#he's just the current best example of one of the many ways the judging in this sport is fucked

[psychic-waffles]

i am just so tired

judges pretending ilia has higher pcs that YUMA AND SHUN just so he can finish 20 POINTS AHEAD of everyone else at the end???? what is the point??????? he would have won anyway!!!

ilia is a good skater, his tech score is obviously higher than anyone elses (that boy can fucking jump), and genuinely he deserves a fair amount of the medals he's gotten just from that (whether I like it or not), but what he absolutely shouldn't have is the highest pcs in a competition. it just does everyone a disservice and takes away the whole point of any of this

again ilia would still be on the podium at every competition, he still would have got gold here, but it would have been at least a fairer fight for everyone else. also in the long run it would also give both ilia and everyone else more incentive to become more rounded skaters, it makes the whole sport better

this sport is so fucked (part 9675323346568)

[alpaca-clouds]

Sypha as the Paragon

I will openly admit. I will always be confused by people, who call Netflix Castlevania nihilistic or cynical. Because... It really is not, is it?

The usual argument goes, that it is cynical/nihilistic mostly for showing cycles of violence. But that does not make it either thing. And it is one of those "media literacy" things, that I wish people would understand. (Because no, CV is not the only show suffering from that criticism while actually telling a very hopeful story.)

Usually the people will argue about this because of season 3. Aka: All the storylines (with the exception of Isaac's arc) in S3 ending in betrayal. The people then will further argue that either the story did dirty by especially Lenore, but possibly also Taka, Sumi and the Judge, or that those characters are the absolute worst and deserve to die.

But I cannot help but feel that both attempts are actually really bad takes.

So, let me talk about Sypha. Because it is fairly clear that Sypha is the paragon of the series. Which is interesting. Because one should think that Trevor or Alucard would be the paragons of the show. Sure, in some way Alucard takes a paragon role in season 4. But for the most part Sypha is the paragon of the series.

A paragon usually is the hero character in a story, who not just does all the heroic stuff, but also more than anything is exemplary for the "moral of the story". Very often they will also go on and inspire other people to do the same.

And that is the point: This is Sypha. It is not Trevor or Alucard, who are examplary for the moral of the story, it is Sypha. She is the one to do good not for any personal reasons, not for any cynical reasons, but because it is right. Because it is right to help people.

What makes her the paragon, though, is that the story does proof her to be right. In the end she converts the people around her to those believes, which is most notably in Trevor of course. Because he does start out as a cynical nihilist - but in the end is willing to die for this greater cause.

More importantly, though: The story validates her believes. It does end up confirming again and again, that while in hard times so many people will suffer and struggle, people in generall can and will be good - and do right.

Okay, but so what about the betrayels?

Simple. Kinda simple at least. It is our old favorite topic. Or rather the topic that keeps coming up in current media so often: Cycles of violence/abuse. This is the clearest in Taka and Sumi, because we know their story. They were slaves. They were abused. They are probably (at least judging by their designs) additionally from a group that was marginalized in Japan at the time. They indeed only know people lying to them and betraying them. And because of it they do the same in return.

With Lenore it is a bit more complicated. Because with her everything is subtext. While it is fairly likely that she is Scottish and hence the entire war in her Backstory that we know about has been linked to the first attempt at Scottish independence, we can just guess about everything else. But lets face it: We know what happened to noble girls who got taken prisoner by the English during wars.

And while there is not a tragic story to the Judge, he also is an example of how hard times provide those best cover for those corrupted by power.

In the end, Sypha (and also Lisa) are the ones who might as well turn to the audience to tell the moral: "Make the world better, and people can be good."

Hells, just to confirm it, they also make sure to hammer it home in season 4. With both Trevor and Isaac having their monologues about "building a better world", and "building a future for people to live in".

It would be cynical/nihilistic if what the story here said was: "Welp, some people will be assholes and they will inevitably get you at some point. Better be careful." But that is not what the series is saying. What it is saying is: "The world out there is hard, and some people know nothing but hardship. They will not know any better but to hurt others. But if we made the world better, they would not be forced into this situation."

Lenore is a tragic figure. Taka and Sumi are tragic figures. That is the point. They did not need to be "evil". But in the world they lived, they had no choice.

[waitmyturtles]

Pain, Suffering, and Narratives in Some Asian Dramas/BLs (An Utterly Un-Scholastic, Highly Personal Big Meta)

I’ve been meditating on the topic of pain and suffering in dramas over the last few weeks, as conversations across Tumblr have been taking place regarding the success (or not) of the Our Skyy 2 x Bad Buddy x A Tale of Thousand Stars episodes. I can’t help but connect these thoughts to some of the fabulous older shows I’ve been watching in my Old GMMTV Challenge watchlist project, where I’m catching up on older Thai BLs in order to better understand the fabulous works that we’re seeing airing now. This Big Meta in part comes out of my having just watched He’s Coming To Me and Dark Blue Kiss, but I was also very deeply inspired by a Japanese BL that many of us here have fallen in love with, Our Dining Table, that features a poignant moment recognizing that feeling pain is a necessity in feeling love for another person -- that accepting pain and suffering is a part of the life we decide to live, from an Asian cultural perspective.

I’m using some big generalities here, so let me explain where I’m coming from. During certain large portions of my life, I’ve explored either becoming a Buddhist, or at least practiced Buddhism, particularly Zen Buddhism. While the world of Western capitalism has unfortunately taken up the majority of my current time/life, I do still have a desire to learn more about the history of Buddhism and try to incorporate some kind of practice in my daily life.

The reason why I offer that caveat is that a core of teaching in at least the spaces of Buddhism that I’ve been privy to, is the recognition of pain and suffering in one’s life. Suffering is a core tenet of Buddhism, one of the Four Noble Truths, and one that a human being does good deeds or makes merit in light of (as we see quite often in our beloved BLs) in order to receive “good” karma for a happy existence in this life or the next. (Again, mad generalizations here, but you get the point.)

I’ve been thinking about this because I often wonder if us Western viewers (I count myself as one, as an Asian-American) are too demanding for linear, clean, direct, and/or happy communication, narratives, and endings, particularly in the realm of Asian BLs, in regards to either romantic love and/or love from one’s nuclear parents/family. I think about this very much in the context of the Asian BL genre, where queerness -- as accepted, OR NOT, in Asian societies, friend groups, and families -- may indicate an existence that is not necessarily a happy one. 

There are other issues by way of demands from fans that often determine the outcome of a BL script, such as shipper demands for overtly sexual content. What I’m proposing here is that, in my opinion, some of the best dramas/BLs from Asia are rooted in a reflection and acceptance of the tenets of suffering as a natural part of Asian life and, subsequently, Asian art. I further propose that because of that acceptance of suffering, that we — Western viewers — are often left potentially feeling unsatisfied or unfulfilled by a particular ending of a drama. I posit that the linear/binary/clear outcomes that Western audiences so often demand are limiting in comparison to the non-binary, non-linear journeys and conclusions of art that Asian filmmakers can reach in their work, vis à vis à general cultural understanding that pain and suffering are a part of daily life.

Before I give a drama example, let me use one from real life, that is so very often reflected in art: filial piety. I wrote about filial piety quite a bit in my reviews of Double Savage, a non-BL from Thailand that focused on the plight of a discarded son who was judged by his father as a jinx.

When I try to explain to Western friends that Asian parental love is very often conditional (I myself have experienced it, and my experiences mirror those of my friends), I experience a lot of denial.

“There is NO WAY your parents don’t love you.”  “There is NO WAY your parents will ever give up on you. Even if they treat you badly, they love you.”  “In the West, we ALWAYS end up loving our children. That’s what society demands of PARENTS. We’re CONDITIONED to be like that.”

A major cultural competency issue that Western therapists face with Asian clients is when Western therapists say to Asian clients who are having family issues, “why don’t you just talk to your parents about what you’re feeling?” Talking to Asian parents about a child’s feelings, in MANY instances, is not realistic. The language of that kind of emotion may not even exist. AND, there are unspoken social boundaries AGAINST children having those conversations with their parents in the first place. To have those conversations would very well ROCK the foundation on which Asian families are structured.

My parents may love me — the dad in Double Savage mayyyy have loved his son? — but an Asian parent like that, so rooted in their JUDGEMENT AGAINST an offspring, will often not budge. Time and time again, my Asian friends and family will talk about how they felt unloved as a child -- especially if their skin was darker, if their siblings were more successful in school, if they were a middle child, etc. VERY often, our Asian parents don’t know what us children do by way of work -- my parents don’t know anything about my work, for instance.

The Western perspective and social demands for a STYLE of loving one’s children in a very particular, involved, and empathic way -- those cultural expectations don’t necessarily exist in Asia. So we see parents like, say, Non’s father in Dark Blue Kiss; or Korn’s father in Double Savage; or ESPECIALLY Uea’s mom in Bed Friend, a fantastic example of an Asian parent who takes PERSONALLY every aspect of her son’s social and sexual “differences,” blames him for those differences, and accuses him of ruining HER life vis à vis how he was born to be the way that he is.

And yet, at least for Korn and Uea -- we see those children, for the majority of their dramas, continuing to devote themselves to their parents. Because filial piety -- the Asian cultural and social demand for RESPECTING one’s parents above all else -- is existent and EXPECTED of almost EVERY living Asian, no matter where you live on the continent or your various diasporas. 

The equation is: even if you suffer at the hands of your parents, even if you don’t receive unconditional love and empathy from your parents, you must sacrifice in order to respect and serve your parents. You can imagine how much therapy even one individual would need to process that -- if that individual even ALLOWED themselves to think about what was happening, which oftentimes doesn’t even happen. 

I’m not saying that filial piety EQUALS suffering. What I’m saying is that the practice of filial piety will almost always ASSUME a level of suffering that one must undertake to participate in the practice of honoring one’s parents.

Where I felt this *assumption* most strongly and recently was in my viewings of three Aof Noppharnach shows: He’s Coming To Me, Dark Blue Kiss, and Our Skyy 2 x Bad Buddy x A Tale of Thousand Stars, but I think Double Savage and Bed Friend also fall into this category as well. Very quickly:

1) HCTM was rooted in storytelling around the practice of Thai-Chinese Buddhism. Thun’s suffering was apparent: he was fatherless, he was gay, and could see ghosts. AS WELL, Med’s suffering was that he didn’t know how he had died, and why he was being held in purgatory before moving on to his next life. 

2) Dark Blue Kiss was rooted in internalized homophobia. My big review of DBK is coming next week, but quickly, between the two main couples (PeteKao and SunMork), you had internalized homophobia playing various roles of emotional INTERPLAY, that AFFECTED the external emotional demonstrations of the character -- particularly in Pete, who was viscerally working on becoming a calmer person, but was triggered by Kao’s internalized homophobia to not be open about their relationship, and Pete’s jealousy subsumed him. DBK is the only show I’m mentioning here that has a clean happy ending for all couples involved, but more on that in a second.

3) OS2 x BBS x ATOTS, on the Pat and Pran side, was rooted in a clear but indirect conflict between Pat and Pran about openness and independence. If Pat and Pran had been open about their relationship (à la Pete and Kao) -- would Pat have needed to sound tough to his engineering friends that Pran *depended* on Pat to close loops? And on the Tian and Phupha side -- there is plenty we don’t know about Phupha’s past to make judgements, but I think it’s safe to say that he grew up in such a rural environment in Thailand as to make him assume that coming out and meeting his partner’s parents was an non-reality for the majority of their relationship, until the end of the OS2 series. The journey to get to the point of the ring was a tough one, particularly for Tian, who wanted more openness.

4) Both Double Savage and Bed Friend seem to end happily, especially for Uea and King in Bed Friend. But: Uea loses his parent. Yes -- he NEEDED to lose his mom, because of how toxic she was. But from an Asian family structure perspective -- he only has his sister by the end of that traumatic journey, which is not necessarily an IDEAL or complete ending. The bonds among Korn, Win, and Rung are permanently affected by the behavior of Korn and Win’s dad in Double Savage. The ending is a copacetic one -- they have survived, and will learn to survive together, after all the trauma they have lived through. But it’s not necessarily a HAPPY one. Both of these endings do not necessarily reflect the holistic ideal of the Asian family structure.

I emphasize all of this because, as I said earlier: I think a Western demand to CLOSE LOOPS in Asian dramas is unrealistic.

In Asian life (big generalization, but let me roll with it): you are angry at your parents, and you process it internally, very often without any help, and after a couple days, things go back to the way they were. The children do not demand change from their parents.

In OS2 x BBS, what I DIDN’T SEE -- and, from this framework, what I argue that I DIDN’T *NEED* TO SEE -- were any clarifying conversations between Pat and Pran about how either of them would CHANGE for their relationship. The biggest confession we got was Pat telling Pran, “without you, there is no me,” and Pran quietly agreeing (thank you to @lurkingteapot and @dimplesandfierceeyes for the incredible post on the improved translation of “I can’t live without you”).

But throughout the episodes, we saw their existence together, and arguably, their conditions -- how each of them has organized himself to comport to the other’s immediate needs. How Pran’s larger burden of keeping in the closet to keep his nuclear family structure stable kept them from being totally out, and how Pran designed fibs to be able to have at least one public demonstration of love between him and Pat on stage. They know they cannot solve intergenerational trauma in the span of a series. They’re still closeted two years later. And throughout all of this: how Pat digests Pran’s needs, and keeps his (Pat’s) own needs for openness at bay. We know he feels pain, too, when he makes his confession to Pran in Pha Pun Dao. We know he’s watching Pran as Pran hesitates to put on the bruise cream.

I feel that Pat’s acceptance of this existence is both heart-rending and utterly beautiful from the perspective of seeing Aof’s work as *Asian* art. I feel like, as an Asian, that I KNOW, that PAT KNOWS, what Pran has to lose. Pran has A LOT to lose. And so, Pat -- instead of demanding for outing and openness -- will hold what Pran needs him to hold. He knows when Pran is grumpy, and needs to be grumpy. And Pran’s got a lot to deal with. He’s got so much that he’ll need to go to Singapore, likely to get separation from his mother -- and that will result in him and Pat being separated (and I’m intentionally not analyzing Pran’s need for space from Pat here, but I think we can safely argue that, too, as Pat’s helpful attitude may smother Pran at times) (and there’s also the issue of the nuclear pain that Pat himself may feel at losing trust in his father for his father’s past foibles). 

After the OS2 episodes, I didn’t need to know THE REASONS, the stark REASONING for why Pran needed to go to Singapore -- because, indirectly, it was already very clear to me that these young men were already holding tremendous burdens. Singapore, for Pran AND for Pat, could have ultimately been a motivator for growth. But I don’t need to know this. All I know is that they continue to have various levels of pain that they will be dealing with in their nascent adult lives.

While Dark Blue Kiss ULTIMATELY had happy endings -- how it got there was PAINFUL. Kao was ROOTED in fear that he would upend his family’s stability, while being the breadwinner. He was held back by extremely traditional role expectations of an older son. And he had no communication with his mother about straying from those roles. Pete’s dad served as the first -- and, I’d argue, maybe BL’s first -- paradigm-breaker as a parent, being SO open about his son’s queerness as to encourage healthy sex practices. But what I argue in this thesis is that up until the very last, bitter end, Kao was relegated to ASSUME that he would live in pain. His expectation was that Pete would ride with him. Pete couldn’t take it anymore and bubbled over. And Kao was forced to make a decision, for Pete’s sake, literally, to BE open, and to save the relationship. That shit ain’t easy.

Lots of folks who have read my posts on this site know that I appreciate a good Asian drama rooted in family and/or community trauma, like 10 Years Ticket. It’s the way in which Asian filmmakers depict this trauma that speaks very much to my life, my culture, and my viewpoint on what’s realistic in this world, and how that reality can be depicted in art. What I’ve found in watching Asian dramas is... I don’t always want clean endings. I don’t always want loops closed.

Sometimes, Asian kids can’t talk to their parents (Pran, Kao). If you grow up like that, you don’t immediately learn the language of intimacy for your family members, your friends, your lovers (Pran’s struggles after BBS/ep5, Thun’s coming out and not knowing the words for it). It might be EASY, or culturally UNQUESTIONABLE, to not argue with your parents about the ways in which they engage with their children (Korn, Win, Pran). Sometimes, to make a break in order to survive, you need to leave a toxic family member behind, which is NOT an ideal scenario (Uea). 

Sometimes, you lose the love of your life (Ueda-san in Our Dining Table). Sometimes, you fall in love with someone — and you find that you can’t *exist* without them (Pat to Pran). And you have to live with the pain. I might even posit that the risk of that pain makes the love you have, either for the person living or the person passed, that much more meaningful to you.

I watch Asian dramas because I don’t feel like Asian filmmakers are subject to the Western demand to clean up all emotionally questionable loose ends. This is not When Harry Met Sally. Harry and Sally should have only remained friends, and not gotten married -- even Nora Ephron and Rob Reiner knew that -- but they also realized that Western audiences would not accept such an ending.

“The script initially ended with Harry and Sally remaining friends and not pursuing a romantic relationship because she felt that was "the true ending", as did Reiner. Eventually, Ephron and Reiner realized that it would be a more appropriate ending for them to marry, though they admit that this was generally not a realistic outcome.”

If I don’t get clean clarity in Asian dramas, I’m okay with it. My mind switches to the pain POV, that relativity mindset. Everyday life in Asian cultures can handle the weight of the painful and sufferable unknown. And that’s why I love these shows. 

And, OF COURSE, not ALL Asian dramas are like this! Cherry Magic ended wonderfully. Old Fashion Cupcake ended beautifully. KinnPorsche ended sexily, if not a little confusedly (are they related? kinda? or not? whatever?). Minato’s Laundromat ended happily -- although we’ll see their relationship pain points in the upcoming second season. And we see relationship pain points in the ongoing drama of Shiro and Kenji’s relationship in What Did You Eat Yesterday -- all while they share their happy nightly meals together at their kitchen table.

Life is complicated. I posit that Asian dramas, for my taste, satisfaction, and cultural relativity, do a much better job at depicting that complicatedness than the West can ever do, and that’s why I stand so often on my soapbox to encourage Western viewers to understand these Asian cultural touchpoints more -- to learn about how we’ve accepted pain and suffering as an automatic given in our Asian lives, from our cultures, our spiritual practices, and from living amongst each other.

[bigboysdrinkmilk]

More ppl has been deported under Biden than Trump, which is kinda funny in its irony

I don’t know why the anons on this site have decided I should be the receptacle for all of Joe Biden’s perceived sins. Maybe they just like hearing me talk.

The only time in recent memory I have referenced deportation with regards to the current political climate is that Trump has stated he wants to deport American Muslims after Hamas’ attack on Israel in October.

“Deportation” is a morally neutral legal action. There are plenty of “good” reasons to deport someone—if, say, you’ve identified they are spying for a foreign power or if they had fled to your country to avoid rightful prosecution by the legal systems of their own country.

And there are plenty of “bad” reasons to deport someone—because you are targeting them because of their sincerely held religious beliefs, as an example.

Specifically I would guess that you are referencing Title 42 deportations, of which Biden does have a higher total number. But Biden also experienced a higher total volume of immigrants at the border, and when you take the total number of deportations as a percentage of encounters, you start to see a little different story.

Along the way, Biden has worked to end Trump’s inhumane “Remain in Mexico” policy, which lead to the kidnap, rape, and abuse of more than 1,500 migrants. A Trump-appointed judge ruled Biden had improperly ended the policy, forcing the government back into enforcing it, and the Biden Administration took the fight to the Supreme Court and won, ending the policy officially.

During Trump’s administration, he intentionally separated families at the border. At least 3,900 children were separated from their families.

Biden has worked to reunite the majority of those families—2,500 children have been returned to their parents so far—and rolled out family reunification programs for citizens of certain countries - including Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala and Colombia - who have relatives in the US.

Trump made little use of parole—the system by which migrants may be allowed into the country even if they do not currently qualify for a visa—and has said he would end parole status for migrants in his future term.

Biden has been one of the most pro-parole Presidents in history, and as many as 30,000 migrants are able to fly in to the US per month through the program, including vulnerable people from Afghanistan and Ukraine, in particular when they are found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture in their home country.

So, as I have said in post after post, I ask you again—

Will we neglect the *good* because it is not perfect? Will we embrace the *bad* because we are unsatisfied with *good?* Will we risk the ruination of our democratic norms because in a difficult political environment, Biden did the best that was available and politically viable at the time?

Vote blue this November. And when you do, remember that you’re doing it to keep families together, that you’re doing it to grant 30,000 people parole status every month, that you’re doing it to end the inhumane Remain in Mexico policy. And remember that you’re doing it not because the results will be perfect, but because they will be a step forward.

The road will be bumpy. But every bump is worth it.

[qe-podfic]

Check out the cover illustration for Chapter 2 of Quantum Entangled. Made by the wonderfully talented @commentdismal

So impressive. The rendering took my knees. /pos

Excerpt below cut:

Crowley uneasily drifted into wakefulness with a crick in his neck, a mild hangover making itself apparent via an insistent thumping at the back of his skull. The lingering stench of a headache was drumming inside his head like he was the unfortunate desk assigned to a kid with ADHD. All things considered, it wasn’t the worst way Crowley had ever woken up. It didn’t even make the top ten. That’s why, despite not knowing exactly what reason he had for falling asleep on his own damn couch, he wasn’t all that concerned. Slowly, like a ping-pong ball through molasses, memories of the previous night trickled into his awareness.

Aziraphale was here. Aziraphale was here and in his bed. Aziraphale was here and in his bed and wearing his clothes. At once, Crowley realised he had made a grave tactical error.

Drunk Crowley and sober Crowley were only the same person by virtue of the fact that they unfortunately shared a body. Currently, sober Crowley was cursing—quite creatively, mind you—the very notion of that unavoidable fact. Always trying to make the best out of a bad situation, he decided to approach the morning with an impudent unfuckedness. As the saying went: ‘Not fucked over was the one who was unfucked.’ (-Confucius, probably.)

Crowley checked his watch, surprised to find that it was no later than eleven am. He wanted breakfast, or brunch, or just a nice package for the calories he depended on to… Y’know… Live. And it would be rude, if he was cooking for himself, to not at least offer something to his—rather reluctant, he remembered, mortified—guest.

Each stride rendered as unfucked as he could manage, he made his way to the kitchen. First, he used his hideously expensive coffee machine (a ROCKET MOZZAFIATO—imported from Italy) to make one flash bastard of a latte, with the ultimate goal of kicking his A1 adenosine receptors into a more coherent semblance of order. E.g. not receiving adenosine.

Then, he took a wok from his large and impressive array of pots and pans, like a gallery of hung men above the island bench top, and placed it on his induction stove. The stove itself was seamlessly blended into the counter in such a way that it made people helpless to envision burnt hands and accidental emergency-room phone calls. The sleek black design (because Crowley could be sold on almost anything if you made it sleek and black enough) was self-aggrandising in the same way that many circumspect judges on certain cooking shows were. The kitchen as a whole, really, was a lustrous example of the kind of high-tech cookhouse you’d find in the back of a Michelin star restaurant. 

Grabbing a few eggs from the fridge, Crowley scoured for omelette ingredients that were both generally palatable as to, hopefully, not be offensive to Aziraphale’s tastes—whatever they were—and impressive enough to make Crowley seem like he, at the very least,  knew what he was doing on a culinary level. Sticking to his mantra of unfuckedness, Crowley picked out some bacon, cheese, and spinach, along with various herbs and spices from the pantry. Crowley liked omelettes as a general rule. The ratio of effort to edible nutrition was highly favourable—having spent most of his life as a university student with no spare energy to waste on frivolous flambés, brûlées, or any other such fancy French dish.

Making an omelette wasn’t a difficult process. There were two steps; step one was to put all of your ingredients (chopped or unchopped depending on how groggy you were when preparing it) into the pan. Step two was to wait. Heat and time. They were the universal duo that laid claim to the title of ‘instigator’ in most molecular reactions.

Obedient to this philosophy of unfuckedness, heat and time, Crowley chopped bacon, cracked eggs, tore spinach, and altogether cooked a damn good meal. With the two omelettes cooling on their respective plates (the plates were square shaped and black because Crowley refused to be acquainted with the typical agreement of things) he ventured through his cupboards on a mission for tea. Aziraphale seemed like the tea-drinking kind. Finding an abandoned box of loose-leaf French Earl Grey, the label slightly sun faded, he put the kettle on.

Proud of his domestic accomplishments, he set off to wake Aziraphale. He hoped the comestible peace offering would be a balm for any of the awkwardness left over, lingering, from last night.

“Knock, knock,” he greeted onomatopoeically, tapping on the bedroom door.

“Urmf—Crowley?” came the quiet reply, obvious in how freshly awake it sounded. Crowley opened the door, just a crack—not enough to see into the room but enough to let some light in—before chuckling mildly.

“Morning, Angel. I made breakfast. Tea is available too, if you want some.” There was a muffled sound of agreement, and then the distinct shuffling of someone getting out of bed. Crowley padded his way to the kitchen to give the man some privacy.

He was halfway through his own omelette, near-afternoon sun shining down on him from large windows on the east side of the kitchen, when Aziraphale made his presence known. With a curt clearing of the throat, he stood, unsure of himself, at the edge of the kitchen’s connecting hall.

Crowley was fucked. Oh, he was so utterly fucked. Aziraphale made an innocuous image, in Crowley's home, in Crowley's clothes; but that did not stop the racing ambitions of Crowley's mind. Aziraphale wasn't to know this, though. The Queen shirt hung loose on him, gently draping over one shoulder but leaving the other exposed. Crowley felt like a Victorian—or the man responsible for the dress codes of high school girls—scandalised at the revelation of flesh. He reprimanded himself for his undignified train of thought. Aziraphale deserved more than to be ogled like a piece of meat at the snout of a hungry, hungry hound. He couldn't possibly help that his hair was bed-messy, nor the fact that it did terrible things to Crowley's sense of composure. Nonetheless, Crowley would survive. He wasn't a wanton beast. Humanity afforded him—in theory—some amount of dignity.

“Your plate’s over there. I tried to guess how you take your tea; is ‘two sugars and a splash of milk’ anywhere at all close?” he asked Aziraphale, swallowing a bite to hide the raspy quality of his own voice. The astonishment on Aziraphale's face answered a simple ‘yes’. Although, maybe it was astonishment at the breakfast laid out in front of him. It wasn't really a normal move, Crowley reflected sheepishly, to cook a meal for the guy who had just come over for a drunken movie marathon. But Crowley wasn't normal in most things, so he resolutely didn't think about it.

“Yes,” Aziraphale murmured, gaping a little.

“That's exactly how I take it.” The whisper was draped in the kind of mid-morning confusion that only ever occurred after a late night of considerable drinking. He gently cupped the mug, tendrils of steam rising from it in fragrant arches. Sipping the beverage softly, his eyes fluttered shut, simple pleasure oozing from the drop in his shoulders.

“Thank you, Crowley.” His voice was etched in all-too-raw sincerity. He opened his eyes, gazing at him with the kind of look that forced Crowley to turn away.

“Don't thank me. It's the least I could do,” Crowley mumbled weakly. Undeterred, but still feigning propriety, Aziraphale hummed in absent acquiescence. He took the plate with his omelette, looking suddenly affected.

The gentle graze of porcelain plate against the bench top seemed almost reverent, as Aziraphale sat himself on the barstool next to Crowley’s. One thing that Crowley had learnt about Aziraphale—in the heated revelry of their late evening—was that he liked food. No, he didn't just like food. He loved food. Adored food. Damn near worshipped food. As he slowly raised the fork to his lips, Crowley hoped that the sacrifice was fit for the tabernacle of his idolatry.

Aziraphale’s eyes popped open in wide, slightly hedonism-glazed, surprise. 

“Oh—” He almost keened. And, if Crowley wasn't already red in the face, this would have been the inelegant signal that drove blood to the apple of his cheeks.

“Oh! This is simply scrumptious!” Aziraphale praised, made guileless by the distraction of—rather excellent, in his opinion—cuisine. Crowley ducked his head as if trying to bob under the blow of his words.

Untrusting of his vocal cords, Crowley didn't reply, content to revel in silence while Aziraphale finished his meal. The relative quiet gave him the chance to recalibrate after the unexpected misalignment of his neurological circuitry. It was peaceful. Cosy.

Discord:

AO3:

[astroninaaa]

hi thanks for your explainer posts on the legal stuff, they're super interesting! i'm currently studying for the exam you have to take to get into US law schools (since theyre graduate programs here unlike in most places where law is an undergraduate degree) so its really interesting to learn a bit about how the law functions differently in other places!

one thing i'm curious about -- when i first saw the info about cellbit being able to get the twitter info for these accounts, i assumed that he wasn't actually going to go through with suing ALL of them, and it would be more likely that most of them would simply get some sort of cease-and-desist letter instead, with maybe just a couple having full legal processes to use them as examples. However, I saw people on twitter saying that the process is actually a lot more simple than i had assumed and also takes place mostly online, so suing all of them would actually be more realistic than it sounds. do you know anything about that? how likely do you think it is that he actually sues all of these people (and also the other batches of accounts that probably just aren't public yet that hes also gonna go after later lol)

hi anon!!! good luck on your exam, i really really hope you get in!!!! law is So Cool.

yes it is a LOT more simple than that. he wouldn’t need to sue them individually, and in brazil nowadays we do a LOT if not almost all of court/lawsuit work through the internet. mediation meetings are done through zoom. oral sustentation as well. it’s preeeetty chill

if he wants to, i’m absolutely sure he can sue all of them at once pretty easily. it depends on what his strategy is tho. i think sending cease-and-desist letters could also be a good call and probably way easier than suing hundreds of people, because even tho it’s simpler than it sounds, it’s still fucking hard /lh

even tho the crimes committed are basically the same, the degree of fucked up shit said throughout the many accounts and tweets varies quite a bit, so even tho he could sue everyone in the same lawsuit, it would still be 😭😭😭 a MESS and the judge might think the situations are too different bc of that varying degree and ask him to do different lawsuits anyway. so, like, how worth it would it be?

i don’t know how likely it is for him to sue everyone because that depends on him and his lawyer and what they think will work best, but i think he did the most important bit already — which was getting twitter to delete all the tweets, which they already have (they actually turned in to court with all the proof that they deleted everything like, this week, iirc). if he wants to sue everyone, he can, but i think he also can just sue the worst ones and that’d be wayyy easier. there’s also the whole discussion on whether or not he can sue the foreigners. so while he technically could sue everyone, can he sue the non-brazilians? the judge still has to decide that

so yes like technically he can and if he really wants to drive home the point of “you’re not free of consequences for what you say on the internet” he def should, but i think it depends on his strategy here.

[jewishvitya]

CW - talking about antisemitic depictions and about the house elves and the depiction of slavery in the books.

I'm having a frustrating day with a lot of physical pain, so I'm not the best at judging currently if I should be posting all of these thoughts. It's a response to multiple arguments by rude anons that I blocked (not for being rude, for being transphobic), but the arguments themselves stay on my mind and I just. Need this out. Ignore this, it will be all over the place, I'm basically venting. Hoping it'll be the last bit of HP criticism I post.

I'll tag it for you to block, as usual.

I've been asked what I expect of Rowling, since my criticism of the goblins included the books. She already wrote the books, they're printed and they're out there. She can't just change them, criticism does nothing because she has no path to correct her mistake.

First of all, with her transphobia - as far as I'm concerned she has blood on her hands at this point. The way she emboldens transphobia endangers lives and erodes queer rights. Anyone who contributes to the current push against trans people is complicit in trans genocide - and she made herself a symbol of that movement. Even if she did a 180 on her issues with Jewish stereotypes, she wouldn't redeem herself.

But she isn't the only one who wrote a story and then realized that her story has deep issues. What does it look like, if an author doesn't want to perpetuate those?

From what I know of Tolkien (and I know nothing LOTR or anything, just heard this from other Jewish creators who discussed this issue, treat this paragraph like I'm repeating a rumor) - Tolkien did stumble on an antisemitic depiction while writing his dwarves. Then he course-corrected by creating a more complex and nuanced picture of the society in his future works. Basically, he leaned into the idea of his dwarves as a Jewish allegory and made it a better and more respectful allegory. They have wonderful cultural details, like having foreign-language names used outside of their community - and names in their own native language that they call each other. Half of my family comes from France, and my mom was born there. She had a Hebrew name and a legal French name. That's extremely common among Jews in some areas of the world.

This response is what I would have expected if an author cares about being respectful of Jewish people. Acknowledge the issue, and try to do better.

But what if the issue was brought to your attention after you completely finished your story? In that case: "Yes, I'm sorry, I didn't realize I was writing an antisemitic narrative with my depiction of this fantasy race." Support the voices criticizing your work, and apologize. Let it be an example of tropes to avoid, and encourage others to be careful of the same pitfalls.

What you don't do, is act horrified and say "Oh, how could you, I never intended to make the goblins an antisemitic allegory! Surely if I don't mean it, it can't be hurtful!"

Also, if you truly care, you don't then abuse the memory of the holocaust when you write spin-offs of your original story, including its imagery to support a bigoted villain's argument.

Marginalized people understand that not everyone knows what we do. The stereotypes and the harmful ideas that weaved themselves into popular culture are about us. We know that it's invisible to people who aren't the target, and as a result aren't forced to learn these things. To many people, it's just a trope they're used to seeing. Like villains have hooked noses - it's practically a shorthand for an evil character.

All the stories we tell are based in some measure on stories we heard. Narratives and tropes feed off each other between different pieces of media. It's easy to pull together a harmful narrative without realizing, when the tropes that make it up usually go together, and are so common they're everywhere. So we know a person who means no harm can create something really hurtful, without knowing it.

That's why we criticize media: we want you to see and be aware.

In addition to this, I've been accused multiple times of ignoring the fact that these books discuss bigotry and condemn it. I'm not ignoring it, I know they do - or they try to. But Rowling wrote a story against racism without understanding it and without interrogating it in herself. She only knew to condemn it when it's rude and violent and outright hateful. Not the foundations of it.

So, sure, say she didn't mean to write something harmful. What does she do when she learns she did? Nothing. And not just about the issue of the goblins - about everything. I detailed the problems with her depiction of lycanthropy, but she did the same thing with the house elves.

There's lore about creatures called brownies. They'll perform chores for you, but they'd rather not be seen while they do. If you try to pay them, they'll get offended. If you give them clothes, they'll leave. This is a very partial description, but you can see the inspiration here.

And then she turned them into a slave race. They're bound to their enslavers, possessing powerful magic but using it in their service, forced to punish themselves for disobedience and endure extreme abuse. Kreacher actively wishes to have his head put on display when he's too old and weak to be of use.

To show the reader the horrors of freedom for an elf, JKR turned poor Winky into a depressed drunk with no purpose in her life. Winky's story is horrifying.

Only Dobby takes care of Winky for that whole year. She never recovers during it. Then she's made to witness the interrogation of Barty Crouch Jr., which upsets her and causes her distress. As a result, she hears about Crouch's death through a toneless forced confession - and the interrogation continues around her. That same day, she watches the last member of the household she loved have his soul taken by a dementor, and then she's left alone with the body while Dumbledore argues with Fudge. Only after, he sends Madam Pomfrey to do what she can for Winky, and take her to the kitchens where Dobby will take care of her again.

And Rowling wrote all of this. Did she think this is an example that even compliant house elves suffer and get neglected, even by the sympathetic wizards? Was this a lesson that even those who don't seek freedom suffer and lack agency in this system?

No. Rowling turned it into a cautionary tale against freeing slaves. Unless they're "weird" like Dobby.

Maybe she didn't try to be racist, but this fits disturbingly well with the arguments against ending slavery in reality. That enslaved people will turn into aimless drunks. That they need to be enslaved to have purpose. That those who want freedom have something wrong with them.

And I know this was criticized. What was the response to the criticism? Nothing direct as far as I know, but after all of this - there was an article published on Pottermore to argue that Winky's story is a warning against freeing the elves. It was taken down fortunately, but after this article the arguments against freedom are no longer the opinion of characters within the world - it's a message given to us by real people.

She doubles down. Every time. People keep yelling that she had nothing to do with Hogwarts Legacy, she's not responsible for the way it builds on her original canon. Well, she seems to approve of it. It continues painting the same line with the same brush - just bolder.

She doesn't care about the racism, she doesn't care about antisemitism - she just wanted to use the nazis as her easy villains. She doesn't have the imagination for any other kind.

[crazykuroneko]

IWTV Figure Skating AU headcanons

Because I miss figure skating and IWTV is my current hyperfixation. Probably only fellow fs stans understand this, but whatever.

Louis de Pointe du Lac:

His most known program is definitely his The Swan. Choreo: Gubanova's The Swan. Costume: Hanyu's Notte Stellata. Strong skating skills as good as ice dancer, deep knee bent, flexible, so he can do layback ina bauer and difficult spins.

Tend to go to brighter music for short program (jazz, hip hop etc) while doing something heartfelt for free skating.

Pretty consistent as a skater. Keep getting high scores on Skating Skills and Presentation. Unfortunately he doesn't have big quads (only 4T to 4F, when he wants to risk it) and he's Black. so USFSA doesn't really support him and doesn't get that American over scoring. Even though he has saved USA's spots at Worlds etc many times with his consistency (just like Jason Brown)

Lestat de Lioncourt:

Typical European showman. Known for his character free skating programs. Reference: Javier Fernandez (second example). Pretty good skating skills, jump technique is decent. Actually pretty stable jumper, has all big quad jumps except 4A, but he can't focus sometimes so his axis is messed up.

Definitely always brings out the most chaotic programs for Exhibition and they always go viral and give you secondhand embarrassement.

Representing France ofc. Complete with French overscoring. at least 3 times European champion in a row. For drama, the president of French federation is still Didier and they have love/hate relationship. Running his mouth like Scott Moir at press conferences. Sometimes do backflips just to send fuck you to judges if he feels they're underscoring him (usually happen at Worlds, thanks to Russia and USA). He gotta continue that French tradition.

Armand:

For drama he is representing Russia. His coach is Marius. And Marius is basically Eteri, and he's his (current) number one girl.

Has all the quads and he'll backload the heck of them for score (that rule still exists here idc). Skating Skills aren't as good as Loustat but he has a huge TES and Russia fed backing. And almost always land his jumps.

Tend to use warhorses in his programs. Known for his long limbs and fast paced transition. Has been skating since novice and gets called the prodigy since the beginning. References: Yulia, Evgenia.

European champions are always between him and Lestat. They've been rivals since junior. But unfortunately since Marius is Eteri, sometimes he has to skip competitions for injury. He's way more relaxed during exhibition programs

Okay, now if they're a team:

De Pointe du Lac/de Lioncourt:

(Not to be biased but) chemistry on Virtue/Moir level. Definitely representing France, because USFSA is stupid and Lestat points a gun on Didier's head to take Louis. Coached by Zueva.

Combining Louis' elegance and Lestat's character by performing classic Hollywood pieces with storytelling. Debuting with this FD by Virtue/Moir. Ofc they go to the Olympics with this Moulin Rogue program as well, complete with the crotch kissing lift 😏

Definitely has a rumor they're secretly married going for them.

De Pointe du Lac/(insert Armand's last name here):

Unfortunately, no choice other than representing Russia. Coached by Tatiana Tarasova (but she likes Louis don't worry!).

Tend to use haunting classical music. Very synchronized, very classy. Reference: (a must watch!) Gordeeva/Grinkov's iconic Moonlight Sonata. Or Torville/Dean's Bolero.

Bonus: Claudia

Definitely best known for her teenage spirit and her Romeo & Juliet program.

Known for her big jumps, 3A, and musicality. That one girl who goes "I'll beat the men as well. Just watch" Reference: Kostornaia

[commentaryvorg]

The Great Ace Attorney Final Trial Commentary: Day 2, Part 1

This is an ongoing mini-commentary covering the final trial of The Great Ace Attorney (Resolve) in line-by-line detail. It’s written from a perspective of already knowing the full truth of things, so there will be spoilers for facts that only get revealed later on in the trial. This is not a commentary to read along with one’s first playthrough!

(The commentary will update on Tuesdays and Saturdays. Check this blog to find any other parts currently posted, and if it’s not yet finished, follow to catch future updates!)

Now that we’re below the readmore, I can add that this isn’t quite a commentary for everything going on in the final trial. It’s focused specifically on Kazuma and what’s going on in his head, only covering things which are relevant to him in some way (for the most part). I already had a lot to say about him in a big analysis post over on my main blog – but I have even more to say about him during the trial in even more detail, so here we are!

We’re starting day 2 here, aka the first trial day of case 2-5.

Writing the commentary for this day of the trial is going to feel a little odd for me, because I’ve essentially already done it before – just in character as Ryunosuke, instead of as myself. This was a chapter in my AU fic in which this trial day goes off the rails towards the end and Kazuma gets arrested for Gregson’s murder, because he should have been and I am forever salty that it didn’t happen in canon. The purpose of the chapter in the fic, even though it was 90% retreading canon events, was to utilise all the existing buildup the game had that made it seem like things were headed in that direction, so that my AU could actually deliver the payoff it deserved to have. There are so many really good bits that would be so delightful if they were foreshadowing what was going to happen to Kazuma, except for the fact that they aren’t. I am going to be compelled to point all of these out and grumble about them here.

Here's one to get us started, just as Ryunosuke heads into the courtroom.

Ryunosuke:  (Today I battle with another in pursuit of the truth. My best friend, Kazuma Asogi, who I trust more than anyone else in the world.)

Like, yes, this is adorable in and of itself, that Ryunosuke still trusts Kazuma that much even after the way he’s been acting since he came back. But! Imagine how much juicier this line would be if it was followed by Ryunosuke getting Kazuma arrested for murder! That is absolutely what I thought it existed to foreshadow on my first playthrough and asghjkghjdghjdfs.

Stronghart:  “Yesterday’s proceedings brought to light a shocking and disturbing fact: There was a side to the victim, Inspector Tobias Gregson, that was unknown to his superiors at Scotland Yard.” Kazuma:  “Yes, he was carrying out operations in secret, which Scotland Yard knew nothing about.” Stronghart:  “And in those clandestine operations, he had an accomplice.” Kazuma:  “Mr Daley Vigil, who would be given the inspector’s identification…”

During what is supposed to be Kazuma’s opening statement, Stronghart is having just as much if not more of a part in it, and they’re both practically finishing each other’s sentences. (Here is just one example of their tandem speech extremely coming across this way.) Clearly Stronghart, who is determined to keep Kazuma in line after his shenanigans with Vigil yesterday, firmly instructed him on what he was supposed to talk about, and apparently they may have even spent a while rehearsing this speech together. No wonder Kazuma wasn’t surprised to see Stronghart here at the judge’s bench today.

Stronghart:  “Which brings us to the crucial issue of the victim’s time of death. The defence yesterday proposed a suggestion that the victim may have been killed one day earlier. This was based largely on the discovery that the victim’s pocket watch had not been wound.”

Not really! It was also based equally if not more so on the scorch marks on the candle, which have still not been explained as anything other than evidence that a gun was never fired there at all. But nah, Stronghart is just as happy to draw attention away from that as Kazuma is.

(Since he knows the full truth of the murder, Stronghart is also the only person who may be aware of the even more damning evidence that proves a gun could not possibly have been fired in the Fresno Street room. But he’s especially not going to draw any attention to that.)

Kazuma:  “The prosecution has something to report on that subject, My Lord.” Stronghart:  “Really? Go ahead, Prosecutor Asogi.”

Geez, look at him acting like he wasn’t expecting Kazuma to bring this (the autopsy report) up at all and this definitely wasn’t all rehearsed and planned out.

Stronghart:  “But the official opinion of the investigation team was made clear yesterday. That the time of death was 5 p.m. on 1st November.” Kazuma:  “There are indications of an attempt to disguise the real time of death, however. It seems that the natural decaying process of the victim’s body may have been slowed by keeping it chilled.” Stronghart:  “That’s out of the question.”

Stronghart apparently also elected to put himself on the “nope it’s definitely impossible” side of this little scripted exchange. In reality, the entire first testimony we’re about to have is to examine the possibility that Gregson was killed the day before, and that testimony was very obviously Stronghart’s idea, so he was perfectly okay with this avenue being explored! (because he intends it to end either with nothing substantial or with apparent proof that van Zieks did it anyway.)

Kazuma:  “It’s conceivable that he was killed in the course of his secret activities.” Stronghart:  “Do I sense that the prosecution has some information regarding those activities?”

Gasp, look at Stronghart’s amazing sixth sense to pick up on this, and not at all that he blatantly knew Kazuma was about to bring this up because he told him to, nope, nothing suspicious here.

Honestly, this is all remarkably brazen, but I guess since Stronghart has a licence to do whatever the heck he wants, he doesn’t care how obvious it looks because nobody’s going to call him out for it anyway.

(Also, look at Kazuma acting like he’s entertaining the idea that Gregson was killed during his secret outing on the 31st, when really he hasn’t entertained that at all because it was definitely van Zieks, okay.)

Kazuma:  “Scotland Yard put an enormous effort into investigating that precise matter yesterday. I think we should begin by presenting the results of that investigation work.”

Once again, note Kazuma’s avoidance of giving a direct answer to Stronghart’s question. He sure does have some first-hand information about Gregson’s real secret activities that day, but he phrases his response in a way that shifts the focus onto something he knows full well is a red herring. Again, he is so good at doing this without actively lying.

--- Testimony 1 ---

Ryunosuke:  “Smuggled goods?!”

Ryunosuke is quite surprised to hear this brought up out of nowhere – as he should be. It seems he can already tell on some level that this is a complete wild goose chase that has nothing to do with the actual case.

Spare a thought for Kazuma, who gives us a summary of the smuggling case and must have spent some time researching this information to recite it in court, while knowing this is irrelevant and fully intending to throw it all out the first chance he gets.

Kazuma:  “There’s no question: the accused, Barok van Zieks, was present.” […] Kazuma:  “In short, Lord van Zieks had ample opportunity to murder the victim.”

Kazuma looks very smug about suggesting that van Zieks could easily have murdered Gregson at the gentleman’s club… even though he knows for a fact that couldn’t have happened. Granted, he’s intending to throw all this out by revealing what Gregson was really doing that day, but the fact that he’s looking so smug about the idea that this irrelevant point throws even more suspicion onto van Zieks is a bit much. Kazuma, please.

(This is one of the very rare instances of Kazuma referring to him as “Lord van Zieks”, incidentally! I… can’t think of any specific reason why this one might be an exception, alas. Guess he just ever-so-occasionally slips up and falls back into habits from his amnesiac days.)

Ryunosuke:  “But I was hoping to find out the name of the club.” Kazuma:  “That won’t be necessary.” Ryunosuke:  “What?” Kazuma:  “It’s conceivable that the club might be used again by the smugglers in future. Therefore… the prosecution has been asked not to reveal the name in these proceedings.”

Note Kazuma’s wording here – he has been asked not to reveal the name of the club. It’s not actually his decision, and he doesn’t actually want to hide that information. He’s just putting up a token amount of resistance here, presumably because Stronghart instructed him to, but he’s bound to be trusting that Ryunosuke will keep pushing. And when he does…

Stronghart:  “The prosecution is rightfully exercising caution, I imagine.” Kazuma:  “……… No, My Lord. The prosecution has no objection.” Stronghart:  “…!” Ryunosuke:  “Kazuma?”

Too bad, Stronghart – turns out, as the lead prosecutor on the case, Kazuma gets the final say whether you like it or not.

Ryunosuke also has an interesting little reaction there, like he’s surprised at Kazuma suddenly changing his tune, or perhaps relieved to see an indication of his friend acting on his own terms and not what he’s been ordered to do.

Kazuma:  “There’s no question that Inspector Gregson was looking into these black market dealings. However… it’s not yet been established that he was on that particular trail on the day in question.”

And here he goes, opening up the possibility that Gregson wasn’t there that day at all, to allow Ryunosuke room to prove it, despite what Stronghart wants.

One incidental thing to note here is that Ryunosuke is now addressing Kazuma with his given name in court, and will continue to do so for the rest of the trial, even though he was calling him “Prosecutor Asogi” in the trial yesterday. Perhaps it’s got something to do with the conversation they had in Kazuma’s office yesterday afternoon, the first thing even vaguely close to a proper conversation between friends that they’ve had since Kazuma’s return. It seems like that closed the distance between them just slightly, enough for Ryunosuke to internalise that this is still Kazuma, albeit a Kazuma with a lot of unexpected emotional baggage, and start instinctively defaulting to calling him by the more familiar name again even in court. (Although this must be on a pretty subconscious level, since we still had Ryunosuke in that scene outwardly telling Kazuma that he’s changed.)

Ryunosuke:  “The Grouse? What sort of a club is that?” […] Kazuma:  “They’re not places where a foreign student like you would be readily admitted.” Ryunosuke:  “Have you looked into the mirror recently?”

I love the way Kazuma tries to project his foreign student status onto Ryunosuke alone. Kazuma is above that, right? He’ll definitely be taken more seriously by the British judiciary and not be written off because he’s “just a foreign student”, won’t he…?

Ryunosuke:  “As I understand it, they’re places where well-to-do gentlemen socialise with friends and colleagues.” Kazuma:  “Don’t imagine for a second that a foreign student like you would be admitted.” Ryunosuke:  (Seriously, is your mirror cracked or something?)

And he does it again, just a few lines later. His particular hypocritical insistence on this just really delights me, which led to me figuring out what it’s implying about his feelings on his own foreign-student status.

Stronghart:  “If it wasn’t a gentleman’s club… then what was it?” Ryunosuke:  “…A steamship.” Kazuma:  “You think… it’s a ship…?”

There’s a subtle screen-shake on Kazuma’s line there, which I like, as it implies an undercurrent of something more going on in his head. He knows it was a ship, and on the one hand he must be glad and proud that Ryunosuke’s zeroing in on the real truth… and yet also perhaps a little worried what that might end up revealing about him.

(After all, Kazuma may well not have been expecting Ryunosuke to prove this much, since this isn’t just proving it wasn’t at the club, but also proving where it really was. He can’t have imagined Ryunosuke would randomly have Mikotoba’s steamship ticket on him in order to cross-reference the ship’s name.)

Kazuma goes on to argue that it couldn’t have been the SS Grouse because it hadn’t docked in Britain yet on the day in question. He has to feel kind of torn about putting up resistance to this, too – on the one hand he wants Ryunosuke to prove the smuggling irrelevant so that he can reveal what Gregson was really up to and is just saying this to make Ryunosuke’s argument stronger, but on the other hand, perhaps a part of him doesn’t want Ryunosuke to prove how Gregson got onto that ship in Dunkirk (and that he brought someone else with him…)

Kazuma:  “Then show your evidence for that assertion!” Ryunosuke:  “…Very well.” Kazuma:  “…!”

Kazuma has an interesting little reaction here as Ryunosuke unflinchingly announces he’ll present his evidence. He’s got to have been expecting Ryunosuke to have something and not just be making things up, but perhaps he’s a little worried about exactly what he has and how damning for him it might end up being.

If you’re playing this part of the trial from chapter-select mode (like I’m doing right now for this commentary), the Court Record will assume you haven’t yet examined Gregson’s trunk to find the passport inside it. Which then makes the fact that I have to do so right now to be able to present the passport kind of awkward, because it will be a vital plot point very soon that Kazuma shouldn’t know that the passport was inside the trunk. So uh. Let’s just have Ryunosuke hide behind his bench to sneakily look at the trunk and take the passport out, Kazuma totally won’t see that, it’s fine.

(Of course, we can assume that canonically Ryunosuke took the passport out of the trunk at some point yesterday so that this isn’t an issue.)

Stronghart:  “What’s this? A passport for travel issued to the victim?” Kazuma:  “………”

Kazuma keeps himself poker-faced as the passport is presented. But as Ryunosuke shows that he’s very much figured out what it means…

Ryunosuke:  “…there’s a distinct possibility he wasn’t even in the country!” Kazuma:  “…!”

…he flinches back in shock. It’s a little bit of an odd delayed reaction, but I do think he’s realising here that Ryunosuke having seen that passport is a Bad Sign for him being able to keep his own dodgy actions hidden.

(And maybe he also remembers where Gregson was keeping the passport, so the fact that Ryunosuke has seen it means he’s also found a certain metal trunk that a very damning piece of evidence was left in…)

Kazuma:  “……… Ha ha ha ha ha hah! I’m impressed, Ryunosuke Naruhodo! I certainly didn’t expect you to get your hands on that passport.”

But Kazuma regains his composure pretty quickly, of course. He’s fine! He’s definitely fine and proud of his friend for figuring things out and just wasn’t expecting him to have seen the passport, hmmmm, nope, nothing suspicious about that specific point.

Ryunosuke:  “What? You mean… you knew about this?”

Meanwhile Ryunosuke is several steps behind those of us in the commentary who know everything Kazuma knows, and is only just catching onto the fact that Kazuma was aware of at least some of this all along. He seems pretty shocked here, presumably at realising that his friend was hiding information from him. He never openly picked up on any of the earlier hints at this – of which there were a lot – perhaps because he doesn’t want to think about how underhanded Kazuma’s capable of being.

Kazuma:  “The prosecution’s strategy for this trial has been laid down by the Crown prosecution office:”

Instead of directly answering this question, and also diverting the conversation entirely away from the matter of the passport before he gives too much away, Kazuma goes on to explain that this whole angle about smuggling was something he was ordered to do. He says it was from the Prosecutor’s Office, and I guess on a technical level it was, but let’s be real – it was Stronghart. Kazuma probably even knows this, given their blatantly rehearsed opening statement… but it seems like directly calling out Stronghart for this is not a risk he’s willing to take when there isn’t much reward for it.

Kazuma:  “I think the Prosecutor’s Office is trying to hide something.” Ryunosuke:  “What?!” Kazuma:  “And now that you’ve expertly disproven their assertion… I intend to reveal what I believe that something to be.” Stronghart:  “What are you playing at, Prosecutor Asogi?”

Stronghart is glaring at Kazuma, clearly Not Happy at him going against orders like this. Again: those orders were so obviously from him, especially since it was all to hide Gregson’s role as the Reaper’s tactician, which Stronghart in particular would quite like to keep hidden, thanks.

Kazuma:  “A courtroom is a forum for the truth, My Lord. Which is why it’s my duty to present all the facts, without exception.”

Kazuma’s entire speech here, and particularly these lines, really give the sense that he cares a lot about doing things honourably and without corruption in order to uncover the whole truth. Which, in principle, he does!

And yet. All the facts, without exception? He hasn’t exactly been keeping to the word of that, now, has he – and he still isn’t planning to.

Stronghart:  “Let me guess… This was your intention from the outset, wasn’t it?”

Of course it was; of course Kazuma wanted to reveal Gregson working for the Reaper, just to paint an even bigger picture of how completely terrible van Zieks is. It doesn’t take much for Stronghart to figure that Kazuma planned this all along, either. There was a bit in Stronghart’s office during yesterday’s investigation, in which Kazuma was being told off for going off the rails with Vigil in that day’s trial. Stronghart ordered him to stay in line next time, and he mentioned to Ryunosuke that if Kazuma continued not to, “I will be forced to take steps”. Apparently those steps amounted to “script his approach to the trial and oversee it as the judge to make sure he stays in line”. And of course he still didn’t, because Kazuma is stubborn and doesn’t bow to authority for the heck of it.

But like… surely Stronghart would have known there’d be a good chance Kazuma wasn’t going to behave, even being directly overseen like this? What further steps was he planning to take if (when) Kazuma inevitably didn’t?

…Apparently, the answer to this is “nothing at all (other than some displeased glares)”. So that whole mini plotline about this amounted to barely anything. I guess it gives Stronghart an excuse to be the judge for the final trial days, but honestly I wouldn’t have batted an eye at him doing that anyway, minor powerplay with Kazuma or no.

I’d thought, on my first playthrough, that Kazuma’s defiance here was going to lead to Stronghart realising he can’t control Kazuma and that he needs to get rid of him, therefore causing Stronghart to deliberately nudge things towards getting Kazuma arrested once the assassin thing is revealed a little later in the trial. It would have made perfect sense! Kazuma ought to be just as much if not more of a threat that Stronghart would want to get rid of than van Zieks is, given that he’s just proven himself uncontrollable and has a lot more reason to seek the truth about the Professor case than van Zieks does. But somehow, canonically, Stronghart just shrugs and decides, nah, getting rid of van Zieks is totally still the greater priority, for some reason, let’s just let things continue like this.

Grumble grumble Kazuma should have been arrested, look at how much sense it would have made.

(It isn’t even made at all clear why Stronghart is so determined to get rid of van Zieks in the first place. I’ve seen it suggested elsewhere that it’s because, what with him vying for promotion, he wants to put an end to the Reaper at last and pin it all on the poor convenient scapegoat so that none of it can be traced back to him. I guess that’s the most reasonable explanation, but it'd be nice if there was some proper indication of it somewhere in-story.)

Anyway yes, Kazuma dramatically announces that Gregson was on a mission for the Reaper that day.

Kazuma:  “The prosecution made an assertion in court yesterday:” Kazuma: [yesterday] “Inspector Gregson was investigating the identity of the Reaper. When he discovered the location of the man’s secret hideout… he was killed. As I’m sure everyone can imagine… by the Reaper’s hand!” Kazuma:  “But in reality… the truth is the opposite of that.”

He makes sure to clear up any confusion caused by his previous argument by citing it and pointing out it was incorrect. But conveniently, he doesn’t mention the fact that he already knew it was incorrect when he made it yesterday, because unlike the rest of the police force, he did not learn about Gregson working for the Reaper only yesterday afternoon.

Kazuma:  “Barok van Zieks never carried out any of the actual killings. Whenever the Reaper’s victims lost their lives, he always had a cast-iron alibi. Which tells us… that he must have had an accomplice.”

Sure, Kazuma, it definitely tells us that, because Barok van Zieks must definitely be the Reaper, no other possibility. This couldn’t possibly tell us that maybe van Zieks just isn’t actually the Reaper at all.

(Granted, he is thinking along the right lines, since the real Reaper mastermind also does not carry out the killings himself. He also just knows that to be a fact, since he’s had Gregson approach him as merely the Reaper’s tactician. But his logic for arguing this here is based entirely on his tunnel-visioned “van Zieks is definitely the Reaper” premise and not anything rational.)

Susato:  “We also arrived at the same conclusion, didn’t we? That Inspector Gregson was operating as the Reaper.”

You and Ryunosuke didn’t exactly “arrive at that conclusion”, though, Susato. Van Zieks told you that he’d figured it out during his investigations, and you believed his judgement, that’s all.

Ryunosuke:  “Barok van Zieks is not the Reaper!” Kazuma:  “A predictable response… from someone who’s advocating for the man.”

Nice mental deflection there, Kazuma. Ryunosuke’s totally only insisting this because it’s his job to as a lawyer, definitely not at all because he genuinely believes in van Zieks and he might be right to or anything, nope, no need to think about that possibility.

Ryunosuke argues that Gregson couldn’t have been acting as the Reaper on the Grouse because nobody was killed there.

Kazuma:  “…Pfft!” Ryunosuke:  “What’s so funny?” Kazuma:  “You’re right, of course. No suspicious deaths were reported on board that ship. But I think perhaps you’ve missed the point. That’s precisely why Inspector Gregson lost his life!”

It’s kind of painful how Kazuma seems to think this is amusing. Van Zieks murdering Gregson for the oh-so-terrible slight of not killing his target this one time is so obvious in Kazuma’s head that he snickers at the thought that Ryunosuke stumbled into helping him argue that.

Ryunosuke:  “What?!”

Understandably, Ryunosuke has no idea why Kazuma seems to think that makes sense, because it doesn’t.

Kazuma:  “There’s no question that Tobias Gregson was heavily involved in the Reaper’s activities. You may just be an apprentice, but if you’ve spent any time at Scotland Yard, you must have heard rumours…”

Rumours aren’t evidence, Kazuma! Granted, he also cited just a moment ago that Gregson’s secret notebook contains details of the assassination plots, which is actually evidence, but it is something that he tries to bring the rumours into it too. Perhaps it’s that he knows for a fact Gregson was part of the Reaper for reasons he can’t reveal without incriminating himself, so it’s frustrating him that he still can’t quite treat it as fact in court, leading to him trying to back it up in flimsy ways as well as solid ones. Alas, how much easier Kazuma’s job in this trial would be if he was just willing to incriminate himself.

--- Testimony 2 ---

Ryunosuke:  “I know Judge Jigoku! And I saw him the day before yesterday! Here in London! So I know for a fact that the man hasn’t been assassinated!” Kazuma:  “As I said… the Reaper failed.” Ryunosuke:  “Oh…” Kazuma:  “Gregson missed his chance to kill his mark and returned to British shores.”

One thing the narrative never properly discusses about Gregson’s mission here is… was he even supposed to kill his mark in the first place? Gregson was the tactician, not the actual assassin. It’s his job to investigate the marks and figure out the best opportunities to kill them, and then to pass that information onto the assassin who will do the actual deed. If Gregson goes on a trip to investigate a mark with an assassin in tow, surely that’s just an information-gathering mission? Surely Gregson himself would usually try not to be present during the actual killings?

Granted, that’s all moot in this instance since this was never a real Reaper mission, and actually Kazuma was sent along so that he would, in theory, kill Gregson, but still. I guess the narrative just never discusses this because it would unnecessarily complicate things. And clearly we cannot be bringing up any possible flaws in Kazuma’s very sensible logic here, right.

Kazuma:  “But the Reaper wouldn’t tolerate the mistake. So he killed the inspector… personally. The Reaper of course being the accused… Barok van Zieks!” Stronghart:  “It’s… an undeniably logical argument.”

It really isn’t!!!!! There are so many things wrong with this argument that it’s honestly kind of hilarious.

It’s ridiculous that the Reaper would get so mad at Gregson failing to kill the mark when he’s not even supposed to be the assassin – as I said, this was surely just an information-gathering mission if Gregson was there. Even if it wasn’t, the killing itself is still not Gregson’s job. The Reaper should be getting mad at Kazuma for failing, if anyone.

It’s also just ridiculous that the Reaper would go so far as to kill any henchman of his for one small mistake that didn’t actually have any negative consequences. Gregson can still try again, surely? Sometimes unexpected things come up that make assassinations not safe to go for without getting caught! If he killed his men for every tiny thing like this, he’d run out of men very quickly.

It's also ridiculous that the Reaper, a very careful serial killer who has kept himself hidden for ten whole years, would apparently carry out this retribution by shooting Gregson in a house in a populated street, thus immediately getting himself caught red-handed like the most bumbling criminal imaginable.

And of course, this entire argument hinges on the assumed premise that Barok van Zieks is the Reaper, something Kazuma has still not shown any proof for whatsoever.

And, even if we somehow take everything about this argument as solid, it still only “proves” a potential motive for van Zieks committing the crime! It does not prove that he did it!

But Kazuma realises none of this ridiculousness. No, of course van Zieks is so petty and vindictive as to murder his henchmen for one tiny mistake that isn’t really even part of their job, and of course he’s stupid and bumbling enough to get himself caught for it, and of course he is definitely the Reaper, because he is The Worst Person Ever.

Stronghart agreeing that this argument is logical is laughable – but then, Stronghart is apparently (for some unclear reason) still on the Let’s Get Van Zieks Convicted train, so he’s happy to agree with anything that’ll let him do that so long as nobody questions it.

Ryunosuke:  (Kazuma… You planned for the trial to go this way all along, didn’t you?)

Which even Ryunosuke isn’t doing! He’s only marvelling at Kazuma having planned this – if anything, the way he’s thinking this reads as if he feels cornered. He’s not at all considering that this is a terrible argument actually. I would side-eye his response to this the most, since he doesn’t have such a good excuse for being wrong as Kazuma or Stronghart, but… I suppose this just speaks to how much Ryunosuke idolises his best friend. It doesn’t occur to him to ever expect Kazuma’s arguments to be flawed, because Kazuma’s the best at what he does, right?

I love the sheer audacity of van Zieks striding up to the witness stand during his own trial and slamming his leg on it to express his displeasure at the bullshit going on. It’s so very him. And I really can’t blame him right now.

Kazuma:  “The accused has no right to speak uninvited in court. You will return to the dock.”

Kazuma is Not Happy. He may have been fine with calling van Zieks to testify unnecessarily yesterday, but in that instance, he was in control and was doing so to prove van Zieks to be a terrible liar. Can’t have van Zieks speaking out of turn and saying things that might make people think he’s not a horrible person.

Also, one little detail I enjoy during this bit is that the angle of Kazuma’s eyeline in his poses while he’s addressing van Zieks is just slightly lower than normal. It gives the subtle sense that he’s not looking van Zieks in the eye. Of course he wouldn’t want to do that.

Van Zieks:  “That girl is no detective.” […] Van Zieks:  “Repeating rumours heard around the Yard… Reading entries from a notebook of unconfirmed origin… That’s not testimony. It’s practically a script. No doubt the rest of this trial will go exactly as you’ve clearly planned.”

Van Zieks is essentially accusing Kazuma of being corrupt, of having rigged the entire trial to get him convicted unfairly. And it’s not that Kazuma isn’t being kind of corrupt right now, what with his very terrible argument that Stronghart is conveniently choosing to agree with… but it’s not really in the way that van Zieks is suggesting here.

The first testimony we had today, about the smuggling, really was practically a script. That whole line of argument was bullshitted by the Prosecutor’s Office (aka: Stronghart) to come up with something to hide the truth about Gregson acting for the Reaper. And Gina, a very inexperienced detective who doesn’t know much of what’s going on and is the most willing to accept anything that doesn’t involve Gregson working for the Reaper, was called to give the testimony, even though all she was really doing was reciting what she’d been told to say about the smuggling. And Kazuma didn’t like that he had to script that part of the trial, and was happy when Ryunosuke managed to disprove it for him!

This second testimony of Gina’s is a lot less scripted, though. She’s stating actual facts about what’s written in Gregson’s secret notebook (the notebook she found, so she’s a relevant person to testify about it), and the purpose of the testimony is to prove that Gregson was indeed working for the Reaper. This is something that van Zieks knows to be true thanks to his own investigations, some of which involved that very notebook! And Gina is the one person who’s actually trying to argue against this angle on Gregson in her testimony, by adding an unwarranted personal-opinion line at the end about how surely he was really just investigating the Reaper. So she’s hardly a witness who’s biased towards Kazuma’s case.

The actual problem here is that Kazuma is taking the true and backed-up facts that Gregson was working for the Reaper and went on a Reaper mission that day, and using those to spin a thoroughly flawed argument about how this means that van Zieks, who is totally the Reaper, totally killed him. Van Zieks… doesn’t quite seem able to see that. His own hatred of Kazuma is twisting his judgement just a little out of whack on this matter, too.

(It’s pretty amusing that van Zieks’s mistake here is that he’s assuming Kazuma is being corrupt in a more competent way than how he is actually being corrupt. Everybody is overestimating Kazuma’s ability to form a coherent argument here. Which is fair, because Kazuma really is so much better than this the rest of the time!)

Kazuma:  “………”

Kazuma’s response to van Zieks insinuating that he’s rigged this testimony is nothing but a silent glare. Maybe he feels somewhat secure here, because at least he knows that he hasn’t really rigged the testimony at all.

(He was trying to bring the rumours into it, though. Van Zieks isn’t wrong to call him out on that bit.)

Van Zieks:  “In your mind, I’m sure I am the Reaper… who sent your father to the gallows all those years ago.” Kazuma:  “…!”

Kazuma remains in the same pose, but his text box implies a slightly more intense reaction to van Zieks bringing up his father, because of course. I really like how van Zieks is able to empathise with Kazuma to some extent and understand how he must feel about the death of his father, even though van Zieks believes that Genshin deserved it!

Van Zieks:  “But you’re in danger of becoming a far more sinister Reaper yourself… by attempting to have me condemned with this feeble excuse for testimony.” Kazuma:  “What did you say?”

This is the only part of van Zieks’s words that gets a verbal rise out of Kazuma. Of course he’s especially not pleased at the insinuation that he’s being worse than van Zieks himself in the way he’s approaching this. And, hey, while van Zieks is off about the precise ways in which Kazuma’s being corrupt right now, he’s not wrong to suggest that at all! Kazuma, please take a step back and look at yourself before you become the very kind of demon that you’re trying to fight.

This delightful little exchange gets interrupted by Susato and Ryunosuke, as the latter appeals for van Zieks to remain in the stand for the cross-examination, since he might know important information. It’s almost like he’s the one who actually has proper information on the testimony’s topic of Gregson being part of the Reaper, because he literally agrees with what the testimony’s arguing! Not such a corrupt testimony, really, is it, van Zieks?

(This trial day is short enough that it isn’t split apart with a save point, but I have so much to say about it that I’m splitting it into two anyway! So I’m stopping here, just before we start the actual cross-examination.)

[rykersreign]

Me and my reasons on why Sonic from Sonic Prime is not too out of character for him!!

I feel like I should start by saying absolutely no hate to people who don't like Prime Sonic. I 100% understand why someone might not like him as a character and I do lightly touch on that!

Also I would appreciate it if when you state your opinion on the matter you do it in a civil way so we can all have a normal conversation on it. I will delete comments that seem too attack based or are just hating on this subject.

Aside from that feel free to tell me how you feel about the matter!!

I feel like Sonic's character in prime is not necessarily the worst or out of character for him. I actually really like this version of sonic due to his character flaws! I find it to be a fun and different way of writing him in his earlier stages of character development.

First we should approach the negatives before we approach the positives; Sonic is very immature compared to his previous iterations. He is impulsive, not the best at truly working in a team, and can be annoying at times.

These characteristics get in the way of his ability to problem solve and act in a way other iterations do but these aren't too far off from other versions of Sonic.

This can 100% make him an unappealing and sometimes frustrating character. I know I've watched some scenes in the show and hated his responses to some situations.

Although Sonic does have some positives! He's still loyal to his friends, tries his best to listen past his impulsive nature, and is overall still as loving as ever.

There are plenty of Sonic timelines where he is the one that messed up. Was it this bad? Not always but it's not rare for him.

Idw sonic for example allowed Metal Sonic to live his life the way he wanted which immediately backfired, same with the Mr Tinker situation.

Sonic has a consistent characteristic in which he trusts too much and wants others to have the chance to change. Any mistake he makes is due to him trying to help others.

While Sonic from Prime's situation is much different he still was trying to help others. Prime wasn't just a simple mistake Prime was a big mistake but that's not weird for his character.

Sonic from prime still puts effort into helping so many people but at times that could be a flaw. This want to help others often backfires as he doesn't fully trust his friends to be safe and handle the situation which can make him seem overbearing; This is consistent with him tho. He has always been the self sacrificing type Sonic frontiers is a good example of that.

Throughout all of Sonic frontiers he is hurting himself to help others.

Most sonic iterations want to help others so desperately they don't think about the consequences whether that causes hurt to themselves or others.

Although many iterations of Sonic trusts their friends abilities and skills they can all still be scared for what can happen.

Sonic from Prime makes mistakes that are undeniable, I mean he destroyed the entire universe but he's still got those positive traits that can sometimes even out the negative.

I feel like judging his character at this current point of the show is very harsh given how much as a character he is potentially set up to change.

At this point in the show it really depends on if the writers want him to approach those issues or not.

[autisticempathydaemon]

THIS IS FOR THE MATCH-UPS AND ALSO /NF TO DO, IF YOU DONT WANNA, ITS OKAY! :D

What song are you fixated on at the moment? What lyric or verse, and why? — OOOH definitely Dance with me by Topline Addicts, as for lyrics: You say "come and dance with me", but I'm a bit too shy so I just smile politely (its giving me so much Lasko vibes this part and I love it)

What is your Enneagram type? — 9w1 the peacemaker (k think thats what its called)

Do you love gargantuan Youtube video essays, and if so, which is your favorite and why? — I never heard of them (if they are a person bcs I tried to look them up but no luck, unless if you mean subnautica–?) I'm sorry ;-; /lh

Tell me about your childhood imaginary friend. — Not really an imaginary friend, but I guess I could count my daydreams of myself as a fairy princess when I was a kid? So charming and pretty and powerful as hell, getting the hearts of those fictional character I loved at that time

What is your go-to way to fall asleep? — Always lying on the side, my back facing the wall. I try to sleep on my back but it's not working so far, other than these, I need complete darkness and quiet, bcs I get stiff when I hear a noise

If you had to change your name, what would it be, and why? (In tandem, if you have changed your name, why did you pick that one?) — If there was this name in my country, I would go for Jax or Jaxen, gender neutral and short and has a nice punch to it!

What is your favorite of Redacted’s audios, and why? — Lasko fucking Moore. This guy almost took down the channel, was number one before the purge, keeps breaking stuff even in his apartment, he is just like me fr /hj (Lasko kinnie here) and even lately, I love his development so much, like he will always be my number one (I love other characters too tho!)

What Redacted boy holds no appeal to you, and why? Like, not the one you hate but the one who you don’t get the hype for. (I won’t judge, I promise.) — It's I guess because of how much he is popular? I love Sam, but I sometimes forget how much favorite he is and it always surprised me /lh

Tell me about that one book/movie/tv show you know all the words to. — The Smoke Thieves by Sally Green, I love the dialogues between two characters, which one is kinda always flirty (not in Gavin way, he is like "youre so pretty and your pretty eyes omg") and so chill and happy with the other, who is awkward and doesn't know how to accept compliments and theyre so gay omg

Which Redacted boy are you platonically attracted to? Like- forget dating, which dude do you want to be your best friend? — I dont wanna answer this because that means I have to choose /j./lh (... Huxley... I will smooch his cheeks. As a friend.)

Do you have a go-to thing you ramble about when you’re tired, and if so, what is it? (For example, my boyfriend knows I’m ready to sleep when I start talking about space.) — It depends on the mood while I'm tired, but most of the time, it's my Redacted OCs currently, especially when I'm so tires I can't even type right LMAO

Tell me your go-to gas station and drink combo. — Some chocolate snack bar and milkshake in a bottle

Tell me about your favorite playlist at the moment. — I made it yesterday, but it's all kinds of happy sounding songs and OST without any lyrics and it feels so nice to bop into it

What’s your guilty pleasure media, and why? — Wattpad books,, i wanna get back into reading some, its been years

And whatever else you think tells me about who you are! — I'm libra sign, INFP, I like the nights and sunrises, have many redacted OCs (around 20 of them, i like to play with the kinds of powers and try to mix them and experiment) and I like to text RP! I also currently work on my gaslamp fantasy WIP book(?), I'm undiagnosed neurodivergent (possibly audhd), dyslexic and I also listen to Mr Laveau's Nexus AUDIO RP series (recommending if you like video games sfx and original art) and started listening to DND group The Adventure Zone!

I HOPE YOU HAVE A NICE DAY/NIGHT/ALL THE TIME! :D

Okay, so you know who I’ve always thought should really be into fantasy and DnD? Asher, and since canon hasn’t yet confirmed he loves these things, you can be his introduction!

The combination of your personality types and your being a writer gives me the image of an emotional and emotionally intelligent person, which I think is a good match for Asher who is also pretty emotionally intelligent! I think your vibes would really match, and together you two could be, like, the heart of the Shaw Pack as the Beta and his mate. Also, Asher is some sort of flavor of neurodivergent, and I love making ND4ND pairs, ya know?

Your life together would be so FUN, I’m actually jealous. I think getting Asher into DnD and games would be such a treat, listening to TAZ together, helping him learn rules and the different systems, maybe putting together a campaign with Angel and Davey because Angel would be a fuckin bomb DM, I feel it in my heart. He’d also be such a lovely partner for a writer. I can very clearly imagine Asher laying his head on your lap, having you read what you’ve written that day aloud to him which functions as both a cute bonding activity but also a way for you to spot-check and edit how it reads.

Song:

What would you do if I stole you tonight? (Ahh ahh)/ Why waste time? (Ahh ahh)/ 'Cause the world goes on without us/ It doesn't matter what we do/ All silhouettes with no regrets/ When I'm melting into you/ 'Cause I belong in your arms

One, you said you like happy-sounding songs, and I think this is a great one. I love it’s kind of dreamy, high vibe, you know? Two, this came out around 2012, when Asher would have been a teenager, so I like how nostalgic and romantic this song would be for him.

Runner-ups:

For a writer who loves fantasy, OC’s, and roleplay games, Guy is a sure shoe-in for a runner-up! I think he and Asher have a lot of similarities, but I went with Asher because he struck me as a better match for an introvert. For a Lasko kinnie, I had to choose Aaron as another contender because they’re my favorite Redacted rarepair, and I’ve been meaning to write something for that shop for a while.

note: thank you for your entry, I hope you like it!

Read this post and send me an ask if you’d like a match-up of your own! 💌

[frostyreturns]

Now I'm not going to say any of this to pick on anyone or to be mean but it needs to be said.

It's exceptionally weird to me when Christians have this attitude, statism and progressivism are the dual cancers infesting the modern church. Ignoring the years and years of anarchist thought and writings on how a society can be organized...and not even going into the non aggression principle or that fact that there is no one answer and that anarchy means people organize or don't organize as they see fit and how they agree to...as Christians the Bible is the source and literally outlines perfect examples of how to build a stateless society.

It sets out not only moral guidelines but also rules for how to settle disputes. You ask where do you expect values to come from in a stateless society...how about this for starters.

Just as a side note you might want to take note of how many of those commands that every government in the history of the world has violated as a matter of policy on a massive and daily scale. Which God warned us would happen when he advised us not to have government and even added that by demanding government we are rejecting God and equated the government to being another false god.

Samuel 1: "But the thing displeased Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the Lord.  And the Lord said to Samuel, “Obey the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them. According to all the deeds that they have done, from the day I brought them up out of Egypt even to this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are also doing to you. Now then, obey their voice; only you shall solemnly warn them and show them the ways of the king who shall reign over them.”

So not only does the Bible not endorse government God himself warned his people about the reasons government was bad and they are all the same kinds of things anarchists reject the state for. Don't believe me I'll quote it.

"So Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking for a king from him. He said, “These will be the ways of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and appoint them to his chariots and to be his horsemen and to run before his chariots. And he will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and some to plow his ground and to reap his harvest, and to make his implements of war and the equipment of his chariots. He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive orchards and give them to his servants. He will take the tenth of your grain and of your vineyards and give it to his officers and to his servants. He will take your male servants and female servants and the best of your young men and your donkeys, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your flocks, and you shall be his slaves. And in that day you will cry out because of your king, whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

Now you might be saying he's just talking about the specific king they got at the time not that all kings and all governments are bad. But look at what he's warning them about...is not the current government much much worse? They all do these things to various degrees obviously in modern day it's not donkeys and fields they steal but the principle has remainded the same and practice applies regardless... whether the kings soldiers are horsemen or fighter pilots the concept is the same and earlier he had just finished applying his disapproval of the state in general terms.

So to recap the Bible equates government with slavery, rejection of God and the worshipping of false gods. And yet Christians have the nerve to assert that government is good and ordained and approved of by God.

If we discarded the entirety of the governments laws and just used instead Biblical guidelines for how to organize society you would A.) have an anarchist society where the only authority figure is God and even then following God is your choice if you read the Bible freedom of choice is a major theme. and B.) You would have a much better society than what we have now. A lot of people would be shocked to find out that the guidelines for how to organize a society that the Bible lays out is actually not a theocracy or monarchy it's essentially a stateless society where you look to God (voluntarily) for morals and to settle general disputes amongst yourselves with some basic guidelines for conduct. If you want specific examples there's tons in the old testament most of which would still make for a better society than any current governments laws.

The idea that society decided what murder is...is crazy to me. Murder is murder and it has always been murder since Cain and Abel. It was murder before society, during society and long after society it will still be murder. Society didn't decide what rape is...it's when you have sex with someone against their will. See words have meaning and that meaning comes from our understanding of and the existence of those concepts not from the government. The notion that we can only conceive of what murder and rape is because we have the government is...literally insane and saying those words out loud should be a clue you've been brainwashed at some point. It's not true, it's not Biblical.

The more I think about it the more I research and the more I understand Christianity and the Bible the more I become convinced that not only is it compatible with anarchy, anarchy is the only political system compatible with it.

[myjunkisyuzuruhanyu]

Alright, I want to be fair, cause I sent that ask cause you're a fan of both Yuzu and Shoma and don't really favor one over the other, it seems like...

In what ways do you think Yuzu is a better skater than Shoma?

I am a huge fan of both and the question remains hard because they are such different skaters with such different styles. And I love them both for utterly different reasons. And ofc atm it's easy for me to say Shoma is my favorite competitive skate and Yuzu my favorite retired skater.☺️ But as someone who likes competitions better than any kind of gala stuff I am currently thinking more about Shoma. Though admittedly I am more in the Shoma fandom than in the Yuzu fandom for maybe obvious reason 😅

Again this is a subjective opinion and while I think some things can be better objectively "measured" it also doesn't mean that Shoma is "bad" in comparison or anything.

Let's start with something obvious if you have followed me for the past years. Yuzu is imo a better jumper especially on Toeloop jumps. The height of Yuzu's jumps is better. Yuzu's jump technique is purer or clearer than Shoma's especially on the take-off at Toeloop jumps. We don't have to talk about Yuzu having a miles better Lutz jump. And I also think we don't have to argue about Shoma's take-off technique for the 4F being questionable. I think Shoma's Toejumps though got significantly better from when he first started in seniors vs. now and Shoma's edge jumps like Loop and Salchow aren't significantly worse than Yuzu's. Yuzu's take-off technique is sublime. There is a reason ppl call his jumps "textbook" and I say I agree though there is no official "textbook" and the evaluation of jumps through judges isn't much about whether a jump is textbook. I think Yuzu was a bit undervalued in GOEs throughout his career. His jumps leave nothing to desire. He even fixed his Flip edge over the years.

4T1Eu3S:

4S:

3F:

I think no one can compare to Yuzu in the transition department. (Not to be mistaken as Shoma doesn't have transitions which is a lie. Shoma has tons as well but not as many) Yuzu had fun to try to include as less cross-overs as possible and thus every step is almost a difficult step and turn which are difficult transition. Just look at Let's Go Crazy and watch only Yuzu's feet, this is an example of extreme difficulty even other programs of Yuzu are hard to match. He unfortunately never got the best evaluation for his efforts in transitions and after the Olympic season this criteria was even removed from the PCS as a standalone criteria (mind you the evaluation was not really coherent to what skaters did anyway). Still a bit sad that LGC wasn't skated competitively to it's full potential. I love LGC.

Now the more subjective part, which is hard because I like Yuzu's style of skating but I also like Shoma's style of skating, but they have a different approach. I would not say one approach is better than the other, but it leads to the impressions that I shared in the "Shoma is better answer" and leads also to what I want to emphasize with Yuzu:

I think Yuzu is better at packaging his programs. I am actually not sure if I find the right words to say what I intend to emphasize here, but let me give it a try. Yuzu has a complete image in mind what he's trying to portray with his programs. It's seen in all details and costume and poses that are memorable and suit the program, it's seldomly repeated in other programs. Shoma's approach is more subtle and more from within him.

I think Yuzu has a rawer energy, more attack in his skating than Shoma. I think best seen in how he throws himself into the Seimei step sequence and hell breaks lose. The emotions are set free. Same for when I first really noticed Yuzu in Romeo and Juliet 1.0 in 2012 how emotional he skated on the ice. I think he is "better" at letting go of the emotions. It grabs me every time.

And I think that also speaks for what differences grab me in Shoma's and Yuzu's skating. Yuzu's emotions and expression are differently emoted to me than Shoma's. Shoma's skating is like music to me, fascinating and a calmness about it. Yuzu's skating is full commitment and commands you to look at him and the emotions shown grab me. It's different for everyone and I am not sure I can express my feelings into words, but this was a try.

(All GIF's taken from @ the-real-xmonster Tumblr)

I replied to what I think Shoma does "better" than Yuzu here:

[obsessivelollipoplalala]

hey, how do you know that? "One of Brian’s main traits is that he defends people he likes to the death and that won’t change. He’s been that way his entire life. He’s loyal to a fault and is pretty gullible in a lot of ways, honestly." Not being mean I just wanted some examples??

Lol it's simply something I've observed over the years. There are examples I can name off the top of my head, such as him excusing Freddie being outright rude to fans with "oh but he had to rest his throat, you see <3 that's why he told them to fuck off <3 Freddie threw away a whole box of gifts from Japanese fans because he doesn't like clutter in his life <3" (side note: compare that action to the current drama lmao). Honestly, that is so, so simpy, it's hilarious. I don't have the links to the interviews where he's said this handy (I'm pretty sure he's talked about it more than once), but let's be real: Freddie was rude a lot! But Brian swoops in like "b-b-but he was actually focused on recording!!!"

I can't find it right now, but there was a time back in Brian's twitter days when he publicly snapped at someone for insulting Anita's singing, and then apologized (I think he initially called the person a "bitchy little worm" lol). Anita was on this competition show in 2011, Strictly Come Dancing, and she was actually worried that Brian would get big mad and intervene if the judges got too harsh on her:

Now, vehemently defending his wife and Freddie are to be expected, and unsurprisingly, this extends to Queen. Brian is very defensive of the band and their work, and anything closely associated with it; that's why I think he's defended the film so much, because the project meant a lot to him and he thought it was a net good for Queen and Freddie, so he wasn't interested in accepting much criticism of the film and defended it publicly on more than one occasion.

He's shown this behavior towards other people he likes yet doesn't know as well, especially colleagues in the industry or, more recently, scientific colleagues like Walt Cunningham, who just died and got a nice little tribute post by Brian despite being a jackass climate change denier (and Brian very obviously feels strongly about climate change, so for him to like the man despite his flat-out wrong view on something Brian cares about a lot says something). Back in the movie days, Brian even got into hot water by still following Bryan Singer on instagram and snapping at someone who commented on his profile and told him to unfollow--again, I think this is because Singer was associated with a project that meant a lot to Brian, but to his credit, he actually issued a lengthy public apology that seemed genuine to me, who at the time, was not a fan of Brian lol. This goes to show how this trait is a double-edged sword, because it's sweet when he defends Freddie and Anita, but it's bad when he defends people who shouldn't be defended (although, I do believe him when he says he didn't realize following Singer on social media would be seen as supporting him. People do need to remember we're talking about a senior citizen here).

And so, I think Brian's defensive nature leads him to assume the best of people because he really doesn't want to think people he likes have done wrong or are bad. It's also a mindset he seems to have about people in general; after the 2020 US election, he made a video talking about how shocked he was that so many people still voted for Trump. Brian more or less came to the conclusion that Trump voters must be seeing something different, their news sources must be wrong and leading them astray, and we should create some kind of independent truth council. I could not believe how naïve he was with this post. Like...obviously, even if you could create a totally unbiased source of truth, morons and political conspiracy theorists just wouldn't believe it! Lol. And in general, I think Brian has a difficult time believing that there could really be a large amount of bad people in the world (I think this influenced his political campaign to appeal to people's supposed "common decency" too), but it's like...as someone who has lived in America her whole life and is extremely political invested, I can confidently say that no, Trump voters really are just awful fucking people. They're not led astray, they willingly walk off the cliff because the GOP tells them what they want to hear about women and minorities. I swear, I'm not going on a tangent lol. The point is, Brian wouldn't accept my conclusion here. I think it's genuinely hard for him to accept that there are a lot of people who are simply bad actors in this world, and that's about people in general--apply that to people he actually likes? Yeah. No. You'd have to tell Brian someone committed murder and show him the body before he'd accept that they're bad.

This is also why I think it's incredibly telling that Brian has held ill feelings towards Paul and Barbara for the rest of his life, because he's not a spiteful, angry person who writes people off easily, he actually defends people too much a lot of times, but that's getting off topic lol.

Does this all make sense?

[noa-ciharu]

I've seen your Fuuma supremacy post on birb app (and love it!) and as a fellow Fuuma appreciator I'd like to ask you for gathering twelve reasons to why Fuuma is great / should be appreciated more~ uwu 👉👈

Hohoho that's an interesting one. Honestly it's a bit hard to put into words why certain character is underappreciated cuz it's hard to pinpoint what makes ppl get attached to character in the first place. But I'll try my best :D

1) honestly his early X self. He's so kind and gentle to Kotori and Kamui, very protective brother and friend. Also how soft he and Kamui are back then 🥺 and touchy feely with one another

2) speaking of early X Fuuma, just look at how gay he was for Kamui from the very start

Who the hell thinks of their friends in this shojo typical style??? With sakura petals and sparkles to the boot?? Good boy Fuuma was so head over heels for Kamui, it was adorable 😭♥️ good bf material

3) oke so onto his more complex and intriguing late X self: the enigma of what precisely happened. I've seen some people are discouraged by permanent hiatus and lack of elaboration just what happened to Fuuma. And while yes, I too would prefer if we had answered, mystery and head-scratchers are intriguing to me. I love to speculate, to analyze the possibilities with what we've been given so far. Which brings me to the next point:

4) there's more to late X Fuuma than it meets the eye. It's easy to dismiss him as sadistic without a cause villian (as he's portrayed in X anime sadly) but in manga that's far from the case. Like take this scene for example:

It's true he's ruthless in fulfilling people's wishes and doing bad deeds but look at his expression. That's not face of a man who's too delighted by causing mayhem, in fact looks more saddened by the fact too many people lose sight of themselves in process of caring for their loved ones

5) his more childish/bratty side

This scene in Ebisu before the destruction in vol4 for example. It was equally adorable and sinister given you know who Fuuma is but his kindness did seem genuine. Similar mischief can be seen in his interactions with Seishirou, Kakyou to some degree and sometimes when interacting with other Dragons

6) wish seeing ability and his general omnipotence. I love how he appears like personification of Judgment arcana (just taken on a darker meaning), how he can see deep inside person's heart and see what wishes dwell there. And how he delivers judgement by making those wishes reality. Tbh, I'm not trying to justify Fuuma's actions here but characters around him really do have fucked up wishes (ahem, Subaru, ahem Nataku) - X is basically a story about messed up people in messed up situations. In some lighert X AU he would have severed as a Santa claus or something but alas, X is far from light story

7) simply, these ambiguous lines

Fuuma is judging others on their lack of self awareness 25/8. Add scene with Karen and that "if killing others is wrong then why do we lose sight of what's truly important" line. As well as many more. Honestly maybe it's just me, but there's something ♥️ about characters that are 'above others' but still have a weakness/vulnerability that's tying them back to same humans they're supposed to be above (in Fuuma's case that's obviously his connection to Kamui). In X it's wishes that give characters sense of humanity and will to live and Fuuma himself isn't above wishing; his wish is connected to Kamui one way or another

8) how to not mention his homoerotic courtship battles with Kamui? Iconic honestly. Where else would you get this type of content that's not a BL manga

All shonen battles can go home these are only type that matter

9) oke so since since we're getting shallow for a bit: HE'S HOT AF ♥️🔥 I mean look at those evil smirks

10) I can't find a panel rn but at one point when Kamui said his wish is to bring old Fuuma back current Fuuma's eyes widened and that's the first and last time in series he appeared genuinely shocked. Which leads me to obviously question: why? Does it shock him Kamui wants other Fuuma back? Is Kamui wanting old Fuuma back somehow contradicting Fuuma's own wish (like if only way old Fuuma can come back is if Kamui were to die and Fuuma's wish is for Kamui to live)? I want to know what his wish is 🥺 I'm torn between him wanting Kamui to acknowledge his new self and wanting Kamui to start appreciating himself and wanting to live no matter what. Maybe it's both of those, maybe those wishes are connected somehow 🤔 either way it's that head-scratcher of what precisely late X Fuuma wished for that's intriguing. Maybe it's connected to old Fuuma's wish to protect Kamui but why hurt him so much then??

I need coffee for this

11) honestly, all the softer conflicting expressions he has, especially when Kamui is in question. Like this one for example

So soft and torn 🥺 Imma go cry why so emotional 😭😭😭 obvs this isn't the only instance, manga is filled with those subtle scenes where he's talking to Kamui or thinking about him with rather conflicting yearning expressions

Which bring me to the last one:

12) this scene. Prediction, whatever you call it. I need to know what will happen 😭😭😭

Look. Fuuma is one of my fave characters so it's only natural I want to see him suffer. I need him to break down cuz of something Kamui did, or even cuz of his death. I want him to be crushed under weight of his emotions and angst 🥺🙏 Wish master who can grant anyone's wish yet there's noone to grant him his own now that Kamui is no longer alive. So my point here is that Fuuma and generally whole late X setting is perfect angst material

All in all, I guess it's Fuuma's complexity that made him one of my faves. There's way more to him than it meets the eye

[crusherthedoctor]

1, 7, 12, 18 for Sonic :P

1. the character everyone gets wrong

All of them.

If I had to pick one, then I'll be predictable and go with Eggman. Other characters may come close or even exceed in terms of how often they're turned into something they're not (Sonic and Shadow being the two that immediately come to mind), but for obvious reasons, it's a bit more personally infuriating when it pertains to the good doctor.

7. what character did you begin to hate not because of canon but because how the fandom acts about them

I try not to let fandom alone sway my thoughts on a character too often, since I prefer to judge a character through… well, the character, and their showing in the actual product(s).

That said, there have been exceptions that are too overwhelming for me to ignore. Usually this relates to characters I already hated in the first place, like Surge, so it's no major loss. But for a more regrettable example… Amy.

Now let me make it clear that "hate" is MUCH too strong a word in this case, since I wouldn't say she's a straight up bad character or wish she'd be removed. I still like the basic concept of her character, and I still appreciate her good portrayals and what she's able to bring to the table.

But for a multitude of reasons - most notably, the one-two fuck you punch of Frontiers and Prime making me realise that the amount of times where I think she's been portrayed legitimately well pale significantly in comparison to how many times they've dropped the ball with her, even compared to other characters - she's unfortunately been losing me all over again. And the fandom's current attitude with her, such as their tendency to defend everything she does when they'd eviscerate her if it were any other character, their tendency to break their own rules in order to give Amy preferential treatment ("Respect the ordinary girl!… but plz let her go Super and be more powerful than Knuckles and Tails combined and one-shot Eggman's strongest robot and beat the entire cast in a fight tee hee"), their tendency to spark #Rally4Sally-style hysteria every single time she's not in something, and rabid Sonamy fans… acting like rabid Sonamy fans, has only amplified this.

Maybe the tide will turn yet again if she gets a string of better, less eyeroll-worthy portrayals in the future. But for now, when taking her overall history into account, I've come to the regretful conclusion that she's arguably the most overrated of the recurring game cast at this point in time, and ultimately the fanatic sides of her fandom are no different to that of Sally's.

There's also Silver. Like with Amy, "hate" is an exaggeration, but it's no secret that I've never found him that interesting, whether in his canon game form or the flanderized penis hour mood that Evan Stanley loves to turn him into. But in the distant past, I had frequent encounters with fans who would lash out at me if I said so much as a single negative thing about him. Needless to say, this did not raise my enthusiasm for the character.

Finally, the Freedom Fighters. On their own, they're probably not the worst conceptually, even if Sonic being a member himself doesn't work and goes against his character. But they are so hyped up the ass and touted as being infinitely superior to the game cast that I can't muster any goodwill for them anymore. This only increased after I was reminded of just how often they made massive dick moves in Archie, and how they rarely got called out on it in any meaningful capacity. So even putting their fandom aside, they're kinda hard for me to like anymore.

12. the unpopular character that you actually like and why more people should like them

Obligatory mention of Black Doom for being the Best Shit Villain, compared to Mephiles and all the other ones who are inexplicably popular. Black Doom was the key to all this, so I'm glad they got him working, cause he's a funnier character than we've ever had. He's stylistically designed to be that way. (Jokes aside, how sad is it that even with my unironic goggles on, there have been so many shit villains in this franchise that Doom isn't even in the top ten worst at this point?)

For a more sincere example, we have Marine. Everyone had a hateboner for her at the time, and some people still do (one of them being Flynn apparently), but I never found her annoying. I understood the development they intended for her, and I thought it was handled decently for the most part. I also scratched my head at the flack she received for her Australian accent and lingo, since I never saw anyone complain about Bunnie and Antoine's stereotypical Texan-ness and French-ness respectively… oh, right, they're Freedom Fighters, so they can get away with it. -_-

Then there's Elise, who was just underdeveloped at worst (that and having a realistic human design, but that wasn't exclusive to her), and did not deserve the vitriol that she ended up getting. As far as non-Blaze princesses go, I actually prefer her over Sally at this point, because Elise doesn't have an extended history of being an unreasonable prick to Sonic for bullshit reasons, and never tried to change him either. That Elise was the one in '06 who got labeled as the worst character of all time, when a literal recolor was standing right there, was one of the early indications to me that this fandom might not always have the most agreeable takes.

She's not outright hated like Elise is (was?), but since she has a similar dynamic with Sonic, I'll mention Shahra as well. I used to think she was a bit bland outside of her relationship with Majin Ganondorf, and I expressed that opinion even quite recently. But in the past month or so, in light of how much I've grown to either hate or be disillusioned with certain other characters, I'm beginning to appreciate her non-abusive partner-related traits a lot more now, and her bond with Sonic is admittedly sweet. The Sonic Likes Tall Girls meme we have going on may have also contributed. Secret Rings is still by no means a game I care much for outside of its villain and some level aesthetics, but Shahra is a good character in retrospect IMO.

And I share your appreciation for Infinite and Zor. I approve of the intent with Infinite's character and think it was handled well despite some rushed aspects, and fail to understand why people single him out for being one-note when this franchise is stacked with one-note villains, and Zor's lines are genuinely hilarious and I will die on that hill. The latter's transformation into Unironic Generic Edgy Guy #6 in IDW was devastating for me. :(

18. it's absolutely criminal that the fandom has been sleeping on…

Actually playing the games.

Eggman being a villain.

Eggman being a competent villain.

Rouge being more than who she is at first glance. As in, someone who is deceptively intelligent, more caring than she lets on, and will ultimately do the right thing despite her jewel thievery hijinks. AKA, not a villain.

The Hard-Boiled Heavies. They were rightly beloved come their debut, but ever since Mania came and went (and not counting their appearance in Seasons of Chaos that I'd prefer to forget), it's like fans collectively forgot about them. I'll say it till the cows come home: they had more personality in a game without dialogue than Sage did in a game with it.

Darkspine Sonic. It does have its fans, but it tends to get overshadowed by the lame as fuck Dark Super Sonic from X, and the equally lame as fuck Fleetway Super Sonic. I may not love Darkspine per say, but as far as dark forms go, I can recognize the thought that was put into it, and I appreciate that it allows Sonic to utilize his feelings in a positive way via keeping his rage focused on the guy who deserves it. This is much more in-tune with Sonic's character than a generic evil form would be, and it also avoids the unhealthy and unrealistic implications that anger, sadness, etc is inherently a bad thing that must be dismissed or concealed at all costs.

The Advance trilogy's soundtracks. Yeah, they get their kudos, but still not enough. >:[ I consider these compressed GBA ditties to be among Sonic's best, and find them more memorable and impactful than many a generic orchestral soundtrack you hear in plenty of games nowadays.

In light of Grass Simulator 2022, Sonic having an actual aesthetic of any sort. Other games did this so well, including CD, the Genesis and Advance trilogies, Mania, SA1, Heroes, Colours, Secret Rings, the Riders games, some of SA2, some of ShtH, even 3D Blast of all games. You can have all the technical graphic detail you want, but in the end, a plain grassy field does not fill me with inspired wonder in the same way as environments like Studiopolis, Night Palace, Red Mountain, Quartz Quadrant, or Twinkle Snow.