#like I know that its a very basic theory being proven true

[random-dragon-exe]

Ok, so I'm rewatching the OG FOP and I literally just saw this.

Juandissimo's wand is actually longer. Fairies really can transform their wands to look different. Granted, it's like that for a second or two but still, it happened.

My theory that fairies can transform their wands is canon!

Now I wonder if this will come back in A New Wish. Probably not, but it's just wishful thinking at this point (pun intended).

[mx-information]

Do you see? It’s important that you see.

To my fellow fans of The Silt Verses, if you’re looking for something to fill the void after the finale, might I humbly recommend a favorite comic series of mine: The Department of Truth.

On its face, the premise is simple enough: Cole Turner, an FBI agent who studies conspiracy theories attends a Flat Earth for his research. There he is approached by a pair of expies for the Koch brothers, who invite him to board their private plane to the edge of the world. He accepts the offer, watches footage of the moon landing being faked, runs into an eyeless woman in a red dress, sees the ice wall with his own two eyes. But the world isn’t flat, that’s the truth. Easily tested, easily proven. But the ice wall wasn’t faked either, and that’s because of the other, stranger truth: the world as we know it is not stable beneath our feet. The truth is only true because people believe it to be so.

Enter: our titular Department, a secretive branch of the U.S. government whose purpose is ensuring that conspiracy theories stay conspiracy theories, lest they find their way into reality. Cole Turner, as it turns out, has just been recruited. They could use the expertise, and they can hardly let him out of their sight after what he’s encountered.

Cole finds himself dropped in the deep end of a hidden world, hungry to make itself real, a world of secret and invented histories, of people who become subsumed by the idea of themselves, wild animals made of pure belief, night terrors made real, and that bizarre eyeless woman in a red dress watching over it all.

I think it’s a great series for people who liked the more eldritchy, existential horrors of TSV along with the rather unsubtle social criticism. I especially recommend it to people who really enjoyed Val and The Last Word. It’s much more of a spy/conspiracy thriller than something like TSV obviously, a lot more steeped in the cultural memory of the Cold War and the Satanic Panic and such, but it shares pretty similar themes of the powers and dangers of narratives, of the monsters our ruling class makes coming back to haunt all of us, great and barely-comprehensible powered handled with catastrophic irresponsibility, that sorta thing.

Also the art style just absolutely fucks. Like seriously just google it and scroll through some of the images.

Content warnings for just about anything you can imagine being associated with a comic series entirely about how destructive conspiracy culture is. There’s all sorts of discussion of Qanon and the Satanic Panic and that comes with discussions of sexual abuse and child exploitation by the media. It goes into the militia movement, the Waco Siege, all that stuff. The villains are fascists trying to impose their horrible, racist beliefs upon the very structure of reality, and the DoT itself isn’t that much better. Issue #3 goes very in-depth on school shooting ‘truthers’ and does not pull its punches. Basically, just know what you’re getting into, it treats its subject matter with what I consider appropriate gravity, and as such is very much not a lighthearted read.

[emmkitt]

istg if walkie talkie ends up NOT being taco ill be so damn surprised. like if its not taco it’ll end up being some random new antagonist we’ve never even met before (or cobs, which i doubt; i don’t think it’s cobs himself, but i do believe whoever it is could very well be working for him)

itd be weird to introduce a whole new character in the final episode, itd make more sense to play off a character who’s been in the show the entire time and has reason to play the role of antagonist.

season 2 proved taco knows how meeple products work/how to override their functions for her advantage. also she’s proven to be a great manipulator, so it’d make sense how she’d be able to collect a whole gang of people who don’t even necessarily hate mephone all that much, and turn them against him (sprinkles and dr fizz probably being the best examples of this; you even see dr fizz question WT’s actions during the whole confrontation near the end of iii18). It’d also explain why Ballpoint Pen isnt part of the Unvitationals; tbh he seems way too smart to be manipulated, no offense everyone else, even though he does seem to have a similar level of reason to hate mephone as the other Unvitationals.

also shoutout to @somebean81 for pointing this out.

so basically, vote to join III. Understandable as to why Lightbulb, Knife, and Suitcase can’t join the cast, they’re still part of s2, but why Taco? Her arc with Mic has basically ended, I highly doubt they’re going to interact anymore because Taco has shown no real interest in Mic on an emotional level, she just wanted to use her for her own gain; and now that Mic is no longer in the game, she probably sees her as ��useless’ to her. no chance in manipulating any of the remaining cast, so why not teleport away… and try to manipulate someone else….?

where’d she go when she teleported?

hmm..

(alsoc if they knew Taco wouldn’t be allowed to join, why add her to the poll at all? If Taco is WT it’d give it away to outright say she was joining the iii cast when she clearly isn’t a contestant………. maybe they’re keeping her presence a secret…….hmmmmmmmm)

I honestly think that either A. Taco’s motivation for manipulating Mic could’ve gone way beyond simply wanting to win. Or B., maybe that could be her only motivation. Which is why if WT is Taco it would explain why she’s so keen on mentioning to the remaining competitors that there is no prize. WT has proven to have loads of knowledge about ii, knowledge that probably only a former contestant could have, and there’s really only one former contestant I can think of who’d have such a grudge against mephone/the show in general.

cough.

also season 1 kinda proves taco is a good actor as well, so putting on a new facade as WT probably wouldnt be hard for her. WT could very well be her using a voice changer, but do we really doubt that she could pull off an american accent lmao.

anywyas if this is true i hate taco even more. leave floory and mephone alone.

but thats jsut a theiry. a gay theory

[thislittlekumquat]

Right but they have a point in regards to the belief in this figures not being based in any sort of fact or evidence,

That’s the difference, the atheist worldview is by far more accurate

We mock flat earthers for being wrong but not other provably false beliefs?

With all due respect, and I mean that, the concept of any sort of divinity is by definition unprovable. Modern science runs into the issue of unprovables quite often. When I was in college, my professors all worked quite hard to ensure that we understood that there are very few absolutes even in science. Many things that we take for granted as "laws" actually have the formal title of "theory", because they haven't been proven, but there's so much evidence in favor of them and the way we operate under the assumption of their truth continues to provide results, that they are essentially, but not truly, laws. Evolution, for example, is not a law as defined by science, but rather a theory.

So, that's one thing to consider. Another thing to consider is that there is not only value in things we can prove or disprove with modern science. I can't scientifically prove that my spouse loves me. I can't scientifically explain why I like my favorite band, or my favorite novel. And yet these are things I know, and they're true in the sense that they form my world, my experiences, and my life. If you try to prove every single thing you believe in, or that you prefer, or that you experience, you'll never be satisfied. To practice science and to live life ethically and happily, you need to understand what science is, what its limitations are, and how to prioritize it as a concept and as a way of knowing. Science, nor indeed any system of knowing, cannot be the be-all, end-all of your thoughts and opinions. I am a scientist and a historian by education, and having both allow me to understand that many of the conundrums we face today are not unique to us, and many of the things we assume our ancestors did not know, they did in fact know (Ferdinand and Isabella and basically all of Europe knew that the world was round. They even knew that Columbs' calculations were wrong about the size of the sphere. They gave him money for other complex geopolitical reasons, and they were his last ditch effort, since every other wealthy patron he approached knew he was wrong and turned him away).

I suspect that the impulse to deny divinity derives in the majority of cases from a sense that the human institutions of religion are frequently abusive and cause as much suffering as they do comfort to their adherents. This is a fair assessment, and you're not wrong to make it. But on an individual basis, there is nothing less intelligent or foolish about feeling that a divine something exists. I am not arguing that religious people are better than atheists. Speaking as a former angry teen atheist myself, I am simply commenting on the fact that it has been a facet of the formal atheist movement for centuries to assume that it's more rational to be atheist. Even if it were, who is to say that rationalism makes one a better person? You're on tumblr, so I assume that there's something here that moves you. Is it a fandom? Is it photography? Is it art? Is it music? None of these are rational pursuits.

So I reject the idea that divinity is demonstrably fake, because it isn't, by definition, and I reject the idea that even if it was demonstrably false, it makes one a better or smarter person to be an atheist. I think it's completely fine to be an atheist, but one must temper one's sense of self-importance with the experiences of others.

P.S. I screenshotted the post because I found it ironic that OP used the word "stigmata", which is a very particular devotional concept and image in Roman Catholicism, among other Christian sects, and a very mystical one at that, in their username, while simultaneously professing to find people who are religious to be stupid and backwards. I think there's something going on there, and it amused me. But I did not bother OP or the person who reblogged it onto my dash, nor did I tag the post in any way to lead people to my post. So I wonder why you, anonymously, felt as if their point is any more valid than mine.

[tayfabe75]

Your theories really give me hope (which I’m very afraid to receive). But if we imagine that everything is really like this and they are playing a show for us, wouldn’t it be too cruel for them? Being with someone else and playing love for a long time, do they still have time for each other in this whole show? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of it all? They could have just stayed together in secret if that's what they wanted. And also isn't it cruel to their partners? Okay, I can see how Travis benefits from this, but Gabbriette? She is the one who follows Matty, not the other way around, like Travis, why does she need this?

If this is really some kind of show, what is its purpose then? For now they're just satisfying the haters. 

I'd really like to believe that Matty and Taylor have a future and that they'll find their way back in the end, but to me right now it seems like they've both just moved on (I'd love to be proven wrong!)

With full acknowledgment that this theory is a bit… bold, please remember the "never-ending commitment to the bit" aspect of kayfabe, because it is, perhaps, the most important.

Is it cruel for actors to kiss during a stage performance or while shooting a film? Everyone involved knows that it is a performance. It is a "massively collaborative theatrical universe", after all. That means that everyone involved has signed on to do this. No one is actually getting hurt by anything that is going on, and they all stand to greatly benefit if this theory is true and ends up being revealed. Being a part of a collaborative effort like this could catapult everyone's careers much more than a basic PR relationship would.

Yes, they have to spend time apart. But these are professional musicians who travel the world for work. They know the pain of having to be separated from loved ones. Maybe it's because I'm an elder millennial, but I don't think it's that hard to be physically separated from one's partner for a few weeks, especially not with current technology. There's a lot of very strange speculation I've seen online about how there's no way Matty could stay committed while on tour, as if Adam and George aren't also rockstars in a band with serious partners they're devoted to. Further, if this truly is kayfabe, then it has been planned for years in advance.

Yes, they would still have time for each other in this whole 'show'. Probably a lot of it. I suspect that not all photos or videos are posted exactly at the moment they are taken. They help move the narrative along or help place each person in time and space, regardless of whether they are actually physically there. If you're headed to NYC, it might be helpful to establish yourself in LA instead. If people will stalk you on social media anyway, then why not use it to your advantage? Social media isn't real life, not even for non-celebrities - it's all a carefully manicured version of one's life.

I don't agree that Matty and Taylor are merely satisfying their haters right now. I think they're satisfying a great many fans who are basking in the romance of it all - those sweet Instagram likes or matching letterman jackets.

So, what are they up to? What I can tell you is that their priority certainly isn't putting the few supporters they have out of their misery by just simply getting back together. And they would not participate in kayfabe for shits and giggles, either. I don't personally bother with the minutiae of their relationships or daily lives, and if it upsets you, you shouldn't either! I very much want Taylor and Matty to end up together (genuinely, anyone with hearing should root for this outcome). But if I'm dead wrong and it never happens again, then I understand exactly why. 'Peace' spells it all out. But why simply roll over and let the media dictate the narrative around your chosen partner when you're one of the most powerful women in the world?

The clues are all there to be discovered and they point to one common enemy who has tried to destroy their lives and relationships (no, it's not the fans). I don't want to have to spell every little thing out, though. Instead, I'll leave you with another fun quote from Brad Troemel:

"Because everyone thinks that screaming at their parasocial bestie is the most effective punishment for doing something they didn't like, it winds up drowning out any individual voice into one uniform wall of digital rage. Micro-celebrities' fear of experiencing this rage is what leads to audience capture, where 'besties' feel locked into permanently performing the version of themselves they understand their audience to always want them to be. The only way to avoid audience capture is for besties to periodically burn down their own platform to establish a new set of audience expectations."

…and Taylor promised that the Reputation vault would be "fire"

[maurenislife]

Categorical Guide to Boys

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐥𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠...

⋘ 𝑃𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑡...⋙⋘ 𝑃𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑡...⋙⋘ 𝑃𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑡...⋙⋘ 𝑃𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑖𝑡...⋙

██████ 100%

Type 1 : Fake woke Schizophrenic Hotep Know it all 

This specific type reaks of a brain that has marinated too long in YouTube and un-chcecked conspiracy theory and edvidence 

he has speed read hastily, never has double checked any theory

he just has tried shrooms and is experiencing exisitiental feelings and has no tools to interpret it so he uses cheap low hanging fruit of theories and culture. 

has no set views and can be easily moved if you use the right langauge cause he has no scope of transitional words or know the inner workings of argument IE persuasion. 

I suggest you preform your own customized litmus test to make sure somebody is normal is to test their basic knowledge of reality and socital problems at large. 

often hypocrites 

skimmed thru history and assumes most information at headline value

his schizophrenia about no reality and conspiracy overlap in a scary way not a smart way.

SUGGESTION: stay away unless you wanna become his next victim 

-- subset spawns also reference 

“stay at home pothead”

”ego death victims” 

RATING 0/10 UNBEARABLE 

Type 2: Chill  “insert drug” Guy 

smoking is their entire personailty

they are chill

super quiet 

very annoying

they think their Seth rogan and they are not half as entertaining

clumsy at being cool

cute at being clumsy which makes them cool

quiet 

He lives in the moment so he forgets the future and misjudges the past

he can move foward with a lot he just be chilling

needs a vape or a smoking device at all times

Often his life will go no where 

there's always the ex as his true love *fight me

they will often to too fried to even give a fuck about how you feel

they live in a secondary reality probably with a green tint 

---subset spawns include 

“soundcloud drug dealer”

“cool isn't cool enough for cool dude so its not cool till I say its cool dude”

RATING 8/10 they are enjoyable but don't get too high u might start to feel like you could do better 

Type 2.5 : *SUBSET SPAWN/ Soundcloud drug dealer

they always send u music or ask for input on music or projects

Your extensive knowledge on Rap will never be enough or compared to his 

you know “nothing” bout this song...... NOTHING period

he wants to be the next carti but he will be the next HVAC cause they mostly all suck

you will end up liking one song 

“hyperactive narcissist driven psychosis” THIS is cause they drug deal and sit in the house all day alone. They can develop a level of psychosis with a hard splash of narcissism cause they breathe their own air and ice each braincell with cookie apple fritter gelato packed woods. they can be driven now into a narcissist driven dreamland which mirrors heavy psychosis little do they know cause they high af all day. their morals tier on gimmick and notoriety. they are the end all be all, they are the winner and the loser. Their life is the Odyssey in which they believe they are the only unique force in this life when in reality there are many people just like him.

he is either always horny cause he is alone or always wants emotional reassurance cause he is alone

all his friends are complete assholes as well 

even though they are all fake deep cause of the heavy drug use they all are  active HYPOCRITES.

you are never the only one there are several bitches of different flavors in his phone

His ego death created a personality scarred by the ego death 

if he often gets mad at you its cause you have proven time and time again you  just “happen to be cooler” than him

If he really wants to fuck you he probably wants to really fuck 5 other girls too.

He will always secretly hate you 

----subset spawn includes 

“stay at home pothead”

5/10 seeing is believing so at least you met one, they are a fun pastime but love them at a distance don't feed their ego anymore than ur text back did.

Type 3  We get it he's athletic* 

always at the gym

just recently lost weight and wants to shame you

used to play sports 

Might think he looks back on highschool memories like nostalgia but it’s definitely envy

Loves his mom way too much

Takes the adult league way too seriously

Has a borderline autistic love for sports

Relates life and real life situations to sports on a unreal level

Might think he wants a gym rat girlfriend but actually likes the fact he can compare himself to you subconsciously

Secretly smokes alotta weed but “anti drug” as a health performance

If they play college sports their ego will be inflated grossly

In his freetime he will mention about how he has to immediate back to the gym

The sex will be good but not enough that u believed all he does is workout.. you would have been expecting more

Shames the party lifestyle but takes part in it part two hypocrisy

If he recently had a weight transformation his ego will be back like it never left

They are secretly insecure as fuck

They watch porn to a unhealthy degree and probably envy the male performers

RATING 6/10 they look good but boy are they annoying…. If only they could let go of the mommy and image issues smh

—— subset spawn include and not limited to

“Infinite highschooler”

“Son of a frat”

[max1461]

I think all this is basically right, and you're justified in being as pessimistic about the possibility of measurement as you are. I certainly can't imagine what sort of argument might convince me that some given test is indeed a test of internality, or what have you. I'm perhaps more pessimistic about the possibility of consciousness ever being something we can talk about in a robustly empirical way than I let on.

At the same time... ok, I have a friend who had not encountered the idea of mathematical proof. And at one point she asked me "what's the deal with Graham's number, what is it?". And I explained what I knew of it; I said (paraphrased) suppose you have a network of points and lines of a specific type, and you color each line red or blue, it's been proven that if the network is big enough (given by Graham's number) certain patterns will necessarily emerge in the coloring. And I also mentioned that Graham's number was so big, its digits could never actually be computed. And she was totally baffled by this; she couldn't imagine how we could ever know whether such patterns appeared in the colorings or not if we haven't gone up and checked. If we can't even write out the number in full because it's so big, would could we possibly know anything about it at all?

I tried to explain to her the general idea of a proof, that you can show by deductive argument that some property must hold of a whole class of objects themselves defined by some property, even without checking them all. I gave examples. But I don't think I really convinced her, at least not in that moment. This may have been a failure of my own explanatory ability (although I was more careful and accessible than I'm being in this recap), but still. Sometimes one can't imagine what an argument could look like until one sees it.

I think the probability that we are analogous to my friend in this scenario, regarding consciousness, is pretty low. I think you're probably right, or approximately right, that we'll just never be able to devise objective methods for studying or speaking about it. But I am hesitant to rule it out completely, perhaps more than anything else on the grounds that it would be very annoying if that turned out to be true. Maybe as we learn much more about the brain than we presently know, some compelling theory of internality will present itself to us in a way that is convincing enough. Obviously I'm even less hopeful that we could demonstrate such a theory beyond a shadow of a doubt, but I feel at least moderately optimistic that our ability to reason about consciousness might somewhat improve as we learn more about the brain, and allow better educated guesses.

Baffled by claims to the effect of "consciousness (in the sense of internal experience) doesn't matter/isn't real/might as well not be real because we can't measure it". True, we can't measure or detect it in an objective and repeatable way, as we'd very much like to be able to, but

That doesn't mean it's unobservable. I can observe it in myself. In fact I'm pretty sure I observe my own consciousness, very directly, every single waking moment. You'd be hard pressed to convince me it isn't there, about like how you'd be hard pressed to convince me my hands don't exist. It's right there!

Just because we can't measure internal experience objectively and repeatably right now doesn't mean we'll never be able to. Science abounds with things we couldn't measure until we could. Sure, maybe we'll just never be able to detect it in a way everybody can agree on... but maybe we will. It's a pretty strong claim to say with certainty that we won't.

This is probably the weakest objection of the three, but if consciousness is, you know, as good as bullshit... what is it that everyone keeps referring to when they talk about consciousness? And saying that they have? Uh like why, from the point of view that this consciousness stuff is Not Meaningful, does everyone keep going "I'm conscious"? Like what is the thing they are actually experiencing, if consciousness is a load of hooey?

I guess I just don't understand this position. It seems like denying what is plainly in front of your face. It seems, well, fiercely anti-empirical, to a degree even the big-daddy rationalist Descartes couldn't countenance.

To be super duper uncharitable, it sometimes seems to me like an ill-thought-through ingroup signal? Like "consciousness is a humanities thing, philosophy is a humanities thing, but I'm a Science Guy and we use measurement. Since I can't measure consciousness it is bullshit". And this ingroup signal leads one, as I said, to deny the basic empirical observation in front of them. Like, yeah, there is no objective and repeatable metric for pain either, but I think even the most hardcore Scientist would yowch and tell me to stop if I hit him with a big stick. I don't think he would say the concept of pain is meaningless because we can't (yet) quantify it objectively. And if he did claim that, I don't think he would live by it.

But, I don't know. Like I said, that is a massively uncharitable take. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the position. Or maybe I'm using the word "consciousness" differently. As I said, the thing I mean by this is internal experience, internality, the fact of there being some thing it feels like to be you.

[antiloreolympus]

8 Anti LO Asks

1. i love ppl who are like "wow persephone looks so mature now!!!" ma'am she literally looks the same, all of them do. the only person who looks different is hebe and she's just a hera clone now. i swear they just make up whatever they want to see and claim it as fact.

2. //FP..

I find it dumb that some people are gonna be like "Persephone is 30 now so her romance with Hades is perfect now" like, buddy, she could be 70 but she has barely lived like 1% of what Hades has lived, and why do I care if she's 30 if she acts and looks like a 19 y/o, if you're gonna use that 3000-year-old-l*li argument, then her romance with Hades, a +2000 year old guy, is creepier from the begining

3. Teen Hebe looks exactly like her mother, RS really has no understanding of character design smfh

4. NGL I'm kinda impressed with just how bad S2 has been. IDK why its this way, RS' lack of writing ability finally being too obvious to ignore? Her refusing to listen to her editor? Her being lazy and stealing ideas from other comics/fanfics/theories like she's done before? General burn out? Writing herself into way too many corners and her now flailing/burning it all down to doing whatever the hell this is? Who knows, but it's shockingly bad.

5. Def my favorite thing the stans try to do is claim the comic is actually “super diverse” and they post like .. one panel of a non-name nymph that’s drawn bigger or whatever and claim that’s actual representation. Like no?? If you can’t even name the character and they can easily be cut out of the comic with nothing being changed, that’s not representation at all. Far from it actually.

From OP: Exactly!

Reminding me of the ‘RS is normalizing breastfeeding’ posts I saw recently. It’s literally Ancient Greece, of course the nymphs with babies will breastfeed. I’m positive they haven't developed formula in the mortal realm. I don’t think getting excited over it is a bad thing at all but it’s disappointing because it’s the bare minimum.

6. gotta love GOTTA LOVE RS having persephone say her attitude when she was 7 years old was "internalized misogyny" like... I swear I could hear her thinking "hmm how can I address all the criticism I've been getting in the vaguest way possible?" like something about that moment feels very performative, as a way to throw a crumb to those with valid criticisms of her fantasy racism and complete double standards when it comes to the women she portrays

7. Not sure how this will all be handled in part 2 of season 2 (badly probably considering how bad the first few chapters are) but I think what ultimately bothers me so much about fans attacking and criticizing Demeter is that she’s not proven wrong.

What I mean is - when someone decides to do an overbearing parent storyline, typically they are supposed to show how the parent is right, but also wrong in not letting the child do something. Demeter not letting Persephone interact with Olympus was done because she felt Olympus was bad and would hurt her child - she is proven right because the gods use and abuse each other (especially women) and treat Mortals, Nymphs, Shades, and other non-gods as expendable trash.

However, what we don’t really get is Demeter being proven wrong. Sure, Persephone finds a friend in Eros and falls in love with Hades - but Hades is basically a romanticized, rich, slave driver that treats everyone around him badly. Eros doesn’t respect Persephone’s choices and forces himself into her business quite a few times. Persephone’s only real female friends, Artemis and Hera, also don’t really treat her well either. Artemis completely misreads her and Hera literally tries to set her up with her ex lover even though she’s barely an adult.

What we really needed to see was some positive aspects of Olympus- Hades actually being a decent person, Persephone finding true friendships, maybe groups that help lower-class beings, or Persephone finding something good at her university- something that proves to Demeter that while Olympus can be dangerous, it can be good too. I’m just not seeing the good at all, and that’s what makes it hard for me to paint Demeter as an abuser. If anything, all I’m seeing is a justified mother and a bratty, man-obsessed daughter who doesn’t respect her own privileged upbringing. 

8. How can "the other kings became kings because they took advantage of a fertility goddess" make any sense when Uranus is a sky god just like Zeus (sky-->rain-->fertility) and Cronus is literally an earth god, he carries a sickle fcol

[writerben01]

Oh, I need to keep this one in mind. Such well-transcribed thoughts, as I rarely think in words but instead imagery, that I have wished to see in verbal form for so long.

Thank you very much. I have the opposite problem that I always think in words and plots and logical structures. When writing I really struggle to picture places and people, even when I have no problem writing about what they're doing or saying.

And since this will be a long one, adding the rest of my response under the cut.

Gods, of any sort, are certainly some possibility, as may be entities higher than them - but the words of men twist for their own desires, and this is well-documented itself throughout history in spite of them.

It's difficult to say whether 'gods' are a possibility without defining them more closely. Gods as creators would be proven or disproven based on whether they did the creating of us. Gods as powerful creatures that guided us, will be proven or disproven based on whether they actually contacted us. And as you say, it's hard to know whether their guidance was left untainted by corrupted men if it was every the case.

Jesus, for instance, is speculated now to have been a political figure of great importance, but he could not simply walk on water, or awaken after being dead for so long (though cases of being falsely believed dead were also incredibly high then relative to now). The evidence given for his reawakening is that this man, who had a significant following and was publicly executed in such a way to ensure it was especially drawn-out, was found to have been missing from his tomb. Men put that rock there, after placing his body there. Others could have moved it themselves, taken him to honor what was left of a man who truly was a savior to them, in the ways that any person could be - just only should they put forth the effort. And that, having to truly try to do that, is terrifying to many, hence he is elevated to the status of something more than a normal person. A child of a true single God, despite them claiming all people to be children of that same God anyways.

I've bolded the word 'evidence' because I do want to emphasise again that this evidence is given to us as witness testimony. If someone told me they attended a magician show and had seen them do something impossible, that would not be enough to convince me. People saying they had checked the equipment would not be enough to convince me the magician performed real magic.

We can speculate on what really happened. I like the theory that people moved Jesus' body from the tomb to honour him. But at the same time, that still engages with the basic story. We don't have enough evidence to know Jesus was truly buried in a tomb, or that it was found empty afterwards. We have a story.

Also, small nitpick, but Jesus is I believe not so much special for being the son of God, but for being God himself reborn on Earth in the form of his own son.

Christianity, and its semi-adjacent religions, are the biggest I am personally exposed to, but I know many such groups are guilty of this too. However, it's simply how some are, how people raised their whole lives with this promise that everything is truly stable in this way are. Like those who could not live without conflict between the weak and the strong; like those who could not live without the perceived stability of caring politicians or economy. Change on such a scale is terrifying, maddening at times.

It's like religion is a security blanket. It makes the world simple and it feels good to pretend there is a God like a plan, much like it feels good to wrap yourself up in a blanket and pretend it can protect you against all problems. The world itself is scary and dangerous and there is so much wrong that you want to tear your hair out. I get the urge to turn to stability to avoid truly facing reality, especially if that's how you were born and raised. I just don't think it's the right choice.

I personally have some enjoyable speculative theories of my own, on how entities existing in higher spatial dimensions could match ancient descriptions of gods or god-like entities capable of shifting form at any time or manipulating things without touching them, piecing together wounds by hand and changing elements for others But they are simple theories, that my ever-racing mind churned out, rather than something I truly believe to have been the case, otherwise religions would likely be more unified - unless such an entity or a group of such did that intentionally, but at that point the blame is hardly on people for falling for it.

I love theories like these. I like exploring them in fiction and I like imagining a world where objects have thoughts and concepts are embodied in beings with power. I like if the fiction takes the world's magic and brightens it up by making it real.

But of course there's a difference between creatively making ideas and champoning for their likeliness. If there's one thing science teaches us it's that there are many things that sound like they ccould be true, yet only one thing that truly is.

Such circumstances which formed those thoughts and theories were unimaginable, much less the theories themselves, to people of the time and even the truth would form its own religion - possibly with such an entity to guard it. Tales of gods walking the world among men.

Tales of old gods are tales of murderers and cruel authoritarians. It does fit if those are powerful aliens that wanted to be worshipped and punished anyone who stepped out of line. Especially if they killed those that knew or suspected the truth.

Richard Dawkins coined 'memes' as cultural genes and that's a useful model to keep in mind. Ideas / theories survive over generations by having certain characteristics. A religion that tells its followers to spread (violently) is more likely to spread than one that tells it followers to keep their religion a secret. A religion that is resitant to change is more likely to keep its current form, but unlikely to adapt to changing times.

Ideas / religions / culture continues to be passed on to other people and generations because they give something of value. Or, in the case of alien overlords capable of killing, the ideas survive because they keep you alive. Say what you want about the old god, but if your intention is to be worshipped by everyone, killing everyone who doesn't worship you sure is a quick way to get that done.

Religion and atheism on the workfloor

So, I want to put some of this to paper. A few weeks back, we had a Christmas celebration at work which was centred around nourishment in all senses of the word. We had a walk to nourish our need for exercise, during which we talked about suggested work topics to nourish our intellectual appetites, and were given a demonstration by our hospital’s kitchen staff for the most literal interpretation of nourishment. We ended with drinks and snacks and had a generally good time.

But I want to talk about the middle portion of the afternoon. The one that was intended as a deeper sort of nourishment, for which they had invited a Spiritual Care Professional to speak to us about the meaning of Christmas. And he was religious as hell, Christian to be precise, joined by a Muslim to make it more diverse. It was hell.

For context, in a Dutch hospital, the Spiritual Care Professional is available to talk with patients who are dealing with unsettling news. Often these are people who are dealing with terminal illness and need help accepting their diagnosis. Often this just means they need someone who will listen to them talk without saying much in return. Never to tell them what to do, just to help them realise what they want themselves.

It was to be a twenty or thirty minute session, and after five minutes it already felt like I’d spent an eternity with them. No, that’s not fair. The Muslim hardly did any of the talking, explaining some points of his religious when prompted, and I had no specific objections with him. It was the Christian who was the main speaker and my frustrations are with him.

I knew I needed to step away, but it was already too late. We were in a circle of about 20 to 30 people, only a third of which I was familiar with. These are not social situations where I can easily act in the best of times. When presented with something unfamiliar, I have a very brief window where I have the confidence to act differently than all those around me, to be the non-conformer, before the situation I’m in starts to drain so much energy that I can’t even fathom pulling unwanted attention towards me.

I don’t want to sound so pretentious to say I’m immune to his semi-intellectual rhetoric, but I have been exposed to the way he talked before and developed a dislike. Questions like ‘what does Christmas mean to you’ and then pondering like a Greek philosopher to explain inconsistencies. Presents are an integral part of Christmas, but that’s not a bad thing. After all, Christmas is when humanity got the greatest gift of all time: Jesus Christ. When we give presents now, that’s just in honour of that gift. Many people have dinner together on Christmas, because food and company are fundamental desires that humans have exhibited going back to ancient times.

It's… conjecture held up as explanations. Like reality does not matter, as long as we can feel better about our current situation for having thought about it. It’s something I do a lot in writing fiction, where there are other expectations from my audience. I don’t mind brainstorming these ideas and bouncing them around. I do mind when someone lectures at us and uses these brainstorming ideas as a way to pretend to be saying something profound from a position of power.

I do not care for it and I am not the audience for this kind of event. I would have much preferred a straight up lecture with actual knowledge about Christmas traditions, or even a public speaking event where I learned more about my colleagues through their own traditions. But not everyone can get what they want. I realise that. Like I said, I’m not the audience for this kind of event, and these events do not have to please everyone.

But then this man had to go on to expand the conversation towards those who don’t believe in anything higher than themselves or *smug grin* ‘at least those who say they don’t believe in anything higher’.

It was at that point that I clenched my fists and tightened my jaw. I knew if I were to speak, I would start yelling things I would soon after regret. I’m describing it like this because I do not want to downplay my emotions at the time. I was angry and insulted, which I not often am. I was annoyed at the situation, annoyed that I had not stepped away sooner, annoyed that even when something like that was said to me, I was still not walking away because I did not want to be rude. Because if I was rude I would be asked to explain myself, and I did not have any nice words to do so. And also, I felt a little bit betrayed.

One of the unspoken rules is that we don’t talk about religion in the workplace. And that serves me fine. I can work with Excel and make policies and we never have to talk about religion. So to bring religion into this space, in a public enough event that I don’t feel comfortable freely expressing my own feelings as an atheist, in such a way that it’s making me seethe, that felt unacceptable to me.

At the time, I was in no mood for drinks after work. I knew if I kept feeling that angry, I would simply walk out. I was lucky this event was sandwiched between the other two. I had already had fun with the walk which had lifted my mood, and the kitchen’s demonstration was a lecture on the effect of food on patient care including samples. It was distracting enough that it gave me time to set aside my feelings. I made it through the afternoon.

Instead of ruining the whole day, the insult was a sour note in an otherwise pleasant Christmas celebration.

Over drinks, I was asking what others had thought about the Spiritual portion. A close colleague said she had doubts going in, but felt like she could have a respectful discussion in the end. She was pleased with the experience.

So that leaves me, overanalysing, wondering exactly what set me off so much. Shouldn’t I be able to respectfully discuss religion? If my main complaint is that I can’t express myself without being insulting, then isn’t it my problem?

I had a streak of atheism interest in High School and college. And the recurring theme in atheism spaces is searching desperately for a good argument for god. And yes, there’s a lot of intellectual wanking going on in the atheist communities, by people who act that by virtue of disbelieving in god they are going to be smart and knowledgeable in all things. Which usually manifests in sexism and racism, to worrying degrees. That is to say, society has these problems to worrying degrees, the atheist community is no exception, but there’s a special kind of stubbornness from supposed intellectuals who have decided these behaviours can’t be wrong because they’re exhibiting them, and they’re too smart to have ingrained prejudices.

But avoiding all that toxic behaviour and sticking with the ‘good’ communities, for a lot of atheists there is a desperate need to find the best arguments for God and engage in them. And then a growing disbelief when we cannot find anything.

Each argument that pertains to prove something must have created the universe because nothing comes from nothing, automatically assumes that God came from nothing. There’s Pascal’s Wager, which posits that it’s always rational to belief in God when being wrong costs so little while being right is an infinite reward and avoids infinite damnation. Which is a decent argument, except for the part where it says nothing about which of the mutually exclusive Gods one should worship.

The more you dive into the logic, the clearer it becomes that religion has no good arguments in favour of it. And it is mostly about the vibes instead.

When I was younger, me and my siblings would sometimes lament that we wished we could believe in god, because we saw how much comfort it gave others. Culturally ingrained, we believed that faith is a beautiful thing and there is something precious lost if you don’t have the capacity for it. But over the years I’ve learned to reject that thinking.

It’s not that I merely lack faith in God. It’s that I went looking for evidence and could find nothing. It is that cherished facts held among those of the Christian faith don’t hold up to the tiniest bit of scrutiny. Do you know why we know Jesus was born on Christmas? The date isn’t in the bible. So when a priest three centuries after Jesus’ death needed to know when Christ was born, he used logic. Christ was the most important of humans, therefore he had to be born on one of the most important days. The equinox to be precise. It only made sense. And a thousand years later we’re still being taught this conjecture as fact. Even though most scholars now agree that considering all the descriptions in the bible around Jesus’ birth it’s actually more likely that, if Jesus even existed, he was born somewhere in March.

Faith, in the meaning of belief without evidence, is not a good thing. It’s what keeps us believing in wrong things. Homeopathy, charlatans, quacks, con-artists, anti-vaxers, covid-deniers. If you have faith without evidence, you are going to be consistently wrong and often taken advantage of. Why would this be a bad thing in all areas in life except religion?

It's considered rude to say that belief in God is on the same level as belief in the Fey, belief in superstitions, or belief in Santa. But I do not know another way of expressing my own views in these matters. We know, know, that humans start believing wrong things when left to their own devices. We know humans are unreliable narrators and can misinterpret and embellish. Sometimes, we just make things up. All of us should be naturally sceptical of any extraordinary claims that isn’t backed by evidence.

For me, there are two straightforward explanations to Jesus. Either there really was a person capable of performing miracles 2000 years ago who claimed to be the son of god, or there was simply someone with kind words that encouraged others to be better versions of themselves. Someone whose stories were exaggerated in the roughly 100 years between his death and the New Testament’s creation. In the same manner that humans have always exaggerated stories and people.

Isn’t the second option so much more likely than the first?

If I were to tell you that I managed to turn water into wine yesterday, would you take my written word for it? If there were twenty-six witnesses who also saw it happen, would you belief the written word then, knowing that there are inconsistencies between the witness testimonies? What is the Bible if not just the witness testimonies of a few people who claim they saw miracles happen? Why would that be enough to convince you?

And yet, we are faced with a conundrum. Because there are many, many people who are convinced. And who do believe in god. That is something that begs for an explanation. And so I have some thoughts. I think we are taught from a young age not to question religious beliefs as we do other beliefs, in part by viewing it as a personal(/cultural) preference instead of a factual question. I think religious communities carry many benefits and humans naturally avoid thinking about subjects that would carry negative effects if questioned. Much like we don’t like thinking about the ethics of eating meat, because thinking it through might mean becoming a vegetarian.

Mostly, I think it’s habit. It’s a rare thing to have Christian parents raise a Muslim child. Children aren’t usually raised with many religions from which they end up choosing the one that they think is most likely to be true. They usually adopt the religion of their parents and have to make a conscious effort to adopt a different faith.

A religious person might counter by asking if that’s even the right way to look at it. When there are no arguments to give, they shift away from asking whether it’s true, to asking whether it’s valuable to belief, whether believing it brings good things into the world, whether it makes people happy.

So I feel, in the end, that religious people do not care about Truth. Not when it comes to religion. It’s sacrilegious to think your own religion isn’t true, but it’s not something they actually care about. Truth is optional. The religious just need enough arguments that they can pretend they believe that it’s true, so that they can reap the other benefits.

How does that assertion feel to the religious person? To be told that they don’t really believe what they say they believe? To have my world view forced upon them?

I imagine it’s somewhat similar to being told I’m only ‘saying’ that I don’t believe in a higher power.

There are some Christians who cannot imagine a world view that does not include a higher power. So desperate are they to explain the conundrum of the atheist, that they assume we must have some other ideal that we hold up as God. They accuse us of having science as a religion, or that a belief in humanism is the greater force that we believe in. Doesn’t an atheist have any ideals or hopes or ethics? Of course we do. They’re just created without an appeal to higher authority.

This behaviour is a refusal to accept our answer. These religious people have concluded that something higher is needed in every viewpoint about the world, and therefore they do not belief us when we say for us there is nothing. For us, at least for me, believing in anything more is a delusion.

And I do not know how to convey that without stepping on people’s toes.

Christians and Muslims can get along because they do not talk about the natural implications of their believes. If you’re a Christian, you traditionally believe that you need to be a Christian to get to heaven and that otherwise you go to hell. For Muslims, it’s something similar. How do you have a conversation where you’re respectful to each other, but also believe the other person is going to spend an eternity being tortured for being wrong?

As an atheist I get along with religious people because our differences to do not come up in conversation. Because I limit myself from saying what I really think. Because the natural implication of my belief is not only that the most logical conclusion is that there is no God, but that all people who do believe in God are wrong and have not followed the logic in pursuing this question. And that I’m mostly fine if they all want to believe something that is most probably false, but that I’m tired of pretending the question of God is something unknowable and all answers are equally likely.

I’m sorry, but that’s just not how I see it. God probably does not exist. Me treating other religions with respect is avoiding the subject of how unlikely they are to be true. It is saying: you are entitled to your wrong opinions as long as you don’t bother me with them.

I can’t go back in time. I can’t speak out retrospectively in a workspace against the Christian who should have spoken from respect and avoided the subject. But I can imagine how it could have gone if I had a bit more confidence.

When he said: “How about those who ‘say’ they don’t believe in a higher power?”

Perhaps I could have said: “That’s me. And I don’t just say it, I truly believe in nothing above us.”

“Ah, but surely there is something. Just this morning I accidentally brought an extra can of cola with me to work, and one of my patients’ dying wish was to have a can of cola. How would you explain that?”

“Coincidence.”

“Yes, there are people who believe in coincidence as something bigger than us. Also called destiny or fate.”

“No. Not destiny. That implies there is a plan. I mean coincidence as in random chance.”

“Having faith in randomness is still faith. Surely not everything is random?”

“And in those cases I don’t believe in the randomness. And frankly, I don’t like how you’re conducting this conversation. Whatever appeal you wish to make against something higher, it’s a distraction. All the problems in the world are human made. And that’s scary. But it’s also empowering. Because that means all the problems can be solved by humans too.”

“Ah yes, humanism…”

“Humanism is a philosophy that I agree with. It’s not higher than me and I am at liberty of tearing it asunder and rebuilding it from scratch if it defies the values I hold dear.”

“Well, you say all this now, but what if you need support? If, like in my line of work, you find yourself terminally ill and with nowhere to go? What will you grasp when there is nothing left?”

“Then I’d rather have no hope, than the false hope you’re peddling.”

He would probably just shake his head, unconvinced and still thinking I was lying. And I would at least be able to point out that for someone asking me questions, he seems incapable of listening to my answers.

That did not happen. I grit my teeth and bit my tongue until we were allowed to leave. The others applauded. I did not.

To close, he handed us a poem printed on a small piece of paper.

I scanned it and there was some nice sentiment in there. They wished us happy holidays and spoke of light in darkness. Just enough symbolism to leave a bitter taste in my mouth. But that was not enough for them. It also had to mention God explicitly.

I accepted the paper without saying anything and left it on my desk to deal with in the New Year.

[zaprlcorn]

Venus Rx and Fated Relationships

Is it possible you could meet your future spouse during a retrograde? 

A retrograde is when a planet reverses its motion—it moves backwards. Depending on the planet, retrogrades can last anywhere from 30 days to ~6 months. Venus goes retrograde approx every 18 months. Venus is the closest planet to Earth. In a world filled with hopeless romantics and love being the goal of life, when Venus goes retrograde, the effects are felt heavily.

Venus retrograde is a time when we are called to reassess ourselves in terms of “Venusian” things. These “things” revolve around love (internal or external), relationships, values, finances, pleasures, etc.

Because Venus is widely known as the planet of “love” it is no surprise that many people get into relationships when the planet goes retrograde. We’ve heard of exes coming back during Mercury retrograde to get closure (revising communication), but what about going back to people from past lives? Because retrogrades revisit the path a planet was once on, we do the same here on Earth. During this time, many people find themselves in relationships—specifically, “fated” relationships.

At the most basic level, our goal on this Earth is to procreate, carry on our lineage, and achieve happiness in some shape or form. The primary way of life goes: fall in love, have kids, and strengthen our family line. You hear songs about love on the radio, you see it in movies, shows, books, poetry; Love has been an emotion untouched since the beginning of time, so much that the idea of a “soulmate” is popular in pop culture and worldwide. Since astrology has gained popularity over the years, so has the term “twin flame”. A twin flame is essentially the idea that you are the half of somebody else’s soul, resulting in a star crossed lovers tale like Romeo and Juliet (with or without the suicide). In astrology, it has been proven that you can see karmic connections via synastry between two individuals—whether that’s two friends, an employee and boss, or a mother and child. However, in this post, I want to focus on the karmic connection between two people in the romantic aspect.

NOTE: I do NOT condone or support concept of twin flames for many reasons. This post is in no way shape or form about twin flames, saying the persons in this post are twin flames, or saying that you will meet your twin flame during Venus Rx.

Over the years, I have noticed that many people find a long-term partner, or even their spouse during Venus retrograde, in this thread I want to focus on one couple, in particular, that seems to prove the theory to be true:

Zayn Malik and Gigi Hadid.

August 9th, 2015

Venus, Uranus, and Jupiter were all trine each other at this time. Indicating an abundance of out of the blue fated connections and relationships.

There’s no denying that Zayn and Gigi are pretty much in “soulmate” territory. Despite breaks and breakups, they’ve amounted a total of 5 years together. Five years ago, when Zayn and Gigi first met, the planet Venus was in retrograde, which Zayn actually mentions in his song cruel:

Venus in converse, you put a spell on me

Converse: a situation, object, or statement that is the reverse of another or corresponds to it but with certain terms transposed.

Zayn and Gigi met at Kylie Jenner’s birthday party, on August 9th, 2015. The song Cruel is about meeting somebody at a party and feeling a spark. Put two and two together.

When looking at Gigi’s chart, Jupiter was transiting her 5th house with a pretty tight conjunction to Venus (3 degrees separation) in the sign of Leo meaning that Venus and Jupiter were in an exact conjunction that Summer.

Leo is ruled by the Sun, the center of our universe, the Sun shines down on humanity and makes everything beautiful. Leo is home to the 5th house.

The 5th house is the house of relationships, sex, children, parties, creativity, and joys. Speaking of Joys—Venus’ joy is in the 5th house, meaning that this is an extremely favourable place for Venus to be (side note, Zayn had a planetary joy transit himself during this time. His moon was transiting his 3rd house and 3H Moon represents the Goddess.) She enjoys being in the 5th house, as she can utilize everything on the table in that room of the house.

Moreover, Jupiter, at the utmost basic level, has to deal with abundance. Jupiter being in the 5th house is favorable because the sign Jupiter rules (Pisces) is the sign Venus is exalted in. That said, Venus conjunct Jupiter in the sign of Leo equals an overflowing abundance of Venusian energy. It should also be noted that Jupiter rules a woman's husband in the birth chart. At this time, Gigi was in a VERY FAVORABLE position to meet her potential spouse. Moreover, when Jupiter crosses one’s 5th house, this indicates that a woman could meet her husband.

“Whenever Jupiter and the lord of 7th house transits the first or ninth house this is more indicative of things like Marriage commitment, deeper and strong relationships. And if Venus or Jupiter itself rule these houses then it is a double significant of relationships.“

Lord of Gigi’s 7H: Mars & Pluto

Mars was transiting her 4H, ready to cross over to her 5th

Pluto was transiting her 9H

“The seventh house represents connecting with others in a physical bonding and 9th house represents long term relationship.”

Now, remember when I said the Moon was transiting Zayn’s third house? The Moon changes signs every 2-2.5 days, so this transit came and went, but it was extremely fitting for the moment. The Moon was in Gemini, the sign of communication.

The 5th house is the house of relationships, sex, children, parties, creativity, and joys.

Where did Zayn and Gigi meet? What happens at parties? 

Venus, Jupiter, and Mercury (Gemini’s planetary ruler) were in a nice conjunction during this time. The Moon was also making a few aspects to Zayn’s natal Moon that day.

Moon in aspect with his Venus in the 1st house (opposite of the seventh house, house of long term relationships) within 1 degree of each other. Venus signifies ones girlfriend or wife in the natal chart.

Moon in aspect with his Jupiter in the 7th house (opposite of first house, house of self and the physical body)

“The ascendant represents the body in the individual of the person who wants the relationship.”

Another thing to note is the planet Uranus. Uranus is an outer planet known for causing upheaval and out-of-the-blue events. During this time, Uranus was transiting Zayn’s 1st house of self. Another thing to consider is his natal 7H Jupiter sextiling Uranus transiting his 1H, which means positive, but abrupt change in relationships. 

“This is a good time to tackle difficult tasks that have caused frustration or limitations in the past.” Venus Rx tends to bring people into your life who you’ve had a “past life” connection with.

Because of Uranus’ influence, Zayn’s life was a bit all over the place, so he found himself in a more adventurous state. Because his 11H (the 11H is responsible for social circles) Sun and transiting 1H Uranus were in a square aspect within 2 degrees, That said, Zayn was meeting new people and doing new things with said new people.

We got such a spiritual connection...

Zayn and Gigi are a great example of proving Venus Rx to be a time for cuffing szn. Despite having breaks and breakups, they’ve always found their way back to each other.

I’ve spoken to many other people to have met their partners during Venus retrograde, and almost all of them say it’s like a spark. They feel an automatic deep sense of familiarity with their partner, saying it’s like a spiritual connection.

Zayn is always singing about Gigi and him having this spiritual, fated, and past life connection:

     I been feeling high when I touch your body     That's how I feel the soul inside her body

       — Flight of the Stars (2018)

  Think I'm from space, my soul fell down   I found the Earth, not leaving now   I know your face, think you fell too   And ain't no place now, if I got you

      — If I Got You (2018)

We got such a spiritual connection, Don't you know you're fuckin' beautiful?

     — Common (2018)

I found my life in between shots and getting high The cage I was in fell away when she asked me to dance again I found my life in between a first kiss and a last goodbye

    — BRIGHT (2016)

Girl we'd still make it If the planets all faded away 

    — Imprint (2018)

I know I seen your face In different times and places

....

We can be Something divine, planets align where we should be

   — Talk to Me (2018)

With all being said, I think it’s safe to say if you’re looking for love, lookout for the next Venus retrograde (or look for 5th, 7th, or 9th house transits). Sometimes the universe throws somebody in your path and it’s fated. While Zayn and Gigi are an example in the media, I’ve seen it happen numerous times with everyday people. While some find their exes coming back around for a second try, or end up in murky karmic relationships, for the most part: Venus Rx seems to be a good place to start if you’re looking. 

Venus retrograde does not always mean things will work out because retrogrades are here to reassess things we did not master in the past. But love is all about taking chances. So take your chance, and have fun. Soul mates do exist, and you may end up finding the one.

[fellowstrangetownappreciator]

The Strange Case of The Strangetown Metamorphosis

There is a mysterious Sim that appears in Strangetown.

That's like saying "there is a fish that appears in the ocean", I know, so I'll be a little more specific.

They are an adult whose memories show inconsistencies with those of their family members. Something is missing!

Alright. That's also not saying much, that's like half of the premades in vanilla, non-clean hoods.

They are immediately recognizable by their appearance and, dare I say it, have distinguishing features unique to them.

Well, that also kinda fits everyone...

They feature in more than one installment of the series.

Again, not that helpful. I mean, almost everybody from the base game hoods is (for better or worse) represented in TS3 or TS4.

They appear in TS2 for PSP!

Hmm...

They are a member of a wealthy family connected to science and paranormal.

And...

They are somehow connected to (possible) cloning.

I imagine that now you’re probably rolling your eyes and asking: Why didn’t I just simply say I was going to talk about Bella Goth?

Because... I’m not!

It’s Loki Beaker. In this mini-essay I’m going to speak about Loki, what is the mystery around him, what hints are there and what are some of the theories and which one do I fancy.

It’s basically a routine round of the popular game “connect EAxis’ oversights and glue them together into a headcanon”.

So without further ado, let me introduce you to:

The Mystery of Loki Beaker!

0: Preface: Loki who?

“As soon as he perfects his latest invention, Loki is sure to get the recognition he knows he deserves. In the meantime, he keeps himself busy by trying to assemble a nuclear reactor out of common household items.”

On the first glance, Loki as a Sim seems quite straightforward. He is a Knowledge Sim with a very eccentric personality. All his trait points are in the extremes, as you can see:

He is a scientist, a competent one at that, as proven by his high career level and the fun fact that some of the game’s horrible machinery you can buy for Aspiration points is attributed to his creation.

(It explains why are the Beakers the only ones who have the stuff lying around by default. It is normal for a Strangetown family to own a non-buyable reward object or two but those are career rewards, the Beakers are the only one who canonically own Aspiration points rewards.)

Even though he knows his stuff when it comes to his profession, he is very corrupt and tests his questionable projects on his captive, Nervous Subject.

To say that Loki is unpopular would be an understatement. No one but his wife Circe likes Loki, even his own sister is indifferent towards him. Yes, he has a sister. Her name is Erin and she also lives in Strangetown with a colorful collection of roommates.

Nothing mysterious about him so far. (apart from his eyebrows)

1: Characterization fallen apart

And then The Sims 3 happened. It was actually quite late into the game’s life cycle, the early 2013, when a beautiful nordic-themed world was released on TS3 Store. Its name was Aurora Skies and it featured Loki, Erin and their parents.

TS3 Loki is a child and Erin is a toddler.

Now I haven’t actually played Aurora Skies. I own (and love) TS3 but the price range for the Store worlds is too high for me, content-to-money wise. So there might be some hidden clues about the Beakers in their house or relationship panels that I haven’t been able to inspect but... not to sound cynical but I doubt it. I doubt such attention was given to detail of this family in Aurora Skies, as they don’t even have individual bios.

But... that is... fine? I mean, we have Loki’s TS2 bio...

Nope. Sure we do. And it would be fine if hair color and ambitions weren’t the only thing Loki and his younger self (from now on referred to as smol Loki) had in common.

Let’s take a look on smol Loki’s personality.

The first noticeable thing is that there is not a trace of Loki’s trademark villainy. He’s not Mean Spirited, he’s not Evil, he’s not even a No Sense of Humor Sim. His extreme neatness and hyperactivity are nowhere to be seen either. While it is true that TS3′s capabilities of defining personality are very limited as it picks “outstanding points” rather than a position of each trait on a scale, and it only has 5 slots (and tiny teeny 3 for children), it doesn’t make any sense still for the devs not to pick some more loki-esque traits for the precious slots they had.

Unless...

They didn’t care about Loki’s personality and there were no deeper intentions.

Unless the devs were trying to purposefully show us new angles of his character that either got suppressed while he was growing up, or manifest in ways that TS2′s scale system wasn’t able to show.

Could the Lucky trait in particular have had something to do with the change?

(Also, those traits of smol Loki are reason why I usually go for a Family Secondary Loki in TS2 and thus make Strangetown the purgatory of two unstable blonde Knowledge/Family sciency guys.)

We also must not omit that even though smol Loki didn’t display any of them, he still had all of Loki’s signature traits in him, as Loki in TS2 has his actual personality synced with the genetic one, meaning that there was something in there that caused him not to act so mean that got lost as he grew up. In other words, something brought up the worst in him.

And that’s not all. Smol Loki is not a regular TS3 child. You see, in TS3, premade children aren’t particularly known for being highly skilled experts. Neither are in TS2, for that matter, and it’s okay. It’s realistic.

Smol Loki has a skill maxed.

It is very rare for a premade regardless of age to already start with a maxed skill and I personally don’t know of any other premade children that do.

And it’s writing.

What does writing have to do with Loki? Does Loki write? Probably he has to, those academic papers aren’t gonna spawn out of thin air, but that’s not what the writing skill in TS3 (or the hidden writing skill in TS2) are about. They’re about creative writing only.

Ok, ok. How high is Loki’s Creativity skill, then? In TS2, skills are much broader, they more resemble skillsets than individual skills, and writing categorizes under Creativity. Bring out the skill panel!

Two. He has 2 points in Creativity. That is... low. That is actually very low, especially for a Sim that has supposedly been writing for fun since childhood. (and was a prodigy, while we’re at it) It is safe to say, I think, that if the player doesn’t make him do it, Loki doesn’t write anymore and he hasn’t been doing that for a long, long time.

While I would cynically admit that the dissonance in personalities might be just the lack of damns given from EAxis’ side, this seems to me too on the nose to be unintentional.

They would have no reason to bring the Beakers back without the “evil scientists” thing in mind. I mean, that’s what they’re iconic for. That’s what they’re recognizable by. (apart from their eyebrows)

So the person who was in charge of creating smol Loki probably knew they were recreating “Loki the mad scientist”.

So when they were picking the skill they use to demonstrate that this kid is gonna go far, they thought... “evil scientist = writing”...?

I would understand going for Creativity in general. I mean, Loki’s an inventor. That comes with the territory. But creativity as such isn’t really a skill in TS3. It’s divided to different activities.

Wouldn’t it make more sense just in general to pick logic, then? I mean, Loki isn’t that extremely logical by default but it is his second strongest skill and a feature unmistakably connected to being a scientist.

That’s what leads me to believe that writing plays a role in the story and it was chosen on purpose.

So how did a sweet little family-oriented boy talented with words transform into the ruthless catboy inventor we know and love?

And that, my friends, is the mystery of Loki Beaker.

2: A closer look at our environmentalist friends, the Beakers

If we want to get the full picture and come to a satisfying conclusion of some sorts, we need to inspect smol Loki’s surroundings. Maybe there is a clue to the continuous force or a traumatic event that shifted smol Loki’s direction in life?

Loki’s and Erin’s parents are named Gundrun and Bjorn. Even though their age would still allow it, they’re not present at the start of TS2′s Strangetown play, they’re long dead. Bjorn died before Erin became an adult and Gundrun died shortly before her son’s engagement to Circe. Because they died by the time Loki had (presumably) already long enrolled in his current life-path, we can safely rule out any tragic early death of parental figures scenario as a possible answer.

Gundrun is the only Beaker that canonically also writes. She has 5 points in the writing skill. She also shares some traits with Loki, namely the smarts and ambition.

But she has little to do with science and is way more business-oriented which is a trait she shares with Circe’s ancestors, for example her father. Maybe the families knew each other from business ventures even before they moved to Strangetown? It is stated in their memories that Loki and Circe first met when they were children. But I digress!

Anyway, I don’t see anything in Gundrun that would suggest any abusive behavior towards her son that might have triggered his drastic change. Possibly but not necessarily she might’ve been a bit absent but nothing out of ordinary.

And now the father, Bjorn.

Bjorn is the sciency half of the couple and works as an Aquatic Ecosystem Tweaker. Again, he has zero traits that would raise any red flags and he shares 4 out of 5 traits with either smol Loki or Loki. (I don’t know if Loki is a “natural cook” but he cooks quite well, so I think that counts.)

What’s interesting about Bjorn, though, is his speech that serves as a flavor text for the Aurora Skies store page.

(Image transcript: “Do it for science! Science is everywhere around us, but at Aurora Skies it’s not just something you learn; it’s something you do!  We need bright young minds to make the dreams of the future a reality. Even now we’re finding more uses for garbage to help the planet. Charging batteries, powering machines - the sky is the limit. Just this last year we created a modified Hot Air Baloon using garbage as fuel and turning it into pure air with a pine breeze scent.  Now you can have efficient travel and an amazing romantic adventure with no cost to the ozone (or your nose)! Every year we’re creating more and more exciting things in the world of science. Garbage-powered hearts, heart-powered cars, solar-powered cats; what will you think of next!  It’s all up to you. Do it for Science! Did you know? Hot Air Balloons are an epic form of travel based around the simple principle that hot air is lighter than cold air.  They lift in the air based on the heat system in the balloon. Increasing the temperature of the air inside the balloon makes it lighter than the air outside and the balloon begins to float.  More air is required to lift heavier things; that’s why the balloons have to be so huge! How cool (or hot!) is that?”)

From this piece of text we can see Bjorn’s passion and dedication to “green” science. Nothing in his traits suggests he fakes it, so I think it’s safe to believe that this peppy idealist is a glimpse into Loki’s father’s genuine self.

He might have encouraged his children to follow in his footsteps (”We need bright young minds to make the dreams of the future a reality.“) and smol Loki, who later in life seemed to have similar levels of enthusiasm (science is his One True Hobby), might have been receptive to that.

Now just close your eyes for a second and imagine an alternate reality in which Loki picked up where Bjorn left and instead of a energy-refilling machine that electrocutes you if you’re not happy enough, he invented “solar-powered cats”.

Still no hints on what could’ve messed Loki up, though.

Let’s take a look at the parents in TS2. Even though they’re not present and aren’t even resurrectable, they’re still coded in the game for purposes of genetics, memories and family trees, so some of their characteristics are salvageable.

And by the Watcher, they were both Romance Sims.

They were workaholic Romance Sims who cared about the environment and liked recycling (and Hot Baloons).

And they were both extremely Nice and very Sloppy, if their personalities on wiki are something to go by. Which they unfortunately aren’t, at least not completely because most ancestors don’t simply have “their own” personalities and use presets instead, so they tend to be quite similar.

The same goes for most of the Beaker clan, unfortunately. Fun fact is that there is no Knowledge Sim in sight (before Loki, of course). Maybe they weren’t a scientist family, but a bunch of Romance Sims who used to spend their free time in between woohoos saving the planet with eco-science. (3 out of 6 of Loki’s and Erin’s ancestors were Romance Sims, 2 were Fortune and 1 was Family)

But! There is one outlier. Her name is Gertrude Beaker. She is Loki’s paternal grandmother.

And similarly to her grandson, she certainly has a personality to remember.

She doesn’t use a preset, this is a personality that someone went and manually assigned (...or generated) for her. And she is Neat, Outgoing and doesn’t have a nice bone in her body. But unlike Loki, she has a sense of humor (which makes her even more dangerous, in my opinion) and is extremely Lazy.

She is a Fortune Sim and the only Beaker who shares the darker sides of Loki’s personality. (to be clear, I don’t mean their taste for cleaning but the round 0 of Nice points)

Because she doesn’t feature in TS3 at all, it is safe to say that she wasn’t in her grandchildren’s lives until the family moved to Strangetown. Could she be the corrupting influence on smol Loki?

As far as personality comparison goes, she seems to be the only possible culprit, the only one who’s personality shares the same unpleasant qualities he became infamous for. But! That’s not saying much. There is no evidence she actually did anything.

There’s not even any evidence that she ever met her grandson, given he has no memory of her dying which means she might have died before he was even born. That would be a solid evidence on the contrary and would rule her out. But I’m leaving some maneuvering space for theories here because she is the only Beaker ancestor with custom personality, after all, and that is suspicious.

That’s all the Beakers we know of if not counting Atom and Ceres, who came after Loki, so they’re not relevant to the question of his childhood. Or... are they?

3: And that’s when the trouble began

Another part of this question that might help us discern what happened to Loki is the when. All we know so far is that there is a big void of unknown between smol Loki and regular Loki and the point of transformation happened in there somewhere.

Thankfully, we have something to give us an idea. It’s this snapshot in storytelling pictures for the Beakers:

It shows smol Loki destroying a dollhouse. It seems to be in an impersonal environment of some sorts. The cheapest bed in the game is against a bare white wall, the window is hid behind blue curtains and there doesn’t really seem to be anything else but the dollhouse, a teddy bear in the background and that... very unpleasant bed.

It clearly tells us that Loki’s shift started in his pre-teen years.

And seeing that room which is definitely not in the Beaker Castle at 1 Tesla Court, it makes me think of a hotel or a cheap apartment the family was staying in while moving from Aurora Skies to Strangetown. Maybe the castle-like something the household inhabits at the start of the game wasn’t a property of the Beakers at all, maybe that was where the Salamises used to live and now it belongs to Circe?

Anyway, could it had been leaving Aurora Skies that sent smol Loki down an existential crisis and settling in the not exactly welcoming environment of Strangetown, enrolling in a local school, that sealed it?

But why all the stuff with writing? This would work with any other hobby but somehow it had to be writing and it’s our task to find out why.

4: Not your average tragedy

Now in our search we already have some ideas but it wouldn’t be thorough if we didn’t take into account smol Loki’s actual personality. I mean, we went into what traits he doesn’t have but what about those he has?

Namely Lucky and Family-Oriented.

I think Lucky is a very interesting choice. There’s nothing inherent about Loki Beaker that would make you go “that’s one lucky guy!” (if you don’t count his relationship with Circe as a stroke of luck, that is) and the same goes for smol Loki.

But... it could be a clue. His metamorphosis either couldn’t be triggered by trauma because he’s lucky and it would avoid him, or it must’ve been something tremendously horrid so he’s lucky he’s still alive.

Now we know we are searching for something that happened in his late childhood, verging on the start of his teenage years. His family was going through the turmoil of moving to a desert and he has already known his future partner Circe. Meanwhile Erin-

Oh, wait. Erin.

Smol Loki was Family-Oriented which implies he would probably have a good relationship with his little sister, as he would’ve naturally inclined to protect her and help his parents take care of her. But!

Not only do they have an amicable but distant relationship as adults but Erin seems to forget that Loki even existed in her childhood.

He has the usual set of memories of a sibling growing up well but she doesn’t, she has no Loki-related memories at all, not even of his marriage, which was a quite recent event.

Could the reason for Loki’s “downfall” be somehow related to his sister? Was there a dramatic event in which she lost a part of her memory?

5: Theories!

Ok, we’re finally here! Now I try to present some theories about what might’ve happened.

1. Burdens of the golden child

In Aurora Skies, Loki used to be the little wonder every relative was gushing about. With his father as an acclaimed scientist and a very liked person in general, there was little to no adversity his son had to face. He followed his passion and having nobody to really compare himself to, nor anybody who would terrorize him, he prospered.

But then the Beakers moved. Strangetown was... different. It was way smaller than Aurora Skies, so everybody inherently knew everybody and everybody had to interact with everybody... because the small space of a desert community didn’t leave them with any choice. And it was bleak and unfriendly. No one except for the Salamises knew the Beakers, so they found themselves under scrutiny from their new neighbors.

So Loki, who used to live thinking he was unique, was now sitting everyday in a much smaller classroom with Pascal and Vidcund Curious, whom he was immediately being compared to. But he wasn’t like the Curiouses. He was a kid of a scientist but wasn’t a science kid. He didn’t have much in common with Pascal who approached him and tried to befriend him at first but he wanted to. In Strangetown, nothing seemed to be cooler than being really, really into science. Pascal’s and Loki’s communication attempts were rather poor, though, and in the end, they never made friends. Loki slowly began to disdain the oldest Curious boy and it culminated a few years later in high school when Pascal made an attempt to woo Circe. It was even worse with Vidcund. Ever since Loki’s first day at the new school, Vidcund had been eyeing him with a disgusted look and Loki became quick to reciprocate.

In Strangetown, nothing seemed to be cooler than being really, really into science. Even Circe was on it! She was the only person his age he has know in Strangetown before his family moved in and he liked her. Not “like” liked her, yuck! But he thought she was cool. Her family used to visit the Beakers in Aurora Skies and they played together. She was a friend! Or so Loki thought. She seemed to like hanging out with the Curiouses much more.

In Strangetown, nothing seemed to be cooler than being really, really into science, yes. But not in the eyes of Buzz Grunt, the son of a general who lived in Strangetown. Their family were the self-proclaimed protectors of the hood but at the same time they weren’t shy to show a strong distaste for all that made Strangetown an important desert settlement in the first place. And little Buzz, although Loki doubted he understood the nuances, was very fond of asserting his dominance over his less sporty and hyper-masculine classmates.

Suddenly jealous of the Curious brothers, under pressure from both the adults and his peers comparing him to them and bullied by Buzz, Loki’s social life fell apart. He started having problems... and he came up with solutions. He has always liked science but from back then on he hyperfixated on it to prove everybody who picked on him for being a worthless parody of a science kid wrong.

Not only his social life and self-confidence were busted, though. Moving away from Aurora Skies to Strangetown that had much higher prices for housing because of the limited space, the living standards for the Beakers lowered. It was chaotic and uncomfortable. Plus, almost everybody in Strangetown was loaded. Why, Circe and her parents lived in a small castle! Loki felt like they’re the only “poor” family around and it played into his new-found insecurities.

And then there was Erin’s accident. She suffered a severe head injury and even though she fortunately survived, she was never... the same. She had issues with her memory. Loki tried to convince himself that he’s big enough not to cry but when they were visiting Erin in the hospital and she didn’t recognize him, he cried. It was his little sister! And... it was all his fault anyway! If he was quicker and pushed her to safety, she would’ve been fine! Or even better, he wished the car would’ve hit him instead.

Loki was becoming more and more snappy, focused on his grades and projects, unavailable. The siblings never mended their relationship, Erin, even though she recovered, never got to make new memories with her brother. Not remembering them growing up together, he was like a stranger to her. A scary mean teenage boy she didn’t know and, even though she was a very friendly child, she was too intimidated to willingly spend time with him. And Loki was always busy and moreover, he felt guilty and inexplicably angry, so he postponed approaching her, until it was too late, he was in college, she was in high school and it was too awkward.

And... there was no time to write anymore.

2. Gertrude the Neat and Mean (and Lazy)

Ok, Loki doesn’t have any memories of his grandma. But hear me out! Erin does not have any of him either and yet they met. This theory doesn't require any additional write up – he simply got under the influence of his 0 Nice points granny and she cultivated him to be just like her.

My personal take: This is maybe my least favorite theory of them all, even though it is quite straightforward. It doesn't take much into consideration and demonizes Gertrude, who as far as we know, might not done anything wrong.

3. The accident

This theory takes advantage of TS3's canon sciency machinery, namely Cerebralizing Brain Enhancing Machine 2.0.

It can, among other things, change a Sim's personality. There is (quite unfortunately, in my opinion) no chance of consequential failure in the actual game, the most it can do is to (non-fatally) electrocute your Sim. But...

Imagine smol Loki sneaking into his dad's laboratory, most probably at his workplace.

He was curious. Ever since his father showed him all the equipment in there, all he could think of was the machine that made people smarter.

Maybe it could make him smarter?

I mean, Loki knew he was already quite smart. At least, he's been told he was and he had no reason not to believe it.

But he could be even smarter.

He could be like his dad. Or his mom. Or Erin. Everyone was talking about how clever young Erin seemed. Loki was proud of her but part of him just wanted that, too.

So what if... he went to dad's laboratory, just for a little while, and made himself smarter?

He made all the necessary preparations. It meant to memorize dad’s schedule, so he knew just the time when he could sneak into the laboratory. It also meant to get a good costume so he won’t be recognizable on the security footage!

And then finally, he was ready. To infiltrate the laboratory was easy enough but it only made Loki more nervous. He was on the edge but determined. He wanted to make it big in the world. He needed to seize the opportunity. And fear... fear was there to be ignored! Hands, stop trembling!

His confidence grew a bit once he got to the machine itself. He knew how to run it thanks to his dad and it made him feel competent and ready.

Little did he know that there was a huge oversight. Although Loki could operate the technology on a very basic level, his knowledge went nowhere near deep enough for him to detect that the machine has yet another set of settings and those currently expect an adult user. It wasn’t configured for a child patient.

But unaware of that, the boy in his patchy dinosaur costume climbed on top of the machine and with his eyes wide open and his heart racing he connected the Brain Enhancer to his system. Then, with his hand sweating, he pushed a button on a remote he was clutching to.

When Bjorn, alerted by Loki’s screams, rushed into the laboratory, it was way too late.

As his terrified father was calling the ambulance, the child was alive and even still awake. He was too weak to cry. He just watched Bjorn, wishing for death and looking for signs of wrath in father’s eyes.

There were none. Only fear.

Physically, Loki Beaker managed to recover just fine. With the power of advanced medicine and plastic surgery, the burns he suffered were reduced to nothing but almost invisible scars.

But inside, he was never the same. Literally. Even though the procedure backfired horribly, it still worked to some extend - but even that extend was warped. Loki succeeded in giving himself the Genius trait but several of his traits were replaced also, including the Lucky trait that probably saved his life.

6: Conclusion!

I like Loki very much. (no sh*t, who would’ve guessed) He’s a very controversial and over-the-top character who tends to be rather unpredictable in the actual gameplay. I started writing this giant thing to find an answer to his backstory that would satisfy me and hopefully also some of you.

With a heavy heart I conclude I’m not successful.

First I have to admit I originally planned to present 5 theories instead of 3 but I scrapped 2 of them.

First was about Atom time traveling and replacing Loki, creating himself again and again in a time loop (would explain the huge personality difference between smol Loki and Loki-Atom) and it was very far-fetched but fun, alas I realized it was out of character for Atom, since he seems to love his sister and his Plumbot so much he would hardly leave them behind to pull that off.

The second was about Nervous and the corrupting power of Death he has inside that would slowly drive Loki and Circe “evil” even though it’s unclear whether they first adopted him with being a lab-rat in mind. But it would not make sense since a change like that would be visible on their personality panels. That’s not that important, though. What made me not include this theory is that it feels uncomfortably victim blame-y. It’s not directly since it wouldn’t be Nervous’ fault anyway but any attempt to shift the blame from Loki and Circe in this situation feels uncomfortable.

(To be clear, I don’t think the Beakers deserve demonization. In my opinion, the best way to treat them narrative-wise is like eccentric people capable of feeling love and doing good things sometimes, yet irredeemably self-centered, morally bankrupt and deserving a lifetime in jail for child abuse they have done on Nervous. Not one-dimensional but still villains and still objectively bad people.)

And those 3 theories above? They could’ve been better.

I think I like the first the most, even though I still feel like something is missing. I just tend to like relatively grounded explanations and this one doesn’t feature the supernatural nor any deus ex machina gadget.

What about you? And do you have any other theories? Sky’s the limit! It’ll make my day to hear them!

Whatever your takes are, they’re all valid.

[wonkyyslush]

SHIP YOUR MUTUALLSSSS I WANT TO SEE THE DRAMA

*evil laughter* instead of paying attention I wrote all of this down during my classes you’re welcome.

I tried to do people you wouldn’t really expect either

And I’m indecisive so some people have two my bad 👩🏾‍🦲

You should also pay me for this I worked hard

I’m never doing this shit again I need a nap omfg 🗿 if you weren’t included in this and you want to be you gotta wait a month for my brain to regenerate sorry besties

@uniquabackyardigans I was stuck between both Aran Ojiro from Haikyuu and Shoto Todoroki from mha so I just picked both.

Todoroki is emotionally unavailable already your type. All jokes aside he would be really soft with you and it’s like a whole different side of him other people don’t really see often. If you were upset about something he probably wouldn’t know how to comfort you (I feel like he’s bad at comforting people in general) but he’d try his best. Also he’s probably touch starved just like you <3 have fun with his conspiracies.

I feel like people think that Aran is mean because of his resting bitch face and also this face -_- he occasionally makes. So when they see how nice he is with you they’re so confused ?? Also remember when you were complaining about your ass in your jeans? He’d say it does make your ass look like a square just to make you mad :) you too also probably think flipping people off is a good date idea 🗿

@king-tobiyolo I ship you with Sakusa Kiyoomi (is that his name?) Now hear me out it would probably be a opposites attract sort of thing. You make shit jokes he’s a germaphobe you’re a menace he’s less of a menace. He hated you at first, you and your bad jokes annoyed him. So when he started catching feelings 👩🏾‍🦲 Theres never a dull moment with you two. You get him to loosen up a little (not a lot but it’s still noticeable).

@lilies-and-rosies I ship you with Megumi Fushiguro. You and Megumi have a interesting dynamic. You’re either done with everyone’s bullshit together or he’s done with your bullshit. You send him the dumbest things (I’m talking about those weird people you find 🧛🏾‍♀️) and he hates to admit it but some of them actually makes him laugh. I feel like he’d be the type to be embarrassed over over the slightest things such as hand holding so you’re gonna crack him out of his shell 🥸. Also you’re a Tsukishima Kinnie? No problem who else would he date he has Yuuji Gojo and Nobara on his ass. LMAO IM SORRY THAT WAS FUNNY TO ME. I also ship you with Hange Zoe but I’m too Lazy to explain further I’ve been at this for hours

@sao-tom3 I ship you with Itadori Yuuji. I don’t know if you’ve watched Jujutsu Kaisen yet but I feel like you and Yuuji would be a cute couple. He’s in love with your cat obviously not more than he’s in love with you but it’s a close call 🤩. He cooks for you (period get yourself a man who can cook). If you have a specific comfort meal you like to eat when you’re sad he’d gladly make it for you and do whatever he can on top of that to cheer you up. He’d also be the type to randomly go “Do you wanna do my make up for me?” Do his makeup bestie 🤬. Have fun with Sukuna bothering you two though. 🦤🦤🦤

@angeldvst-amajiki I ship you with Armin Arlert. I can’t explain myself on this one I just feel like you would be his type (his type being intimidating woman, not saying you’re intimidating but you did say Tamaki would be afraid of you NOT THAT I THINK ITS TRUE THOUGH) um anyways you and Armin would be that couple people didn’t really expect but once they see it they love it. Armin would constantly reassure you that he loves you wether he says it to you straightforwardly or coveys it through his actions. His love language is either quality time or giving out gifts and when I think of Armin giving you sea shells enjoy bestie

@shawtyybae I ship you with Akaashi whatever his last name is. Doesn’t he just look like mega mind? 🥸 But Fr Fr it’ll take a very patient man to deal with your bs. At first I thought that Akaashi would probably go for someone who isn’t a menace (yes I’m saying you’re a menace) because he already has bokuto giving him migraines but you’re an exception I guess? Most of the time he’ll go along with your jokes because why not but other times he’d be like 🧍🏾‍♀️. Akaashi is also a over thinker proven buy bokuto himself 🙄 so I feel like he’d overthink your relationship and then need reassurance that you still like him (I have a ton of Akaashi conspiracy theories but that’s not the point)

@starrjin I ship you with Inumaki and Kita but I don’t feel like writing these anymore so I’m only gonna explain Inumaki 🗿 You and Inumaki in my opinion would be good for each other. He can comfort you without even having to speak somehow and for him he finds your presence comforting. His love language in my opinion is physical touch and acts of service. He can’t speak? He’ll make up for it with his actions.

@melichios I ship you with Eren Jeager. Why you may ask? Because I read your about me and you’re basically into edgy people and who’s edgier than a mass murderer? Also “men with long hair” Last time I checked Eren has some pretty long hair 🌝 He also finds your interest interesting (see what I did there? 🤩) like your biotechnology. Loves hearing you talk about your interest. I mean he’ll fall asleep on you listening to you talk about it but he loves it nonetheless.

@hoodsokka I ship you with Sero and Denki from Mha but I’m only explaining Sero 🗿 You two would be a comedic duo. He wouldn’t even mind the accidental dick jokes in front of his mom (haha get it because you accidentally told a dick joke..in front of..okay) He goes along with whatever impulsive urge you have except having a baby at 17 (haha..get it because..okay) Wether this is a platonic ship or a romantic ship that’s for you to decide.

@aphroditeparadisesstuff (WE SHARE SO MANY OF THE SAME INTERESTS) I ship you with Tsukishima Kei. I read your about me thingy too and it says you’re sarcastic. Who’s more sarcastic then Tsukki? 🤩 You like reading too so library dates yaaaaay. Every now and then he recommends books he’d think you’ll like. He loves hearing about the things you’re passionate about seeing you rant about something like mythology makes him smile. Also “I’m shy” great you two can stay at home together :)

[carinyms]

I've scrolled through a lot of discourse on episode 4 of Loki and I need to talk about it

(good lord its a whole essay im sorry)

I gave myself a headache from crying while watching this. (I joined the Loki fandom post-IW so I’ve never had to see him die before while emotionally invested and boy!!! Is it doing things to my fragile psyche!!). But now I’m rehydrated and more stable and ready to party so let’s go

Right off the bat, I loved this episode — loved it loved it loved it. Silly, manic in-shock Loki is gone and shit is getting real. My thought while watching this was truly “wow this is my favorite episode so far” and damn am I in a minority with this opinion lol.

So here’s my perspective on some of the discourse flying around, and just general thoughts

On the whole ‘Narcissist’ thing:

IMO, Mobius saying this means nothing: he’s mad and he’s spouted lies at Loki to push his buttons before (see: every interaction they’ve had since episode 1).

Loki saying this to Sif-- well, Loki is and always has been an unreliable narrator on himself. The major theme of this show is that he doesn’t really know who he is, deep down, and he’s trying to figure it out. The TVA is taking advantage of this, and even though he’s trying to stay above it all throughout the series, he's still in a really impressionable spot and absorbing what others tell him about himself. (not to mention this scene is literal torture and he’s already proven that he’ll say whatever he needs to to get out of it.)

But he does admit one true thing when he says “It’s because I’m scared of being alone.” (And like wow okay same don’t mind my tears) but here’s a big brain idea!

Sif pulls him up and says ‘You are alone, and you always will be’, which is like, WOW that’s cruel after what he said, but it makes me ask wonder: Sif is sentient in this scene, but obviously it’s not really her. Who’s controlling her? And why is it so important for them to make sure Loki thinks he’s alone? I’d go as far as to wager that Sif never even said this to Loki, the big bad made this up. (he admits he forgot about this ever happening, I doubt he’d remember what she said.)

I think the nexus event on Lamentis that caused the branch was two Loki’s joining sides. Or, Loki no longer being alone. Loki insists while talking to Mobius that “she’s not my partner!” but she was, and they were partners from the moment they grabbed hands on Lamentis — right when the timeline broke off. I think Loki variants teaming up is the biggest threat to whoever is pulling the strings here — that’s why the post-credit scene is so significant. (Is Loki the only person who has multiple variants of himself who've escaped the TVA?)

And here’s where I’m gonna get salty--so I apologize but i need to rant about this-- but it’s seriously pissing me off that so many people are intentionally reading this as Loki/Sylvie and then being mad about it when that’s clearly not what’s happening and why is everyone acting like Mobius with one angry jealous brain cell and no critical thinking about the context of the characters.

If people ship it that’s chill, but for the people who are against it—it’s clearly supposed to be platonic, and it’s so upsetting that in the year of our lord 2021 we still can’t have a man and woman hold hands without people saying it’s proof they want to f*ck each other, like what in the misogyny??? STOP. This show was written by a bi woman and Tom the-most-emotionally-sensitive-man-on-this-planet Hiddleston — let them display an intimate loving friendship goddammit. This isn’t romance, this is Loki learning how to admit he cares for someone who cares for him in return — something he hasn’t experienced a whole lot of and clearly doesn’t know how to navigate.

(You have permission to personally come at me if it actually turns out to be romantic by the end of the show—but as of right now I will die on this hill.)

Him putting his hands on her shoulders to me was a clear indication he wanted to hug her, and I’d like to think he would have told her he cares about her, and that they can figure it out together. Because these are two characters who’ve never had anyone else to rely on and trust, and for the first time they’re not alone.

And I have to think about what prompted this from Loki. He just lost Mobius the moment after he called him friend. The way I see it, he’s just realized the true gravity of what they’re up against, and Loki is suddenly very afraid of losing Sylvie too before he tells her cares about her, of dying truly alone because he never told anyone what they meant to him. (Don’t think about this in the context of him also having watched his entire family die knowing he never told Frigga or Thor how much he loved them either don’t think about it—) He’s realized, finally, that he has doesn’t have to be alone, that he can choose to be close to people and have friends. And god it’s so heartbreaking that he never got to hug her or have that moment with her. I really hope they get that in the end. I hope he gets it with Mobius. I hope they have a group hug. I'm upset again.

Okay, deep breath, ANYWAY.

Hopefully this didn’t come off as attacking anyone else’s opinions.

Personally, I love this character so much, I’m just so happy to be seeing him in his own storyline that they can’t go wrong here. Objectively I think the production is amazing, and personally I love they way Loki’s character has been explored so far. (Yea yea, was I HOPING that the bad-memory loop would morph into Sanctuary and Thanos and like a full exploration of his true worst memories? Yes but let’s be honest my whump needs will never be met in canon and I have to accept that lol.)

Honestly I left all my own meta about this character at the door when the series started, because for me the opinions I’ve formed from the hundreds of (amazing) fics and meta I’ve read on this character and what’s true in canon are basically inseparable at this point, and no portrayal is going to live up to the way Loki exists in my head. Canon Loki and fic Loki are two different characters and I can enjoy both at the same time :) I’ve just loved seeing the character get given the different dimensions he deserves, and written by people who care about his story.

Also, it’s not over! If he was dead and this was it I’d be very upset, but this is the rock bottom of the storyline, and I think the whole next two episodes will be the build back up. I trust it’s gonna be worth it. SO hyped for flaming sword Loki. I would die for Sylvie, but I’m excited to see him on his own again.

My current most pressing questions are:

-what was the fallout of Sylvie’s bombing the timeline? (Have we seen that yet, am I just dumb and missing something?)

-Obviously, who’s behind it all? (Kang? Is there a head honcho Very Evil Loki at the top?)

-How much does Ravonna actually know, and to what extent is she just a pawn too? She asked Sylvie to prune her— she’s probably also been duped here.

-Is everything we learned about the sacred timeline BS? How much of what the TVA workers believe is real?

-my favorite theory so far is that the war of the timelines miss minutes talks about hasn’t actually happened yet, maybe making setting that into motion is the true endgame, leading into Multiverse of Madness?

(Side note: holy HELL im so excited for this soundtrack to drop on Spotify. It’s SO AMAZING I had CHILLS in the end credits.)

Open invitation to discuss anything with me if you feel inclined! :)

[practicalmagicintuitions]

Hi sorry for the messy long rant, but i have some things to get off my chest that probably makes no sense sorry

First off i am SO conflicted about all of this bc one way I think everyone has their right to express their opinions and connect that to their personal experiences, but i think we should also remember that we have no idea how HC and NV met, i barely know anything about her, and while yes it does look like she gave up everything in the US and that she doesnt post anything on her instagram of her going to tourist places so it seems like she is really isolated and cooped up in that rental, but again we dont really know that 100%…? We have literally no idea how theyre doing rn and what theyre doing. Everything we talk about her is just the same old assumptions and theories that we’ll never know the truth off.

I dont excuse her problematic actions, her apology was awful and maybe she was in utter panic that the first thing she did was just send those messages because shes ignorant on these social issues. But on the other side shes also gotten A LOT of abuse and bullied by people online, making fake shit thats practically career ending. Henry tried protecting and standing up for her with the FO post, but he could have worded some of that better. But like im in the minority of that. Practically everyone thinks the FO post was good.

The hate has taken a big toll on Henry and im surprised people havent noticed this. Hes totally disconnected himself from his fans and seems pretty much everyone and i dont even blame him. I hope he talks to someone about this, but i doubt he doesnt.

Hes gotten these types of rumors about him for years, but theres never really any backup to prove these rumors. I dont rly know what to say on this matter, but its just oof that Henry is either known for being a creep, a bad actor or hyped to infinity of how great of a geeky sexy guy he is. Theres no inbetween

Im glad this acc is a safe place for people to share their opinions, but sometimes i think people get too biased and read too much into these messed up rumors that they cant differenciate between whats actually true and just fake speculation to stir drama all because he dated a 19 year old in 2015 as if that isnt a common thing with rich men…i dont like it and i still hate that he would go down that ruite but it is what it is :/

I cannot really argue with your first paragraph. We know nothing specific or very less. People basically should stop taking about him and them if we olny can discuss the proven facts.

The made up stuff especially the porn was awful but his FO was before that. He tried to protect themselves after the S16 backlash and the awful photoshop theories. (somehow those were simpler times because those were so obviously made up “discoveries”) After her blackface photo we got the FL pictures and her pictures from the tental but he went completely silent. Maybe except the Meat picture in his story.

I think people noticed this, they just don’t feel pity for him. I mean the hate is never acceptable but I cannot say voicing some sort of disappointment especially if it’s not on their SM is something people should stop. This situation is partly his fault. I am sorry if he is getting hate, no one should, but even before NV his started to change. His presence on IG. ( and maybe NV has been in the picture already we just didn’t know.) So it’s not 100% because of the bad reception of their relationship.

I cannot really add anything more, you put everything together so well and I cannot actually argue with anything you said. Thanks for this ask and sorry for it took me so long to answer.

[funkymbtifiction]

4

I know places like Enneagrammer are very strict about their definition of 4 as someone who deliberately self-differentiates and creates an elitist identity out of their suffering. But I'm not sure they're right anymore. Given that the Enneagram is all theorising without scientific proof, this is all up to subjective interpetations anyway. Enneagrammer can't claim to be definitively right unless they go out and do the hard work to empirically validate their claims with academic research across a large, representative sample using the scientific method, which online typology communities don't do lol. It's more 'Yah I have 5 friends like this and my aunt is like this and I browse Reddit and PersonalityCafe a lot and I like this theory, so I'M RIGHT!' So, since this is mostly up to subjective interpretation and personal experience, here's my take:

For 4s, I lean towards Enneagram writers like Richard Rohr's interpretation. The 4 is someone who wants to live deeply and authentically and seeks beauty and meaning as a driving goal. I don't think it's necessary that elitism/superiority to others needs to be a defining part of the 4. Maybe this is common in 4s, but I don't think it HAS to be a definitive trait as this definition is too narrow. We need to have a broad definition of the 4 because, in my experience, there are people whose core motivation is to live with depth and meaning, and whose core fear is to live a shallow life. A lot of people (particularly philosophical, thoughtful and creative people) fall into this core motivation and fear but without the 'I create an identity around my suffering and am elitist') aspect. So you need a type that accommodates that kind of orientation towards depth, meaning and beauty, and imo no other type really covers that. Your thoughts?

“I must be a mermaid, Rango. I have no fear of depths and a great fear of shallow living.” ― Anais Nin.

I think the truth about 4s is somewhere in-between all the descriptions of 4s. As regards Enneagrammer, there are a few things that have always bothered me about them. One is that they ignore the emotionalism of 4 and focus primarily on it being elitist. I notice they talk an awful lot about being separate, and painting oneself into a corner, and this is highly true in a lot of ways, BUT... 4 is also "I need to experience every emotion to its last drop," and they avoid talking about that. Maybe it's something they don't like to admit to themselves? (It also makes me a little suspicious when 4 is apparently such a rare fix and yet every mod over there still has it.)

I know 4 fixers who over-inflate everything and yes, pick back over conversations looking for a good reason to feel insulted. So Rohr is accurate in how he talks about how 4s aren't satisfied with an ORDINARY life, they are searching for a much, much BIGGER emotion. There are 4s like Anne Shirley, who display ALL the traits of a 4, from over-emotions and emotional magnifying (making everything SUCH a big deal) AND the crippled / rejected bird syndrome (no one wants me, I'm an ugly redhead!). The only core 4 I've ever known felt that way. Unwanted, prematurely rejected, surprised to be desired or included for her own sake, but also -- you milk every feeling for what it's worth. You don't "get over it," you sit in it and make a big deal out of it, because this is what I am FEELING. That's what you have to remember about 4. It's not just I love this, or I am deep, it's I will drink every last drop of my feelings. I will not move on from this intensity. (Bright Star, Shakespeare, Lucy Maud Montgomery, Emily Bronte, etc).

If you define 4 as merely someone who wants a deep life, you will have a lot of people mistyping as 4s because honestly, who wants to be thought of as shallow? The 4 = depth thing (and the woman who invented tritype uses that description, basically, for 4, which is how I mistyped as a 4 fixer for several years) has made a lot of people assume they are 4s, because they want life to have meaning, they want their movies and books and things to be deep, they love deep conversations, they need BEAUTY like they need air (this is me) but... they don't have the elitism that goes with 4. You must have both to be a 4 core, IMO.

I can spot a 4 anywhere; some of them actually get mad if you love what they love, because it's not theirs and it's not unique and it's not "special" anymore, it's not a "niche" interest that makes them special because they know about it and you don't. They love to dress "weird" and stand out, because as an image type, they are "displaying themselves" -- Enneagrammer has that spot on. The girl who works at a checker at the local store who is forever wearing 16 different necklaces, buttons, and earrings and when you ask her about them, she will smile a little and assure you that you don't know who any of these bands are (and she's delighted to be proven right) ... is a 4. ;)

In my opinion, NF orients itself toward "depth and beauty" anyway as a core desire, and NFP in particular does this because high Ne and Fi hates reality and wants a fantasy. It's idealistic, and not interested in the mundane. And you don't have to have 4 in your stack to feel that way. But you do need some of that "I love what I don't have, and I hate what I have" behavior to be 4, like Rohr said -- the woman who hated her husband until he left her, and then she loved him again, because 4 is always longing for something it doesn't have.

ETA: I wanted to add something here. It's very easy to latch onto superficial descriptions of 4 as an NF type especially and assume you are one, which is why I was so torn about 4 for a long time. Do I want everything in life to be meaningful and beautiful? Yes. Do I need everything to be deep? Yes. Do I search for deeper emotions than the one I am having and feel remorse if I am not feeling them? Yes. Do I have a condescending attitude about people loving things I deem as shallow? Yes. Do I have yo-yo relationships where familiarity breeds contempt? Yes. And yet, I am still not a 4. I am just an ENFP. Your personality type, the things your dominant function wants and needs, factors into these things as much as your Enneagram fixes. All of the above is me being a Ne and a Fi type. So if you exclude the negative, darker aspects of 4 and don't look at them (elitism, painting yourself into a corner, over-identifying with your broken image), you will mistype, in the same way you have to look at the core motivations and what that looks like of every other type. People really want to be 8s, also, but what about the crap being an 8 brings into your life? The ruined relationships? the aggression issues? being disliked and alienating people? You have to see it all, the good and the bad. The good of having a 2 fix - helpful, generous. The bad? - you owe me. Lots of people want beauty and depth, but lots of them also do not struggle with specifically 4 problems of self-sabotage.

[gemsofgreece]

Has any politician of power ever called out Merkel, about what it's like to see Germany -former Nazi Germany- with it's recent history in Greece & the world, backing Turkey -former Ottoman empire- with its recent history in Greece Cyprus, Armenia & the world? When Hitler rationalized the holocaust because "who after all remembers the Armenians" & Turkey still has to answer to the genocides it committed, & gets more & more entries written about it in Genocide Watch??

This answer can go wrong in so many ways and I am afraid it might. I sincerely tell you my intent was to be analytical and not judgemental. I am not sure I succeeded but if this answer makes you bombard me with hate anons, please note I will not answer.

What politician would dare say that... Certainly not a Greek. And the rest of EU also mostly obey Germany so nobody would say this, not even a French because that sure is a very bold thing to say.

I had a thought sort of similar to what you say though. I was thinking that it’s interesting how slow true change is, even if it is already completed in theory or nominally. For example, Germany has done - let’s say - everything to leave its past behind and redeem itself and yet, even though the violent days are fortunately over, Germany is now accused of a different form of expansionism via the EU and financial relations. So even though the method has changed dramatically, the intent of controlling Europe remains. And to connect this exactly to your ask, Germany and Turkey have been allies in both World Wars I think. Even though Germany denounces its past, it retains friendly bonds to countries that assisted it at evil times. This happens because everyone rushes to put all the blame to basically one sinister man alone but national memory and conscience, even unintentionally, can not change rapidly. Germany and Turkey are historical allies and this is engraved in memory no matter what. And also, we all know that South Europeans often report cases of discrimination in North Europe. This doesn’t apply only to Germany but it certainly includes Germany and I have two stories from very close friends that took place in Germany and helped me realise it. You can also see it through the Greek crisis which worked as a great excuse for the German media to unleash inexplicable hate and propaganda against the Greek nation. To be sure, we have shitty politicians but how did this give the right to random Germans to equate our identity to a joke and our ancestry to a lie? Well it didn’t. This hate propaganda had made quite a few young Greeks to feel ashamed of their ethnicity a few years ago and I knew quite a few that were glorifying North Europe beyond belief and reason. Thankfully this is dying but you see what kind of effect it could have?

Turkey supposedly tried to leave the Ottoman past behind in the previous century although this is entirely up to debate and right now it is more than clear that the country has Neo-Ottoman aspirations. Moreover, apart from some short periods of friendliness, Turkey has followed an aggressive and at times downright hostile and violent policy against neighbouring nations. So, as much as I would love to say I totally believe Turkish people who speak for peace and love, I have my doubts, forgive me. Yes, I do include some people because of a) personal experience and b) someone does elect all those politicians that follow the aggressive strategies right? Last time I checked, tensions did not start with Erdogan. It’s just that a bad idea simply needs one unstable man to become truly terrifying and destructive like Germany has already proven.

Germany and Turkey understand each other because they are both expansionists still. They will work together until time comes that one will get into the other’s lane. Right now Greece is a mere annoyance to Germany which is why Germany doesn’t know what to do and how much patience to show. But someday their interests are bound to collide.

To any readers, do not get this answer the wrong way - this is not a hate post against German and Turkish people or their culture. It is though my genuine understanding of the strategies these countries follow. Don’t come to me with a “not all Germans, not all Turks” because I already know that. I don’t know if I can make myself clear enough with the term “national conscience”. What I mean is that I truly believe Germans feel totally ashamed of Hitler but that doesn’t mean Germany as a country isn’t controlling over others or that there isn’t a thing like VERY white supremacy still infesting the country. I am sure that every Turkish family wants to live in peace and tranquility but that does not change the fact that the massive collapse of the Ottoman Empire has been a shock to the national memory that Turkey can’t get over yet.

This applies to every nation. Greece is not an exception. Just so we’re fair, that damn national memory is the reason Greece (and probably the Balkans too) has so much trouble progressing. Nominally, Greeks are proud and fiercely protective of their heritage which they wish to imitate and match. For the time being, they can not do it. This is because, on the exact flip side from Turkey, Greece hasn’t managed to get rid of the syndrome of “raya” yet meaning Greece hasn’t got over the centuries long slavery (and imagine if we also add the Romans!) and the way people worked and competed against each other to ensure their own survival only, with little interest in the greater good or how they frequently relied on foreigners and oppressors to decide for their sake.

In short my answer is that change, even with the best intentions, is very very slow. Things do not change because you announce they did.

And my Greek answer is:

Όλα τριγύρω αλλάζουνε και όλα τα ίδια μένουν - Μανώλης Ρασούλης