#like. it would be extremely hypocritical of me to say that people cannot or should not engage with media containing copaganda-- it is prett

[gen13ordinaryheroes]

Actually no longer vagueing. Expliciting. Cannot stop thinking about that person that got mad at Niels for calling Prowl a cop because 'not every version of him is a cop'.

Some of you are well and truly cooked vis a vis your ability to recognize copaganda and your own susceptibility to & perpetuation thereof.

[ozzgin]

https://www.tumblr.com/fangdokja/780957838431436800/update-log-no-one-is-safe-anymore-you-may?source=share

I'm sorry but can you shed some visibility on this (if you are comfortable) it seems the situation is worse than we thought. She posts so much I would have never seen this had I still been following her. You can ignore if you want

Here's the link for everyone

Thank you for sharing anon, I don't keep tabs on people I no longer have business with, so I wouldn't have known myself. This is referring to the anti-queer yandere writer I posted about recently.

I also want to make a quick disclaimer that I'm not bashing anyone for writing taboo topics. Fiction is fiction and one should not censor ideas regardless of their stance. It would be quite hypocritical of me to weep over some matters while me and my mutuals write yandere/dark content to begin with. So, just to clarify, I am not the trope police.

I think the problem lies within the wording again, which is even more peculiar as it's coming from a person who's extremely eloquent and chooses their sentences carefully. It's one thing to say you want to write without worrying about censorship; many authors here express the same disappointment.

On the other hand, stating that you've been longing for and holding back from writing about

Concentration camps

Genocide

Antisemitism

Racism

White Supremacy

KKK

Paedophilia ("No boundaries—children, infants, innocence—nothing is sacred in fiction")

Fatphobia and body-shaming

Conversion therapy

is honestly wild and sounds to me like a cry for attention from an individual having a breakdown. Copy-pasting a list of trigger warnings with flashing headlines of "it's going down guys, the shackles are coming off", as if hate crimes are some sort of evening entertainment is disturbing. It's giving middle schooler who discovered 4Chan and is coming up with ways to offend people and sound "unhinged".

Interestingly, nothing from the list contains triggers that she would find offensive, such as religious blasphemies or anything to do with Christianity. The classic case of 'no boundaries count except for mine, of course'. :)

Serious question, though, are we sure this is an actual adult and not some elaborate joke crafted by an edgy kid after catholic school hours? The whole post is written in such an obviously cringe way that I personally cannot take it seriously.

[halcantdothat]

THE THREAD I HAVE BEEN PROCRASTINATING ON FOR A WHILE!!!

murderface’s autistic traits

because i see a lot of people talking about toki, skwisgaar, and nate’s autistic traits but never murderface.,,,

under the cut

one of the more obvious traits is his interest in war history and macabre things, which definitely seems like a special interest. it takes up his WHOLE ROOM, and the only time we see him taking a vacation is for a war reinactment. it is basically the only thing we see him have any interest in outside of dethklok and other music endeavors (which he does not seem to be that interested in even) he is genuinely PASSIONATE for history.

his gullibility is definitely overplayed for jokes but to me it reads as an extremely obvious autistic trait. for example , the firecracker scene. that scene just screams autistic to me. the way he just never realizes that he should STOP trusting them and keeps on bending down? yeah.

one of the less obvious things that I notice is his pickiness with foods. also a joke and definitely tied to extreme internalized homophobia, but it just seems like something that most neurotypical people would not go to the lengths to defend. yes I know that he does eat a hot dog in doublebookedklok but who says autism people cannot be hypocrites, I know I am lol. also just a headcanon of mine that he is sensitive to foods and sticks to foods he is comfortable with + knows well, seems to be pretty canon compliant too.

something i notice is how he does seem to understand some social norms, but not fully. and even the ones he does understand, he does not care to follow. for me as an autistic person that is something I heavily relate to. It is hard to follow the social norms you do understand when you have no reason to, and you have never had them explained to you. murderface was just treated as a problem kid his entire life so of course he just sticks with it instead of trying to work on his attitude.

kind of reaching but autistic people are more likely to experience depression and other mental illnesses, something that murderface definitely deals with. he also shows symptoms in less typical was, tied in with his anger issues. i think his anger issues could also be compared to how he was never taught to deal with his emotions, and also combine with autistic meltdowns of the sort. basically all of his issues just are worsened by his autistic traits.

SPELLING!!! i know this is just something that shows he is uneducated, which makes sense as he (in the shoe, NOT the comics) grew up in the south (probably in poverty) and never cared for school, but it also could have been heightened by his trouble learning new concepts. he very easily could have been pushed away by the fact that no one understood how to be patient with him and teach him in a way he understood, an experience lots of autistic people face.

the way murderface talks to people, he rarely knows how to act when he is not complaining or insulting people, which definitely ties into the lack of social skills. he also seems to not be able to tell when people are joking, or read emotional subtleties.

with how he tries to be a “gentleman” around ladies, it definitely shows how he does not know how to act outside of stereotypes and what he has been taught, almost like he is following a script.

HYGIENE. a big thing for autistic people. i know some people who are extreme near freaks and very very cautious with hygiene, as for me and others,,, not caring at all. i think it is obvious murderface falls into the second category, he does not CARE about hygiene and frankly, does not want to. we seen him showering in one scene so I think he is capable of doing self-care oriented things, but maybe it is hard for him to start, or he is uncomfortable with it in most occasions.

we???? Have never seen him wear pants? Like never. Even when wearing suits he has never worn pants. Definitely a sensory thing and NOT NORMAL?? just something subtle but texture in clothing is definitely a big thing with sensory issues.

headcanons

ahem ahem,,, we never see him in any shoes with shoelaces so I like to headcanon that he either never learned how to tie his shoes, or if he did, he is very bad at it and it takes him a while, so he is embarrassed to tie his shoes in front of anyone.

i also like to think he makes a lot of references to old TV shows (see my murderface agere post) and got a lot of his ideas of what “masculinity” is from those. i assume he shaped his worldview around fiction and what he learned from history, which resulted in a really warped perspective.

that is all for now!! i will probably add onto this later!! ^_^ byebye!

[theconstitutionisgayculture]

Pornography is kind of a thorny topic for me, because on the one hand, I think it's evil and it destroys lives. On the other hand, I think censorship is bad no matter who's doing it and that trying to curtail people's constitutional rights "for their own good" is exactly what we're always mad at the Left for doing. But I also hate that borderline-pornographic ads are almost everywhere and the number of prepubescent children who have been exposed to pornography is appallingly high.

I really hate feeling like a hypocrite. But I'm not sure "keep that garbage away from me and especially keep it away from kids" is compatible with "I support freedom of speech," and yet I cannot bring myself to abandon either position.

Do you have any insights on this?

It's perfectly within the bounds of free speech to keep inappropriate material away from kids. For example, most people would agree that prohibition was bad, right? But most people who think alcohol should be legal also don't support a 10 year old being able to buy whisky and get plastered. Another example, no one has ever seriously suggested making sex illegal, but the vast majority of people understand that having sex with children is evil and wrong. Children just aren't developed enough to be able to make certain, adult decisions for themselves. This has been recognized by basically every society humanity has ever had, from the most anarchistic to the most totalitarian. As long as you're not saying something should be banned for everyone because it might harm children, there's no conflict between the desire to protect children and the desire to support freedom of speech or personal liberty.

Honestly, the real test of my own support for personal liberty is drugs. In a vacuum, my beliefs say that adults should be able to use any drug they want. Sure, they're harmful, but so are alcohol and cigarettes and I would never support a ban on either. But on the other hand, every time hard drugs are decriminalized, it causes death and societal decay. Being able to get heroin at the local CVS would be absolutely disastrous to the country. So how do I support my almost militant belief in personal liberty with the reality that absolute permissiveness can lead to the destruction of the country?

It's a problem I've wrestled with a lot, but I've come up with a loose moral framework that I think solves it. If something can be immediately lethal or extremely harmful to adults on its own, and there's no societal benefit from it, and banning it wouldn't violate someone's human rights, then you can probably support banning it for adults without being a hypocrite about supporting freedom. This way, I can support things like making pot legal, because pot on its own can't kill you, while also saying drugs like heroin and fentanyl should stay illegal, because they can, and because they're horribly addictive, which causes extreme harm, and there's no benefit to society because being on these drugs ruins people's ability to function properly. It also allows for legal gun ownership on multiple fronts, because owning weapons is a human right, and guns are a net positive in society because they allow people to protect themselves (also a human right). So even though they are immediately lethal and extremely harmful, banning them would be a massive violation of people's rights and general personal liberty principals.

I'm sure there are things that don't fit so neatly into this framework, because no philosophy has ever taken everything into account, but so far, that's what I've come up with. I'm sure I'll keep refining it as the years go by, as I do with most of my beliefs as I learn more or experience more. But for now I think that's pretty good.

[sokkastyles]

Hi.

Hope you are doing well.

Thank you for your answer on the previous question on Aang.

I saw your reblog of the post on TSR, where the anon says that Zuko wanted Katara to murder Yon Rah, and I legit thought, no where did Zuko say he wanted Katara to do that. He simply said that he could help her find the man who killed her mother and helped her when she needed it. I know this has been discussed, but does this idea come from Aang saying it's about revenge?

Also, on the comic panel where Mai says she cannot fathom betraying her father, I think it actually adds to Zuko's bravery to face Ozai and call him out. I think Zuko should have broken his relationship with Mai because if she couldn't tell him this vital information that he had every right to know, then he cannot trust her and it's better to leave the relationship.

I would like your thoughts on this.

Yeah, it's based on what Aang says. It's just so crazy to me that people would rather listen to Aang's definition of Katara's experience instead of listening to what she actually says.

Making it about what Zuko wants is also another way of decentering Katara and her experience. Maybe Zuko did want Katara to murder that man, but he doesn't attempt to influence Katara other than enabling her to make a decision. Aang didn't want her to have the choice to begin with. Most importantly, he doesn't assume he knows what she will do and what's good for, which is why even him admitting he was wrong at the end makes him come out the better person.

And absolutely, that part in Smoke and Shadow is so bizarre because the whole POINT of Zuko's narrative is that he stopped enabling his father's evil. That literally changes everything about it. It's also doubly hypocritical for Mai because her response to learning that Zuko was talking to Ozai is to immediately blame him for it, even though Zuko was hurting no one but himself and NEVER ONCE allowed Ozai to influence his behavior, even though the comic makes us think that that is what is going to happen.

And the thing is, yes the comics are bad, but this is consistent with how Mai is characterized in the show, as someone who would break up with her boyfriend but not allow him to break up with her, as someone who would dismiss his emotions but then get extremely angry when she isn't catered to. As someone who can't deal with her boyfriend's issues but can't spout anything but negativity and hatred and just expects him to put up with it. As someone who likes her boyfriend to put more work into the relationship than she's willing to.

[kaiasky]

so spoilers for wind and truth the latest stormlight book

jasnah has this whole debate thing with odium where she starts out as a utilitarian and odium proves to her and the judge that she's a hypocrite because 1) she cannot know the greater good for certain especially not when an immortal god is saying he knows for certain his way is best. 2) while she'd sacrifice a stranger to save her kingdom she wouldn't sacrifice her family and that makes her a hypocrite for not truly caring about the greatest good for the greatest number of people etc. and so actually her utilitarianism is just cover over more petty noble-squabbling look-out-for-you-and-yours philosophy.

and overall this works for me right. Jasnah losing a debate and having her world shaken is very fun and I like where she arrives at the end where she's like shit. I have to reassess my whole philosophy. what do I still believe in. like I think she holds the Clown Stick for much of the scene but it does mean she gets scenes of her nobly trying to be intellectually honest as she rebuilds and reconsiders her ideology.

And like. I like that she's put in the vulnerable position of feeling on a gut level that Odium is wrong but not being able to articulate that rationally yet. Particularly in a book about like. what it means to make wrong choices and then make better choices later, I like that it isn't that Jasnah's scholarship is useless when she finds she's wrong, and instead it provides an orderly way for her to rebuild.

However. part of me feels like. look. I dont think Jasnah is actually lying about "greatest good" shit. I think if Teravangian could credibly tell her that he served the greatest good she would be like. for real? Convince me that a war in the cosmos is necessary. why not something more subtle. can we put checks and balances in this? sure you wield the Shard of unbridled hatred and scorn but like. That's why we set up checks and balances. idk.

idk. there's an alternate way to write it where Jasnah ends up being the spark of the idea to fuse Odium with a balancing Shard somehow or to like. create the Council Of Feelings to manage the power etc.

and. Idk. I think probably id be a little cynical about it. Ohhh now mister liberal Mormon is going to preach to me how even seemingly reasonable tolerant atheists will make deals with the devil if they don't have a code to give them morals.

buuut. idk.

first off I think Jasnah/Teravangian is a fun dynamic. and in particular if there's not Hoid, I want her to have someone who can be like damn she's smart.

Secondly like. IDK. I think in order to sell Teravangian as an extremely dangerous person to be holding Shards you'd really like him to say like. "yes this power is driven by strong feelings. This scares me and I am thinking of how to manage this through Establishing Systems." a thing that I think Jasnah could find pretty appealing

I think it would be excellent to have a non-Yolen non-Shard who is cosmere-aware and has has strong thoughts on what the future of the Shards and cosmere should be. particularly bc she's exes with Hoid.

Like. from a doylist perspective the goal is for Thaylenah to fall from a seemingly sure position, and from a watsonian perspective it's bc Odium isn't trying to recruit Jasnah, he's trying to get Thaylenah by proving her a hypocrite. And also even if her arguments are defeated she's still ideologically opposed to tyranny and so there's nothing a tyrant can offer her. I get it. but c'mon give me Dark Jasnah

[skaruresonic]

Remember me? To start off: I'm sorry about triggering some terrible and mentally painful memories when I went off about how I felt about the state of Flynn criticism. I never intended that. I wasn't defending or, heck, even trying to invite discussion about Flynn's rabid fanatics anyway. I could've chosen my words better, but aside from the detractors' mentalities, I meant to focus on Flynn ONLY. And I have nothing against your or their fan fictions. I do fan fiction, too. I just noticed what seemed like extreme shilling surrounding their exposure. I don't aim (and never did) to change minds about the dude, but I find the constructiveness of the critical discourse has been long lost.

Fitting that I received your ask on the first-year anniversary of my visual novel.

And I have nothing against your or their fan fictions. I do fan fiction, too.

Then why bring it up? What does "and your fics aren't even that good" add to the conversation about another writer's work?

I just noticed what seemed like extreme shilling surrounding their exposure.

Ah. There it is.

Look, I'm going to be brutally honest with you. But before I do, I want you to know I'm not angry with you, just annoyed - and perhaps angry in general at the overall situation we're in.

Honestly, the current climate is reminding me of the time antis gentrified Half-Life and caused the old guard to disperse. Everyone in our mutual circle is drifting away from Sonic in some form or another because it's such a toxic cesspit, and what's worse, they blame us for it. Would you want to stay in a situation like that?

Anyway, I have no patience for "you keep shilling your work" anymore because that standard only seems to apply to us. If we held everyone else to that standard, this entire Chili's would be revealed as hypocrites in an instant.

The fic mocking is not an isolated event. I've seen it happen over and over again, for years. Folks mocked Crusher's fic and OCs on TV Tropes. Folks mocked Darklight's OCs on Twitter. Folks sneered that we were too stupid to comprehend storytelling, and once someone said "none of them can even draw."

They can never leave it at "their criticisms suck." No, they have to make things so much more personal than they need to be. In the absence of an actual argument, they call you names, say you deserve all kinds of punishment, including but not limited to death and rape. Crusher had to delete hundreds of threats from his inbox. So please forgive me if my patience has waned paper-thin.

Folks feel the need to knock us down a peg because they think it's "warranted" on the basis of "we have egos." Which is a riot when, again, everyone on social media shills their work. That's what fandom does. You cannot throw a rock in here without hitting someone who thinks their AU improves on the games. I don't know why IDW is so sacrosanct that saying "I could probably do better" is considered blasphemy.

Whether or not my friends shill their own work as being "better" than IDW or whatever else is irrelevant. IDW staff are professionals (or should be, anyway); what do they care if some rando thinks they can do better? Besides, have you heard Flynn's recent grumblings about how he's tired of having the same conversations about his work since he was in high school? Why does he keep answering questions he doesn't want to dignify with a response? Why does he sound so miserable for someone who essentially Won the Game(tm)?

People telling you your work sucks a couple of times, yeah, maybe you can chalk that up to trolling. But when damn near everyone takes the excuse to hit below the belt, you start to feel less like "don't feed the trolls" and more like you're deliberately being targeted as a punching bag.

And I'm sorry, but I have no patience for that stuff. Take whatever umbrage you want with the state of criticism these days, but leave the fic out of it. That's all I ask.

[jessidogg]

I'm sorry to say this, but your plead to leave Justin alone just perpetuates white male privilege.

1. He criticized Britney Spears, his ex, for her drinking problems when she was a) being forced to perform to be able to see her children, b) forced to get an IUD, c) being financially abused and defamated by her father and ex, and d) recovering from the mental and emotional trauma of being exploited as a child star. This is one of the main reasons he's being so heavily criticized now. It was not only hypocritical, he ended up doing something worse because Britney never drank and drove

2. OF COURSE the cops say he was perfectly polite. He's a rich white man. He had no reason to fear for his life, the cops probably weren't aggressive towards him at all. He also knew he'd be easily bailed out

3. It is EXTREMELY out of touch to attempt to brush what he did under the rug. My uncle was killed by a drunk driver and it left my aunt and cousins devastated and in a really bad way after his death. Drunk drivers have ruined lives for purely selfish reasons. Just because he voiced your favorite animated troll doesn't diminish that

4. He's a grown ass man. He doesn't need you coming to his aid. People are allowed to be mad at him for his reckless and careless behavior. All your PSA does is try to guilt people to stop criticizing him. That's shitty

Hello! I have read all three of your asks and I totally understand where you're coming from! I'm so sorry that your uncle was killed, that is really depressing and sad and I'm praying for your family still💕

One, I'd like to say that no, JT does not need me to come to his aid. I'm VOLUNTEERING to bc I like him. I don't need his permission to tell people to forgive him, that's stupid. It's totally alright to stand up for people, just bc he is an adult does not mean that I cannot stand up for someone.

Two, you are so right! Driving while drunk is a stupid thing to do, and like I said, I am very frustrated he did such a thing. Justin has done tons of things he regrets from his drinking problems, and I wish he would just stop. But addictions are hard to stop (I totally understand that bc I have been thru multiple myself) but I wish he would just try a bit harder.

But I am not brushing what he did "under the rug". I'm sure that I won't persuade you, and that's fine, but I was only saying that we shouldn't take advantage of this to hate him even more.

I am sick of people going "haha, he's a loser" as if just because he is a celebrity that gives him more reason not to sin. I am saying that him driving drunk is just as bad as anyone else driving drunk, and that being drunk in general is terrible but that also shouldn't be the reason we hate him.

Justin Timberlake would never hurt someone on purpose. We all know that. The fact that he could have hurt someone is terrifying, but it's reality and I realize that. The point is, he made a mistake, and mistake does not mean an "oopsie" in this case, it means a "he knew what he was doing and it was a terrible idea".

In my other post I did not phrase it very well, and I'm sorry about that. What I meant was, Justin did something wrong. I am a strong Christian, and I believe that every sin is just as bad as any other. The difference is, some can cause way worse consequences. Driving while drunk is way more dangerous than maybe lying to your parents. But my God tells me that one is not worse than the other.

Even for those not being a Christian, I think everyone should know that there should not be worse sins, and "okay" ones. Everyone deserves a chance. You should forgive everyone 70 times 7. Then do it all over again.

If a liar told a nasty lie about you and didn't apologize and kept going, but a murderer turned himself in and repented and stopped, would you still say the murderer is the worst person?

The fact that Justin won't try harder annoys me. But we should never put even more hate on him just because he's well-known. He is a human. He is just as bad at stuff as other people are.

Also, Justin Timberlake is a nice guy. The fact that he knew he was going to get released wasn't why he was nice, and being white and rich should have NOTHING to do with what the police say (I find it extremely weird for u to use that description). Justin has been known for being a sweet kind guy and he loves his fans, friends, and family. He has been seen in the middle of a concert stopping everything to make sure a fan who seemed in need of help was alright by ordering security over and asking if they're good. He does tons of stuff around his town just to help out. DudePerfect, one of the most popular trick shot YouTubers, are strong Christians and said that one of their favorite memories was playing golf with Justin Timberlake. There would be no reason for them to lie about that.

Justin should not have criticized Britney Spears about that. That is very confusing why he would, and maybe he was just trying to get her not to go the direction he did a few times, but idk, it is just really stupid. But again, humans in general are stupid. I bet u can name a bazillion times u criticized someone about doing something that you have done or ended up doing yourself.

NOT HIDING IT UNDER THE RUG OR SAYING IT'S RIGHT BECAUSE IT'S NOT, JUST SAYING THAT WE ALL DO THAT KIND OF STUFF

Gosh, I know I'm probably no getting my point across, here lemme try to say this in an easier way. Erm... Justin Timberlake is human. Humans sin. Okay. Sinning is not good at all. We all do it, however, intentionally, from lying to murdering. Big or small consequences can come from any of them. DWI is terrible. I hate when I hear about anyone doing that. You have a right to be angry, I am angry at Justin. But I hate how the already Justin haters are taking advantage of every thing he does and making him seem worse than he is. You can hate him, whatever, but you can't stand beside him everywhere he goes, paper and pen, and mark down his every sin, calling him "even worse than before" with every count. Being drunk is bad!!! Driving while drunk is bad!!! But we should feel sorry for him that he doesn't seem to be able to find an outlet in something else. And we shouldn't hold up his every action, dangerous or not, against him. If we all counted everyone's sins, we would all add up to the same amount of terrible that Justin Timberlake is. We are all dumb humans. We shouldn't hold up everything against each other. We don't know the whole story of anything. All we know is that he was driving drunk. He was probably stressed, trying to have a good time, other stuff. This doesn't make it right. But it should cause us to be more cautious about the situation. Most of the people who bully have things going on at home that is causing them to let out their anger on others. Not saying that's right, but we shouldn't call them "bad people" and basically say "he did this so we're more better than them." That may not be how you think of it, but it's what you're saying.

I really hope I am not making people feel guilty, that is the last thing I want. I just want people to understand my view. If I made anyone feel guilty or it seemed that way, I apologize, that's not how I meant it at all. I just didn't agree with stuff, and I wanted to say what I thought, just how you just sent me what you thought.

Hope I said this right. I may not have because I am bad at explaining things through type. I'm sorry if I offended anyone, I love you all and mean nothing rude. 💕💕❤❤💕💕❤❤💕💕

-Jessi

[nichelink]

(this post was originally written in feb but i got too scared to post it until now.)

after making [this post] where i went into some detail about not wanting "doctor+patient" terms for nichelink, i would also like to talk about why i specifically don't want and will not coin "yandere+target" type terms.

[tv tropes page for yandere]

i do understand why people identify with the trope and yandere characters. i have a lot of empathy for people who love obessively and fixate on another person to an extreme extent and generally consider myself well-versed in understanding mental illnesses (especially heavily marginalized ones like bpd and other pds). and to understand better, i have spent a lot of time looking into the irl yan community on tumblr.

but i do not believe that identifying as a yandere, at least as the internet currently does it, is a healthy coping mechanism, and therefore i won't allow my term to encourage it. my reasons:

i have never once seen a japanese person saying their approval of this or identifying this way, it has always seemed to me that it's white anime fans who identify this way, and that's very uncomfortable to me. while i am also white, i don't think it's right that there's a portion of the liom community that encourages white creators who coin "subsets" of yandere and dedicates a huge portion of their public identity to identifying with this when it is a japanese cultural trope.* i don't see this brought up at all in the liomogai community, with one of the only exception being [one anonymous ask] from the discussion when dissomei was needing a new name.** "I'd like to submit a gentle request as an asian BPD haver to please reconsider 'yanno' as a prefix. I know it comes from someone who reclaims yandere, but I am not comfortable, as someone who's culture AND mental illness are both targeted by the 'yandere' trope, for people who cannot reclaim it to use 'yan' as a suffix for an umbrella term."

the online culture of irl yans is deeply concerning to me. i encountered a lot of people openly encouraging harm to their "beloved," and while i understand that yes, having violent urges exists, and that there is a difference between encouraging acting on it and simply mentioning it, and of course it affects your life and your relationships... i saw very little accountability or acknowledgement of how these actions could be inappropriate, and more often saw people encouraging fixating on yandere characters even heavier than someone already does.

i also saw at least one case of idolizing yuka takaoka, a real woman who attempted to murder her boyfriend because she loved him so intensely. yuka was described as an irl yandere by the media and gained a following from yandere fans for this, and after being released from prison has become a streamer and cosplayer.

*i am aware that japanese irl yanderes may exist and i may simply have just not encountered them, however. if this applies to you, i am more than open to talking with you (off anon) and seeing what your thoughts are.

**this is an example. it is not me saying dissodic-archive did anything wrong or is bad or something. i don't believe they did.

even if i coined these kinds of terms and made them 18+ only, i still don't believe it can be healthy. now, once again, at the same time: i do understand this might seem a bit hypocritical. nichelinking is intended to include things that at a face value wouldn't be seen as healthy or something you should desire, like being an object owned by another person, but from my perspective terms like that are less realistic to human life and therefore seem removed enough that i think it is inherently easier for people wanting to use that term to understand where the boundary lies.

alternative terms which may be seen as alternatives may be coined, however; but i again worry about this seeming hypocritical. for example i am planning a nichelink that imitates the dynamic of a kidnapper and the person they kidnapped. my main justification so far is that my post will include lots of emphasis on how the term is intended for people with desires for consensual non-consent dynamics to do something specific that is agreed upon in advance... and also that "a kidnapper" is not a concept that originated from outside the united states.

this post is also not to say that i Hate you or something if you identify with yandere tropes, because i do not, and i don't want people who do to feel alienated or unwelcome here; but i still i wanted to explain my thought process. i get nervous when i feel like my actions may be misunderstood, so i wanted to share where i am coming from and give the nichelinkers out there context on why i am saying this.

commentary/opinions on this are welcome even if you disagree but please assume good faith and use tone tags with me.

[archivalofsins]

Hey now that some folks are out of bounds- "LET'S PARTY"!

Gunsli what do you mean? Remember when I said I haven't talked about what verdict I've personally wanted for Kotoko. That's because I couldn't care less, I like both options when it comes to the narrative of Milgram.

I am in no way condoning Kotoko's behavior I'm solely saying this from a narrative perspective.

Let me explain through exploring how I view the options~

So why would some want Kotoko Guilty?

Well the reason for that is simple she jumped some people's favorites and could do it again if voted Innocent.

Haruka and Mu are still sitting at Guilty. Their fans have a vested interest in not indulging Kotoko's mindset further. Secondarily she threatened to kill Mikoto. Thirdly she's shown through her second voice drama and song that she no longer believes in Es' judgment and is vying for the role of guard herself. Anyone who recognizes any of these things and are opposed to them happening will vote her guilty.

Meaning fans of Haruka, Mu, and Es all have a reason to be wary of Kotoko getting a second Innocent verdict.

Though in the words of Utena,

"But was that really such a good idea?"

Kotoko's trials are questioning the degree of separation necessary needed to excessively punish another. Because no one knew her victims when this started it was easier to forgive her behavior. I mean we only have one side of the story and she's so passionate against evil doers. Why would anyone not take her at face value.

So, what will be gained from saying I'm okay with you jumping strangers who I viewed as in the wrong without knowing a thing about them based solely on your word. Yet, I know the people here I know them well and I think some of them are nice. These people didn't deserve the way you treated them.

Though what makes the prisoners better than any of Kotoko's victims? Is it such a good idea to present that people only matter dependent on how well we know them? Is that any different from for example Shidou's mindset.

"Someone’s value cannot be the same as another."/"Should choose between superiority or inferiority."

Is there a sense of equality if one were to instead just,

"Hate evil as the evil that it is."

Or are both ways of thinking to binary and rigid to fully be acceptable. Are the audience hypocrites in finding Kotoko Innocent for killing killers we don't know and then finding her guilty for simply harming some killers that some of us feel like we know.

That's the question of her trials. Do people hate the sin or just the sinner? That's the question of Milgram overall. How much can another person judge someone. Over what ammount of time will one become more lenient or forgiving on someone.

And should one even be more lenient on another person just because of how long they've known them or how well their beliefs allign with their own?

In the same vein people would want Kotoko innocent for the same reasons she stated she dislikes. Not because they believed what she's doing is right or acceptable but just because they like her. She would be innocent for no reason other than being a killer we've gotten to know. Enforcing once again that she is no different from anyone else here. A thing that she has been shown to be upset about and afraid of through her second mv.

She'd just be innocnet because the majority would think they know her well enough. That's she's good deep down, she just made a mistake, was a little too extreme. Even though her actions were bad it doesn't mean she is. To be forgiven under those circumstances. Oh, she'd really hate that I'd imagine.

Simply because she wants to find others that understand her mindset and behavior people that view these things in the same and truly believe she's right. Finding her Innocent while still stating her actions were wrong in this case finding what she did forgivable wouldn't be enough. Now she could assume that everyone found her innocnet because they agreed with her so hard.

However she was innocent by a pretty large percent last time and her mv still shows her anxieties around her own innocence... So, I personally doubt that'd be the case.

So I feel like being innocent again would just strengthen her feelings of being treated like the rest. Especially considering even more people are innocent including Mikoto. It just doesn't seem like it would give her the feeling of drowing in the knowledge that she's right that she's stated to want from the jump.

So, I think in response she'd do exactly what she's doing now and what was implied she'd do from her first cover Anti Beat. Lash out in order to hide her own insecurity and take some control over the situation. The best way for her to do that is to put herself in Es' position to prove how above the others she really is.

Which that outcome would be pretty cool too actually.I would like to see how they'd follow through on the foreshadowing in Yonah if she were Innocent. Even if I do have a good idea on how they would.

Personally I just think she'd lash out even more just to prove to herself that she's better. Because she simply always feels inferior on some level. Like it's not difficult to tell that she doubts her own feelings and philosophy. Especially since she seems to need to be told she's right because she already feels she's wrong but she hates being told she's right. because she knows better than anyone how wrong she is.

So, she'd just keep stepping over the boundaries of others and put them in a position beneath her. The same thing we see her try to do with Es over the course of her second trial just to assert that she's doing what must be done. She's doing what others are too weak to do themselves all to stregthen her own feelings of vindication.

It's a lose/lose situation no matter how I look at it. That's what makes it so lovely. When nothing can be right that in turn means nothing can be wrong. These are just events that are happening att that point. The label of good and bad is completely up to the observer.

That's the best part of Milgram. It goes exactly where the audience is willing to take it.

Oh but Gunsli you wouldn't want Kotoko to run the prison and Es to just defer to her would you? That could be bad. You wouldn't want Mikoto to possibly die? You wouldn't want anything bad to happen to Haruka and Mu the only two guilty? It's not about what the fuck I or anyone else wants.

It's about the characters wills after the last bell tolls everything that happens next is up to the sort of people they naturally are.

Isn't that exhilirating. Isn't the most equisite kindness a story and author can give. The opportunity for the reader to enact their own will on the media and the media enact its will on the audience in kind?Isn't there something so miraculous about that. It's a thing of immeasurable beauty a once and life time experience. At the same time isn't it also the most disgutsting thing one could ever do to others and themselves.

Doesn't everyone want to see it- What lies at the end of Milgram? The culmination of all these choices all these clashing wills. Kotoko's trial is so engaging to me because it sets the stage for trial three perfectly. It's interesting because Innocent or Guilty the cog will still turn.

The worst part is the question what is judgment? What good does it do? What would Innocent serve? To be told you're right or acceptable just because someone assumes they know you and sees the good in you. That they know what you'd do and who you are deep down. It's soul crushing isn't it? It can be painful can't it? Even heartbreaking.

The hero some see are they real was the victim? If a person doesn't push what can they learn? What will one do when the things they don't yet know become things they can't unknow? Will they lash out in anger saying this wasn't what I thought it would be? Will they dig themselves in even deeper? Try to force that thing into being the shape they wanted it to be?

To me the fact is with this case Innocent and Guilry are quite frankly the same thing. If she's guilty she's no better than the others she judged and if she's innocent with the rest of them that still means she's no better than they are. She'll never be drowning in that feeling of being right unless everyone is guilty except her.

I find that mindset of Kotoko's that insecurity which ultimately stops her from accepting any kindness. So, very touching and human. Though it's ultimately going to fuck us all over no matter the outcome. It's tragic she was last in line. So tragic that she was put there-

Jackalope must be laughing about that placement choice just a bit. The same with Muu who wanted everyone innocent. Maybe if they just showed up a bit earlier the things they desired would have been possible.

Too bad, so tragic... I wonder just who put them there again.

Regardless of if one knows the outcome. Despite what one speculates. I wonder... Should ones morals change based on that sort of thing. Personally I think a person should do what they'd regret least. That's usually how I do things.

This isn't a post I spent days on or anything just some thoughts on the verdict outcomes for Kotoko specifically. Plus what I think the logic around it is. I personally think both choices lead to bad things for each prisoner not just Kotoko. So, this isn't the only trial like this but it was funny for it to be the one where this is most apparent to me.

I'm really interested in both options because I'm the sort that would like to have both if possible. It's so incredibly unfair that there's no way to see it all here.

[neuship-zone]

Ok so a lot of your responses seem to just skip over the actual points of a post. Either you just don’t understand what you’re talking about or you’re playing dumb on purpose. If I’m responding to proshippers saying that ‘fiction doesn’t effect reality’ with evidence that it DOES, then you can’t ‘disagree’ by saying ‘oh well it doesn’t effect it 1:1’ cause that wasn’t what was being said. The point is that decades of fiction being used to oppressed and belittle people and it WORKING because it upholds stereotypes, is proof enough that fiction does effect reality, no matter what scale it is, it just DOES and claiming that it doesn’t at all is wrong. Lurker blogs smd u say u ‘don’t agree but don’t wanna write a whole response rn’ is just a lazy way of saying u feel attacked cuz ur not a real minority for liking fictional abuse porn

First of all a lot of this is projection and stereotyping (ESPECIALLY the last sentence), and a clear indication that you did not look once at my blog (which is odd because you would have had to do so in order to send this ask). This shows me that not only are you a hypocrite (since the post you're referring to was literally about how stereotypes are harmful), but that you’re not sending this ask in good faith. This would normally be where I stop, but I'm going to humour you instead.

Secondly, you seem to be misinterpreting what I meant by "I disagree". I never said that what you said about fiction being used to discriminate against people is wrong, but I didn't like your approach of the topic.

But hey, since you asked soooooo nicely (/s), here's a full response I typed up at school today:

I cannot deny the harm that stereotypes in fiction can cause. However, I see them as less of an example of fiction affecting reality, and more of an example of reality affecting fiction (people seem to forget about that during debates like these). Some people are misogynists who believe specific values about women, and they reflect that in the content they make. Women, and other people affected by misogyny, see it and are disappointed (unless they aren’t, I talk about this later). Misogynists see it and revel in their misogyny. And other people? Well, it depends. If that is the only content they are exposed to, and they are encouraged to see it as only the truth, it is effectively propaganda.

However, we forget two important things. First of all, we live in a world where media stereotypes are actively being discussed about. Often when I engage in discussions about the stuff I like, I will inevitably end up talking about deeper themes like racism or homophobia. Unless one lives in an extremely abusive household, doesn’t use the internet, or is genuinely a bigot (which are all factors not affected by fiction), I would find it hard to believe that the average person can engage online with people about a misogynistic piece of media and not realise it’s misogynistic. And awareness is important, because when people realise that what they’re being given is not real, it WILL have less of an effect. That’s why propaganda is more effective when it is a person’s only source of information, and why it becomes less effective when the person is surrounded by people with diverse opinions.

Secondly, we are still talking about fictional characters. It’s great to have serious discussions about fictional characters in relation to real topics, but these are not real people. As such, people do have the right to treat them however they want. I may not agree that certain things are okay or should be done, but ultimately there is nothing I can do. For similar reasons, it would be absurd to say that someone who likes a character who is a misogynist (or a misogynistic portrayal of sth) is a misogynist themselves. There are many reasons why someone would like a character or show despite it being misogynistic (nostalgia, liking other character traits, etc). Heck, there are even people who like the show BECAUSE it’s misogynistic, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing (though now we start to tread murky waters)

There are a couple of reasons why people would like problematic content. They may relate to the problematic themes in question. For example, in context, someone could be suffering from internalised misogyny, or be an ex-misogynist themselves, and relates to the characters for that reason. Some (like me) could just be interested in problematic themes (not in a sexual way, before you start hurling accusations at me). Personally, I find writing problematic themes interesting because they force me to have to think from the perspective of someone I don’t agree with or see myself as in any way (or occasionally, it’s a way of addressing certain traumas) and I find that psychologically interesting.

As for the people who just get off to stuff like that? Well, even that can have nuance to it. Some just have paraphilias, some do so to cope with trauma, some do so to enact fantasies that they can’t irl, and some…..are just really weird no offence. You can never really know, so I don’t judge, but it’s not something I’m fond of, and I do think doing it for extended periods of time CAN be harmful (keyword: can, it’s not guaranteed). However, I’m not a therapist, I can’t and won’t tell people what they can and can’t do. But personally I would just block these people if they make me feel uncomfy.

You can feel free to disagree with anything I’ve said (my word is not gospel after all). In fact, I encourage you to disagree and tell me why, because I want us to have civilised discussions. But do not put your half-baked assumptions in my mouth. I’m a person, not a caricature.

(Though, your original post was specifically talking about content which "glorifies harmful content". In my experience, "glorifies harmful content" could mean fuck all depending on whom I'm talking to so I'm mostly just talking about such topics in general, not the stuff that is explicitly just porn, which I have a more negative opinion about)

[gatekeeper-watchman]

The Right to Life

          “The Right to Life”, the title given to the very important issue of abortion prevention, seems to especially come to life at the beginning of every election cycle, used by certain politicians as a tool to arouse and exacerbate the emotions of the electorate in an effort to secure votes. In between election campaigns, it seems we hear very little about the issue. It only comes up when Joe Blow wants to run for office or be re-elected. I’m sorry, but this aggravates me to no end. This issue should not be politicized. Especially significant is that the most, if not greatest, support for this issue comes from the “Christian Right”.

Now, let’s be clear about this–let there be no doubt. Although, at times not a very good one, I am a Christian; and I firmly believe in the right to life. I am opposed to abortion, except in those cases when it is medically necessary, where the pregnancy is the result of incest, or, arguably, some other extenuating circumstance is involved. Babies can always be placed for adoption, for which, the Lord knows, there is always a continuous and raging market. As we speak, Black Market Profiteers are kidnapping babies, raiding nurseries in hospitals, and stealing them from wherever they can be found. There is especially no need to kill them when there are plenty of those who want them and will love and care for them. The right to the sanctity of life demands the right to life, as redundant as that may be sound.

Now, let us get back to the “Christian Right”. They are professed Christians, born again, just as I professed, above, for myself; but, let me tell you one thing about Christianity. You can’t profess one segment of Christ without, also, accepting the other beliefs that go along with the faith. You cannot. You cannot pick and choose what you want to believe. To do otherwise is downright hypocritical. You can’t have one part without the other.

What am I talking about? I’ll get down to it. It’s this. When it comes time to go to the polls, many voters will vote for a politician based upon this one issue, or perhaps it might be another. I've used this issue, “The Right to Life” for a reason, but it is only as an example. The point is, there are others–other singular issues on which a voter may choose to focus. Too many of us don’t look at the “big” picture when we vote. We are very myopic in our views.

Back to my example–that politician who is so vigorously proclaiming the right to life in order to get your vote, is also supporting other issues on his platform which the voter simply chooses to ignore. On the one hand, he, the politician, will vote to support the saving of millions upon millions of lives from abortion; while, on the other, he will choose to ignore, in times like these, the plight of the forty-seven millions of us living in poverty, with twenty million unemployed or underemployed, including an approximate million homeless women and children as well as men, sleeping on the streets, under bridges and/or in their automobiles. In these times when there are three people unemployed for every job opening and a job is extremely difficult to find (impossible for some), he will vote against the extension of emergency unemployment benefits; he will vote for the reduction, if not elimination, of the food stamp program (while, in the same instance, vote for "welfare" grants to millionaire farmers [some of whom are members of Congress] under the guise of subsidies); he will vote for the reduction of Medicaid; he votes against national healthcare. Also, just an afterthought, what would our nation’s condition be if the twenty millions of us in the prisons (this is on top of the forty-seven million in poverty), were to come into the unemployment lines (Of course, not all, but the release of many prisoners is currently under consideration)?

I could go on and on, but I’m sure you understand what I am saying. This whole political process is broken. It makes no sense at all–and much of it, unfortunately, has been cast in the name of Christianity; which, Christianity it is not. Warfare is not Christianity. Torture is not Christianity. Lying, cheating, stealing, fraud, and deception are not Christianity–no matter how you cut it. Soon, we will again have an opportunity to vote–our next election is just down the road. Look at and study the real issues. Be careful for whom you vote. What you think you see, might not be what you get.

From: Steven P. Miller, @ParkermillerQ, gatekeeperwatchman.org Founder and Administrator of Gatekeeper-Watchman International Group Sunday, July 28, 2024, Jacksonville, Florida., Duval County, USA.  X … @ParkermillerQ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/Sparkermiller.JAX.FL.USA, Instagram: steven_parker_miller_1956 #GWIG, #GWIN, #GWINGO.

[meowwrites]

“to the twelfth agate concubine,

(tw for mentions of suicide!)

My lady, I apologize that you must see me this way, for I know that you care for me just as I have you and I, as your sole lady-in-waiting, was one of the few people who would look you in the eye and hold respect for you. I apologize for my definite absence in your life from now on, and I hope you can forgive me.

A year ago today, I understand you attempted to end your own life just as I have now. You were dressed in this exact clothing, your hair put up the same way as mine, and you had written a letter the same way I have. This is no mistake on my part, I am purposely mimicking you.

You, my lady, are full of splendor and delicacy, one in which I am proud to say I have served for as long as I did. I apologize for being so rude to you in the beginning of our relationship, even despite the fact we were both in similar positions. You never deserved such treatment, and I never deserved the high praise you have given me.

My lady, being by your side has fulfilled me, and I cannot bear the thought of you leaving me as you wanted to a year ago. You have a beautiful heart and soul, one that should be praised to the heavens, not to be wasted by hanging rope. You deserve a life you want to live and so much more.

Everything I have done for you up until this point, is done out of love, even now as I leave you.

I was never a religious person, but for you I would be. You are my god, my universe, you are the one thing I hold dearly above all. You are the one I worship, and I hold no regrets other than the fact that you will be alone after my death.

I have never been able to give you your own jewelry nor dresses, for I was never taught how to sew correctly or make fine jewelry, so please consider this parting as a gift rather than a loss. I’m giving you the chance to lead the life you always wanted.

I left my clothes on your bed. I also left my jewelry and my daily routine in writing. I left every letter I have every written to anyone. Please, take my place in this world. I will act as you. The emperor will assume you have died, and will presumably ask you whether or not you would like to keep working in the palace under the pretense you are me.

I understand you like to draw. You have piles of sketchbooks hidden away; you engrave your drawings on your walls and on rice grains, you are extremely talented. It’s as if your hands bring life to everything you touch. I would like you to pursue this passion of yours, to be the woman you have always wanted to be.

This is selfish of me to ask of you, I could imagine you’re in indescribable pain right now, and I once again apologize. I don’t mean to make you feel more pain than you have gone through. Please know, one of us would have definitely gone this way, and I would rather it be me over you.

I made an oath once I become your lady-in-waiting, that I would serve you diligently and without hesitation. And if I could, I want to do so for eternity. To remain by your side forevermore would be my greatest honor.

Please don’t shed tears over me. You’re too pretty to be wasting tears over someone below you. I would rather you hate me than wish for my return.

I love you.

That is selfish of me to say. I know that. I’m unworthy to even speak to you. I’m unworthy to even touch you if it weren’t for the fact I’m your lady-in-waiting. I’m a hypocrite for loving you.

But I’m your hypocrite. You will always be my lady and I will always be by your side even in death.

I love you even in death. There will never be a moment where you are without me.

I live to serve you, and even in death, I will serve you.

I pray that we will meet again, in our next life.

Goodnight, my love. May we meet again, when morning comes.”

[ph0bia-archives]

Interpretation is entirely personable and I do not mean to argue against your own opinions and views but. Personally cannot see DiMA as some manipulative monster. This is just me ranting cause he’s one of the best written fallout 4 characters imo. Obviously spoilers ahead :3

For one— he doesn’t maliciously manipulate Kasumi. From the sounds of it, he just asks her questions that lead her to believing she’s a synth. She was isolated, and felt that she stood out even in her own family. She wanted a reason to leave, to think that she was connected to machinery more than it being a personal comfort. Acadia is a refuge for synths. It makes no sense for DiMA to lure normal people there?

For two— of course he acts like the institute! His whole existence is to form a personality around experience. He grew up in the institute, taking in their methods and morals. The only expressed reason he grew disillusioned to them is because Nick suffered. But that’s still all his first experiences. The institute, and people hurting synths.

For three— I don’t think it’s ever explicitly said what far harbor was like before the sole survivor gets there/before synth Avery. Maybe they were hostile towards synths, or Acadia. At the very least, they’re still hostile towards the children of atom, a group who 1. Before Tektus we’re (if I’m not mistaken) relatively peaceful, and 2. Did not react negatively or with hostility towards Synths. This is a simple baseline, but remember. DiMA went from only knowing people who hurt synths for their own gain to sitting alone in a cave for a year, to people who didn’t want to hurt him. The safety of synths is his first priority. Replacing Avery is extremely fucked, yes, it’s exactly what the institute does. Because that’s the first things DiMA knows. If far harbor was aggressive against Acadia, what should DiMA have done? Probably definitely not murdered a woman and replaced her, but from his perspective, that was probably the least damaging option, rather than letting his synths die, or killing the harbormen. He removed the memories likely because that’s how the institute functions! He was acting like them! The people who hurt the person he considered family!

Four— I didn’t actually choose/explore the routes where you’re with the institute or the brotherhood of steel, so. Can’t really say for certain my thoughts on his reactions, but. I think it would make most sense for him to act peacefully if you say that before giving him the tapes, because he wouldn’t have an idea of how he’d reacted previously. He wouldn’t know he had the experience of combatting groups who’d want Acadia exterminated, he doesn’t know the extent he’d go to preemptively keep Acadia safe.

Five— with the replacing tektus plan, it goes back to perhaps WHY he removed the memory of replacing avery. That’s what the institute does. If he remembers that experience of doing the same thing as his creators, maybe he’d integrate that into his personality. I don’t know if it’s fleshed out HOW DiMA’s mind works, if it’s like an actual person who can pick and choose what they learn from, or if it’s all turned into gained knowledge, or if I’m a dummy who needs to brush up on lore (good time to say that most of my interpretations came from my play through of far habit which I didn’t know existed until I accidentally started it, so. If anything I say or think is in contradiction to another route or such. Blame the naivety). But after he has that tape, he knows this is 1. Something that worked and 2. Something he’s willing to do with all the same reasoning as before. So he does it again.

Over all. I think if DiMA is hypocritical it works. He’s a machine over a hundred years old. That’s a lot of experience for a mfer who’s mind is supposed to develop and base itself on experience! His mind likely grows and changes rapidly based on events that happen to him. I can’t imagine he’s hypocritical without being written that way. Everything bad he does is for Acadia. I cannot interpret him as some malicious leader who wants to wipe out the other factions. Just someone who’s learned that sometimes the ends justify the means.

Anyways sorry autism rant OVER

Fo4 Far Harbor DLC spoilers

Replaying Far Harbor and watching vids abt the different lore it’s impossible to see DiMA as anything but an evil, hypocritical, and downright stupid monster. I don’t get how so many people love him.

He’s a murderer who had plans to obliterate an entire people and who did murder and replace an innocent woman. When you confront him about those memories that he purposefully removed bc he couldn’t live with how evil he is he’s like “I can’t believe I did that :’( we should totally do it again tho that’s a really good idea.” And then you can!!! It’s literally the exact same horrible things that the Institute does! He manipulates Kasumi (who we can determine by talking to the Institute, the people she knows, and by killing her in an Institute quest is not a synth) into believing she is a synth and lures her to the island with this manipulation!! He manipulates many others like this too to get his evil desires done in pretty obvious ways. I would count many of his synths, Nick, and the player among his targets.

If you’re sided with the Institute and you tell him and his synths to come back to it he says no but that he will not run and will not attack you. He condemns all of the synths in his “sanctuary” by taking not action and allowing you to go report back their existence to the Institute so that coursers can come reclaim or kill everyone there!! Same thing happens if you tell him you’re with the Brotherhood and synths existence is an affront to humanity he’s like “okay but we’re not gonna leave still” and then you can bring the Brotherhood forces to murder them all.

If you blow up some of the factions on the island he’ll be like “You’ve only brought death here >:( I hope you can live with yourself you monster!” Like that wasn’t his WHOLE ASS PLAN that he removed his memories of bc he couldn’t live with himself!!! Fucking hypocrite!!! This is only a few of his crimes. He is so evil and stupid it hurts.

[gauntletqueen]

That person Nintendo went after was genuinely a very very bad and exploitative scammer, some reblogs on that post go into it in detail including how taking a portion of wages is a standard way to collect fines that cannot be immediately paid in full. I dont feel bad that he received legal action, but considering the total fine is so large he might have his wages taken from for life, I do feel like Nintendo is overreaching to scare others into not trying the same thing. Which I think is a really dumb and dystopian "we have the money to fuck this one guy up real bad so you better not try the same" situation that makes me think less of the company, a company I already disliked.

Bit of a meaningless ask, sorry, just saw a lot of people thinking he was some innocent modder and Nintendo was big and evil and scary, but really Nintendo just really screwed over one bad guy way more than was necessary and it was a gross misuse of power to scare others into not messing with them. No harm meant by this, just wanted to say this to someone, if you feel differently I'd like to hear about it

First off, yes, the story is more nuanced but Nintendo still comes out the villain with how insanely severe the punishment is. Second off, this isn't a single instance, Nintendo has a long and disgusting history of fucking over fans and creators. They are a built-for-profit corporation which does everything in its power to earn more and more each year, no matter what. It has been repeatedly proven that things like piracy and fan games don't really hurt sales, and for Nintendo to crack down on it again and again shows their disregard for the consumers beyond how much money they can extract from us. This should be taken as a harsh reminder of that if nothing else. The same goes for every other corporation, but Nintendo gets away with it the most because people are blinded by nostalgia goggles and the like.

To go more in-depth, Gary Bowser wasn't a "scammer". He ran a company that made pirating hardware for consoles, including the Nintendo Switch. Their products allowed you to run pirated and homebrew software. There wasn't any scamming there, the products functioned as advertised. The problem was that they contained DRM protection, preventing others from copying the software's code. Using an unofficial cartridge would lead to bricking the console, which is definitely hypocritical. It was also faulty and could, unintentionally trigger even in the original cartridges on rare occasions when you messed with settings too much for example. So yes, that is bad, BUT obviously Nintendo doesn't give a shit about that. All they care about is that someone used a Nintendo product or IP in a fashion which they did not ordain, profit or not, and they once again acted with extreme prejudice. It's highly likely that Gary Bowser will never, ever be able to repay the massive debt to Nintendo before his death, especially considering his poor health and age will make it hard for him on the job market in general. And there is no way Nintendo's lawyers didn't realise this, it isn't to recuperate any supposed losses. It is, as you say, a scare tactic, because Nintendo's higher ups care that much more about their money-making products over a human life which they have, effectively, destroyed. Regardless of how good of a person they might be. (all this info regarding the case can be found in the articles in the post I reblogged, and articles linked in the reblogs you mentioned)

[captnjacksparrow]

As someone who tries to stay away from analyses because they tend to bash other characters to prove a point and they very often have a tendency to see the view from one stand point and never think of others, I find your analyses soothing. You rarely take just one side and you're not doing any mental acrobacy to prove your point and that's critical thinking, being able to see things from more sides and not seeing things in black and white. Of course you're not perfect but no one is and it's fine. Keep on doing this and I hope others will learn from you, if you had any recommendations for similar blogs, feel free to share

Thank you so much, Anon.

I think my write-ups are nothing new. It's just that Kishimoto's writing reflects in my posts. So, all your words in this ask is something I would direct it towards the Author. Because there are stories which talks about Revenge, Discovering oneself, Anti-Government, Good vs Bad, Righteousness and all that. But this story's core theme is Understanding and Anti-War.

Best Example is, Pain Arc.

What impressed me in that Arc was that scene when Naruto was seething with Anger and Hatred after seeing Nagato for the first time, as he rightfully should be because he is the looking at the person who is responsible for the death of his Master and Sensei. But Naruto had the strong mental integrity to control his hatred and started to ask Nagato, the right question.

"I don't know a thing about you... Tell me your story... And then I'll give you my Answer"

Naruto actually wants to listen to the other side of the story and come to a conclusion rather than striking at him just like that. And this is what Naruto has been doing from the First Arc... Haku, Gaara, Nagato, Obito were all the people he put an effort to understand before straight-up killing them like the rest of the other ninjas.

Look at the other side and see if you can still say the same thing. Otherwise, you are just a total hypocrite. Wonderful Message!!!.

This scene just explains it all.

“What about my Master? My Sensei? My Friends? My Home!?”

As an Audience, I was extremely devastated and couldn't move on from the shock I received after Pain obliterated Konoha. I was also feeling just like Naruto.

But the tables turned... All in a second.

"But what about my family? My friends? My Home? You Konoha Ninja aren't the only ones allowed to speak of Peace and Harmony, especially after you did to my village what I just did to yours."

Pain is simply asking some painful, logical, hard-hitting questions for which Naruto had no answer...

And Look at Naruto's dejected face. Even as a viewer, I didn't have an answer either. I can't even pick any sides and Nothing is black and white anymore. Unlike Kakuzu, Hidan, Deidara and Sasori... Nagato is not doing this for fun or money. He has a purpose and has an extreme pain behind that purpose.

But it doesn’t mean that Nagato was right though. His pain is understandable but his methods are not. 

And that’s why Naruto’s decision of “It’s enough... Let’s stop this.... You have suffered because of us. And We also have suffered because of you... Let’s put an end to this vicious cycle of revenge/hatred and let’s think about the future” is the right decision, no matter how you look at it. It’s idealistic. Yes. But also, It’s a tough choice to make considering the loss Naruto & Konoha has suffered....

Which is also very similar to...

How Hashirama and Madara came to an agreement of Peace by setting aside their Generation after Generation of their ill-feelings and decided to unite together. 

So, If the Narrative itself is pushing this dilemma where you cannot take sides because there are no innocents on one side but an Understanding could stop pointless conflicts and ill-feelings, then I feel while writing my post, I should also think in a similar way, think through others' POV and stop being biased by putting the blame on a single entity...

As for the blog recommendation, 

I got this inspiration to write lengthy posts with Panels only after reading one of the Quora writer’s meta posts over there. However she is a NaruSaku Shipper, though. But she is my favourite when it comes to bringing up her points and explaining it in an understandable way. It’s been months since I read her posts last time... But her link is here.. [Link]. (She covered good topics other than shipping if you scroll down her page but stupid people disgusted her comment section it seems, so she is not writing those topics anymore)

However when it comes to Tumblr though, I’ve seen this person (senjuhashirama) wrote an excellent post about Will of Fire. That post clearly explained as to how Will of Fire concept can be used in a good way as well as in a bad way. [[I didn’t mention their blog explicitly because I never had a conversation with them, so I feel it’s inappropriate to specify them here.]]. I’ll attach that post... [Here]

And then there is this Excellent Analysis post about Obito in all of the internet.. [Post Link].. It's just WoW!!! Even if you don't like Obito, but by the end of that post you would eventually understand the depth of that character. There's no bias, no tear wiping, no blame shifting or no asspull agenda making. It's exactly how the author has written his character. These are the kind of posts I truly crave for.

I’ve never seen anyone here in Tumblr writing about all the topics... And Even if they do, they go full on Anti-Anti-Anti Konoha and Pro-Pro-Pro Uchiha (mostly Sasuke stans) and you will see them hating half of the characters in Narutoverse (especially Naruto) which goes against everything the story has set up and eventually they blame it on bad writing which I can't suggest from my side.

As for my imperfection, I think I know what you mean and I am kinda being intentional (??). Lol. You mean my Sakura/Hinata bashing (mostly Sakura)... in posts they are not relevant, Right?. I do think about this a lot and was conflicted about it... But then, her fans are self-insertive in every part of the story (even in a story where she isn't relevant) and it's very very hard to take part in the public fandom discussion without having her fans forcefully spamming their ideas everywhere. So, I kinda want to show their theories are utterly wrong through my posts.

So, Thanks again for this Ask. I thoroughly enjoyed writing this.