#might be the most reasonable political choice that they could possibly make right now

[montanamp3]

thinking about her again <3

(*zhen from psycholonials by andrew hussie)

[oh-no-its-bird]

<climbs in through your windows and falls fca first onto the floor>

Hey so uh I don't remember if you found a third to Huohua and Hana's team and I just wanted to jump in real quick with a suggestion that I think is around the same age as them-

Nara Ensui

My reasons are thus:

1. While the Ino-Shika-Cho trio is a big thing, clearly not all Yamanakas/Naras/Akimichis can be in one of those cells, and based on the naming convention, it seems to mainly apply to the clan heirs/main family, probably for political relations reasons

2. Ensui (seemingly) wears eyeliner and I feel like that should make him pivotal to the plot

I did actually choose someone to be their third on the team !! They're getting stuck with Kabuto bc I find him fascinating and it'll be a fun way to get Houhua dropped onto Orochimaru's radar

However Ensui is such a fun choice too, I might have to put him in my back pocket for later use. Ur so right, any character w eyeliner immediatley deserves to be elected for plot significance

I will say, I think it'd be so fun if he was added and we did play with like. There weren't enough kids to make an even number of ino-shika-choi teams. Do u think he'd feel left out? How do you think he'd be chosen to be the one excluded that year? So many fun thoughts ,,

Might have to play with that later actually, I like the crumbs of that narrative. Idk if Houhua is gonna pass the chunin exam yet so if he doesn't, maybe his second team can include him? Hana would pass for sure, and Kabuto's whole thing is that he fails it every year.

Actually quick side, note: the fact that this is possibly Kabuto's first chunnin exam (how old is he again ?? I don't fucking remember but not that old) is interesting too, he won't know what he's going into like he does other years

Anyways team (whatever number) my beloveds <3

Does their team number change w the teachers they're given ? Bc like, they were handed to Kakashi first, which would make them team 7 (for like half a day) but after that, are they still team 7? Could be cute if they're called smthn like team 7 and a half

Their team number is constantly shifting w each new teacher they're thrown at, the other teams just start calling them team 7 and a half to make fun of them and it sticks

Team 7 and a half my beloveds <3

Actually. Thinking ab Kabuto now. Having thoughts. Experiencing emotions.

I do think the most interesting result in Houhua being on a team w him would be he recognizes that Kabuto wants to fail the exam on purpose, then somehow, some way, tricks or corners him into passing.

VERY big wrench in Kabuto's plans and Houhua is suddenly on his list of least favorite people. He has BEEF. No idea how we'd get there tho, or if I even wanna fr take it there, I just think it'd be interesting.

ANYWAYS UHH

While I'm here and talking ab the au, take this comment from the vault fic chapter where I posted about the au:

I absoloutley think Jun and Kisame should get to know eachother for sure, itd be so fun !! Idk how exactly, but if nothing else Kisame seems to be great at handling standoffish ice prince bitches (*cough* Itachi *cough*) so he should be surprisingly good w interacting w Jun !

Which also brings up the fact that like. Jun and Itachi interacting would be the funniest thing ever. Because before Itachi hearing that Houhua has some mystery relationship w this guy, they're probably just standing next to eachother in dead silence (it's very peaceful)

But then Jun gets potentially rather violently recruited into Akatsuki, so now he's being very frosty (they are still standing together in dead silence)

And then by the time he melts a little, Itachi has noted the weirdness w Houhua. And now he's being super frosty and incredibly passive aggressive. And also possibly plotting a silent murder.

But Jun has no fucking clue who Houhua even IS so he literally has nothing he can say to explain this shit to calm Itachi down. And also does not care enough to even try to explain. And also Itachi is Itachi and isn't explaining why he himself is mad anyways so Jun has no fucking way of knowing why he's even mad. Or even telling that he is mad bc hes shit at reading people

(They are still standing next to eachother in dead silence)

Kisame comments on how whenever they're w Jun, Itachi is the most animated he's ever seen him. Very impressive work there Jun!

I do not think that Itachi would make a conscious plot to pretend to be in a relationship with Kisame. But I do think it'd be really fucking funny if Itachi, completely without thinking it through, blurts out that he's in a relationship w Kisame w some very vague (and possibly a little manic) only half-thought idea of making Houhua jealous.

Kisame is ???????? but doesn't argue bc Itachi is... probably going somewhere with this? Tho he doesn't understand where.......?

Itachi immediately regrets it (his face is still dead blank and unreadable, but he's screaming internally) but refuses to backtread bc that's embarrassing. He has never admitted to a mistake in his life, and he is not going to start here. (Kisame is going to RUTHLESSLY make fun of him for all of this later, and he will deserve it)

Itachi also blurted this out like. Totally unprompted and probably in the middle of a battle. No one (especially not Houhua) fucking asked. So Houhua, very very confused, goes "????? Good for you ???????? You still murdered our entire clan tho so um ?? I'm gonna keep fighting u? If thats ok?"

(No one in this conversation is leaving with their dignity intact)

I THINK ITD BE SUPER INTERESTING IF HE DID ACTUALLY? Hmm I might have to think ab that one. I wanna make sure all the mangekyou awakenings in this au are as heavy and significant as they really should be, yk? So idk if I'd wanna use Houhua's play dead jutsu for it, it'd feel a bit cheaper to me, just a bit. But then if I played it right ig it could be as heavy as it deserves. Mmmm, choices

Kabuto and Houhua are making direct eye contact going "I smell a rat in here and I KNOW it's not just me"

[heyseihai]

art by jessie yami (fb)

It's christmas in the north again, and this time, Seihai and co had to accompany Tenjin on his last accountability trip of the year, context below the cut:

Seihai, as usual, is the trophy he always loves to boast about. So after two daughters he needs to showcase how proud he is for putting a baby boy in her, and how he is SO sure it's a boy this time, same old, same old red flag man talk.

The daughters had to tag along for soft power reasons. Tenjin can't present any of them as heirs, but daughters = political alliances in the future, so they have to go with him anyway. He must teach them their proper place now, before they grow up and refuse their roles as future branches of his dynasty.

Leiftan was allowed to come only because Tsubomi would be a pain to deal with. Again, this trip looks like family holiday, but it's all about politics. Tsubomi's dettachment from reality could be a problem for the image Tenjin needs to uphold.

Curiously, she's the first to grasp something is wrong. At some point during the travel she finds a bird charm and she tells Leiftan about it, who warns Tenjin right away.

In other words, the Christmas land was destroyed by Crystal-Lance's instability, so companions there ended up taking shelter in Genkaku. During the accountability meeting kitsunes in that location say they're worried such companions might become a problem for their environment.

Leiftan volunteers to go and given that it's the best choice he has at the moment, Tenjin allows it. Given how Tsubomi would be a noisy burden for them during the meeting, he also lets her go with Leif.

During this accountability trip Seihai has been kindly forced to make presence in all meetings, "the boy needs to be in contact with his people and his role sooner as possible" after all. Some say that was the reason for Tennoh's feeble health later on, despite the most common reason being "the northern spirits punishing Tenjin for marrying a serpent instead of a kitsune".

Yuki was probably the only one who was genuinely having fun. She was fascinated by how Chichi-Ue kept everyone's attention, how he seemed so interested in solving those problems. How everyone respected him, even the most ardent complainers. She might not understand half of those things they're talking about, but the atmosphere is fascinating, she wants be like him so much!

Tsubomi's unknown link with the northern spirits helps them calm down the companions. Even Leiftan doesnt understand how she did it, and when they return and he tries to tell Tenjin about it, the king dismisses the idea. He's convinced Leiftan was the one to do all the work, he's just trying to paint Tsubomi in a good light in order to gain some brownie points with him.

In the end, everyone sort of enjoys Christmas the best they can. Yuki playing with Leif's mascot Sapphire; Tsubomi becomes obsessed with bird charms; and Tenjin still insists on giving Seihai his coat despite all the warm clothing she uses. It could be read as a "love language kind of act" of his towards Seihai.

Ooor something he does just because he wanted to be sure his son would be comfortable. And Seihai smiles to herself because: "why would he do that? Kitsunes don't feel cold, let alone baby kitsunes, they don't need coats". She knows he's doing it for her, and Tenjin is angry for being unable to control his overprotective instinct.

The clothes Leif uses now in Genkaku come from a mobile game I used to play, Legend of Phoenix. The black robe and now the golden one are used by a character called Wei Jie.

Padoru padoru and haaaappy christmas!

[reginarubie]

Hi! Reverse Firesteel reader here!

Wow, finally Daenerys view has come!

It seems both Tyrion and Daenerys quite confident that her dragons can take on Vhagar. I mean, yeah it's 2:1. BUT THIS IS FREAKING VHAGAR.

A smaller dragon and a meaner rider — her own ancestor — had killed Aemond Targaryen and Vhagar already once. She would do it another time if he turned out to be real and against to her and she would ensure this time it stuck.

HELLO, even Caraxes was much bigger than any of Dany’s dragons. Not to mention that he was veteran of many battles as much as Vhagar.

Is it even possible on their size? How big are Drogon and Rhaegal right now?

And Daenerys is a descendant of Rhaenyra AND Daemon, so if she had learned her family's history, she can imagine how much Aemond would hate his half-sister and uncle. Is it truly wonder to her he didn't ask her hand?

I can't wait for Daenerys to finally meet Aemond.

Thank you for another fantastic chapter! You are my one of the best hotd fic writer!

Hi @ahristata

You raise fine arguments which we can make as omniscent, external readers/viewers.

Let's try to dissect it all.

What you say about Aemond is 100% right and whilst I believe Caraxes was smaller than Vhagar, he was bigger than Drogon but has Daenerys ever seen another dragon save her own?

Viserys was used to see the dragon's skulls in the throne hall, so if he lived to see Daenerys' dragons he would know how little they actually are if confronted with older dragons, but Daenerys doesn't have that term of paragon.

She might know Vhagar was very big, but she might be overestimating how big Drogon an Rhaegal actually are, she might think that two of them at that size — and growing bigger with each year as she said — could say their own against Vhagar who is bigger, but also older and perhaps slower.

It stands to reason, especially with how powerful the dragons have been physically and psycologically for her, that she would think to easily stand a good chance, especially as, to her knowledge she is the only Unburnt Targaryen in history. As s8 Tyrion put it, she walked into a fire and walked out alive and with three dragons she might also believe that the Iron throne isn't only her right but her destiny, as also displayed in her dragon dreams.

Plus, Daenerys is very young and inexperienced in the politics of the west; in the east her brute strength was good enough to make her the victor (and still she had trouble in Meereen where her rule the most faced resistance; and Yunkai' government she created imploded in the matter of months) and the Dothraki way good enough to get her what she wanted.

She has no recollection of how the Realm actually works, with its lords and feudal system beyond a theoretical knowledge. One good example is the mere fact that whilst she accepts (to which degree it remains to be seen) that her father was a madman she still believes that Viserys ought to have been crowned king and bases her right on Aerys' time as king.

We always say she's hypocrital and she is, but I don't think she is aware of how much of an hypocrit she is. Yes, her father was a madman, but he was still the king.

Yes, Viserys was unfit to rule, but he was still the rightful king.

She thinks she's better than both — and she is — but she also keep basing her birthright on them. Why? Because she doesn't understand that it was the lords who offered Robert the crown after he won the Rebellion; she doesn't accept that. She doesn't respect their choice to determinate themselves because she thinks like an autocrat; not like a queen who actually needs her lords/ladies allegiance to rightfully esercise her “birthright”. She believes to be an illuminated queen because she tries to play nice with opposition, though she really does not, and insetad just exercises her power thinking of all lords and ladies (nobles in the east) to be below them and that she is has been merciful to spare them, as if she doesn't understand that you cannot rule only over those who venerate you. The moment some of the nobles betray her, she punishes all of them.

All of this to say; yes theorically Daenerys knows Vhagar is bigger and battletested, but she also believes in her right and in her dreams and doesn't really understand — because she doesn't have the experience — what that entails, not only about dragonbattle but about the several reasons why Aemond could pose a better candidate and actually has a better chance to rule than her.

So, that's why Daenerys is so confident.

Now Tyrion... Tyrion is a smart man but he also famously can be incapabale of seeing beyond his point of view (which is why he keeps asking himself “where do whores go” pertaining Tysha even after Jaime came clean about it). So yes, he knows how big Vhagar is, he knows his history, but he also knows that Aemond and the Starks had yet to deploy the dragon so it stands to reason that the Stark' honor might keep a tight rein on the dragon.

Daenerys in the East to his knowledge has three dragons (perhaps two, but it's still more than one) and she has used them with little to none prompting, and he believes he might manipulate her better than he could outsmart Aemond and the Starks. Also, Tyrion too, might have read about dragonbattle but has never seen one, he cannot know the difference a saddle might make, or that Daenerys didn't educate herself on that matter.

Yes, Aemond hated Rhaenyra and Daemon, but Dany is not them — just like she's not her father, she might ask forgiveness for their sins but she's not guilty of them and should not be treated as such in her mind — and she is a fullblooded, trueborn Targaryen. In her mind it makes sense, she has two dragons and he one. In her mind the smart thing would be to join their forces.

Plus, never forget, Daenerys thought there might be out there in The world two men who would ride her dragons and whom she could trust — and whilst that's very optimistic — it also displays how she sees herself as the special woman between women, the other riders have to be men, because this way she can be Aegon the Conqueror come again, instead if there was even one woman she'd end up being the side-dish and not the main-course, the consort and not the regnant.

Seeing all of this, coupled with Viserion' death, and the news that this Aemond hasn't even reached out to her — like she was petulant about the nobles in Qart not poisoning her because she was not considered a powerful guest — but chose to marry instead this little girl with no dragon is unthinkable to her. It offende her.

It's gonna be fire when they meet, that's for sure!

Thank you for the lovely message, I hope you have an amazing day/night!

~G.

[anamericangirl]

What do you think about trump possibly getting arrested for fraud?

If he does get arrested it’s nothing more than a maliciously motivated political ploy to keep him from being voted in as the next president. If you’ve paid attention at all to anything since 2016 you will know they’ve been saying they will “get Trump” since he won the election but they never had anything to get him for.

And they still don’t. There’s no real evidence of any crimes and the case against him is so weak it can’t be anything but political. Even anti-trump prosecutors have refused to take it in the past because it’s simply too weak to prosecute. Even the illegal things he supposedly has done were so minimal that the statute of limitations has passed for even the most serious charge they could realistically put against him. Which means they would have to create a crime, read through the lines and misapply the law, all of which they are willing to do to “get Trump.”

Take 5 seconds to research DA Alvin Bragg and it’s obvious he’s doing this for political points. Look at the crime he’s been ignoring in his own district and then ask yourself why. And ask yourself why he’s ignoring those crimes but going after a decades old flimsy case against Trump that there’s next to no evidence for. Even if he gets prosecuted no reasonable jury would ever convict him on such a weak case.

Why are actual serious known crimes committed by the Biden family not being prosecuted but hypothetical crimes by Trump are?

Where is the indictment for Hillary Clinton whom there is a much stronger case against for similar and more serious crimes?

The whole Stormy Daniels case is bs and there’s nothing to prosecute there because while paying hush money is shady and less than decent it’s not illegal. It’s not a crime. Which means if they try him for anything in regards to that they will have to make up a crime and charge him for it.

And anyone who understands what is happening here, even if you hate Trump to your core, should be furious. Because even if you want Trump locked up or whatever, the way this is happening is a disgrace to our country. The way it’s supposed to work is a crime is found and then they find the person who did the crime and in this case what they are doing is finding the person they want to prosecute and then trying to find a crime. And right now people might not care because it’s Trump and Orange Man Bad but forget that it’s Trump. Maybe next time it’s you. Or your mom. Or the kid down the street. The fact that they are doing it to Trump means they are willing to do it and if they get away with it they will do it again.

Another reason this should infuriate people is because it’s an attempt to keep him from being the president. And that should upset you even if you don’t want him to be the president because what they are doing is trying to override the voice of the people. They are trying to choose the next president when it’s not up to them. It’s up to the voters. They want to keep us from being able to vote for or against Trump because they don’t want him to win. We should not allow this because this time it’s Trump but next time it won’t be. We can’t let the establishment pick the candidates and keep us from voting for people just because they don’t want them to be the president. That is not a choice they get to make. That is up to us, the voters.

This is actual election interference.

I know you might not have been looking for that much but that’s how I’m feeling about it right now.

[mariacallous]

The murder of Alexander Navalny and the advance of Russian forces ought to compel the West to unite to defend democratic freedoms.  

As Ukraine runs out of shells and soldiers, it is clear that Europe needs to find the resolve to sustain its war effort.

And as the American far right follows the instructions of Donald Trump and deprives Ukraine of aid, it is equally clear that stopping a Trump second-term is the objective that overrides all others.

Not just for the West in general, but for the United States in particular, whose democratic freedoms Trump threatens.

Surely these simple statements of political reality should not be so hard to grasp. Surely there ought to be an anti-fascist alliance from California to Kyiv.

Tens of millions of people should be putting aside their differences and uniting against a common enemy.

Our times are so frightening because they are doing nothing of the sort. Or, rather, not enough people are prepared to compromise to defend themselves and the best of their societies.

The pro-democracy alliance feels weak and unsure of itself.

Often now, it can seem as if the Kremlin is right, and that all it needs to do is to hold on in Ukraine until Western resolve crumbles.  Often now it also seems to be the case that all Trump needs to do is to count on the US warped electoral system and divisions among his opponents to deliver him power.

Anti-fascism sounds almost a romantic cause as it conjures up images of men and women uniting in the 1930s to defeat the Nazi enemy.

In truth, there was little romantic about anti-fascism in the past, and there is nothing romantic about it now. Putting aside your differences sounds well and good, but in practice it means you must abandon pretty much every principle you have.  You must ally with people you normally oppose, and choke your protests about ideas you normally abhor.  

The underexplored truth is that tyranny and the threat of tyranny remove choice. Alliances against today’s strongmen fly against the central belief of the consumer society that the market will meet our preferences down to the smallest of our whims. Most do not want to abandon their parochial concerns for the greater good.

Two groups make my point for me: US leftists and British Conservatives.

Leftists are the first to shout “fascism”. And yet with Trump making no secret of his desire to install a quasi-dictatorship, they cannot oppose him.

Or rather they cannot lift their eyes and accept that the only way to beat Trump is to vote for the compromised Democrats.

Writing in the current issue of the Nation, a left-wing US journal from the old school, D.D. Guttenplan goes through the reasons why leftists may let Trump win by default.  A little too discreetly for my taste, he refuses to say whether he believes letting Trump win by default is the right thing to do. (“Choosing the lesser evil is never inspiring,” he concludes with a touch of lawyerly caution, “Still, it’s a choice all of us will have to face.”)

Yet Guttenplan is clearly right that disgusted left-wing voters may put their purity before the necessity of stopping Trump’s return to power.

In the swing state of Michigan, American Arab voters are infuriated by Biden’s support of Israel.  "Vote for Palestine. No Biden," say the fliers being handed out at Detroit mosques.

In a tight race it would not take many staying at home or voting for a minor candidate to hand the state and possibly the presidency to Trump. More broadly, and across the US, disgusted left-wing voters have plenty of candidates looking to lure them away from the Democrats.

Cornel West, a leftish academic calls Biden a war criminal and says Israel and the US are “intertwined in genocide”. You could say that Robert Kennedy Junior was a left alternative to Biden. His conspiracy theories appeal to sections of the youth and black vote, who might otherwise have gone Democrat. And once again in tight races, it won’t take many switchers to hand swing states to Trump.

Launching her campaign Jill Stein, the Green candidate, and yet another leftist looking to take votes from Biden, declared there was no difference between Republicans and Democrats .

“The political system is broken. The two Wall Street parties are bought and paid for.”

In normal elections, the radical left can just about get away with pretending there are no differences between the major parties – it’s never true, but they can get away with it.

But the whole point about totalitarian parties in the 20th century and the anti-democratic strongmen of our day is they are not like other democratic parties because they do not accept democracy.  The failure to face the obvious means that a significant minority in the US can believe two contradictory thoughts at once

They believe that Trump will bring fascism and white supremacy back to power in the US.

And yet and at the same time they say that they are entitled to indulge their secondary political interests, even if they help the fascist white supremacist return to power as they do it.

Put it like that they sound like silly and spoiled hypocrites. You feel the need to tell them that Biden’s industrial policy represents a decisive break with neo-liberalism and that a Trump presidency would be a disaster for Palestinians.

But in truth you miss the point if you go off into policy debates.

In normal times, the position of American leftists would be defensible.

Politicians do not own voters. If you are an Arab-American, who objects to the US supporting Israel, why should you vote for Biden?

If you are a US socialist, who damns the Democrats for not being socialists, even though they never promised to be socialists, you are entitled to say that they have failed to be radical enough for your tastes and cannot expect your support.

At a visceral level, you may well feel a greater hatred for centrists, who have diluted progressivism, than for the right, who say what you like about it, is at least honest by its own lights.

The lesser of two evils is still evil, and is not a great choice to offer those who want nothing to do with evil in any of its manifestations.  

The problem with this argument in a crisis is that it fails to capture the choices, or lack of choice, when democracy is in danger. The question is not which version of American policy towards Israel you should vote for but whether you will still have an effective vote if Trump wins again.

The only realistic way out of this dilemma for US leftists would be to argue that a second Trump presidency would not be so bad, and that mainstream American liberals were descending into hysteria when they talked of a potential dictatorship.

Funnily enough they could have said that during Trump’s first term. Trump and the Supreme Court judges he appointed did some terrible things but democracy itself was not in danger.

But by refusing to accept the result of the 2020 presidential election, storming Congress, trying to get crooked election officials into key posts in state governments where they might rig the ballot, and embracing anti-democratic doctrines from Orbanism to Christian nationalism, the US right has made it very clear that it is a threat to democracy this time around.

I have not seen a single prominent figure on the US left try to deny it and argue it is OK to boycott the Democrats because Trump poses no danger.

After watching the far-right storm the capitol, no one can seriously make that argument. But the worst of the US left cannot go on to accept the grim, anti-fascist conclusion that they need to abandon their dearly held principles and do whatever it takes to stop Trump regaining power.

Nor can the worst of the the UK right.

Last week the British had to endure the spectacle of Liz Truss, a former prime minister, no less, endorsing the far right propagandist, Steve Bannon.  At his urging, she declared that this country is not in visible decline because of her policies and the policies of her Conservative party but because of “friends of the bureaucratic establishment and…friends of the deep state” who “work together with the bureaucrats…to keep things the same”.

Truss has come out for Donald Trump. As has Boris Johnson. What an extraordinary moment we are living through. Two British prime ministers are backing a man who organised a coup against his own country’s constitution and stands every chance of being condemned as a criminal by a succession of courts.

The double think of some US leftist is repeated on the British right

Conservatives say that they absolutely believe in resisting Vladimir Putin in Ukraine and defending the wider security of Europe.

Yet they also cheer on Donald Trump, whose supporters are already sabotaging the Ukrainian war effort, and who has made it clear that he will undermine NATO if and when he returns to power.

They are doing it for the same reason as US leftists. They cannot tolerate breaking with their side in the culture war. They cannot aid their opponents. They would rather carry on as before than accept the need to change.

Fight fascism. It sounds so easy. But the compromises required to defend our societies from authoritarian threats at home and abroad are too much for too many people to bear.

[episims]

Judi negotiation skill appreciation post

I've already played Judi's household so it's unlikely I get a chance to let her explain how buying Hanna was for her. This super self-indulgent post sheds some light on Judi's point of view!

No pictures. If you're not dying to know, this probably isn't for you lol.

So let's chop this scene into pieces:

Judith “You’re not stupid, Craig. You must realize that if I didn’t have a pressing reason, I wouldn’t be here.” Chase “Hmph.” She’s right. “I’m listening.” Judith “Thank you. I would rather negotiate indoors if that suits you.”

Judi has literally called Chase a nutcase, and that was before Chase slept with her ex. She needs to really compose herself to be polite.

Even more so to flatter him, as Judi tries to do by acknowledging Chase's intelligence. It works; it's a small step forward to get Chase to agree about something. Being inside the house also makes it slightly harder for Chase to just walk out of the situation.

Chase “-no. She’s not for sale.” Judith “Oh, I’m sorry for my choice of words. Do you wish me to call it a she?”

Since the goal is to get Chase to sell Hanna, it might be a problem that Chase humanizes her. So Judi lures him into changing the pronoun, hoping that it creates some emotional distance too.

Judith “I agree. But I could point out that I can afford to pay its current market value in full. I evaluated its components; many of them are outdated. Its wholesale price will only continue decreasing.” Chase She’s researched based on what Jonas has told her. I was careless with him. “The components don’t matter. They hold their value as scrap metal.”

Chase doesn't take Judi's bait about Hanna's decreasing market value so seems like he isn't hugely interested in cash. It's a bit of a setback for Judi; she doesn't have anything else than money to offer.

Judith “So it comes down to the code. Do you have proprietary over it?”

Spoiler alert: Judi knows damn well that Chase doesn't have proprietary over Hanna's code. She indeed did research. But considering how tightly Chase has pursed his lips about his past, bringing it up would likely only get Chase to raise his guard.

But the negotiation isn't moving anywhere so Judi tries to subtly push Chase to a more uneven ground. She's careful to make it look like an innocent question, something that would make sense to ask.

Judith “I’m not desperate to buy, Craig. I can hire home aid, just as well. There’s clearly a lot of potential going to waste with this project ending with the first prototype, but you’re right. It’s your concern, not mine.” Chase “Hmph.” Hanna’s value decrease was inevitable. But… the market has advanced for my benefit as well. It shouldn’t be impossible to find equivalent parts anymore.

Would Chase sell Hanna if he didn't feel it was completely by his own choice? Probably not, so Judi gives him room to make that decision. And while she has money to spend, it doesn't hurt to leave the impression that she's not ready to pay anything.

Since she now knows that Chase can't be won over by cash only, she tries to convince him that selling Hanna wouldn't take away his lifework but offer a means to continue it.

You can tell that Judi found the right lever as Chase stops to think about the possibility of selling for the first time.

Judith “What I need is a childcare assistant so it’ll only be for a few years. After that, it can break down all the same.” Chase Most of Hanna’s components have extended their lifespan by then, anyway. “It would be cheaper for you to hire a person.” Judith “Cheaper, not easier. Thanks to these idiotic restrictions, I would need to find a local for it. That aside, as you well know, I don’t need sleep. Having service available around the clock would be beneficial.”

Yeah, right. Judi has pretty good connections, of course she could find someone who has the right to pass to Foxfire.

The thing is that Judi wouldn't have considered buying Hanna if Jonas hadn't asked for it. That is a strong motivation for Judi to get the deal done; being seemingly ignorant of Hanna's fate is a bluff to hide that. Assuring Chase that Judi isn't trying to monetize Hanna herself is important, too.

Judith “It’s important that you answer in short. Do you understand?” Hanna “—yes.” Judith “Good. Do you know how to cook?” Chase *mutters* “Of course she knows how to-” Judith “Let me review the product, please.”

It's an act, aiming to close the deal for good. Judi attempts to keep the conversation with Hanna simple so that she doesn't accidentally talk to her in a way that conflicts with what she just told Chase.

So, here you go! If it seemed easy, it's only because Judi's a crazy good negotiator.

[hildegardladyofbones]

okay final thoughts on disco elysium (post-first playthrough). major fucking spoilers ahead.

This run took me 38 hours and I did it in 6 days (both irl and in game). Today was the day where I played the least, only 5 or so hours

My main strategy for picking options was: 1. what would *I* do? this lead to most of the boring and centrist answers because I don't want to take a stand on politics of a world I don't know shit about. Will definitely make other choices in the future now that I've gotten a grasp. 2. What would Kim approve of? disappointing Kim makes me physically sick. 3. Which of the options has the name Kim in it? I just wanted to say his name as much as possible.

In the future I will definitely be picking the silliest options. I also plan on picking the thinker archetype (i picked the sensitive one because i liked the addition that he might begin to lose his mind.) and that one says that he's very bad with people, which logically would lead to out of pocket things.

Most importantly: I didn't do shit in this game. I didn't even disco. I thought I had an other opportunity to finish that quest, because I could have never thought that the killer would be on the island. There's also the deal with Cuno. Idfk what it is. Will get to that next time. And what was it that Joyce had to say? And how would've the tribunal gone had I not failed all but two red-checks?

Other shit i want to rant about. Kim. Oh my fucking god, Kim. Hands down the best character in any video game I've ever played. (Oh yeah that reminds me- I'm certain I didn't find out all there is to him). I've talked about it before (Wayyy too much) how he was so kind and patient and down-to-earth when he didn't have to be. How he doesn't fuck around. Usually. One of my favourite traits of his is that he is so willing to do random shit for the fun of it. He also doesn't take anyone's shit, like, he has effectively shut people's mouths up. His voice was also way too soothing and enjoyable to listen to for absolutely no apparent reason. I cheered and clapped when he spoke. I am a total kim-freak and I am Definitely kimfected. I can go on. about the fact that he smokes? absolutely obsessed with that fact for no apparent reason. And he's gay! I never would've thought they'd go there. I will be needing an orange bomber jacket and round sunglasses moving forward, thankyouverymuch

I should also talk about Harry. The reason why I didn't fuck with him *as much* is because to me, his characterization was very inconsistent. I'm sure I'll grow to like him even more when I actually know what I'm doing. I absolutely appreciate the constant angst he was in tho, especially after the tribunal, but *that* deserves it's own post. He is one of the more believably fucked-up detectives in fiction and definitely one of the most well-written. What absolutely seals the deal for me is the addition of his skills (?)(idk what to call them). Not only was it a wonderful game mechanic, it also made the game so much more interesting. And the fact that it's canon, there *are* voices in his head also adds to it. The narration was also on point, they picked the right actor for it. Speaking of game mechanics, the dice roll was also a needed addition. That's what made the game hard. Too bad it took me so long to figure out the logic behind it. I think I did that at like the second to last dice roll in the game. It's also, obviously, a nod to ttrpgs' that were an inspiration for this game. That also appears in the gameplay itself. Most of the time the characters are standing still while the narration tells us what's happening. That's neat as well, idk, i've never played an ttrpg

And then there's the ending. I will skip the middle parts, mostly, because they're just great and I love the story and that's pretty much all i have to say about it. The ending fucntioned as a review of how/what we did this run. Kim pretty much laid out exactly what kind of cop we were, what we believed in, how well we did the investigation, etc. and for that fact alone I don't know if I could ever stomach doing a playthrough where I don't solve the crime to near-perfection. I cannot stomach letting that man down. I will most likely be missing out on a considerable chunk of the game that way, but as about everything besides DE lately, idgaf. Kim is the blorbo of all time. Anyway it kind of pains me that the ending came so suddenly, mostly for the afore-mentioned reasons. It also kind of hurt me mentally because of how we're forced to confront how much of a shitshow Harry is. And the fact that it's so heavily hinting at a sequel that never came. The world is against me specifically for not giving this game a sequel. For not letting me see more of Kim. That's right, I will never shut up about him. I am superbly annoying about that guy it's unbearable even to me. FUCK i digress, the main reason why the ending left me with the heavy feeling is the feeling of loose ends. (I didn't fucking disco, remember?)

HOLY SHIT I HAVEN'T EVEN TALKED ABOUT THE WORLD !! I was *absolutely* *positively* astonished the more I learned about the world. I love history as much as the next history freak, but what I love more is *intentionally* mixing up the decades. The cars looked a century old, they had computers, they had ttrpgs', the year was '51 and they had disco, obviously. I live for that shit. There's also the thing that I do with my own fictional world and that is mixing made up shit with our world shit. I am beyond elated when I figured out that's what they were doing because i've never seen anything else do that. Their world mostly looks like and acts like our world, except the cultures, geography and history are all original. it's what I did because I didn't want to learn about the london tube system. And of course there are some super-natural elements (what the fuck is the pale? who is the paleworker? huh???) as well. The similarities between their and my world go on, but I digress. The worldbuilding done here was superb and so fucking impressive. Honestly stuff like "oh why would they call *their* months march, april, etc when the guys that named the months didn't exist in their world" and "oh why do they have communism if that was invented by Karl Marx" doesn't bother me at all. That is the shit i live for. It pains me that there most likely won't be a sequel, but luckily I am estonian so I can read the novel. The game being so heavily estonian-made was another reason why I bought it. (the others being: it was 4 eur and it said the artstyle was inspired by oil paintings)(had i known how life-changing this game would be for me, i would've gladly paid the 40 eur)

There's still more i could talk about, actually. This game also did some pretty insane things to me as a person, but I won't divulge the details here (also my mother thinks i should go to sleep? fuck her, i am staying up until 4am. again). For the time being it altered how I interact with the world, possibly permanently, but it's too early to tell. I am still knee-deep in the brainrot. If you really want, I could elaborate if asked, I don't care that much about privacy.

Anyway thank you for reading this rant? idk why you'd do that, i literally didn't proofread anything i wrote here. Most of it is about Kim anyway. I still have no idea what drugs they put in that character. Literally addicted to him. I think he's not just the 57th's best (or 41st's i guess) but he's just the best. in general. in every category. never figured out what the deal with the gloves was tho.

[cloud0818]

Reading KHR in Japanese (4)

In Japanese, we can get a person's character and personality by the way of speaks. How about :

Byakuran

First person : "Boku"

Second person : Their name / "Kimi"

On the whole : Lightly,Brightly,Childlike

In a good way or a bad way, It's very light. He speaks to people like a close friend or like a mischievous child. His speaking style is optimistic but his mood is stable. He sometime plays funny and makes fun. But this is the reason why makes people scared. He says very, very fearful things lightly like it is nothing. Then, in a moment, we suddenly realize that he is truly a terrible ruler. Just like a child who can't distinguish between right and wrong. Anyone who knows him knows that you mustn't offend him, no matter how gentle he seems.

His speaking can be described as youthful, but it never be felt underestimated. When he shows his horrible side, the words chosen are very cruel. His way of speaks is a bit one-sided nuanced. He speaks to know he will win the negotiation, and enjoys the conversation. He lets his pieces play on the board. And enjoys their reaction, but he is not looking for sympathy or praise, but rather there is a nuance that his behavior is natural. Like " I DO. You understand. Don't you?"

So far, it was about him in Future arc. We get a different impression of him in the Future arc and the Arcobaleno arc. This is evident in the way he speaks. This is a complex issue that leaves everyone with the impression, "I don't know why, but I could feel he is change." He is almost the same, but something is different. That's how we feel. So, let's try to analyze this somehow!

First, let me give you my brief findings. Yamamoto described him as "be cleared" or "he changeed kind of his intimidation". Maybe the English translation is different, but I think "clear" plays a good role in understand his change. In Japanese, there is an metaphor that a person who has been obsessed with something bad becomes a different atmosphere completely when it is exorcised. He was just like that.

There are many different analyses of who he was and what he was thinking. Therefore, it is not possible to speak of change in general. But one might say that he has come to enjoy the world. There are nuances of one-sided, conversational enjoyment still. And Tsuna or Syoichi is puzzled by him. But it seems a bit like a mean big brother, no shadow of a scary ruler.

I haven't yet finished my own analysis of him. So here is what I perceive for now. I think he has a bird's eye view of the world in the Arcobaleno arc. I think he is interested in how the world, his friends and lots of people were changing. He gave the world away.The world is no longer be his board. So he seems a little distant from people. Neither is a bad meaning. He came to enjoy things that didn't go his way or that he didn't understand or can't control. His childlike way of speaking does not change. But he changed, like child who interest in everything or enjoy chemical experimentation. This is the MY opinion constructed from the nuances of the Japanese language.

Interestingly tips. He add to "♪" at the end of the sentence. This shows fun mood. It also used in Future arc sometimes, but in Arcobaleno arc it is added to most of the says. Looks like fun ♪

He uses first person "Boku". In this case, we feel more childlike than polite or elegant. He calls people by their name. And basically, he uses the suffix "Kun" or "Chan". No matter others gender. It gave us a close nuance, but he uses it for everyone so may seem a little distant. He has called Reborn and Bluebell without the suffix. Or he sometimes take out this suffix when he is very angry. Or "Kimi" is also used.

He used "Kisama" once, for Yuni when she showed up at CHOICE. There are nuances of surprise, anger and upset there. He calls Yuni without suffix on such situation. However, he is smart enough to call out "Yuni-chan" immediately and try to resolve the situation. He knew Syoichi to betray him. And he enjoyed observing such behavior of Syoichi. But he didn't expect Yuni whom he thought had become a complete puppet, to turn against him. He used this second person pronoun only once, it was the very moment his board was disturbed for the first time.

His speaking is consistently jovial, naughty childlike, and lighthearted. But in this, we can see his intelligence, capacity, brutality, and curiosity. Or we feel even he is innocence by way of speaks and the changes. However, in the scene where he and Tsuna come to an end, he was indeed the most 'inhuman' enemy with his brutality, his strong anger, disappointment, uncontrolled, and elusive fearfulness. This gap makes him a unique, charismatic, and memorable character.

[nofomogirl]

Thinking of the implications of Bigshot Crowley

Especially looking forward to S3

In the original book, it was pretty much the whole point that Aziraphale and Crowley were nobody particularly important for their respective sides. Just regular low/middle-ranking field operatives, most of the time invisible drones to their superiors.

In season 1 it is certainly not as pronounced - possibly simply because some things are easier to stress in a written medium - but it isn't contradicted in any way either.

Unsurprisingly, there had always been many headcanons and fanfics that made Aziraphale and Crowley more special in the great scheme of things. I say "Aziraphale and Crowley" but of course, 95% of them focus on Crowley. Since there's more room for speculation and all. The particularly popular fanon is that Crowley was originally an Archangel. Possibly Raphael, but there are other candidates as well.

And now we're after season 2, where pretty big hints were dropped that Crowley was indeed pretty high in the angelic hierarchy before his fall.

How do I feel about it?

I'm not too sure.

I'm still getting used to it being canon. I've always enjoyed the speculations, the theories, and the fanfics. But I also felt that while for some people it was just a "what if", some simply couldn't be satisfied with their protagonists being ordinary. I have some feelings about that.

And what do I think about it?

A lot!

Firstly, if Crowley used to be someone with considerable authority was it his choice to give it up? And if it was, then when exactly did it happen?

Fanons usually point to the Fall as the turning point and it makes sense. It was always implied that Crowley wasn't really invested in Lucipher's rebellion, he just had questions of his own and that's it. So it made sense that after becoming a demon he decided to lie low and not get involved.

But doesn't pre-Fall Crowley seem awfully... alone to you? In the one scene we got he is about to bring his creation to life and the only witness is the randomly (?) passing Aziraphale? If he's someone important, isn't it weird?

I can't help but feel that in Heaven Crowley was already removed from main power structures. Perhaps he simply never saw the appeal and never participated. Perhaps he lost interest along the way. And perhaps he was somehow excluded, possibly without him fully noticing.

But most importantly, what does it mean for his character development? And how it ties to Aziraphale's character development?

Because let me stress it: we had ended season 2 (1) knowing that Crowley used to be in a high position in Heaven and (2) seeing Aziraphale accept a high position in Heaven.

And frankly, it was this realization that made me really want S3 to happen. I mean, I wanted it before simply because I want to see the two finally get properly together and have their happily ever after. But now I'm really curious about where exactly we go from here. Now I'm interested not just in a destination but in an actual journey they're going to take.

It seems pretty obvious that Aziraphale needs to finally free himself from Heaven. Experience the ultimate disillusion.

But what if Crowley's entire job isn't just to wait and graciously accept his angel back when he finally sees reason? It would certainly make for a much better story if he had his own crap to sort out.

My headcanon right now is that Crowley indeed was an Archangel but because he was not into politics - for lack of a better term - he let others call the shots. I think he never fully acknowledged and processed that he had the power to make things better.

And that finale...

Crowley might have wished Aziraphale could just drop everything and go with him like Gabriel and Beelzebub left together. But the point is Gabriel and Beelzebub never cared about Earth, they're selfish and don't give a damn what calamity and bloodshed they leave behind, and too self-righteous to question their choices.

It is a fact that Heaven and Hell can't be left to their own devices.

Aziraphale and Crowley aren't humans who can just quit toxic jobs that are also corporations ruining the planet, move to another country, and make it not their problem. Humans have a chance of living happily and dying before the consequences of their former employers' actions ruin their little paradise.

It's perfectly understandable that Aziraphale doesn't want the responsibility of doing nothing while he could. It's also perfectly obvious that he's being manipulated and way over his head. Especially with Crowley not by his side.

I just want season 3.

It would be also nice if it wasn't just Crowley being right about everything and Aziraphale needing to apologize for his entire existence. But I'll take what I get, I guess.

[shivunin]

So I saw your tags on the types of love ask and I'm also obsessed with the first weeks and months after Fenris and Hawke break up lol!! I would love to hear more of your thoughts about what Maria and Fenris are feeling/thinking esp wrt fighting together, how the kirkwall group sees them, and just generally how they cope with not being "together" but still being around each other all the time.

Oooh anon, I tried to keep this a reasonable length and I failed haha. In my defense, I have 30k words of unfinished fic answering this very question and I pared it down as best I could.

So:

I think the immediate aftermath is, of course, the most painful--but it's also the most careful on her part. Analysis sets in for her pretty quickly about a day later, when her head is more clear: she loves him and she doesn't believe that loving him gives her a right to take his friends and home away. Hawke is very aware that she has the power to do this if she isn't careful.

What can she do about it? Give him space. Make sure he knows he's still welcome. Keep inviting him to things where many of her other friends are present. Never touch him unless she has no other choice, because she knows she'll give herself away. Look at him directly as little as possible (this one is for her own sake---watching him is like putting her thumb on a bruise to make sure it's still there). Be alone rarely, if ever, and if alone then at a great distance. No more walking home together; no more late nights reading in her library before the fire; no more long goodbyes at her door. She tries so hard to be careful with him and instead she is stiff and overly polite.

It hurts. For both of them. I've talked before about how friendship is the bedrock of their relationship to me, and for a while they lose that, too. Maria's fatal flaw is that she thinks she can perfectly read everyone around her. She assumes that the boundaries she's drawn are good for both of them and she never, ever asks Fenris what he thinks or wants---because that would mean talking about it.

Fighting is rough for a while, because one of them is now dedicated to not paying attention to the other. They both get hurt, badly, in the few weeks immediately after that night. Fenris occasionally slips and calls her Maria (he can't get it out of his head no matter how much he'd like to). Hawke occasionally slips and pats his shoulder or elbows him to make a joke before she remembers and pulls away again.

At last, they get in a really big argument over what Fenris says to Merrill during Mirror Image. Maria loses her temper (she usually keeps a very tight leash on it) and says some things she doesn't mean---the subtext being, if she is a monster then I am a monster. If you knew that before, then why did you ever pretend you wanted me? She does not say this explicitly, because I think she doesn't actually want to know the answer. She apologizes as best she can without actually acknowledging what happened, but now that is festering between them, too.

All of their friends definitely know what's going on. They had front-row seats to the budding flirtation, the tiny gestures of affection...and now they also get to see Hawke putting herself as far away from him as possible, Fenris's absolute refusal to discuss any of it, the pained way he looks at her when she isn't watching, and so on. How can they not know? I think Varric and Isabela try to discuss it with Maria, in their respective ways, and she laughs it off. I think Anders probably makes a pointed comment and she bats that away, too. (Actually, Aveline might be the only one who's still oblivious, judging by the dialogue in her Act 2 quest.)

She does eventually confide in Sebastian, because he's supposed to take confessions, isn't he? Surely this is not so bad a thing to carry, in comparison to everything else. In the end, all she really wants is her friend back and she doesn't know how to get back what they've lost. She blames herself far more than she blames Fenris (Hawke should be able to fix everything always, obviously). Before she can come to any conclusions about how to patch things up, Leandra dies and she really starts spiraling.

When she finally emerges from the big blank space immediately following the funeral, Hawke is erratic. She gets drunk and sloppy, she throws herself into fights she couldn't possibly win, and she stops being careful with Fenris.

(For the record--I think he prefers the minor arguments to Hawke being polite with him. Maria is polite with Meredith and Marethari and the Viscount and the Arishok. She is friendly or charming or crass with everyone else. Being on the receiving end of cordiality was far, far worse than anything she pulls while she's grieving.)

Again--it takes something big to knock her out of this spiral. Luckily, Kirkwall has no shortage of shitshows. Hawke faces down death, comes to terms with the fact that she's just going to have to be in unrequited love with Fenris forever, and acquires a new title, not necessarily in that order. Fenris watches her die, acknowledges privately that he would rather be with her than without her regardless of what they are to each other or what dangers they face, and is there with her when she needs him the most.

Some of those boundaries stick around--she doesn't look at him often or for too long, which he hates, and they don't spend much time alone together. But slowly, slowly, they rebuild their rapport. Hawke and Fenris respect each other deeply; I think that's what makes the rest of it possible. Love is one thing---messy and busy and too heavy by far---but respect is something they both understand, and it's a good enough foundation to build on. She does love him; if she could make it into a purely platonic love, she absolutely would. More importantly, Maria trusts him and he clearly feels the same. It takes time, but they get back much of what they lost.

I want to be clear: she never thinks of any of this as biding her time for him to realize he wants her; she knows that he never will. She also knows she has to be okay with that if they're going to be friends again, and that matters to her most of all. It would have broken her heart to lose him because she couldn't move on.

For Fenris's part--I don't know how much of his reaction is guilt and how much is being caught essentially flat-footed. I cannot imagine what it would be like to work up to wanting to be emotionally intimate with someone (physical intimacy entirely aside) and then have that comfort entirely ripped away because of something he feels solely responsible for.

So, anon, to answer your question:

They deal with it by letting what happened between them be the third party in the room, ultimately. They both know what happened; they know that talking about it by now is more likely to open up wounds than it is to heal them. What they have is immeasurably valuable to both of them. If he still dreams about holding her, if she measures every suitor at her door against Fenris, well---that's for them to handle alone. Nobody else needs to know.

[nokingsonlyfooles]

Reefer Madness Lives

This is not such a hot paper, and the peer review process where it was published is not so hot either. Peer review in general is... Let's be charitable and say it's more for money and prestige than scientific rigor. But, just for basic integrity, you need to operate with a double-blind. CMAJ is single-blind, so their reviewers know if they're up against anyone famous or well-connected who might bring them a lot of attention. And their primary criteria is "importance and novelty." Less delicately, if it looks like it will get a lot of clicks and cites, they'll be pleased to publish it. This is not all that out-of-the-ordinary for science journals, and that's kinda bad.

But a paper saying that pot is gonna poison your children and give people schizophrenia will get a shitton of clicks and cites. It's the number one trending story on CBC right now! And there are live comments!

I need CBD and THC to deal with my PTSD and sleep problems. It's possible that, after being under-treated for decades, I will eventually deal with my underlying health issues enough to sleep unassisted, but I ain't there yet. And ya know what makes it really hard to make it to go to doctor's appointments and get care? Not being able to sleep!

I had a medical marijuana card before, and I could probably qualify for one again if I had to. But A) Do you really want me taking up a doctor's time for this when there aren't enough doctors for everyone right now? and B) Legalized recreational use keeps availability convenient, variety and quality-control reasonable, and prices low. If you are going to inflict capitalism on me, don't kneecap what little benefit a free market is able to provide.

Now, we don't want to get people high without their consent, and children cannot consent to getting high (although some of them do need cannabis products for medical reasons), so for fuck's sake store your shit carefully if you've got kids. But "cannabis poisoning" as they put it, means, "I feel awful and maybe I threw up but I won't die, even if I'm super paranoid and feel like I might." Most people who wind up in the hospital are adults screwing around with edibles who don't know what to expect, and all they need is a nice, patient friend who'll tell them they're fine. This "poison" doesn't kill people. Unlike, say, antifreeze, or children's Tylenol. (Although, I hear Willie Nelson's friend had a bale of pot fall on him one time, so it's not as safe as they say!)

And the schizophrenia thing... People with mental health issues self-select for these studies by choosing to self-medicate. You might also say cannabis use has a strong correlation with PTSD flashbacks - because people with PTSD know it helps and they freaking well try it, and sometimes they still have flashbacks. A psychedelic is not the best choice for schizophrenia, god no, but if you're having associated depression and sleep issues and you haven't been diagnosed yet, you might give it a try. Better mental healthcare and better, earlier diagnoses and treatment will address this issue more effectively than yet another moral panic.

But a certain portion of the population is really invested in "drugs are bad" and "drug users are addicts and addicts are bad" narrative. Like, literally invested. It keeps them in political power and gets money for studies like this and "public health" campaigns that are really thinly-veiled, outdated DARE propaganda.

Even this study, which specifically excluded medical marijuana use, found social benefits to not criminalizing drug use and drug users. No shit. People don't get addicted to something because addiction is fun; they have severe, unaddressed problems and they're doing whatever they can to cope with them, whether that's staying stoned all the time or blowing their retirement fund on Funko Pops. And most people who use drugs don't get addicted. (Also most people who buy Funko Pops, one assumes.) Removing them from society and giving them all criminal records doesn't help anyone.

Harm reduction should be the goal here, as in most things. You will never get it perfect, but you need to take steps towards improving the general situation as much as possible. Sending the War on Drugs (really, the War on Your Own Population) into extra innings after decades of failure is... Ha-ha, well, it's self-destructive addict behaviour, y'all. Maybe you could use some social services to help you deal with your problems in a better way.

[ionfusionpunk]

Ooooh I really really liked this, and the video especially was phenomenal. I do gotta say - well, don't have to but want to - that I'm split pretty 50/50 between the two sides.

(I explain why under the cut, but you don't have to read it if you don't wanna get kinda political sorry)

On the one hand, yes, I believe that parents should be the ones mainly responsible for policing their children's media consumption. They should be able to decide when - if ever - they want their kids exposed to certain things. No problemo, right? But I also think that it's so much easier for kids to access media without their parents' knowledge (I did it all the time, for example, and I'm one of the oldest Gen Z has to offer) which of course makes it harder for parents to vet everything their kids listen to. We can't expect parents to be able to listen to every album their kids might want to because a) there's so many, b) that's contingent on the kids feeling safe enough to express which albums they want to listen to, and c) it's dependent on the kids telling their parents what they want to listen to instead of just going ahead and listening to it for free. You don't have to buy every song you want to listen to anymore.

So on the other hand, I think that in this modern era, there should be some way for parents to be able to better monitor and control what media their kids are consuming. Because even if we don't agree with them, those kids are still the responsibility of their own parents, and it's only our responsibility to make sure fellow adults have all the facts to make informed decisions for their kids. But we can't make those choices for them.

What happens in someone's own home is not up to us, and we should not control it. However, the Old Dudes were right when they said that they do have the right and the duty to ensure that publicly things should be monitored for the safety of minors. Again, parents should be able to control to the best of their ability and within the bounds of reason and possibility what their kids are exposed to.

Now, there are several ways to do this, I realize, and not all of them involve using a rating system like we do for movies (though it's my personal favorite which I'll explain).

A) There are several apps and software parents can use to monitor their kids on their devices; we know them best as parental controls. These are great in general for controlling app usage and curfews, but unfortunately, it just won't be able to monitor media the way we're talking about here. There's also the issue that most if not all of these parental control software need to be paid for, and that's going to put a lot of parents off, especially in this economy when they might need to choose to spend that extra money on food or other necessary things.

B) We could start to use AI to monitor or check media. Now, in this context we've been specifically talking about musical media, but I'd like to point out that this is also applicable to digitally or physically written media as well. All you technically would need to do is ask Chat GTP to tell you if certain things are in the song/album/book/etc. This would be, in my opinion, one of the few good uses for AI as we have it. Now, unfortunately, this also has drawbacks. As we know, AI as it is constantly gets things wrong. So it's not exactly a foolproof system for parents to use. The benefits however might outweigh the cons because AI is much more accessible for families of all economic classes now (meaning a lot of versions that would fulfill the above-mentioned function are free). It also would take far less time for parents to research what media their kids are consuming which was a sticking point in the video.

B.2) You could actually potentially use AI and parental control software in conjunction with each other to prohibit certain things on your kid's device, but I'm not quite sure how well that would work. It's a potential option, however.

C) My personal favorite because it really is the most accurate and thorough and can be easily applied in schools - I'm a teacher - and would actually potentially help fight the book-ban thing: Just instating a rating system for media - i.e. music and readable media like books. I know this is what Dee Snider is against, but hear me out. Once again, there's just so much media. With children getting internet access younger and younger, it is unacceptable to expect parents to be able to keep up with everything on their own, especially in an age when most US parents are barely able to be home because they hold extremely demanding jobs or quite often more than one demanding job just to keep a roof over their family's head and food on their table. A rating system works well in conjunction with my formerly mentioned suggestions, but especially the parental controls for those parents who can afford the better software.

A rating system also works in schools for books because, just like you need parental permission to watch certain movies in certain grades, your kid would need parent permission to read books above a certain rating in the library. So a book like Looking for Alaska? Make it PG-13. Only teenagers can read it. Or PG-14 if that suits you better. But no matter what, now it's clearly labeled for teenagers - which means anyone trying to ban all teenage-rated books can't because there are so many books that would share the same rating but for different reasons. It could, potentially, if done correctly, protect our rights to consume the media we want while also protecting a parent's right to parent their children.

And look. I'm more than aware exactly how badly any of these things could go. I know that nothing is 100% foolproof. I know that instating a rating system specifically could go so very wrong and potentially backfire and make it difficult for endangered and at-risk teens and kids to access certain materials and help. But there are safeguards you could put in place. There are ways around such issues. I'm even more than willing to write a whole other post about it, but this one's just getting way too long.

My point is that we don't live in the era seen in the video anymore. We don't. And as much as we may not like it, that does mean we need to be prepared to find new ways to protect each other and ourselves from people taking away our right to choose while also allowing others their own right to choose for them and for whoever they are responsible for.

Like I say about anything political: My goal isn't to support whichever value is closest to my own. My goal is to support the values that protect my own and the values of those around me.

[transmigratedlily]

"Respawning” & "permashifting”

Truly, I don't know if I should be polite about this—since some people genuinely don't know any better—or go all out because this sort of information is AT. YOUR. FINGER. TIPS!

Anyway, I have been a "transmigrator" for 7+ years now, though that’s a conversation for another day.

Ever since the whole shifting trend on TikTok, I’ve seen this silly concept called "permashifting." Naturally, I put two and two together: permanent (perma) + shifting = respawning, right? Wrong. Very wrong.

Here is my understanding:

RespawningRespawning refers to the idea of leaving your current reality (CR or VR) entirely and permanently to live in your desired reality (DR). This process is often described as akin to starting a "new life" in another realm, reality, or existence—whatever you wish to call it—usually from the ground up. Unlike temporary shifts, respawning implies no plans to return to your current reality.

Mind-Body Disconnect: Some believe this involves leaving behind your physical body in the CR, essentially letting it "die" as your consciousness fully integrates into the DR.

Conscious Awareness: In most descriptions, you remain fully aware of the transition and make an intentional choice to respawn.

Preparation: The process may involve detailed scripting (outlining what your life in the DR will be like), as well as mental and emotional readiness for such a significant change.

Risks & Debates: Some in the shifting community view respawning as extreme and potentially harmful if misunderstood or taken literally. It’s often advised to reflect deeply on your reasons for shifting and ensure you’re not using it to escape challenges in the CR. Here’s where I completely disagree: Why is death so looked down upon? Truly. It is not harmful, it is not extreme, and most importantly, respawning is NOT suicide. You don’t need a reason to shift, transmigrate, permashift, respawn, yada yada—you don’t even need a reason to shit. You just do it because you need to, for goodness' sake.

Permashifting Permashifting refers to a permanent or long-term shift from your current reality (CR or VR) to your desired reality (DR), where you choose to stay indefinitely without returning to the CR. Unlike temporary shifting, permashifting ''emphasizes stability and integration within the DR.''

Conscious Transition: The process is typically intentional and involves a clear choice to make the DR your primary or only reality.

Integration in the DR: Focus is placed on fully adapting to the new environment, forming lasting connections, and treating the DR as your home.

Open-Ended Possibility: Some interpretations suggest that permashifting doesn’t have to be forever. While you might remain in the DR for a long period, you could retain the option to return to the CR if desired.

I asked the lovely ChatGPT to make a graph on this topic, and I have many things to say about the "knowledge and information" these twats have about such topics.

A. Intentionality What year are we in? May whatever is up there give me the strength to live another day away from this buffoonery. Jesus Christ.

Permashifting, respawning, and temporary shifting are all the same thing. You bring your very deepest desires to you, just like you can bend THIS reality with your mind. You can do the exact same with your "DRs." They are not special for shit.

If you desire a shift to be temporary, go ahead. If you want a shift to be fully permanent, go ahead. If you want a shift to be long-term, go ahead. But that doesn’t make you some mystical "respawner" or "permashifter." It’s all the same, and the differentiation is pointless.

B. Duration Read above. No need to repeat myself.

C. Connection to CR What do you even mean by "can remain as a possibility?" If you desire to maintain a connection to your previous reality, THEN YOU WILL.

Want to stalk your loved ones back in your old CR? Fine. Have an app on your phone that works like a camera app, magically installed with cameras all around your past reality. Who cares? The universe (you, to be quite frank) doesn’t.

And as for "no return"—if you think you’re stuck in your DR with no way back, you have the mental capacity of a pipe. No matter where you are, you can bend reality to your will. The very universe exists within you, and yet you’re letting unreliable information (that I don’t even know where it came from) trap you in these disgusting and meaningless assumptions? Get a grip.

Finally, for "always maintain a link to CR": You maintain a link to anything and anywhere you desire. This isn’t something like, "Oh no, the universe cursed me to be stuck in an MLP reality forever and ever." What you desire is what you get. Not what you’ve been "cursed" with.

D. Preparation Needed If this part of the graph refers to preparation for the shift, respawn, or permashift, I have news for you: It’s not needed.

Respawning, even when it involves "death" for some people, is painless unless you actively want it to hurt. The entire process is tailored to your liking. There’s even something called a "deathless respawn"—the name gives it away.

E. Emotional Impact The only emotional impact you’re likely to feel is the overwhelming realization that you finally made it after all your hard work. It’s the most satisfying, delicious reward: seeing your loved ones happy, healthy, thriving, and exactly where they want to be in life.

This entire act of bringing your desired reality to you is completely up to your liking. If a god (yourself) wanted grapes covered in gold leaves, it would get grapes covered in gold leaves. Who cares how? Who cares about preparation? Who cares about duration? It’s yours. Period.

So now, let's go over it, in a easier, less snarky way. shall we?

terms like respawning and permashifting might appear distinct at first glance, but when we strip them of their labels and cultural baggage, they reveal a singular truth. They are different paths to the same outcome: the ability to transcend, reframe, and inhabit alternate realities. Whether you call it respawning, transmigrating, permashifting, or just shifting, all of these labels circle back to one universal principle—the malleability of reality.

Despite surface differences, they all:

Share the goal of redefining one’s conscious experience.

Depend on the individual’s ability to reshape their reality, whether through intention, focus, or belief.

 at the heart of all these discussions is a deeper understanding of reality itself: it is not fixed but pliable.

In every universe, reality bends to consciousness. Shifting labels are merely tools to articulate the same truth in different ways.

The malleability of reality isn’t confined to physical transitions. It’s evident in every moment of decision-making, dreaming, and intentional focus.

Whether someone calls it respawning or permashifting, what they’re doing is engaging with the same universal law: reality reflects and adapts to the mind that perceives it.

Meaning, if you have "respawned” to a reality in the Edo period of japan, maybe you feel homesick about your previous reality.. You are more than welcome and allowed to just mold reality back into your previous reality, or maybe even- another new and improved reality!

the TikTok phenomenon has inadvertently caused division by creating rigid definitions for what should remain fluid. Permashifting being labeled distinct from respawning causes unnecessary confusion and gatekeeping. These terms should empower, not limit, individuals exploring the nature of consciousness and reality. Instead of focusing on the labels, the community would benefit from unifying under the shared principle that we are creators of our own experiences. Whether you call it respawning or permashifting, it’s all the same act of stepping into a reality where your desires align with your experience.

In truth, "respawning," "permashifting," "transmigrating," "shifting,” and every other label boil down to the same principle: consciousness shapes reality, and reality is endlessly malleable. These terms are tools, not rules. They point to the infinite potential of existence but are not the existence itself.

As someone with 7+ years of transmigration experience, i’ve seen how labels fail to capture the boundless nature of this phenomenon. Instead of clinging to terminology, let’s focus on the universality of the experience and the shared human capacity to mold reality in any and every universe.

[bllsbailey]

The Morning Briefing: Revisiting the 'Kamala Harris As Sacrificial Lamb' Theory

Top O' the Briefing

Poll Perspective. On August 29, 2016, Hillary Clinton led Donald Trump by 5.9 points in the RealClearPolitics Poll Average. 

Happy Thursday, dear Kruiser Morning Briefing friends. Bensallel felt that he could best put his skills to use in a confectionery that appreciated his ability to dazzle all ages with Billy Ray Cyrus chic. 

There is just so much to process every day in the substance-free, media driven faux presidential campaign of Kamala Harris. It's like "The Monkees," "The Manchurian Candidate," and "Being There" all rolled into one. 

And you're watching it while you have a concussion. 

We've spent a lot of time examining the mainstream media hacks' newfound fascination and affection for Harris, a woman they previously treated like a french fry that had found its way underneath a car seat and was forgotten. The prevailing opinion has been that the combination of Trump Derangement Syndrome and relief from Biden Senility Fatigue has made the press minions and some Beltway Dems decide that they might be able to love Harris enough to make her their first ex-wife. 

As I've written many times, Democrats are the "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" party, so it's entirely possible that they've forgotten that they never really liked Kamala Harris that much. 

Another possibility is that the Dem hierarchy want Harris to lose, but they've got to put on a big show just because they loathe Trump so much. A little plausible deniability never hurts either.

The powers that be in the Democratic party could be thinking that, if Harris wins, they will need another bus under which to throw the head of the party. They can triple the amount of handlers that Biden had and she'll still find a way to muck up the works. 

Maybe they are just making room under the bus where President LOLEightyonemillion has been napping and hoping to throw her there in November. 

That could be the reason that she isn't getting any pushback from the Democratic National Committee for almost becoming Trump Lite now that she's getting around to pretending to have policy positions. This is from something that my friend and partner in thought crime Stephen Green wrote yesterday: 

And that brings us to today's flip-flop, coming close on the heels of Harris doing the Triple Lindy on banning fracking, gun confiscation, decriminalizing illegal border crossings, decreasing funding for the Border Patrol, eliminating private health insurance, Medicare for All, court-packing SCOTUS, defunding police, Green New Deal, EV mandates, and (I'm running out of breath here) a federal jobs guarantee. Harris wants to build the wall. Somebody get her a red MAGA hat, won't you?

The real test of my theory will be if she says something bad about Hamas and the Dem leaders let her slide. 

As Mr. Green and I have been saying all year, the Democrats didn't have any choice but to stick with Harris for this election if they wanted to get rid of Joe Biden. That doesn't mean that they want her to hang around for a long time. For most of my many years as a political activist, the Democrats have been brilliant at playing the long game. Their frothing anger over the mere existence of Donald Trump has made them a little shortsighted. 

If they are putting on a show right now and hoping to usher Ms. Harris off the stage quickly, it would indicate that they're back on their game. 

It's no secret to even casual observers that the Democratic upper crust types have had their eyes on Govs. Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer for their future plans. One has to wonder if they quickly bowed out of the Kamala Harris veepstakes on their own or if the Democratic power brokers strongly urged them to do so. 

The Democratic party elite may just be willing to "endure" four years of peace and prosperity under Trump 47 so they can retool and get back to their assault on the Constitution with players who aren't liabilities every time a camera is on. 

Click the button below to get the Morning Briefing emailed to you every weekday. Have your coffee with me, people. It's free and it supports conservative media!  

The Mailbag of Magnificence contributions can be sent to morningbriefing@pjmedia.com.

Everything Isn't Awful

Never get between a cat and a hair tie. 

PJ Media

[fr3nchtoastcrunch]

My High School science/chemistry teacher was the definition of a no-nonsense teacher. Case in point: This is the method would use this method to deal with disruptive/lazy students.

At the beginning of the year (and occasionally on other days), he would say this:

-----------------------------

(HIS WORDS, NOT MINE)

Everyone listen up. Right now.

When I am teaching a lesson, there are two things you need to know.

One, I will not repeat myself. Ever. If you talk over my lesson, fall asleep, or you just aren't paying attention, tough luck. If you actually have a disorder that makes it hard for you to just sit down and listen to me without talking, falling asleep, or whatever, I will need some proof. Otherwise, I will not take any excuses.

Two, I will not help you on assignments if you talk or fall asleep during my lessons. When a student is talking over me or taking a nap during a lesson, I automatically assume that student knows everything about the lesson and therefore does not require my assistance. That's the only possible reason you could have for being so rude.

It is not hard to just sit down and listen to somebody talk. It is also not hard to produce proof that you have a medical condition. If you can't do either of those things, that's not my problem. Now, if you do have some sort of disability and you prove that you're not lying to get my sympathy, I will gladly make accommodations. Otherwise, you'd best be on your...best behavior.

In my 20+ years of teaching, I've found that I can only help a student if it is clear that they want to succeed. I've tried many times to help people who just don't care, and we both ended up worse than before I started.

So, if you want to succeed in this class, you better show it to me with the choices that you make. If you want to come out of this class smarter than before, then I will see to it that you become smarter. But if you couldn't possibly care less, that's your problem, not mine.

I am not your friend. I am your teacher. Don't forget it.

-----------------------------

Despite the fact that the subject he teaches is generally known for being incredibly tough, he had by far the highest passing rate for all of his classes compared to the other teachers. According to him, there was usually only one or two students at most who would fail his classes; most people who did were often expelled later due to bad behavior.

His tough-but-fair method to teaching was pretty ruthless, but he was always genuinely polite and helpful to those who clearly showed that they wanted to pass his classes.

The disrespectful kids who never put in any effort usually shaped up pretty quick, especially because he had four classes that you were required to pass in order to graduate. If you weren't in his good graces, you'd have a bad time, plain and simple.

This right here is the method that every teacher should use. Some might say it's unethical, but I say who cares? IT WORKS.