#generalized sense and not take you seriously

[cripplecharacters]

Writing Profoundly Intellectually Disabled Characters

[Plain Text: Writing Profoundly Intellectually Disabled Characters]

While there is a glaring lack of intellectually disabled characters - except maybe big, physically strong, white men who can’t “tell right from wrong” or have a personality - in all sorts of media, specifically profoundly intellectually disabled characters are next to non-existent, with the existing ones being used more often as plot devices rather than portrayed as human beings.

This does make a degree (and not more) of sense considering that 85% of ID people have it mild, 10% moderate, 3.5% severe and only 1.5% has profound ID, the larger group inevitably gets more representation (which doesn’t make it good, but it does exist). However, it hopefully doesn’t need explaining that minorities deserve to be represented too (...and represented well), so this is what this post will be about.

Please don’t treat this as your only source on writing a character like this (even though I’m willing to bet it’s the only one like this, at least on tumblr), do your research and always check other sources.

Also, for clarity: intellectual disability isn't an umberalla term for "mental/brain disability". It's a specific, singular diagnosis that used to be known as "mental [r slur]". It's not the same as brain damage, autism, dementia, dyslexia, and anything else that's not specifically "intellectual disability". It's something that you are either born with or acquire early in life.

How do I Include Them in the Story?

[Plain Text: How do I include them in the story?]

A profoundly ID person will spend the majority of their time either at home or in some sort of care facility since they will require 24/7 help. The easiest role to put them in is probably a family member of another character. I've mentioned on this blog before that the "ID characters always end up as the annoying younger sibling" thing is overdone, but none of these necessarily have to be true for this suggestion to work (especially not the "annoying" part).

A non-ID character could have an intellectually disabled older sibling, twin, cousin, uncle/aunt, the sibling of a grandparent, etc. Seriously - a severely disabled person can be an adult, or even an elder. Just not as a parent, since a profoundly disabled person can't consent (a lot of ID people very much can, but this is the one disability where your level of functioning is baked into the exact diagnosis - profound ID comes with the inability to consent/understand the consequences enough to consent).

"They're a family member" is basically the easiest "excuse" to include a profoundly intellectually disabled in a story (and, as a bonus, you don't have to figure out how the other character would react to meeting them for the first time, since they probably knew each other for a long time already).

If your story isn't about the profoundly disabled character and instead just features them as a character, it would be much easier to not make the other character their primary caregiver. It's simply a ton of work and the character wouldn't have time for fighting dragons and whatnot - it'd be easier to have the abled character spend time with the disabled character at home (or care facility; you can very much visit someone in one) hanging out rather than actually doing the caregiving part.

Outside of a home and a care facility, there are also day care programs that some people might attend. This is the rarest solution out of the three mainly because of financial reasons, but also these resources aren’t as common for people who can’t walk, learn self-care, etc. Going to one takes time (the profoundly disabled person isn’t gonna walk there by themselves) and probably requires a specialized van (that you can bring a wheelchair in, which is incredibly expensive). Most day care programs are focused on people who are moderately or severely ID at most. One made for profoundly ID people would require 1:1 aides, which generally means the programs are much smaller for logistical reasons, but also even more expensive. For most people, too expensive without funding. Basically, this is an option, but you have to consider your character’s financial situation and/or what kind of financial support do disabled people get where they live.

Another way is having the disabled character in some sort of high position - in real life there were quite a few cases of profoundly and severely intellectually disabled royalty. Depending on the place and time there might have been pressure to not let the public see them, but this wasn't always the case. The biggest example of the latter was probably Emperor An of Jin (the first Jin, Eastern one) who was, as his title suggests, crowned at some point. He didn’t actually rule (his uncle did) but yes, you can have a severely disabled person as the head of a monarchy, it’s not without precedent.

In fiction you can do whatever you want anyway when it comes to ableism, you can have it be there, or you can have it not be there - and if it does exist then there are still different kinds of ableism you can portray that aren't the "literally killing-the-disabled-baby/hiding-them-in-some-dungeon level of eugenics" kind. Maybe a rich family who cares about their image would actually be unable to shut up about their kid to show how "saint-like" they are for caring for the disabled - it is unfortunately realistic, and can be a potential way to have the character exist in public, not ignore ableism, and also not go the aforementioned literally-just-murder route that writers usually do to show an ableist family.

Characterization

[Plain Text: Characterization]

Warning; the bar here is somewhere in the Earth's inner core. If your character has a single characteristic beyond aggressive/loud/unmanageable*, they're automatically at the top of most complex fictional representation of severely/profoundly ID characters. Congrats.

* - Some people are those things but, unsurprisingly, they're other things too. A lot of profoundly ID people can actually be completely quiet - you notice people who are loud because they're loud.

As with literally every character, you need to figure out what they like and not like. This can be quite literally anything, but try to think of the basic stuff. Do they have something they really enjoy eating (and conversely - something they refuse to eat)? Do they have some sort of comfort toy or object they don't want anyone touching (and maybe showing them playing with it with a different character could be a way to show how much they trust them)? In more modern settings, do they have a favorite show they always bug everyone to put on? Are they really clingy or do they hate physical contact (again, maybe they only enjoy it from a specific character)?

Another characterization could be comfort objects. A lot of profoundly ID people are autistic (which I'll touch on later) and will have an object that they bring everywhere the same way that non-ID autistic people might. There's nothing really specific here, just another layer of "this character is a Person". Maybe they have a blanket they really enjoy chewing because the texture feels good or some sort of plushie they like to throw around because it makes a sound they find funny. Lots of options. Maybe they have a personal “tell” to let others know they want their comfort object brought to them.

Keep in mind, you have to show this all in non-verbal manner. A profoundly ID person is probably not using any sort of AAC device (the most robust one I remember seeing right now was a low-tech one with "yes" and "no", but there are probably ones who operate on a larger amount of singular words). This is basically another opportunity for characterization - what do they do when they're happy - laugh, flap their arms, make sounds? - and when they're upset - scream, hit themselves, make different sounds? Obviously, you'd have to take other disabilities into account (e.g. many profoundly ID people won't move much, some might not be able to make much audible sound, etc.) but almost anything helps.

This brings us to…

Communication

[Plain Text: Communication]

An important thing (concept?) I'll throw here is "total communication", which can mean different things in different contexts, but here I'll use it to mean "using everything you can to communicate with someone who cannot do so in a ‘traditional’ way".

Communication can be categorized as having two sides; expressive and receptive. For most intellectually disabled people in general, receptive skills tend to be significantly higher than expressive ones, though there are specific disorders where it’s reversed or equal. As mentioned before, most profoundly ID people won’t speak orally, won’t use sign language, and won’t use AAC (though out of all three, AAC is the most likely one). Some might say single words, but that’s about it. It’s not a “physically mute but can write perfectly grammatically correct sentences” situation, it’s more of a “[single noun]” one, if anything. Receptive skills however are pretty decent (in comparison) and they would probably understand their name, the name/title of their carer(s), names of things they see every day, events they have some frame of reference to (e.g. if they grew up Christian, they would probably know what Christmas is), etc. Your other characters could (and should) talk to them like they can understand, even if they don’t catch everything or even most of it. I say a lot of “probably” there, but the people who can’t do so usually have other comorbidities, which I’ll mention later.

To go back to expressive communication, eye pointing can be used to figure out what the character wants. A change in breathing can be used to tell that a character got stressed. Throwing an object can be used as a hint that the character wants to play. Maybe them reaching towards person A means they want to eat, but reaching towards person B means they want them to sing a song for them. Maybe them making a particular face means they just had a seizure and need to be comforted. Whatever their "tells" like this might be, other characters who know them would probably be able to tell more-or-less what's going on - you don't have to go really in-depth, especially if it's a minor character, but figuring out the ways your character communicates with others will make it feel more like a person and not a Disabled Lamp (“if you can replace a disabled character with a lamp or a sick dog, they’re not a character”).

If you read some of these and go "that's a thing that a child would do" then you're not necessarily wrong. A profoundly ID adult might enjoy activities that primarily kids partake in. This is, I can't stress this enough, not the same as "mentally being a child". Otherwise, a whole bunch of adults on this very website would be "mental middle schoolers" based on the shows that they watch - but they're obviously not. A profoundly ID adult doesn't have the "mind of a baby" if their favorite game is throwing a toy, they have the mind of a profoundly intellectually disabled adult. Sometimes people assume that since ID people aren't mentally [incorrect age], they always "act their [actual] age" and essentially end up downplaying how much some people's ID affects them, when the point is that no matter what you do, you are your age. An ID character who is 26 years, incontinent, constantly puts their hand in their mouth, can't speak, whatever, is mentally 26 years old the same way that they would be if they had a wife and a mortgage.

For the last thing from this section I'll circle back to the assumption that all severely/profoundly ID people are loud, aggressive, etc. - as I said, some of them are (just like abled people). The thing is, this is not always an unreasonable response to being unable to communicate with the people who are caring for you. If you had a pressure sore but couldn't explain it to anyone you'd be pissed off and screaming too. That's an extreme example, but still applies. If someone is severely stressed out (for an abled person, this might be inheriting a ton of debt, for a profoundly ID person it can be a change in daily routine), they can lash out. It's an unpleasant but very much human reaction to have, even if what's behind the ID person's behavior is significantly different from what an average abled person might consider "a good reason".

So I guess my advice is, try to show some empathy to the character, even if they genuinely are loud and/or aggressive. Intellectually disabled people - including the profoundly disabled ones - aren't some alien species that is just mean and hates their caregivers for no reason, some just can't process their feelings the way an abled person might because of their disability. That's not to say that caregivers aren't allowed to feel frustrated - because they are - but that very severely disabled people aren't purposefully evil. As mentioned in the earlier parts, all behavior has a cause, just like for literally everyone. So if the character is being "unmanageable": maybe they aren't some cursed burden, maybe they're just stressed out of their mind and now someone they don't know that well is trying to do *something* to them, which they can't figure out because of their disability affecting their receptive language skills.

Resources and What to Keep in Mind

[Plain Text: Resources and What to Keep in Mind]

Some resources you might read about ID can be potentially misleading. Even if you specifically look for causes of the profound severity of intellectual disability, you will get results for mild ID. That's mainly because people with mild ID make up >85% of intellectually disabled people and those with profound ID make like 1%, so they're a minority in a minority.

Basically:

Down syndrome is a very unlikely cause. It's always listed as the main genetic cause of ID, but that's only true for mild and moderate severities. If you choose any of the common causes of ID make sure it actually has the symptoms you're looking for.

Most profoundly ID people will have either severe brain damage early in life (and this can come with cerebral palsy), cephalic disorders (e.g. microcephaly), genetic conditions that you've never heard of (e.g. Pallister-Killian or Emanuel syndromes, 3p deletion), genetic conditions that you've never heard of for a very understandable reason (e.g. X-linked intellectual disability-limb spasticity-retinal dystrophy-arginine vasopressin deficiency… there are hundreds named in this way), or just have it without a known cause. The last one happens much more often than people tend to assume.

For a reason I'll probably discover at some point, most disorders and syndromes that come with ID are said to have "autistic-like features" rather than being "comorbid with autism". In practice, it's the same thing. Your character is probably autistic.

In the same way, a lot of practical resources will assume that ID = moderate ID (since most mildly affected need no or minimal support, and severely/profoundly disabled ones are a small minority) so pay attention if you're looking at the right things. If it's talking about having a job, travelling alone, etc., then you got clickbaited.

Another subsection here will be comorbidities because there are a lot of them. I’ll mention the biggest ones.

Brain damage is the most common one (except autism) and can vary a lot. There is barely anything I can say about this one, it’s an enormous spectrum that for some people causes disability and for others barely affects their symptoms. Cerebral palsy, especially quadriplegic, is seen a lot and might affect the character’s mobility a lot. Some people might be unable to breathe or swallow and need a breathing or feeding tube.

Deafness and blindness are comorbid with a surprising amount of causes of ID. The thing is, you could take advice for deaf/blind characters as-in for a character that has both (e.g.) glaucoma and mild ID and not change much, but this doesn’t really work for a character who’s profoundly disabled like this. The situation that can happen here is that it’s not actually known if the person is or isn’t deaf or blind because they can’t tell you. As mentioned earlier, some people will have absent receptive communication skills. How do you verify if they’re deaf or just not reactive to language? Some people won’t react to even extremely loud sounds, even if they can hear them perfectly well (besides, a lot of deaf people can still hear some). Same for verifying if they are blind - obviously, sometimes there’s something visual going on, but often there isn’t. Especially since the main causes of both blindness and deafness will be brain-based, not ear- or eye-based. Another character not being sure if the disabled character is blind or just very uninterested in visual stimuli is a possibility, especially with less advanced medicine.  This is also why you might see those weird statistics of "between 5-90% of people with [condition] are deaf" kind.

Mobility is almost always severely affected. Some are fully mobile, but that’s simply not common. The average person will be unable to walk independently. It’s not always a muscle or nerve problem (though it absolutely can be), it’s mostly an issue of coordination. Because of this (and understanding physical space), operating a wheelchair (...successfully) might be impossible. This doesn’t mean you should just drop your character in a hospital wheelchair for them to get wheeled around because they will probably need a wheelchair that will actually support them - a headrest, ability to tilt, a harness, all that. This could be done with a powerchair (they can have controls on the back for a second person to operate), a manual wheelchair, or an adaptive stroller.

Now for resources;

One good resource I can recommend is SBSK (which I shared before), to my knowledge this is the only place that interviews severely and profoundly ID people (+their families) and the interviewer is great at actually interacting with many of them. 

Most resources on the practical things only ever talk about caregivers (who are very important) but completely ignore the actual person being cared for which IMO kinda defeats the point.

Good luck writing!

mod Sasza

[etherealrin]

♡⸝⸝ definitely not a high school boy in love!

highschool!rin has something to tell you…

warnings: none // wc: 1.3k

note: not really proofread and kinda crack, bit of ooc rin, au w no blue lock and sae doesn't go to spain, reader is a girl

you can’t seem to find your best friend of twelve years, itoshi rin, for the life of you. some may question how a bubbly and outgoing person such as you came about to being so close with the likes of him- who was cold, rude, and generally terrifying.

you guess it was just because you had known each other for so long, since you were childhood friends. so why was it that rin seemed to be dodging you lately?

“i can’t believe this guy…” you mutter under your breath as class ends. he was skipping your one shared class, chemistry, too? the audacity is crazy.

“hey y/n, is rin sick or something?” isagi asks you, walking towards your desk as the bell rings, signaling the end of another day.

“i don’t know, he’s never done anything like this before,” you sigh. you think back to when you first met the itoshi brothers. you had taken a liking to the younger one almost immediately (albeit you were scared of sae). isagi’s brow is furrowed. “well, if you do manage to find him, tell him we need him at his best for nationals on friday,” he says, exiting the classroom.

nationals? it was so unlike itoshi rin to be missing soccer practices. you begin to wonder if he had been kidnapped, murdered, run over, or worse. you decide that there was only one way to solve the mystery. you had to break into the itoshi household.

okay, so maybe it wasn’t really breaking into the his home if you had knocked on the door and been let in by sae, but at least you could catch rin off guard.

“could you please not tell your brother that i’m here?” you beg sae. sae looks at you, humored. he cocks a brow, fighting a laugh, as if there was some inside joke you weren’t aware of.

“sure?” he offers, snickering. “i mean he’s been locked inside his room the whole day anyway, doubt he’s aware of anything happening right now.”

the itoshi rin confining himself in his room? so he was alive and well, yet why the hell was he not at school? it doesn't ease your nerves that sae was behaving strangely either. yet you try your best to tiptoe up the stairs, as to not alert rin’s sharp senses. sae snorts at this but remains silent.

as you traverse through the itoshi’s hallway, you pass by bronze framed photos from the past. you and rin, age 6, playing with bubbles while sae sat perched on a slide slightly above you in the playground. rin as a newborn (adorable and peacefully asleep). sae and rin holding up a gleaming golden trophy together, their elementary school soccer team flanking each side with an awe-struck look on their faces. you pause in front of rin’s door. not a sound nor a soul could be heard from the other side, as far as you could tell.

except- was that the scratch of a pencil and the crumpling of a paper? just what witchcraft was rin doing in there?

you unceremoniously creak rin’s bedroom door open, just a crack. it’s enough for you to notice the piles and piles of rejected scraps of notebook paper littering the space, each in his slightly messy scrawl, which was indecipherable at the moment given most had been crossed out. papers lined his floor, bed, and even surrounded the desk he was currently hunched over, where he was squinting at yet another piece of paper. you’d never seen rin or his room in such a state before. what evil spirit had possesed him? rin was never one to take his homework this seriously, so it must be something else entirely, you conclude.

rin glowers at his door, not bothering to look up from his work. “sae i said i don’t need your lukewarm little writing advice!” he groaned.

“didn’t know i was your brother now,” you joked, inviting yourself into his quarters. it had been a few months since you’d been inside his room, but it appeared the same. it was still decorated with a heap of medals for rin’s soccer endeavors, the occasional school assignment, the white sheets of his bed made pristinely, and soccer cleats lying in a corner by his backpack. surprisingly, a grainy polaroid you two had taken together at a friend’s party (which he had only attended because you begged him) was plastered to his wall as well. the only major change were the discarded piles of crumpled paper.

“i- wh- y/n?” rin stutters; clearly, you were the last person he expected or wanted to see in his house at the moment. “get out, please,” he huffs. “i can’t believe sae let you in, i had extremely specific instructions!”

“you instructed sae to not let me into your house?” you ask, bewilderment in your tone. “and you’re avoiding me at school? why? i haven’t done anythi-"

you're suddenly unable to form words as you finally read the contents of one extremely wrinkled paper. it was…a letter?

dear y/n,

i know i act like i hate everyone and call them all “tepid npcs,” and while that might be true, i don’t think you’re one…

the rest was angrily scratched out. another letter read:

y/n,

you make me feel really weird. like i want to throw up around you, but somehow i like it. i want to be near you at all times.

i really like y-

the remainder of the note appeared to be torn off. a loud sigh brings your attention back to rin, who currently refuses to look at you.

“rin, what’s the meaning of this?” you’re practically begging for an explanation.

“are you illiterate?” rin grumbles. “do i really need to spell it out for you? i thought you were smart!”

“hey! it’s not my fault that what i’m reading doesn’t exactly match your character,” you shoot back. but you can’t control the blush that’s managed to creep onto your cheeks, or how your heart was pounding inside your ribcage right now.

“y/n, you actually drive me crazy. do you know how nervous you make me? not even an ounce of awareness of how distracting you are to me? hell, i can’t stop staring at you in class! i woke up today and i couldn’t take it anymore, seeing you would be too much and i..." he sighs for the umpteenth time. “i had to tell you how i felt, so i guess this is it,” he admits quietly. “take it how you want.”

“rin.” you start. he won’t meet your eyes, evidently bracing himself for the worst. “itoshi rin, look at me,” you plead. pained azure eyes meet yours. “i’ve liked you since we were four.”

“huh? why didn’t you ever tell me? i went through all this pain for what!” he seethes, evidently distraught.

“because i didn’t think you’d ever like me back! you reject all the girls every valentines day, and at one point i wasn't sure if you even liked girls!”

the dark haired boy stares at you, eyes boring into your soul.

“oh i’ll prove to you that i do like girls,” he declares as he stands up, pulling you to him by the waist.

you two are too close now, you can hear his slightly erratic breathing and your own. you're suddenly hyperware of the boundary he was crossing, the invisible line drawn between friend and something more. his spidery lashes flutter shut as he closes the distance between your lips, and you feel your own close as well.

the kiss is long and full of everything. all of the unsaid words, the tension between years, you felt it all in that one moment with itoshi rin. you savor every detail, vowing to commit each inch of his mouth to memory.

when rin finally pulls away from you, you’re both breathless and grateful for the air.

“itoshi rin, never ever pull a stunt like this again,” you start, wagging a finger at him. “i seriously thought you had died or something!”

“i’ll make it up to you pretty,” rin whispers, never taking his eyes off you. “can i take you out?”

you’re aware of the stupid, lovesick grin stuck to your face at the moment as you nod. “yeah.”

somewhere on the first floor, itoshi sae chuckles, having heard it all- his high school brother’s confession to his first and only love.

a/n: rin tries to beat sae up after this for sure (he doesn't win). if u made it this far i want to kiss u, hope u enjoyed <3

[sdv-confessions]

Sending an ask with regards to the anon that said Sam/ Penny didn't make sense to them.

Not a shipper myself but I do know one of the main reasons is opposites attract but another, and a personally, more compelling reasons is that on the surface they seem like opposites but their more alike than they appear. And oh boy am I gonna go off about them.

Again not a shipper but I do like it when fics and general creatives explore how Sam, despite not initially appearing as such, is burdened with the responsibility of growing up a bit too fast because of the absence of a parent. Obviously this is about Kent and how he never really raised Vincent and even when he was there, he wasn't fully there or Vincent was too young to remember. Not Kent's fault obviously but it still left a noticeable absence in a male guiding figure that Vincent needed after being comfortable with one. And Sam, initially would try and prop his dad up, making him out to be a good father who was serving the country. He's out there kicking Gotoro butt. But as the years passed by of Kent not coming home, gradually Sam became more responsible for Vincent in the prior role. He probably taught him how to ride a bike, or tie his shoelaces and other activities and skills traditionally taught by a father.

Fics tend to explore this more reserved side of Sam that a general chunk of the fandom isn't aware of. Cause the cutscene that presents this more complex side of Sam is one of the only truly missable cutscenes of the entire game (the year 1 beach scene with the perfect circumstances). So general concensus is that Sam is an aloof skateboarder who kinda takes his job seriously and has his head in the clouds dreaming of becoming a popular musician. That's what's presented with most cutscenes and dialogue of Sam.

Penny, however, contrasts this image completely with honestly more grounded cutscenes. You can tell she's a hopeful person trying to make the best of the hand she's been dealt. And everybody knows she was forced to be the adult when Pam spiraled into alcoholism and negligence. And Penny herself admits she does the cooking, she does the cleaning. She takes care of the family by herself. And she's been doing this, presumably, since she was a child.

Penny's circumstances and character (doting and anxious but hopeful) make her maturity levels leagues above Sam's. But that's an assumption based on Sam being the loopy golden retriever stereotype (but he is a good boy, one of the best). And when you base their relationship purely on that, it is opposites attract.

But then that would be focusing on the surface and to get to the true meat and potatoes of the ship, you gotta dig deeper.

With Sam, once you include both the fact he was Vincent’s important male figure/ role model AND the fact that he's a silly goofy guy as previously mentioned, the ship gets so much more interesting. You also have to include the fact that Penny isn't all doom and gloom. She knows how to have fun and can be relaxed. Examples of this would be the picnic, the recipe testing and especially her 10 Heart event cause that shows she can be a bit adventurous.

And they both share a similarity in how they utilise their passions and hobbies as an escape from their circumstances. Penny primarily reads for the sake of escapism. Sam plays the guitar and writes his own lyrics, most likely to express his frustrations (I admit this is a bit of a stretch. I'm spitballing here). And both have an oddly nurturing nature to them. When married Sam is a children's edutainment performer, a job he's extremely proud of, therefore showing he has said caring nature and love for children. Penny is the town's sole educator for Jas and Vincent and has admitted their resources are limited with regards to educating the two. And yet she takes them out for educational field trips, that are most likely unnecessary but she's aware that even if they are, they're fulfilling experiences for the children. They both have a passion for caring for children, going the extra mile for them (I especially commend Sam, as I do have experience with being a musical children's edutainment performer and to genuinely go through with it takes serious mental fortutude unironically).

In most SamPenny content and to my understanding, the ship thrives in how they contrast yet compliment each other well. Sam can relate to Penny's struggle of being forced to grow up too fast, having to fill in for somebody who should be but isn't there (I still love Kent, this is more for Penny's dad and Pam specifically). And in some depictions, he comforts her on it. And in Canon, he would do exactly this as seen with Year 1 Beach Scene (that beach scene is the glue for this entire argument). And Penny could educate on new topics as Sam is a curious person in general.

And another opposites attract element that I really like about them that I rarely see being explored is how their weather dialogue reflects this so well. When it rains, Penny's dialogue is gloomy and distant. She doesn't like the rain, seeing it as unpleasant and an environmental reminder of her home life and how washed out and depressing it is. Meanwhile, directly opposite her trailer, Sam is happy as can be because he gets to play his guitar as loud as he wants. A genuinely optimistic view of the weather. A good contrast with Penny's more depressive perspective. And this does apply vice versa.

To me, their relationship can be summarised as this: Sam is the sliver of sunshine on a cloudy day and Penny is gentle breeze to cool one on a blistering summer day. Penny acts as the unexpected calm to Sam's chaotic storm whilst Sam shows Penny the beauty and positivity in even the most seemingly negative of scenarios. When there's excess of one, the other balances it out. They comfort each other in their pain, they lift each other up when down. They can choose to indulge the other's interest for the sake of feeling fulfilled by their partner's apparent excitement when discussing their passion etc.

In conclusion to this silly little rant for a ship that isn't even in my top 20 Stardew ships, nevermind otp: he was a skater boy, she was a scholarly girl, could I make it more obvious?

.

[bonemarble]

love your thoughts on Leah! how do you think her relationship could develop or what direction would it go in regards to Anna and Charles after wild sign?

interesting question! i don't think i have a very good answer for a "direction" these relationships could take, mainly because that depends on the larger story pb wants to tell: is this a story where people deconstruct the social order that has generated them or one where they try to find some measure of peace in it? i'll explain better under the cut.

charles and leah, i think, are at a point where they are starting to come to terms with their rivalry and identify its true cause: they were two lonely children starved for affection fighting each other because they couldn't fight bran for it. at the same time i don't know that this modicum of understanding is enough to build a relationship. even seeing the situation with a bit more clarity, the material causes that pit them against each other are not going to disappear, they have centuries of ill feelings between them, and i think at this point they simply don't like each other very much. even more importantly, i think there's a very good reason they are so repelled by each other and it took them so long to see the other's distress: they are very good mirrors. they both spent formative years of their lives with bran as the only (if imperfect) parental (or quasi) figure in their lives and attached the majority of their sense of self to their usefulness to him. to fully recognise the pain of this in the other would come very close to recognising this in themselves. they both know bran doesn't treat them well but they have become accustomed to it, i think. they grow some thick skin over it, shrug it off and get on with things (that's how bran wants them after all). seeing the other's wounds would make their own much more difficult to ignore. there's also an even more convoluted contortion in place: if they each believe bran is somehow unfair only towards them while he is right when he mistreats others, they never need to really question bran's judgement. feeling isolated in this unfairness is preferable compared to confronting the life-shaking truth that the person that moves the sun in your world may be doing it wrong. many other thoughts along these lines but this is already long.

leah and anna also have a mildly antagonistic relationship but of course there's less history there. my main issue with anna is that the only way to give her some true tridimensionality would be to acknowledge with some seriousness the difficulty of her circumstances. she was turned against her will, abused for years, and then latched onto her only saviour. he is a man she knows little when they basically marry and he is violent and possessive. her new life revolves around him and his complex family, with which she lives and has to deal all the time. at the same time, her survival depends on their support and protection, as we have seen how much her 'omega specialness' doesn't really ensure safety without material power to prevent her exploitation. there's no need to turn this into a grimdark novel, but if this context is not always waved away, suddenly she is not an unrealistic fairy always untouched by events: she is someone making strategic decisions to craft the best life possible out of her circumstances, finding love where she can and fighting for it. she has no true interest in anyone besides charles bc she is rightly guarded and balancing her new relationship with him already requires a lot of her energies. + he is the only person she can trust to be in her corner, without which she should be as lost as when they met (she also truly loves him ofc but this hardly explains her isolationist behaviour). she manipulates others not bc she is some quirky genius: it's the only way she sees to obtain what she needs when she is surrounded by aggressive impulsive people that are more powerful than her and feels the need to forestall their worst reactions. when bran and charles start giving her some latitude, she relaxes around them, especially as she realises she has things she can leverage (charles's love and her omega powers) to ensure a better condition for herself. but she is still wary of their flaws and recognises how they impact leah. yet leah is unpleasant. she sometimes makes her life more difficult but not really with the gravity and frequency people seem to assign her. even on good days however anna, so so smart and crafty and sneaky in navigating her circumstances, is almost annoyed by her: how has she not learned to do this better? how has she not learned to make herself likeable and dance around people and avoid confrontation to better obtain what she wants? but there's something else behind it, imo: leah might be brash and crude but she is real. how liberating that must be, to not always feel like your well-being depends on how quickly you past on a smile! the reason anna doesn't like leah, is the reason most people don't: to acknowledge leah's reactions as sensible is to eliminate the displacement of blame that allows life under unfair circumstances. to see leah's anger is justified means asking herself: why is she not angry? leah is a great mirror for her too. she can recognise her pain if she imagines her to be in a much more difficult position, someone to help from a higher standing. to confront her from a position of parity would mean to confront that position of parity: that she doesn't have any more material power than leah and her current better treatment stems from a momentary lucky alignment of events over which she has little control. bran and charles are, in their own ways, as unpleasant as leah is, only 1) anna needs them to survive; 2) since they also need her + they are not threatened by her they generally choose to treat her better. i am not saying anna should roll over and let leah treat her however she wants: leah enacts a similar mechanism with anna after all. disliking anna for being treated better is the only valve available to release her anger: it's not like she can accomplish much by going against bran and charles.

necessary prelude for me to say i don't care if leah and anna become fast friends. much as i don't care if leah and charles do. i think this dynamic is interesting even if it remains antagonistic, as long as either immobilism or change follow some logical exploration of this setting. it can truly go either way i would be ok with both.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Noah Berlatsky at Everything Is Horrible:

As several commenters have pointed out, it’s hard to know how to react to Trump’s recent threats to conquer Greenland and/or Canada and/or Panama by force and/or economic coercion. Is this actually a plan? Is it a weird phantom his rage-calcified synapses produced when the microphone got thrust in front of him? Does taking it seriously lend it credence it shouldn’t have? Does mocking it downplay the danger? World leaders are in fact taking it seriously; France and Germany both warned Trump not to attack the borders of the EU. On social media, as you’d expect, people have taken a more mocking tone. One commenter joked that they would accept annexing Canada if every province got two senate votes. Fwiw, I very much doubt that Trump will actually try to annex Canada or Greenland. I fear that some sort of military intervention in Panama is a good bit more likely, given Trump’s racism and the long history of US presidents stealing shit from Latin America whenever they feel like it. But whether or not Trump implements any of his imperial schemes, I think it’s worth thinking through what conquest of Greenland, or Panama, or Canada would actually mean. Trump may not pursue this particular evil plan, but it’s worth explaining at least briefly why it’s evil, if only as a reminder of just how ugly Trump’s disdain for democracy is.

Disenfranchising millions

The quip about Canada electing Democratic Senators is telling I think, because it underlines a central problem of colonialism in democratic polities That problem is that, in theory, claiming more territory is also claiming more voters. If you engineer a hostile takeover of a territory, you’ve just added an electorate which hates you. If Canadians or Panamanians are allowed to vote in US elections, they will generally vote to regain independence first and foremost. At the very least, they are likely to vote against the asshole that launched the invasion. This is not a new or unique problem. Colonial representation, or the lack thereof, was the cause of the American Revolution; Britain wanted control over the colonists, but it did not want to give them votes in Parliament. Or, as another example, there’s Israel—a “democracy” only if you ignore the fact that Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank can’t vote, because if they could vote they’d quickly demand an end to the occupation and control over their own territory and lives, which Israel’s government does not want to give them.

Trump is a fool, but he does have some sense of who votes for him and who doesn’t. And he’s consistent in saying that people who don’t vote for him should not be allowed to vote at all. Any annexation of Canada, or Greenland, or Panama, would be done on MAGA terms—which means that the people in those countries would be disenfranchised. Remember that Puerto Rico and other US territories still don’t have full US voting rights! Trump would absolutely not let Canadians vote for Democratic Senators. MAGA would say that Canadians needed time to learn the ways of American democracy, or he would say they were not loyal, and demand that anyone who wanted to vote had to swear an oath to the US, and to Trump personally. You might then get Senators from Canada—elected by an all pro-Trumpist far right rump electorate.

Colonialism is bad

Trump has of course claimed that Canada/Greenland/Panama would be better off under MAGA. The pretense is thin though; it’s obvious that Trump wants additional territory because he thinks it would make the US bigger and more powerful, and perhaps just because he likes the idea of taking stuff by force. This duplicates the historical disconnect between colonial rhetoric and colonial policy. Colonizers always say that they are working for the good of the colonized. Rudyard Kipling famously encouraged the US to invade the Philippines for the good of the Filipinos; “Fill full the mouth of famine/and make the sickness cease.” Walter Rodney in his classic How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (1972) notes that “colonial apologists” claim that colonial rule was responsible for “economic modernization” and “political uplift and emancipation.”

Rodney puts a wrecking ball through those pro colonial arguments. He points out that European development in Africa was all aimed at extracting resources for the benefit of the colonizers, not the colonized. Europeans only built roads where they needed to get goods from the interior to the coast; they did not invest in infrastructure to allow Africans to travel in their own countries, or between two countries. When Africans wanted to learn new technologies and build new industries, they were systematically stifled; the British made it illegal for Ugandans to own cotton gins, for example.

[...]

Why aren’t you laughing?

Again, it feels ridiculous to talk seriously about what an invasion of Canada or Greenland or Panama might mean practically. It’s not going to happen. Why talk about the consequences for democracy, or the potential for exploitation and cruelty, or the consequences for reproductive rights? It’s all silliness. It’s just Trump babbling.

Disenfranchising Canadians by annexing Canada is a foolish move.

[felixcloud6288]

Dungeon Meshi Chapter 62

It's the boy and he's making us a delicious meal story.

Throughout this chapter, we're given Mithrun's backstory as a Dungeon Lord. However, the story we're told is actually Kabru's retelling because when Mithrun said he'd tell Kabru everything, he meant he'd tell Kabru EVERYTHING.

The chapter alternates between Mithrun's time as a dungeon lord and his and Kabru's journey through the dungeon. Each time we go back to Mithrun as a dungeon lord, it's actually Kabru putting the story together in a comprehensible way.

Kabru's adoptive mother is in the group. Her name is Milsiril. There weren't any good shots of her uncovered arms this chapter so I can't say whether any of those scars were from before this incident.

I take it that elves are generally prone to using unnecessarily complex methods to achieve certain end goals. Mithrun told Kabru that he'll need a sleep spell or a potion to be put to sleep, and he said being bundled up cozy and given a foot massage would never work, right before falling asleep.

It's exactly the same vibe as the mandrake harvesting thing only with fewer dead dogs.

All of this happened before the shapeshifter encounter? The shpaeshifter Kabru and Mithrun encountered probably was the same one then.

Kabru and Mithrun are both serious characters and whenever the story focuses on them, it tries to take things seriously. But with this one single panel, it's clear this is going to be an exception.

There's a light inconsistency with timing. Kabru said it will take a week until they're rescued but the day ends saying "Four days left until rescue." I just can't tell if there's an error with what Kabru said or if that message is not supposed to be tied to the end of this specific day.

The next page opens with "Day three after the fall" and Laios's group had fought the ice golem that day. So if it's already been two days since Kabru and Mithrun fell, then that would mean chapters 39-42 were all in a single day and there was a roughly two day period of Laios's team either finding the way to floor 6 or travelling through the floor before encountering the shapeshifter.

On Kabru's end, the only known moment of time passing was when Kabru fell asleep for five hours last chapter. Meanwhile, team Laios would have had to take some time to make Marcille and Senshi's snow shoes.

I'm going to guess that it takes roughly two days travel to get to the cave system in the sixth floor. Kabru and Mithrun encountered the shapeshifter near the start of the path to the caves while Laios's team encountered it near the end of the path.

Mithrun is probably wearing Shuro's jacket. It at least matches the color of the jacket we saw Shuro wearing in chapter 32.

The inciting incident to Mithrun becoming a dungeon lord was seeing his brother with the girl he liked through a magic mirror. But then we cut to Kabru thinking about how that's a good plot hook.

I think he either super dumbed down what was in the mirror, or may have straight up lied about what really set Mithrun off. Like, his brother living this happy life with Mithrun's beloved is part of it, but that note where Mithrun joined the Canaries in his brother's place tells me that the mirror is actually showing him how wonderful his brother's life is and how this could have been Mithrun's life instead.

Makes sense that the barometz fruit doesn't have the same organ structure as a real sheep. It's just trying to mimic the sheep to attract predators. The bones are probably just stems to help keep the shape.

Kabru and Mithrun stole the hippogriff's eggs and accidentally turned it into a griffin. Maybe it attacked Laios's party because it thought they were the egg thieves.

Maybe Mithrun's poor directional skill is because he got so used to the layout of his own dungeon that he's forgotten how Euclidean geometry works. It might make sense to assume that a stairway up is actually the way down and to go forward, you need to go back.

Several of these characters were named in the start of the chapter. The two row are Nils and Sita. The middle one in the bottom row is Coyote. I can't tell who the other two are, but I want to say the one on the lower right is Yugin.

Sita is a guard while the rest are criminals.

Mithrun's "beloved" was definitely an illusion of some kind. The goat's power only extends to the dungeon so it couldn't have brought her into it.

She may have been a lamia from the start since we can see a snake body in the corner of the very next panel.

Her color pattern indicates she's a king snake lamia. I talked about them in chapter 10. She's harmless, or at least as harmless as a lamia can be.

The scene where the goat ate Mithrun's desires is unsettling. The goat holds him down and violates his body. And it gouged out Mithrun's eye in the process.

And when the goat was done with Mithrun, it left nothing behind of his wish. He's left lying in front of the magic mirror he destroyed.

This comes right after the Winged Lion showed Laios his ideal world where people and monsters live together in harmony. The magic mirror was probably placed to tempt anyone who explored the dungeon and Mithrun took the bait. And the vision Laios saw in chapter 60 is just the Winged Lion baiting him into becoming a dungeon lord so it can eventually eat him too. And it will probably eat all of Laios's companions first just like the goat ate Mithrun's.

So now we have to deal with the dramatic irony that Laios's party is relying on an even greater threat to stop Thistle.

The elf with Milsiril was also named in the opening part. Her name is Helki.

Did Kabru make a tart?

So the reason ancient magic is forbidden is because it opens the path for demons from another dimension to come in. Demons feed on human desires and grow stronger as they feed. Demons are trapped in dungeons to prevent them from reaching the surface and they lure people into the dungeons. People with particularly strong desires are made dungeon lords to cultivate those desires to be even stronger.

And the Utaya incident was the result of a demon getting strong enough to break out of its dungeon.

This is the second two-page spread in the series.

The demon in the image has a few characteristics matching the Winged Lion such as a mane, wings, and similar horns to some statues of it.

The first two-page spread was the world the lion promised Laios and the second is what would really happen as it destroys the Golden Kingdom. I can't tell if the person it's about to eat is anyone specific but it would be appropriate if it were Laios.

Even if knowing the truth wouldn't stop people from trying to use ancient magic, being forward about the danger and reason would at least stop some of them and let them understand why anyone trying to use ancient magic should be stopped or deterred. Like, Marcille is studying ancient magic BECAUSE she doesn't know why it's outlawed with no reason given.

The diagram used when explaining the quality of desires is literally an upside-down diagram of Maslow's hierachy of needs.

Kabru has realized he made a grave mistake entrusting Laios to the dungeon.

So Kabru and Mithrun were the ones who made that campfire from chapter 50.

The changelings have decided that Mithrun is super buff by elf standards.

If Pattadol is the Marcille of the Canaries, then Lycion must be the Senshi.

Remember how there was a panel in chapter 50 of Shuro freaking out because Laios threw the bell? Way more stuff was happening at the time. Shuro's face and Cithis telling him to shut up still happened though. Mithrun also hit his head when it happened.

As it turns out, the Canaries have been in the lower levels of the dungeons for several days when the Winged Lion warned Laios about them. Since Mithrun knows where to find secret passages, he probably figured out a secret way to the next level after Laios had opened that giant door and they camped out on the next floor when Laios's team was riding the trolley down.

Kabru and Mithrun were always just ahead of Laios this chapter so I expect them to meet up just before they all reach the bottom of the dungeon.

back

[last-sprout]

Last Sprout Dev Diary - Jan 10, 2025

Hello, and welcome to the new year! After the break, I'm here for another dev diary - this one being a bit more about something conceptual. If you want to read the last dev diary from December, you can do so here.

If this is the first one you're reading, I'm @oneominousvalbatross, and I'm the tech side of the sprout team! This week I mostly worked on status effects, but I want to take some time to talk about a broader, more conceptual topic, and save the full breakdown for next week.

My poor boy, who has every disease.

Something I don't think I've really specified before in these dev diaries is my background in game dev, or, rather, my lack of background. I started seriously learning how to code a bit over a year ago, and entered my first game jam in February of 2024.

(The game was barely functional, but it did exist so like, there's something.)

My academic background is in philosophy (simultaneously the best and worst thing tbh), and apart from being pretty good with computers in a broad sense I didn't really have much to go on for this project. I'm bringing this up because I'm going to be talking about something that I had to figure out for myself, but that might be like, compsci 105 or something if you went through school for it. That said though, if you have always kind of wanted to make games, you can absolutely make games! I didn't think I was a math person, or a coding person, until I started doing it.

Game Development is Hard

I'm going to assume that software development in general is hard, but I haven't really done that, so I'm talking about game dev. I spent around two weeks not touching the game, and when I came back, the first thing I noticed was just how hard it was to get my head back around something with this many systems! This was also something I ran headlong into when working on that game jam, I reached a point in like, a week where I couldn't touch any system without potentially breaking every other system.

The solution I use, and the reason why I could come back to this without completely losing my mind, is to reduce the number of access points into a system to the absolute bare minimum. For example, we can look at the animation system. It's really complicated! It needs to be able to swap the sprites out on a variety of different renderers, it needs to be able to adjust animation speeds, control shader parameters, and it needs to be able to queue up multiple animations in sequence, plus it needs to send out events on animation end so that I can use them to time up other game actions.

If I was to condense all of this into a few sentences: A system can be as complicated as it needs to be, but try to envision it in its own little box, with precisely one entrance/exit. If you need to spawn a projectile, you should really just be able to go, like, SpawnProjectile(projectile), with as little external work as possible. This means if you need to completely rewrite how spawning projectiles works, you can do that, and all the other classes that spawn projectiles can still just do their thing.

A helpful diagram

The way I would've done this originally would have been to have, like, a SpriteAnimator class with a 'speed' field. I'd set it to one by default, and then whenever I need that speed to be different, I'd have whatever object needs to change the speed go in and set the speed to whatever. If you've done a lot of programming, you probably immediately realized the tons of problems this could cause - problems into which I ran headlong.

What do you do when you want one animation to play at a certain speed, then go back to the previous speed when it's done? If you do, do you assume that the speed was set to 1 before, and just reset it, or do you have one of the two objects involved store the previous speed to go back to it? If you do, what happens if, halfway through an animation, another object butts in to adjust the speed again? Say you're playing an animation at half speed, and then a speed buff gets applied that's supposed to last for a minute. Your speed buff goes in, sets the faster speed, the animation suddenly starts playing faster, then when the animation is finished, the object that was waiting to reset the speed goes back in and sets the speed to 1, leaving the animation playing at the default speed when it's supposed to be faster.

These kinds of problems will always be a risk, but in my specific case I split the speed at which an animation plays out into three places. First of all, an animation has a frame rate, which is meant to never change. We do most of our animating at 12 fps (on twos, I think is what you call it in the traditional animation world? idk, not a 2d animator), and each animation object keeps track of its frame delta (1 / frame rate) so that the controller can progress through the frames at the right speed.

However, we don't submit the animation to the controller in its unaltered form. Instead, we have a data structure called a PlayableAnimation. This contains the animation itself, but it also has the speed at which the animation should be played, as well as some other useful info that might change between two instances of the same animation. A controller maintains a stack of playable animations and can look at the individual speed of each one as it progresses through.

On top of that, there's a final speed modifier that can be submitted along with the playable animation, without changing its values. This way, if I want to play an animation at double speed for whatever reason, I don't necessarily have to set the value for the entire controller, I can just say this animation should be faster, and nothing else. Some animations have different frame rates, or are re-used with different speeds for different purposes, and I can do all that configuration without having to put all that weight on one field.

All of this sounds wildly complicated, and it kind of is, but importantly, if you're playing an animation from any other system, all you do is type in "Controller.PlayAnimation(animation)". You can also go like, "Controller.PlayAnimation(animation, speed: 1.5)" if you want it to play faster, but all of that stuff is handled completely without additional input. This is what lets me come back to the game and keep working on it when it's been months since I've touched a part of it.

Why This is Relevant Right Now

Status effects seem simple, but they kind of need to touch every other system at least a little bit, which is why I spent all that time talking about making systems. A status effect needs to be able to do things like apply damage, but it also needs to be able to play animations or sounds, and it doesn't always want to play those things on the source of the effect.

Some demos for the animations different status effects will use.

Plus, this is a roguelite, so we need to be able to add and modify status effect stuff within the upgrade system, which might mean modifying the magnitude of the effect, changing colors on animations, or tying other things into the effect when it goes off! As long as each of those systems has the cleanest possible entry/exit points, this is doable, but it's been a long battle making sure the game can keep moving forward and not get mired in constant bugfixing and complexity management.

I have a lot of cool game design thoughts on the effects themselves, but I think I'll leave that for a later week. As per usual, thanks for reading, feel free to send any questions or thoughts here or to @oneominousvalbatross, and I'll see you next week!

[zvtara-was-never-canon]

I wonder if Americans have like.. a very different view of maturity than the rest of the wolrd. I can't help jut think that whenever the whole "no 14 year old girl would go for a 12 year old", like, i admit that i never saw that happening in my country, but i do still remember a fair amount of my teenage years and frankly, 12 and 14 years old aren't really that apart in emotional maturity, they were around the same. So whenever they bring that about Kataang it just confuses me ans why the whole "she acts like mom to him" never made any sense to me, i guest that it could just be looking their past with rose tinted glasses.

From what I've seen, americans are weird about age in general, that's why they latched onto that bullshit "Your brain is not fully developed until you're 25" research so fast so they can treat 20 year olds as babies, AND why is so common for parents to just fucking kick their kids out of the house the second they turn 18, regardless of if they're in any way ready for that and will be able to provide for themselves because "you're grown now."

Aang likes to goof off? That means he's a toddler that doesn't take anything seriously and is "too pure" to understand the concept of sex, nevermind that he's constantly forcing himself to cope with unbelievable grief and trauma for the sake of properly doing his job to save the world, and he's literally at the stage where the hormones are SCREAMING.

Katara is nurturing and a GIRL? Clearly she's an adult. That's totally a mother right there. Can't be a mother without being an adult. She's practically 40, Aang is too young for her.

Unlike Zuko. You know, 'cause he's angry and bitter? And thinks he can fix every problem through war? That's adult behavior, right? That's totally not poor coping mechanisms and a result of literal propaganda, right? You've seen the movies, everything can be magically fixed by a bomb.

Again, PAINFULLY american. "Pacifism is a naive, childish idea. War is the ONLY way, that's how REAL men solve problems." Literal cold-war propaganda/logic.

[inazuma-fulgur]

I will also defend trans men here, I see vitriol about both just by different people.

Men, and women keeping proximity to men in media/political circles, target trans women for being predators and for mutilating themselves

Same for trans men actually, just by women and men keeping a proximity to those women. This one is a little weird though, because trans men post transition are predators and trans men pre transition are always victims who are tricked into mutilating themselves.

This isn't just on tv, this is stuff my neighbors and coworkers tell me. Austensibly, in my experience, cis women are negative towards trans men and largely neutral or positive towards trans women, whereass cis men are negative towards both

Non binary people don't even exist because they don't touch on the framework people use to understand themselves, so they can just be denied and don't require any arguments beyond "lmao silly"

[the-transgenda-agenda]

I generally try to keep this page positive, but I've been thinking about that ask I got the other day. I'll admit that I'm probably "privileged" due to my ability to pass well.

There were times before I even started testosterone that I was assumed to be a boy (until I spoke and said something goddamn my voice used to be obnoxiously high).

I still have faced pretty extreme transphobia and harassment and shit though. Being able to pass does not make someone safe from bigots and transphobes.

I've seen a handful of transfems in corners of the internet who try and say that transmascs have an easier time passing and evading hate. While that might be true for a handful of people, that's not true for everyone.

There exists transfems who have an easier time passing than certain transmascs and vise versa. I have met numerous transmasculine people who struggled to pass and spend every conversation having to correct people on pronouns over and over.

I'm lucky to be tall, but there are many transmascs who are not. Who are short. Who can't get the surgeries or hormones that they want. Or maybe they don't want them but still just want to be seen as who they are.

I don't know how else to word this, but struggles are individual. All we can really do as a community is stand together. Listen to what people have to say. Support our brothers and sisters when they struggle or fail. Lift each other up.

There will always be someone who "has it worse". Throwing around death statistics means nothing. I know transmascs who are forced to be seen as women in their lives. There are transfems to have the same problem.

Our struggles overlap. Sometimes they diverge because of the nature of how gender is seen in society. Pointing fingers at each other out of jealousy or trauma is not helpful.

I've seen vents of things I might not have batted an eye at but you know what, I have sympathy for it.

The trans community is supposed to be a community, regardless of gender. We should be united. We should be spending out time and energy helping one another. Giving each other tips and advice. Supporting each other. Hyping each other up. Sharing resources.

Not hate. Not divide. Not complaining about who has it worse. Its pointless, and its stupid.

I understand the urge of having something bad happen to you, and wanting to scream into the void or at someone else you think has it better, but its not productive.

[randomnameless]

Genuine question, not trying to start a fight, why do you get so upset about gods and churches being presented in a negative light in fictional works?

No pbs!

I guess it's a mix of being too common, too forced and having, in general, the cast use common tropish arguments to fight /defeat them.

I rant a lot about this game, but take TS where we have three sort of factions opposing each other, and each are supposed to suck. Who is the faction who never receives any "positive traits" or "pet the dog" moment?

The game force fed us a scene where an Aesfroti soldier - when Aesfrost is depicted as a highly militarised nation with a cult of personality towards their current ruler, that invaded the protag's home and slaughtered several civilians and NPCs in the process - say goodbye to his wife and kids before going to "war" to defend his land against, well, the protags who are invading it to kill their warmongering leader.

As force-fed as this scene was, it, I believe at least, tried to tell us that even the Aesfrosti who pillaged villages and killed their inhabitants are humans, and care about their loved ones, sure it's corny, but it's all about not deshumanising any party.

When we attack Hyzante? Niet, zilch, nothing. No similar scene where random soldiers, or NPCs, worry about what is going on and if they're going to die when their wall has been breached. They just, don't exist in this context.

I think the cherry on the cake is the Golden Route scene, where, apparently, nationalists Aesfrosti decide to turn back against their ultra charismatic leader because, uh, he "lied" when he declared the war and used a false pretense, so the soldiers and people who were butchering babies and invading a city where people were preparing a marriage apparently now have morals and rebel.

There's no similar scene for Hyzante when the cast reveals that the teachings of their Goddess were made up and salt wasn't exclusively given to them by divine intervention, because rock salt exists everywhere. Sure it would be a bit weird and forced that people thinking they're chosen ones and looking down on everyone else suddenly, hm, don't break down when their entire system of belief is shattered, but hey, if the Aesfrostian Gregor can have morals after washing his hands of all this Glenbrookian blood, why shouldn't religious npc #55 not make the same heel face turn?

And then, we have the slavery/human experimentation plot - in general, when TS tries to give nuance, they more or less explain/justify why something that "sucks" is done, it's basically Silvio's character.

Aesfrost' Gustadolph manages to push his "freedom" mentality because his land is a harsh place where people are desperate to survive, salt smuggling is reprehensible, but it's the only way to give some to the ones who cannot afford it. Of course is everyone is free, no one is because, as Gustadolph puts it, they're basically free to die for his ambitions.

Hyzante? Follows a racist creed where Rozellians have to pay for some great sin, and are slaved away in a lake to recover salt until they die. It's, later, justified by Hyzante wanting to keep its salt monopoly else they don't have anything, and wanting to curb down the Rozelle people because they know about the exitence of rock salt (and I guess getting free workers to harvest salt from the lake + having state enemies make his own population docile/not willing to rebel ?).

And then, we have the human experimentations, that are just done for, uhh, Idore's lol. When Hyzante is known for its "advanced medicine" and we could have had the usual dilemna of, idk, having those humans experimentations used to develop this medicine that is reknown in the world (idk, sacrificing a Rozellian to save someone else's life?) - it's not the angle the devs picked. Rozellians are sacrificed to power up an idol, Idore wants to control the world through his idol and soft power (compared to Gustadolph's hard power) and manipulates his people (just like Gustadolph) to do so.

The two are very similar, but who is the final boss? Complete with a transformation in an eldritch monster? The war-mongering imperialist or the jaded old man who is leading de facto a religion?

Hopefully there's the entire "human experimentations for no other purpose than the lols" to settle them apart.

---

I recently watched Dune, and even if I have some issues with the adaptation, the Bene Gesserit isn't portrayed as "comically" evil-er than the Harkonen Empire, I reckon the comparison isn't adequate, because Dune is multi book series when I'm mostly talking about video games.

Symphonia's church of Martel is a font for the Big Bad (tm) to put in motion his nefarious plans, and yet, through the game, we see how random clergymen use their, uh, religious buildings to help people around. Ultimately Martel herself is reincarnated through plot device and tells the big bad to stop being an ass and the story is less about "church and gods evil" but "big bad distorts Martel/church's teachings and role for his plans because he has a tragic backstory"

(but then Symphonia ends with the biggest whitewashing from every Tales I've played for its big bad so I'll stop talking about it because otherwise I'm going to be salty).

Abyss' church is more or less the same thing - the Church is supposed to help people deal with the fact their verse has "predestination stones" where the future is already written, and in the course of the game, we see how it has several factions and one opposes the group (who has the pope as a NPC!) - but it's not a story about "gods bad church BaD".

I remember playing Suikoden Tierkreis a long time ago, and while the game seemed to go through familiar "church bad gods bad" route and we end with defeating a god-like entity... I pretty much loved the twist that, in a game that relied on alternate dimensions/universe, the god-like entity was actually the protag if he made different choices!

In those games, if you fight a religious body and someone pretending to be a God or what not - it's not because people fight against an eldritch creature who wants world domination and to erase puny insects, or is the reason why everything goes wrong, but because, at the end, the conflict/fight is ultimately caused by someone, generally a human or at least a non "god like" entity, wanting to destroy the world.

I don't remember if FE was my first JRPG series or not, but I always liked the idea that if the world is doomed in those games and the heroes must prevent said doom, it's not because a god-like being wants to destroy the world, but because people, humans/randoms are the most shitty ones out there.

---

As for the "tropes" often used to deride fictional churchs and religious people, well, I will again point to TS - which did a splendid job in the Benedict Route where you smash Hyzante after allying with Aesfrost.

There's one battle where out protags diss Hyzantese because they worship a goddess and have no free will, listening to Her teachings and Her says (the traditional "religious people have no free will and listen to their churches who tell them how to think!") - which is immediately countered by one of those Hyzantese characters asking Serenor if he's not the same, but instead of blindly listening to a Goddess, blindly follows Benedict. And it ends with the final chapter title referencing automatons/puppets : who is that title talking about ? The fake "idol" Idore created, or the fake "king" Benedict created?

Anyways, the usual "religions people have no free will because their church/religion tells them how to think" trope reeks of r/atheism and the double standard - bar in this route of TS, but I guess, in TS itself in the Roland route! - is never called out, blindly following a charismatic leader is okay, as long as charismatic leader isn't religious?

Regardless of my IRL thoughts about religion, usually those tropes are presented as a "gotcha!" when they are... not at all, but the games/books leave it at that and we're supposed to roll with it.

I'd say it's lazy writing or, as we saw in Naruto, a quick way to end a story without having to dwelve in characters and their motivations : "you're a god/alien/other being and you're bad, so let us do what we want!" - end of the story.

Hopefully some fillers and to an extent, Boruto gave her more meat bar being the 11 hour villain we had to defeat quick and who manipulated the previous sad'n'lonely antagonists - but it still felt rich from Naruto, known for his famous "talk no jutsu" and trying to understand people he's fighting against, to drop the ball with Kaguya, calling her pure malice and ending with some "let us live the way we want" to wrap up the plot so he can wrestle with his boyfriend later on.

In the end, we often end up with "religion bad bcs the big bad manipulates people through it", as if those mangas/animes/vg never have other examples of charismatic people not using religion to manipulate their randoms/people or "gods bad they should let humans do what they want" when we've read/seen/played through various, uh, really fucked-up shit humans did - but on their own! and ultimately, but it's more in fandom spaces, with have Projection 101.

TLDR : church/religion/gods are too often used in those works as the ultimate scapegoat to either wrap up a story in a rushed ending or to pretend to have "nuance" but still have a common enemy where all the "nuanced" characters can grow/be whitewashed and side together against that "common enemy".

Just like in all things I guess, I prefer when something isn't painted as purely negative and all of the positive traits are erased because there is a need for a perfect scapegoat - sure, bring out too much "nuance" and writing/designing a game/manga/anime becomes harder because there's no "clear cut" antagonist, and yet, the one who always gets fucked in this scenario is the religious/church side.

Want a generic stock villain who will destroy the world so the heroes have to fight against them? Just create a "religion" in your setting, and have the big bad either hell bent on resurrecting Chtullu to destroy the world because Chtullu BaD, or have them be the most corrupt piece of shit who manipulate everything in the shadows, so the rest of the world, even the ones who slaughter others bcs they feel like they must start a war, can be whitewashed at the end.

I mean, there's a saying about diverting attention from a fire by starting a bigger one near, or a trope of "aliens made them do it" : who cares if Madara started a continental war and targeted a village full of random civilians he swore to protect because he lost the elections? Did y'know he was manipulated by a woman, I mean, an eldritch thing created by a woman, regarded as a God, who ultimately wanted to get out of her fridge to kill everyone?

Roland must get over his hatred for Aesfrost for barging in his kindgom and killing hundred of his people while they were preparing for a wedding, because hey, Idore is evil and plans on ruling the world through his sham religion!

I'll forever be salty at TS for not giving Kamsell the occasion to rise against Idore, or not even have minor NPCs get the same treatment as Sycras suddenly going all "u lied to me gustadolph so i won't listen to u anymore + sad goodbyes to my wife'n'kids".

Extremism of all kinds can lead to wars/tragedy/fucked up shit - Sure I don't want to get my History lessons in video game medium when I play lol, but what I really don't like is how it feels like depicting "they're extremists because they're religious" feels like the default/easy answer : want a bunch of brainwashed people the heroes must fight against and can't talk no justu their way out of this fight/will fight without looking too BaD? Depict those people as "misguided" members of a corrupt church/believers of a religion, no one will givea fig. If they are instead supporters of a charismatic leader who throws them through the meatgrinder to further their goals? Well, there's no automatic loyalty so either you have to show/depict it on screen, else it can be challenged at key points to demonstrate how those people - who follow the charismatic leader - aren't completely "mindlessly listening to their leader" or how their leader "isn't that bad after all".

[uncanny-tranny]

You know, I don't think cis people are uniquely more normal about sex and gender compared to trans people when I saw a bunch of cis people legitimately angry that a man gives directions based on landmarks because "man is when gives street names (smart), woman is when gives stupid landmarks" like the call is coming from inside the house. Also unchecked misogyny is going to fucking destroy everybody's capacity to engage with other humans like they are people.

[alexoreality]

You might not have to hear this but some one piece ships literally don't make sense that it gives me the ick 🥲 (some ships i just respect and leave alone, i'll color them in blue.) (And the ones that give me severe trust issues is purple)

AceSan - ...okay... The smirk...? What else...? Trauma bonding?? What...? I mean, its cute, i can leave the ship alone and its fans. I think this ship stemmed from the way Ace was drawn looking at Sanji *my boy was greasy* Y'all are horny though.- (sorry. But they'll get along so well with supporting and stuff- TRAUMA. MY GUY. I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT 😭

HanLu - thats a grown ass woman.

LawLu - and thats a grown ass man. (But Luffy's 19- AGE GAP???)

ZoSan - i'm sorry HUH. The two men that insult each other 24/7 were being shipped??? HUH. (But they respect each other- I KNOW THAT??? BUT GODDAMN THE FICS DON'T GET THEIR CHARACTER RIGHT 😭 ZoSan is a well-liked ship, but don't consider them canon and that they'll kiss after Zoro defeats Mihawk)

ZoBin - THAT IS HIS MOTHER FIGURE.

SaboSan - ...They never met 😶... and what if they do? Trauma bonding again?... Y'all I'm sorry but huh- how. Legitimately I'M SPEAKING RATIONALLY, HOW THE FUCK WOULD TWO PEOPLE FALL IN LOVE??? THAT WAY???

UGH ITS JUST A 2D CHARACTER!!

Well DAMN YOU WEREN'T TREATING THEM LIKE THAT WHEN I WAS DISSING THEM??

[gu6chan]

maybe its sample bias but i think it's kinda funny how most people I've seen who've played drakengard because of nier are making ending e THE endgoal and more often than not the main if not only reason they're playing the game at all and when they finally get it they're like "this is it the single most impactful, greatest moment of all gaming. im wiping tears from my eyes this is it" and then you see the drakengard fans who've played drakengard because they like drakengard and you ask them about ending e and they're like "eh. it was okay, i guess"

[torgawl]

a bit obsessed with the idea of kusakabe dying as a form of sacrifice to specifically protect/save somebody else. it's consistent enough with the theme of the past generation achieving no meaningful feats against significant threats but it's also ironic enough that someone without a technique and who claims their philosophy is primarily self-sacrificial - although he tends to stay from his own ideals in critical moments, proving he's not only brave when necessary but he does have a sense of responsabilty and guilt - ultimately redeems themselves through death resulting in the achievement of something his colleagues have failed to do. not that i'm wishing for him to die, i hope he doesn't. but it would also make a clear-cut distinction between him and a character like mei mei, who narratively serves a very similar purpose (besides her being a foil to nanami). to have someone be awarded by their selfishness just for it to not be worth much within a world and system that runs and sustains itself due to the sorcerer's labour power, whose only means of subsistence is to sell themselves away. a class of people who is doomed no matter what path they choose to take, as long as they do not break free from their duties and as long as the system doesn't collapse. a death that could serve as a symbol of punishment towards solidarity and altruism but a win for revolution.

[fideidefenswhore]

What are your thoughts on Jane Boleyn, and the role she supposedly played in the fall of 3 Queens (Anne Boleyn, Anna of Cleves, Katheryn Howard)? Do you think she has been too maligned by historians for centuries, especially when it comes to the relationship with the Boleyns (it seems she got along with Anne)?

Now that I've read both works and compared them side by side, I suppose I would say my stance on Jane Boleyn falls somewhere in between that of Julia Fox and James Taffe ('Somewhere in between' is not, btw, Alison Weir); although closer to the former than the latter. Offering critique of both biographies, I would say that of JF is too apologetic (smoothing out wrinkles that exist in her arguments rather than acknowledging them) and JT is too severe.

Especially when it comes to the relationship with the Boleyns? Yes and no. Obviously she was married to George, she sent him a message of comfort while he was in the Tower, and wore only black the rest of her life, which was quite the potent statement. However, I would allow for the possibility that she potentially, inadvertently implicated him or AB (ie, testimony of hers was twisted to suit the crown's case). This is where I think there are flaws in the arguments of some of her defenders-- they cannot allow for even that possibility and so make claims that disallow it; some of which are untrue. 'Jane was only blamed as a means of absolving Henry in the whitewash of Elizabethan propagandists' is not true. Johannes Sleidan in 1545 claimed that Anne and George died by her 'false accusation'. Sleidan was a Reformer, so he would have been more sympathetic towards the plights of these two than the average person, and would have spoken to others that were as well, but the motivation to vindicate Elizabeth did not yet exist; she was at this point the very unlikely third in line to the throne.

I do appreciate that you said 'got along' with Anne, not 'besties', because...it's possible they were very close, certainly, but we must also allow for the possibility of animosity. The linchpin for the argument of closeness is the report from Chapuys that they 'conspired together' to banish Henry's mistress from court. Was this the precise truth? Considering the source I'm doubtful. Probably there was a lady Henry was serving at this time (although that we never have a name makes the story somewhat suppositious), but did they need to have 'conspired together' against her for Jane to be banished from court (which is what happened instead)? Jane might have merely made Anne aware of her, and Henry finding out that she'd been the source would have been enough for banishment. Or, as was presented plausibly in Adrienne Dillard's fictional rendition, Jane might have dropped hints to Cromwell that this mistress was a supporter of the two exiled and contumacious royal women that were Anne's adversaries, Cromwell might have passed this along to Henry, and Henry might have banished Jane for shattering the illusion that this woman had no independent ambitions or ulterior motives and merely let him hit for the sheer pleasure of his company.

If this was evidence of closeness, and it might be, then we also have to remember that the end result was Jane's banishment from court, and that there is, as JT fairly pointed out, no evidence that any of the Boleyns spoke in her defense, favor, or for her return. It would take an extremely magnanimous person to accept all that with equanimity and not feel any resentment whatsoever. So, if there was intimacy, there might have also been rift.

That leaves the question: enough 'rift' for her to seek vengeance? I doubt that much for all the reasons Fox outlines in her biography, but at the same time I wish there was not this relentless push to only defend women that we assert 'deserve' defense, on the premise they were entirely selfless, accepted every insult with grace, never kept any grudges, never had personal ambitions (the actions she took during the queenships of those you mentioned would suggest otherwise), mixed emotions, or conflicting loyalties; that we could acknowledge that acknowledging the agency of historic women also means acknowledging they were capable of making mistakes.