#like practically what did she want?

[jq37]

What is it that the Rat Grinders actually want exactly? Or at least, what does Kipperlilly want since she's the one we know the most about.

At the top of the season it seemed like she wanted to Be The Best at school and Be Recognized in a very Tracy Flick/Sara Berry kind of way and was just going to crazy lengths to get there because this is a world where you help a dragon kidnap girls so you can be Prom Queen and life goes on. But now we know that the Rat Grinders are a part of Porter's larger plan and one of the major steps of that plan is completely abolishing Aguefort as an institution.

It's clear what Porter gets out of this. He gets to be a god and he gets to continue his imperialistic family legacy. And I would maybe get what Kipperlilly would get out of this is she were the Cleric/Paladin of the plan. She'd get to be the new god's champion, like she was gushing to Lucy. That's maybe worth something to an achievement hunting, Type A individual.

But she's not gonna get to be the best student at Aguefort if Aguefort doesn't exist anymore. Hell, Elmville won't really exist anymore. Is Porter planning on opening a new Adventuring School in Rage Elmville and she gets to be the god Principal's pet? Does she think he's gonna make things "fair" for her somehow? How? Retroactively killing her parents? Does she want to use the powers she cheesed from the easy XP he drip fed her to be a renown adventurer? Kinda hard to pull that off when everyone knows you were part of the plan that doomed the town. Maybe she thought they were going to get away with it without being implicated? Does she literally not want anything other than a chance to kill the Bad Kids? Or even pettier, to just to be stronger than Riz? Is that worth it to her? To damn the whole town just so she can say that she beat Riz once? Did she want something concrete at one point but at this point she's just lost in the sauce and doing whatever the next task is without knowing what she'd even do with a victory if she got it? Did she already get what she wanted in the free XP and now she's just paying her end of the bargain?

I'm just very unsure about what her version of a happy ending is here.

[technically-human]

Hey, don't cry. Ghost yuri, okay?

(Now that you know the girls, they need to meet the boys!)

[chiquilines]

Whoopsie daisy im late to the panel redraw train but this page is tattooed on my frontal lobe

[scoriarose]

She came up with a new activity

[sysig]

Well aren’t you so popular (Patreon)

[optiwashere]

Huh, I didn't even realize it'd been a year since BG3 came out until I opened tumblr this morning. Kinda wild. I didn't think much of the game's release: I like Larian's games, and I like the BG series. I wasn't ever going to skip the game, but I didn't think I'd play it at launch because I was busy working on a novel in 2023 and not doing well financially.

Thankfully, circumstances left me with a little bit of extra money last year just before launch and it meant I could spend on a video game. I needed a pick-me-up after said 2023 novel failed to go anywhere, and BG3 was right there. Like most CRPGs, I played it in basically every moment of free time that I had and did as much as I possibly could in one playthrough.

It's so odd how these small happenstances can snowball into coming back to fandom, finding some friends I might've never met otherwise, and writing a lot of fanfiction along the way. I'll probably have something more interesting to say/share when it's the 14th, AKA when I sat down and wrote my first fic for this fandom.

Anyways, it's been a lot of fun and I'm looking forward to more years to come 💜

[cluescorner]

Arlecchino's whole deal is unbelievable

Arlecchino: Huh I wonder what's causing my weird powers? I can't really worry about that right now tho, I've gotta become King and then kill my "Mother".

*Kills Clervie and "Mother"*

Arlecchino: Huh I wonder why I was able to defeat a Fatui Harbinger when I'm like 17 or so? I can't really worry about that right now tho, I've gotta be in jail and become a Harbinger.

*Is in jail for a while and becomes a Harbinger*

Arlecchino: Huh I wonder why I am-

Pierro: Hey what's up hello, anyways you're descended from the Crimson Moon Dynasty of Khaenri'ah. I'm sure that this is a lot for you to take in so-

Arlecchino: Ok.

Pierro: ...You're just cool with that?

Arlecchino: IDK maybe? I can't really worry about that at the moment, I'm a father now. This orphanage full of children I love (who also are child soldiers and are not allowed to leave or else I'll execute them except maybe now I'm just gonna wipe their memories IDK I'm morally complex) isn't gonna run itself.

*Runs the orphanage/spy recruitment initiative*

Me, the fucking player: WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU ARE KHAENRI'AN? WHY WASN'T THIS BROUGHT UP IN YOUR FUCKING QUEST?? OR ANYTHING ELSE????

Arlecchino, talking to me through my phone: I honestly don't know why you care, I'm too busy to give a shit. Anyways, I'm gonna go fight fate itself I guess. I'm sure that I don't share any thematic parallels with any other Khaenri'an characters (particularly as it relates to acting and family angst) and that I haven't made the idea of 'curses' on Khaenri'ans and what they entail even more complicated than they already were. See ya.

[thecasualqueer]

If Lena had been Kara's best friend in season 1 instead of Winn she would've gotten to wear pants from the start.

[dootznbootz]

I'm going feral again with a silly headcanon.

I just had that post on how Odysseus made Puzzles for himself and Penelope and I have another idea and I'm just really excited to share it lksdjf

I basically plan to have this man in love with Penelope within 10 mins (I HAVE A PLAN! It sounds crazy but I think it'll work. Plus these two are reckless and young when married. His first crush and he's not handling it well.)

This is them. Or at the very least Penelope is definitely playing it off very nonchalantly and is kind of messing around at first, thinking that the "trickster" is "not being genuine" when he's never been more genuine in his life. She can see right through all his lies and bullshit and basically forces him to be vulnerable, something he loves yet is TERRIFIED of. Especially as she "unmasked" him so quickly (and tricked HIM.😉 Won't say how. no spoilers yet) and so effortlessly and he's just a MESS. Athena isn't helping and just watches them both fumble around, even when Odysseus is asking for some guidance, Athena just smiles and is all like "I'm the Goddess of Wisdom, not of Love. Figure it out yourself." (PENELOPE IS JUST AS MUCH OF A BLORBO TO HER AS ODYSSEUS IS, YOU COWARDS!)

(Art by isei-silva right here on tumblr! Their post! )

I won't go into huge details. I WILL write this fic someday and I need to leave SOME things a surprise. But KNOW this man will be pulling out all the stops trying to impress her and tries to show all the things he's good at and one will be his "puzzle making".

He'll bring a puzzle to her TRYING to talk all "suave" (he'll be semi-tongue tied. Something that he's not used to and is annoyed that he can't seem to think around her)

It'll probably have a little gift inside and he'll be chatting away about how he worked hard to make it and that there's a trick to it and blah blah blah

Penelope: Oh! There's (some sort of treat or gift) inside!

Odysseus: Wait, you solved it already?

Penelope,🤨: Yes. All you have to do is this.

Odysseus, falling (more like sprinting at this point) further in love but also mad his plan to woo her didn't work: Well... Yeah. That's a gift for you.

He's trying SOOOO hard but he has to stop "showboating" to genuinely impress her. Man has to be fucking vulnerable for her to be impressed by him because she already can read his "tells" on when he's pulling something. No more "tricks". Be yourself, you fucking idiot >:D

[butchnavi]

life went forward and the world moved on but I never got over among us (2018)

[screambirdscreaming]

I used to like saying "gender is a social construct," but I stopped saying that because people didn't tend to react well - they thought that I was saying gender wasn't real, or didn't matter, or could be safely ignored without consequences. Which has always baffled me a bit as an interpretation, honestly, because many things are social constructs - like money, school, and the police - and they certainly have profound effects on your life whether or not you believe in them. And they sure don't go away if you ignore them.

Anyway. What I've taken to saying instead is, "gender is a cultural practice." This gives more of a sense of respect for the significance gender holds to many people. And it also opens the door to another couple layers of analysis.

Gender is cultural. It is not globally or historically homogeneous. It shifts over time, develops differently in different communities, and can be influenced by cross-cultural contact. Like many, many aspects of culture, the current status of gender is dramatically influenced by colonialism. Colonial gender norms are shaped by the hierarchical structure of imperialist society, and enforced onto colonized cultures as part of the project of imperial cultural hedgemony.

Gender is practiced. What constitutes a gender includes affects and behaviors, jobs or areas of work, skillsets, clothing, collective and individual practices of gender affiliation and affirmation. Any or all of these things, in any combination, depending on the gender, the culture, and the practitioner.

Gender encompasses shared cultural archetypes. These can include specific figures - gods and goddesses, mythic or fictional characters, etc - or they can be more abstract or general. The Wise Woman, Robin Hood, the Dyke, the Working Man, the Plucky Heroine, the Effete Gay Man, etc etc. The range of archetypes does not circumscribe a given gender, that is, they're not all there is to gender. But they provide frameworks and reference points by which people relate to gender. They may be guides for ways to inhabit or practice a gender. They may be stereotypes through which the gendered behavior of others is viewed.

Gender as a framework can be changed. Because it is created collectively, by shared acknowledgement and enforcement by members of society. Various movements have made significant shifts in how gender is structured at various times and places. The impact of these shifts has been widely variable - for example, depending on what city I'm in, even within my (fairly culturally homogeneous) home country, the way I am gendered and reacted to changes dramatically. Looping back to point one, we often speak of gender in very broad terms that obscure significant variability which exists on many scales.

Gender is structured recursively. This can be seen in the archetypes mentioned above, which range from extremely general (say, the Mother) to highly specific (the PTA Soccer Mom). Even people who claim to acknowledge only two genders will have many concepts of gendered-ways-of-being within each of them, which they may view and react to VERY differently.

Gender is experienced as an external cultural force. It cannot be opted out of, any more than living in a society can be opted out of. Regardless of the internal experience of gender, the external experience is also present. Operating within the shared cultural understanding of gender, one can aim to express a certain practice of gender - to make legible to other people how it is you interface with gender. This is always somewhat of a two-way process of communication. Other people may or may not perceive what you're going for - and they may or may not respect it. They may try to bring your expressed gender into alignment with a gender they know, or they might parcel you off into your own little box.

Gender is normative. Within the structure of the "cultural mainstream," there are allowable ways to practice gender. Any gendered behavior is considered relative to these standards. What behavior is allowed, rewarded, punished, or shunned is determined relative to what is gender normative for your perceived gender. Failure to have a clearly perceivable gender is also, generally, punished. So is having a perceivable gender which is in itself not normative.

Gender is taught by a combination of narratives, punishments, and encouragements. This teaching process is directed most strongly towards children but continues throughout adulthood. Practice of normatively-gendered behaviors and alignment with 'appropriate' archetypes is affirmed, encouraged, and rewarded. Likewise 'other'- gendered behavior and affinity to archetypes is scolded, punished, or shunned. This teaching process is inherently coercive, as social acceptance/rejection is a powerful force. However it can't be likened to programming, everyone experiences and reacts to it differently. Also, this process teaches the cultural roles and practices of both (normative) genders, even as it attempts to force conformity to only one.

Gender regulates access to certain levers of social power. This one is complicated by the fact that access to levers of social power is also affected by *many* other things, most notably race, class, and citizenship. I am not going to attempt to describe this in any general terms, I'm not equipped for that. I'll give a few examples to explain what I'm talking about though. (1) In a social situation, a man is able to imply authority, which is implicitly backed by his ability to intimidate by yelling, looming, or threatening physical violence. How much authority he is perceived to have in response to this display is a function of his race and class. It is also modified by how strongly he appears to conform to a masculine ideal. Whether or not he will receive social backlash for this behavior (as a separate consideration to how effective it will be) is again a function of race/class/other forms of social standing. (2) In a social situation, a woman is able to invoke moral judgment, and attempt to modify the behavior of others by shame. The strength of her perceived moral authority depends not just on her conformity to ideal womanhood, but especially on if she can invoke certain archetypes - such as an Innocent, a Mother, or better yet a Grandmother. Whether her moral authority is considered a relevant consideration to influence the behavior of others (vs whether she will be belittled or ignored) strongly depends on her relative social standing to those she is addressing, on basis of gender/race/class/other.

[Again, these examples are *not* meant to be exhaustive, nor to pass judgment on employing any social power in any situation. Only to illustrate what "gendered access to social power" might mean. And to illustrate that types of power are not uniform and may play out according to complex factors.]

Gender is not based in physical traits, but physical traits are ascribed gendered value. Earlier, I described gender as practiced, citing almost entirely things a person can do or change. And I firmly believe this is the core of gender as it exists culturally - and not just aspirationally. After the moment when a gender is "assigned" based on infant physical characteristics, they are raised into that gender regardless of the physical traits they go on to develop (in most circumstances, and unless/until they denounce that gender.) The range of physical traits like height, facial shape, body hair, ability to put on muscle mass - is distributed so that there is complete overlap between the range of possible traits for people assigned male and people assigned female. Much is made of slight trends in things that are "more common" for one binary sex or the other, but it's statistically quite minor once you get over selection bias. However, these traits are ascribed gendered connotations, often extremely strongly so. As such, the experience of presented and perceived gender is strongly effected by physical traits. The practice of gender therefore naturally expands to include modification of physical traits. Meanwhile, the social movements to change how gender is constructed can include pushing to decrease or change the gendered association of physical traits - although this does not seem to consistently be a priority.

Gender roles are related to the hypothetical ability to bear children, but more obliquely than is often claimed. It is popular to say that the types of work considered feminine derive from things it is possible to do while pregnant or tending small children. However, research on the broader span of human history does not hold this up. It may be true of the cultures that gave immediate rise to the colonial gender roles we are familiar with - secondary to the fact that childcare was designated as women's work. (Which it does not have to be, even a nursing infant doesn't need to be with the person who feeds it 24 hours a day.) More directly, gender roles have been influenced by structures of social control aiming for reproductive control. In the direct precursors of colonial society, attempts to track paternal lineage led to extreme degrees of social control over women, which we still see reflected in normative gender today. Many struggles for women's liberation have attempted to push back these forms of social control. It is my firm opinion that any attempt to re-emphasize childbearing as a touchstone of womanhood is frankly sick. We are at a time where solidarity in struggle for gender liberation, and for reproductive rights, is crucial. We need to cast off shackles of control in both fights. Trying to tie childbearing back to womanhood hobbles both fights and demeans us all.

Gender is baked deeply enough into our culture that it is unlikely to ever go away. Many people feel strongly about the practice of gender, in one way or another, and would not want it to. However we have the power to change how gender is structured and enforced. We can push open the doors of what is allowable, and reduce the pain of social punishment and isolation. We can dismantle another of the tools of colonial hedgemony and social control. We can change the culture!

[funarisjournal]

I gif'd a walking moment with the two...but mostly because I wanted to be able to gush about the chill way Kasuga walks lol

[theguardianace]

man. it hasn't even been a full half day of this event being out and im already drafting a fic for it. what an absolute RIDE thsi has been.

[yveltalreal]

why do i have multiple anons trying to mansplain pokemon breeding to me

i dont need a step by step guide for myself. what part of me telling anons "i know what you are talking about" implies im fucking stupid? hell if we wanna expand our scope a bit out of talking about the two posts about buneary that prompted 4 different anons mansplaining pokemon breeding and care to me, you will remember that i have outright stated i lived with family that bred and trained the floette line. and that i helped with the gardens. you will also remember I HAVE MULTIPLE POKEMON INCLUDING DRAGON TYPES WHICH ARE KNOWN TO BE DIFFICULT AND KNOW HOW TO CARE FOR THEM. i know how fucking pokemon care works. i wouldnt be talking about how well known it is not to get a fucking buneary if i didnt know shit. i wouldnt be talking about how bad of an idea it is to own a buneary if i hadn't looked into buneary specifically in the past or hadnt seen people realize what a mistake theyve made by getting one first hand. 4 anons. 4 DIFFERENT anons.

i know how pokemon breeding works and if one more of you fuckers tries to mansplain it to me im going to figure out a way to doxx you down to the specific universe

[lunarharp]

“sorry i dont always get it” (from april) & “sorry i dont always understand” the sequel 🍷🍓

[monards]

i fear that i don’t acknowledge enough the fact that i KNOW rhinedottir's evil !!! and she's horrible !!! and that she's wholly ireedamable !!! i know and love and respect that fact !!! i'd shoot myself in the frontal lobe if hoyo made her out to NOT be wholly evil !!!! but the reason i always go on and on and on about her humanity and complexity is because. SHE IS ALWAYS DUMBED DOWN !!!! TO JUST THAT !!!! it's literally the greatest and most moving theme (IN MY OPINION!!!) in genshin, that human beings are COMPLEX !!!! and they're MORE than just evil or bad or wtv. we see this through every character to almost ever be introduced to us -> literally just take arlecchino as an example. if anyone was at all paying attention to the discourse around her when the fontaine teaser dropped (and. 4.0 in general) it was the BIGGEST thing to watch people argue between "she's a harbinger, so she's clearly the most evil and the big antagonist of fontaine because of these accounts we have right now !!" versus the argument of "we've only seen ONE perspective of her so far, and it's no duh that all this stuff sucks -- but there's no way she's JUST gonna be all these horrible things,, because literally nobody to exist is just horrible and cruel with zero to no good in them. and also that'd make a shit narrative by hoyo in a story driven game" AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED !!!! we saw !!! in REAL time !!! that while arlecchino was rightfully cruel and horrible and, yes the things she did were fucked up beyond belief and she should absolutely not be excused for any of it - she is NOT just evil ! she's shown to care, albeit in a fucked up way that only shows she's even more deranged ; but what's so incredibly important about her is the way that her being "evil" doesn't mean she's incapable of anything else. She is evil, yes— but so many of those evil actions have *motives* and *reasons* that explain them (but not excuse or condone!) and, although they don’t save her grace or anything of the sort, they DO show her true character. AND YHATS SO IMPORTANT!!!! She’s capable of being an antagonist while still being justified in some form, and given nuance and backstory and redeemable traits

I am !!! NEVER !!! going to say rhinedottir is a good person. she isn't! no shit sherlock ! how the fuck do you think im gonna go on and ignore the fact she sent both her kids to their deaths, and also fed one to another. dare i say, that is NOT anything good !!! suprise of the century !! woah !!! -- but what i AM gonna say is that she's much beyond that? hello !! not only has the point of her having not a zero good trait or will in her body been. proven false over and over and over again. but it's such ! Sad and not compelling is character choice for her *not* to be nuanced and complex and justified in a fucked up !! — like do you REALLY think hoyoverse (who is clearly capable of, and likes to make) complex characters, who are horrible, while not being *only* those horrible things, would pass up a golden (haha) opportunity to make a characters whose entire existence is JUST that??!,!2????

believe what you want! Do what you want! This is a silly video game that will be eroded along with time in a hundred in so years ! But god so help me, please don’t be willfully ignorant to the complexity and nuance of characters, just because you want a villain. No villain , real or not, is entirely evil. People are complex and multi faceted and people really, really need to hop off this cart of going “okay but stop saying she’s multifaceted because it takes away from her being evil” because it DOESNT! If anything, it makes her so much more compelling . Which is something some people can apparently. Not handle.