#gods of violence

[metalsongoftheday]

Thursday, November 23: Kreator, "Army of Storms"

Gods of Violence was more than just a continuation of Kreator’s remarkable hot streak- it was an escalation and elevation of the simultaneously manic, focused and hooky aggression Mille Petrozza, Ventor and crew had been consistently delivering since Violent Revolution all the way back in 2001, and turned out to be something of a late-career masterpiece.  There was a bit more of a groove to “Army of Storms”, but it still kicked ass mightily, with Petrozza snarling and gargling in fine form and the band sounding so purposeful they were basically undeniable.  There was a ruthless efficiency to Kreator at their prime, and the track was of a piece with their recent material while also amplifying the signal with a balance of tightness and frazzled fury.

[stayallnite]

nowplaying Apocalypticon by Kreator out of Gods Of Violence

[mipexch]

I WAS MADE FOR YOU // YOU WERE MADE FOR ME

[ruporas]

your love returns in tragedy (ID in alt)

[azuremist]

TME and TMA as intersexist terms: as written by an intersex transfem

I’ve had a few different people in my inbox asking me why I view these terms the way I do. In particular, why I claim it’s intersexist. So, I thought I’d lay out a few examples, so everyone can understand where I’m coming from.

Imagine an intersex woman. She was assigned female at birth by her doctors, and was able to go about her childhood as a woman with no inclination that anything was amiss. Sure, she didn’t experience certain parts of puberty, but puberty was different for everyone, right?

But, later in life, she learns she has Turner syndrome. This is an intersex condition where a woman has only one X chromosome, rather than the usual two.

Soon after she learns this, she finds that laws are being made to attempt to keep trans women out of women’s spaces (often specifically sports) which use chromosomes as a defining factor of womanhood.

Would this intersex person be considered “transmisogyny affected”? She has been raised as a cisgender woman with no problems regarding being ‘clocked’, but she is also a direct target of transmisogynistic laws. She lies in a gray area.

Now, let’s go to another intersex person. Imagine an intersex man with PAIS. AIS is an intersex condition where babies are born with testes and XY chromosomes, but their body is immune to or can’t respond to androgens (which includes testosterone). Intersex people with partial AIS (PAIS) often develop a vulva and clitoris during puberty.

This intersex person identifies as a man, and he was assigned male at birth. However, his body does not produce testosterone, and he went through a feminizing puberty. To the average eye, he appears to be a woman now because of this.

Would this intersex person be considered “transmisogyny affected?” He was assigned male at birth, and now appears to be a woman, much like many transfems. However, if many saw how he looks now, stating that he is a male, they would probably clock him as transmasc. He was raised as a boy until puberty, and then faced astrozcization from his peers when he began a puberty that feminized him. What he was facing was a form of intersexism where transmisogyny was playing a huge part. Does his childhood matter? Can one become TME over time, when they were TMA as a child? Again, he lies in a gray area, where the answer is not quite so simple.

What about the “opposite”, per se — an intersex woman who had a masculinizing puberty? She has aromatase deficiency, which means that many ‘male’ hormones (which would usually be converted to ‘female’ hormones) would remain unconverted. She identifies as a woman, and was identified as a female at birth and was raised, until puberty, as a female. But now, she would be clocked as a trans woman upon looking at her. What does that make her? Is it different from the previous example? How and why? This intersex person also lies in a gray area. How she should be described with these terms is not clear.

And keep in mind, these are all relatively simple examples. All of the examples I listed self-identify as cisgender. But there are intersex people who are trans in any direction you can imagine.

If that last example identified as a trans woman, because she is now clocked as one, would you be able to say she’s wrong for that? What about if she identified as transmasculine, because of her experience with puberty? What if she’s multigender, bigender or genderfluid, and says she’s both transmasc and transfem because of her complicated experiences? Would that make her a TMA transmasculine person? But I thought that transmascs were all TME? That’s how it’s so often framed, anyway.

The reason why these questions are so difficult to answer is because these terms were not made with intersex people in mind. Very real intersex transfems were pushed to the wayside in favor of centering the perisex view of transgenderism. Intersex people are nothing but an inconvenient little afterthought, annoying perisex people with their demand for “inclusion” and “consideration”. (As per usual.)

You cannot simply make a new gender binary and say, “No, really, this time everyone fits into these two categories! Forcing people to confine themselves to these two rigid labels which are shown as opposites, and as never interacting, will definitely include everyone this time!!” No matter what the contents of the new binary is, it’s not going to work, because sex and gender alike are too complicated for that. There will always be people in the gray area.

This isn’t even getting into the fact that these terms, for all intents and purposes, seem to have been popularized by and associated with the Baeddelism movement around 2017, which was essentially “Radical Feminism 2: We’re Trans Women, So It’s Fine!” This movement is known for chronic villainization of trans men and non-binary people who aren’t transfem. (They act like this with cis people too, but noticeably less so than they do with non-transfem trans people. How curious.) Think along the lines of how regular radfems treat all men (and who they deem to be men) as inherently morally disgusting scum who deserve to be attacked.

Methinks that maybe these terms aren’t the neutral, fact-based descriptors of oppression that many people nowadays tout them to be, considering that.

So, yeah. “Transmisogyny exempt” and “transmisogyny affected” as terms: not even once. Listen to intersex people, stop trying to make sex and gender into binaries, and for the love of God, stop drinking the queer seperationist koolaid!

[drenched-in-sunlight]

i love the DLC man

[bixels]

Scary Sunset.

I'm concepting things way outta order in this story, but I'm sure you can piece things together. Context is for a storybeat where, after defeating and capturing Adagio (thus having all three sirens in her possession), Sunset enacts her revenge plot to release the sirens on Canterlot as Thea discovers she's been manipulated. In a confrontation, the two scuffle and fight over the siren orbs while Sunset struggles with her conflicting wants and emotions.

[prokopetz]

One of the pieces of feedback I'd received on the previous revision of Eat God is that the introductory text didn't clearly communicate what the game's big-picture deal is. I'm hoping this rewrite makes it clear!

(Image transcript under the cut.)

Introduction

Eat God is a game about being on the outside. It revolves around the Folk, beings who stand for every small, funny-looking creature in every game that insists small, funny-looking creatures are morally okay to kill, every goblin and kobold and imp, all reimagined here as members of the same impossibly varied, self-created people. Each player will take on the role of one of the Folk, different from any other, and navigate the world from their knee-high perspective.

Of course, player characters in Eat God aren't just any small, goblin-like critters. They're also God-eaters, practitioners of an esoteric discipline – part existential philosophy, part martial art – that comes with both fantastical abilities and big questions: namely, what does it mean to eat God?

Is “God” the systems of oppression we build to keep others down, and eating God means throwing off those chains?

Is “God” the culmination of an error in our understanding of reality, and eating God means finding another way to be?

Or is “God” just a great big tyrant in the sky, and eating God means exactly what you think it means?

As a God-eater, your journey to find out will take you from place to place, with each destination presenting potential answers, usually in the form of someone being ground under someone else's boot. Owing to your limited outsider's perspective, your interventions may not always help, at least not in the ways you intend, but they'll definitely ensure that those who benefit from the status quo are having a bad time.

Or, in less elevated terms, Eat God is a game about a bunch of gender-ambiguous muppety things with bullshit super powers wandering around causing problems on purpose. If you cause enough, you might even accomplish something.

[shelfperson]

okay but WHYYY is no one talking about louis and daniel WHYYYYYYYYYY is no one talking about the greatest grandpa4grandpa relationship known to man and i don’t even mean romantically i mean in the most basic human platonic level their relationship is FASCINATING.

like louis SAUGHT HIM OUT after FIFTY YEARS he FOUND HIS BOY, this horrible infant who DID NOT UNDERSTAND A THING HE TOLD HIM, who saw his raw, decades-old pain and wanted in on it, AND HE GOES BACK FOR HIM BECAUSE HE KNOWS HE’S CHANGED. he can understand now. he can help him find the truth.

and like, they’re both absolutely terrified by each other because they’re both uniquely skilled at getting under each other’s skin and finding that truth (and also because… louis could just up and eat daniel anytime but shhhh…) and it’s because they UNDERSTAND EACH OTHER. louis’s interviewing daniel as much as daniel’s interviewing him, just. pulling teeth from each other’s head, trying to pull out all the rot with such violence and cruelty (from both of them!! daniel is a cockwallop!!) but they want to help each other they CARE ABOUT EACH OTHER.

LIKE THIS????

THIS FUCKING SHIT?????

GAGGED ME. RUINED ME. I HAD TO STOP AND TAKE A WALK AROUND THE ROOM.

(the gifs are from @loumands account btw. great work my guy)

[anthonysperkins]

Brokeback Mountain (2005) dir. Ang Lee The Living End (1992) dir. Gregg Araki Dry Wind (2020) dir. Daniel Nolasco Fireworks (1947) dir. Kenneth Anger The Sergeant (1968) dir. Dennis Murphy Tom at the Farm (2013) dir. Xavier Dolan God's Own Country (2017) dir. Francis Lee Lonesome (2022) dir. Craig Boreham Moonlight (2016) dir. Barry Jenkins Wandering Heart (2021) dir. Leonardo Brzezicki

[achillesbeloathed]

Such an underrated Achilles moment is him cutting off his hair to place in Patroclus' hands before lighting his funeral pyre. Like, listen listen listen, the main reason our boy grew his hair long at all is because his father promised it to the river-god Spercheus upon his safe return home. Please. Peleus promised to sacrifice his son's beautiful hair in exchange for his beautiful son's homecoming. And Achilles, fucking Achilles (beloved/beloathed), cuts it all off to give to Patroclus on his final journey, because he knows, he knows, the river-god won't fulfill his father's request. Because Achilles won't let him. Because in that moment, Achilles already knows he won't be coming home.

[archdevilsupreme]

starring in Ice Nine Kills' "A Work Of Art"

[vaguely-concerned]

sometimes I think of all the on-the-surface warm, well-meaning but deeply ineffectual advice and attention john gives harrow through harrow the ninth (make some soup and get some sleep! get a hobby! don't be so hard on yourself! self care harrow! as long as I need take no actual responsibility in this relationship whatsoever I would have loved to be your dad!) set up against the stark truth that with his other hand he has been staging her attempted horrific murder again and again and again like a living nightmare on the logic that it will 'put her down or fix her'. and then I find that I wish there is a hell. a special hell where twitch streamers turned necromantic death emperors go

[moghedien]

Minthara says “in Her name” when you first meet her and she’s following the Absolute but when you recruit her and she expresses that she no longer follows any god, but she still has an intact paladin oath, and she says “in your name” occasionally because she’s no longer Lolth’s paladin or the Absolute’s paladin, she’s your paladin

[themetalgodsmeltdownposts]

(The Metal Gods Meltdown)