#if you disagree and think their relationship should have that western feel to it

[antianakin]

hey, just wanted to say that i appreciate you creating this space to discuss more uh....unpopular takes on star wars. obviously fandom is a hobby and i don't want to ruin anyone's fun! but i also want a space to push back against fanon interpretations without treading on anyone's toes, you know?

like the whole obi-wan catholic guilt trope, jedi repression trope at large...i'm being dramatic but as an asian person, sometimes it sucks that this is such a prevalent idea about a heroic group that was influenced by buddhism and is very asian-coded. i'm not wording this well but just like how stories about european knights often reflect *the very best* of western values like chivalry, honor, gentility, i could really see a lot of the best of asian culture (a huge over-simplification) in the jedi.

but all that being reduced to "oh actually it's totally catholic guilt" or a inadvertently a regurgitation of prevalent asian stereotypes (the jedi as a group suppress individuality, they don't express emotions, they are too harsh, too unforgiving, lack compassion) is...frustrating to see, even though it's everyone's right to interpret & relate to things as they see fit.

especially when focused on obi-wan! even if we assume that obi-wan is repressed, secretly attached to an unhealthy degree but hiding it, or whatnot - the man quite literally airs the dirty laundry in front of mace and yoda, perhaps the "highest" members of the jedi. he says that he thinks anakin is arrogant, isn't listening to him. i dunno but a repressed person who hates confrontation and vulnerability probably wouldn't do that. he should've gone "haha nope anakin and i are totally fine masters, totally fine" instead of looking for advice & airing out his frustrations.

people getting angry at obi-wan for putting the jedi order over anakin is still annoying, but at least accurate. like yes! obi-wan does put the good of his culture and the galaxy at large over his old padawan! good for him!

but honestly all popular fanon obi-wan tropes go round on a roulette wheel waiting for me to pick one to be petty about lmao.

I definitely get what you mean about wanting a space to push back on common fanon interpretations without stepping on anyone's toes. That's obviously exactly why I made this blog in the first place. It's why I named the blog "antianakin" at all, it's supposed to be a giant neon warning sign to people that I'm not going to feel ashamed of some of my more negative opinions. It's why I use anti and critical tags as much as possible, and don't use the more general tags most of the time (aside from just... "star wars"). This is my space to put my feelings out there, positive AND negative, and I work really hard to make sure I'm not invading spaces that are meant for being positive.

I also often don't reblog people's posts that I completely disagree with JUST to talk about why I don't like their take. I won't invade someone's Jedi critical post in order to tell them that they're wrong about Star Wars. People have tried to tag me into posts like that, but I'm not interested in doing that kind of thing. If I DO want to say something about what I've seen, I make my own post about the issue.

It's interesting that you mention that stories about European knights often reflect what's viewed as the best of Western values, because so often when I see people talk about what would make the Jedi BETTER (or Legends versions of the Jedi that they think were done better), it's usually pretty clear that the Jedi are being turned INTO your more typical European knight to reflect those exact values. They're often wandering on their own, doing what they personally believe to be right whenever and wherever they want, defending the helpless wherever they find them by just riding in on a white horse and slaying an enemy or a monster. And of course some of those values they uphold are about what love and relationships should look like, too, so they all end up in committed monogamous relationships (even if it's with more than one person, it's still usually monogamous). This is one of the reasons I started getting frustrated with the High Republic novels by the third one because it started having that vibe that the "good" Jedi who stuck to more "traditional" ways of doing things and "traditional" values were so much more like your typical European knight, while the Jedi character doing something more modern and more political was losing his way and struggling with a desire for things he was repressing.

It's a feeling we've seen come up time and time again and it keeps getting tossed out in more recent shows, too, the idea that the Jedi "lost their way" from what they should've been, that they once used to represent something worthwhile and losing those traditional values is what caused their destruction and the only way to keep it from happening again is to go back to that. It's not hard to see where that storyline feels compelling, obviously, but it IS sad to see the values that the Jedi DO have in the Prequels in particular getting tossed aside as unworthy and to see their defeat being rewritten as THEIR failure instead of everyone else's.

I've had people tell me that this story feels like it has more nuance to it than the Jedi simply being the heroic victims and the Sith being pure villains. And I get why people think that, I just think that there's a lot of nuance they're MISSING in the story being told, and that that nuance exists EVEN WITH the Jedi still being the heroic victims and the Sith being clear villains. I am more than happy to help critique some of the WAYS that that story got told in the Prequels, the issues in the structure of the Prequels and how it maybe muddied some of the messages that the story was trying to get across, but I also think that that critique is SEPARATE from my feelings on the intended narrative itself. I don't think that the narrative itself is bad or lacking in nuance simply because it may not have been told perfectly. And, personally, I think that some of the more "nuanced" Jedi critical takes often seem INCREDIBLY simplistic themselves.

As for Obi-Wan, fandom will do what fandom does to its darlings. I've certainly done my fair share of simplifying my faves down to shadows of themselves because I happened to enjoy the shadow sometimes in its own right. But I do think that there's plenty of evidence to contradict a lot of people's more popular interpretation of Obi-Wan as a repressed, damaged, traumatized waif. I don't mind a LITTLE of that sometimes, usually when I read fics set in the early years of his apprenticeship with Qui-Gon following some of the events of Jedi Apprentice, but it comes with the context that Obi-Wan is still VERY YOUNG at the time and is dealing with some fairly specific things that have just happened to him and is still learning how to do that in a healthy way.

By the time you hit The Phantom Menace and ESPECIALLY the Clone Wars, Obi-Wan should no longer be a repressed, traumatized waif of a person. That's when it stops being believable to me because the character we see on screen in that time period never fits that description. Like you said, he's ACTIVELY confrontational to his superiors. He does do it with Mace and Yoda (and he does it in ROTS as well as in AOTC) and he does it with Qui-Gon during his apprenticeship, too.

The one other time I was willing to accept some of this characterization was in the Kenobi show where we do see him being more repressed and traumatized and less willing to stand up for himself when faced with confrontation with people like Owen. But one of the reasons this worked for me is because, much like with those JA fics, it comes with a VERY SPECIFIC CONTEXT, and it's done with the intentional purpose of giving Obi-Wan somewhere to develop. He also doesn't stay particularly submissive or waif-like for long, we see him gain back a LOT of his willingness to stand up for himself and confront people by the second episode. The message wasn't that Obi-Wan had ALWAYS been damaged and traumatized or that he was always "meant" for sadness or whatever, but that he had the capacity to find happiness IF HE CHOOSES TO ACT LIKE THE JEDI HE ONE WAS. The only reason he's struggling is because he ISN'T acting like a Jedi anymore. He's not finally figuring out how to handle his traumas, he's GOING BACK to being the person who can handle his traumas.

Anyway, yeah, I feel you, I have definitely experienced the roulette wheel of petty frustration at fandom interpretations of Obi-Wan lol. I can barely handle the "he drops his lightsaber all the time" joke because I feel like it often makes him come across as childishly incompetent.

[burr-ell]

"the tendency of this fandom to only engage with what THEY want these characters to be#as opposed to what their creators are trying to do and the stories they want to tell" slap this on a bumper sticker, you just summed all cr discourse (about PCs at least) in 2 sentences

It truly is maddening (and it's not by any means exclusive to the CR fandom). The reason why the discourse always goes the way it does is that at the end of the day, the loud fanwanky people only see what they would do, if they were self-inserted into the story, as a valid choice; and they are, more broadly, fundamentally disinterested in what others think or feel. There are several examples of this, and the variety of spaces within the fandom that produce these ideas is an indicator that this isn't endemic to one specific group of people.

-Keyleth is an important character whose feelings and choices are validated by the other PCs and cast even if they still disagree with them, in spite of how she and her preachiness get in the way of the Murderhobo Jubilee? It's not because the cast are all friends and they genuinely believe Keyleth is valid and are interested in how these discussions and choices can guide the story. It's because Marisha is the DM's girlfriend, and also here's my totally unbiased theory that my pet favorite players Sam and Travis secretly hate Marisha and Keyleth.

-Vax's presence is still felt and nodded to in the post-canon VM oneshots? It's not because he was an important character who mattered. It's because Liam wants to make everyone talk about his tragedy because he has Main Character Syndrome. Scanlan Wishes for Vax to appear at the wedding? It's not because he cares about Vex or because Sam and Liam wanted a sweet tribute to Vex and Vax's relationship and by extension Liam and Laura's friendship. It's because Liam thinks Vex's life should always revolve around Vax, and Sam wants to enable him and jerk himself off as the one who facilitated it.

-Beauyasha and Fjorester become canon? It's not because the players wanted it and it happened naturally. It's because there was a secret behind-the-scenes push to "force" those ships to become canon instead, and like, Dani Carr is some sort of shipping puppetmaster who made the players do it, and "they" (whomever "they" is) decided to sink Beaujester or Widojest because it was "obviously" going to become canon before the pandemic hiatus gave them time to "make the corporate-approved ships happen".

-Beau and Caleb try to reform the Empire and dismantle the Cerberus Assembly from within? It's not because it makes sense for their stories or that people who would take this position regarding a corrupt government might have a valid perspective that differs from your own. It's because the people at Critical Role Productions LLC are all spineless neoliberal cowards who won't commit to real activism. The best activism, after all, is violent, and violent revolutions have always resulted in stable aftermaths, and the real world has never demonstrated that this mindset is foolish.

-Relatedly: Caleb doesn't kill Trent personally? It's not because the most poetic justice would be to deny Trent the thing he wants most from Caleb. It's because "Limo Brain" is too obsessed with tragedy to have the stones to do "what needs to be done".

-Asmodeus, DnD Satan, turns out to also be CR Satan? It's not because it fits with the cosmology and the lore; it's because Matt Mercer is too attached to the "establishment", and the Prime Deities should have actually turned out to be the bad guys because of my personal baggage about Western religion and Christianity they're a little mean to my blorbo sometimes.

There's a pattern here: fans had expectations that they'd built up for themselves after projecting and building up fanon and deciding what players meant before they explained themselves fully, and when the players strayed from that, they were derided for all manner of reasons. I think we're seeing that same pattern play out in C3 as the story progresses in a way that fans dislike, and in fact we have seen fanwank spread whenever someone does anything that interferes with personally catering to a) the favored ship and/or b) the favored philosophy. (Orym, Ashton, FCG, Percy, Pelor...all valid when they affirm the Fandom Opinions and all disdained when they don't.)

Don't get me wrong, I think there's a place for comfort stories that deliver a personal catharsis. And I'm not going to dismissively say "well if you want it so bad make your own" because, as an artist, I am very familiar with the fact that creating is hard and draining and sometimes you just need to consume instead. But when you become so wrapped up in yourself and your feelings to the point where your perspective is the only valid one, someone else's feels like a betrayal when it isn't. It's always "They aren't doing what we wanted and here's why they're terrible people because of it" and never "Hmm, why is this what the cast wants? Let's examine that."

This isn't a new phenomenon, but I think it ultimately stems from not assuming that other people can differ from you in major ways in good faith. There are a lot of reasons for that (some more understandable than others), but I think you rob yourself of the potential to enjoy something new when all you do is demand what you already want. No matter what you're doing or where you are in life, you tend to become a better and wiser person when you open your mind to what other people have to say, no matter how mundane the subject matter. Sometimes the stories people have to tell are challenging—and the only healthy way to deal with that is to engage with them on their own terms.

[kyouka-supremacy]

Hi! I saw an older post of yours (I think it was a year old?) and wanted to mention that some of the gags you mentions aren’t meant to shock or shake the reader

They’re references to the authors and/or their works which a Japanese audience would pick up on (e.g., Naomi and Tanizaki’s relationship references Naomi (the novel by Tanizaki)— I’ve read there’s another novel that might used as a reference as well but I haven’t read that one yet— and Dazai’s suicidal tendencies and etc, including the double suicide part, is a reference to author Dazai’s life and death. Dazai liking crab is also a reference just as the nicknames “slug” and “mackerel” between him and Chuuya. That one scene with Higuchi and her sister? Reference to author Higuchi and her sister. It’s not just limited to gags either— author Atsushi and Akutagawa being compared to one another and the beginning of BSD resembling Rashomon, the relationship between character themselves)

BSD is filled with so many references…but not necessarily ones a Western audience would get (which makes sense)

(I could also go into Mori and how a fair amount of translations did him dirty— what admittedly little dialogue of his I’ve read in Japanese isn’t creepy— but that’s a whole controversial topic I’m not going to get into haha)

This all being said, you have every right to feel however you feel about them! (Genuine)

Hi!!!Thank you for going out of your way to share info on the way bsd references pre-existing literature of the authors that name the characters, it's very nice of yours!!! And thank you for being so polite in your ask, I really appreciate it I actually received a bunch of very rude asks on the same subject in the past I just ended up ignoring ashgvdkajsydksahvfb.

Thing is- I was already aware of what you mentioned! The official bsd manga English translation by Yen Press that I read offers nice irl author insights once in a while that adds a lot of insight and trivia; the rest I just learnt by reading analysis here and there ahah. I probably already knew when I wrote the tags of the post you mentioned (I believe it to be this one). I am aware the gags are references to the original authors' works- but I still find some of them to be plenty distasteful. I suppose it's just a matter of personal preference! To me, one thing is to explore themes of abuse, incest, suicide, pedophilia and the such in the context of a well rounded literary work that treats those subjects with the mindfulness that should be served to them; another is to make a gig out of them that's only brought up once in a while for laughs, and thus results tremendously poor in taste. But that's just as far as my judgment goes, so of course, it's fine for anyone to disagree!! I don't think literary references shouldn't be made at all, in truth I find them very cool!!! I really like how the opening of bsd mirrors Rashomon!!! I like how Dostoyevsky embodies the devil from The Brothers Karamazov! But when it comes to, say, Dazai being a suicide maniac, and that being made a joke, when the real author actually killed himself with his lover; I find that massively indelicate, to the point I was in seriously disbelief when I found out about it as I was watching the anime for the first time. Everyone will have a different opinion on this though, so you know- just something to reflect over :)

[delululover]

I just love how the "Only Friends" team gave us so many spoilers but still managed to clown us and keep us in the dark.

I mean from the so many contents we got during the filming time we all had an idea in mind about each couple's dynamic

For instance I myself thought

TopMew are gonna be the sweet boyfriends going on dates, having fun, having healthy conversations when in reality they are barely talking, Top sees Mew mostly as a prize/challenge, Both are fighting for the power dominance in the relationship, they don't have any trust on eo, Mew is determined to do the "right thing" by offering his affection as a reward for quitting addiction which we all know never works. Their relationship in overall is a mess with just a "boyfriends" tag which is kind of blinding both them and the people around them from seeing how not good for eo they are

SandRay are gonna be the friends to lovera type of couples where one is totally sure about his feelings and the other ia clueless but refuses to let go of their "friendship" and acts like a possessive cat whenever someone tries to get with his "friend" (I may even be correct with this prediction)

BostonNick I thought will be the couple we will see the least of, won't have much plot to their relationship except sex and Boston will totally ignore Nick out of bed which (Idc if anyone disagrees) he is not, Boston is totally leading Nick on emotionally and we are seeing fair share of their scenes, infact if anything they are the creators of most of the drama in the series and their mess is probably gonna take the longest to solve. Definitely not a short running pair and has a lot of things going on in their "situationship" or whatever.

So as the episodes are coming out I am eventually realising that what we saw/the source of our assumptions were all based on the first few episodes. They gave nothing away and spoiled next to nothing. I am totally clueless about what is going to happen after episode 5.

And yeah don't say that "well your fault for thinking they will give everything away before the original episodes release" I am not saying that they will or they should. But the amount of "ongoing shoot" content we were getting I was a biiiit confident that I have figured out the show. Ik very arrogant of me but that's the thing the Western film industry is so secretive about their projects that it makes us think that getting some behind the scenes will be able to spoil the fun for us.

Anyways kudos to the team for this amazing marketing. They are literally keeping me on the edge of my seat.

Ps I am quite new in this bl fandom and ofts is the first show I have fully been invested in so that's why is amazes me. Most of you probably find this post stupid and old news. Please ignore if you do thanku.

[uyuforu]

I did an analysis on his Vedic chart and western chart. I'm not an astrology expert and still learning <3

1. Leo stellium/ sun, moon, mercury which in purva phalguni and megha respectively. His dk (it indicates spouse in Vedic astrology) is moon which is in megha so I think might have megha in her big 6

2. He has 9th house stellium so might like sag/mula influence and his rising is also mula

3. 7th house is in Gemini which is ruled by mercury so he might like mercury influence. Now, I'm not saying he won't be able to Gemini but the thing is it is not necessary to be attracted to your 7th house sign. I'm not and most of the people around me when asked tend to not be attracted too. Instead the ruler of the 7H they were attracted to so she doesn't have to be a Gemini but Virgo. I think she might have Virgo in her big 3 since it's also in his venus.

4. I think he is mostly attracted to earthy energy (remember he had a crush on iu and he said he likes Emma Watson in an interview ig I'm not wrong and both of them rediates heavy earth energy) which might be because he has Capricorn descendant in his d9 chart.

5. He has cancer rising in his d9 chart where he has his Jupiter (he also has Jupiter in 1H his western chart) so possibility is she might have sag/mula rising as well.

6. He has Moon in gemini in his dk chart. Again mercury influence here so I think she most likely have Virgo or Gemini in her big 6.

7. That mercury is in megha, again possibility of having megha in her chart (probably her venus so it will be in conjunction with his moon)

Western chart:

1. Now, he has cancer descendant and cancer is ruled by moon. But the thing is I don't think it is necessary to think that your fs will have their planets in your 7th house that's why I have to disagree with the "she definitely have strong cancer placement" statement. Let's not forget he has Virgo stellium in his chart and I don't think sensitivity will go well with his over analyzing tendencies (just my opinion) instead I think she might have cancer-like vibe to her. Yk you might not have cancer placements but certain aspects in your chart can show those traits. Ex. One of my friend has her chart ruler in cancer and I legit thought she was cancer which she is not. So, it is possible she is still nurturing and caring without having cancer placement. Also, jk needs a caring partner based on his chart who can understand him so someone who has their venus conjunct his moon or maybe sun in synastry can leave that effect in their relationship.

2. About moon rulling his 7th house, I think instead of cancer, he is more attracted to Taurus placements and moon being exalted here does make sense.

3. Personally, I think he NEEDS 8th house synastry in his romantic relationship, without it he might feel something is missing. It does happen often to the 8th house natives. I have 8th house placement and all the people who are close to me have this house syanstry with me. And from his chart, it is obvious that he wants a passionate, caring and an all consuming type of love so I think he will certainly have 8H synastry with his fs.

Please share your opinion on this and Sorry if it's too long. Have a great day✨

Posting this for people who want to know more about Vedic astrology (I know nothing about it so giving my opinion about it wouldn't be a good idea).

For the western part, it's important to understand that when astrologers say "she must have cancer placements" it can apply to planets, asteroids, rulers, but also the 4H, degrees, etc. It's way more than just having a lot of planets in cancer. It can also having moon as the ruler of your chart, but also just moon having a huge impact in one chart. It's also only observations, so one should always take a step back when you read them :) But thank you for sharing your opinion too! Everything must be taken lightly, but new observations and theories are always welcomed.

Taurus being in the 5h makes sense, but tbh I always felt like that: 5H are the people you are mostly attracted to. It can work out as much as not lol. The 11H can be people you'll be mostly friends with. He can also be attracted to Capricorn placements as it falls in his 1H, and he can often have a good feeling with them too. The 7H is not necessarily about who you are attracted to to marry, it's mostly the vibe of the person you'll marry. So you may like the characteristics of the sign that is in your 7H.

Example: I have Aries 7H, but I never dated an Aries nor was truly interested in them (no offense lol, no hate intended) but I find myself being attracted to guys who can have Aries characteristics (without being an Aries). You see what I mean?

But 7H, 5H, 8H, 11H, 12H, 1H, 4H synastry is always a good thing (lightly for 8H though), so if his FS has cancer placements that would be cool too, like it would fall in his 7H! Leo could be a thing too since it falls also in his 7H. It's just from a point of view of being a good possible synastry.

JK has a 8H stellium, so yeah I think he needs that too. And he seems like he needs to be "obsessed" with someone too lol so I agree.

- uyu

[nabilla3]

Diaspora Aesthetics

African Diaspora in the works of Aaron Douglas, Jacob Lawrence and Jean-Michel Basquiat (Lemke, 2008) is an article, in the book: Exiles, Diasporas and Strangers (Mercer, 2008),  that aims to investigate what diaspora art looks like and can be characterised by. The writer, Sieglinde Lemke, does this by evaluating three artists’ work (named in the title) and visually analysing how they link to diaspora. 

Throughout the essay, the writer explains that diaspora art in general serves to unite people. She compares the work of R.B. Kitaj’s First Diasporist Manifesto (1989) and Stuart Hall’s Cultural Identity and Diaspora"(1990). She finds that both reject a “backward looking conception of diaspora“ (Menke, 2008) and believe that diasporic art aims to affirm the diasporic identity. From this statement, it can give off the impression that the imagery of the paintings will be  positive and welcoming as unity is synonymous with cohesion and totality. Key fundamentals that are observed by functionalists. However, Kitaj says how the diasporic life is defined by “transient restlessness, Un-at-homeness and groundlessness”( Kitaj, 1989) and Hall describes the black diaspora being characterised by its “hybridity, contingency and diversity” (Hall 1990). Despite seeming to contradict themselves, they mean that by creating art work that individuals can see themselves in, even if the imagery represents painful experiences like struggle and oppression, the viewer feels seen and comforted, thus forth “being forward looking” and creating unity. 

Early on in the essay, Menke introduces how the homophone of “roots”, “routes” and “riots” are used as key aspects in the diaspora discourse. Clifford (Menke, 2008) observed how by combining roots and routes, produced what Gilroy (1993) called “alternate public spheres”. This was when a “community consciousness” and a community was constructed. This meant that although the individual may feel like they are alienated in the society that they live in, they can still connect to their ancestors and their culture through the art that connects different parts of their culture and community through diaspora art. 

One point I personally agree with Menke was when she was discussing Aaron Douglas’ work Negro in an African Setting and quoted Paranjape (Menke, 2008) saying that the the artists represent  that the “homeland” is a sort of “sacred site or symbol almost like an idol of memory”.The diversity within different diaspora was acknowledged many times in the 

Although I disagree with some of the interpretations of the art discussed in the essay whihc used the the idea of “yearning” which was repeated theoughout the text. These statements give off the impression that there is resentment for the country that the individual lives in. There is the implication that the country the person has ties to is where they should feel belonging but I find that from personal experience and form conversations with other people from a similar background to me that young people who were raised in a country that is different to their ethnicity, experience some sort of imposter syndrome when surrounding by either cultures that are a part of their hybrid identity, so they do not have the same sort of relationship to the “homeland” the essay seems to romanticise. It also makes me think that you must sacrifice one of your collective identities in order to be accepted; however, I do not believe that this is true. 

In the essay I would have also liked to hear more about post modern theories in relation to the art pieces. When Menke would use the term postmodern it was usually brushed over. There is a part earlier on in the essay where the author writes about how Locke, one of Aaron Douglas’ inspirations, emphasised in his manifesto the new negro that artists need to use their culture and ancestry to inspire their art, the way that  famous western artists like picasso did in order to shape black american modernism. By reclaiming the influences, it allows the “disenfranchised to create their own meta narrative ”(Menke, 2008) . Postmodernist theorists like Lyotard would argue that “meta narratives are breaking down”(Lyotard, 1979). They no longer hold power anymore. This is a result of increased fragmentation of society caused by factors like globalisation. So maybe even if there is a new theoretical meta narrative it may not hold as much power as posed in Menke’s writing. 

I do agree with Lyotard that overarching metanarratives do not dictate how people's lives go as strictly anymore. I think that the reason for this is because of the increased access of technology and the internet. This has led to ���pick n mix identities' ' (Baudrillard, 1970), since individuals’ consumption are no longer restricted by age, class or gender. Globalisation and glocalisation means that consumers can choose elements of identities from anywhere in the world, this is not just limited to clothes. Diasporic identities can now find communities online. I think there are many more subcultures online than there were when the book Exiles, Diasporas an Strangers was published.

Although I agree with these postmodernist theories, I do not think they always apply to diasporic identities as the theories seem to mostly apply to the west. I think that purely having access to all these types of identities and subcultures does not give someone the privilege to take a part in them and use them as a part of their own identity. For example how Sohelia Sokhanvari presented Iranian women, they in theory could wear what they wanted but, there were consequences to these decisions. Diasporic identities tend to cluster together and create communities. There are many examples of this in London, such as ChinaTown. By growing up in one of these small diasporic communities, I find that the values that are encouraged in the “homeland” are continued on. Like the types of clothing and expectations of “young bengali women.”

After reading this extract, I would like to look more into the history of Bangladeshi textiles and also the concept of primitivism that was mentioned in the book. Where cultures that did not resemble the west, are looked down upon. I have experiences where people would make remarks such as comparing acts like eating with your hand (instead of your hands) as uncivilised or “animal like ''. I think that looking into this can help me choose symbolism that will inform my work.

Baudrillard, J, 1970, The Consumer Society, SAGE Publications, Ltd. 

Gilroy, P, 1993, The Black Atlantic: Modernity and double Consciousness, Harvard University Press

Hall, S, 1990, Cultural Identity and Diaspora, Identity: Community, Culture, Difference, Lawrence Wishart

Kitaj, R.B.,1989, First Diasporist Manifesto, Thomas & Hudson Ltd.

Lyotard, J, 1979, The Postmodern Condition, Les Editions De Minuit

Menke, S, 2008, African Diaspora in the works of Aaron Douglas, Jacob Lawrence and Jean-Michel Basquiat, The MIT Press

Mercer, K, 2008, Exiles, Diasporas and Strangers, The MIT Press

[bisluthq]

taylor going to the baseball game in a low-key fashion, chatting nicely and seemingly ready for a quite night out, just to half-way trough end up sloppy drunk with a need to express PDA was quite funny to watch //

i just wanted to say that im not against your points regarding drinking but these anons are like just... lying (for what?). she did not seem sloppy drunk, not even at the end of the game.

i totally get your point about drinking and the culture around it but i feel like that some people have an agenda behind it (probably dont like her current relationship (whatever if you don't to me but the people who don't generally are as much as obsessed as the shippers for some reason)) - making it clear that i dont have one tho - im a swiftie so im not unbiased but i'm not a cupcake one that thinks taylor lives in a fairytale with her boyfriend of the year). she was veryy out at the us open but very normal at this baseball game.

like that anon said, she was not the only one drinking, so it was not out of place and she was just watching the game, not dancing or being extra 🤷‍♀️ the pda thing could be true, but i just saw videos of them at the beginning of the game and they were cuddling for no reason since then (and kissing too). the us open was awkward but travis seemed drunker than her this time soooo as someone who dont have exactly the same take as you but dont really like drunk people, i was happy that she seemed fine - leaving the game too, i also realized that she was not the one with a drink in hands.

that’s very fair and balanced and actually I’m not gonna lie to y’all I wanted to share my stance on drinking culture in general because I’m thinking about this a lot lately and fundamentally this blog is yk my thoughts on shit so fwiw let me confesses that I didn’t look at that many pics of her at the game so ergo I’m not that well informed. It’s also not that deep. The US open was random and awkward and kinda worrying yes, this I believe wasn’t lol and that’s def “better” but I think fundamentally many of us should (again in western society just because of norms and standards) question our relationship with alcohol. I 100% agree with your take here actually.

I also agree that a lot of anti Tayvises are going on about the drinking and I want to reiterate I disagree with that profoundly because I personally believe - based on shit she said but also based on general lifestyles - she drinks less with him than she did with Joe so that’s not the problem there at all.

[sincerely-krp]

r kelly is notorious creep, but you’ll still find artists and fans looking up to him, listening to his music. i’m sorry but this won’t die down. this is now a mark on all these male idols. if you choose to roleplay those faces, you’re choosing to side with his interests or “hobbies”, you’re choosing to side with the author of that series, you’re choosing to be neutral. but as a community, we should not forget this. we should not forget how our discomfort was placed last in favor of an idol. // the difference is that r kelly is a convicted criminal, serving a literal sentence, with actual victims. r kelly, if anything, is also more closely tied to his work than the mangaka is (like you don't see the mangaka's face and hear his voice when you read/watch mia). even some ppl in this discussion didn't even know how creepy the mangaka was until others brought it up. if you look up the mangaka's name, all you find at first glance are articles disproving rumors that he was arrested because he never was. you have to do a deeper dive to find out that he's a creep, and the censored anime/manga on its own just isn't enough for some ppl to clue them into that fact. you literally have western artists still working WITH chris brown, and they aren't canceled by the majority of the public. and idols are what.. mentioning that they once watched a highly-rated, censored version of a show made by a creepy guy?

you could make the argument that "they should have known better. they should have seen the signs :((" but these idols have literally mentioned this anime in passing once or twice. idols are real people, with busier lives than most. they made a mistake in mentioning mia. but you guys are grasping at straws finding ways to ruin their lives and careers + convert everyone else to be on your side to do so. this is not infantilizing them; you guys know how much harsher k-netz and even int'l fans are these days in tearing idols down compared to other types of celebrities. people who disagree with you also have the capacity to think critically. no one who is giving an alternate viewpoint to yours and also coming to their own conclusions is siding with the author or approving of the content matter??? give me a break.

let's compare the two: your discomfort as an anon in the krpc talking on an rp vent blog VS. idols who literally live in the public eye, have careers built on parasocial relationships with fans, and face scrutiny from their own country as well as millions around the world. forgive us for wanting to give idols the benefit of the doubt for doing something that isn't a crime. if you feel discomfort, by all means, unstan them. stop streaming. burn your photocards. whatever. but don't act like anyone is forcing you to rp in a group with these faces. write indie. write in a private group with friends, or in a group with admins who share your viewpoint. and don't blame admins for not making a decision on the matter in 48 hours, when the idols' companies haven't even addressed the situation yet.

・❥・

[sophieberardo]

Many men tend to view women’s quality of life in “developed” countries as perfect and equal to those of the opposite sex… but I highly disagree.

The only point these men offer is the fact that there aren’t any laws/legislation that discriminates against women. Now many women would be stumped by this statement thinking that high income countries laws fully support women. It takes a simple search to find out that this is definitely not the case. In fact there is laws upon laws that make it significantly difficult for women to get into hard labour jobs: getting support from their employers for dealing with the burden of reproduction: entitlement to pension and other benefits: succession and inheritance: property: divorce and family laws. Now taking all of these laws into practice it makes sense as to why there are still major issues in these so called developed countries such as equal pay, abortion rights and general abuse towards women at home and in public.

Now let’s pretend like these patriarchal men that there are no laws that discriminate against women… in fact there’s many laws that support and protect them. Wrong. Laws that outlaw rape, domestic abuse and femicide are still getting broken at a large rate. Even practices such as female genital mutilation are still present in countries such as the UK with 137,000 women having undergone this violation of their genitals. Women in developed countries still have to fear for their lives when leaving a relationship, walking alone at night and have to remove themselves from privileges that men take for granted since women take up 90% of violent sexual crimes. Women cant even feel safe around their intimate partners and acquaintance’s since 51.1% of sexual assault statistics were by a close partner and 40.8% by an acquaintance… bearing in mind 63% of sexual assault cases go unreported, these statistics should be a lot higher then they actually are. My point being that even though women from western countries have more laws that “support” them, they are often lousily implemented leaving room for major amounts of abuse that should not be taking place.

The final thing that men will let us is to be grateful for progressive changes made in these developed countries. Tell me how can you be grateful when there’s still large gaps where horrific crimes are committed against women. Be grateful for human rights that we should’ve had in the first place has done nothing for us and will not create the change we need in order to combat these problems in these “progressive” countries. Do you think that if the suffragettes settled down and found gratitude in their husbands us women would have education, a right to vote and to own property… of course not.

(I am in no way saying that women in developed countries have things worse then those in less progressive countries. I am just simply trying to point out how men will think that women in western countries have things so much easier when that is clearly not the case)

[the-way-astray]

ooooh, controversial opinions! about time i dipped my toe back into the discourse. here are my opinions on the above:

agreed. i wouldn’t consider this series good anymore in almost any capacity. my last hope is that shannon at least answers all the unanswered questions, however satisfying or not she does it.

agree that keefe is toxic and manipulative, disagree that he would stop if he was told what he was doing. whenever he reads someone’s emotions against their will, they always show visible discomfort, and we know keefe is perceptive when it comes to emotions, so we know he’s aware of this. but he doesn’t stop. same thing with announcing to the room what sophie’s feeling. but that hardly matters because i don’t actually care that he’s toxic and manipulative. i care that he’s never called out or villainized for it, or that it never affects his interpersonal relationships in any lasting way. something like that should have consequences. for keefe, it does not. i can only assume from the way shannon’s writing it that she genuinely believes this is either a good thing, or just part of keefe’s prankster bad boy charm. also if you manipulate people, even unintentionally, then by definition, you are manipulative.

yeah, fitz is absolutely more developed, mostly because the narrative does hold him accountable, which allows him to face real consequences when he fucks up. maybe a bit too accountable. i would say, yeah, he's morally better than keefe. he has a temper which can hurt people but he always apologizes after the fact and tries to be better, and he supports matchmaking (which is literally eugenics) due to his upbringing, but other than that there isn't much wrong with him morally. keefe on the other hand, in my opinion, treats sophie poorly, maybe not on purpose, but he does. and it's never called out, so he never tries to fix it. maybe he doesn't mean to do it, but he still does.

here: "As for Fitz’s anger issues…they’re not anger issues. His anger can be dangerous and can cause issues, but he doesn’t have anger issues. Anger issues is a problem that a lot of people struggle with. It’s where even the slightest inconvenience can make you explode. Something like spilling water on some papers, or the clock ticking too loud. Fitz hasn’t gotten mad for such things. He’s only gotten mad at serious issues. (And before you call Matchmaking frivolous - it’s not. Being a bad-match is being totally ostracized and being treated like vermin for the rest of your life)" (quoted from a post by @sunset-telepath from a long, long time ago)

i love sophie, but literally agreed. her personality is incredibly inconsistent and shannon just kind of does whatever the plot needs with her in that given book. stellarlune sophie especially pissed me off. it wasn't development, it was a completely personality 180.

i agree that canon sokeefe absolutely sucks. keefe is not at all likable, but you can tell shannon really thinks he is (and most people would agree). disagree that they wouldn't be shipped in any other book or with another author. a good author could make me like them, as i've already talked about. they have potential for sure.

can't talk about this because i haven't seen shannon's apology. but yeah, laura's all but a confirmed homophobe.

yeah, in the actual universe, it's okay, i suppose, however we need to understand that books do not exist in a void. real people read and interact with them, and the implications of the gnomes and parallels to real historical events that have happened makes shannon seem incredibly careless.

alright, lemme list a couple things. we have: all elves following a very western culture, despite the fact that elves are canonically made up of all human races, which sort of culture-washes poc characters, the whole blue-eyes-regardless-of-race thing, and a lot of racial stereotypes (@sillyguy-supreme has done the hard work of compiling a bunch of posts that discuss kotlc's poor handling of race into a masterlist, but to give you the rundown, we have: songs being forced into being a asian monolith stereotype (which means it's impossible to tell whether they're chinese, japanese, vietnamese, or korean, even though those are four different countries with different cultures), prentice, a black father, being in jail for his son's entire childhood, the poc characters all feeling very token-y, and tiger parent songs). there's more but that should be a nice, good start.

100% agreed. i miss fintan as the main villain of the story. he was actually interesting. i do not give two shits about lady gisela as a villain, she is actually so boring.

agreed. the kotlc girl are all incredibly mid and terribly unfleshed out. i actually have a post about biana being canonically mid as a character cooking in my drafts. maybe one day i'll post it. but shannon does seem to think that all the female characters just need a single badass moment to be a good character, instead of doing the hard work to write a good character arc (see: della and edaline). fanon does a fantastic job with the female characters, though, so i can hardly be mad.

sexist comments: “‘Wow, most girls would be crying about a wound like that—most guys too. Even I’d be playing it up for sympathy and stuff.’” (Keeper, implies that girls . . . cry more???), “‘Makeovers?’ Keefe scoffed behind them. ‘You girls sure know how to have fun. Maybe you can braid each other’s hair and giggle about boys while you’re at it.’” (Keeper, implies that girls are constantly and entirely obsessed with boys all the time), “‘Eh, that’s what they all say. But deep down girls always have one guy they can’t take their eyes off—isn’t that right, Fitz?’” (Keeper, implies that all girls have silly, frivolous crushes on guys at all times), “What is it with girls?” (Keeper, stereotypes an entire gender), “Girls” (Keeper, said exasperatedly, for context, stereotypes an entire gender), “Sometimes I let boys sit with me, but I’m not a fan of girls. Girls are annoying.” (Keeper, self-explanatory, i feel), and the famous “Keefe smirked. ‘I think the moral of this conversation is, females are cruel.’” (Legacy, also self-explanatory). all the ones in keeper were removed in the graphic novel, so i'm inclined to think that shannon decided they were, in fact, sexist on second thought. but the legacy one was written in 2019. this especially pisses me off since the lost cities are supposed to be entirely gender-equal, and none of these things are ever called out by the narrative as sexist. so, uh. do with that what you will. there's also some incredibly sexist implications woven into the very fabric of the series, like when sophie thinks to herself that she needs to dress more feminine because she's growing up (implying that girls wearing more masculine/androgynous attire is a childish thing). there's also the fact that shannon writes girls being emotional by crying and boys being emotional by being angry far too many times for it to be anything other than internalized sexism.

[tumblr character count reached! list numbers are starting over from one, real number will be in parentheses]

(13) AGREED. there is not a single good example of character development in the canon series, though fitz is the closest.

(14) we absolutely do!!!

(15) agreed, but i would cut down to sophie, fitz, keefe, biana, dex, marella, stina, and wylie (i explain why here) if i rewrote the series (and flesh them all out more, obviously). but i agree that a lot of the characters lack depth to such an extent, it's actually strange. shannon . . . isn't the best at character writing.

(16) agreed. i badly want the series to end at book ten, but i get that there's too many unanswered questions and unresolved plot threads (which i actually have an upcoming post about! stay tuned for that!) for that to realistically happen. so there will likely be a book eleven, which i hate.

(17) laura's art sucks. JASON CHAN IS MY KING, HE'S ONLY FLOPPED ONE (1) TIME EVER. chrissa's art is a bit hit-or-miss for me, but i adore her fitz. i do think that no artist has been able to capture keefe's smirk properly yet, though (exempting jason chan from the blame because he's my king and also keefe isn't supposed to be smirking in any of the covers, anyway).

(18) 100000000000000% agree. absolutely unnecessary. why did that need to happen, please shannon, not every guy has to be in love with sophie and he's her literal cousin. i also hate the idea that a kiss can tell you if someone is "the one" and the idea that you should need to kiss someone to figure out if they're correct for you, or else your friendship will never be the same. shannon, i actually despise you for this. what the heck.

(19) yeah, and i think shannon realizes that. she's stopped putting wylie and linh in romantic-coded moments in recent books, thank the universe.

(20) disgusting, disgusting behavior on his part. and imagine if he did get his wish. how is that gonna go, does he think? "hey, meet my daughter, sophie! and my nephew, dex! they're married! no, that's not weird at all!"

(21) yep, that's a pretty well-known fact, and thankfully i'm pretty sure shannon is at least a tad bit aware of it. definition of eugenics: "the study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable". if we ignore the human part of the definition, that's basically what matchmaking is.

(22) this was one of my main points in this post. literally the entire point of the series is to get a different perspective on the lost cities. it was never about the neverseen, it was always about the societal issues in the lost cities. but the series is utterly focused on the neverseen, and not at all focused on sophie fixing the lost cities' issues. she even joins the fucking nobility. i cannot fathom how shannon managed to lose track of the main point of her own story so badly.

(23) disagree, i think fitz wants some peace and quiet. the bad match thing, as far as he's concerned, will last his entire life. i'm sure he thought his banishment would be impermanent, and that eventually they'd clear their names and fix everything. so fitz not wanting to be a bad match isn't out of character for me. there's also the fact that he's been brainwashed by society into thinking that's the only way to go. also, fitz is very attached to his beliefs, in my opinion. he believed the council were in the wrong, so much so that he was willing to leave the lost cities with sophie because he disagreed with them. with matchmaking, i do think he believes in the system, at least a little. that would make it difficult for him to question it.

(24) STINA AND SOPHIE COULD ABSOLUTELY FIX EACH OTHER, YES, YES, YES, YOU GET IT. i do agree that sophie is a horrible leader, but i don't think it's her fault. it's the council's, for putting a teenager in that position instead of being actually good leaders themselves.

(25) not only is it terrible, it actively takes away from the core themes of the story. at the end of the day, the council are the true villains. they are the reason all of this is happening, and even into the latest book, they just want to put a band-aid on the deeper problems by defeating the neverseen and returning to the status quo. sophie working with them defeats the point of the story.

(26) LITERALLY, BRO. see above bullet point for more explanation.

(27) yep, it's already been confirmed.

maybe i'll add an additional reblog with some of my own unpopular opinions but i think that's enough discoursing for today lmfao.

Gimme ur unpopular kotlc opinions, no hate zone (I might explain why I disagree with you but all respectful)

[helbertinelli]

But doesn't it make sense for Anidala to be a troubled relationship since we know where Anakin's gonna end up down the line?

No. Anakin and Padme loving each other and being so good to each other is what adds to the tragedy. People were expecting Vader to be this abusive, evil person behind the mask, but that's not who he was and that's what makes his story even more tragic. He was just a good guy who wanted to help everyone and who was scared of losing his family and he did the absolute worse choices, and not out of malice or evil, but because he was desperate to save his wife and child(ren). And then he lost everything because of those choices and he lived his entire life in pain and with hate for himself and the Emperor and everyone else, except for Padme and his child. Padme was the only person he never stopped loving even when he lost everything. And then he found out about Luke and he loved Luke just as much too. And I'm sure he loved Leia like he loved Luke when he found out of her existence.

It's because Anakin and Padme loved each other so deeply and they were so good to each other, it's why Anakin choking Padme was the point of no return for him (we knew that Anakin won't turn back to the light side then), it's why Luke was so open to believe in the good that exists in his father and try so hard to save him (just like Padme did before him), it's why Anakin chose to finally do right by Padme and his family and help his son and turn away from the dark side, it's why Leia chose to forgive him in the end and name her son after him.

If their relationship would have been troubled and Anakin and Padme would have acted like they do in TCW where they're fighting and they mistrust one another and it's a chore to spend time together, then not only it would have cheapened their relationship but everything else that followed the end of their relationship wouldn't have made sense anymore. Why would Anakin still love Padme when their love was lukewarm and they were always troubled? It would have been no different than his relationship with Obi-Wan or other Jedi. Why would Padme think there's good in Anakin even after he hurt her if their relationship was always troubled? She believed that because she knew Anakin, she knew he wasn't a bad person and she knew that him being a Sith wasn't what Anakin was meant to be. If their relationship was like in TCW, where Padme breaks up with him after he beat up the guy who tried to force himself onto her, if Anakin always treated Padme like she was cheating on him and if he treated her like at the end of ROTS often, then him turning to the dark side would have happened much sooner and he wouldn't have cared so much about doing right by his family because he never trusted his family and he would have been content to just stay with the dark side. There wouldn't have been a reason for him to turn back.

It would have been out of character for both Anakin and Padme if their relationship was troubled (they're good and kind people and they wouldn't treat each other badly) and it would have cheapened the tragedy of Vader and Anidala if their relationship was any different. There is conflict in their relationship, but it's always the two of them dealing with something, rather than the two of them against each other. The biggest conflict was having to hide their relationship, but they never took that out on each other because they were in it together. And then the other big conflict was that they were always apart and they were always living in fear of not seeing each other ever again.

[ilikekidsshows]

Curiously, is there a popular fanon that you don't like in ml fandom? Is there anything that you like?

Most of the fanon I disagree with are fan interpretations of Adrien that I feel misjudge the entire point of Adrien’s character, especially when it comes to shipping stuff. The thing about Adrien is that he is intelligent and he understands people, he’s just too sheltered to utilize those skills in his interpersonal relationships all the time. He’s actually better at dealing with manipulative and kinda nasty people like Lila (as seen in ‘Ladybug’) because he has personal experience with such relationships considering his father and cousin. The parts of the fandom that insist that Adrien is a total social moron for not figuring out Marinette is in love with him ignore that the entire point of Adrien believing when Marinette swears up and down that she isn’t interested in him in any way is that he trusts her. This trust is a good thing.

Adrien knows Marinette is trustworthy, so he will not jump to the conclusion that she’d lie to him. Similarly, whenever Alya obviously pulls something to put him and Marinette together, Adrien can see what she’s doing (examples are ‘Star Train’ and ‘Despair Bear’) but he goes along with it anyway because he trusts that she isn’t up to anything bad. And he’s absolutely correct about Marinette and Alya both. They are both reliable, trustworthy people and they deserve Adrien having faith in them. Insisting that Adrien should mistrust Marinette enough to think she’d lie to his face is actually an insult to Marinette’s personal integrity. So many characters would be able to realize just how much Marinette lies (because of secret identities) if they didn’t make the active choice to take her at face value or let any obvious lies drop with the justification that this is Marinette, she wouldn’t be up to anything bad.

On the other hand, I do like the headcanon that Adrien is into anime and that’s where he gets his romantic notions from. He is very similar to Tamaki from Ouran High School Host Club and Mamoru from Sailor Moon, after all. Watching anime also makes sense as a hobby for someone who’s isolated, in addition to single-player video games. The western anime fandom is kind of a product of the internet, after all, due to the big role digital distribution of fansubs played in many shows getting popular in the 2000s. Because of this the anime fandom still very likely to bootleg shows.

[lunarnatalya]

💕Rising Sign Observations💕

Observations about the rising signs from the eyes of a Scorpio Rising watching you all from the corner with x-ray vision O_o... jk xD

🔥ARIES risings tend to embody this energy of being both slightly distant, slightly somewhere else, yet simultaneously very on edge and physically responsive to their surroundings. They can be very caring but their attention span isn’t very long so their sympathies can be kinda blunt in nature. They are not afraid of being in opposition with anyone (Aries/Mars being the God of War) so when they disagree with something you said or did, you will FEEL it especially if you’re a Water sign... they won’t make the effort to hide their facial expression, or posture or anything of that nature. Sun is exalted in Aries (in Vedic astrology), so everything shines through.

🌱TAURUS risings are very generous and giving, and it tends to be because they don’t want to get wrapped out in the complicated nature of 8th house stuff. They’d rather give to everyone and show their cards than find themselves feeling in debt to others, or like people are angry with them or anything. Of course out of the kindness of their Venusian hearts as well, but also just for peace.

🕊️GEMINI (I’m using a Dove because they are messengers just like Gemini) risings are super playful and easy to get along with, they make you feel comfortable and at home in conversation like you’ve known each other for years. The thing is, then you’ll see them talk the same way to someone else and some people, especially water signs will see this as a betrayal when they don’t mean to hurt anyone, they are just natural social 🦋s and want to extend the same kindness and communication to everyone. I’d imagine that the Geminis in question would be Rohini Nakshatra in Vedic astrology, which is described by astrologers as ‘babylike’ and wanting to experience bliss all the time much like babies do.

🦀CANCER risings, I’ve noticed are super sweet and kind, but because of their extreme sensitivity and vulnerability tend to be very taken aback if you do anything to make them feel out of their comfort zone or like their safety has been threatened. As soon as you do that, they’ll forgive you, but they will deem you as someone who they should be wary around- and of course they’ll bottle up their emotions about it. They forgive, but they also collect all of the things that have happened and emotionally hold onto them.

👑LEO risings I’ve noticed are very in their regal energy and confidence all the time not really taking things too seriously and more focused on just living an awesome life, but when personal things or things related to family or the heart come up even slightly, they get VERY fierce and something in them just seems to rise from within them. I’d guess it’s because the majority of the time, a Leo rising will have fierce, loving, protective and loyal Scorpio in the 4th house of home, family, and the heart space.

.🌿VIRGO risings have such a distinct energy! There’s something about them that you can’t miss- could relate to how in Vedic, most of the Virgo risings will be Leos. They have such a quiet authority and power and can be very dainty in their mannerisms and everything. They suppress their voice a lot and don’t speak up so that they don’t ‘make any mess’ socially or emotionally, and can be really hard on themselves in that way.

🌸LIBRA risings I’ve noticed, can be very cynical but very motivated to move forward nonetheless especially because they’d never want to let anybody else down. I think this also relates to how in Vedic, the Libras are mostly Virgos. They can be very picky about aesthetics especially! Libra risings are also often very quiet, but I think this one depends. The misalignment with Libra & Scorpio is a big reason why I stick with Vedic often too- Libras in western often don’t embody balance so much as the embody the pickiness of Virgo, and Scorpios in Western are often very artistic, relationship oriented, and scared to ‘tip the scales’ more like Libra... then Sagittarians are often very deep and tend to have troubled pasts and demons more like Scorpio. It’s not that Western placements are untrue, but my theory is that Western is showing us the physical world since it is showing us the sky as it is from Earth, but Vedic is showing us the non-physical. Sorry Libra, you got the rant xD

🔮SCORPIO risings- like maself- are very very almost dangerously deep thinkers. The thing is, having a Scorpio Sun or Moon can make you very deep thinking too, but the thing about Scorpio rising is that this mode of deep thinking is initiated in their IMMEDIATE, environment, because that’s what the rising sign is about. They don’t have to get emotional to do this, and don’t have this inner fire to pursue deep thinking like Scorpio Sun would, they just do immediately and instinctively and it can be very crazy making for us. We can zone out at the grocery store thinking about something super dark or something dark that happened from the past and really get trapped in our own bubble there. A lot of the Scorpio risings who relate to that are probably Swati in Vedic astrology- Swati struggles with this because Swati is the ultimate middle Nakshatra, so it is always attuned to the hidden world and ‘space inbetween’. 

💕SAGITTARIUS risings (heart emoji because I think Sagittarius risings need love, especially if you’re Jyeshta in Vedic) tend to be very secretive. They will do the ‘normal stuff’ like go to school/work, do normal every day stuff but they’ll often not fully divulge what’s going on emotionally (which is why to me it makes sense that Sagittarius becomes Scorpio in most cases in Vedic). I’ve noticed Sagittarius risings often don’t show up to social events either for mysterious reasons- they won’t really explain why or it’ll seem mysterious in nature but they won’t show up, and people tend to miss them/worry about them because of it.

✨CAPRICORN risings... okay hear me out, I have observed that they are quite adventurous, but in a very refined way. They aren’t all over the place trying to travel and try new things and be cray like the stereotype of Sagittarius, but they are wanting to try new things in a very sophisticated and planned out way. They are often super creative but their creativity always has purpose- like making a bookmark to use for the book they’re reading, or doing an artwork with the clear intention of giving it to someone, or putting it in a certain place on the wall they want to fill. Always with earthy, rich purpose.

🌟AQUARIUS risings, I’ve noticed are really good at knowing how to get a rise out of people and also knowing EXACTLY how people are going to react to what they’ll say or do. They are comfortable saying controversial things and speaking up about their opinions partially for this reason- if they already have the social and emotional awareness to know how people will react to their behaviour, they don’t have to be afraid of anything that comes their way as far as backlash goes because they already anticipated it! Smart cookies O_o

💫PISCES risings - aww man, I love you guys  💕 I’ve noticed a lot of Pisces risings tend to feel like outcasts in this world. They can feel very isolated and alienated and the infamous ‘charming awkwardness’ Pisces can have definitely comes from this feeling of being the ‘local weirdo’ lol. Pisces risings are amazing at bringing ideas to life as well, if they have an idea, they can explain it to you to a degree that they can make you feel like you BOTH had that idea and both have an emotional connection to it. Definitely relating to how Pisces will often become Aquarius in Vedic.

So that’s the end of my post on my observations about the Rising signs 💕 Subscribe to my YT Channel for videos on Astrology :) 

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRlHfp9V-Re62OmTwh5SROg

[ideas-on-paper]

Don't quote me on this, but I believe I've read somewhere that instead of 2, there were originally going to be 4 loyalty confrontations in ME2. One that was cut was between Mordin and Grunt, as we know from unused voice lines. As for the forth, we don't know the participants, so it might as well have been Jacob and Thane.

The interesting question is: What would they even have to argue over? I can see where the point of conflict between Mordin and Grunt might be, but Thane and Jacob barely have any reason for their interests to clash. Also, given that the loyalty missions are usually the catalyst (at least for the Miranda/Jack and Legion/Tali fights), what part of Thane's loyalty missions would Jacob even disagree with, or vice versa? (Since Jacob's dad has proven himself to be both a bad parent and a bad person, Thane should have no objections to stopping him, and all things considered, Jacob should be supportive of Thane being a father who at least wants to make up for his past mistakes.) This almost makes me wonder if they had something completely different planned for Jacob's loyalty mission...

It's funny though that whenever the dialogue suddenly gets weird, Jacob seems to be involved in some way. First the line about the public not knowing Shepard was dead, now this, and then there's this line Legion has during the neutral ending of Jacob's loyalty mission (the one I shared with you) that I'm still not completely over... I don't know if the dialogue ever gets this awkward with other characters, but if it was just Jacob, that would be kind of weird.

I remember that Thane also says that Irikah was the one to wake him from his "battle sleep", and that with her death, he fell asleep once more. I think what Thane means to say when he describes himself as "dead" is that his body does something, but he doesn't actually feel it. It may be hard to imagine for people who've never experienced it, but since I'm familiar with this sort of feeling, I can kind of relate to it. (Also, aside from the Hanar's training, I think part of the reason why Thane "empties" himself like this is to cope with his assassinations - he sees himself as a sinner because of his body's actions, so if he let this mentally get to him, it would probably destroy him.)

You just summarized my exact issues with the Justicar Code. Since it was written a long time ago, morality was probably quite different back then, and as you said, it can't take issues into account which have arisen later. Tbh, I also highly doubt that the Code takes every possible situation into consideration - this may just be my own personal experience, but from what life has taught me, the moment you think you considered every possibility imaginable, something entirely unexpected happens. In such a situation, the Justicar Code being so clear-cut might actually be a hindrance - it's good to have principles, but without flexibility, you will have difficulty to react to new and unforeseen events.

BioWare's "blindness" to other mindsets than the western one is also something that personally bothers me. It's the main reason why I consider Kasumi's character such a giant missed opportunity: She is the only Asian member of the team, but despite her character being designed around this, it's barely reflected in her mindset. It's possible that human culture in ME has become sort of "globalized" over time, but I would've loved it if they played with Kasumi's Japanese origin some more. (For example, one thing that I find particularly fascinating is the Japanese belief that inanimate objects can be alive, which is also responsible for the very positive attitude Japanese people have towards robotics. This would give Kasumi's "kleptomania" a bit of a different flavor - like giving the items a "worthy home" - and also make for a very unique relationship between her and the synthetic characters, Legion and EDI, compared to other members of the crew.)

Mass Effect 2 replay, recruiting Thane:

-There is quite a bit of autodialogue throughout this mission.

-As others have said, Seryna raises questions. Why did Nassana let her former head of security leave?

She kills shift workers that leave – at least, allegedly – but the former head of security can just walk out?

As we see with Thane and Shepard, that’s a big security risk.

-Why does Seryna want Nassana dead so badly?

She helps Thane. She helps Shepard on the chance that helping Shepard find Thane will end with Nassana dead. Nothing asked for in return.

This is a lot to do because you don’t like your former boss. Even if your boss is having people killed to protect her secrets. It seems personal – did Nassana kill some Seryna cared about?

-Seryna says she and Shepard will leave after shift workers clear out Tower Two.

However, there’s a salarian in the area fussing that’s he’s lost his family’s data because Nassana forced them out ASAP. He’ll get it once he’s allowed back in.

So it seems the towers have already been cleared out. If the salarian had been kicked out from an earlier shift, I presume he could have gone in when the next shift was permitted in.

-Seryna doesn’t ask if Shepard’s plan is to stop Thane or not until you’re in the car with them.

Considering she wants Thane to kill Seryna, she must be very confident Thane can take Shepard out if Shepard’s plan is to stop him.

-Letting the first salarian worker die is just cold, especially if you say his coworkers are on their own. There’s no reason to not help him.

-All the shift workers are salarian. Illium’s an asari dominated world, so they’re a minority on it. There’s probably some parallel to the real world in that and Nassana’s treatment of them.

-Kasumi about Thane helping the first group of salarians you find: That’s sweet. An assassin with a heart of gold.

Considering Kasumi is a thief with a heart of gold…

-Nassana’s essentially enslaved the salarians: They have to work to the end of their contract on threat of death. They don’t get overtime, and she’s quite willing to kill them when she wants them to leave.

This is probably legal on Illium.

-Huh. No one commented on me letting the mercenary who was up against the window go. Garrus always comments on that.

-Speaking of, the glass in these towers breaks way too easily. Nassana’s cheaping out on materials.

-If you go neutral on the salarian worker that points a gun at you, Kasumi calls him a “jumpy little lizard”.

Charming. Kasumi, you’re supposed to be better than that.

-If you choose any other option, Telon ends up passed out on the floor. It’s funny watching him swoon if you go paragon/renegade after skipping the renegade interrupt.

-The salarian workers do a lot for this mission. Without them, it would just be one long corridor of shooting. They also characterize Thane as a man who protects innocents before ever meeting him.

-I died so. Many. Times. On the windy bridge. Those drones that shoot missiles are awful, and what do you mean I can’t get a lock???

-The sun in the background when you finally meet Thane and Nassana adds a lot of drama to the cutscene.

-Jacob’s bitchiness to Thane is very odd. He never indicates an issue with mercenaries or assassins before or after this scene.

-As others have noted, Jacob’s claim he’s loyal to more than a paycheck is hypocritical. He left the Alliance because it had too much red tape, and he insists that he’s skeptical of Cerberus and will leave if it gives him reason to.

So that’s not loyalty to either employer. The closest he can say is that he’s loyal to his beliefs, but if so then the same could be said for Thane.

-If you go renegade with Thane and tell him you only hired him because he’s a good gun, he can bite back and reply that’s he’s working for you by choice and can leave at any time.

Nice. It’s always good to see someone push back against Shepard.

-You can tell Jacob to keep an eye on Thane.

This entire scene is so odd. I’m wondering if the original plan for Thane was different and it would have had him more ethically ambiguous?

Maybe you would have had Thane switch loyalties while he was on a mission by paying him more than his current employer. That would explain both Jacob’s and Shepard’s skepticism of his trustworthiness.

Just, something to explain this scene.

-If you go paragon, Thane says that he’s just a weapon. Weapons don’t kill, their wielders do.

I disagree. Thane chooses to be a weapon, ergo he has culpability for who he’s directed to kill.

“Just following orders” is not a get out of jail card.

Normandy

-Mordin’s loyalty mission is very abrupt. You only get one investigate option, and no real dialogue options.

Considering how talkative Mordin normally is, I suppose this curtness is a sign of his distress. No explanation for why Shepard’s not asking questions though.

-Samara says the code is 5000 sutras and covers every possible situation.

How long ago was this written? Because societies change over time. There are ethical questions that exist today that couldn’t have been imagined 500 years ago. What happens when one of those crop up?

Maybe this is one reason why asari society is so static – justicars decide what’s “correct” and kill everyone who disagrees with them. Makes it a bit difficult society to progress.

-And what happens when justicars disagree?

And I’m not accepting a cop out that the code causes all justicars to always come to the same conclusion. Look at how much blood has been spilled over human religious texts.

Are there factions of justicar that kill each other on sight? Did someone work out a truce so justicars with different interpretations politely avoid each other?

-Ah, time for another ME2 humanity is special moment. Humans are more individualist than any other species Samara has known.

Is this all humanity? Because as I recall, western society is normally considered more individualistic and eastern society is more collectivist. Did Bioware think that far?

-Thane had his eyes treated so he can see hanar bioluminescence. As a result he can’t see the difference between dark red and black.

That seems a tad dangerous for an assassin. Isn’t being able to tell colors apart critical for being able to blend in?

-When I choose investigate with Thane, there’s an option for other topics. However, this takes me back to the start menu. So what is is purpose? I can choose Return and other also go back to the Start menu.

-The drell situation with the hanar on Kahje is sad. It’s good they help each other, but it shouldn’t be a death sentence for the drell. Let them help hanar on other worlds that don’t make them sick.

-If you go neutral with Thane, he says he’s always considered himself dead to some degree.

Well, that’s fucked up. I’d like to have some words with the hanar that trained him.

-If you go paragon, he doubts your medical facilities and staff can do anything that the best hanar medical professionals have not been able to.

As others have pointed out: Buddy, the Normandy has Mordin fucking Solus on board. He cured a brand new multi species pathogen created by the Collectors working out of a back alley on Omega. Miracles are his specialty.

[nightswithkookmin]

A quick lesson on ships

Because why not??😌

No but seriously, bare with me, I'm trying to answer your questions. Sit if you have to. Hehe

Uban Dictionary defines shipping as this:

A term used to describe fan fictions that take previously created characters and put them as a pair. It usually refers to romantic relationships, but it can refer platonic [sic] ones as well. (Just think of “shipping” as short for “relationSHIP”.) 9 Apr 2015

Ships can be platonic or romantic or both.

There's fictional ships and non fictional ships too. You ship two people you want to be in a relationship or who already are in a relationship or who you suspect to be in a relationship- perhaps due to queer baiting, ship baiting, romance baiting etc.

In the shipping fandom, there are two sects of people. Those who are Proships those who are Antiships- antis are ironically considered part of the shipping community because for some reason they are always in shippers business💀

Antishippers are those who oppose a particular ship or shipping in general (more on that later.)

Proshippers are well- Pro ships.

Pro-Ship

A term mostly used in fandoms, but can stretch outside of this to include original characters. The core belief is that shipping two fictional characters, no matter if they are family, share ages gaps, considered to be unhealthy, or show blatant signs of being abusive or other generally unsavory behaviours, are valid in a fictional setting.

Pro-Shippers or "anti-antis" are also known as "rainbow meaties" and will use 🌈 + 🍖 emojis together often in their bio on twitter or other social media platforms- usually within fictional settings.

These shippers reinforce the idea fiction is separate from reality and shouldn't be confused with the other.

‘Anti’ is short for ‘anti-shipper’ or ‘anti-[ship]’.

Kindly read through this thread to get the gist of it.

III

IV

Shipping non-fictional individuals is a subset of Proshipping, in my opinion, known also as alternative shipping- as far as my knowledge on it goes.

As with fictional shipping, alt ships have their antis too. People who disagree with shipping real couples in a romantic way for whatever arbitrary moral reasons they have and who feel entitled to go out of their way to correct, stop, police and punish such shippers.

Then there are those who although may be pro real people shipping think they have the right to tell others how they should ship and to what extent they can ship.

Others too prefer to ship real people platonically because they view romantic shipping of real people as problematic.

So to answer your question on Anon's post- there is no such thing as a Proshipper who is also Anti shipping. Thats oxymoronic. Perhaps they might be platonic shippers who are anti romantic ships but not necessarily romantic shippers themselves.

I don't think there's anything wrong with preferring to ship platonically. It is when they assume by virtue of their false sense of moderacy that they are better than others that shit starts to get funny.

Those shippers are delusionally confused beings with a supremacist imperialist complex rooted in ignorance and absurdities.

I usually walk by those quietly. keep it pushing. Gotta mind my business somehow even though most times I just want to pull their hair and bite them and shit😭

I try to keep it classy.

Lord knows I try.

You are either pro ship or anti ship. There's no in between. Those shippers who are shippers but claim they are not are nothing but fraudulent, fake us, simps trying to bamboozle their way through life- pardon my Swahili.

There are a lot of anti shippers moonlighting as shippers in this fandom. It's fascinating.

Personally I think those people are either confused or their desires to appeal to other Anti shippers must have morphed their brains into ass dick hybrids.

Anti shippers in general are notorious gatekeepers, gaslighters, bigots, high key sanctimonious and often have a cis white westernized sense of morality and ethics through which they fliter others and expect everyone and everything to conform to.

They impose their values on others, their ethics on others, resort to manipulation, policing, intimidation and bullying to impose their will etc.

Within shipping, there are those who are Proshipping yet anti certain ships. Most Tuktukkers are anti Jikook. And assume anyone who isn't a tuktukker is equally anti Tae Kook and so go ahead and exhibit anti behaviours towards them.

Think of such groups of shippers as Proshippers with a preference for particular ships if you will.

There are Pro shippers who also feel some kind of way about Shipping real life people or alt shipping.

Here's further resource to help you understand what proshipping is

If you are intolerant with other shippers choice of ships or style of shipping and you traumatize them for it that's Anti shipping. Especially if you feel entitled and justified to traumatize others because you take a higher moral status over them.

You can be proship and not like how certain people, how they go about

Simply walk away, click off, mind your business. You are not the only adult in these streets and leave people to do what interests them.

I think for as long as I can remember, I've always been a proshipper and I ship both platonically and romantically, fictionally and alternatively💀

Some themes in fiction are a hard limit for me such as the R word, pedophilia, incest, child abuse- I just can never find the entertainment in those topics and will struggle through such themes.

But others believe it's just FICTION and those fictional characters aren't really dealing with the imaginary struggles we read about.

Yall do you sis.

I don't really know why people make a big deal of it or try to demonize the concept of shipping as if it were something strange or mysterious- just keep your moral values to yourself. I am not your mother's daughter. we were not raised in the same households.

Then again I think it all depends on the different cultures and social backgrounds we all come from and how entitled, supremacist or imperialist they are.

For Yoonmin, I shipped them romantically but didn't think they were a real couple at all. I just romanticized their interactions and found humor in it. At the back of my head I was expecting them each to one day find husbands or wives and go their merry ways and even harbored the thought they each could very much be in serious romantic relationships with others.

In similar ways, I shipped Minimoni and Vmin.

You can ship a pair romantically and not think at all that they are actually REAL.

A lot of jokers ship Jikook romantically and don't assume they are real. Just as a lot of people shipped say Elena and Stefan romantically even though Paul was married.

Some shipped Elena and Damon too due to their unscreen chemistry and even felt they could be a thing- that was before later it was revealed they had started dating in real life. Even that I was holding on to my Bonnie x Damon fantasies because Bonnie was my bias and I shipped her with everyone romantically- of course I didn't expect any of those ships to manifest into something because it was the character I was shipping not Kat herself. To this day I still love her onscreen chemistry and friendship with Damon and don't see how people could wish for it to be more than that😭

It was beautiful as is. Not everything should climax into sexual intercourse.

But if I felt at some point any of her ships had crossed into alternative ships I would have jumped on those and supported it whole heartedly.

If you assume a pair are a real couple and dating in real life that's alt shipping- a lot of alt shippers suspect a ship is real and that's why they ship them.

There is no such thing as platonic alt shipping.

And for me personally, because I believe Jikook are a real couple and have made that cross over I don't ship any of that pair romantically with other members anymore.

It's bizzare to me to ship someone I know has a partner romantically with anybody else- I make exceptions for Vmin of course💀

I know JK is side eyeing me but I don't care.

I want Tae to be happy too😭😭😭

Tae just wants his bestfriend and soulmate😭

It's too much😭😭😭😭😭😭

He stays shooting his shots🤣

Jimin Harem is real🤭

I must admit, I catch myself slipping on Vmin and Minimoni every now and then- old habits die hard and they don't make it easy 😫

But that don't mean I think Vmin is dating. THAT WOULD BE WILD.

Summary

Proshippers can be Platonic or Romantic shippers and you can ship a pair romantically and not assume they are real at all.

Anti shippers are just assholes trying to beat their values down people's throats.

Alt shippers don't ship their OTP with other players romantically.

I don't know what you mean by Jinkooker...

Do you ship Jinkook romantically or think they are real?? Sis...

Maybe you just ship them platonically or casually.

I ship all the ships platonically.

Especially all Jimin"s Tae's ships. I'd let my self flirt with the idea of romance every now and then.

JK's ships don't make sense to me as ships.

As nonplatonic ships I mean.

I'm fascinated each time I see a hardcore JK x any member ship besides Jikook swearing up and down JK is screwing Namjoon🤣🤣

I hope this helps??

GOLDY

[shihalyfie]

@sage-striaton replied to your post:

Idk how people can say Frontier has characters that lack depth. Imo it’s a very psychological season. The whole adventure thing is aimed to making them grown in their behaviours and feelings, it’s a big metaphor of their development

I’m sorry for hijacking your response to my post to segue this into another rant of mine, but I want to emphasize that one of my goals with this blog (if I can be said to have any) is that I really, really, really want people to re-examine whether they actually believe in the rhetoric that’s been dominating this fanbase for two decades, or whether there’s more to it. This is especially in regards to the fact that we’re talking a series deliberately written in such a way that it’ll change meaning and nuance as you get older, so it can “grow up” with you in a sense, and yet it seems like -- especially in regards to Adventure through Frontier, due to their position as the oldest series that the majority of the fanbase was elementary or preteen age during -- people are still regurgitating the same rehashed twenty-year-old ideas like they’re undeniable law. It’s one thing if they’re saying it because the series didn’t sit well with them the first time and they don’t want to watch it again, but we’re reaching a recurring problem where it’s sort of “brainwashing” even people who don’t actually believe it but feel compelled to go along with it, or wouldn’t feel that way if it weren’t for peer pressure. Obviously, there are dissenting opinions, and ones that are even very loud about that, but that pressure remains.

The mainstream opinion in the fanbase is that Adventure is untouchable and impervious to any criticism, 02 is its inferior sequel with half-baked characters, Tamers is an auteur work that’s the “deepest” of the original tetralogy due to being dark, and Frontier is devoid of much substance at all. Even those who don’t really believe in this will still be pressured to go alongside it, those who like 02 or Frontier will be pressured to consider it a “guilty pleasure”, and it’s only very recently when certain events revealed that the idea of 02 actually having quite its own fervent and passionate fanbase that likes it on its own merits became properly recognized. (I have actually noticed a huge uptick in 02 fans, especially casual ones, being more shameless in talking about liking it in the last two years; you’re still going to get the obnoxious person “reminding” you how bad it apparently is if you bring it up, but it’s not nearly as prevalent as it used to be.) I’m not talking about whether something is a “good” or “bad” series -- that concept doesn’t really exist to me as much as whether it’s “to one’s tastes” or not, and I think one of the joys of this franchise is that it has things that cater to people with vastly different preferences -- as much as a lot of potential for analysis and intimate thought about these very fascinating series. Even if 02 and Frontier were as shallow or half-baked as they were accused of, I wouldn’t think it’d be shameful to like them for one’s own reasons anyway, but what frustrates me is that I just don’t think that’s true in the first place!!

Not helping is that there’s still a refusal among the fanbase to admit that there were substantial differences in American English dubbing (especially in regards to Adventure and 02), which I don’t mean as a bad thing in the sense that some people prefer to stick only with that dub and consider that version what they want to work with, but in the sense that the treatment of them as “the same thing” has been horribly detrimental when two people, one coming from that dub and one coming from the Japanese version (or a dub more closely based on it), will end up often having an argument doomed to go nowhere because they were never talking about the same thing to begin with. Recently, a friend admitted to me that although they’d switched to the Japanese version a long time ago, they still couldn’t get the image of Daisuke and Takeru having an inherently hostile relationship (they don’t) out of their head due to the influence of that dub, and although they consciously knew better -- at least enough to admit this to me -- it wasn’t helped by the fact that the fanbase itself continues to reinforce this image because of how normalized it is to treat the dub version and the Japanese version as “virtually the same” and for Western fanbase discourse to assume you should be projecting those takes into the Japanese version. If you’re hanging out in English-speaking circles but are working from the Japanese version or a dub directly based off of it, you do actually have to filter out a lot of takes you’re hearing because they won’t actually apply to the version you’re watching, but not a lot of people realize this.

All four of Adventure through Frontier share tons of key staff, especially Seki, known for her focus on wanting the kids in the audience to be able to empathize with and relate to the characters on screen. All four share some of the best character work I’ve seen not only in this franchise, but also in kids’ media in general, and I also stress that a lot of this has a ton of nuance that isn’t always apparent unless you read between the lines. I do understand that a lot of this probably went over our heads as kids, and I won’t say that the choice to execute it this way should be impervious to criticism, but nevertheless, I think it’s important to call attention to the fact it is there, and much of it becomes recognizable once you see it that way; for instance, so much of "it's contradictory character writing!" comes from the fact that the series tries to represent humans in their inconsistent, messy ways, and while it'll feel "messy" from a writing trope perspective, when you think about it as "since this person has this mentality, does it make sense to approach this with this mindset?", suddenly it becomes very consistent. The supposedly “shallow” 02 and Frontier characters will act in ways that match existing psychological profiles meant for actual humans to terrifying degrees, in ways that you might actually recognize even better once you’ve hit adulthood and start intimately understanding things like depression or anxiety in ways you might not have before. Shockingly, “having heart, important themes, and kindness towards the human condition” are completely valid reasons to uplift a creative work in ways distinct from technical writing or cerebrality or how many tropes they subvert or whatever.

On the flip side, people praise Adventure and Tamers for being the naturally “superior” works with better writing, but when it comes to talking about why the writing is supposedly better, a good chunk of the reasons stated don’t actually explain anything substantial, or go back to actually being passive-aggressive dunks on the other series in some form -- it’s because 02 and Frontier’s character writing sucks that badly, or because Adventure had the “best plot” (which may be true if by “best” you mean “easiest to understand”, but that doesn’t mean much to someone who might not be very happy about how its story progression is just a boss rush), or because Tamers is the “deepest” when by “deep” they actually mean “cerebral, dark, and unsubtle about it” without any further meaning (as if Adventure and 02 were idealistic series that never went into anything nuanced and not, say, the fact they went very viciously deep into societal issues between parents and children, psychological horror, and intimate takes on the human condition). I’m personally saying this as someone who does think Adventure and Tamers have a lot to praise in terms of their approaches to realism and the unique aspects each bring to the table, and I feel that people like this are doing them more of a disservice by not bothering to uplift them for any reason that isn’t actually just inherently condescending. I mean, even taking this outside of the original tetralogy for a bit, when I was plugging Appmon earlier, there’s a reason I focused more on its theme and character writing and the use of “dark” writing to convey its sheer range, rather than trying to boil it down to a shallow “it looks cheery but gets really messed up later!”, which is unfortunately an argument I’ve been seeing about it lately.

In the end, when I write my meta, I write it "making a case" for my point of view, and I welcome others to disagree, but if you disagree, I really hope it'll be because you personally disagree, and not because the entire fanbase has been saying otherwise for twenty years and I sound like a radical. I’m not saying that everyone’s consensus takes are completely unfounded, but frankly speaking, this fanbase has some really bad takes, and in the past few years I’ve found it freeing to not only “say what you feel without worrying what others think”, but actually go out of my way to outright try and purge all the preconceived notions and pick only the ones I agree with because I actually agree with them. I encourage you to do it too! And if you do, you might find things about something you like that you didn’t realize before.