#i understand the morality issue with this

[allthecastlesonclouds]

i lied today’s the day Autistic Rah’ōxah post be upon thee

she's so very. so very autistic. here's my list of evidence.

Flat vocal affect

Deep facial/name blindness, to the point she has to rely on her friends/father to remind her of people.

A high sense of morality- she's bothered by people who're going against good, that's a quarter of the reason she's in the business of adventuring! (the other quarters are evenly split between friends and punching) she wants to do good– she rescues parker from an owner who doesn't want him + lets him have interests, if her friends are wrapped up in their drama she'll try to deal with the issue herself as best she can

Special Interest- punching! she punches a printer well enough to fix it! she found a course in college specially to focus on punching! when it's suggested she take a level in rogue or wizardry she looks so confused at the suggestion– she's happy where she is, why would she want to learn anything that isn’t her SI?

Her whole emotions deal. She says she doesn't like them, that she's bored by them, and she very much is in a way. but she does have feelings, she just doesn't express them in a very neurotypical way– and views this other way of expressing emotions as acting (see all of Feel Better Soon). But she is genuinely hurt by things (Legzi stealing, the girls ignoring her and them breaking apart), confused (especially when she's trying to talk with her dad about a new topic or understand emotions), and caring.

she's very uninterested in speaking which is a very autistic thing! she'll speak when it's important to her or when she's required to give a response, but she doesn't really seem to care to try– and she'll choose what she says carefully when she does! (and how lovely it is that she has friends who will listen when she has something to say!)

she also very much doesn't understand social cues– like why she's dressed in a suit for season three instead of proper adventuring gear, or that rinald is trying to be their rival, or that legzi didn't get into darkmouth at first (and what to say to respond to some of these things)

(i would've added more examples but i'm at the image limit u.u) Anyway!! Autistic Rah'ōxah real everyone go watch Drawga and read Ladies Book Club <3 <3

[everwalldigan]

just a little curious about the people absolutely crashing out over the Bruce dating Joe chills daughter storyline (which I dislike cause I think it’s lazy and just bad storytelling but like… this doesn’t even scratch top 50 questionable love interests within the batfamily or even just Bruce) I wonder how do you guys feel about batcat in The Batman (2022)?

Bruce pursues a relationship with Selina Kyle and then finds out her father Carmine Falcone hired Chill to murder the Waynes and then stole their money for his own personal gain…. So technically his role is even worse than the Joe chill in the comics cause he actually premeditated their murders and directly benefitted from it, while the comic version of Joe Chill was an average criminal who just wanted some cash.

I’m just wondering why you think one is scandalous and the worst thing to happen to comics (it’s really not) while the other is okay and cutesy. Do you think it would be logical for Bruce to start condemning Selina for her father’s actions? She did know who Falcone was to her, even if she might not have known what he did to the Waynes, so it’s almost the same situation. (Completely ignoring Selinas and Scarlett’s morals/actions here cause it’s not the point I’m trying to make)

I understand most people have probably not even read the issues with Scarlett and are going off shock value from popular fandom posts (considering this has been going on for months and last months issue was not her first appearance, so why the uproar now?) but like most of us have probably watched The Batman (2022) and I have not seen discourse about that. I’m just curious as to what makes those two situations different (other than execution cause I’ll be the first person to call out Tom Taylor’s mediocre writing)

[pillowspace]

hey, um!!! i absolutely adore your art and aus and writing and everything sososososo much but, since you ship sifloop and it is selfcest... whats ur perspective on like. the whole "selfcest is incest/worst than incest" debate. and how it applies/if it applies to sifloop at all. IM SORRY IF THIS IS A SUPER UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTION/TOPIC u can skip and just ignore this ask if u want!!! /gen /nf im just curious ur perspective since i enjoy sifloop dynamic So Much but i'm just. confused and a lil uncomfortable w/ actually shipping them romantically bc of. well. The Selfcest Factor :'D

Hey, it's okay!!! I don't really mention topics like that on my blog, I'm very tame in how I post, so I'll just shyly hide under a readmore for my answer <3

First of all, I don't see selfcest as incest. I think that if someone were to meet a clone of themself and see them as family, they very reasonably could, but that it itself is not a family situation on its own if no one has decided that. It's a "decide it, and it'll be" situation.

I understand that a lot of people are weirded out by selfcest, and I think that's very valid and reasonable, but I'm very used to it so it's just normal to me.

As for whether or not it's worse, I'm sure it can gross someone out WORSE than incest, that's fine, but I really don't believe a completely fictional concept that does not exist in the real world (even if you can get a tiny bit close) is like... morally worse. It's practically clay, you can shape it however you want.

Growing up around the concept of selfcest made me feel better about myself honestly. It's comforting to tell yourself "I love you," and I dealt with my self-worth issues as a kid by making selfcest OCs to process self-love through creation. Knowing that a fictional character could find worth and affection in themself as if looking at someone else always made me wonder if I could do that too, and that's quite possibly the least harmful thing I could have ever had that reaction towards. Whenever I felt bad, I felt more willing to "talk it out" with myself as if I was talking to someone separate, which made it easier to treat myself with kindness.

I also just generally think the word "selfcest" contributes to this ickiness around it, and I do dislike the word, but I try not to think about it much. It probably could have been named better.

Ultimately: anyone can not like it. That's okay. But at the end of the day, it's harmless and is as fictional as a vampire. And anyone can also not like vampires.

[jellyfishline]

As I understand it, this is less of an issue with specific companies being morally bankrupt and more of an issue with the way the legal system in the USA works as a whole. If information is requested by the cops, companies legally have to comply and give over that information if they have access to it. Some are just more eager to comply than others.

This is why if you're planning anything that might be seen as legally dubious (such as planning to get an abortion in a different state, or participating in a protest--actions which you have a legal and ethical right to, but local authorities will often try to find reasons to prosecute you for anyway) it's vitally important that you don't leave records anywhere, especially on the internet. If possible, try not to leave text or email records either.

PSA: never discuss private affairs in your DMs, especially contraception and abortion. Social media moguls will absolutely sell you out to the government. There are already cases of people being charged based on evidence in their DMs.

[evenmorefatallyobsessed]

So after Team Jnpr found out what happened with Playtime Co how many toys would they kill because some of them are beyond saving. Actually this could be it's own story. But anyway Yarnby, Catnap, and Miss Delight I think are to far gone. The Doctor would probably be no moral issue with killing. Mommy Long Legs, Dogday, and Doey would probably be willing to help them.

So not gonna lie didn't think too deeply on said concept, I was just commissioned to make the model and send it to them. I literally thought of it as I posted it...

But that is a interesting point, after all a good amount of the toys tragically aren't rehabilitate anymore... Just about any small one for sure as they all are basically feral.

I actually wonder if the smaller bodies can think beyond animalistic thoughts. It was mentioned several times that bigger bodies were failures that resulted in animal like natures like with Yarnby and Pianosarus.

So I imagine most the smaller toys are the same though Mommy does seem to be able to control the Mini-Huggies so some are... Trainable. Which is just another level of fucked up.

Ultimately I'd have to say JNPR would kill a good amount, their first kill would be Huggy, and they would be shocked when they do so cuz they don't understand what it is at first thinking it's a Grimm... Until it doesn't disappear and then a monster and once they learn they range in reaction.

Ironically I see Ren reacting the worst as this would break his semblance from emotional overload and since he rarely deals with emotions it would utterly devastate him... Nora wouldn't be much better realizing it's a child who was probably a lot like her.

Pyrrha would be inconsolable and like she was with Penny, Jaune would also be in a horrible state. But as we've seen in the series he is the best at pulling himself together.

And ultimately for his team he would shove his mental issues down to deal with later knowing something just died in him... They'd talk to Poppy and all four would be disgusted, horrified and angry...

As for which toys, yeah... Yarnby, Catnap, and Miss Delight would all be killed. I do kinda also see this situation where they hesitate to kill them, but Jaune would force himself forward to do it, so his teammates wouldn't.

They Would HATE Sawyer, things would not play out like in the game, they'd tear his robotic army apart shatter his container and drag him out piece by piece already being far past their initial innocence at that point.

Jaune would unlock his semblance from the sheer tragedy of seeing all this horror. Probably when he see's Dogday, desperate to heal him, to heal someone who suffered so much, he's had to kill so many victim already. They didn't deserve this! they weren't monsters, they were people, children who'd been twisted, used, turned into playthings for Playtime.

He'd activate his semblance as he rushed forward, grabbing the little critters rushing into Dogday, pulling them out of his flesh, ignoring them biting, scratching, trying to eat him as he did. He couldn't let him die, not another kid, not one who could still think, who still had a soul, and even now was tortured. Jaune would pass out waking up to see Dogday alive... The mini critters dead, torn apart, his team looking more spiritually worn out then ever.

Jaune would apologize, regretting that he passed out, that he didn't kill the small toys... The Feral children... that his team had to, that he couldn't protect them.

Yeah... this would be a emotionally fucked AU... Bright side I can see them saving Mommy Long Legs and by extension, Bunzo Bunny, PJ Pug-a-Pillar and the Mini-Huggies that she controls.

With Catnap I think Jaune more then anyone would understand... Loyalty is one of the core tennent of the Arcs after all... he would try but when his teams in danger he decides.

Doey, and all the toys in the sanctuary would be saved, because to put it simply the Prototype would die before Sawyer (The Doctor does) when he attacks the sanctuary Jaune and Pyrrha would go with Doey to fight him while Ren and Nora would follow Poppy's plan.

[qoldenskies]

been into those raph&leo against donnie&mikey pre-movie fics lately. and like. thoughts on don being the more outspoken at how destructive and idiotic the other two are, while mike is more sensitive and overwhelmed by everything? not that im hating on these characterizations! i enjoy the angst they bring, but overanalyzing is fun.

sure, mikey is the youngest and it makes sense to an extent. however, dr delicate touch and dr feelings are very loud and blunt. and yeah the situation is more extreme, but i think about donnie taking a similar position to what he did in hot soup: the game, staying out of the raph&mikey debate until directly addressed.

personally, i see mikey taking the lead on trying to get through to raph+mikey with donnie there to mediate and give his input when needed. and behind closed doors they definitely take turns comforting each other for sure. they’re both shown to be distraught over familial situations (turtle-dega nights and hidden city’s most wanted), so it makes sense to me for them to take shelter in each other as opposed to one of them being a total shield for the other.

oh, i dont like it. i actually find it unfaithful and flanderizing when it comes to their characters, especially since mikey is a lot more outspoken and direct while donnie is passive-- and this manifests in their behavior as a duo, too.

if not directly emotionally affected by it, i could see it slowly shifting donnie's behavior. he starts to close himself off more, works harder, becomes quieter and more standoffish, not really understanding why he feels so bad because the tension is slowly getting to him. being neurodivergent also makes arguing uhhh hard to witness especially if it were to get intense, loud noise and all that. not to mention raph and leo do almost get into a fistfight at the beginning of the movie so there is a VERY good chance that's happened before, especially with how quick donnie and mikey are to try and pull them apart.

i think comfort would be mutual though, yeah. mikey being distresed and fearful doesn't feel like it aligns with the way he normally acts in conflict? like disinterested and annoyed and then determined and frustrated feels like it aligns with him better. he's not a helpless crying child but i could see him getting more and more upset the longer it goes on, especially because he loves both of his bigger brothers and he feels like they're acting so stupid lmao.

mikey's also not really a savant when it comes to mediating because that's ALWAYS been more raph's job, maybe leo sometimes. he's more likely to go "guys stop fighting!" instead of actually breaking it up and that does very little, it'd probably just come off like moral high-grounding. even in the doctor feelings seminar he did with donnie in the show he was not exactly taking a very empathetic approach he was just being condescending LMAO

generally with donnie i feel like it would manifest in more avoidant behavior (and maybe this is a bit of a hot take but i feel like he would be more likely to have an "is it me?" reaction to something like this, especially because so much of this is about team synergy and he plays such an essential role in support), while mikey would be desperate to "fix" it (more than he is to actually resolve it) once he realizes it's becoming a persistent problem, but because he's unable to properly get to the root of it, it'd just make him increasingly more frustrated. and ofc i do think this would also seriously strengthen donnie and mikey's bonds with each other because i could see both of them having a breaking point about it eventually.

i DO actually have a fic in the works about this exact scenario, it's a sequel to coming undone that mostly addresses the kind of pain and frustration of donnie being unable to properly harness his ninpo as seamlessly as the others can, having some gifted kid issues because it's really hard to try new things when he's been so effortless with science for so long, all while there's so much tension in the family because of the leadership switch,,, it's about donnie and mikey bonding and confiding in each other mostly but ive put it on the backseat for canary continuity, maybe one day i'll pick it up again!!

[ematini]

What is your opinion on people calling Caitlyn a sexual predator/predatory lesbian?

I definitely can't blame people for saying that, because the two on screen relationships Caitlyn has, Vi and Maddie have EXTREME power imbalance.

It happens not once but TWICE, and neither is mentioned or acknowledged by any character. That's a pattern of behavior. And what conclusion are we supposed to draw from it? Because all signs point to Cailtyn just not caring about the difference in status. People are not pulling accusations like that out of their ass, like certain individuals claim, because they're very clearly shown on screen, just not properly explained/addressed.

What also bothers me is that if the writers wanted to avoid dealing with that, both of those issues could've been avoided by making some changes in the writing. If they wanted to keep Maddie a traitor, just make her a young officer who shows admiration towards Caitlyn, assures her she's doing the right thing, and subtly pushes her more towards Ambessa. If they wanted a rebound plot line, why not make Cait's affair partner another Councilor's daughter? They wouldn't even have to go through the trouble of explaining that entire lore. The natural conclusion would be that they've known each other since childhood through their parents, and the writers would have their motive of Caitlyn trying to date someone her mother would approve of.

Again, i know Caitlyn is not written to be that way. That was not the goal. It's just the writers' ignorance shining through once more. They either didn't catch on the implications or just straight up waved a dismissive hand at it. They swept it under the rug by making Maddie a traitor, which shifts all the blame onto her and not even mention the issues her relationship with Vi has. You can't just write motifs like that, then ignore them and explain your motivations in interviews. Especially if, by the end, the goal is clearly for us to understand and forgive Caitlyn. You're portraing a "hero" character (morally grey or not, Cailtyn is meant to be a hero in the story) in a bad light and instead of letting people form their own opinions on their behavior, you're forcefully attempting to sway our judgment, by ignoring half the shitty things they did. If people have to read interviews to understand what you were aiming for, that shows a flaw in your writing.

[thesweetestsupervillains]

So right off the bat, you guys are missing one part: this isn't a fascist problem. Fascism is a problem, but this thing you're talking about is not specifically related to fascism. I think claiming that it is threatens to give the wrong solution: this is not a problem simply of the right wing. This is a human nature problem.

You might say that it's the embodiment of the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

But I will instead offer a quote by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. He was a soldier during WW2 for the Soviets, but due to words against Stalin in private he was thrown into a gulag. He then wrote things, reflecting on his own actions on behalf of the Soviet Union during it's early days.

To quote him:

It was granted me to carry away from my prison years on my bent back, which nearly broke beneath its load, this essential experience: how a human being becomes evil and how good. In the intoxication of youthful successes I had felt myself to be infallible, and I was therefore cruel. In the surfeit of power I was a murderer, and an oppressor. In my most evil moments I was convinced that I was doing good, and I was well supplied with systematic arguments. And it was only when I lay there on rotting prison straw that I sensed within myself the first stirrings of good. Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either—but right through every human heart—and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains … an unuprooted small corner of evil. Since then I have come to understand the truth of all the religions of the world: They struggle with the evil inside a human being (inside every human being). It is impossible to expel evil from the world in its entirety, but it is possible to constrict it within each person.

Keep in mind, this man was writing inside a Soviet gulag.

This is the issue with puritanical thought; it assumes a certain moral infallibility, and in the name of doing good human beings become cruel and oppressive. In the name of liberation we become oppressors, in the name of justice we become unjust.

It is easy, convinced that we are correct, to condemn others and thus treat them as inhuman. This is not something we can simply call fascist. It is simply that in our current moment, it appears to us as fascism, but the impulse is older, more base than that.

it's true and you should say it.

[bloodypeachblog]

See? Told ya.

@omniuravity @fatgumsurpremacy-remastered @neonvehk @moths-and-mantids

Audio taken from:

and

[moeblob]

A lil guy !

[pepperpixel]

SAID HE LIKES CRAZY GIRLS,

BUT HE HATES WHEN I ACT CRAZY,

IT TAKES TWO TO TOXIC!

FINALLY!!! Finished these pics of jinx I’ve been working on!!!!! HOLY SHIT, these took so long…. But finally… they’re done… pls enjoy this art of my beautiful princess w a disorder. Featuring alternate colors for the big pic and also a closeup! Cuz I rlly like how both the lines and coloring on her face turned out… like the pink gradients w her eye… her deer in headlights expression,, like uve just startled a raccoon digging thru ur trashcan and r two seconds away from getting mauled.. m proud of it!

[blackbatcass]

can you imagine being dick grayson though. you have a unique relationship with bruce just by nature of having been raised by him since you were circa eight years old.. you love that man in a way you can’t exactly articulate. you understand him probably better than anyone else ever. you’ve gone through all kinds of hell because of him. he’s fucked you up in ways that will never be fixed. then you have to watch all these other younger kids go through phases of clawing after that relationship you had with bruce and you just have to sit there like. HAHAHAHA. UM. YOU DON’T ACTUALLY WANT THAT. I PROMISE YOU.

[freakinator]

vagueing but i think certain ppl need to realize that you can be both manipulative And traumatized 😭

[mohntilyet]

DATV Spoilers Just in Case!) I’ve seen a head canon floating around that when solas puts a mage!Rook in the regret prison, it tranquilizes them. What do you think Viago’s reaction to this happening to a Crow!Rook would be?

i think there's a small terrible part of viago that instinctively thinks it was a bad investment/solution to send rook off with varric, since he's lost one of his best assassins. and then of course he hates that this is his first reaction because rook is more than that to him, but he's been conditioned by their lives to worry about his power and the mission first. and then i think he throws himself into trying to prove that he is a better man than that by finding a cure, without being obvious about it, even if his worry actually makes him messier and obvious. a similar outward reaction to what i've seen people headcanon about how he feels when he gets the news that rook is stuck in the fade trap in general (anger, determination, frustration, etc)

the idea of viago as a man who clings to "i rose to this rank for a reason, above the other crows. i'm a killer but with my poisons, i'm cleaner. i'm royalty. i'm better." is so beautiful to me. who he wants by his side/publically allies with is made more interesting to me for that reason. rook and teia make a very short list, so for him to lose either of them (especially to a fate worse than death. like i know there's a cure but i'm not sure if that's common knowledge and it has rammys bro) will inevitably cause a crash out the likes of which thedas may have never seen before <3

[fluffmonger]

So, in my experience growing up as a deeply curious child in an Evangelical (tm) church..... We *did* read the Bible, we had Sunday school, and Bible studies, all kinds of things. My church used the New International Version as a standard, which keeps some of the poetics of King James, but is a lot clearer and cleaner to read, more modern English. Reading the Bible wasn't the issue at hand.

What we weren't taught was how to interpret the Bible in Context, as a document that was written by historic humans in historic societies and cultures, across several hundred years. There's... Depending on the church, and pastor or Bible study, you may get some emphasis on the difference between the gospels and the letters, or a rundown of the "parts" of the old testament ... But that's usually it. There's no digging into it, and absolutely no questioning. There's very little, if any, acknowledgement that it is in fact, a bunch of separate texts all compiled by a small group of Christians, decades or more after the death of Jesus. To many Christians, I'd wager it feels like the Bible just appeared fully formed out of the air one day, as their holy book. And of course you can't question it, it's *the word of God* so it has to be correct and right, and if you question you're Doubting and not Having Faith (etc).

I hadn't connected the fact that many of the writings of Paul, and John the Revelator were done in the Reign of Emperor Nero until recently, when my classicist partner saw the dates and went "wait what". And if you know anything about Nero well..... Is it any wonder that Paul might have some Concerns about things like morality, and public display of faith and other things? And again! I'm someone who was asking questions and such, all the time, even back then. I was deeply nerdy about it and trying to read it like I read in English class. This made me..... Unpopular. And also felt kind of blasphemous? Like, I always felt odd about that approach while I was in the middle of it because it was *not* standard.

Likewise, a lot of the old testament gets written off as "a collection of stories" and treated more like.... Parables or fables?? Instead of a written collection of Jewish oral history about their history, laws, traditions, and culture. It's all set vaugely "in the past, in Bible times" without any rooting to real history or landscapes or cultures. And of course, because the Bible is all that matters, most Protestants and evangelicals don't think at all about any of the scholarship that goes back millennia on any part of it, the writings of Rabis and later on Christian scholars. The Bible as I was taught, wasn't a living document or a record, it wasn't something to be debated about or argued with, or even questioned, no matter how weird it outdated it seemed. It was *law*, ironclad, and to the claims of many, perfect as is (despite being a work in translation with a lot of nuance and no understanding of translators bias or how a translation should work).

It's.... Pretty fucking dire, and horrific, especially to me now, because the things I've learned about the time periods that the Bible is from? Are actually fascinating, and make it *so* much richer as a text! And then understanding the world of early Christianity, how it became what it is today, how those beliefs and practices became established.... Man, it's fascinating. But again, there's this culture of "Christianity has always been like this and will always be like this" that's very present in those spaces that make it really hard to gain sight of it all.

And... Of course at the end of the day.... The reason people like me didn't realize some of this, is because we weren't told. We werent given the tools to ask the questions we needed to. You can't explore what you don't even know exists, and when you're just told that we don't associate with "those people" and are discouraged from thinking about other faiths except to convert them..... Well.

So yeah. It's not (just) that people don't have reading comprehension.... It's also that they quite literally arent taught the context and origins of their faith for.... Reasons. Also, American Christianity has always just been... Very extreme. Probably bc of the puritans but hey.

Since posting that "how many mass graves and extinct cultures" post last month, I've had multiple Christians in the notes whining that there isn't a "specific instruction of belief that Christianity needs to wipe out every other religion in the world" in Christianity's teachings, and that it's all just The Church/King James/etc.

And every time, I point to the literal text of the passages of The Great Commission.

And nearly every time, that shuts them up; the only time it didn't, it was to engage in some disgusting semantical goalpost moving.

But it's like...

Why do Christians not know the content of their own texts? Is your faith really so tribalistic and totemic around the concept of "Jesus" that you all don't bother to actually read the religious texts?

It feels like it must be--I've heard of too many instances of Christians walking out of readings of The Sermon On The Mount because they think it's "liberal nonsense" and the like, but I just find it baffling and more than a little sad that I, a Jew, apparently knows the New Testament's text better than the people who swear by it and ostensibly believe and follow it.

[foundfamilynonsense]

Being the victims of mass genocide is not failure.

And I think any character that says so should be a villain. So of course Ahsoka says it. I’m getting evil ahsoka headcanons again.