#like it is actually a very critical development in those years specifically which is why something like. for examplr

[cleromancy]

actually bc i was posting about this re jason the other day as well. i DO think its so funny when people are like. "this character wouldnt do xyz and to prove it here are some panels from when they were 13." like buddy idk how to tell you this but. even characters that dont have a drastic face-heel turn change like jason did tend to not stay static if theyre allowed to age

[apas-95]

I’m an anarchocommunist that thinks a lot of other anarchists are stupid. For example, I don’t think that most people will just make insulin or do garbage collection/processing out of the kindness of their heart, and I also don’t think if it was genuinely done out of the kindness of their hearts that it’d work great. My idea is that for the “getting people to do the shitty jobs” question, the people that do those jobs should be compensated better in some way. Maybe a larger/nicer house, I’m not sure on the details. But other anarchists will say “all labor is equal”, and while I’d like to agree in the “work is hard” sense, I think things for the obvious common good, like teacher or garbage man or doctor deserve some sort of reward over other jobs. And for the efficiency of the labor, I think *specifically for labor* there needs to be some sort of organization, and we can use what’s worked before. We don’t need to have bathtub insulin if there’s a factory right there, and if there’s no connection from the insulin factory to doctors/pharmacists and truck drivers then it won’t work either. Really, my main problem with Marxism/Leninism or Stalinism or Maoism or any combination of those is that there are specific people with far too much power over others. I’m ok with light power in the way of “man you gotta drive the firetruck to the burning building even though you hate the dude that lives there”, but I’m not ok with the idea of a supreme leader or representatives in a political sense due to as I’ve amounts of power obviously corrupting people.

Really I’m sending this to you to get your criticism of my ideas- I think you’re pretty smart, and even if I disagree with you on some issues, I think I agree with you on others. I also want to say that not all anarchists are… like that.

So, years ago, before I started reading any Marxist theory, this is about where I was at politically. If you think about any of the practicalities, you come up to points where, very clearly, the maxim of 'no authority at all' conflicts with being able to do anything. If you're seriously considering how society could be better organised, if this is something you actually intend on bringing about, then you make some amount of concession to reality - as you did with the firetruck example!

Now, myself, I went on like this for a good while, coming up with methods of truly democratic organisation that wouldn't be susceptible to the types of totalitarianism I'd heard about, ending up very similar to your position. I was interested, however, in how these 'failed experiments' that I'd learned devolved into bureaucracy started out, and I started reading up on the history, and realised, with some discontent, that what I'd developed, once I'd made all the concessions for reality that would be necessary if this system were to be the actual one real human beings lives depended on, was essentially identical to the Soviet system.

From there, I read up on Marxist theory, still basically wary that this had all, at some point, been taken over by an evil dictator, but able to see that the earliest stages, at least, had been exactly what I was imagining, but put into practice. Reading the theory, reading how their experience experimenting with different forms of organisation, and the failures of some types, had led them to discover what did and didn't work, and adjust accordingly, made me suddenly appreciate why certain things were done certain ways. The harsh experiences of civil war had revealed certain dynamics and mechanics in the way society and production worked, which translates into political theories that bore out results I wouldn't have expected (and neither had the communists who had discovered them through practice!).

Eventually, with some chagrin and a significant deal of excitement, I realised that much of what I'd passively absorbed about socialism, many of the common-sense maxims that I'd been taught by capitalist society about the nature of power and so on, were very much artifacts of a decades-long war against these communists and the system they'd built, carried out by exactly the corporations and empires I had thought myself opposed to.

I won't critique any individual point of yours, but I will enjoin you to try out some Marxist theory - Dialectical and Historical Materialism, or Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, or Principles of Communism, or even the Communist Manifesto, and to read between the lines of whatever capitalist source you read on socialism, to notice every [citation needed] and wonder what actually happened such that someone felt the need to make something up.

[blueskittlesart]

I've heard that while most people really really love BotW and TotK, some people hate those two for going open-world, and some people hate TotK specifically for something about the story. As the resident Zelda expert I know of, what do you think of those takes?

"something about the story" is a bit too vague for me to answer--if you look at my totk liveblog tag from back when the game was newly released or my general zelda analysis tag you may be able to find some of my in-depth thoughts about the story of totk, but in general i liked it.

the open world thing though is something i can and will talk about for hours. (I am obsessed with loz and game design and this is an essay now <3) breath of the wild is a game that was so well-received that a lot of the criticism from older fans who were expecting something closer to the classic zelda formula was just kind of immediately drowned out and ignored, and while i don't think it's a valid criticism to suggest that botw strayed too far from its origins in going open-world, i am more than willing to look into those criticisms, why they exist, and why i think going open-world was ultimately the best decision botw devs could have made. (totk is a slightly different story, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.)

Loz is a franchise with a ton of history and a ton of really, REALLY dedicated fans. it's probably second only to mario in terms of recognizability and impact in nintendo's catalog. To us younger fans, the older games can sometimes seem, like, prehistoric when compared to what we're used to nowadays, but it's important to remember just how YOUNG the gaming industry is and how rapidly it's changed and grown. the first zelda game was released in 1986, which was 31 years before botw came out in 2017. What this means for nintendo and its developers is that they have to walk a very fine line between catering to older fans in their 30s and 40s now who would have been in nintendo's prime demographic when the first few games in the franchise were coming out AND making a game that's engaging to their MODERN target demographic and that age group's expectations for what a gaming experience should look like.

LOZ is in kind of a tough spot when it comes to modernizing, because a lot of its core gameplay elements are very much staples of early RPGs, and a lot of those gameplay elements have been phased out of modern RPGs for one reason or another. gathering collectibles, fighting one's way through multilevel, mapless dungeons, and especially classic zelda's relative lack of guidance through the story are all things that date games and which modern audiences tend to get frustrated with. for the last few releases before botw, the devs had kind of been playing with this -- skyward sword in particular is what i consider their big experiment and what (i think) became the driving force behind a lot of what happened with botw. Skyward sword attempted to solve the issues I listed by, basically, making the map small and the story much, much more blatantly linear. Skyward sword feels much more like other modern rpgs to me than most zelda games in terms of its playstyle, because the game is constantly pushing you to do specific things. this is a common storytelling style in modern RPGs--obviously, the player usually needs to take specific actions in order to progress the story, and so when there's downtime between story sections the supporting characters push the player towards the next goal. but this actually isn't what loz games usually do. in the standard loz formula, you as the player are generally directly given at most 4 objectives. these objectives will (roughly) be as follows: 1. go through some dungeons and defeat their bosses, 2. claim the master sword, 3. go through another set of dungeons and defeat their bosses, 4. defeat the final boss of the game. (not necessarily in that order, although that order is the standard formula.) the ONLY time the player will be expressly pushed by supporting characters towards a certain action (excluding guide characters) is when the game is first presenting them with those objectives. in-between dungeons and other gameplay segments, there's no sense of urgency, no one pushing you onto the next task. this method of storytelling encourages players to take their time and explore the world they're in, which in turn helps them find the collectibles and puzzles traditionally hidden around the map that will make it easier for them to continue on. Skyward sword, as previously mentioned, experimented with breaking this formula a bit--its overworld was small and unlocked sequentially, so you couldn't explore it fully without progressing the narrative, and it gave players a "home base" to return to in skyloft which housed many of the puzzles and collectibles rather than scattering them throughout the overworld. This method worked... to an extent, but it also meant that skyward sword felt drastically different in its storytelling and how its narrative was presented to the player than its predecessors. this isn't necessarily a BAD thing, but i am of the opinion that one of zelda's strongest elements has always been the level of immersion and relatability its stories have, and the constant push to continue the narrative has the potential to pull players out of your story a bit, making skyward sword slightly less engaging to the viewer than other games in the franchise. (to address the elephant in the room, there were also obviously some other major issues with the design of sksw that messed with player immersion, but imo even if the control scheme had been perfect on the first try, the hyperlinear method would STILL have been less engaging to a player than the standard exploration-based zeldas.)

So when people say that botw was the first open-world zelda, I'm not actually sure how true I personally believe that is. I think a lot of the initial hype surrounding botw's open map were tainted by what came before it--compared to the truly linear, intensely restricted map of skyward sword, botw's map feels INSANE. but strictly speaking, botw actually sticks pretty closely to the standard zelda gameplay experience, at least as far as the overworld map is concerned. from the beginning, one of the draws of loz is that there's a large, populated map that you as the player can explore (relatively) freely. it was UNUSUAL for the player to not have access to almost the entire map either immediately or very quickly after beginning a new zelda game. (the size and population of these maps was restricted by software and storage capabilities in earlier games, but pretty muhc every zelda game has what would have been considered a large & well populated map at the time of its release.) what truly made botw different was two things; the first being the sheer SIZE of the map and the second being the lack of dungeons and collectibles in a traditional sense. Everything that needs to be said about the size of the map already has been said: it's huge and it's crazy and it's executed PERFECTLY and it's never been done before and every game since has been trying to replicate it. nothing much else to say there. but I do want to talk about the percieved difference in gameplay as it relates to the open-world collectibles and dungeons, because, again, i don't think it's actually as big of a difference as people seem to think it is.

Once again, let's look at the classic formula. I'm going to start with the collectibles and lead into the dungeons. The main classic collectible that's a staple of every zelda game pre-botw is the heart piece. This is a quarter of a heart that will usually be sitting out somewhere in the open world or in a dungeon, and will require the player to either solve a puzzle or perform a specific action to get. botw is the first game to not include heart pieces... TECHNICALLY. but in practice, they're still there, just renamed. they're spirit orbs now, and rather than being hidden in puzzles within the overworld (with no explanation as to how or why they ended up there, mind you) they're hidden within shrines, and they're given a clear purpose for existing throughout hyrule and for requiring puzzle-solving skills to access. Functionally, these two items are exactly the same--it's an object that gives you an extra heart container once you collect four of them. no major difference beyond a reskin and renaming to make the object make sense within the greater world instead of just having a little ❤️ floating randomly in the middle of their otherwise hyperrealistic scenery. the heart piece vs spirit orb i think is a good microcosm of the "it's too different" criticisms of botw as a whole--is it ACTUALLY that different, or is it just repackaged in a way that doesn't make it immediately obvious what you're looking at anymore? I think it's worth noting that botw gives a narrative reason for that visual/linguistic disconnect from other games, too--it's set at minimum TEN THOUSAND YEARS after any other given game. while we don't have any concrete information about how much time passes between new-incarnation games, it's safe to assume that botw is significantly further removed from other incarnations of hyrule/link/zelda/etc than any other game on the timeline. It's not at all inconceivable within the context of the game that heart pieces may have changed form or come to be known by a different name. most of the changes between botw and other games can be reasoned away this way, because most of them have SOME obvious origins in a previous game mechanic, it's just been updated for botw's specific setting and narrative.

The dungeons ARE an actual departure from the classic formula, i will grant you. the usual way a zelda dungeon works is that link enters the dungeon, solves a few puzzles, fights a mini boss at about the halfway point, and after defeating the mini boss he gets a dungeon item which makes the second half of the dungeon accessible. He then uses that item in the dungeon's final boss fight, which is specifically engineered with that item in mind as the catalyst to win it. Botw's dungeons are the divine beasts. we've removed the presence of mini-bosses entirely, because the 'dungeon items' aren't something link needs to get within the dungeon itself--he alredy has them. they're the sheikah slate runes: magnesis, cryonis, stasis, and remote bombs. Each of the divine beast blight battles is actually built around using one of these runes to win it--cryonis to break waterblight's ice projectiles, magnesis to strike down thunderblight with its own lightning rods, remote bombs to take out fireblight's shield. (i ASSUME there's some way to use stasis effectively against windblight, mostly because it's obvious to me that that's how all the other fights were designed, but in practice it's the best strategy for that fight is to just slow down time via aerial archery, so i've never tried to win that way lol.) So even though we've removed traditional dungeon items and mini-boss fights, the bones of the franchise remain unchanged underneath. this is what makes botw such an ingenious move for this franchise imo; the fact that it manages to update itself into such a beautiful, engaging, MODERN game while still retaining the underlying structure that defines its franchise and the games that came before it. botw is an effective modern installment to this 30-year-old franchise because it takes what made the old games great and updates it in a way that still stays true to the core of the franchise.

I did mention totk in my opening paragraph and you mention it in your ask so i have to come back to it somehow. Do i think that totk did the gigantic-open-world thing as well as botw did? no. But i also don't really think there was any other direction to go with that game specifically. botw literally changed the landscape of game development when it was released. I KNOW you all remember how for a good year or two after botw's release, EVERY SINGLE GAME that came out HAD to have a massive open-world map, regardless of whether or not that actually made sense for that game. (pokemon is still suffering from the effects of that botw-driven open world craze to this day. rip scarlet/violet your gameplay was SUCH dogshit) I'm not sure to what degree nintendo and the botw devs anticipated that success, (I remember the open world and the versatility in terms of problem-solving being the two main advertising angles pre-release, but it's been 7 years. oh jesus christ it's been SEVEN YEARS. anyways) but in any case, there's basically NO WAY that they anticipated their specific gameplay style taking off to that degree. That's not something you can predict. When creating totk, they were once again walking that line between old and new, but because they were only 3ish years out from botw when totk went into development, they were REALLY under pressure to stay true to what it was that had made botw such an insane success. I think that's probably what led to the expanded map in the sky and depths as well as the fuse/build mechanics--they basically took their two big draws from botw, big map and versatility, and said ok BIGGER MAP and MORE VERSATILITY. Was this effective? yeah. do i think they maybe could have made a more engaging and well-rounded game if they'd been willing to diverge a little more from botw? also yeah. I won't say that I wanted totk to be skyward sword-style linear, because literally no one wanted that, but I do think that because of the insane wave of success that botw's huge open world brought in the developers were under pressure to stay very true to botw in their designing the gameplay of totk, and I think that both the gameplay and story might have been a bit more engaging if they had been allowed to experiment a little more in their delivery of the material.

[lune-dreams]

Murder Drones Episode 8 and its Issues

It's been a hot sec since I've last posted, but I'm back!! Today's post actually concerns episode 8 and people's issues with it and I'll be doing my best to address every claim against it that has been made with negative connotations! #1 The runtime is terribly short, glitch should've made it longer

First of all, I feel like the murder drones community has a habit of forgetting that glitch is an indie animation studio and we can't expect them to give us amazing long content! On top of that, the writing was finished by Liam awhile ago so this was all already pre-planned and it was clear that murder drones had a very specific ending in mind! Finally the animation quality, was just amazing in this episode and I can't imagine the amount of work it must've taken them to animate such a detailed episode and it's 20 minutes on top of all of that, and not many indie animations have the ability to do all that within a year!! #2 The story didn't give us proper closure

I know that in the story there were a lot of loose ends that weren't tied up, however we did still get an ending. Liam is known for often dropping projects early on and we got very lucky that we managed to get some form of an ending!

See with this story the whole point of it was that they were trying to defeat Cyn and they pretty much accomplished that which essentially means the story comes to a close since there's no reason to drag on what is done!

#3 V coming back was bad

Okay I can see why you might say that, considering all her development lead up to her death which was a good wrap for her story, however keep in mind we finally got some form of closure between N and V! The hallway scene when V apologizes to N, I think that was definitely one of her biggest points of development and I think we owe Liam for that amazing writing, not only did he manage to give her a purpose in the new episode, but he was also able to tie up some loose ends with her issues and give her the final development that she really needed!

#4 Uzi was so cringey during this ep and that just sucks

Okay firstly, I understand that some people might view being cringy as weird and that's okay, but I don't see an issue with it whatsoever, people can be as cringey as they want if it makes them happy and doesn't hurt anyone! Now addressing Uzi's cringeyness, it's quite literally in character for her! If you've been watching the series since the beginning, her whole character has had this whole cringe thing going on and I'm not sure why you would hate on a character for just being themselves, she's just being her normal self when she calls herself a "damaged oc"!

Conclusion: I know that there's a lot of reasons why some people might've not enjoyed episode 8 of murder drones and that's completely okay, these are just my personal thoughts on all this and it's mainly to address all the hate against glitch for the episode, which btw they do not deserve! Please do not send hate to glitch, criticisms are okay, but hate is not. Anyways I hope that this post reaches those who have been looking for it or need it! Thank you for reading!

[shiny-jr]

Hi Shiny! I’m not new to your blog but I have been reading up on the works I’ve missed since I haven’t been the most active on tumblr for like, a solid year, (possibly more?) and I forgot just how amazing your writing is; you are definitely one of my favorite writers, and I greatly enjoy every one of your works.

That’s why- as a reader who really wants to get into writing- I would love to hear what stands to be your biggest inspirations, and especially what media (whether it books, songs, films, etc.) has influenced your writing. I’ve been looking to develop my writing style by taking in the works of others, so any recommendations are appreciated!

Welcome back, anon! Let me see what I can think of off the top of my head.

As I sit here, the first thing I thought of is vocabulary. I think having a good VOCABULARY is key to making a good story, especially when it comes to the flow. I grew up reading a lot, and recently, I began reading more again just books and articles. Through that process, it's easy to learn words, see a new one, and look it up. You might remember said words and use them later.

I've actually been told that I speak kinda eloquently at certain times, like in a professional-business like way, which I totally don't mean to. But yeah, I digress, vocabulary is very important. I'll give you an example.

I started writing this chapter for a new series, and it was late at night, and my heart wasn't really in it. When I reviewed it, I immediately hated it. Why? Because of the vocabulary. It was all simple words, repetitive, and without any variety. I'm not saying your vocabulary has to be great or anything, but when I write, I always have a site called wordhippo open. Just for when I can't remember a specific word or I'm looking for a synonym to change things up and prevent that annoying repetitiveness.

CHARACTERIZATION is also a huge deal. Writing for characters that are not yours is not easy. It's difficult. One thing I do is if I'm not sure about a character's decisions, actions, dialogue, is I look for reference points from what they're from. Voicelines, art, anything helps. If its lacking, I try to think of another character they're similar to and ask myself what would this other character do? Would it be the same as the first character? That usually helps.

Of course, this includes character development and conflicts and relationships and such. I think some of the best characters I've ever seen in media, are from the animated Avatar: The Last Airbender. That series has such solid personalities, variety within the cast, good interesting conflicts, and one of the best character development arcs in modern day animated media.

As for songs, I usually just listen to instrumental songs when writing. I found that lyrics tended to distract me, which is why I try to avoid it when writing. No series or novels come to mind immediately, although I do write personal reviews for those I read. Most of which is either praise or criticizing (mostly criticizing) the writing style of the author, the characters, or the plot. I'm glad to share some of those, but I've written a good number of them and they're lengthy, just me yapping.

Anyways, that's a lot. I'm not sure if I answered your question as you wanted? I hope I did. Let me know if there's anything else.

[wisehearts]

I don't know if this is spicy inherently, but there def could be some spicy elements depending on the answer.

The thin line between already being close friends with someone and officially dating them is an interesting question when it comes to byler. other than, like, making out and doing more lol, what do you think the main subtle differences will be between established byler and current byler? (spicy or otherwise)

Because they already have a pretty romantically charged friendship

I think you were maybe talking about the show, but I went overboard again, I'm sorry 🙏

it's a little tricky in ways isn't it, because in s4 they really were behaving like couples do, just standing closer or turning to each other in group situations.

I think the biggest differences are really going to be about intention. and behaving unapologetically both with each other and around others! they won't feel like their actions are "too much" for a friendship because it becomes unrestricted.

their friendship is romantically charged, which means there's a LOT of tension, and shifting into a relationship means there'll now be a lot more relaxed energy about them. They settle more into who they really are and can be, they'll appear a lot brighter both bc of their romantic relationship and from the acceptance of their sexualities. I think we'll start to see that right after the confession with the relief that comes from it 🥺

It's nothing we don't already know will happen, but I agree there's a very thin line in differences to happen with byler specifically. I honestly almost think it's just about putting a new label on what they already are 😂

When you have a connection that close, you can naturally get flirtatious too which is what happened in s4, and why I say the difference is about the intention and purposeful behaviour!

I guess actual examples would be in their touches? Right now we have them physically close but still not crossing the line between them, whereas in a romantic relationship they'd be touching in some way during deeper discussions, or at least offering it. An example being mike placing his hand on top of will's, or on his shoulder vs him holding will's hand and rubbing his thumb across it soothingly (something that can be platonic or familial too, but between two boys in this context, it's romantic)

in terms of their life there's the future planning: they may have little things about each other that they find annoying or don't agree on, or discover they will, but the difference is that with friends you can mostly just accept it because you're (usually) not living with them, or can criticize lightheartedly. The difference for mike and will is communicating they don't like something a certain way and finding middle ground because they plan to spend many years together.

you've got primacy and how maybe mike and will may have tried to divide attention between all the party, or sit next to them for movies etc, but once in a relationship they'll have reason to pick each other in those moments without feeling bad.

But that's also why I find it fun that byler are together in a friend group, because I like thinking about that development and how they will have moments dustin and lucas express they want time with them individually or together, but obviously byler would make it work easily and it's no problem. but lucas and dustin will adapt to the fact byler are officially each other's person now and it's not platonic "favoritism"

the spicy side again is intention! there are no accidental glances, or innapropriate touches, no guilt for enjoying the view, or perceiving things as suggestive and getting turned on. mike can stare at will's ass and then actually tell him how much he loves it

They're going to have sides of their everyday life reflect in there too. will feels comfortable to ramble as long as he wants without judgement? will's going to become comfortable expressing his pleasure and show another version of himself by being a little slutty in bed or whatever the vibe

As for what we could get on the show? I think a lot of the differences will actually come through in eye contact and held gazes. Definitely more touches and going back to that s2 physical closeness (ex. mike's arm around will's shoulder). and scenes where their priority is officially each other, even a little dramatically to get that point across. OH and a hug, but this time nuzzling into each other's necks and their hands having movement wherever they touch

I'd love any other examples others can think of, because I really had to wrack my brain, they're already behaving like such a couple 😭 but sometimes it's hard to define anyway because some friends have sex and some couples aren't super physical!

[that-ari-blogger]

Deadly Simplicity (Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief)

The Percy Jackson series is one of those ubiquitous franchises that almost everyone has at least heard of. The books single handedly sparked a growing interest in mythology and history, with a focus on Ancient Greece. But there is more to them than that, suffice to say, you don’t get to be the first google search result for “Uncle Rick” for nothing.

I have never been one for rewatching or rereading stories I like. I have a ton of books on my shelf that I read once and then never came back to, but having this blog inspired me to start re-experiencing things from a critical lens.

I decided to reread the Percy Jackson books and genuinely wasn’t planning on posting about them until a thought struck me. Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief is simple by design, and relatable on a level I was not expecting it to be.

Let me explain.

SPOILERS AHEAD: (Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief)

First up, a confession.

I got into the franchise in the weirdest way possible. The movie that we all try to forget came out when I was too young to understand why it was so awful, and my childish brain got hyped on the cool magic stuff. So, I read the first book, and then the Heroes of Olympus series that began releasing in the same year and I began to understand exactly how wrong I was.

This story would be unusual, if I hadn’t also done the exact same thing with Avatar: The Last Airbender. I’m sorry, I promise I didn’t do it on purpose. At least that one was a few years later, and my first experience of the true series was genuinely Bitter Work, take a guess at how quickly I worked out the difference in quality.

Anyway, Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief feels like a bedtime story, and that’s pretty much what it was. But I would propose that the story also functions as a legend, or a folk tale.

I want to prefix this by saying that I am not a semanticist. The word “legend” has a specific meaning, and my basic knowledge leads me to believe that it fits, but if someone with more understanding argues contrary, they are the authority.

However, I’m not arguing pure definition, I’m arguing more on vibes, which are conveniently more difficult to pin down, and leave me with some wriggle room.

In any case, Percy Jackson is a legend because of how it develops. It’s a simple story told with a purpose, that evolved over time. Like the legends of King Arthur.

The series overall is famous for making writing about heavy subject matter with respect look effortless, but looking at the first in the series, its noticeable how many of the themes that would become central in the later books are absent entirely.

This is a story of empowerment about ADHD and dyslexia, that abruptly gains some family thematic at the very end. It’s got a cool backdrop with magic and a sense of humour, and that’s it. This isn’t trying to be anything more.

Which, for the record, works uncomfortably well. I am not dyslexic, so I can’t speak for that experience, but I was recently diagnosed with ADHD, and with that hindsight, Perseus Jackson came to my house, knocked down my door, and said “I see you.”

In every behaviour, from the inability to focus except in moments when he can’t do anything else, to the struggle with school, to the unrivalled inability to read a room, I have seen in myself a thousand times. But the key here is that these are reframed as empowering with one majour exception that is actually quite funny.

Percy’s ADHD becomes an explicit divine gift that will help save his life time and time again, and his Dyslexia becomes a secret language that only a select few have access to. It doesn’t even ignore the issues of living with the two, it just adds on a few cool magical powers to make them feel special. When you are a kid, or even as an adult, sometimes you need the affirmation.

But I mentioned an exception, and that is the main conflict of the story. The book doesn’t have a main antagonist, and Ares is tagged on at the end as a boss battle. But there is an opponent, the Summer Solstice itself.

Filling the role of villain in a story about a character with ADHD, is the threat of a deadline. And from that perspective, the story about characters getting sidetracked by everything under the sun, before getting their arses into gear the night before becomes half funny, but also empowering. It says, “you can do this, and you will do it your way.”

When I watched the Disney + series, I was originally offput but unable to put my finger on why. But I think it’s the tone. The series feels like it was written from the perspective of an adult looking at the adventure and going “he’s twelve, he’s gonna get killed”, while the first book oscillates between that and “I’m twelve, I’m gonna live forever”.

Case and point, book Percy gets annoyed at his father about twice, and immediately forgives him, while series Percy is well aware of the situation, and reacts to it with that knowledge in mind.

Watch this space for my coverage of Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters for more details on this, because that gets really interesting.

My single biggest bugbear with modern internet discourse is the drawing of similarities between stories as if its some great revelation. Like, congratulations, you’ve discovered tropes, what’s your point?

In this context, the similarities being drawn are between Percy Jackson, Star Wars, and The Galbraith books (Harold Pots and the Spooky Triangle, Harold Pots and the Hole with a Snek in it. You know which books I’m talking about).

I’m not going to argue that there aren’t similarities, but I challenge you to write a story that is made up of entirely new ideas that nobody has ever thought about before.

All stories, for example, feature a young hero and a coming-of-age story. All have a tragic backstory and a wacky mentour. All have an introductory adventure to tie in a hint of worldbuilding, then lead into the greater story for the second act. All feel like they were written to be standalone stories with hints at a future added as an afterthought.

However, the differences between the three are so much more significant. Star Wars is trying to fit into the Hero’s Journey, the definitive writing stereotype, and it did so well at it that anyone trying to compare to the trope now compares with Star Wars.

Harrold Pots and the Life Rock of Live Giving Rockiness is trying to be a Bildungsroman, which is separate from the Hero’s Journey, but does have a fair few similarities. Notably the travel into a symbolic new world of adventure, and the return home as a changed person. But the theming is different, Harrold Pots, for all its many flaws, is a story with a solid theme. With friends, you can accomplish anything.

It also, as a side note, heavily implies the idea that forcing someone to be something they are not (I.e., the protagonist’s relatives trying to convince him that he is not a wizard) is impossible, and I chose to read that as trans affirming because I know Galbraith definitely didn’t mean it that way and I am petty.

To further back up this point, some people in the story aren’t born as witches or wizards (AMAB, assigned muggle at birth), but are accepted regardless. This reading is definitely based on the flimsiest of reasonings possible, but it’s a testament to what can happen when you see patterns in stories that aren’t there or aren’t as significant as the author meant.

Back to Percy Jackson, it baffles me that this gets lumped in with the two aforementioned franchises, because it’s truly awful at sticking to a specific structure. It’s a hero’s journey at parts, and a Bildungsroman by technicality, but it’s its own thing.

Percy learns about the stolen lightning, the title of the story, just before halfway through the book, and then he departs on his quest. I’m genuinely not sure to see the story as five act, four act, or even two act, and I don’t think it matters. That’s part of what I meant about this feeling like a legend, because it has the same meandering structure, it’s a story meant to be told, not marked on a scale.

Which leads me to my point about empowering. This book, by its very structure, backs up the simple theming of the story. You can do it, and you will do it your way.

Final Thoughts

There are so many little details in this book that I could talk about, so I’m going to focus in on two more before I leave.

Dionysus is my boy in the mythology, but in his introduction in this book, he manages to have more teeth than any other god in the series. Sure, Zeus is throwing storms around and being generally big (in a physical sense), but Dionysus comes across as powerful because he shows Percy just what he is capable of. Show don’t tell is a hell of a thing, and the choice to make the threat of “I can drive you insane with barely a thought” by literally getting in Percy’s brain and giving him examples of what Dionysus can do from the perspective of those he’s cursed shows a level of power and raw intimidation factor that nothing in the rest of the series will get close to.

There is one other similarity between this book and Harold Pots and the Oh-My-G-d-Its-Robert-Pattinson, and that is the one thing I dislike about the story. In this book, and only in this book, Riordan has a habit of indicating morality with appearance. Every evil person is ugly, every good person is beautiful. Once you notice it, you can’t unsee it.

But interestingly, this stops in the final few chapters with Luke’s betrayal, which is the series’ main turning point. Well, one of two. And this only works because the book has conditioned you to expect the handsome Luke to be benevolent, so the twist hits hard. It works, but I’m glad Riordan didn’t continue with the trope.

Next time, I will be looking at Percy Jackson and the Sea of Monsters and exploring just how much this book is the opposite of the one I just covered. So, stick around if that interests you.

[pico-digital-studios]

My thoughts about JD 2018

Yes, I'm aware that I'm running a risk of being hounded by fans who think JD 2018 is borderline irredeemable as a game, but... I honestly can't help but feel bad for the reception it ultimately got. Sure, the game wasn't at all the best, but there's still some good points I can see out of it from the gameplay footage I've seen, alongside me playing some of that game's songs on Just Dance+.

For starters, I wouldn't call every choreography the worst in that game. I genuinely had fun dancing along to songs like "In the Hall of the Pixel King", "Another One Bites the Dust" and "Sugar Dance", and some of the other choreographies on the game look like they'd be fun for me to perform. However, I wouldn't call all of them very good, either. Simply put, you're not gonna be catching me dancing to "Make It Jingle", no way. "Beep Beep I'm A Sheep", maybe, but I'll at least keep my hands off my bedroom floor for that one.

Now, as for the song selection itself. I was pretty numb to some of the big pop ones on there for a bit, but watching gameplay footage and trying the routines on Just Dance+ helped me have some renewed appreciation for what we had back then. Though I'm not as big a fan of some of the songs on that song list, there are still a good majority on there I've enjoyed getting to listen to, especially with the choreography visuals.

Onto the menu presentation. Yes, it was pretty simplistic, but it definitely had substance to it, especially with how the colours in the Just Dance mode's menu changed depending on what song you had selected. And boy, those holiday themes looked like a joy to experience on the menu! The basic good stuff of Easter, Halloween and Christmas without disrupting the core essence of that menu. Makes me wish the other games after then had such a feature to use.

As for the extra modes themselves. I can pretty much agree with a lot of the criticism directed towards Kids Mode, and if I was manning that, I'd take an approach that Just Dance Kids 2014 did, incorporating nice songs for the little ones alongside some good pop songs for the older kids. Even though Dance Lab isn't as good as Just Dance Machine, what with its routines bundled into preset groups of 5, I'll be alright getting started with that before taking on its Shake Lab mode.

But the idea that truly stood out to me, and why I'm aiming to get the game for my Switch as an extra side-thing in case I can't access the Just Dance service? The Double Rumble songs, which allow use of both Joy-Cons in a set of five different original songs. Ubisoft could've gone well with the Switch versions by incorporating that into some of their actual song lists, but sadly, it got dropped the following year and hasn't been seen again since.

Honestly, as much as I like the newer menu layouts introduced in 2019 onwards, what with you being able to preview songs before dancing to them, I miss remembering the feeling of trying to dive right in and see if the choreographics picked my fancy or not, like I did with the Wii versions of 2014 to 2016. And I'm not too big a fan of the bland white background seen in 2019 to 2022. Feels devoid of any substance compared to what 2018 had going for it.

If I decided to help develop a Just Dance offline game in the future, I'd definitely take cues from 2018 for the interface design choices, and I'd include the option of having either thumbnails or song previews available for when a song is selected, and this can be toggled whenever. Sets of songs (like those from past games) would have the category system that 2016 to 2018 had utilised so that it's easy to flip through them, alongside having the Search function available at all times if you're trying to find a specific song from the selection.

Though 2018 was more limited in other modes compared to the previous year, at least its Switch port can be considered playable (and at least 2018 Switch didn't ditch two popular songs like 2017 did for its port, or sent said versions to Unlimited for no reason). I'm honestly sour about 2019 outright ditching all the alternate modes aside from the Kids Mode, much to people's distaste to it barely changing its acts (and including some kid-unfriendly songs through Unlimited (especially looking at you, "Who Let The Dogs Out?" and "Copacabana")).

So, as my final verdict, I can see 2018 as a fun game for me to play on occasion, though I do admit that it needs some improvements (like a fixed song list and such) to better stand out. The visuals are pretty up to snuff, and should Ubisoft revisit that old menu style again, it'd definitely be a plus with the odd tweak. That, and not locking most of the songs behind playing a couple again.

[utilitycaster]

Just wondering.... why is the Imodna codependency such an issue meanwhile no one had a problem with the codependency between Widobrave?

Hi anon, this is a great question!

I've actually covered this - I don't think their situations are as comparable as many people think! Here's the post about that in case you haven't seen it. And, as the anon in that post points out, Widobrave did get a lot of pushback and hate, actually. It sounds like you might be very new to the fandom, so I want to give some gentle advice: it's worth being careful about assuming a certain form of discourse did not occur. Often, it has. I understand it's difficult to prove a negative (ie, that Widobrave did not receive hate) and it's even more difficult to do so via the Tumblr search, but Caleb and Veth's relationship was frequently criticized, diminished, and treated as not just insistently platonic, but also strictly familial. But back to the original question: I think that Caleb and Veth far more quickly built other relationships and were able to express anger with each other - Veth's outburst towards Caleb in episode 48 is a standout moment that resulted in a greater understanding, and I think I'd feel much more positively towards Imogen and Laudna as a potential romance had Laudna been able to make the same accusation, that Imogen's people did this. Was it a fair accusation from Veth? No! But it eventually cleared the air, whereas Imogen and Laudna keep sweeping everything under the rug, ignoring that the rug is now so lumpy they can barely walk without failing.

Another reason is simple numbers and recency. Widobrave, as of this post, has about 280 fics on ao3. Imodna has 1,085. This increased popularity may indeed lead to increased scrutiny. We're also, as the previous paragraph hints, talking about a ship that is in an ongoing campaign, so you're going to see far more posts talking about it than a ship from a past campaign, simply because it's still unfolding and is the subject of current discussion! Recency bias is a very real thing, and it can be difficult to adjust for, but when making this sort of comparison, it is vital to do so.

I would also be remiss if I did not address the elephant in the room, which is the nature of the fans who ship them. I'm sure this question is intended in earnest good faith, but I'm afraid I've gotten a pretty significant amount of harassment specifically from people who ship Imogen and Laudna together and don't like anyone who points out the flaws in their relationship. I've never received the same from people who shipped Caleb and Veth, despite never really shipping the latter, and indeed, and this is obviously my limited experience, but the people I follow who do ship Widobrave often embrace the flaws and conflict inherent in the ship. There are many Imodna shippers who are wonderful - especially those who do like to explore the flaws and codependency and how it might one day resolve - but, understandably, those few bad actors attempting to ignore the lack of development in the relationship or even worse, advocating for it, have really been very unpleasant to deal with. As a result, it's led me to consider more deeply why I find Imogen and Laudna's relationship uninteresting, romantically, and so that's probably another factor in why I specifically have explored Imogen and Laudna's issues far more than Caleb and Veth's. (For me personally, it's also that I was a lurker for the first year of the Mighty Nein campaign; I was binging Campaign 1 concurrently and didn't finish until July 2018, and didn't make this blog until around New Year's 2019, so I've written comparatively fewer thoughts about early Campaign 2). But getting back to the previous point, I think something people who send hate or baiting questions on anon may not always realize is that it often has the opposite effect as intended; it leads people to defend their opinions, and in doing so often strengthens their convictions as they find more evidence, which leads them to make even more posts!

Anyway, I hope this helps - obviously, this is only my perspective, and I sincerely hope anyone else of whom you ask this question extends the same good faith, honesty, and openness to other perspectives that you are bringing. I do however urge you to at minimum attempt to find some discussion from the era of early Campaign 2 to get a better understanding of how Widobrave was treated, just to ensure better responses to your inquiries. Anyway, welcome to the fandom!

[lucysweatslove]

I got my new car today!!! I haven’t actually driven it yet. Because new things are scary for me and it takes me a little while to get used to something like driving a new car, I wanted to drive it around my parents’ a little before going in a busy road. Rob said it has “responsive break” and i wanna get that “feel” down before I’m in heavy traffic. I like it though and am very grateful and excited!!

Being at my parents’ hasn’t been too triggering this time around. Usually there are some kind of comments about my body or what I’m eating, but we have such a short turn around this year that thankfully it hasn’t been too bad…

Did have to listen to my mom talk about this guy who has multiple myeloma (my mom has a precursor to MM) and apparently is in “full remission” using an antiviral but it came back because he got the covid vaccine…. Tried to explain why that’s probably not true actually but you know… I think she just desperately wants there to be simple/easier answers to the cancer she might develop, which I get, but I also feel like this is how misinformation takes roots.

(We don’t have a perfect system here in the US by far, but we aren’t lagging behind in the cancer treatment realm…. If antivirals worked to cure MM, there would be research on it… and people would do it… contrary to popular belief, Big Pharma isn’t pushing ineffective expensive drugs to steal your money and keep you sick…drugs are ridiculously expensive, but it’s not malicious… insurance companies are far more malicious for refusing coverage than the pharma companies imo)

Also listening to some people talk about pot shop workers (specifically managerial roles) not deserving to be paid a certain amount, all the gender critical bs, like yall, I don’t like government regulations in general and I have my views on how we attempt legislating morality and why it doesn’t work, but like…… when you use that argument to justify why people who “don’t have any education and just know drugs” (not a real quote just a paraphase) don’t deserve to be paid a certain amount, AND you don’t use it to say that like, gov shouldn’t restrict access to health care like abortions and gender affirming care… that’s not “government shouldn’t legislate morality,” that’s “government should legislate the morality I agree with” which is… the same thing you’re complaining about the “other side” doing.

Especially the gender stuff. It takes very little actual energy to use somebody’s preferred, correct pronouns. Affirming care literally saves lives. When you spend a lot of energy and time lobbying against these things, it really just tells me how uncomfortable you are with the idea that somebody could have a different life experience than you. The only person who should be spending that much time and energy caring about those things… should be the person themselves. Partners or family ofc should care too, but in a “how do we support this person so they can live a fulfilling life” way, not in a “i can’t handle anybody having a different lived experience than me” kind of way.

And also if you’re gonna complain about federal spending and budgets, can you at least acknowledge the ridiculous defense budget? Even if your viewpoint is “I don’t know how we can realistically and safely scale that back,” just like… recognize how little the government actually spends on programs like VA health care in relation to the massive defense budget. We rank third in the world for per capita military spending… I’m not saying you need answers on how to solve anything, but if you’re gonna criticize the drops in the bucket, acknowledging that they are in fact drops in the bucket comparatively would be nice.

[queen-simia]

lrb: honestly all of this and more has me nervous about the two leads and their relationship in the upcoming comic. folks who know me and my particular leanings will be kinder, I know, but once it escapes containment, all hell may break loose

thought barf below the cut

I already know Virgule will probably be polarizing. he's pansexual by nature as an incubus (when sexual energy is your food, it's best to be omnivorous, knowhutimean), which I already foresee as Problematic™... and he's technically genderless but identifies as masculine, though I write him harder on the camp/femme side. all that plus the fact he's an inhuman being (a demon, to be specific) adds up to poor Virgule potentially being a hate lightning rod ("she should know better as an ace! aces get coded as robotic/inhuman all the time, why would she turn around and do the same to gncs and pans if she claims to care so much???").

the funny thing is, Virg's camp and charisma are all based directly on the stage persona of a straight cis man: Dylan Charles Germick (Planet Booty's front man). and that persona is played as fully sex-positive and lovingly as possible, and is derived heavily from Prince (who was straight *and* very genderfucky, as you know). so, it's not like Virg's character background lacks nuance or is just "lol them silly sex-hungry fairy boys~" but I can easily see how critics could jump to that conclusion

and there's a not-insignificant plot point early in the story that involves consent and boundaries that Virg starts out on the wrong side of (and also introduces the possible interpretation that his feedings may involve dubious consent). thaaaat's gonna be fun to deal with~ 🙃

but again! it's not just for salaciousness! it's to establish a strong part of the dynamic between Virg and Sonrisa re: trust and expectations. could it be done differently? ...not really, given the context of the story and the characters' natures...? it's something I've agonized over in the years I've been developing this story, trust me. :p but it's definitely something I know will be a sticking point when it comes out. maybe it'll cause a fall-off in readership, maybe it won't, but I've been online long enough to anticipate the worst

sorry to say it's stuff like this that had me wondering at several points whether I should bother at all. but, I'm stubborn and vain enough to want a story centered around a short, fat aroace woman that doesn't view any of those traits as negative that I'm going to do it anyway.

tbh I already know having Sonrisa be fat is going to attract loads of mouth-breathing chuds—already inoculated against that 1) from First Contact's 4chan reception of my buff strong-featured Femshep, and 2) lived experience as a fat chick. that funnily enough will hurt less than any potential queer audience blowback. I guess because while it's undeniable I'm fat, my relationship with queerness is much more tenuous.

I already feel like I'm treading on toes as not just an aroace (who, like our bisexual cousins, are already regarded as Schrodinger's Queers), but a demiaroace who seems to prefer mascs ("why don't you just admit you're straight, gawd"). thing is, my lived experience is very much *not* heteronormative, to the point where I've cried and had depressive episodes over possibly having to marry someone I don't love just to survive... and that was *before* I knew asexuality even was a thing. I've experienced medicalization of my lack of sexual attraction. I've lied about my orientation to avoid awkwardness, both socially and medically. I have more in common with your flagship queer identities than I do with straights... but because the four people I've fallen in love with—and only one of whom I've actually had sex with—over 43 years of life happen to be cis men, it still doesn't feel like enough.

so I guess I fear if I tell my story in a way that offends people who are "worthier" queers than myself, I'll have proven myself even less deserving of inclusion than before.

fat-shaming? used to it, next. betrayal of found family? utterly shattering.

bah. still gonna draw my dumb comic. just... still pretty nervous about it, I guess.

[bokujou-monogatari]

do you mind explaining why you like island of happiness over sunshine islands and tree of tranq. over animal parade?

Disclaimer 1: this is not my full answer because I want to provide more than just my ramblings and have actual tangible evidence to my reasonings. Which, I do have, but my schedule has been very limited recently and I just haven't gotten around to digging things up.

Alright, it's about time I answered this, just because it's been sitting here in my inbox and I don't want to keep you waiting too long.

Disclaimer 2: I don't know what the hell happened in 2007 to 2010, but something tells me there was a Too Many Cooks situation in the dev/production line; may have been what contributed to the creative differences and why Wada was ushered to leave after the AQL Merger. But again, this is one thing I -don't- have the specific insight to.

Disclaimer 3: long post, I'm sorry 😭

Tree of Tranquility was created 2004 (preproduction) to 2005-2006 (production, commitment, release candidate) and released in 2007. The person spearheading direction was Yoshifumi Hashimoto, the acting director for many games after he was brought to the team when Victor merged with Marvelous in 2003. He was purely Marvelous staff at the time, and was not part of the initial team that came with Victor/Toy Box. He was given the role for Tree of Tranquility in order to innovate gameplay on the latest Nintendo system - the Nintendo Wii. He had support in the way of Yasuhiro Wada and Hikaru Nakano. To a degree, Nakano was more closely involved than Wada, who at the time, was more oversight than development.

Hashimoto wanted to use the success of A Wonderful Life to make a more intuitive, iterative title that followed similar successful principles while in a whole new setting. Thus, Tree of Tranquility did its best to be its own thing while still trying to be a knock on of the preceding console game.

In this article I translated years ago (which frankly needs an update, but the general information is There), Wada was interviewed for the release of Animal Parade; he stated that when he finally took a look at the final product, Tree of Tranquility did not capture the feeling of being a true successor to A Wonderful Life, and that he was largely unhappy with how things turned out. As such, he ordered the team to create a turnaround version of the title which stripped characters down to bare stereotypes, rewrote original relationships and changed them, and changed functionality of gameplay systems - all within a 9 month period from the release of Tree of Tranquility to Animal Parade.

As to why I like Tree of Tranquility so much:

I am just not a fan of the antiquated rural ideals and stereotypes Wada mixes very well in all of his games.

He added those into Animal Parade, and also just pretty much turned Tree of Tranquility into a depressing hot mess with plotholes.

I had already been so used to the (then) complexity of the character narrative in Tree of Tranquility that coming to Animal Parade felt like the characters had been body snatched. I have a whole dissertation on my blog about the character narrative of Maya, and I could write about every single character of the game and the ways they stand out in ToT compared to AP. Between the two, for what the story was supposed to be, it also felt less impactful when playing Animal Parade, than when you literally got told how much of a difference you were making throughout the story of Tree of Tranquility.

(Of course, this isn't to say Tree of Tranquility doesn't have its own problems, it does! But you can't escape narrative bias in any media - it takes critical analysis.)

I think Animal Parade holds its own as a game, and I can see why so many people enjoy it. However, narrative wise I will always choose Tree of Tranquility.

Island of Happiness is also the same in this regard. Hikaru Nakano was not satisfied and felt that the game could be iterated on further, and thus Sunshine Islands was created. For me, Island of Happiness felt more tight knit but also diverse- what with the single community island, branching heart events instead of linear ones, and overall feel. I just couldn't attach myself to Sunshine Islands despite the fact it was supposed to have "enhanced" the story presented in that generation.

Feel free to hit me up about this more, I love talking about this topic specifically :)

[zorilleerrant]

I think the problem people have with the current trend in book summaries is that 20 years ago, when you read a book summary, it included the normal who what when where why that people recommend writing in nonfiction articles. A review or recommendation being a kind of nonfiction, people got used to seeing them. And now with the truncated article most common in news reporting it's probably not as familiar to readers of news, either, so it probably shouldn't be surprising that descriptions of books don't contain all those parts.

I really don't think the problem is that there's a 'who' included in the description, because that's always something we wanted to know. It's that there are often paragraphs of lavish description of the 'who' or the 'where'... and very little of the other questions.

People generally want to know the what when why of it all, too. A lot of people are also interested in the how - I've never been much concerned, because I tend to assume the book's going to answer that, but it is frustrating that genre descriptors have become more of buzzwords than anything intended to set up expectations for the story. People slap together any of them they think have crossover with their intended readership, regardless of whether those words in that order actually describe a subgenre.

(A cozy mystery is a specific genre of book. A cozy fantasy is... possibly something people are trying to push now? But nothing established enough to tell me what you mean.)

So we get the 'who', often in too much detail. I know that's just the trend of the moment, but I'm used to people talking up character traits in the introduction to a story because they don't bother illustrating or developing them across the text. It makes me worry that everything being advertised is an informed trait, and the character might as well be another milquetoast Chris Pratt performance. Which is to say nothing of the times when several of the diverse array of characters happen to be extremely minor in the text... leaving the main cast much less diverse indeed.

The 'where' is similarly difficult. It used to be that I could look at something advertising a setting in that much lavish detail and assume it was worldbuilding-driven, or at least that worldbuilding was a large part of what was going on. Instead, it's so often just telling us things in the author's head that have no relevance to the book, and only appear in the first chapter or two before being forgotten about entirely. The rest of the story is just modern New York, London, Paris, etc. with a new coat of paint. They have all the same preoccupations but they say prithee or have a HUD built into their eye implants. Not much worldbuilding at all.

The 'what' being missing is probably the easiest to explain; there have always been complaints that a blurb concentrated too much on the plot, or even gave the ending away. And too much of that is similarly dreary and frustrating to try to wade through, making it hard to look at a book and tell why you'd want to read it. But until the particular glut of it for a few years in there, it was mostly restricted to genre books that used archetypal characters and themes, so the variation in stock plot was the critical deciding factor.

It's the 'when' I feel like I'm missing the most, when I see all these descriptions of characters, because the 'when' is so integral to a character-driven story. Telling us who they are and what they're like is the perfect opportunity to tell us how long it is they've been concerned about this thing. What point in their lives they're at. The kind of experiences they've had already and haven't had yet. How long their world's been the way it is.

But it's the 'why' I sometimes feel like people are unable to even answer. It may be something to do with the push for people to write for themselves, which I do endorse, but just because I wanted to, while a wonderful reason to write, isn't a good enough reason to read something. i mean, I assume you wanted to, or someone else wanted you to, or I don't know why any book would've gotten written. But I want to know what makes the story sing.

Why are the characters doing what they're going to do? Why do they care? Why now? Why about this? Why is the setting the way it is? Why did it start going right or wrong or something sideways? Why hasn't anyone done anything, or why did they fail, or why don't people know they succeeded? Why does this thing go right? Why does that thing go wrong? Why is it told in this tone, voice, mood? Why are these parts included? Why does it follow this character, and that plot, and the other setting devices? Why does it use this motif? Why is it concerned with that philosophy? Why is it about this when it's really about that? Why does it feel some way when it could feel totally different? Why did you write it?

Why should I read it?

[0ystercatcher]

Y’all do kill trans people though. Maybe it’s not often directly, but you definitely stir up as much hate as possible, push us towards suicide, and try to regulate us out of existance.

I recommend you look up stochastic terrorism.

who is yall? radfems? gender criticals? women? marxist feminists? anyone who doesnt buy into lib gender politics regardless of political goals? conservatives and a specific variety of gender criticals (esp those who do peddle regressive, reactionary politics against trans and gnc people) are not a good representation of radical feminism any way you look at it - even if you wanna criticize purely online spaces of radfems where you will see some weird overlaps - they really do tend to work differently.

there is a conversation to be had wrt right wingers using "feminist" points (often they arent truly feminist if you examine their reasoning closely) as bait to attract more people but you have to think about why this works so fabulously in the first place atm. the current mainstream framework of liberal gender ideology is failing. it doesnt really help trans people, it Especially doesnt help women (which i wont lie, should be reason enough to dismantle it), and it ends up replicating the same old sexist dynamics that harm all of us in the first place. it is completely insane postmodern shit that most people can see right through, and leftists and liberals not only dont rightfully criticise it but instead tend to fully support it (the leftists usually do this despite this benefiting the medical and beauty industry, among others, for some fucking reason). this creates insane amounts of rightful backlash. conservatives are very capable of using that backlash to gain favor with regular people who up until the past few years werent very engaged w gender or feminist politics. and they can see the actual problems popping up w stuff like gender self id, letting children and teens transition, exposing children to content they shouldnt be privvy to under the guise of "inclusivity and diversity" etc. they arent dumb. denying these problems is dumb and tbh, often stems from stupidity and misogyny alike.

and i know what stochastic terrorism is. are you implying radfems specifically engage in it to attack trans people? bc that sounds silly to me. radfems are hilariously badly organized in many developed countries, and when they arent they often have to deal w pretty serious often violent harrassment when organizing in public. and in countries like mine they tend to face serious backlash from the government and from liberal gender ideology weirdos (trans and not) as well as from conservatives. radfems are also not the ones actually killing trans people, if you look at stats that tends to be. yknow. men. a group women in general tend to not have that much influence over.

[krewekreep]

Introduction of Sorts + Interests

This page will really be for me to get back into writing, develop my writing and indulge myself. I’m open to requests though but ask people to definitely contextualize your Bias (person you’re requesting for—yes I’m gonna use K-pop lingo oh well) and/or the scenario cause otherwise I’d simply write for myself. Which is why I also am making this page because I’ve been on tumblr for 10 years (my main account turned ten this year) and I’m worn out of the smut fest no prose or story fics. Definitely has its place in the community but the older I get the more I need actual full blown delusion. I need scene, setting, set up, climax, denouement…and so I’ll fulfill the order myself. 🫡

My interests:

(Im a 2010s coded Tumblr user so uh, I mean I suppose Dr Who and Supernatural aren’t 😂😂😂😂lmao ew anyway (I was into supernatural I’m ewwing at you and myself) .

Too I usually am not following everything that’s mainstream (I know im so cool) so also if something isn’t listed I most likely know of it—but went no further. I also like older anime and media so if you have something super specific that feels out of place no worries. Im gonna end up writing Greek smut about Dionysus so…🤷🏾‍♀️

Anime: (I’ve seen actually too much anime to name so here’s the ones I have a bias or have an affinity for the characters)

JJK,

Chainsaw Man

Bleach

Naruto

Demon Slayer

Attack on Titan

Fate Series

Etc

Manga:

JJK

Chainsaw Man

Bleach

Attack on Titan

Spy x Family

DanDanDan

Berserk

Etc

Fave genres are horror/seinen, shoujo, and slice of life.

KPOP: (1st-mid 3rd Gen main but still aware of 4th gen pretty deeply)

I dont really want to do requests for idols but I don’t mind overall, explained further below

My fave boy groups (somewhat in order): Big Bang, Shinee, BAP, BTS (ex-army, long story**, don’t come to my page with that bullshit 💕) B1A4, IKON, EXO, 2PM, GOT7…I could go on. (I’m not gonna list them in an order but my heart can’t not include MBLAQ, Teen Top, U-Kiss, etc ugh those were the days😭)

Girl Groups (in definitive order): 2NE1, Brown Eyed Girls, F(x), Girls Generation, TWICE, 4Minute/Hyuna, Wonder Girls, Secret, After School, Global Icon (short lived), Tiny G ( VERY short lived), EXID, Ladies Code, etc.

Now 4th Gen…is cute…they got CUTE people that’s for sure. This list will be co-ed simply because I’m not feral for boy groups like I was younger. Really the boy groups don’t do it for me (4th gen overall criticism tbh) cause it’s really looks and kinda arrogant personalities I find obnoxious given y’all can’t even publicly date or be seen smoking…tone down the elitist vibe lol. But shade aside I do jam some things and have a playlist for my fave 4th gen songs so for sure no hate just a BOMBASTIC side eye sometimes. Anyway…

Stray Kids

Aespa

Lessaraffim (I’m gonna leave it like my mind spells it, enjoy)

NCT 127 (specifically them ((in reference to the units)) cause I enjoy R&B coded K-pop, they do too much Niggaboo shit (looking at Mark and Taeyong DIRECTLY in the eyes 👁️👄👁️)((BUT it’s a Soo Man thing cause him, YG, and JYP competing over who wish they were a born a Black man the most…Soo Man and JYP ✨fist fighting✨over the top spot IYKYK)

New jeans (they’re minors and if they all aren’t their def much younger than me so no requests for minors please this is for taste assessment only)

BIBI and other female soloists (Hyuna, Sunmi, Ga-in, Lee Hyori, etc)

IVE (they really got some bops tbh, this is another TWICE case of let these young women talk and sing how they naturally would…music and live performances will thank them for it)

Nobody really else I guess honorable mentions are Ateez, Fifty-fifty,

———————————————————————

*im gonna add that for Anime/Manga the double dipping means some combination of me knowing the material in both forms of media. Like Jujutsu Kaizen is an amazing example currently as of course the anime is ongoing but the manga is far ahead by a large portion of plot. So if your anime only, manga only, or something be sure to let me know so I’m not spoiling by accident. Don’t want the smut to spoil a character death or something….right? 😅

**the long story short and overall caveat of why I’ve fallen out of love for groups and K-pop are the fact that yeah as a Black person I genuinely started getting pissed off with colorism, n-word usage, appropriation, and mockery. The shit gets old and as a poor old super fan I’m happy I didn’t spend the money people do for folks who would literally refuse my hand…🫤 be fr. Likewise, the deaths of idols who were literally my biases really (of course) bothered me and took a toll on my enjoyment of the genre too. The more you love it the more you learn and that’s usually where the fun ends and now it’s numbers charts and placements. Lame 😭. I let the time I was fan be that but otherwise ? Eh I’m good I’ll bop from time to time and catch the tea but my bread in my pocket (besides my B1A4 What’s Happening and Twice Scientist albums😂)((and the other old albums I’ll get before they disappear forever or get destroyed🫠))

But yeah that’s that on that. I’ll be posting whatever ends up decent enough to be read by others. Otherwise wherever this ends up hope you drop a message🥸!

[transhawks]

*posts that are going to get you a box of my favorite orange flavored chocolates mailed to your doorstep (anyways, yeahh!! Lmao, it was so wild to me to read a post that lists everything Hawks did and I’m going like yeah!!! And then it ends off with something like “and that’s why I hate him and he’s evil incarnate” we are two different people lmaoo, I feel like you’re the only appreciated of unhinged Hawks on this site. He can be a sad little chirp chirp while still being crazy. So r other ppl

That sounds delicious actually. In all seriousness I had to disengage with actual Hawks "haters" in late 2020. I was very critical of him, argued with Hawks apologists (specifically in the whole Twice aspect) left and right, was getting frustrated at people just ignoring the clear references to the current political situation in the work, but seeing the actual Hawks hate hurt the nonetheless. I'm really lucky that a bunch of us in the Jinkei server and dbhwks spaces were really down to clown him and roast him, but there was still an element of at least finding him an interesting character if not liking him. A lot the hardcore Hawks haters not only didn't find him distasteful (which isn't wrong imho) but also felt that anyone who felt he was interesting was approving of his actions.

I had to justify why I liked him as a character to so-called friends, even a beloved best friend. Why I found him interesting - as if that invalidated my well-worn anarchist/leftist ideals and years of them and all the political activism and organizing I got involved in my late teens/early twenties. It was like... a very cruel time. I have a whole personality disorder that makes me think in polarities and extremes, and that space and group on here was not helping.

And then his development seemed to stagnate (or more I just didn't really understand what Horikoshi was doing with him) and I don't know, I clung on to what I originally liked. It really took reevaluating the entire manga and starting to find all of him funny to really, truly love him again.

He's a fascinatingly complicated character, incredibly well-crafted by Horikoshi, and I'd say among his top-tier written characters, like Tomura or Dabi. Now, that's on his *complexity*, nothing else. Not that I go looking for such opinions, but I'm going to clarify that and save some Hawks haters time gossiping about me saying "Hawks is a good as Dabi or Tomura according to local Hawks-obsessive transhawks", nah, we're talking about complexity and his narrative. Those things are very different than the character being ethical, not that any of them are.

And! And! It's okay to like the confusing, unhinged characters who bring chaos! 2020 me could never understand loving All For One, but he's so fascinatingly hypocritical and hilarious that he's quickly becoming a favorite.

I just regret we spent so much time as a fandom ascribing moral values to liking certain characters rather than just fucking enjoying them as they are. That wasn't healthy. That wasn't right of us, or me, specifically. I'm still someone who believes that the fiction/reality argument is bunk and not understanding that there isn't an actual separate space or how much any sort of art medium affects and shapes our values is a big problem, but I think when we started saying that anyone finding a character interesting was condoning their actions was when the plot was lost.