#ignore the fact that i accidentally said two dimensional entity the first time i know language i swear

[ehhgg-art]

you ever think about the fact that laios won not by being a monster but by being human.

monsters as we’ve seen throughout the manga are predictable, they have this rhythm to them that, once someone understands, can be used to take them out. take kelpies like anne where laios states that she is just a monster and cannot be trusted. even kensuke is “just a monster after all”, running away from danger when laios needs it most. kensuke is beloved by laios not just because he is a monster, but because laios, in human fashion, anthropomorphized him in his mind (giving him a name, etc.)

but people are different. they are multifaceted, non-monolithic creatures. long lived races are not all pious and apathetic towards short lived races as we see with marcille and senshi. chilchuck actively works against the prejudice against half-foots. tallmen from every region have their cultural differences as we see with shuro and laios/falin. even “demi-humans” like orcs have depth to them, having rich culture and values despite the general idea that they are a violent pillaging race.

even laios’ family and village, the nexus point for his dislike of people, have depth to them. though their parents did not actively protect their children, they did not wish harm on them either. the exorcisms performed on falin by their mother was harmful in laios’ eyes, but helpful in his mother’s perspective.

laios himself, despite loving monsters and hating humans, is so very painfully human. he hates humans but has risked life and literal limb to save his sister and his party. he loves monsters but is aware of their dangerous nature and spares them no mercy.

(big spoilers under the cut)

the winged lion mistook laios as a one dimensional entity, one which only operates on a one track mind without paradox. it thought laios to operate like a monster, and so it approached his desires like one. it believed that laios, being so obsessed with monsters, must behave like one as well, so completely disregarded the fact that laios could have something up his sleeve.

but laios is not a monster, he is human. he has ulterior motives, overlapping beliefs, contradicting values. it is his humanness that made him explain to his party what to do when things went awry. it is his humanness that allowed him to lie. lie to the world about his true plan as well as lie to the winged lion about his intentions.

sure laios WANTS to be a monster, that much is definitely true. but what he IS is a different story. laios is an unpredictable, sporadic, messy human being. it is that fact which the winged lion overlooked, and ultimately led to its downfall and laios’ victory.

[holydramon]

bnha digimon au but this time it’s lore! Part 1 of ???

This post is super long, so please blacklist the taga #bnha digimon au and/or #long post if you don’t want to see it. I’ll try to add a read more to this later, but I can’t on mobile. Sorry!

ok so I put some of the Digimon lines I’d give characters here, but I think it’d be cool if I explain the lore of the actual au! Also please note I might eventually go over actual headcanons I have about characters and the partners at some point, but I won’t atm since that would make this way to long plus I haven’t really… Made hcs for every character yet.

This also is more or less exactly what digimon are in this universe and like how the Digital World is in this post. Not too much about relationships of how Digimon effect hero work or anything. I’ll probably make a part 2 where it’s more about the BNHA aspect of this than the Digimon aspect, but as of now I don’t feel too qualified to talk about that that stuff since I’m nowhere near caught up on bnha and don’t want to accidentally contradict anything oof.

- This is more or less a custom/my unique take on a Digimon universe. So, it won’t adhere to any specific universe canon and may ignore typical canon. That said, this will borrow some elements of/be based on the Adventure universe more than others, since it’s the one I’m most familiar with.

- I will start with some of the more general stuff before getting into the nitty-gritty of what are digimon and how does this universe work stuff. Such as: Most civilians only ever reach their partner Digimon up to Perfect. While it is possible for a regular civilian to have a Digimon capable of digivolving up to Ultimate, it is very uncommon.

- Some people can’t even get their Digimon over Adult level during their life, though that’s more uncommon than being able to get up to Perfect.

- Something I want to note about the above two is this: there’s nothing wrong about not being able to reach Ultimate and everyone is technically capable of getting their Digimon to Ultimate, most just Digimon have no need to and never get the appropriate training to do so. Same thing with not being able to get up to Perfect. While most people’s Digimon can get up that high, they usually have no reason to anyway.

- That said, Quirkless people are much more likely to never be able to get their partner past Adult level than people with Quirks.

- Digimon have a form they usually stay in, ranging from Baby I - Adult. It is extremely uncommon for a Digimon to stay usually at Baby I though, and it’s also unusual for one to usually stay at Baby II (that’s why only one person I’ve done the line lists for has their Digimon stay at Baby II, it’s extremely uncommon, especially for people training to be a hero). Most stay at Child form, as usually shown.

- As for staying Adult, only Digimon with a relatively small Adult form stay in Adult most of the time, for convenience. Not everywhere is gonna ceilings high enough for your T-Rex to walk around under.

- You may wonder why I said it only ranges from Baby I - Adult when in the list I had Grappu Leomon italicized for All Might! Well that’s because he (and technically Midoriya and maybe AfO) is the only one able to keep his partner in Perfect 24/7. He technically can’t anymore after the accident, with Grappu Leomon reverting to Gazimon when All Might reverts to Toshinori.

- Crests don’t really “exist”. But they kinda do? Ok that sounds weird but let me explain: Crests as we know it, don’t really exist. The concept of Crests sort of do though, but they don’t really mean anything. Basically, it’s more or less just another category the Digimon is part of. Kind of like Attributes, Fields, and Types. This however is called Alignment. Most Digimon are Aligned with nothing, so their Alignment is “None”. However, if a Digimon is an Armor or one of the Perfects or Ultimates of one of the Adventure Digimon, they are aligned to their related crest. For example, Halsemon is “Love” aligned and Angewomon would be “Light” aligned. Tailmon however, would be a “None” alignment, since she isn’t an Armor or a Perfect or Ultimate of an Adventure Digimon partner.

- In case your wondering why that is, it more or less is because no Crest is required to digivolve a Child to Adult in Adventure. Same with Baby I to Baby II or Baby II to Child. Perfects and Ultimates are tied to the Chosen’s crests. Also the Chosen don’t exist by the way, but I thought it would make sense for these Digimon shown to be connected specifically to a crest to also be apart of the Crest alignment thing Armors are part of.

- Ok, so that’s what Crest Alignment is, but what does it mean? …Not much. It more or less just means that the person partnered with a Digimon with a Crest Alignment has some sort of strength in that Crest. For example, the Adult level for Denki’s Digimon is Lighdramon, which is Friendship Aligned. That basically just means he’s a good friend. Also, even if I am considering talking about HCs or reasonings for each character in something separate, I feel like my reasoning for giving Mina a Knowledge Aligned Digimon will be questioned, which is… Fair. I’m gonna justify it with, Mina may not be smart in a book smart way, but I do think she’s social/street smart.

- Crest Alignment was literally a concept only made because I had to figure out how to explain Armor Digimon and the Crest symbols on them exist in this Universe, considering Digimentals and Crests don’t exist.

- Appmon exist in this universe, but their regular Digimon pretty much. They technically are considered a Digimon subspecies and are a bit rarer, but they work like normal Digimon. The only difference is that an Appmon line can only have Appmon in it, apart from the Baby I and II. So you can’t go from Gatchmon to Tobucatmon or Gazimon to Logamon.

- Virus Digimon can be partnered with/be Heroes. Vaccine Digimon can be partnered with/be Villains. Neither of those are uncommon, but just like how people with “villainous” quirks are judged, people with “villainous” Digimon are too.

- Digimon kinda digivolve into levels during g certain ages of their partner. Baby I and II is usually while their partner is a baby of course. They usually start to be able to digivolve into Child during elementary school. They usually are first able to digivolve into Adult during middle school or high school, and Perfect during adulthood. Ultimate is almost always achieved first during adulthood.

- Quirkless people also tend to have their Digimon gain forms slower than the above, with it being not too uncommon to not get to their Child level until Middle School.

- In order to apply to UA, your partner must be able to already be able to digivolve into Adult. You are expected to be able to digivolve them into Perfect by the time you graduate. Heroes are expected to have their Digimon be able to evolve to higher forms than most people.

- It is also pretty impressive for middle and high school students to have the Adult level be their Digimon’s usual form.

- Some people have their Digimon switch between forms a lot, to the point where they have more than one form they standardly use for normal daily life. For example, Hagakure’s partner switches from Candmon to Wizarmon a lot, for no other reason than just the fact they wanted to stay at that form today.

- Their are some benefits to partners being kept in lower forms, being that digivolution take a shorter amount of time and they actually require less energy to digivolve. However, keeping them in higher forms has advantages like the obvious less time to get to higher levels and they can also hold higher levels longer than those kept at lower forms. So it’s a bit of a trade-off.

- Ok now to the stuff that people probably care about more: why are there Digimon? Well… No one really knows. More or less, a bit after Quirks showed up, Digimon eggs and digivice started appearing when babies were born. No one knows why though.

- That said, there are a lot of theories. Some think that it was caused by someone with a quirk who was able to turn data sentient, creating the first Digimon with sentience spreading through data like a virus. Some think it was some universe/dimensional quirk that weakened the barrier between the two worlds. Some think that after quirks became a thing, the entity that controls the Digital World decided that humans could be good allies, bonding it’s inhabitants with Earth’s. Some think it was similar to how Quirks came to be.

- Anyway, point is no one really knows, and people have lots of different theories on this. Discussions on this topic actually get very heated.

- Now for the good ‘ol digiworld! What’s up with that? Well. No human has gone to the Digital World. Like literally no one. The only proof they have that it even exists is the fact Digimon “come from” it and all have some innate knowledge of it, despite no Digimon partners having ever been there beyond while they were an egg.

- This, of course, opens up for a nice potential story about the Class going to and getting stuck in the Digital World, but I’m not writing that cause I don’t want to die trying to juggle 40-42 characters (42 is only if Aizawa and his partner get yeeted in too).

Anyway tl;dr: Digimon are super mysterious, and no one really knows why they’re there but they’ve just accepted it at this point. Also there’s some specific stuff about digivolving but it’s not too important.

[centaurrential]

“The Spice Jar”

“Let me live the lie, So long as it gets me through the day.”

For a long time it baffled me why activists would choose to devote so much energy to a cause that always seemed like overkill to me: free speech. I suppose the reason for that is because I grew up in a fairly liberal environment in one of the most liberal countries in the world. My feelings of security in the realm of free speech were a result of direct contact with a family that, more often than not, found itself on the right side of political privilege. Juxtaposed by the harsh realities experienced by another portion of my family (but not by me) under dictatorship in Yugoslavia, it seemed like the threat to free expression was a dead issue, a thing left in another world, in the past and locked in a strait jacket, never to seriously perpetrate again. How naive.

I see now that the cause is not overkill at all, but rather in need of periodic resuscitation, with the medics on stand-by; and the best medics would be those who excel in “aspect perception”. Like evil, issues needing that particular kind of attention crop up in unexpected places, and so much vigilance in monitoring the sneaks is due. And a simple mandate of “free expression for all” is stupid and insufficient, because as we always see, static gaming rules can produce matches with vastly different phenotypes. (The existence of “language games” was originally observed by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, so I give him his due credit here.)

I spoke of ideology in my last posting, and wherever one wishes to locate (and I don’t use that term accidentally) themselves on the grid of political persuasions, there will always be conceptual pockets that are purposely left unfilled, often because no one has the guts to touch them for fear of being labelled too politically incorrect, or undiplomatic. But even more radical are those ideas that don’t even find themselves on that grid, because they lie so far outside of the limitations imposed by the prevailing paradigm. A person brave enough to attempt to give validity to those ideas is not only denigrated for being “uneducated” but crucified for being a downright dumbass, and possibly psychotic, if the definition of psychosis is a “detachment from ‘reality’.” But what we think of as reality is merely an idea that has been agreed-upon by people who happen to have sufficient charisma and power to persuade others.

I’ll give you an example: I have, I believe, collected enough evidence that demonstrates astrology is true. Because of this passing interest, I once mentioned to a relative that I was reading a book on the influence of astrology in history, political and otherwise. She asked who the author was and what his credentials were. Nothing “noteworthy” there, and because of that, she actually insulted me and declared it preposterous that I, a usually intelligent person, would consider an argument not backed by the mainstream meritocracy. It’s crucial to note that she has a doctorate in history. I didn’t even have to ask her why she was so appalled, because her answer would have been the same dished to me, on a silver platter, out of fucking Buckingham Palace, that is given to me by every other lazy asshole who considers astrology to be archaic and an immediate write-off. She would have said that “all the studies” performed on astrology show CLEARLY that the “daily horoscope” and the “sun signs” are all bullshit and believers suffer from a case of confirmation bias. Academics believe that mythology and established archetypes have value and are therefore worth studying. And there is a tight link between them and the representational entities found in astrology. But none of “The Educated” give enough of a damn to investigate its complex grammar (see last posting), and the precision required of any astrologer worth their salt.

My little rant about astrology isn’t meant to be a full-scale defence of the practice, but I am trying to demonstrate something. The shallowness displayed in these disses to astrology is indicative of the fact that things already thought to be errant are not even encompassed in the span of that “grid of persuasions” I mentioned earlier. (The grid may be two- or three-dimensional, but who cares?) Those who are already convinced something is “wrong” simply won’t go to great lengths to play the devil’s advocate and explore why there may be a teensy-weensy chance it is RIGHT.

In my mind, if it’s been spoken of, then you should do your homework and read between the lines.

They say, if you can’t find yourself anywhere on that grid, there must be something fundamentally wrong with you. You’re crazed, you’re spacey, out to lunch, et cetera. The grid seems to offer a menu of choices, various combinations of platitudes you are free to choose from. So my point is this: if enough people, with enough influence, tell you that something is off the table, they’re telling you that not even the ingredients are available to conjure something worthy of bringing to the table. Therefore, to those who still hunger: you must look elsewhere.

I can’t say with certainty whether or not there was some grand agenda to marginalize and persecute people who can see outside of things (*cough*lust*cough), but if there is (I use the present tense cause...duh) it’s DEFINITELY ideological. And the reason it’s so fucking scary is because, if your wild ideas reach a certain density, the majority won’t even listen to you. And by ‘majority’ I don’t mean 50.1% of the population, I mean the people you interact with who possess a disproportionate amount of power. And further, by ‘power’ I mean the capacity to effect significant change in something, or to neutralize a challenge to a pre-existing situation. Anyway, never mind disagreement--you might as well not have a mouth at all. Even if your ‘kooky’ ideas are not that dense, the introduction of even one idea that doesn’t fall within the rules of the prevailing paradigm leads to others viewing you with suspicion and the belief that there is a crack in the philosophical foundation of your life.

To give you a visual: think of the scene in The Matrix when the Agents cause Neo’s mouth to grow over with skin, and he freaks right the fuck out. He falls backwards into the wall, as if to put physical distance between himself and this monstrosity. Speaking--expression--is so innate to us as humans with personalities. To add insult to injury, many of us find some things in this world that utterly compel us--that which ignites our “fire”, that which we cannot ignore no matter how detrimental we are told it can be, no matter how hard we try to resist.

...Who am I kidding?! I’m on a roll (!!!), so I’d like my readers to consider the following: We believe that the past and present both exist, yet we have enough trouble interpreting them. Why should interpreting what the future holds be any different? I think we all know why people are so vehemently opposed to that idea...it’s kind of the elephant in the room.

~~~

Now, I work in a grocery store. For a moment during the COVID-19 pandemic, we were all the rage, with people touting us as ‘heroes’ and heaping thanks on us because we’re “essential workers”. Or at least, we were. That died fast. But we’ve always been heroes. I don’t mean to insult my customers, the majority of whom I love interacting with. But I sense that some people just need to be put in their place.

The supermarket is an interesting one because it’s like a little laboratory for human behaviour studies--but it’s better, because it’s not artificial. Virtually every person on this planet leads a life that revolves around food, and when we don’t have good food, we are sad or grumpy. I understand the feeling of having one’s heart set on something and the disappointment experienced when our expectations aren’t met. But I plead with you: try thanking your lucky stars every now and then for all the options you have, as a result of lowly grocery workers.

Everyday, everything is splayed out for us to pick and choose from. And for that benefit, producers apply their intelligence to generate AND to coordinate, so that things are always “in stock”. Luckily all the food waste that’s generated in the name of “looking nice” (I’m serious) now goes to the food bank. If that didn’t happen, some of us would have to force ourselves to ignore the fact that the only final utility of some of that product was to ensure our shelves were pleasing to the consumer eye.  An understudy, if you will: an immensely complex thing, formed for the sole purpose of “just in case”.

Our lives consist of an economy that’s so sophisticated we really do not have to think twice about having SOME kind of satisfying meal. If not our first choice, then our second or third. Show some bloody respect. Right now, we’re all able to shop in relative luxury, but when shit hits the fan--like for example, perhaps, a prolonged power outage occurs--we’ll be yearning for the days when we had to settle for spinach because the all the kale was gone.

I’d like to take a moment to acknowledge the janitors, custodians, cleaning staff, and the specialized COVID sanitizers of the world. The mundane reality is so backwards sometimes. It’s like evil took all that was good and pure and turned it on its head. There is a premium placed on orderliness and cleanliness. Wash your hands for 20 seconds, apply hand sanitizer, kill those bacteria and kill ‘em dead. Ok, you don’t want to get sick--fine. But large-scale operations that exploit people who help you reach the “godliness” that is cleanliness, yet rob them of respect, appropriate compensation, and appreciation--you are grotesque.

So, money. I’m not well-versed in economics, but I call it like I see it. The nice thing about money, and the reason it’s so widely used, is because it’s an easy tool that supposedly ‘justly’ facilitates exchanges of goods and services between people. If something is expensive enough to the point at which you pass the threshold between “justifiable” and “unjustifiable”, that’s the only reason a person needs to not buy something. And the immediate source of justification is the psychology of the individual. Of course, there are many factors that contribute to the rationalization process.

Money may be easy, but money doesn’t reflect the true value of things, and it’s because money doesn’t reflect the true value of things that it is easy. Imagine you bartering spices for someone else’s dairy cow. In order to save time, you’d better hope that your bartering partner and you agree quickly what amounts and what types of spices are justifiable in trading for a cow. The processes that allow the accessibility of both types of goods are different. You and your bartering partner may not agree: they may want more, you think they should get less. BUT, this person you’re engaging with is the only source of a cow for you! Now imagine a plumber, for instance, trading a repair for a haircut. You help me, I help you, and we apply our respective skills toward that symbiosis. Is the haircut important enough to the plumber that they are willing to provide a service in return, sans money? Is the hairstylist appreciative enough of the plumber’s work to design and make them look good for free? A haircut and plumbing services are similar in some ways, but entirely different in others. The function and utility of each is different, and the consequences they generate permeate lives differently. Consequences may be far-reaching, or they may occupy less space in the progression of your life. A tree compared to a blade of grass. That is the nature of choice in this life. And when money leaves the equation, it’s like a dark sheath has been torn away from the true values of things, which are realistically very complicated.

People generally do act rationally, but it’s not in the way neoliberal economists think. The mistake they’ve made is assuming that a ‘rational choice’ is the same for everyone, across the board. Or maybe that’s what they want you to think. Liar, liar, pants on fire. What is rational to one person is not always rational to another. Much of it is subjective, at least if a person is true to themselves. And people’s inherent personalities are different, and therefore their specific motives are different. It’s not clear that there’s an absolute benefit that should be maximized (other than the obvious quest for happiness and avoidance of pain), because the true value of things isn’t strictly definable.

Think in these terms: What fuels our economy is consumerism. When there’s a recession, people have less money and therefore will purchase less, and so the goal to rejuvenate the economy is to get people buying things again. It doesn’t matter too much what, just as long as they’re spending money.

Now consider the resurgence in the ‘minimalist’ ideal. People are starting to wake up and see that having all sorts of shit just because you have the capability to buy it (and because money doesn’t reflect consequences) is destructive, and not only to the environment and the oppressed, but also to the soul. There are plenty of people in this world who absolutely cannot, in good conscience, own a lot of shit and be okay with themselves. This is a thing that I know for certain compels people. To deny this is to deny peace of mind. So, what place does a passion for minimalism have in neoliberal theory?

In what some like to call a post-modern world (a scary thought in itself; does that imply the end of history?) we increasingly find ourselves detached from the larger picture, and that is NOT good. What we see “in front” bears few clues into what happens behind the scenes. People don’t farm, we go to grocery stores. People don’t weave and knit, we shop at the mall. Things are presented in such a refined way that it actually takes some mental work and introspection to develop gratitude for the people working to make us comfortable, often at their own expense, and often not because they are at liberty to do so. Coercion and rationality have a love-hate relationship.

To tie things up, please pay attention to the source of your information. I don’t mean “Angelfire websites” and all that shit, I mean the individuals and groups of individuals in charge of disseminating  information. Karl Marx developed Marxist/communist theory because of his situation in life. He had motives, like everyone else. Motives can come from a place of genuine compassion, sympathy for the meek, and a belief that everyone deserves kindness and less pain in their lives. But motives can also be positively diabolical, and when such motives inhabit the hearts of people with influence, evil spreads insidiously, like a metastasized cancer gone undetected.

[angstandhappiness]

INTERESTING

you ever think about the fact that laios won not by being a monster but by being human.

monsters as we’ve seen throughout the manga are predictable, they have this rhythm to them that, once someone understands, can be used to take them out. take kelpies like anne where laios states that she is just a monster and cannot be trusted. even kensuke is “just a monster after all”, running away from danger when laios needs it most. kensuke is beloved by laios not just because he is a monster, but because laios, in human fashion, anthropomorphized him in his mind (giving him a name, etc.)

but people are different. they are multifaceted, non-monolithic creatures. long lived races are not all pious and apathetic towards short lived races as we see with marcille and senshi. chilchuck actively works against the prejudice against half-foots. tallmen from every region have their cultural differences as we see with shuro and laios/falin. even “demi-humans” like orcs have depth to them, having rich culture and values despite the general idea that they are a violent pillaging race.

even laios’ family and village, the nexus point for his dislike of people, have depth to them. though their parents did not actively protect their children, they did not wish harm on them either. the exorcisms performed on falin by their mother was harmful in laios’ eyes, but helpful in his mother’s perspective.

laios himself, despite loving monsters and hating humans, is so very painfully human. he hates humans but has risked life and literal limb to save his sister and his party. he loves monsters but is aware of their dangerous nature and spares them no mercy.

(big spoilers under the cut)

the winged lion mistook laios as a one dimensional entity, one which only operates on a one track mind without paradox. it thought laios to operate like a monster, and so it approached his desires like one. it believed that laios, being so obsessed with monsters, must behave like one as well, so completely disregarded the fact that laios could have something up his sleeve.

but laios is not a monster, he is human. he has ulterior motives, overlapping beliefs, contradicting values. it is his humanness that made him explain to his party what to do when things went awry. it is his humanness that allowed him to lie. lie to the world about his true plan as well as lie to the winged lion about his intentions.

sure laios WANTS to be a monster, that much is definitely true. but what he IS is a different story. laios is an unpredictable, sporadic, messy human being. it is that fact which the winged lion overlooked, and ultimately led to its downfall and laios’ victory.