#in case someone didn't know

[mikaikaika]

my absolute beloved

[herefortheships]

Some thoughts on the music industry as it is today

Vanessa Carlton's song "White Houses" has been in my mind since last night and it has got me thinking about how they really don't make music like that anymore. Or it's not that this type of music isn't being produced; the truth is that we wouldn't find this kind of lyrics on the radio. Music with honest, meaningful, lyrics. I think the closest I've found to make such profound music AND reach the popular media streams today might be Mitski.

And Vanessa wasn't an exception in the early 2000s, but she was among the last we saw, I think. Her contemporary Avril Lavigne had several profound songs in her arsenal as well, but the media gave the most attention to her more fun songs like "Sk8ter Boi" and "Complicated" with more commercial appeal, I guess. She had such songs as "Tomorrow" in her first album that really touched me. "Naked", "Mobile" were also lovely songs, but they didn't get as much attention as the aforementioned.

Before Vanessa and Avril's time, though, in the 90s, there were many more musicians producing exceptional, creative music, with beautiful, inspired, and profound lyrics that MEANT something, hitting the popular streams of music and reaching wide audiences. Profound lyrics and creativity in music weren't elements confined to the more indie music spaces. At the top of my head, among the musicians putting out lyrics with meaning there was Jewel, Seal, Brandy, No Doubt even had a few songs that were more than a fun quick jam, and heck even some more pop and clubby songs had some meaningful lyrics like the song "Gypsy Woman" by Crystal Waters and several songs by the band Letters to Cleo ("I see", "Here and now" come to mind), even rock bands like Pearl Jam were putting out some profound lyrics The song "Jeremy" comes to mind. And that's just at the top of my head, as I'm here sipping my tea and writing this completely impromptu "essay" on this Wednesday morning.

I feel like more artists had a mind to create lyrics with meaning back then, and that's probably because it was required to compete in how the industry was back then. TPTB in the music industry were actively pushing this kind of music around that time.

Until they weren't.

I feel that although the kind of lyrics devoid of all sense of meaning, apart from creating a fun or party environment, or stirring certain universal emotions like the sadness of a break-up, the fleeting nature of a summer love, the excitement of a fling, etc, were ALWAYS present and will always exist (and I'm glad for it, don't get me wrong! We all need a good Taylor Swift hyper-commercial song to vibe to every now and then. I know I do and I consume that like it's oxygen sometimes), I feel like we don't get enough of this content in the popular streams of music nowadays.

I feel like this decline in the quality of popular music started (or at least became more prevalent) around 2002-2004, when there was a noticeable shift in the kind of lyrics and the kind of environment or "aesthetic" the music industry was pushing. Lyrics were focusing more and more on drinking, partying, getting high, being "dirty" and promiscuous. Singers whose musical message was sexy but which maintained an air of more "innocent" playfulness like Britney Spears, for example, were now showing up a lot more sexualized and, for lack of a better word, "dirtified" into this "sexy-dirty club girl" aesthetic that became popular around that time. And let's not forget the orange-y bronzers, super thin eyebrows and super low jeans hanging at the hip that went with that aesthetic. Even artists like Avril Lavigne were making music videos dressed in sexy corsets at some point (video "Hot" from 2007). And this wouldn't be an issue (again, fun music is always welcome) if it weren't for the fact that this movement started opaquing anything else. This wasn't a problem with the audience and their tastes having changed; this was/is a problem with TPTB and what they intend to promote and the environment they want to create at any given time in the industry.

I feel that around 2007-2015 there was another small shift in which finally the club party people music started to die out, and more creative music started making it into the radio and other popular streams of music consumption. Even in 2005 we had some few musicians making music that broke that party aesthetic, like KT Tunstall. That said, there were (and still are) too few musicians creating music with meaningful lyrics that are making it to the radio, TV, etc.

Recently, even though the clubbing, drinking music is less prevalent now, I've seen an increase in short songs with empty lyrics enjoying great success, becoming popularized through quick-content media such as TikTok. "Nasty Girl" and "I like the way you kiss me" (by the way I'm totally obsessed with that last one) come to mind. Again, I will EAT some of this music up; the fact that this music is fun to consume and dance to, and vibe to, is not what this essay is about; this essay is about the lack of exposure great lyricists and musicians who create and excel at this kind of profound music are getting, and how lyrics that mean nothing other than stirring sexual images or other more "carnal" reactions and superficial emotions rather than those which explore experiences are getting, such as the experience of losing your virginity (and realizing how "common" instead of "magical" it often is in reality) explored in Vanessa Carlton's "White Houses", which prompted this entire essay,

Music, also, was not viewed as "content" in the 90s and previous decades. This is something else that's hurting the industry. Putting creative products such as music, movies, TV shows, all under the quickly consumed and discarded umbrella of "content", under its modern connotation, has also harmed the quality of these products overall, but that's a conversation for another time! Quick-content media begs for "meme-worthy" songs and other songs which can be adapted to addictive one-minute videos.

I am sure that no doubt about it there are hundreds if not thousands of musicians out there creating music independently that have lyrics that are worth listening to, but unfortunately, unless the YouTube or Spotify algorithms randomly suggest such songs at some point, it's unlikely to discover these artists, and I just find that incredibly unfair. There is simply no such thing as meritocracy in which artists and which songs make it into the modern streams of media (and likely there never has been), but I think that as music becomes content, more and more, and as TPTB keep pushing empty lyrics, the appreciation for music with more profound lyrics, exploring human experiences at a deeper level, is going to continue to dwindle.

Today's media might not see artists like Vanessa Carlton making it big with their songs that sound like stories, speaking of the human experience, but we can all still make an effort to find these independent musicians and support their creations instead of following the game TPTB in the music industries want us to play all the time. It's also true, however, that the level of depth in song lyrics is dependent on the consumer's perception. What is profound to someone, might be hard to understand or even meaningless to someone else; what is meaningless to someone might be the most moving song to someone else. I think I've had that experience with Adult Child's "Star", which is extremely profound to me, personally, but I'm sure lots of people would say "what even is that song saying?" There may be a hidden meaning in a particular line that I might be keenly aware of, but a friend might not even notice. So take this essay with the knowledge that there is also an element of personal perception and that I'm speaking solely on general terms.

[somerandomcockroach]

doodles, doodles, doodles of these bozos

[mentally-ill-for-bes]

It's almost hilarious how even when Viktor is trying to get rid of his humanity it just highlights how partial he's to Jayce. His villain speech isn't even threatening, he searches for Jayce to talk especifically, he is still trying to convince Jayce to join him or to see the benefits of glorious evolution, I would say even trying to impress him. He touches Jayce's forehead even when it's not necessary to know his mind, he keeps the blanket even when he does not feel cold or warm long ago. He could have easily kill him but instead he decides to talk more with him about glorious evolution hoping he to accept him without realizing that Jayce is what makes him look the most human, the most desperate for company and understanding

[tragedy-for-sale]

Protective Obi-Wan anyone?

I was re-watching the Ryloth arc and I couldn't help but notice,

I love how Obi-Wan's arm immediately goes to block Cody, he extends his hand out and it's not in the form of a fist, it's flat, it's an attempt to block as much of Cody's chest as possible. Cody takes a full step back to, mainly to get into position to shoot. But he's preparing himself to move behind Obi-Wan, who'd need enough room to swing his lightsaber to block blaster shots.

Obi-Wan's first instinct is to protect Cody, his second is to ignite his lightsaber. Obi-Wan protects Cody before protecting himself and others. His lightsaber would give enough cover for all his men, but his body would only cover Cody's.

In the second frame, Obi-Wan puts his hand on Cody's gun first before turning off his lightsaber. Now, he does know what is about to come out of the grate before his men do, which is partially why he wants to stop Cody. Cody putting down his weapon would signal to his men that there is no danger, however, turning off his lightsaber would do the exact same thing. But he chooses to stop Cody first.

After Obi-Wan puts his hand on Cody's gun, notice how long he looks at Obi-Wan. Cody's guard is down, he doesn't keep his eye on the grate like his men do, he doesn't even try to keep his blaster aimed, also unlike his men. Cody doesn't break contact with Obi-Wan until he does, it's in that moment we understand how much Cody trusts Obi-Wan with his life.

[dykedvonte]

You ever just see a Mouthwashing take that makes you want to bang your head into a wall? I literally just saw someone claim Curly couldn't have been emotionally abused by Jimmy before the crash because he was in a higher position of power than Jimmy.

-Shrimp Anon

The mouthwashing fandom has shown me that people genuinely do believe that certain types of abuse are not as detrimental as other types especially when they deem those immune/resistant, ergo, believing one is objectively worse no matter how it affects the person nor the intersections of power, history and dynamics at play.

Get ready cause this is a yap session:

Cause like it's heavily implied that Curly and Jimmy's friendship was toxic and abusive, pointedly in the direction of how Jimmy uses Curly's belief/comfort in him. Curly wasn't forced to enable Jimmy but he was emotional and mentally on edge around him in almost every scene in some way. Mental and emotional abuse are not contingent on what positions you have at work. Yeah, he's Jimmy's boss but he was Jimmy's friend first and it's like getting into Psych discussion to talk about how social power tends to overshadow any perceived organizational power in the human mind. People are concerned about their jobs ofc but they tend to hang onto and put more value/investment into their personal relationships, hence why there tends to be laws and restrictions around mixing the two.

I always see the sentiments that "Curly is a grown ass man", "Curly is bigger than Jimmy", "Curly is Jimmy's boss", "He just needed a backbone" as criticisms of Curly and while I do agree that on the surface level all of these to be true and viable ways Curly could've taken more control of the situation, I often look at the parallels of Anya and Curly as victims of Jimmy pre/post crash.

The way Jimmy talks to Anya post crash is how he talked to Curly in the pre-crash segments. It's hard to pin-point mainly because we know he hates and wants nothing to do with Anya compared to his contrary but similarly handled obsessions with Curly. It's a weird sort of "honey-moon" effect of abuse Jimmy does in terms of emotional and mental victimization. He is always horrid to Anya, always talking down or questioning her abilities and thoughts in a situation, this of course includes the harassment and assault. However, he has a moment of attempted gentleness/conditioning when he question her about the mouthwash when she's contemplating drinking it at the table. The key difference is he has no personal investment in Jimmy outside wanting nothing to do with him, meaning there is no sort of romanticized version of him that he can condition her off of. He knows this, hence, why he always reverts to trying to make her to scared to oppose him.

This sort of give and take of "kindness" doesn't work on her because she knows he is just doing it to take more from her than whatever he could possibly give but it reflects even the "softer" scenes between him and Curly where he always rewords or rephrases Curly's sentiments and concerns to sound more shallow. He is feigning a deeper understanding by reworking Curly's emotions into something bad and needing to be hidden. Everything is laced with envy and resentment, an outburst just around the corner, I mean he even slams the table in the birthday party scene, a tactic in emotional manipulation to set the victim on edge and cloud their ability to respond. Even if Curly knows Jimmy won't get physical in that moment, the physical actions is intended to make him back down in the confrontation in case it does. This is something that is just not person specific. It ingrains itself into how you interact with the world and life and it shows in major and minor ways with Curly.

Post-crash, the abusive nature is more in tandem to the physical victimization Anya went through and the stripping of voice and autonomy we see take place. Like the parasite in HFIM, Jimmy speaks for Curly most of the time and puts words in his mouth, similarly to how he takes Anya's plans as his own. He very commonly, with the both of them mind you, supplements the worst aspects of himself into them; pettiness, selfishness, lack of understanding... And tries to cover himself with their best qualities; kindness, planning, initiative, etc...

These parallel are just to say that positional power has little to do with if a person can be abused and how it can even be flipped to further the abuse. There is no doubt that Curly could've picked up on Jimmy's envy of his position hence another reason he never confronted him as a Captain but as a friend as doing so would immediately put Jimmy in a space to be confrontational/combative.

I think the disdain some people have when they talk about the heavily implied if not implicitly stated emotional/mental abuse Curly experienced being Jimmy's friend is when treating it as an excuse to why he didn't do more. I can understand that completely because it is not an excuse to why he didn't do more but is a very real reason people in his position in these scenarios can experience whether in the context of a work or social environment. However, I also think the way people talk about it really does demonstrate a bigger problem when talking about abuse when somehow who is/was abused is either part of the issue or enabled it.

Harkening back to the sentiments about Curly's inaction regarding Jimmy, I think the exact phrases I used/have seen show how there is an inherent belief that it is easier to overpower the effects of emotional/mental abuse that go in tandem with the perception of Curly as someone who should be able to. There is not an age you suddenly stop being susceptible to abuse nor a set point or low where you realize how it has affected you. You don't suddenly know to stand up or put a face on to face your abuser nor admit that you inadvertently enabled them to subjugate someone else to the same treatment. Maybe it's my psych brain but their is this growing belief that direct action is somehow easy or always the best method with the game shows you instances where it is not always the case. In real life that rings true too. He should have done more, but it's not impossible to see why he struggled to find a way or didn't even if it makes us mad.

It's not easy to suddenly gain a "back-bone". You don't immediately want to resort to aggression, especially if it mirrors the type you were a victim to. You don't want to believe you allowed yourself to be treated this bad, let it get that bad or allowed something bad to happen to someone else. It is easy to be in denial, to retreat to your thoughts or make excuses to avoid the painful truth. It's frustrating but in a way we know is relatable. It why we both hate and love Curly for it. We know we'd be better, we think we'd be better, we like to think we wouldn't falter in the same ways but it's always easier to say that from the outside looking in. It's easy to see what he was doing wrong because we are seeing it, not him, but the game really does make you picture what you would do if this was your raw reality and it's why this debate about Curly seems so never ending/contradictory. We can all say what we'd do but bottom line is that's much different when you're in the moment with all the emotions and human feelings attached.

I personally think Mouthwashing tackles the themes of rape culture, enabling, toxic masculinity, types of abuse and patriarchy in ways that are meant to deconstruct the typical straightforward views we mostly have of these concepts and how little subtilities of them are just as, if not more, detrimental than the overt/obvious parts. The game deals with the idea of little details and bigger picture in a way to show that sometimes the bigger picture is not the issue but the little details that make it up. It's why I have a personal dislike of depictions of Jimmy as the typical horrible person who would of course do something like this because the game is about noticing the little warning signs, the foreshadowing and foresight.

It's why I dislike the typical discussion of "bro code" and "boys will be boys" for the game because the game makes a point to avoid the standard depictions of such. It is about the type of men who still enable despite not condoning, agreeing or even perpetuating harmful beliefs because they can't see the little details or the ways it seeps into their everyday. The severity is not obvious to them as it was not obvious to Curly, Swansea or even Daisuke the way it was to a woman like Anya. There are little details about Jimmy that should ring alarms but if you are too naive like Daisuke, too distant like Swansea or too conditioned like Curly, they are just off markers.

There is 100% more constructive/concise ways to say "Curly was a victim of Jimmy's abuse on an emotional and mental aspect that clouded his judgements and perceptions in the scenario" while also critiquing on the side of "Curly still had a responsibility to protect Anya as a crew mate and Captain that he failed to do due to biases and stigma's he failed to surpass" without the weird condemnation people give him about should've knowing better than to let himself be manipulated by a person he considered a close, if not family/best-friend and had his own reasons to trust initially. Also stop being weird about victims of abuse in general with this fandom, like sorry not everyone has a like social epiphany the moment someone's nasty to them. People are treating it like you immediately know when you are in a toxic relationship immediately or comprehend when a person is actively dangerous and either it's your fault for not knowing how to leave/cut them off or you deserve it. Like the hypocrisy of people believing how certain fans treat the story reflect their irl views but not their own is crazy.

End statement is: I honestly don't even know man, I've been writing this too long and just like no man on that ship was perfect or really helped Anya when it mattered and I feel like pitting them against each other in discussion on who did the least or most or how it was justified sucks cause in the end Anya always did the most and best thing for herself.

[starry-bi-sky]

i need to get this out of my head before i continue clone^2 but danny being the first batkid. Like, standard procedure stuff: his parents and sister die, danny ends up with Vlad Masters. He drags him along to stereotypical galas and stuff; Danny is not having a good time.

He ends up going to one of the Wayne Galas being hosted ever since elusive Bruce Wayne has returned to Gotham. Vlad is crowing about having this opportunity as he's been wanting to sink his claws into the company for a long while now. Danny is too busy grieving to care what he wants.

And like most Galas, once Vlad is done showing him off to the other socialites and the like, he disappears. Off to a dark corner, or to one of the many balconies; doesn't matter. There he runs into said star of the show, Bruce who is still young, has been Batman for at least a year at this point, but still getting used to all these damn people and socializing. He's stepped off to hide for a few minutes before stepping back into the shark tank.

And he runs into a kid with circles under his eyes and a dull gleam in them. Familiar, like looking into a mirror.

Danny tries to excuse himself, he hasn't stopped crying since his parents died and it's been months. He rubs his eyes and stands up, and stumbles over a half-hearted apology to Mister Wayne. Some of Vlad's etiquette lessons kicking in.

Bruce is awkward, but he softens. "That's alright, lad," he says, pulling up some of that Brucie Wayne confidence, "I was just coming out here to get some fresh air."

There's a little pressing; Bruce asks who he's here with, Danny says, voice quiet and grief-stricken, that he's with his godfather Vlad Masters. Bruce asks him if he knows where he is, and Danny tells him he does. Bruce offers to leave, Danny tells him to do whatever he wants.

It ends with Bruce staying, standing off to the side with Danny in silence. Neither of them say a word, and Danny eventually leaves first in that same silence.

Bruce looks into Vlad Masters after everything is over, his interest piqued. He finds news about him taking in Danny Fenton: he looks into Danny Fenton. He finds news articles about his parents' deaths, their occupations, everything he can get his hands on.

At the next gala, he sees Danny again. And he looks the same as ever: quiet like a ghost, just as pale, and full of grief. Bruce sits in silence with him again for nearly ten minutes before he strikes a conversation.

"Do you like to do anything?"

Nothing. Just silence.

Bruce isn't quite sure what to do: comfort is not his forte, and Danny doesn't know him. He's smart enough to know that. So he starts talking about other things; anything he can think of that Brucie Wayne might say, that also wasn't inappropriate for a kid to hear.

Danny says nothing the entire time, and is again the first to leave.

Bruce watches from a distance as he intercts with Vlad Masters; how Vlad Masters interacts with him. He doesn't like what he sees: Vlad Masters keeps a hand on Danny's shoulder like one would hold onto the collar of a dog. He parades him around like a trophy he won.

And there are moments, when someone gets too close or when someone tries to shake Danny's hand, of deep possessiveness that flints over Vlad Masters' eyes. Like a dragon guarding a horde.

He plays the act of doting godfather well: but Bruce knows a liar when he sees one. Like recognizes like.

Danny is dull-eyed and blank faced the entire time; he looks miserable.

So Bruce tries to host more parties; if only so that he can talk to Danny alone. Vlad seems all too happy to attend, toting Danny along like a ribbon, and on the dot every hour, Danny slips away to somewhere to hide. Bruce appears twenty minutes later.

"I was looking into your godfather's company," he says one night, trying to think of more things to say. Some nights all they do is sit in silence. "Some of my shareholders were thinking of partnering up--"

"Don't."

He stops. Danny hardly says a word to him, he doesn't even look at him -- he's sitting on the ground, his head in his knees. Like he's trying to hide from the world. But he's looking, blue eyes piercing up at Bruce.

Bruce tilts his head, practiced puppy-like. "Pardon?"

"Don't." Danny says, strongly. "Don't make any deals with Vlad."

It's the most words Danny's spoken to him, and there's a look in his eyes like a candle finding its spark. Something hard. Bruce presses further, "And why is that?"

The spark flutters, and flushes out. Danny blinks like he's coming out of a trance, and slumps back into himself. "Just don't."

Bruce stares at him, thoughtful, before looking away. "Alright. I won't."

And they fall back into silence.

Danny, when he leaves, turns to look at Bruce, "I mean it." He says; soft like he's telling a secret, "Don't make any deals with him. Don't be alone with him. Don't work with him."

He's scampered away before Bruce can question him further.

(He never planned on working with Vlad Masters and his company; he's done his research. He's seen the misfortune. But nothing ever leads back to him. There's no evidence of anything. But Danny knows something.)

At their next meeting, Danny starts the conversation. It's new, and it's welcomed. He says, cutting through their five minute quiet, that he likes stars. And he doesn't like that he can't see them in Gotham.

Bruce hums in interest, and Danny continues talking. It's as if floodgates had been opened, and as Bruce takes a sip of his wine, it tastes like victory.

("Tucker told me once--") ("Tucker?") ("Oh-- uh, one of my best friends. He's a tech geek. We haven't talked in a while.")

(Danny shut down in his grief -- his friends are worried, but can't reach him. When he goes back to the manor with Vlad, he fishes out his phone and sends them a message.)

(They are ecstatic to hear from him.)

It all culminates until one day, when Danny is leaving to go back inside, that Bruce speaks up. "You know," He says, leaning against the railing. "The manor has many rooms; plenty of space for a guest."

The implication there, hidden between the lines. And Danny is smart, he looks at Bruce with a sharp glean in his eyes, and he nods. "Good to know."

The next time they see each other, Danny has something in his hands. "Can you hold onto something for me?" He asks.

When Bruce agrees, Danny places a pearl into his palm. or, at least, it's something that looks like a pearl. Because it's cold to the touch; sinking into Bruce's white silk gloves with ease and shimmering like an opal. It moves a little as it settles into his hand, and the moves like its full of liquid.

Bruce has never seen anything like it before, but he does know this; it's not human. "What is it?" He asks, and Danny looks uncomfortable.

"I can't tell you that." He says, shifting on his foot like he's scared of someone seeing it. "But please be careful with it. Treat it like it's extremely fragile."

When Bruce gets home, he puts it in an empty ring box and hides the box in the cave. He tries researching into what it is. he can't find anything concrete.

Everything comes to a head one day when Danny appears at the manor's doorstep one evening, soaking wet in the rain, and bleeding from the side.

[hintcoined]

we need to talk about the end of this case because what

[piningpercussionist]

Okay. Fellas. Real talk. I've seen some of you do it and I thank you profusely for doing so but can yall PLEASE credit the original artist of that piece yall kinda made into an a dtiys/art meme? That's not official art. I am point blank refusing to engage with any of these pieces that I see not doing such. (Even when it pains me to keep scrolling, because some of them are really good!! And I want them here!!! But I do have some rules for myself I try to stand firm by with this blog.)

Like you can literally see them say right there that it's fine IF YOU CREDIT. I'm fucking begging you.

I'm not mad at anyone who didn't know but I've seen SO MANY versions at this point, and I think I've seen maybe 3 or 4 of them RECENTLY include the credit. (And one with improper credit, I think?) Please. Please just. Tack it on.

[demigods-posts]

I've seen a lot of discourse about Virginia Kull's portrayal of Sally Jackson in the Percy Jackson and the Olympians TV series, and I'd like to say that I loved her. Don't get me wrong. I love Sally from the original book series, and I, too, would fight the God of War on her behalf. But something that I enjoyed about Virginia's portrayal of Sally that we don't get in the books is the character depth. We don't hear much of Sally's backstory in the TV series, apart from a couple of flashbacks with younger Percy and that scene with Poseidon (Toby Stephens). However, those scenes do an excellent job of showing us that alongside being Percy's mother, Sally is also a young woman who fell in love with a man she could not be with and is enduring the natural consequences of having Percy. She struggles to communicate with him when she's frustrated, gets teary-eyed when she lies to him to prolong the inevitable, and actively sacrifices her happiness to ensure his safety. Virginia Kull's portrayal of Sally Jackson reinforces the character's humanity, imperfections, and determination, and it's everything to me.

[emmodii]

11/08/2024, 3.24pm

Bonus:

[lgbtlunaverse]

Thinking of the Nie disciple that told Nie Mingjue it was Meng Yao who stayed behind to clean up corpses on the battlefield today.

Nie Mingjue didn't just randomly stumble upon poor lil meowyao eating bread in the novel, he was already looking for him to thank and reward him for his work.

That's what makes it so fun that nieyao's first conflict will end up being about someone else taking credit for Meng Yao's work.

And I'm sure that Nie Mingjue's actual opinions on plagiarism are a lot more nuanced, all we really get from him in this scene is "well you shouldn't kill someone over it!" which leaves a lot of room for what punishments he thinks are appropiate. But I bet that it isn't occuring to him in this moment that the only reason he knows Meng Yao at all, the only reason he got such a capable deputy, is that he noticed someone was taking care of the dead and cared enough to want to know their name. And then the Nie disciples didn't lie to him. The disciple he asked could have said "it was me, Zongzhu" to rise in the ranks himself, but he didn't. He went and asked others, who all also could have taken the credit, but they didn't. Someone saw Meng Yao working and decided to be honest about it and that simple decision is the catalyst for Meng Yao becoming Nie Mingjue's deputy.

Meng Yao can't just work hard to get results, others have to acknowledge that work. If they don't, it's as if he didn't do anything at all.

[clownakai]

Bestie how come you don't feel the terrible horrible no good very bad vibes in here even though there's not one, but two BO operatives in the room

[anghraine]

I know this isn't only an autistic thing or always an autistic thing, but over the least few years, I've realized that a lot of my difficulties with humor are not actually with humor itself. If anything, there are specific kinds of humor that really work for me and I end up laughing so much harder and longer than everyone else that it's uncomfortable or embarrassing.

But a lot of popular humor fundamentally relies on saying things that aren't true. Sometimes this is drastic exaggeration, sometimes it's OTT parody that is far more about Being Funny than about the actual thing being parodied, and often it's flatly false and that's what is supposed to be funny about it. And yes, that's a humorless and ungracious way to describe that kind of humor—I don't mean to say that this is objectively bad or something.

I even understand the jokes intellectually. But in the vast majority of cases, there is something deeply unfunny to me about jokes reliant on something that is either obviously untrue or which I firmly disagree with.

I've seen quite a few posts recently about how, in online fandom, mocking your faves or being amused at other people mocking your faves is an important part of fandom culture. But for me, jokes about my faves based on things they actually said or did, or qualities they clearly possess, can be very funny, while jokes that are based on misrepresentations—even obvious, it's-all-in-good-fun-and-we-all-know-the-truth misrepresentations—are tedious at best.

For an easy example: Anakin and Luke Skywalker are two of my main Star Wars faves. Jokes about sand or Anakin mass-murdering children in his good phase or Luke being far less concerned than Han over the revelation of who his twin is or "it's not faaaaair" can still be really funny to me when told right. Jokes about Anakin obviously mind-tricking Padmé or Luke being obviously an eternally optimistic loser twink are intensely annoying to me regardless of context or delivery, not because they're comparably objectionable or anything but because they're not true.

Functionally this does cut out a lot of humor—especially online humor—but it's not that I literally don't understand it. I get it. I just don't get it.

[mono-socke]

hello JCU fans, how are you doing

I like making angst of my favourite/comfort characters, so naturally, I had to draw this. poor bunny

slightly different version under the cut

[captaindusk]

ok i know nothing about League but from what i've gathered from posts here and there (and correct me if i'm wrong)

Jayce's character was created to be Machine Herald's nemesis

later added lore suggested they were friends in the past but one thing that stays consistent in lore is that they are, again, now nemesis

arcane fans who actually know LOL were convinced jayvik will end up hating e/o at the end of the series

(+some people said they're like THEE toxic yaoi of LoL😭)

(also could be important to note bc some people might not know is arcane is a PREQUEL to LoL)

so idk but it feels like to me that ending Arcane series the way that they did was... A CHOICE alright

like they had to actively go against LoL lore to not make jayvik just hate each other. do i make sense?