#i don't have the evidence

[lys-jeorge]

I need to stop reading the fnatic subreddit. It is a silly place.

[keferon]

Yea...I ..hm

Mistakes on mistakes until.. Until I scratch a hole in my tablet because I can't stop drawing them👌

[goreybaby]

so tired of engaging with fandoms recently, it's just not fun anymore. rlly sick of hearing shit like "if u like them, you must condone their actions!!1!1" and people adopting a mob mentality and attacking you for showing a fictional character an ounce of admiration or perhaps even neutrality. what happened to people minding their own business, or if they really need to discuss it, to do so respectively and without hurling death threats at the other party?? has it ever been that serious?

[ohitslen]

*Vampirizes your Vashwood*

keep reading for more :)

If there needs to be much closer close-up please let me know!

[metanarrates]

Hello. Sorry if this a stupid question u can ignore if u want.

How can someone get better at media analysis? Besides obviously reading a lot.

Im asking this bc im in a point where im aware of my own lack of tools to analyze stories, but i don't know where to get them or how to get better in general. How did you learn to analyze media? There's any specific book, essay, author, etc that you recommend? Somewhere to start?

I'm asking you because you are genuinely the person who has the best takes on this site. Thank you for you work!

it sounds like a cop-out answer but it's always felt like a skill I acquired mostly thru reading a ton, and by paying a lot of attention in high school literature classes. because of that I can't promise that I'm necessarily equipped to be a good teacher or that i know good resources. HOWEVER! let me run some potential advice to you based on the shit i get a lot of mileage out of

first off, a lot of literary analysis is about pattern recognition! not just pattern recognition in-text, but out-of-text as well. how does this work relate to its genre? real-world history? does it have parallels between real-life situations? that kind of thing.

which is a big concept to just describe off the bat, so let me break it down further!

in literature, there is the concept of something called literary devices - they are some of the basic building blocks in how a story is delivered mechanically and via subtext. have you ever heard of a motif? that is a literary device. it's a pattern established in the text in order to further the storytelling! and here is a list of a ton of common literary devices - I'd recommend reading the article. it breaks down a lot of commonly used ones in prose and poetry and explains their usage.

personally, I don't find all the literary devices I've learned about in school to be the most useful to my analytical hobbies online. motifs, themes, and metaphors are useful and dissecting them can bring a lot to the table, but a lot of other devices are mostly like fun bonus trivia for me to notice when reading. however, memorizing those terms and trying to notice them in the things you read does have a distinct benefit - it encourages you to start noticing patterns, and to start thinking of the mechanical way a story is built. sure, thinking about how the prose is constructed might not help you understand the story much more, but it does make you start thinking about how things like prose contribute to the greater feeling of a piece, or how the formatting of a piece contributes to its overall narrative. you'll start developing this habit of picking out little things about a text, which is useful.

other forms of in-text pattern recognition can be about things like characterization! how does a character react to a certain situation? is it consistent with how they usually behave? what might that tell you about how they think? do they have tells that show when they're not being trustworthy? does their viewpoint always match what is happening on screen? what ideas do they have about how the world works? how are they influenced by other people in their lives? by social contexts that might exist? by situations that have affected them? (on that note, how do situations affect other situations?)

another one is just straight-up noticing themes in a work. is there a certain idea that keeps getting brought up? what is the work trying to say about that idea? if it's being brought up often, it's probably worth paying attention to!

that goes for any pattern, actually. if you notice something, it's worth thinking about why it might be there. try considering things like potential subtext, or what a technique might be trying to convey to a reader. even if you can't explain why every element of a text is there, you'll often gain something by trying to think about why something exists in a story.

^ sometimes the answer to that question is not always "because it's intentional" or even "because it was a good choice for the storytelling." authors frequently make choices that suck shit (I am a known complainer about choices that suck shit.) that's also worth thinking about. english classes won't encourage this line of thinking, because they're trying to get you to approach texts with intentional thought instead of writing them off. I appreciate that goal, genuinely, but I do think it hampers people's enthusiasm for analysis if they're not also being encouraged to analyze why they think something doesn't work well in a story. sometimes something sucks and it makes new students mad if they're not allowed to talk about it sucking! I'll get into that later - knowing how and why something doesn't work is also a valuable skill. being an informed and analytical hater will get you far in life.

so that's in-work literary analysis. id also recommend annotating your pages/pdfs or keeping a notebook if you want to close-read a work. keeping track of your thoughts while reading even if they're not "clever" or whatever encourages you to pay attention to a text and to draw patterns. it's very useful!

now, for out-of-work literary analysis! it's worth synthesizing something within its context. what social settings did this work come from? was it commenting on something in real life? is it responding to some aspects of history or current events? how does it relate to its genre? does it deviate from genre trends, commentate on them, or overall conform to its genre? where did the literary techniques it's using come from - does it have any big stylistic influences? is it referencing any other texts?

and if you don't know the answer to a bunch of these questions and want to know, RESEARCH IS YOUR FRIEND! look up historical events and social movements if you're reading a work from a place or time you're not familiar with. if you don't know much about a genre, look into what are considered common genre elements! see if you can find anyone talking about artistic movements, or read the texts that a work might be referencing! all of these things will give you a far more holistic view of a work.

as for your own personal reaction to & understanding of a work... so I've given the advice before that it's good to think about your own personal reactions to a story, and what you enjoy or dislike about it. while this is true that a lot of this is a baseline jumping-off point on how I personally conduct analysis, it's incomplete advice. you should not just be thinking about what you enjoy or dislike - you should also be thinking about why it works or doesn't work for you. if you've gotten a better grasp on story mechanics by practicing the types of pattern recognition i recognized above, you can start digging into how those storytelling techniques have affected you. did you enjoy this part of a story? what made it work well? what techniques built tension, or delivered well on conflict? what about if you thought it sucked? what aspects of storytelling might have failed?

sometimes the answer to this is highly subjective and personal. I'm slightly romance-averse because I am aromantic, so a lot of romance plots will simply bore me or actively annoy me. I try not to let that personal taste factor too much into serious critiques, though of course I will talk about why I find something boring and lament it wasn't done better lol. we're only human. just be aware of those personal taste quirks and factor them into analysis because it will help you be a bit more objective lol

but if it's not fully influenced by personal taste, you should get in the habit of building little theses about why a story affected you in a certain way. for example, "I felt bored and tired at this point in a plot, which may be due to poor pacing & handling of conflict." or "I felt excited at this point in the plot, because established tensions continued to get more complex and captured my interest." or "I liked this plot point because it iterated on an established theme in a way that brought interesting angles to how the story handled the theme." again, it's just a good way to think about how and why storytelling functions.

uh let's see what else. analysis is a collaborative activity! you can learn a lot from seeing how other people analyze! if you enjoy something a lot, try looking into scholarly articles on it, or youtube videos, or essays online! develop opinions also about how THOSE articles and essays etc conduct analysis, and why you might think those analyses are correct or incorrect! sometimes analyses suck shit and developing a counterargument will help you think harder about the topic in question! think about audience reactions and how those are created by the text! talk to friends! send asks to meta blogs you really like maybe sometimes

find angles of analysis that interest and excite you! if you're interested in feminist lenses on a work, or racial lenses, or philosophical lenses, look into how people conduct those sort of analyses on other works. (eg. search feminist analysis of hamlet, or something similar so you can learn how that style of analysis generally functions) and then try applying those lenses to the story you're looking at. a lot of analysts have a toolkit of lenses they tend to cycle through when approaching a new text - it might not be a bad idea to acquire a few favored lenses of your own.

also, most of my advice is literary advice, since you can broadly apply many skills you learn in literary analysis to any other form of storytelling, but if you're looking at another medium, like a game or cartoon, maybe look up some stuff about things like ludonarrative storytelling or visual storytelling! familiarizing yourself with the specific techniques common to a certain medium will only help you get better at understanding what you're seeing.

above all else, approach everything with intellectual curiosity and sincerity. even if you're sincerely curious about why something sucks, letting yourself gain information and potentially learning something new or being humbled in the process will help you grow. it's okay to not have all the answers, or to just be flat-out wrong sometimes. continuing to practice is a valuable intellectual pursuit even if it can mean feeling a tad stupid sometimes. don't be scared to ask questions. get comfortable sometimes with the fact that the answer you'll arrive at after a lot of thought and effort will be "I don't fully know." sometimes you don't know and that can be valuable in its own right!

thank you for the ask, and I hope you find this helpful!

[astral-aromance]

Something that's funny to me is how the fandom has decided that Ñolofinwë is physically stronger than Fëanor based soley on the fact that he fought Morgoth and wounded him, while ignoring that the only reason Fëanor didn't fight Morgoth 1v1 is because Morgoth was litterally shaking and crying while hiding in his evil castle at the sheer thought of Fëanor reaching him, so he sent like 10 Balrogs to deal with him instead.

[vaguely-concerned]

'my cousin is all stomach and no heart' is such a funny thing for illario to tell rook if he maybe is picking up on a little bit of a Vibe going on there. the 'LMAO. well good luck with that friend. better hotties than you have tried and failed and dashed themselves against the legendarily unamorous cliffs of my cousin's complete obliviousness and lack of interest to no avail. (optional 'may I suggest a more hah-hem *undoes another few buttons on his shirt that thing is open almost to his navel now it's borderline obscene* available dellamorte for your consideration. I mean if you're like in the market for one anyway' devious undertone as you see fit)' energy is off the charts.

(illario is above all a funny petty bitch and that's why I love him so indescribably. no no lucanis is right we need him around to drop shade like this he is in fact also an essential crow. we all contribute in our own ways)

[ask-the-rag-dolly]

okay unhinged essay about ragatha probably #1 idk i don't think this is all of my thoughts but here's what i could actually put down

i think the most surprising thing for me Personally is getting a lot of my interpretations of ragatha correct ? like . the thing that almost destroyed my motivation for this blog is the fear that my unhinged overanalyzation of her mannerisms in the pilot were Wrong - i actually thought about canceling everything when i was off from canon - but now ... yeah i'm not doing that

i guess it's just that we had so little of her in the first episode that i thought i was Manifesting her issues but Nope she really is this much of a Loser

first of all ! i suspected that she has low self-esteem but Goodness Gracious !! i didn't expect it to be Actually almost non-existent ?? like i thought i was Exaggerating for this blog but no , no person with a normal amount of self-esteem would Warp an incident so much in their head that they somehow believe something going wrong is Their Fault .

like she's so focused on pomni the entire episode because she Genuinely believes that the fiasco in the first day was her fault ( even though IT WASN'T , but she's really that used to quickly blaming herself ) and wants to make it up to her . but of course pomni is still adjusting and is Overwhelmed by everything ( which is understandable ) so she's not really in the mood for ragatha's bullshit

but with how ragatha reacts and what she subsequently tells kinger - she read those more as ' i do not like you ' than ' i am too fatigued to care about anything right now ' which is such a Large leap , but considering she was the one who Apologized to pomni for giving her a stressful first day ( which was COMPLETELY out of her control , ) it makes sense that she assumes that pomni has something against her - which was not helped by how none of ragatha's attempts of starting a friendship were reciprocated

i do understand why she would Think it's her fault - as pomni's a newcomer and More Stress is the last thing she needs , especially in her first day - but ' oh she doesn't like me ' is still Such a hasty conclusion that someone who already ... Doesn't Like Themself would jump to .

of course i can't not talk about the potential history between her and kinger . through their dialogue you can tell that ragatha's one of those people that took a batshit long time to truly adjust to the circus - which has a lot of interesting implications . with how she seems to understand the process of finding an exit in episode 1 , it explains a lot . my girl was so Not well when she entered the circus .

honestly it's just nice seeing that ragatha at least has Some support despite her being the one who holds everything together - it makes the ending impactful in my opinion ; they do really care for each other and will be saddened if one of them is gone .

also of course she asked if everyone's alright despite having a cleaver to the head ...

something that also has been nagging me for a long time is how much she always gets the short end of the stick . like , literally every time she's on screen , she Has To Get Harmed in some way . i would brush this off as slapstick when her official pin doesn't have her HAVING A KNIFE TO THE CHEST ???

Maybe it's just slapstick . maybe with her having parallels to kaufmo considering how he's said to be a goofy toxic positivity type guy like ragatha and is the one that has abstracted thus far is just a coincidence and doesn't speak levels to what might become inevitable as the series goes on ,

[turtledotjpeg]

thinking about that "I don't have anyone close to me" line 🤔

[whitherwanderer]

Shaaloani Cabin [A/FC]

Just out of sight of Sheshenewezi Springs sits a cabin built by a pair of tired souls. 🏜️🐂

[fluentisonus]

working in a factory has you thinking so much about the insane chain of labor & transport that goes into making literally anything

[egophiliac]

Have you heard of the "Crowley is Malleus' dad" theory going around? Where Prince Levan (or whatever his name is) didn't actually die and just went out to get some milk and is now known as Dire Crowley, the silly man? The implications of that theory is absolutely hilarious when you think about it

hold on, we can figure this out, we just need LISTS

PROS THAT CROWLEY IS SECRETLY REVAAN/LEVAN/LAVERNE/WHATEVER:

unspecified fae of some kind, with similar coloring to Mal

the animal masks are apparently a Briar Valley thing

has some kind of big blackmailable secret that was alluded to in episode 4, and then as far as I know never brought up again

(unless this was just Azul bullshitting, which is extremely possible)

based on Diablo, which...maybe means something?

has canonically worn Dad Shorts

CONS:

(gestures to Crowley's entire personality)

NO LISTEN Revaan was the guy they sent off on diplomatic missions and to take care of delicate political situations, and...look, I love this dweeb, but would you trust Crowley to be in charge of negotiating your war treaties

despite my brain insisting on reading his name as "Raven", Revaan's title does imply that he was also a dragon (or super into longan berries, I'm not ruling that out)

currently unclear why Lilia "my closest friend Revaan...he is no longer with us...I used to make fun of him for being kind of a priss about eating jerky..." Vanrouge has somehow not noticed or said anything

Malleus' Aloof Anime ~Aristocrat~ vibe had to come from somewhere, and by all accounts it was NOT his mom's side of the family

???:

turns into a bird in the opening, I don't know if that means anything but it's kinda cool, I guess

all that aside, if Malleus and Yuu are any indication, then the Draconias have...questionable taste in their social choices. so anything is possible!

[somegrumpynerd]

When you find out years later that you accidentally named one of your henchmen

Image ID: A multi-panel comic featuring au sanses. Panel 1: In Killer's original universe. A dark figure stands in the foreground while Killer is sitting back in the snow, covered in blood. Killer says "wh-what are you?" Panel 2: The dark figure is Nightmare but only his smile is visible. He says "I am Nightmare, guardian of all negativity in the multiverse ...and I have a proposition for you, Sans." Panel 3: Nightmare's hand is outstreched, he says "Come with me willingly and I'll take you out of this desolate and barren universe and let you loose on many others." Panel 4: Killer is looking back at Nightmare warily, a thought bubble shows he is thinking "other universes...?". He says "...in exchange for what? What do you want with me?" Panel 5: Nightmare's tentacles are reaching out towards Killer. He says "I feed off the fear and misery and hatred in this world, stirring these up will keep me powerful enough to fight against the guardian of positivity. In short," Panel 6: Nightmare is looming over Killer now, his tentacles surrounding him. He says "I just need you to be a good little killer." The word killer is in red text. Panel 7: Killer is grasping Nightmare's hand, having accepted his offer. Panel 8: Now in a different au, Nightmare stands beside Killer as he taunts Dream, who is out of frame. He says "You're outnumbered now Dream, I have a killer with me this time." The word killer is in red text again. Panel 9: Dream is lying on the ground looking hurt and ruffed up. Killer is standing in the background, looking ready to continue beating Dream up. Nightmare says from out of frame "You should know better than to turn your back on a killer by now." The word killer is in red text again. Panel 10: Nightmare is standing by Killer again, looking smug. He says to Dream, who is not shown "You'll need more than that pathetic bow next time you meet with my killer here." The word killer is in red text again. Killer is looking towards Nightmare, pleased with this. Panel 11: We are now in Nightmare's castle, present day. It is revealed to be Killer telling these events to Dust, who looks bored. Killer says "-and the name stuck, so that's why I'm called Killer now." Dust says very quietly "did I ask" Panel 12: Nightmare is standing in the corner behind them, he looks very surprised and concerned after hearing all this. Text with an arrow pointing to him reads "Didn't realise he had done this." Killer from out of frame says "he doesn't really call me his killer anymore tho" with a frowny face. Dust, also out of frame, says "that's nice now shut up" End ID.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Peeped the horrors

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[rainbow-flavoured-skittles]

I think that Vania would be Cole and Geo’s no.1 shipper

[serpentface]

SPIRITUAL POLLUTION, THE GESTURES AGAINST EVIL, AND ABLUTION: A POST

The concepts of spiritual purity and pollution are central to the Faith of the Seven Faced God (and similar takes on the concept predate it throughout and beyond the immediate Wardi cultural sphere). There is no clean cut distinction between physical and spiritual health in this belief system (these concepts exist as a heavily overlapping venn diagram) and many methods intended to cleanse spiritual pollution address both realms.

The word for the concept referred to as spiritual pollution is 'mesechitse', which can translate to 'blockage' or 'severance' depending on the context (its underlying meaning is a pathway that has been stopped in some capacity).

At its core, spiritual pollution is a corruption of the living spirit (which is carried by/IS the blood). It causes both physical and spiritual problems. Polluted blood flows improperly and does not maintain the body’s natural stasis or integrity, causing or allowing disease or other bodily dysfunctions to occur. Many ailments are seen as wholly physical and internal in nature, occurring directly due to polluted blood flowing improperly and affecting key organs. Other diseases (particularly contagious or infectious disease) are known to be caused by dagi, which are harmful spirits that enter the body through orifices or wounds. A limited number of ailments (most notably pronounced schizophrenia-spectrum disorders or cognitive disabilities, unfortunately) are thought to be caused by possession by more powerful evil spirits.

At its worst, severe spiritual pollution is thought to impact or sever one's connection to God. Summarized very basically, severe pollution = blockage of flow between one's own living spirit and the greater spirit of God, which deprives a person of God's blessings and protection, severs them from the natural cycling of life and death (and prevents their necessary participation) and can put their afterlife in jeopardy.

Some degree of corruption to the living spirit is seen as completely inevitable and managed by the body, which physically expels some polluting agents via urine and feces, as well as menstruation (thus all of these substances are themselves dirty and polluting agents). It is reckoned as impossible for any living body to exist in a Completely spiritually pure state. The goal of cleansing (and broader practices revolving around spiritual integrity) is rather to maintain stasis of the body's natural cycling (and by extension a connection to God's living spirit) and to keep pollution contained and minimized.

If one's immortal soul successfully reaches the afterlife, it is then reborn into a spiritually pure existence incapable of being 'severed' from God in any capacity. God Itself is a spiritually pure being, but Its body and living spirit (the world and its cycles, manifested as Faces) is vulnerable. The purity of God's living spirit (and therefore the life-sustaining functions of the world that all beings depend upon) must be sustained, protected, and restored through right practice, which is what much what the public religion revolves around.

Spiritual pollution is a separate but overlapping concept with:

-Metaphysical vulnerability, the word for which is 'namne couyibase' (literally ���lacking integrity of Being’). This is a state in which the body and living spirit is considered vulnerable to great change, for good or for bad. These states can have vital and positive uses (they are utilized in many rituals, and it is what allows for conception and birth), but must be entered with caution and intentionality. Uncontrolled namne couyibase can otherwise leave one open to forms of spiritual harm. -Curses, which are targeted infliction of harm (of all sorts- bad luck, evil spirits, etc) onto a person, place, or thing. A spiritually polluted body is has less resistance to curses, and curses can intensify this pollution. -Possession, which is when evil spirits attach themselves to or inhabit the body. In the vast majority of cases, possession does not mean an evil spirit is Controlling the body, merely harming it. A spiritually polluted body has less resistance to possession, and possession can intensify this pollution. -Ritual uncleanliness, which is a state of intensified spiritual pollution that requires complete prohibition from a person from entering sacred spaces or participating in certain rituals until they are made clean. The most common reasons for ritual uncleanliness are active menstruation, being in the mourning period, or having performed a known dirtying action without its required ablution (see below).

---

Multiple levels of religious-medical practice are centered around maintaining the body's stasis and cleansing it of mesechitse whenever possible. The methods are both active and passive.

Passive methods include the wearing of protective objects/amulets or having the motifs on household items or as decoration (the most ubiquitous are charms like the pelatoche (lit: '(ocean) eye') or odatochent (lit. 'Gods eyes'), the skimmer woman, or phalluses, and the wearing of gull feathers), in addition to other beneficial/protective iconography (guardian lions are most common, though physical representations of each Face of God have beneficial functions).

Active methods cover a broad swath of rites and behaviors (which is even broader in non-doctrinal folk practices). I'll be focusing here on the two main everyday methods of protection/cleansing (rather than more specialized rites) that are supported by core doctrine and may be performed by anyone, rather than being restricted to priests.

---

Gestures against evil

These are the absolute most basic protection methods, comprised of three core gestures.

Purity of intent: the hand is held with the palm facing upward, the pointer and pinky finger extended and the thumb and inner two fingers pressed together. This is the most directly ‘cleansing’ gesture, it attempts to bind uncleanliness within the body and thus to prevent inevitable background level spiritual pollution from the body infecting a pure environment or another person. You mostly perform this gesture while entering/leaving a protected or vulnerable space (literal or figurative).

Protection of spirit: the hand is held with the first two fingers pointed together, held upwards for generalized use or pointed for directed use. This is the simplest of apotropaic gestures, aiming to protect the body and spirit from outside harm. This is commonly used before or while entering contexts seen as physically and/or spiritually dangerous, or to un-aggressively counter an evil eye curse.

Dispelling of evil: The hand is held with the first two fingers pointing together, touched to the lips, and flicked away from the body. In practice, this is most commonly used to prevent attachment by malicious or otherwise harmful spirits that may have been evoked (you might perform this after you speak of someone believed to be an earthbound ghost or refer to an evil spirit directly, or immediately after touching a potentially contagious sick person (ideally followed by ablution)). This will not help you if evil spirits have fully Attached themselves to you, but can remove ones that have been attracted to you. Doing this gesture and flicking in the direction of another person is very rude.

These gestures have separate uses, but will often be performed in conjunction (usually in the order given) as a quick means of protecting oneself and the spaces around them. It is not considered a doctrinal replacement for ablution as it does not actually cleanse the spirit, but it attempts to reduce harm (both sustained and produced by the user).

---

Ablutions:

Ablution is spiritually and physically cleansing the body with clean water. The metric for clean water is fairly expansive- ocean water, any flowing water, any clear lake, shallow water sources that are clear and free of (obvious) polluting elements such as animal corpses or unclean animal feces, any clear collected water.

The core requirement of an ablution is for the hands to be cleaned in all circumstances, and for other body parts to be cleansed in addition if the situation requires it. One must fully wet the hands/other affected areas and scrub thoroughly, and then use fresh water to rinse. If you have to clean other parts of your body, you save your hands for last (as they will be used for the cleaning).

It is appropriate to perform ablutions cooperatively, but the person assisting you should participate as well (ie- if you have someone washing your back, they should scrub and rinse their own hands after). Someone considered to be in a ritually unclean state that ablution will not immediately fix (the most common are actively menstruating or being in the midst of the mourning period) should not perform ablutions on others.

Note that there is no Hard distinction between bathing for spiritual cleanliness and bathing for physical cleanliness (there is a separate set of cultural standards for physical hygiene, but most hygiene expectations are Covered by ablution). In most circumstances, ablution is just a regular, sometimes tedious everyday activity rather than a solemn or special occasion.

The ritualized requirements denote that only the hands + any given affected body parts Must be washed, but ablutions will often be an aspect of a full-body bathing routine to meet other hygiene standards. (ie: someone performing ablution before making offerings or eating a meal is only Required to wash their hands, but will very often wash their whole bodies and clean their hair- offerings and a meal are (typically) daily activities, so this is a good time to just get a full bath in while you’re at it). It may additionally involve washing the skin with oil or soap, moisturizing the hair with oil, scraping away dead skin, and applying perfumes. This is not a ritual requirement and is performed because generally, people like to feel clean and smell nice.

The hard physicality of cleansing WITH WATER is KEY to this practice. Per core doctrine, there are no DIY cleansing methods that replace washing with water. If one does not have access to clean water for ablutions, they should not perform offerings whatsoever (but are allowed to pray) until they can be cleansed, and accept that they are receiving spiritual pollution by performing ablution-required tasks in the meantime. A blessing from a priest is the only doctrine-supported spiritually cleansing replacement for water ablutions. In practice many people will use the gestures against evil as a replacement (which is not supported by doctrine and is more common in folk religious practice), and virtually everyone will find ways to get physical contaminants off of their body either way (if you step in dog shit and don't have any water nearby, you're going to wipe it the hell off even if that doesn't make you ritually clean).

Times when such an ablution is generally considered a hard requirement:

Before bloodletting in prayer or making other offerings

Before meals

Before assisting in a birth

After menstruation ends

After receiving penetrative sex

After defecating

After urinating (this isn't as ubiquitously seen as a hard requirement, in a lot of cases people interpret it as 'only if you actually get pee on your hands')

After touching urine

After touching feces (many lines of thought make exceptions for the excrement of cattle and khait due to their clean and sacred status- this makes life a easier for the majority of people who have to use dry dung as fuel)

After touching a dead body (human or animal)

At the end of your mourning period for dead kin (traditionally as part of a larger ritual involving full body submergence in flowing water, rather than as a common ablution)

After touching someone else's blood (aside from rites that require it, in which the blood is expected to be clean and the cross-pollution of living spirit is intentional) (technically includes semen but this does not come up very often)

After touching most sick people (particularly with contagious diseases or any skin ailments)

After recovering from an illness (ablutions will be performed as an aspect of treatment as well)

Before entering most temple's inner shrines (and some temples altogether)

Also a requirement for participation in certain specific rites and/or festivals

The exact nuances on how hard these requirements are sometimes vary, particularly in instances revolving around touch. Official doctrine is that any unclean touch requires ablution, but in common practice this is sometimes reinterpreted as only a hard requirement when the touch occurs to the hands. Most practitioners do not perform an ablution immediately after an unclean touch occurs (if you're a field laborer and step in dung, you're probably going to wait to wash until you retire for the night), and not everyone performs ablutions every single time they 'should'.

Only drawing I have related to ablution under the cut (nudity)

This is one way to do it