#just that I don't think(?) it's the writer's intention

[heyftinally]

I specifically want to elaborate on this part:

Decontextualizing and rephrasing an interview: I am not going to pretend that I am an expert in academic best practices, but I do believe one thing, if a person is speaking on their own identity and lived experience, it is always much better to directly quote than it is to rephrase. As I read this source, I initially didn't know that it was AI, and I was already upset. An interview that is widely available on the internet with no pay wall, was poorly sourced and made more vague than it was in the initial text. By creating one degree of seperation between the original words of A WRITER (whose literal job was largely based in choosing the right words to describe experiences they had) harm is already done. It makes vague what was once clear, and removes Keri Hulme's voice from her own narrative.

As someone who has spent a LOT of time and effort on the nitty-gritty of quoting others in professional documents, I feel like I have a pretty good foundation on which to speak about this.

As a general rule, you want to directly quote the speaker as much as possible.

First and foremost, this is because you don't want to put words in their mouth or misrepresent what they said, as that's dishonest on your part as the interviewer/writer/etc, and harms your credibility. Remember the "Coolsville sucks" meme? Yeah, don't be that person. Quotes should be full and verbatim as much as possible, because anything else presents the possibility that you aren't accurately or fully representing what the speaker said.

The second reason is because when you re-word someone else's quote, you inherently inject your own biases into the new version you create. What that means is, consciously or unconsciously, you are influencing the way readers perceive what was said. This is bad because at best, you're speaking over the person who's quote you re-worded. At worst, you're manipulating your readers to think as you do, regardless of what the original quote said.

When presenting a quote from someone else, your job is to communicate as clearly as possible the speaker's original statement and intention. If giving the direct quote is not possible, careful paraphrasing is vital.

If I say "Sara James then went on to express her dissatisfaction with the pay she received", what would you assume the original quote is?

It could be "Yeah, I found out I was only getting paid ⅓ as much as my costar, even though I have 40% more screen time and I did almost all of my own stunts, so needless to say I'm not happy and I've been talking to my team."

But it could ALSO be "I was surprised when I found out what we were all getting paid. Not to sound like a total nepo baby or anything, but normally the projects I do pay more, y'know? But then I found out that the reason pay was lower for everyone - not just me - was because production was donating a whole bunch of money to the local children's hospital since we filmed in the lot next door. Which I thought was really cool of them! Like, obviously the hospital doesn't get much say in the filming, so I thought it was really cool of production to give back as, like, a thank you. Plus we got to go visit the kids, which was just amazing!"

TECHNICALLY in both of these, you could argue that displeasure about pay IS mentioned - but the specifics of the situation are entirely lost in the oversimplified paraphrasing, and THAT is why changing direct quotes can be dangerous.

So, yeah. I just wanted to elaborate on that particular point because it's one I covered *heavily* while in college. How you quote someone is important.

":')))))))) you realise that gen AI is available to everyone though right??? Queer creators can use it just as much as anyone else??? I just don't understand this post... It really feels like a cheap way to get on the 'AI Bad's bandwagon, and coming from such a thoughtful and insightful creator that's incredibly disappointing... It's okay to not comment on subjects you're not an expert in y'know...?"

Y'all know the drill, I am replying to this publicly but that is not an invitation to send any negative messages to the person I am replying to.

Anyways, let me start by saying that the original context of the post you're replying to is discussing an event where a queer org used generative AI to steal an interview with Keri Hulme. So let's start there. To be clear I don't even know if the original interviewer was queer so let's put the identities of stealer and stolen from to the side. I want to explain the harm done in this example specifically and I hope this is illustrative of what harm generative AI can (and does) do.

The original place I saw generative AI was a queer org that explicitly says they are using generative AI "for good", and as a way to bring more queer history to light. So let's take them at their word, and assume they are not out to cause harm. This is the best example of generative AI that I can imagine, so I hope that makes it clear that I am not coming at this issue from bad faith in any way.

Here is the harm they are causing:

Decontextualizing and rephrasing an interview: I am not going to pretend that I am an expert in academic best practices, but I do believe one thing, if a person is speaking on their own identity and lived experience, it is always much better to directly quote than it is to rephrase. As I read this source, I initially didn't know that it was AI, and I was already upset. An interview that is widely available on the internet with no pay wall, was poorly sourced and made more vague than it was in the initial text. By creating one degree of seperation between the original words of A WRITER (whose literal job was largely based in choosing the right words to describe experiences they had) harm is already done. It makes vague what was once clear, and removes Keri Hulme's voice from her own narrative.

The original interviewer is not paid, or given proper recognition: I get it, sometimes just copy pasting an interview doesn't feel transformative enough, but something that one would learn if they worked in the queer history field and weren't a literal robot rehashing what has already been said, is that not everything needs to be transformed. In those cases, we give credit to the person who said the original words (in this case Keri Hulme), and the interviewer who facillitated the conversation (in this case Shelley Bridgeman). This case (again a best case scenario), takes the attention and byline away from the original interviewer and gives it to an AI.

The original publisher of this story is deinsentivised from paying interviewers in the future: The original publisher of this interview has ads on their website. As a person who also has ads on their website, taking an article like this and rephrasing it for no good reason (the orginal word count was not prohibitive and the rephrasing did not make it more readable), takes money from the publisher. It's pennies, but it's also removing numbers could have been used to justify further interviews with asexual people and archiving of asexual stories. The org that stole from this publication does not interview people themselves so the money and numbers that could have gone to continue to preserve asexual stories goes to stealing them instead.

These are just the active harms that I saw in this specific case. As you said, I am not an expert in generative AI, and will not be speaking as if I am. But I will say that asking me not to speak out on active harm that is being caused in queer history spaces, is disrespectful to my many years in this field.

To illustrate this even clearer: if you were a patron, you would know I recently took down an old article. I have been rereading and editing our backlist of articles, and I found one that no longer fit my standards of sourcing. My standards had recently raised due to a video made by HBomberguy about someone in the queer history space who was stealing from other creators. I watched this video not as a work project, but because I watch most of HBomberguys videos, and this one made me think more critically about sourcing. An AI can't do that. All an AI has is what has been inputted, and it is right now impossible to input every available peice of information about ethics into an AI and get a coherent ethical basis on which it will function.

It is a distinctly human trait to absorb information and change in that way. AI can rephrase information that already exists, steal it, recontextualize it even, but it cannot create something altogether new.

Do I believe that there one day might be an ethical use for Generative AI? Maybe. Do I believe that coming into a queer history space, stealing the words of a Maori asexual author, rephrasing them, and giving the original interviewer and publication no form of compensation for their work, is accomplishing that? No.

On a more personal note: I am coming at this issue with a bias. As a queer history creator, I do not want AI in my space, because it is literally damaging to my financial prospects. It has been like pulling teeth to try and get patrons in the current state of the global economy. I don't blame anyone from that, but I feel very disrespected that I am being asked to compete with a machine now. Not only that, but I am being asked to shut up and be fine with it? No, absolutely not. I cannot and will not stay quiet as space that I have fought tooth and nail to create in mainstream discussions is taken and given to AI.

AI was not supporting me when I was sent gore to try and scare me off of discussing queer history. A person did that. AI was not there to tell me I had written too many sad stories, and I needed some happy endings to remind myself of the good in the world. A person did that. AI was not there when I was being harrassed for supporting and including asexual stories on my website. A person did that.

And after all that, I am being asked to lie down and take it when my ability to pay the people who supported me in those ways, is being threatened. Nope. Not going to happen.

An AI doesn't have to make rent. An AI doesn't understand what it feels like to have to stop holding their wife's hand in public. An AI didn't get calls from people needing comfort in reaction to the election. Pay me for my work, and get this AI nonsense out of my face.

[the-owl-tree]

what are your thoughts on lion king as xenofiction? it's obviously one of the most accessible and largest media that's xenofiction and i think it shares similarities w warriors with it's more rightwing undertones esp regarding divine right of kings/rulers and an honor code system that leans fascist when u think about it.

(None of this disclaimer is directed at you anon) Before I get any yelling at me for reading too deeply into this, (1) you are on the Reading Too Deeply Into Things blog and (2) watch this podcast episode about nazi furries where the Lion King was used as intro material and had the Circle of Life rewritten to be about being proud of being white (skip to 29:47 if you just want that bit).

"But Deer, that's not the Lion King's fault that they rewrote the song!" Okay but why did they use the Lion King? What themes, unintentionally presented, could people in this community pick up on that they use this movie as recruitment material? What choices in the casting of the hyenas and ideas about some species being destined to rule might appeal to a certain demographic? No, I am not trying to ""cancel"" the Lion King, I am trying to make people think why the Lion King has (unintentional) right wing themes and who that attracts.

"But that's not the writer's intention!" Meaning is made through the act of reading as well, there is no such thing as one true interpretation. You can read something and have a wholly different takeaway than what the author intended. Animals as an allegory for human relationships and structures are going to take that weight regardless. Analysis and making meaning is not an indictment on the writer, it is a part of engaging with art. Right-wing voices already shit themselves at the Washington Post's article trying to talk about this, please do not make me relive that era or I'll make fun of you.

Sorry for the hefty disclaimer, people get really mad about topics like this, especially when it comes to something so beloved.

The Lion King is decidedly not about lions lol the lions are a shorthand to signify royalty, it is Hamlet with animals! They are visual shorthands for the audience to understand the character's relationships with one another with the lions, lead by a king, as our royal family and utilizing hyenas, lions enemies in nature, as an antagonistic force. It's similar to how Disney's Robin Hood is also not about animals, it is using animals as visual shorthands for the audience to understand these characters (Robin is the sly and clever fox, Prince John is a scrawny lion signifying his royal status but the lack of mane implies shortcomings, and so on; also not without its shortcomings, man I wonder why Lady Marian is a fox and not a lion in this, what sort of implications were you trying to avoid, Disney?).

The Lion King is uninterested in the perspective of an actual lion, of a creature that does not share human morality and concepts of death and yada yada. Which is fine! It's pretty straightforward about this, but that doesn't erase that animal allegories still come with loads of baggage, especially with the voice direction of the hyenas and how that reflects with the overwhelmingly white cast of the original (there's like four major black voice actors in the cast with james early jones as mufasa, robert gullaume as rafiki, madge sinclair as sarabi, and whoopi goldberg as shenzi. minor roles that include black actors are jason weaver as young simba's singing voice and niketa calame as young nala's singing voice.)

So while I don't think the Lion King in itself is as intentional as Warriors can be about their right-wing themes, I do think that it's not an invalid or even that big of a stretch to read said themes in the Lion King. I actually quite like this video that discusses themes of Judaism in Lion King 1/2, it touches on the unfortunate implications and undertones that the Lion King 1/2 builds up from the basis that the Lion King set down.

I actually find it really interesting how the Lion Guard, a school for preschoolers, tried to engage with a lot of these criticisms. Whether or not they succeeded, up to you, but something about them engaging with "lion supremacy" and even the unfortunate subtext of the hyenas later on is really fascinating to me.

Okay, I've rambled a lot, hopefully I've made some sort of point here lmao but yeah! I agree, I can absolutely read a lot of the unintentional themes and subtext the films have when it comes how they utilize animals in relation to power dynamics. There is a concrete analysis to be made here, even if that's not the intention. I'd say as a piece of xenofiction, the Lion King is not actually that interested in animals, they are merely actors for a human drama. Which, you know, is what a lot of people seem to think xenofiction is unfortunately.

[jesncin]

hi!! would you kindly tell us the comics you used for your passionate defense of martians' gender fuckery?? i would very much like to read more!

Haha sure! J'onn and the Martians are a case of "they're genderqueer coded through science fiction shenanigans but because they don't have the constraints to be Representation they get to be really fun and interesting in a way most Corporate Canon Representation don't get to be". With that, here's the comics I pulled from for queer readings of J'onn and the Martians:

Justice League Infinity Takes place in the DCAU world, where J'onn takes a break from the League to live a quiet life as Amrit Jessawalia. This one's cute, I like it- and the writing feels really intentional that it's meant to be a queer reading of J'onn as it's written very compassionately.

New 52 Martian Manhunter Solo: Epiphany The great Monkey's Paw of J'onn Queer Texts. The New 52 Solo is unintentionally the gayest and genderfunky story of all time for J'onn, at the expense of being extremely convoluted and edgy. It's about J'onn splitting himself into multiple identities to escape death, and all those identities need to unite in order to become J'onn again. This is where J'onn kisses Aquaman, and his heart is represented by a woman. This story is so queer that is spawned this write up on Screen Rant about it.

Martian Manhunter 2019: Identity While this solo is polarizing in the MM community, I still recommend it because it has a lot of merits as a J'onn take. This is written by Steve Orlando, a Jewish bi man who purposefully integrated his Jewish heritage and queer identity into his reimagining of Martian lore. While J'onn isn't technically queer in this story, his narrative is paralleled with that of a bi woman (a cop, barf. Very copaganda run unfortunately), and Martian lore is reimagined as nods to Jewish culture and customs (which is incredibly cool). Martian shapeshifting culture is more thought out in this run, down to Martian pro-creation/pregnancy being a thing both J'onn and his wife M'yri'ah combined do together. This is the most explicitly intentional J'onn queer allegory I've read so far.

JLA 1997 issue 63 This is where the iconic "J'onn identifies as asexual" panel comes from. It's real!! Definitely unintentional representation moment but I think it's funny that this canonized J'onn as "not a cis man" just because the writer wanted to avoid Diana calling out J'onn for being sexist lmao

Carl Lumbly's Interview with Watchtower Database Highly recommend this interview because not only is it rare to hear from Carl Lumbly (the beloved voice actor behind DCAU J'onn) but he speaks in a way that's so profoundly poetic, it's clear J'onn is a character that personally means a lot to him. His headcanon for Martian shapeshifting culture is my favorite of all time, and I love how his take in particular respects the identities J'onn shifts into (maybe I'm making a comic inspired by his take because it's that good). He talks about how he informed J'onn's characterization with his immigrant experience, which I adore as well. My hot take is that Black actors have contributed the most interesting and nuanced takes on J'onn :y

Those are the big holy grail of Queer Martian texts (minus the really cringey transphobic Joan J'onzz story)! The rest is me reading into/projecting onto other Martian characters which is incredibly easy to do when they're a shapeshifter alien species that swap into men and women casually, haha.

[chattematsu]

[4.0 archon quest spoilers]

[goron-king-darunia]

I want to open this by saying that I'm sure everyone put in their utmost effort and that their translations are correct. I am not chalking up any of my observations here as a failure or mistranslation on their part. I'm also not saying that just because the stuff in the event doesn't match my headcanons doesn't mean the stuff that happened isn't canon somehow or that the event should cater to me specifically or that somehow the people at Bamco don't know what their own intentions are. These are my observations and opinions and I'm petty as shit because I have been in deep with DotNW for years and I'm very precious with it and I'm sure I have nostalgia goggles for it the same way ToS fans have nostalgia goggles for the original game that make them overly precious with how the Shepherds of Regeneration were handled/mishandled in DotNW. With that out of the way:

Richter and Aster are cute as always of course, even if I do NOT get the direction the writers went with some of these lines. But it makes my feelings for Ratatosk even more complicated than they already were.

Ratatosk calls Richter out for what the narrative agrees is Richter looking down on Emil and treating him as a kid. Richter and Emil do push back on that and the narrative does imply that while Emil is correct that Richter is at least in part trying to keep his confidence up, Richter himself admits that he still sees Emil as the scared kid he met in Luin and not the man he became through their journey. So on the one hand it's kind of nice to see Ratatosk have something between paternal, fraternal, and self-love toward Emil, wanting Emil to be able to do things himself and shine and be his own person because that courage really earned Ratatosk's respect and he's glad for Emil to be handling things with his own power, even if that means "holding back" from using their spirit powers which Ratatosk considers extensions of his own strength. Emil's independence is something he agrees is better for Emil, even if he doesn't understand Emil's strange logic about it.

Like, it's nice to see Ratatosk openly caring about the other version of himself, the part he hated so much he made it an entirely different self, even if it reads a little bit like narcissism because, like. That's growth. Ratatosk cares for and believes in that part of himself that he shoved away before and embraces Emil as his own person but also as a valuable part of himself. That proves the journey he took in DotNW had an impact on him and what he considers strength and what sorts of qualities he considers valuable to foster in himself through his new self AND old self.

But at the same time Ratatosk is SO FUCKING MEAN TO RICHTER. And, I'm not expecting him to be friendly. These two were fighting one hell of a cold war with each other in their own world because they both had reasons to feel hurt and both had very valid senses of being wronged and wanting justice and that doesn't go away just because they got swept into a new world where at least some of the harm from before was undone. Aster may be back and (If I remember correctly) Kharlan or at least a world tree that is partly like Kharlan has been brought to this world, so like. Yes, the major points of pain for those two have been addressed but that doesn't magically make those emotional wounds go away. I get it. I'm glad they're not super chummy or whatever and pretending they're letting bygones be bygones because having those things unfairly ripped from them AT ALL doesn't simply undo what was done and doesn't mean they didn't suffer and aren't still suffering.

But Interpreting Richter's desire to, like, not have Emil drown or almost drown to death as "underestimating and looking down on" Emil or seeing him as some weak human or treating Ratatosk as some stupid weakling that would let Emil drown is, like, super uncharitable. I'm not calling it a mistake. In fact I do think it says something about Ratatosk for him to be mean as fuck to Richter. But at the same time, it just complicates how I feel about him because, like... I get that you're still mad my dude, but holy shit Ratatosk. Richter can genuinely care about Emil and implying that he doesn't after everything you went through is uncharitable as fuck, bro. Again, I think it genuinely works for the story, I'm pretty sure the point IS that Ratatosk is still growing and still has problems he needs to grow from because, like, being uncharitable toward people who are ultimately trying to help you is generally a flaw that people need to work through, so the narrative setting this up as something Ratatosk can still grow from, that he isn't just a stagnant lump that's done growing and changing, is good. But holy hell. I will never not find that abrasive, which is really sad because I know a lot of people including my closest DotNW mooties love Ratatosk a lot. And during his better moments I enjoy him, but holy hell. If they wanted to write him like a hate sink they wouldn't need to change much.

And then we have whatever this is. XD This screenshot is just funny as fuck to me because this is playing very loose with BOTH the implied canon of the game that Richter and Aster could have been "More than Friends" in DotNW because their relationship is suspiciously vague beyond, like, "best friends" and Rilena is barely a character (sad.) But it ALSO goes against the retcon/rewrite/technically canon compliant expansion of Onshuu no Richter where Rilena and Aster are, if we trust the fan translation, implied to be engaged.

Like, make up your mind, Bamco. Is Aster gay for Richter, Straight for Rilena, Bi for both of them, or whatever the fuck kind of nerd loser shit you're implying here where this absolute rizzlord is SOMEHOW STRIKING OUT WITH THE LADIES AND NOT GETTING ALONG WITH GIRLS?! I can't even tell if I'm supposed to read this as "so gay he doesn't know how to get along with women and Rilena is the tomboyish exception off-screen" or "so straight he gets nervous around pretty girls" or "absolutely insane rizz in mixed company but abrasive personality when left alone with a girl" or even "secretly misogynist somehow." Because I think we're meant to read it in context as "Aster is jealous that Emil pulls bitches and Aster somehow isn't or can't pull bitches?" Aster you pulled the baddest bitch ever by landing Richter, shut up! XD He even brings up Rilena in the next line but not in a context that implies he misses her company or anything more direct like "I miss my wife, Richter." Regardless of what we're actually supposed to pull from this about Aster's relationship with Rilena, Aster is landing bitches, I guarantee it. The autism gets him mad bitches. Don't lie to me Rays. I know your word is technically canon, but you are wrong. The council has decided but the council is stupid and I'm ignoring it or whatever the meme is. If we're meant to pull from this that Aster is not a hit with the girls, you are daft, Rays. Because either you're trying to tell us that Rilena is the only girl Aster could pull and yet later imply that he still wants to ogle other women, or that Aster is available, adorkable, and NOT PULLING ANY GIRL HE WANTS. Like, I'm sorry, these are bot absurd to me. Whatever you say is law, Rays, but even if I didn't already ship Aster with Richter, I would absolutely be ignoring whatever this is. Aster could land anyone he wanted, change my mind.

Also, Richter has a long beat of silence after this implying that Aster/Rilena IS considered canon here, or that he's at least aware that Aster is straight. But that only redoubles what I said before. Why isn't Aster directly saying "I miss flirting with my fiance." or anything more direct? Because being vague about it makes it sound like he wants to CHEAT. I refuse to believe Bamco treats all men the same way they treat Zelos. Aster is not a fuckboy, like come on. Also the long beat of silence for Richter implying that the gay love is entirely unspoken and unrequited oof ouch.

(Feel free to argue with me or refute these ideas by the way, I am one nerd and I built these headcanons in a shed out of the tiny scraps of content we got drip-fed before Rays was even in development and it's been a while since I completed the game and my brain is a sieve at the best of times so, like. I am once again not trying to say my word is gospel here. I am saying I have opinions and I want to bang out the dents here and understand what they were going for so I can adopt the canon stuff I see fit and absolutely burn the rest. XD)

Also, I don't know how to feel about this.

If it was only this, I might soften up on Ratatosk a bit, making a "concession" to hide himself away while Richter helps Emil so that it doesn't bother Richter. But pulling this out now when Ratatosk is offscreen and can't explain himself, in fact, doing it behind Ratatosk's back so he specifically cannot speak for himself, almost cheapens the stuff from before where Richter guessed, and Ratatosk basically confirmed, that at least part of the reason he was hanging back and letting Emil do things was because Ratatosk trusted Emil to handle himself and was agreeing to let Emil handle things on his own.

Waiting to bring this back I think is meant to be a surprising reveal like "aw, Ratatosk does care!" but because it's not coming out of Ratatosk's mouth and because it's being delivered as a different and separate idea that is phrased as though it negates the idea that Ratatosk was hiding so Emil could do things on his own just... cheapens both reasons instead of consolidating both reasons as proof that Ratatosk cares about himself AND about others and he's willing to work with Emil and even Richter to do what's right for Marta and the team. I understand this is maybe a little picky of me because "He's not apologizing the way I want him to" is petty. But coming from Tenebrae who is saying this without Ratatosk asking him to, is it REALLY Ratatosk apologizing?

I know Tenebrae divulges that it's Ratatosk's pride that prevents him from apologizing directly, and I know Ratatosk outright tells Richter in a different Chapter of Rays not to forgive him and that he wants a rematch as a sort of subtle "I can't say it to your face, but I understand my rash actions in our original world were wrong, and you're right to be upset and you don't have to forgive me and I won't ever ask you to and I want you to be able to see us as Equal now that I understand you and see you as Equal (thus worthy of a rematch) but This Is Me reaching out and saying in my own way that I'm sorry and that I'm saying it, not because I want forgiveness but because I owe it to you that I acknowledge my mistakes. I need you to know that you made an impact and that I understand and that you are heard."

But Tenebrae apologizing on Ratatosk's behalf and putting words in his mouth is just... again, really cheap to me. I believe genuinely, in what the narrative is saying here, that Tenebrae says things on Ratatosk's behalf because Ratatosk is too proud to ever say it. But it means way more for Ratatosk to tell Richter to his face "Don't forgive me. Keep hating me. Let that hatred burn in your chest so we can fight again someday." than to have Tenebrae here like "by the way I want you to know that Ratatosk is actually sorry and he just won't say it so I am telling you that his explicit reason for not showing up while you were coaching Emil is not actually because he believes in Emil and wants Emil to win on his own merits, oh no, he actually cares about your feelings and won't say it. Please ignore that he showed up earlier to chew you out for not believing in Emil thereby ignoring both his stated purpose of supporting Emil by going around picking fights with you and my own stated reason that he's trying not to upset you with his presence."

Tangentially, the fact that Aster gets called by the title "Professor Laker" baffles me too. I'm sure it was explained in a different scene and I just don't remember or haven't seen it. I'm not saying he couldn't have earned it but the fact that they're implying he was already qualified in his own timeline and just died before getting the title is really sad.

Also they are straight-washing him so hard in my opinion. Like, yes it's not explicit in the game, not even in the JP version as far as I'm aware. But the fact that it mattered so little in the context of the DotNW game and now both Rays and Onshuu are trying to prove how VERY STRAIGHT ™️Aster is is just... really funny to me. But him being this much of a lecher about it is absolutely insane.

Granted I pegged him as a letch, but for Richter exclusively and that sat better with me because at least in that context, they would have mutually been interested in each other. Having Aster who is still implied, vaguely but still implied, to be with Rilena TRYING TO OGLE OTHER GIRLS IN THEIR BATHING SUITS?! Unacceptable. I am contextualizing this as gay-best-friend behavior because I otherwise cannot square this with what we've been shown about Aster before otherwise. Unless THIS is the reason that for some reason he can't get along with girls. Maybe he doesn't get that this kind of comes off a little skeevy to, like, not want to leave an area because you want to see your opposite-sex friends in their bathing suits. It would be different if they were hanging out or if it was a little more clear this was a friendly thing. But it comes so out of left-field for me here that it just... feels like they forgot they were writing Aster and not Zelos? This just sounds like something I would expect from Zelos, you know?

I can buy Aster as bisexual, really I can. I would even concede that even if it never got brought up in canon that Aster was meant to be straight and with Rilena. Heteronormativity. Me preferring him as Richter's gay boyfriend has nothing at all to do with the canon and straight characters are allowed to exist. But a lecherous creep to anyone but Richter or at the very least someone else who is clearly interested in him back? No. My man Aster is not Lupin III. This is not a guy that gets excited for girls in bathing suits. I refuse. I don't care if it's canon, Rays, you are lying to my face. Maybe I'm being hyperbolic but still.

Again, I'm not saying they aren't making a purposeful choice or are wrong here. It's their character, they can write him how they want. This is just a really unexpected way for them to characterize Aster and I kind of DO NOT vibe with it? Am I alone in this? I have just never gotten the vibe that Aster is the kind of guy who would actively announce that he really wants to see his female friends in bathing suits when he clearly has other places to be.

And I say this as someone who has absolutely based some of my headcanons of Aster's behavior, including guessing ahead of Onshuu that Aster would be adept with a gun, on Lupin. They both have a vibe of "No active thoughts but somehow still geniuses" in their own genres. But the lecher quality is 100% never something I would pin on Aster. This guy likes mischief and a good time but this man is NOT Zelos Wilder. Even if I buy that Aster likes, tits and coochie, this is not a man that gets all hyped to see his allies in bathing suits. This is a guy who downloads 18 petabytes of porn on the company laptop like a decent human. This is a guy who feasts his eyes on what others deign to show him of free will and never stoops to asking for it. I will buy that he's a horny teen trying to make the most of his second life. But I don't care that a brush with death would fuck a guy up. Aster is not a creep. This is not a funny haha quirk like with Zelos, Bamco. Don't slander my boy.

NOW THIS IS MY BOI. This is not a guy who wants to see free cleavage, even from the pancake squad. This is a guy who proudly proclaims he has no athletic prowess like it's a TALENT, grins like a dope and announces himself as the hostage to his captors, and APOLOGIZES TO HIS BESTFRIEND/BOYFRIEND FOR GETTING MURDERED. Aster telling Richter to shut up about his feelings during a serious discussion and then APOLOGIZING because he knows that even though it was necessary to keep Richter's feelings out of it that it was mean and that it's important for Richter to know that he DOES understand how his untimely death affected him.

Even with how much I just do not get about what they were going for with the DotNW squad in this event, this moment from Aster was so good. Especially because Richter calls him an idiot under his breath because it was already water under the bridge and he's just happy to be with Aster. Their chemistry is just so bang-on and cathartic to see. Richter hiding the fact that he's enjoying himself behind excuses of having to tag along with Aster. Aster bragging on his behalf about how Richter's actually a nice guy who cares about and is good at taking care of others, even if he doesn't show it. Aster demolishing junk food during his break and Richter calling him out on it later like "practically your whole day was a break, all you did was eat yakisoba." It can definitely be read as brotherly or even best-friend banter, but my god, to my shipping ass, that stuff smacks of romantic chemistry. I'm so weak to them. Honestly, Aster's such a good hype man for Richter that I bet if he hyped up Rata, I would like Rata more too.

Also goes without saying how Richter fucking apologized for Alice being a dick when it's not his fault and then agreed to help Emil train up to beat Decus even though he doesn't see himself as an expert. We have the two other skits where Richter admits that he doesn't see himself as an expert in most things and doesn't understand why others would come to him for sword training, either, and yet when Emil asks for help on that too, he also offers to coordinate so they can train together. I really love seeing that, though unspoken, Richter genuinely enjoys spending time with Emil and sees them as allies. I doubt he's forgiven Ratatosk. But because they have a sort of truce and Richter genuinely grew to like Emil over the course of their journeys, he doesn't seem to mind putting up with Ratatosk because Aster's safe and he enjoys Emil's company. Not to mention him trying to learn to cook later when he notices Emil needs it.

Bamco may have pulled a lot of unexpected stuff for this event, but I'm glad Richter's whole "doesn't want to be thought of as a mother hen but has THE MOST mother hen energy ever toward everybody but especially Emil" is, like, a consistent thing. They just keep delivering. I love this soft man so much.

So yeah, as much as I don't get the direction some of these interactions went in, still my favorite Rays event and forever salty that global fans never got swimsuit Richter and the official translations for all these delicious skits.

Honestly, though, I am a complete freak when it comes to anything Richter. Short of completely assassinating his character, I would enjoy anything and everything about him so I'm glad he got to shine as Emil's big supporter. He and Aster doing their utmost to help Emil win because Alice went out of her way to be a massive jerk is delightful.

And while it's uncomfy for Alice to call Decus a slave, even when it's not meant that way and even though Marta still lays her affection onto Emil way too thick, it's a genuinely great display of the DotNW characters' interpersonal dynamics, even if I am utterly baffled by and disagree with some of the choices.

Translated by Polka. Proofread by Aera and Seine. Video editing by Scarfy.

[icewindandboringhorror]

I made a few new wax seal stamps out of clay (like the ones I did for my worldbuilding stuff forever ago), this time just of random symbols that I thought might look good done in the style of painting over the raised part of the wax or etc. :0c Some of them aren't carved deep enough to really show up that well, but overall they worked okay for being clay lol

[thatbuddie]

"eddie isn't queer/gay," you say. "he is straight in canon, so him being gay is just a head canon. it's ok for others to think of him as straight because that's what he is."

let's ignore for a second the fact that eddie has never ever ever ever not even once, said in canon that he is a heterosexual very straight guy. seriously!!! he has never once said it!!! if i am "assuming" he's gay then you are also "assuming" he is straight even though he has never once said it!!

how do you think we got bi buck as canon? like i am serious right now, answer the question. how do you think we go bi buck canon? evan buckley was never conceived to be a bisexual man at the beginning of 911. the reason we have evan buckley as a canonically bisexual character today is because us, queer fans of 911, interpreted him and headcanoned him as bisexual. i would go even further and say that it was us, BUDDIE FANS, who interpreted him and headcanoned him as bi. even before the writers were explicitly writing him as bisexual. we read his actions and his story and his identity and said: "this is a bi character!" and the writers looked back and realized that it made sense! and so they started writing him explicitly and canonically as bi.

was it wrong of us to headcanon a character as bisexual then? like for all intents and purposes we were reading a "straight" character as bi. were we doing something wrong? how come you are not complaining/chastising us/shaming us for how we took evan buckley, an otherwise straight character, and saw him as bi? is it because it now serves a purpose to you that he is bi?

also, taking characters that aren't confirmed queer and reading them as queer is what the queer community, and specifically the queer fandom community, has been doing for DECADES. look up the history of queer coding, i am begging you. it has been through the means of queer coding and the perseverance of people that are engaged in it that actual queer representation in media has increased. and let me tell you right now, eddie diaz is, undoubtedly and undeniably, one of the most queer coded characters there is. whether you think this queer coding is conscious by the writers or not. eddie diaz is queer coded.

and i want everyone who says things like "eddie diaz is not a queer character. he is straight in canon. it's wrong to assume a character is queer without the character saying so" to know that this is exactly what straight and homophobic people say. you are using the SAME rhetoric that has been used to shame queer fans for decades for seeing themselves and their experiences in fictional characters of all types. in fact, us, queer fans (and again BUDDIE FANS), were told so many times by straight fans that we were wrong for reading buck as bisexual. and where are we now? where did reading buck as bi take us? oh yeah, to having bi buck in canon.

so please just stop with the "eddie isn't queer in canon" comments. if you don't want to interpret eddie as queer then that is your prerogative. i will be judging why that is, for sure, but it is your right. but be honest about it. it has nothing to do with whether or not he is straight (which hasn't been said) or queer coded (which he so obviously is seeing as so many of us can very easily read him as queer). it's a personal preference and you're not engaging with canon better because of it.

[crookedfivefingers]

3.13 | ᴛʜᴇ ʟᴀꜱᴛ ᴏꜰ ᴛʜᴇ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ʟᴏʀᴅꜱ

link to the post I accidentally wound up prattling endlessly about in the tags 💀

[starcurtain]

Oh, so when IIIII make the "mutual" joke it's delusional, but when Hoyo makes it--

(Actually, since that Youtube end card tried to gatekeep it, here's Ratio's tsuntsun sweatdrop as he tries to think up a good excuse for going on TV to talk about some guy he's definitely not "friends" with:)

[hawkfuller]

interview with the vampire | 2x04.

now that 2x05 has shown us armand's words in louis' mouth, it does parallel nicely with this last dreamstat scene...

[queen-boudicca]

Okay it's two am here (happy pride everyone lol) but I just finished rewatching the new doctor who episode and I'm still blown away by how well done the "his last name is coombs" scene is. Like before that it was a kind of generic episode where there's a bad situation and people are escaping it and the main character seems kind of dickish and incompetent but presumably their arc is to grow and improve over the course of the episode and there might be a moment where this more capable person who's helping them sacrifices themselves to save them and—

And then we get the first big subversion and when I tell you that hit me like a fucking truck and the whole perspective shifts and you realize that this is not the story you thought it was

[acloudysky03]

Hey have you guys ever thought about the parallels between Jayce and Viego now that the we have season 2 (and we know the Arcane lore is supposed to be the canon lore)? They ran back the "I am so overcome with grief that the person I cared about the most has died so I brought them back against their wishes and now the world might just end" plot and I can't stop thinking about it.

Viktor and Isolde both dying these politically motivated deaths when they had so little to do with the actual politics going on just because of their proximity to the person they loved the most? Obviously there are divergences and differences but the fact that this has happened twice now in Runeterra is insane to me.

[qiu-yan]

in MDZS the novel, the innkeeper in Yunping mentions that people are too scared to go petition Yunmeng Jiang for help because someone once walked in on Sect Leader Jiang whipping a guy in the main hall, supposedly because the guy was a demonic cultivator.

[sojourner-between-worlds]

You know what, no, I'm not done talking about this because the symbolism is god tier.

Yusei starts out as a Satellite. In essence, a fake star. Anyone who knows anything knows that when you look up at the night sky, the brightest objects are planets and satellites. They look like stars, but they aren't stars. They are man-made to serve a purpose, and when they wear out, they are easily replaced, the offline ones left to float around as space junk for the rest of time.

But Yusei's not a fake. He's the real deal.

He breaks out of Satellite and earns the moniker "Satellite's Shooting Star". But the thing about shooting "stars" is that they still aren't really stars at all, and worse yet, they burn out so quickly they barely exist for a moment in time. This is what was expected for him, too: he could have stayed where he was, a man-made object with a given purpose, but because he decided that wasn't good enough, he was going to get his moment to shine but then burn out into nothing.

But Yusei isn't a shooting star, either. He's not burning out.

No, he was just getting started.

He pulls other people to himself with all the force of a black hole yet without destroying any of them. (Well, except for one. One who willingly allowed himself to be destroyed to allow Yusei to shine all the brighter.) He gathers them and the future is so bright that there is nothing else to see and you get this sense that, even though you don't know what will happen, anything is possible.

Yusei's not a satellite. He's the real deal.

And he's not a shooting star. He's not burning out.

He's a quasar. He's creating endless possibilities.

[hanzajesthanza]

"the michael kandel translation of "the witcher" short story can't hurt you!!"

the michael kandel translation of "the witcher" short story:

[h0dge-p0dge]

thinking of making a transfem or transmasc simpsons oc cuz the show doesn't have a confirmed trans character or trans episode yet. I think the reason is because the writers are scared they'll mess it up and accidentally make an offensive episode, BUT PLEASE GUYS JUST HIRE MORE TRANS WRITERS AND MAKE A TRANS CHARACTER PLEASE IM BEGGING YOU🙏🙏

I'm also a firm believer in transmasc sideshow mel and moe. also thank u Tumblr for introducing me to transfem Milhouse, that's my headcanon now too I love her she is my daughter🗣️🗣️ (yapathon in the tags)