#identities both in-universe and out of it

[creativemercinary]

I think a part of it is also - instead of gender identity - gender performance. The biggest example i can think of are butch lesbians who use he/him pronouns not because they identify as male (some might, but that's by no means universal) but because that's part of how they express their masculinity in womanhood.

I think the other piece is that pronouns are personal preference, so some people decoupled the gender connotations of pronouns. Most of the time when you're using a pronoun, the antecedent isn't man/woman/person, it's Susie (pronouns indicating she's a girl) or Steve (pronouns indicating he's a guy), but not everyone personally feels the pronouns connect with the parenthesis.

Of course, this still has the confusion you mentioned, but I think it's understandable to want to identify how the person wants to be referred to and feeling like you're floundering when one of the cues you use (pronouns) isn't being as effective as you intended in that regard. The good part is that most people aren't jerks about you getting it wrong when you haven't been told.

Also, English isn't nearly as broken as we think. It's complex, yes, but literally every language is complex, it's just a matter of how much so. And part of English's complexity is in how it was influenced by other languages. It's a germanic language that was occupied by France, thus getting a lot of French influence, particularly in the vocabulary department, and was spoken by people obsessed with Latin being The Ultimate Language, and thus including more Latin-based vocabulary and some grammatical rules (that honestly don't apply in english). And what's more, its the natural state of a living language to change, if not become more fucked up, since people will always use language to suit their current, living needs. That's how we went from hast to has and phased out "thou" in favor of plural "you" to the point that "you" is functionally both singular and plural (with modification necessary for the latter). And it was because if shifting cultural norms of formality. Pronouns shifting grammatical function is nothing new, it's just that its happening in our lifetime and is weird in its unfamiliarity because of it

btw you cant tell what a person's gender is based solely on their pronouns. we really gotta get out of the hole of he=boy she=girl they=nonbinary.

[smiley-mcdoggington]

I think people make Ford a creep more often because if you even hint that Ford Doesn't reciprocate Stan's feelings the entire show becomes Ford the Molestation Magnet who Cannot Catch A Break Ever

[velvetvexations]

I've felt since about 2014 or so that a lot of the way we talk about privilege as a concept was a mistake.

One: while I fully understand the need to have an umbrella term for these things because they originate from the same place and sometimes overlap as more of a spectrum than discrete categories, it's a little bit confusing at best that we ALWAYS use the same term to describe advantages NO ONE should have, like the ability to buy your way into any college you want, AND the lack of DISADVANTAGES that no one should suffer, like being presumed dangerous just for walking down the street and potentially getting jumped or shot for it, AND the lack of daily annoyances that serve as a grating, constant reminder that you are Other, like "flesh tone" very conspicuously not even coming close to matching you or romance being presumed M/F by default everywhere. Yes, we need to talk about what all these things have in common, but we ALSO need to be able to talk about how they're different, and honestly, for the sake of outreach and ~optics~, I feel we've gotta be able to present the similarities and differences up front because I have met NO shortage of people who were super on board with trying to improve society somewhat but got really alienated from theory talk by the straight conflation of those categories, ESPECIALLY the latter two. Never mind the decision that the word for this should be something that most people first hear in the context of an extra hour of video games for good behavior or something along those lines.

Two: No category of privilege is granted universally to every member of a privileged group. Few if any men have all aspects of male privilege. In any lavender scare, NO ONE universally and automatically receives cishet privilege. It's even hard to find white people with all aspects of white privilege, and race as an oppressive class was INVENTED to make it easy to use visual markers to determine who's "in" and who's "out". It's also much easier to lose a lot of aspects of privilege than the language gives it credit for - sometimes, just NOT being enough of a bigot is enough to get you treated like a second class citizen.

Three: Every disprivileged group has some privilege over the next in some ways, AND is disprivileged under them in other ways, and the ways in which this manifests get REALLY chaotic once you start looking at the individual level rather than the group level because of the above. Treating "privilege" like a black and white thing that EVERYONE outside a specific highlighted group has makes futile attempts at "scorekeeping" and the bullshit infighting that comes with it almost inevitable. In fact, a lot of the time, the unshared aspects of closely related axes of oppression can intersect in ways that can't fully be dissected without also examining the axis that an exclusionist is trying to "beat" or disprove - for example, I'd go so far as to argue that because oppositional sexism runs so deep in society, every aspect of transandrophobia has a transmisogynistic flip side AND vice-versa; if we talked about privilege and gender in a way that DIDN'T make it so easy for people to think only one of the two can exist and naming the second is therefore a denial of the first, we'd probably be collectively a lot further along in dissecting both.

Four: Systems of privilege and disprivilege cannot be dismantled by treating the privileged as monsters; this only justifies and perpetuates the system by emphasizing the strength and power of the privileged vs. the hopeless, futile struggles of the oppressed, even when it DOESN'T result in "movements" where the oppressed fear losing their identity if they escape their oppression. In the very worst cases it ends up being every bit as classically bigoted as the ideas it calls out - note how many varieties of radfems arrive at a conclusion where they believe the SAME things about men and women as any manosphere redpill chud, they just think the power imbalance that privileges men is a BAD thing instead of a GOOD thing.

Every damned exclusionist cycle just makes me more and more sure of this. I feel like I've been screaming it into the void for over 10 years and yet no one but the teeny tiny choir has ever listened. At least I've seen more people starting to talk about point 1 specifically over this past year...?

Anon, I'll be honest, I love you but this is a bit too long and dense for me to process so I'm going to post this and put it in my #I just work here tag.

[mariacallous]

Kyle Brett had a feeling Sinners, the new supernatural horror from Black Panther director Ryan Coogler, would have a big opening weekend—but he was also hyper aware of the consequences of failure.

“It’s already extremely hard to have a successful original horror movie or just any original movie,” Brett, a former Netflix lawyer who works as a creative executive at Blumhouse, the production company behind M3GAN, Get Out, and the Insidious franchise, tells WIRED. “If that shit had bombed, original film would have truly gone away.”

The night before its US release, Brett predicted on X that Sinners would clear $60 million, based “on nothing but the number of Black folks who have asked me about it.” In the business of Hollywood, nothing is guaranteed, least of all a hit movie that’s based on an untested story. But not only was Sinners a hit, breaking multiple box office records, it’s becoming a full-on cultural phenomenon, complete with memes and literary deep dives.

Perhaps most importantly, it has challenged what’s become conventional wisdom in show business: the idea that audiences won’t respond to original stories.

Sinners has almost everything you could possibly want out of an original film: sex, vampires, a haunting score by composer Ludwig Göransson, and Michael B. Jordan in maybe his best performance yet. The movie opens in Jim Crow–era Mississippi during 1932 and follows identical twin brothers Smoke and Stack, both played by Jordan, who have returned home after time away in Chicago, where they moonlighted as gangsters for Al Capone. They’ve come back to start a juke joint but are put to the test when a coven of vampires encroaches on their new business. Across its two-hour-plus run time, what unfolds is classic Coogler: a lush, complex story about family, community, and survival that dares to reinvent the horror genre into something new altogether.

The premise has resonated with audiences in such a powerful way that Sinners opened with $48 million domestically and $63.5 million globally, making it the biggest debut for an original film since 2019, when Jordan Peele’s Us opened to $70 million. (The anticipation surrounding a new Coogler project likely also played a role.) Sinners likewise surpassed Nope, also by Peele—which pulled in $44 million its first weekend in 2022—as the biggest opening for an original film since the pandemic began. It is now the only horror flick in over 35 years to receive an “A” on CinemaScore.

“IPs are a comfortable, safe bet, but originals, when you have something that right out the gate can connect with audiences, they can have as big a punch,” says Daniel Loria, an analyst at the Boxoffice Company. “That’s definitely what we’re seeing.”

It can still be hard to pinpoint exactly what kind of movie works best in Hollywood these days. The success of big-budget blockbusters—Dune, Barbie, Wicked—aren’t exactly a litmus test of how well the industry is faring or what audiences are ultimately satisfied with. Certain IP, like The New Mutants from 2020, bomb or never take off for a number of reasons; often it has to do with earnings, but poor reviews and studio mismanagement can also be a factor.

“Some franchises are past their best and haven’t performed. This happens every decade or so, which means the studios are looking at new franchise stories to take forward,” says David Hancock, an analyst at Omdia. “A Quiet Place did this. Minecraft may do it.”

Minecraft, a Warner Bros. property, currently holds the top spot at the worldwide box office, with $720 million, and is estimated to eventually top $1 billion. Video game IP is especially hot right now. The Super Mario Bros. Movie, released by Universal Pictures in 2023, topped $1.3 billion. Paramount’s Sonic the Hedgehog has yielded major dividends for the studio. Until Dawn and Mortal Kombat 2 are also slated to drop this year.

One of the things Sinners got right, Brett says, “is that they treated themselves like they were IP.” That means, per his agreement with Warner Bros., Coogler gets the rights to his film back in 25 years—the type of deal that’s mostly unheard of today. Some studio executives believe it sets a “very dangerous precedent” for copyright ownership and distribution entitlements, Vulture reported, saying it will crater the current power dynamics of the studio system, “effectively imperiling the cinematic back catalogue: the core asset behind all movie-studio valuation.” But “that’s the kind of attitude you need with an original,” Brett says. “It's like, No, this is my intellectual property.”

For a time, a new Marvel epic was a proven seat filler, but the fatigue and declining critical reception around superhero movies that has bubbled up in recent years—a consequence of Marvel flooding the market with comic book IP—means that is no longer the case. Marvel is currently in rebound mode. It dropped Jonathan Majors, who was a rising star in the MCU, in light of his domestic assault case (he was found guilty of two out of four charges), and The Marvels became the studio’s lowest-grossing film across its 33 titles, earning $206 million globally, well below its $374 million budget.

It’s “hard to reinvent that form, and I think this next generation is looking for ways to tell their own stories that service their own sort of collective ADHD,” Avengers: Endgame codirector Joe Russo told GamesRadar+ last year, likening young moviegoers’ communication style to “memes and headlines.”

Not all original films are seeing a huge demand, as the age of streamers has reshaped consumption habits. As of March, movie sales in the US and Canada were down 7 percent this year compared to the same period in 2024, according to Comscore.

In a recent interview with The Independent, director Steven Soderbergh bemoaned that very reality. His latest feature, Black Bag, a spy thriller starring Cate Blanchett and Michael Fassbender that was released in theaters last month, has yet to turn a profit; it pulled in $37 million worldwide on a budget of $50 million. “This is the kind of film I made my career on,” Soderbergh said in the interview. “And if a mid-level budget, star-driven movie can’t seem to get people over the age of 25 years old to come out to theaters—if that’s truly a dead zone—then that’s not a good thing for movies. What’s gonna happen to the person behind me who wants to make this kind of film?”

Still, the success of Sinners offers a beacon of hope. It’s currently on track to have a second weekend increase, which “would be much more impressive for a non-IP April release,” Erik Anderson, the founder of Awards Watch, noted on X. It also belongs to a cohort of original films, many centered around identity, from directors that have also found audiences, commercial appeal, and critical acclaim in recent years, including Celine Song’s Past Lives, Cord Jefferson’s American Fiction, Lawrence Lamont’s One of Them Days, and Sean Baker’s Anora, which won Best Picture at this year’s Academy Awards.

Hancock predicts the “next decade will see a return to original stories” as a bid to bring in a wider range of audiences.

But the takeaway from Sinners and other movies like it go beyond just IP fatigue, says Brett, noting that these films—and their unique audiences—need to be adequately marketed and prioritized.

“If there is anything Hollywood misses it’s how much Black audiences will continually engage with them,” he says. “It’s not just like this one-time-customer type of thing. People will return to Sinners. The excitement of it, to me, shows that it has a long shelf life.”

[celis22]

DC x Marvel AU

"Gotham Dynamic Duo" AU

Okay...this crack-ass AU was born from one of my wildest dreams to date! In essence, Gambit and Spider-Man end up in Gotham together!!

After watching X-Men 97, my mom telling me she was obsessed with Gambit in her youth, and reading a ton of "Spider-Man in Gotham" fics...I had a weird dream where a lot of different concepts were mixed together! It was seriously a freaking weird dream.

How did Gambit and Peter end up in Gotham?

• After Gambit's death, there was a glitch in the universe because at that moment Doctor Strange was casting the spell that would erase Peter from the collective memory (but as happens in many fics) instead, Peter was erased from existence and sent to Gotham... Gambit's soul got caught in the middle and traveled with him!

Where do our two unfortunate victims end up?

• In a Lazarus Pit! Yep! Rage pit for Remy and Peter >:D I like to think that the regenerative properties of the pit basically undid Gambit's lobotomy and gave him back, at least partially, his original powers! While Peter is more spider-like than before!

• The rage pit presents itself differently in Gambit and Peter! For Peter, it's like his spider-sense goes haywire, putting him in a fight-or-flight mode... while for Gambit, it's more mental; he doesn't become animalistic like Peter or lose control like Jason. Instead, Gambit suffers from not having a way to stop violent intrusive thoughts, like... instead of attacking senselessly, he plots murder!

Relationships and Interactions!

• Between Peter and Gambit: Since they're both kind of trapped together in Gotham, they stick together! With Peter creating false identities for the two of them (with Gambit assigned as his legal guardian after Peter's parents "death") and Gambit being the responsible adult who brings home the bread!

• Between Peter/Gambit and the Rouge/villains: I'm a sucker for the aunt-nephew relationship between Peter and Harley (plus Ivy) so...yeah, just silly stuff between them! While Gambit has more of a working relationship with some villains. Example: he works on the iceberg lounge for the Penguin as a waiter...and dancer!

• Between Peter/Gambit and the Batfamily: Gotham's favorite stalker bats mostly interact with Peter, since (surprise surprise) Peter goes to Gotham High and has more opportunities to interact with them. Gambit, on the other hand, is more of an afterthought to the bats; he's only Peter's legal guardian...but not for Jason!

Here we enter the strangest part of my dream...a crack ship! Please don't hate me

• Peter/Gambit’s relationship with Jason: Since our pit boys are broke as hell, they both live in a small apartment in Crime Alley…Red Hood territory! Peter is another alley kid to Jason, an interesting one since he’s caught the attention of his family…but Gambit? He’s love struck with our favorite Cajun man! After seeing him leaving Penguin’s nightclub and getting jumped by some drunks, Jason springs into action to protect him (keeping in mind his code of looking out for the sex workers/escorts in Crime Alley…though I’m not sure WHERE that iceberg is…so just roll with that!) he determines that, as a dancer, Gambit falls into that category…but who knew that Louisiana charm (and accent) would end up giving Jason a crush!

Ages & Timeline!... only for some though!

• Gambit: 27 years old. I know in the series (X-Men 97) Gambit is supposed to be between 30 and 35 years old, but I wanted to make him a little younger... That and because I thought he was around 25 when I saw the series! So... yeah...

• Peter: 17 15 years old. Following the movie canon (NWH), it's speculated that he's between 17 and 18 years old! But continuing with the cliché of Peter being younger, he physically and mentally regresses at the age of 15... the same could apply to Gambit.

• Damian: 13 years old... because I like the idea of Damian being a dangerous little pre-teen!

• Bruce: 40 years old... listen! Old and tired dad, Bruce! Besides, the life of a vigilante is stressful. This man has aged quite a bit due to the stress of fighting crime... and being a father to wild children!

Extras & concepts I don't know where to put!!

• Gambit and Peter are permanently trapped in Gotham! Peter because of Doctor Strange's spell...and Gambit because he died and his soul is no longer in his original universe, so...no Deathbit for X-Men 97!

• John Constantine!...listen, I love Constantine, my mom is a huge fan of his movie and she recently started reading his comics, so I wanted to include him. Plus, I have an AU with Constantine I'm working on.

He's just Gambit's drunk friend. The two met by chance and Constantine smelled the "this guy doesn't belong here" vibe as soon as he met Gambit, so...they just see each other from time to time to drink and shit.

• Gambit's powers, while not at the same level as pre-lobotomy, are quite strong! managing to charge things (and living matter) with kinetic energy without touching them if he concentrates enough.

• The relationship between Jason and Gambit was the main reason for the existence of this AU and an important part of my dream. I think... since Gambit is still heartbroken because of Rouge, Jason would have a hard time trying to win him over...and if we add to that Jason own conflicting feelings about being in love after so long, Jason and Gambit have a complicated relationship, like friends-to-lovers kind of thing but also puppy-love!

maybe i'll do art for this AU later, but it all depends on my motivation...also, i don't know too much about DC or Marvel, so pls don't hate on this AU! it's all harmless fun!

[noperopesaredope]

Clones & Cultural Identity

(This is an in-universe essay I wrote that appears in Chapter 8 of my fic, and I'm legitimately proud of it, so I decided to also post it here)

Clones experience an almost tragic disconnect from Mandalorian culture, the culture of their genetic donor. They are raised away from not just Mandalore, but Mandalorian settings and the overall cultural environment. They are not raised within the culture, and it exists at a distance, something that can merely be observed, not experienced. Sometimes, they can’t witness any of it, not without getting the little disconnected pieces their older brothers were able to gather. While they may know and are trained by some Mandalorian individuals, most trainers will not pass it down to them, nor are they truly raised by Mandalorians. The clones are also raised in a restrictive and hyper-controlling environment that prevents them from being able to practice or fully pass down parts of their culture.

There is little cultural context, because not only are many of them not taught much about Mandalorian culture, but they are raised in such a different environment with such different circumstances, it is hard to apply and utilize these practices or beliefs. The clones have a very unique situation that has altered their collective mindset on life and values and purpose, thus giving them very different values and priorities compared to most Mandalorians who do not have to deal with the type of oppression clones face.

Mandalorians are not raised with the idea that they were created specifically to fight and die in a war they had little to no say in. Mandalorians are not taught that they are less than people and their lives have no value compared to others. Mandalorians are not raised with the constant threat of being slaughtered for any form of imperfections. Mandalorians do not need to deal with all the same unique issues that clones must face and are somewhat accustomed to. And possibly biggest of all, clones grow up surrounded by other clones, individuals who they see as identical brothers with the almost exact same DNA.

I could make a massive list of all the differences between clones and Mandalorians. I could even make a list of the things they have in common, but the different ways these things manifest. However, I will only truly focus on their values regarding relationships and family.

Clones and Mandalorians both value relationships and community, but in slightly different (and even very different) ways. Clones do not have parents, and every clone I’ve met thus far has been extremely dismissive of the importance of parental relationships and even confused by the notion at times. Instead, clones deeply value siblinghood, and most close connections are seen as sibling connections. I have seen about one or two semi-parental dynamics between clones and natborns, but very rarely.

This is almost extremely different from Mandalorians, who do value siblinghood, but appear to value parent-child relationships more, something that is almost antithetical to the clone experience. Mandalorians also have a large culture around adoption, and while I’ve seen clones adopt Jedi Padawan to a certain degree, their form of adoption is more tied to siblinghood and becoming part of the community. For Mandalorians, the relationship is more parental. In fact, that is the main idea behind these adoptions. They are also likely to value non-blood relations, as long as their culture, traditions, and values are passed on from one generation to the next.

However, while they are far from opposed to adoption and making connections with natborns, clones tend to value other clones the most, almost out of principle. While not all clones are close, they often are drawn to and protective of one another. Even if two clones do not know each other, they still refer to each other as “brothers” and hold a certain automatic care and loyalty to other brothers specifically due to the fact that they are fellow clones. This does not particularly apply to natborns.

The clones do not have an obsession with blood relations per say, but they all share what is generally the same DNA, and can have certain trust issues with what might be considered “outsiders”. Of course, this is mainly due to survival purposes, but that is another example of how their different circumstances make their values and beliefs very different from that of traditional Mandalorians. Clones have no rights and are not considered sentient beings, putting them on a very different playing field compared to natborns. They are often in danger of being punished by their natborn counterparts for any number of reasons, and thus must be wary until they can be sure the natborn is relatively safe. Other clones are, by default, considered safe. Natborns, meanwhile, are often not.

The frequent exception to this are Jedi. In fact, that is one of the biggest cultural differences between clones and Mandalorians. Mandalorians have a contentious relationship with Jedi and there is an automatic hostility present. Meanwhile, clones were raised with the belief that Jedi are essentially their superiors, and sometimes even otherworldly beings of great power. Many clones see the Jedi as their greatest allies, and there is an extreme amount of loyalty present, even when some initially feared them. The relationship between most Jedi and clones is an incredibly deep one, and it almost seems to be akin to a spiritual connection. The deeper connection is formed out of experience and gradually gained trust, but the clones seem to hold a noticeable, almost automatic loyalty towards most Jedi, and it’s only broken when the Jedi actively breaks their collective trust.

There are so many subtle differences between Mandalorians and clones, specifically due to their respective situations. There is a disconnect present, a feeling that the clones are separated from Mandalorian culture, though I know plenty who want to learn more about their heritage on a deep and personal level. There is an almost indirect and somewhat unintentional form of cultural erasure at play, where the clones are unable to connect with Mandalorian culture because they are raised in an environment where they can neither be fully taught it, raised in it, or practice it.

The situation the clones face reminds me of what many individuals born and raised in slavery face. They are unable to practice or learn about their culture of origin, but know that it exists, and wish to learn more about it. However, there is no one available to teach them, and even if there was, it would either be impossible to practice, or impractical to implement into their lives. Then, when they are free, they cannot relate to those raised in their culture of origin, and it feels isolating, like they are somehow fake.

It’s hard, finding that connection to culture, a culture that you know exists and you feel you should relate to, but no matter how hard you try, it feels as though you will never truly belong to it. And those raised within that culture will never truly see you as one of them. So many see the clones as lacking a culture, because they are mostly disconnected from Mandalorian culture except in certain areas.

However, there is one thing it seems most people don’t realize or understand. Despite having been disconnected from their initial cultural heritage, clones do in fact have a culture of their own. In fact, they have an extremely fleshed out and intricate one. Like many peoples who were stripped of their cultural roots, they took what little bits and pieces they had left, and made something new, some of which included the traditions they still remembered, and most of which was formed by their new circumstances.

Take their language, for example. Many of them were able to learn bits and pieces of Mando’a, but only the words, not as much of the grammar or sentence structure. So, they simply mixed it with Basic, swapping out words and sometimes fusing them together or adding new rules. I even realized that they began to adapt and change a few words to fit concepts unique to clone culture and the average clone experience. They even have some new words entirely, the most well known being “natborn,” a term unique to clones. They have created what is essentially a fledgling creole language, a unique mixture of Mando’a and Galactic Basic that is specific to them. Or at the very least, they have created a unique dialect of Mando’a out of the little bits and pieces they were able to learn. They even have their own accent, which adds further to the uniqueness of this clone language.

Not only that, they have created a wide variety of visual languages and code systems, some branching off of pre-existing ones, others that are completely unique. The only one I can even vaguely write about is that clones have their own sign language that originated from traditional military hand signals, but soon evolved into something more original. The rest are something I will never truly know about, because most non-auditory clone languages are actually secret and something only shared between clones. Some are so secret, I don’t even know of their existence. The reason behind this is primarily due to clones having experience being heavily surveilled and monitored in ways that could be dangerous if they made the wrong move or said the wrong thing. So they often needed to communicate in ways that wouldn’t cause as many issues, or wouldn’t be tracked like spoken words were. This is an example of clone culture being born out of necessity and circumstance.

Clone traditions can also be formed out of circumstance. Take, for example, one of the most important traditions in clone culture: choosing a name. All clones are born without “proper” names. Instead, they are all given numbers. When a clone comes of age (though sometimes a bit earlier on a less official level), he is able to choose a name for himself. Some are given by brothers as nicknames that gradually become true names, while some are discovered by the clone himself. Names are a method of forging and claiming a sense of identity and individuality. For many across all cultures, names truly are about identity, and for clones, that is especially valuable. They were denied a sense of identity or personhood their entire lives, so the ability to choose a name is to choose a sense of identity and claim one’s personhood, to become more than just a number.

However, traditions are not always born out of circumstance or necessity. Another tradition similar to the naming tradition is the painting of the armor. When a clone is a freshly deployed rookie, the clones refer to him as a “shiny” because their armor is shiny and new, untarnished by the horrors of war. Just like the rookie. After their first battle, they are no longer considered a shiny, and the older, more experienced troopers will help them paint their armor with a personalized design. To earn one’s paint is considered a great achievement. It not only means you are now a true warrior, but it symbolizes that you have survived. There is an underlying grief to it, as most clones will never get the chance to paint their armor since so many shinies die in their first battle. So to paint your armor means you survived the odds, and it is an indirect coming of age ceremony. Clones are also not able to dress the way they want, so painting one’s armor is a form of self expression and fashion, almost artistic in nature. It is a subtle way to claim self autonomy, since if you can’t choose your clothes, you might as well choose the patterns.

One of the most fascinating parts of clone trooper culture are tattoos. While it is not directly stated, tattoos can have a greater symbolic importance within clone culture. Clones do not own their own bodies. They are denied self autonomy by the very fact that they are property of the government, and thus, their bodies are as well. So to tattoo oneself is to take back that autonomy in the most dramatic and intense way. The tattoo is a literal permanent mark on their body, and it can almost be a subtle type of rebellion, even in the most loyal and dedicated clones. It, like armor painting, is also an artform and method of self expression, with each tattoo having its own meaning and purpose. Every tattoo can have a unique meaning. Some are memorial tattoos, some are artistic, some are just to stand out from the crowd. But for whatever reason, tattoos are the most powerful part of clone culture, and the value and importance of it is very unique to their situation. They do not own their own bodies, so to tattoo the body for any reason is to claim it, to regain autonomy and control over oneself.

There are so many aspects of clone culture I cannot even begin to get into, since you could write a whole book about it, but the way different traditions have developed and evolved are absolutely fascinating.

As a whole, clones have a very complicated relationship with culture and cultural identity. I have seen many clones struggle to look for a sense of heritage and a connection to their genetic donor’s culture. To look for a cultural identity. But the beautiful thing is that despite being denied their Mandalorian heritage, the clones have created their own culture. One born of suffering and oppression, but not made of it. Instead, the fact that they created their own unique culture shows their resilience and their ability to thrive despite it all. The clones have forged their own cultural identity, their own heritage. And that heritage is Clone Culture.

~~~~~~

(There's also a few other essays in the chapter, and the next one which is about a fictional music genre called Cava has a passage that I feel fits pretty well):

One small note for you clones out there: even if they stop creating clones, as long as you are able to have children, your culture will live on. Even if your DNA slowly fades away to the point that all your descendants only have a speck of clone genetics, the culture and identity will stay. And even if parts of your culture are tied to your oppression and current circumstances, it doesn’t mean these parts of your culture can’t be passed down. After all, Cava music was born out of our pain, and grew into something unique and often beautiful at times. Your name traditions, something that has become such a prominent part of clone culture yet is tied to your dehumanization, can still be passed down and hold a similar value. To choose one’s name is to choose and claim one’s own identity, so even if none of your children are born with a number, the value still stays. The traditions born out of pain can become something that still keeps your values and beliefs, and still holds meaning. That is what makes Cava so special. And that is why your culture will never truly die, as long as you pass it down.

~~~~~~~~~~~

While not all of this captures all my feelings and thoughts on clone culture, it captures a bit of it.

The biggest inspiration for the culture essay was actually the parallels clones have to the greater African American experience. I once saw a post that sort of mentioned the idea of clones having a disconnect from Mandalorian culture, and part of it made me realize how similar the description was to the evolution of Black American culture.

Slaves in the US were typically riped from their homelands and prevented from practicing or fully passing down their culture. Thus, many future generations lost that connection and only had little bits and pieces of multiple cultures across West Africa. So, they ended up making their own culture out of a mix of what they still had, and their new situation/experiences.

However, now there are many African Americans who somewhat search for the idea of reconnecting with their old roots, roots that their ancestors had been forcefully disconnected from. And yet, there can be a massive disconnect between them and native Africa peoples who managed to maintain a large percentage of their cultures.

The essay was partially about the specific idea of finding culture and that sense of loss, before recognizing that a new culture was formed that still has its own beauty and value despite parts of it being created from oppression. I decided it would be neat to analyze this concept through the lens of the clones, and how their specific situation would manifest both similarly and differently.

I hope you found this interesting and liked it, since the way the clones' situation alters their culture is very interesting to me, and I think it'd be neat to see what other people think about it.

[yusuke-of-valla]

I don't remember exactly what I dreamt about but I did wake up very upset about shows that treat the secret identity part of being a superhero as a burden for their narrative that they have to speedrun getting rid of

[afterthelambs]

Shuake and Jundori are basically the same ship

List of similarities between Joker/Akechi and Junpei/Chidori:

Ship is between a chill guy and an assassin

Characters share the same persona affinity (Arsene and Loki both use curse, Hermes and Medea both use fire)

Assassin's outfit colors are mainly white and red (specifically akechi's robin hood outfit)

Assassin's persona may hurt them (Loki has call of chaos and Medea attacks Chidori)

Assassin deceives the chill guy into thinking they're normal to get info on the group he's part of

Assassin betrays and kidnaps the chill guy + separates him from his friend group because he's the leader (Junpei was lying about being the leader but Chidori believed it)

Friend group is only cordial with the assassin at best but doesn't wish harm on them

Chill guy is the only one who truly connects with the assassin

Assassin insists they dont care about the chill guy but deep down they do

While responsible for their own actions, the assassin is still being manipulated by someone close to them

Revealed that the assassin's abilities were being exploited by the families of both games' wealthy Empress Arcana (Okumura used Akechi via Shido to assassinate enemies, Kirijo group used Chidori as a child experiment)

In late November, the assassin has a 1-vs-many fight against the chill guy and his friends

After you beat the assassin, the ones manipulating them appear and reveal they're willing to discard the assassin for being weak

The manipulators threaten to shoot the chill guy instead

Assassin sacrifices themself for the chill guy during the shooting

Chill guy's greatest wish was to be with the assassin and losing them challenges their resolve to fight (Joker may or may not fold on 2/2 but Junpei gets his resolve back as part of the plot)

Toxic doomed trope

If Royal and Reload (because thats what I played):

14. Chill guy and assassin have a special attack (showtime and theurgy)

15. Assassin died permanently in the original version of the games, but they can be saved in future remakes (if you spent enough time with them and made the right choices in-game)

I think that's it? But if anyone points out more I will edit this and add them

[nenoname]

the experience of reading stan twins fics and being constantly haunted by a name

[cabeswaterdrowned]

“Democracy’s a farce,” Ronan said, and Adam smirked, a private, small thing that was inherently exclusionary. An expression, in fact, that he could’ve very well learned from Ronan.”

Adam emulating rich boys he’s attracted to continues to go crazy

[warrior-of-storms]

they're menaces, they know that they're menaces, and they take pride in being menaces together.

Gwen can and will crash on Terry & Dana's couch when she's in the area, and her greatest joy in life is annoying old Bruce because she's not a Bat and he can't do anything about her. Gwen is like the sister Terry never had. They share like half a braincell whenever they're in the same place at the same time. Bruce is so done with them all of the time.

Somehow, Gwen's life is miserable enough that she considers visiting Terry in Gotham to be a vacation.

[tasticturbo]

[starculler]

Reverse Robins AU except the first kid Bruce collects is originally from the correct timeline/universe (physically and/or mentally, but either way having no way back home).

It's a tossup for me between having that first kid be Duke or Damian (both at once might be an interesting challenge!), but the results are the same:

A kid stuck in a world where they're the first sidekick with all the weight and responsibility and the learning curve that entails. Thinking they're alone until the one who came before them crash lands into their life, and then trying desperately not to let the version of this person they know best overshadow how they interact. Clinging desperately to a hard-won legacy while also having to re-invent themself from the ground up.

[notmyenergy]

how does Ateez lore also center on a character named MITO who wears an all-black cowboy fit

[fellhellion]

head in hands miles’s arc in spiderverse means so much to me. choosing to embody all that spiderman IS by earnestly trying to save those around him and rejecting the notion that he should simply lie down and let fate take its course....augh....

[rathayibacter]

thinking a lot about how IMMORTALITY squeezes a ton of meaning out of being a game. like, theoretically, you could get all the same themes and significance from watching all the footage once or twice, in order, all the way through. after all, that's kinda how previous game by the studio Her Story was: there was a full picture, and it was waiting for you to put all the pieces together so you could see it.

but IMMORTALITY's a bit different. the thing that you perceive to be the big mystery actually isn't that hard to solve, and is really just a couple stops to check off along your much longer journey of understanding. and so much of that is thanks to the specific mechanic of how you uncover new clips. you click on something in the shot, and you're brought to another shot with the same object, or a shot related to that object, or a shot thematically linked to that object. you're navigating via the Kuleshov Effect, and that means you're constantly, inevitably creating meaning through how you interact with the game.

like, super minor, non-spoiler-y example: there's a set of scenes connected by a cat. you see a cat in one scene and click on it, and you're taken to the rehearsal of a scene that will have that cat, but they aren't using the animal actor yet cuz it's just rehearsal. you're brought to the moment that an actress is leaning down and petting where the cat will be, at some point, later. it's a cute little move by the game designers, cuz yeah, these scenes are connected by that cat you clicked on, but not literally, only in the final product.

but then i clicked on the space where the cat would be, and it took me to another scene, once again with the actual cat. and isn't that funny. isn't that interesting. of course it makes sense in hindsight, right? we're traveling via cinematic language, and in rehearsal there's no difference between a cat and an empty bit of floor where the script tells you a cat will be. you gotta treat that empty space like there's a cat there, or else the whole thing falls apart.

this isn't a significant moment in the game. none of the three clips involved really matter that much. but like, at the same time, by connecting these three pretty empty filler scenes in this way, by taking you from a cat to a not-cat to a cat, and telling you that they're all equivalent, the game is making a pretty strong thematic declaration, one that would be completely absent if you'd just watched these three clips separately, in the parts of the movie that they belong in.

not every player is gonna read that deeply into this moment, just as i havent read this deeply into most of the other connections ive made in my so-far 12 and a half hours with the game. some folks will read something completely different into it (there's a pretty fun discussion you could have about it happening in 2 Of Everything specifically, playing into the mistaken identities plot via Schrödinger's cat). some players won't even find that connection at all! there's enough redundancy in everything here that nobody needs to find every possible point of interaction to finish or understand the game. and all that's kinda the beauty of it, right? there's a million ways to examine this text, to work your way through the enormous tower of information you're presented with, and every single one of those paths is gonna create unique meaning. they've taken the process of interpreting art and made it a game mechanic, without hamstringing the actual act of interpretation in the process. the game says "hey, in order to see everything, you're gonna have to make connections," but never forces your hand in what those connections have to be. it's absolutely fascinating.