every move intently and moved quickly enough to catch it. Otherwise, they both would’ve most likely forgotten it there for some soul to find, trash, or worse. He was even kind enough to carefully put her fallen clothes and phone in it for her, feeling less like storing doll accessories and more like spice sprinkling than his liking. Madi, meanwhile, was fuming too much to notice. “You might as well give me your idea, then,” she succumbed. “We don’t have much time for much else.”

“You know this could’ve been a lot easier on both of us if you had just let me bring backup,” Jake reminded her, setting her bag back down next to her and hoping to God that she’d just let him call someone for help.

“Don’t try to diverge from this by bringing up something you had control over – still have control over,” she countered, crossing her arms and cocking her head to the side. As sweet as his situational submission of silence was, she couldn’t physically stop him from doing anything if she tried. Not that she could before, but she definitely couldn’t now. “I saw you fumbling with yourself about something, and if it’s about this, then it can’t be much worse than what I’m already going through, right? Just lay it on me, dude.”

Jake sighed at her relentlessness, recognizing that she still had so much force, so much determination, even with such diminutive dimensions. She had moxie, and he liked that. He liked it so much that he was willing to put her wishes over his own and keep her new look a secret, for now, despite how dumb doing so actually was.

“Can you just promise me to not say anything until I explain it fully?” Jake hoped with a defensive slump and scrunching face. “It’ll make sense with the backstory… probably.”

If one could even call it that, his preface wasn’t much, and the time to ponder it was slim to none. But Madi hadn’t yet a reason to not trust his judgment – the calamity with the cleaners was questionable but not totally repulsive – thus, she shrugged, expressing her tolerance.

Like her with him previously, Jake knew that he wasn’t going to get better out of her, and so he began. “Okay. I have an idea, and, frankly, it’s some divine intervention or some bullshit how this shit with you had to happen on the one day I decided to be a stylish bastard.”

[quietlysomethingalso]

I’ve seen a number of times now that people have a problem with the perceived stupidity of the head surgeon, Abby’s father, for mishandling the situation at the Firefly hospital. With the implication being that by being a terrible doctor, he is responsible for all the events that happened at the hospital and afterward.

Apparently some people have read the game’s lore to mean that Ellie’s death was completely unnecessary for developing a cure. My understanding is that this is people taking the fact that it was stated that blood cultures taken from Ellie produce Cordyceps growth as evidence that no deadly surgery was actually necessary. This reading of events doesn’t really make any sense to me, considering one would imagine blood cultures from any infected person would produce Coryceps growth, and it isn’t stated or implied anywhere that the mutated growth in Ellie’s brain is reproducible by any means without extracting it. It’s quite explicitly the opposite after all, it is the mutation in the brain that is necessary to develop a cure which is why the surgery is necessary.

It’s a pretty straightforward point as far as I’m concerned, but what really bothers me is, what is the value of this line of reasoning? Surely it is clear that this is not an intended reading of the lore, right? Even if you don’t understand why Ellie’s surgery is necessary from a medical standpoint, taking issue with the game’s fictional science is engaging with the story only on the most superficial, CinemaSins-nitpick level. No character ever expresses that there was any issue with Jerry’s practice of medicine, no aspect of the game ever implies that the doctors’ understanding of the situation might not be accurate, and the science the game gives is only there for the sake of verisimilitude and immersion, not because it is essential to fundamentally understanding the situation. Accepting the hypothetical that is presented, Ellie’s surgery was necessary for a cure to be produced. So, what is this criticism about the character of Dr. Anderson actually getting at?

If you are willing to accept the story’s premises, then within the context of the game’s lore, there is nothing wrong with Jerry’s medicine. This issue is just with the way the lore is presented, which leaves open a thematically inconsequential plothole (and again, we’ll just concede that this is actually a lore mistake for the sake of argument, though I feel this is a pretty obvious misreading of the lore).

But what if you don’t accept the story’s premises? The necessity of Ellie’s surgery for the development of a cure is the crux of the ethical quandary at the end of the first Last of Us game. So if you believe the lore is actually intended to imply that the surgery wasn’t necessary, then what this point is actually getting at is that there was no ethical quandary in the first place. In other words, to me, placing the blame on Jerry is really a way of absolving Joel of responsibility for his choice by removing the consequences of that choice. If a cure was possible without killing Ellie, then Joel is no longer making a choice between Ellie and a cure at all, he is simply saving her from catastrophically ignorant child murderers. It’s farcical; it’s framing virtually every character as a fool and Joel as the only sane man. I just can’t understand either game in the context of that interpretation. The interesting question here is supposed to be the ethics of the Fireflies’ decision to go through with Ellie’s surgery, and the ethics of Joel’s decision to stop it. If you remove the significance of that question, then you are basically sidestepping a major part of the story’s depth in order to not be challenged by it. This is really how it reads to me every time I see people nitpicking the logistics of the situation presented at the end of TLOU1, when the hypothetical being put forward is as clear as it is. Thematically, the important thing is the priorities and the decisions of the characters, and, disappointingly, that’s something I think not everyone is really interested in engaging with.

This is really more of a question about TLOU1 than TLOU2, and I find it really telling that I didn’t see this being much of an issue for anyone until the second game, when the head surgeon was transformed into a named character with a personality rather than a background character. The fact is that it is much easier to shift responsibility onto a character you are already willing to dislike than to grapple with whether you agree with the decisions of characters that you already care about. I think this really gets at the fact that people are often unwilling to step away from their attachment to a character and confront both sides of an issue, or look at the bigger picture of what a story is trying to say. It really does a disservice to the story in my opinion, and I feel like I see a lot of this kind of criticism, which just feels to me like it’s being made in bad faith.

Anyway, the point about “malpractice”, or whatever you want to call it, is really not a major one, just some thoughts I felt like putting out there regarding some of the discourse I’ve seen around the game. I think it’s important to consider what point you are actually trying to put across with a critique, and weigh that when you are drawing conclusions.

[jrenvs3000]

Nature and history - an interview with a Russian studies grad!

I was very excited this week to talk to my lovely co-worker (let’s call her K for anonymity) who holds a B.A. in Russian Studies from the University of McGill. I wanted to do an interview with her for this week’s blog prompt, as her thesis project was looking at the historical relationship between Russian people in the 19th and 20th centuries and environmental issues. My questions to her will be marked with J and be bolded, and her replies will be marked with a K and not be bolded. Some of the questions came indirectly from the questions posed in unit 5 about historical writing, as cited.

J: So, tell me a bit about your thesis.

K: In a nutshell, my thesis looked at how different authors in the 19th and 20th centuries in Russia/Soviet Union wrote about environmental issues and how their writing reflects the history of changes made to the land during these periods. I also contrasted different philosophical perspectives on humans’ relationship to nature and animals and how these different perspectives led to different types of eco-conscious perspectives, such as different ways of arguing for the protection of the natural world.

J: And why Russia? What drew you to the people and their culture?

K: It was kind of a random thing, my mom suggested I read some Chekhov when I was a teenager, which really sparked my interest. In university, I took an elective in Russian studies in my first year, and it inspired me to completely switch departments! I also think Russian as a language is fascinating from a grammatical point of view, which made learning it a lot easier.

A portrait of Anton Chekhov, taken in 1902. Taken from Britannica under public domain. 

J: Being around a lot of scientists throughout my degree, I have come across some eye-rolling from people who feel that art or history are not as “important” or “difficult”. We’ve all someone talk about doing a “dead end art history degree” just for something to do. What would you say to these kinds of people?

K: I think that when one states that science is “more important” than history or literature or art etc., this kind of attitude fails to take into account the fact that science and art go hand in hand and can’t really be separated from each other. So much science is reflected in the arts and made accessible to people through its treatment in literature, and many of history’s greatest thinkers have been invested in both the sciences and the arts (Da Vinci comes to mind as the best example).          

One example that comes to mind that shows how literature and science are inseparable comes from my favourite author, Chekhov. Two of his plays, The Wood Demon and Uncle Vanya, have characters who are obsessed with planting trees and with critiquing deforestation and damage being done to the wild animals living in the area. A lot of what these characters have to say about this is based on Chekhov’s interest in cartography and geography, and on the scientific research he was reading. Specifically, he relied a lot on the work of this climate scientist named Voeikov, who did research on how trees affect the climate and how deforestation negatively impacts soil and air quality. Whereas today few people remember Voeikov and his research on climate change (I am probably one of about 10 people who have read his work this century *laughs*), quite a few people know about his research indirectly through reading Chekhov! And Chekhov’s work has encouraged scholars to go back and examine the history of deforestation etc. in Russia which has led to the conclusion that a lot of authors were voicing concerns about environmental issues well before anybody else noticed the severity of the problem.

J: I have to say, never heard of him, but it certainly sounds like he was influential! In your opinion through your studies, how do you feel understanding a community’s relationship with nature in the past can shape our relationship with nature in the future?

K: Within the context of my research, I think it’s very interesting that even close to 200 years ago, scientists and literary figures were analyzing the problematic elements of different societies’ relationships to nature using language and arguments that are remarkably similar to modern environmentalism. With regards to how this might help shape our relationship with nature in the future, I think that it’s important to recognize that many of the nature-based problems we see today (deforestation, poor water quality, damage to animal populations) are not new problems and that they are not going away any time soon. In a way it helps you to realize the gravity of the situation when you’re aware that there are several centuries of accomplished scientists and authors screaming at you from their writing to do something about the problem. In a more general sense, when we think about the importance of nature to the development of more or less every single community ever to exist (think, for example, about the fact that nature and animals are present in all folklore and in all older cultural forms), that serves as a reminder that going forward, we need to maintain a healthy relationship with our surroundings, if not for the sake of the natural world itself then for our own survival.

J: Whose story is primarily being told when we look at history? Is it biased?

K: With regards to the voice of the storytellers, lots of straight white men. I can’t think of many Russian authors who don’t fall into that category, however one interesting thing I looked at was the class difference between 19th- and 20th-century writing on the environment. In the 19th century it was mostly members of the Russian nobility writing about their land (i.e. very rich landowners who primarily interacted with nature through hunting and had indentured servants actually working the land for them). The Soviet author I wrote on was from a poor village in the middle of Siberia, which affected the way his characters viewed nature. To sum up the differences between the two groups, in the 19th century most writers employed what’s defined as an anthropocentric perspective which maintains a firm divide between humans and nature. Anthropocentric arguments for the preservation of nature are typically about why this is good for humans and not why it’s good for nature or animals themselves. In the 20th century the writer I examined wrote from an ecocentric perspective in which nature and animals and people all have intrinsic value and are equally important! Ecocentric arguments for the protection of the environment look at why it’s good for the environment itself. This doesn’t mean that in the 19th century nobody cared about the environment, it just means that their arguments for conserving nature were focused on why it would be good for people to be good to the land, while the 20th-century Siberian villagers didn’t really see themselves as being separated from nature by any cultural or philosophical constructs.

 J: K, thank you! Seriously, it is so interesting that even though you have a Bachelor of Arts and I’m nearly done my Bachelor of Science, the things we’ve both learned would not be possible without each others fields. Thank you for shedding some light on the history of nature!

Hingley, R. F. (2021, January 25). Anton Chekhov. Retrieved from Britannica:               https://www.britannica.com/biography/Anton-Chekhov

[iamipsitamishra]

Trying is such a thing that exists because nobody appreciates it. Sometimes it takes more than simply trying to get a thing done and that is where we tend to overlook its importance. Imagine you are trying hard to get that perfect score card but all you could manage to do is barely sail through the examination with a few good marks, God bless the professor! Does it mean all those efforts were wasted since it did not really work out the way we ''wanted'' it to? I think it is a little sad how easily we convince ourselves of all the things that we are not and make it worse by believing in it.

It is a compelling habit of mine to write blogs back to back without long breaks and then taking a gap of hundred days in between because I cannot really understand how my senses respond to change. It is quite fascinating if you could put yourself in my shoes for once and try to understand how unconventionally things work out with me but I wouldn't superimpose since I would be asking too much of someone who is not acquainted to relate everything on a spiritual note. I do not believe in the existence of ''certain Gods'', who can be invoked by performing a few physically draining rituals although my belief in Karma establishes the notion of tit for tat quite similarly as the ritualistic practices. I do not persuade people to share my opinions since it is offensive to completely discard other's views and practices while establishing mine over theirs, I am not a complete narcissistic. I like to believe that I am not equipped with enough knowledge about the functioning of the state of the world on the basis of ritualistic admiration since graduating in science has made me to always find a pragmatic approach to problems and look for solutions that could be rationally explained. Those that cannot be derived are termed as infinite or unambiguous instead of leaving it upto the Gods to decide the course of everything unknown to us. That sort of laziness should be abhorred at the earliest because we are not supposed to be tamed like domestic animals. You might be thinking what has all this got to do with trying! The fact that I am trying to comprehend my views while also accommodating others opinions cannot just be the outcome of a series of logical reasoning adorned with rational arguments. It takes trying to make space for contradicting views and not acknowledging the efforts put behind it takes a toll on the future probability of good outcomes.

Why do you think nations keep diplomatic ties with one another even while preaching self reliance the moment a crisis hits them like an unprecedented natural calamity? We have bombs that could blow off entire cities to dust in a matter of minutes. Do we really need to be engaging in so many bilateral and multi-lateral talks when every other opponent seems to be caring more about their interests than ours? Does it seem fulfilling to watch a series of engagements being held while so little outcome is achieved at the end of the day? The fascinating thing is that we try to accommodate others opinions to develop better arguments for our sake. If we do not engage in conversation that does not enrage our sleeping neurons, are we really learning anything at all that could be deemed useful?

The world is a tiny place to give in to everyone's greed but it is our oyster if we are willing to compromise and try to accommodate with others. Wanting the best for ourselves while leaving the chaff for the helpless shows our inability to use our intelligence for good. It does not make any sense of all those years of evolution where we had to surpass every other species to get to the top and then fail to establish ourselves by not leading with good examples. Why should any animal be considered to rule over others if they lack empathy and compassion for their own kind? Will trying not help us overcome our problems or are we too ignorant to even give it a try? May be because the wise chose to keep their silence that is why we have so many fools around us.