#im curious on other peoples ideas on this

[troutfur]

Im curious what you mean by "the way the fandom judges incest ships is very catholic" (genuinely. I know very little about Catholicism)

Oh boy, finally an opportunity to info dump about Catholic marriage law on the War Cats blog!

So, the first thing to understand here is that, as an institution that ran as a transnational parallel system of political power in Europe for centuries, the Catholic Church over time became very bureaucratic and legalistic. Thus arose the Code of Canon Law, a codified system of laws and regulations governing the minutiae of any issue that fell under the purview of the Church, from marriage to excommunication and everything in between.

This system was based on the old law code of the Roman Empire, with changes made to suit their theology and holy books. For example, the legal concept of divorce was slowly eroded over time until there was only one way to break off a marriage: annulment, basically declaring a marriage to have been null and void from the beginning due to running afoul of some technicality.

Roman law prohibited marriages between four degrees of consanguinity, which going by the way that law system counted those degrees meant anyone further than your first cousin was fair game. Around the ninth century, the Church decided to increase the number of prohibited degrees to seven AND changed the way degrees of consanguinity were counted. This is how the "xth cousin y times removed" thing was invented, by the way. It is explicitly legal language invented to describe canon law prohibitions to marriage.

Anyway, so from around 800 up to the canon law reforms of the 4th Council of the Lateran in 1215 it was law that your earliest common ancestor had to be a whole EIGHT generations back in order to be legally able to marry. This mostly affected noble families which, as you may know, had a habit of intermarrying. Your average Joe didn't know their family history that far back and the chance Church records of baptisms (which is how they tracked kinship) that far back would still exist and be accesible was slim to none.

Naturally, for the everyman, claiming consanguinity that simply could not be proven became an easy loophole for divorce (which the Church hated). And the nobility was more and more trying to abuse the Pope's power to provide dispensations, special permission to marry regardless of their marriages being within the prohibited degrees of consanguinity. The Fourth Lateran Council addressed this by reducing the number of forbidden degrees back to four but keeping their new way of counting them. And it's been kept like that ever since.

This is still kinda insane because who even knows who their fourth cousins are, let alone has met them? Most secular governments at absolute most forbid marriage within the first degree of consanguinity. And genuinely I think that's enough. People in industrialized societies don't tend to be very well connected to their extended family beyond that and the only sound argument for outlawing incestuous marriage is to prevent familial abuse.

But the way some Warriors fans freak out about distant relations between 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th cousins and balk at the idea that this relation being revealed should invalidate a ship... Really I can't call it anything else other than Cultural Catholicism. It really has all the hallmarks of this specific legal system.

[monster-inside-of-your-head]

ppl writing about what the divergence points for the Fionna and Cake timelines was is interesting but I'm more curious about what wish caused it. Like sure sure how it did kid Marceline died but what wish ended up with the Winter King lmao.

"I wish Princess Bubblegum wasn't a dictator" "ok [timeline shifts so she got the madness instead]"

[majorshatterandhare]

[Answer options in order are:

1. Yes, guitar, mandolin

2. Yes, piano/keyboard

3. Yes, violin, viola, cello, bass (inc. electric bass)

4. Yes, percussion

5. Yes, a woodwind

6. Yes, a brass instrument

7. Yes, multiple

8. Yes, something not mentioned here

9. No, I do not currently play an instrument but I sing

10. No, I do not currently play an instrument and I do not sing.

End Options]

Please specify in the comments or tags!

I’m sorry there aren’t more options, I only had 10 spaces or I would’ve included more. I tried to go with the most common and obviously with groups!

What counts for singing is up to you. I think most people sing some amount, but you can decide if yours counts or not. The reason for this is because you can teach yourself an instrument, so not requiring lessons or anything for either instruments or singing.

If you want to learn an instrument, especially if you don’t currently play any, I would love to know if you shared!

Please reblog! I wanna know how many of us play instuments ourselves and what that distribution is.

If you don’t listen to the Mechanisms don’t respond to this poll! I’m sure your answer is very interesting, but it will skew the results!

[shijimamei]

here i am, back with another "is this stardew thing kosher?" months later!

this time: sea, cave and river jelly!

the 1.6 update hit consoles today, so i started my kosher farm and i got a river jelly and i'm like....

UM ok, this can be eaten but... is it KOSHER?

[telesodalite]

Question for those who dabble in humanformers or the like!

Out of curiosity, how do you come up with or decide on non-transformer names for humanformers/non-mech aus?

Also, what was the inspiration? Are you just roughly translating their name to the closest sounding name? Or is there other personal or cultural reasons behind certain names?

[jsdimensions]

have this drawing i scrapped because as I thought about it i realized that they didn't fit the meme i based it off of

[bmpmp3]

yesterday in vocal synth news

[ellistruggle]

quick question: do yall think my artstyle is consistent? like, do you recognize that i made it? or nah?

[oifaaa]

for the anon game you just reblogged (i’m a newish follower so idk much about you): you had a hamilton faze

It's not right that you can just casually be like I've known you for 5 seconds but let me just expose you real quick

[iridescentis]

question for fic writers: how many docs do you have for one multichap fic? im curious because currently I have four: the fic itself, the planning doc, the notes doc, and the drabbles doc for whenever i feel like writing random later scenes

i find it really helpful and a lot less confusing having each thing separated into its own doc so i can focus and its way easier to find what im looking for

[inquisitiveheretic]

re the prev post what central emotion do you guys think pete wentz writes from?

[simelune]

💭 hmmm venting in tags.

but im very curious what you guys think about the phrase/idea "you can't love someone else until you love yourself"???

[glassgob]

im planning on finishing the chime before i move onto designing counter/weight npcs but if you have a favorite you want me to draw i am not above being coaxed

no images though. do not send me images or headcanons because im doing this all in the dark

[greenfiend]

So I went on Reddit (big mistake I know). And it’s honestly so fascinating to me, like from a psychological perspective, how adamant 99% of them are that there’s zero evidence for Byler/Mike being queer.

When there’s actually more evidence for Byler than so many other ships out there? (For comparison sake, I shipped Ron/Hermione back in the day, and I was fairly confident they’d end up together (they did). Though, there was not as much evidence… I’d argue.)

Like, do just a few minutes of research and you’ll find evidence in the cinematography, the music, the costume design, the script, the acting choices, and more.

To be fair, I *try* to look up evidence to the contrary… and what do I find? Shallow, surface level evidence… “Mike said he loves Eleven” (completely ignoring how lying is a major reoccurring theme in the show…)

Then you have them all echoing that Bylers are delusional. And I’m not even upset. I’m just fascinated. The lack of insight is astounding.

[precalamity]

the talos principle 2 will be out on november 2nd. what will I even do. what will become of me. you will not hear from me for three days at least.

[johnwicklover1999]

i think one thing that anti-theists like.. do wrong (?) is treat religions like they're monoliths, which is impossible. you might find that one denomination is larger than another, but there will pretty much always be other denominations, and varying interpretations within each denomination.

no religion is a monolith, and no religion ever will be one. that's because religion is a personal experience to the individual, who will have their own thoughts and feelings about their faith. that is how people are in regards to everything, because humans aren't a monolith of a species.

i understand it might be confusing, or even frustrating when a religion has many denominations and interpretations, but that doesn't work super well as a reason for wanting to rid of religion. in fact, just yesterday i was told by an anti-theist that 'ideally' the belief of magic would be rid of and traditional religion wouldn't change. i know for a fact that other anti-theists would disagree with that and present their own ideal outcome of anti-theism, because i often browse anti-theism tags to get an understanding of anti-theist beliefs (it's good practice to read up on some opposing opinions to get some standing ground! my dad taught me that.)

it is perfectly okay to be critical of religion, i myself am critical of some religious ideas from varying religions! but when you don't fully understand the religion you're criticizing, and you're getting your information from biased sources, or only reading about limited ideas then you don't have the information to accurately criticize any religion. the idea that all religions are strict monoliths is entirely false, and if someone believes that then their criticism isn't totally credible, especially when they can't acknowledge the good of religion.

in the end, individual religions can not be treated as if they are massive groups of people who all share the same ideas and the same beliefs, harmful or not. because that's literally just not true. if you want to improve religion then actually go forth and try to understand it and listen to different people discuss their religion and it's flaws, trying to get rid of religion will only hurt people. (and i very strongly believe that getting rid of religion will in turn hurt spiritually, and by extension culture.)