#opinion rant

[grayrazor]

Thinking back on it, I wonder if I judged the first season of Star Trek: Discovery so harshly because I was unconsciously comparing it to StarBlazers 2199, which had come out 5 years earlier and is still kinda my platonic ideal for “more modernized and more military-focused Star Trek-derived story.”

Like, it’s a war story, it has shades of grey, the Japanese title is literally “Space Battleship,” but it doesn’t feel as misanthropic or cynical as, say, the Battlestar Galactica reboot.

They still make time for exploring strange new worlds and doing diplomacy with strange alien cultures. They find weird space things instead of just fighting the enemy (or each other) all the time!

The other half of it though, is that Discovery kind of loses focus on the war. I think they were chasing the dragon of Game of Thrones so to speak and so put a greater emphasis on intrigue and spycraft which I don’t think they really pulled off. Despite supposedly being "a Star Trek war story" the war mostly happens off-screen and gets resolved with essentially a genocide-threat deus ex machina.

SBY2199 isn’t realistic by any means, but it still captures a “sci-fi” feel a lot more than Star Trek has for a long time.

Astronomical phenomena are plot-relevant terrain instead of just background decoration.

Ships slide sideways and backwards while fighting, shoot at each other from outside visual range, and don’t always have the same orientation in 3D space.

Energy weapons melt and cut instead of just making explosions.

The insides of the ships feel cramped, claustrophobic, and like they logically fit inside the exterior model, instead of having huge cavernous spaces.

[aro-ace-choas]

holy hell are people unable to treat children with any amount of respect like I know it is hard for some people to believe but guess what kids are their own human beings who deserve to have their autonomy respected I am so sick of seeing people treat kids like the property of their legal guardian (the fact that the law sees it that way doesn't either) your child is not your property they are their own person who should have the right to be treated as such Like gods kids can have some very smart and well-thought ideas and people dismiss them because "Oh they are just X years old what do they know"

oh and for fuck sake stop posting kids online without consent especially if it is a public account

like is it really so hard for people to see kids are real fucking people

[theonehitwonder]

this does not apply if you wear exclusively leggings. Those things tear all the time you need like a million on standby

[raps-hellion]

demigods who know how much an average loaf of bread from the store costs:

leo — he was between foster homes a lot and often ended up homeless. he knows the cost because he's spent many times counting out the spare change in his pockets and praying he has enough.

percy — he and sally went/still go on grocery trips, and he rants to annabeth if the price goes up. want to know how the economy's doing? ask percy about bread prices.

demigods who do not know how much an average loaf of bread from the store costs:

annabeth — maybe back when she was with luke and thalia, but she's been in camp half-blood for most of her life. bread just appears on a plate in front of her, who is she to question it.

frank — he's a nepo baby.

hazel — she's been dead for 70 years. seeing what the price has been inflated to now may kill her.

jason — he was raised by wolves. lupa does not have time to worry about the inflation rate of bread.

nico — he was cut off from modern society for 70 years.

piper — she's also a nepo baby. and she spent a lot of time shoplifting, so the illusion of cost doesn't apply to her.

[the-adventures-of-dave]

Resisting the urge to argue with internet strangers when they say incorrect cat facts. I am Gods strongest soldier.

[artsymeeshee]

[arcanegifs]

Here are some Season 2 Arcane GIF comparisons before and after I color and sharpen them! | Season 1 Comparison GIFs

[shalom-iamcominghome]

I'm in many leftist spaces and I've seen many goyim in these spaces complaining about how often jews talk about leftist antisemitism.

The thing is that this is the consequence of claiming to be advocates or in support of another group of people - when you ostensibly prove you aren't for us, we're going to be harsher than we are to people who never pretended in the first place.

For an analogy, here's a similar situation: I am harsher toward "pro-trans" people who are transphobic than I am to people who are not. This is because the pro-trans person told me they were better than that. I am already aware that the anti-trans person is going to be anti-trans. Their anti-transness is self-evident. What isn't self-evident is a person who claims to be pro-trans and then proves otherwise.

This post is addressed toward leftist spaces because I occupy these spaces the most. It makes me wonder just how safe I am in these spaces when leftist begrudgingly acknowledge that this conversation keeps happening. I feel like a lot of leftists treat those of us who open these conversations like we're an "I left the left" rightist when... Most of us are still in leftist spaces. We have not left the left and through pretending we have, you absolve yourself the feeling of responsibility.

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

I just want you to know that I was rereading the PDMDZS comics yet again, and I finally caved and watched Legally Blonde because you're like a puppeteer that draws things and I'm like "well, guess I have to see it now." Now, after watching Legally Blonde, I must tell you that Elle Woods is love, Elle Woods is life, Elle Woods is everything to me. Elle Woods would have been able to save Wei Wuxian from the Jins all while looking sparkly and fantastic as she does it. (Obviously with her hype girlies in the background)

Her power and influence know no bounds!

[bennetsbonnet]

I came across this screenshot of a YouTube comment about Pride and Prejudice on Pinterest ↓

Ordinarily, I don't go out of my way to pour scorn on other people's interpretations, and certainly not without good reason. But this one really, really irked me.

I don't know what's more depressing; that someone interpreted Mr Darcy and Elizabeth's dynamic in this way, or that 12,000 people apparently agreed...

...because there are two major problems with this interpretation:

Firstly, Darcy is an asshole.

Secondly, he's very much not a stupid man.

This isn't just my opinion. This is canon.

Elizabeth doesn't think Mr Darcy is a terrible person because she happened to feel like it one day. Darcy gave her every reason to think he had absolutely no redeeming features. I mean, their very first interaction, before (contrary to what adaptations portray) they had even said a single word to each other, was when he insulted her.

Not only that, Darcy knew what he was doing, as this excerpt from chapter 3 proves:

'Turning round [Darcy] looked for a moment at Elizabeth, till catching her eye, he withdrew his own and coldly said: “She is tolerable, but not handsome enough to tempt me; I am in no humour at present to give consequence to young ladies who are slighted by other men. You had better return to your partner and enjoy her smiles, for you are wasting your time with me.'

Darcy wanted Elizabeth to hear him. There is no mistaking that. Yes, Elizabeth should have listened to the repeated warnings she received from others that Wickham was not all he seemed and that, perhaps, Darcy wasn't so bad... but you can completely understand why she was prejudiced against him. I wouldn't forgive someone saying something like that about me in a hurry.

There are other examples of Darcy's rudeness to Elizabeth. His tone of voice is described as 'grave' and 'cold' when they dance at the Netherfield ball in chapter 18; when he visits Hunsford Parsonage in chapter 32, he ends their exchange in a rude manner '[Darcy] experienced some change of feeling; he drew back his chair, took a newspaper from the table, and glancing over it, said, in a colder voice: “Are you pleased with Kent?”' and there are too many examples in the proposal in chapter 34, but for me the worst is, 'towards him I have been kinder than towards myself.'

If a man implied that separating my beloved sister from the man who loved her, was kinder to them both than the agony of him proposing to me... well, I don't think he would've walked away from that exchange. Elizabeth Bennet you are a better person than me.

Regarding the other point: Darcy's intelligence is never questioned. In fact, the narrator devotes time to ensuring we understand that in chapter 4:

'In understanding, Darcy was the superior. Bingley was by no means deficient, but Darcy was clever. He was at the same time haughty, reserved, and fastidious, and his manners, though well-bred, were not inviting.'

Again, this man knew exactly what he was doing. He wasn't sorry about any of it, and he certainly was not 'internally crying.' Mr Darcy was a conceited, spoiled rich man who needed to be made aware of his flaws and reflect on them in order to become a better person; or at least, improve enough that he ceased to give the impression that he was not, at his core, a compassionate man with many great qualities.

At the same time, Elizabeth was not a poor, innocent angel who was slighted by a man and who subsequently never did anything wrong. She didn't deserve to be on the receiving end of Darcy's unpleasantness, no; but she, too, was absolutely blind to her own flaws... until she read Darcy's letter.

I just think that if you don't grasp this fundamental aspect of their respective personalities and subsequent interactions, then how can the payoff possibly be satisfying?

Pride and Prejudice is, amongst many other things, a story about two flawed people whose love for the other shapes them into the best possible versions of themselves. It's really beautiful and it's a shame to think such a key part of it is being misinterpreted.

[stardreamt]

I’m bout sick of these people

[spinaart]

hey leader!!!

[lithosaurus]

Not to vague at anyone but I've been seeing a lot of posts responding to Veilguard criticism that entirely miss the point of those criticisms.

No, my frustration with Rook's characterization isn't that there are limitations to a video games PC. It's that there are scant options to RP in the RPG and fewer options to make choices beyond 'do you want to do this quest y/n?' in a game series which previously bent over backwards to explore the idea of how far is too far for the greater good.

No, my frustration with the way the world seems to have changed is not that the there is a change or even that those changes are underexplained. It's that those changes feel more like reboots that don't want to continue the narrative of the previous games. Sure, the differences in the Crows could be chocked up to a differences in the Houses, or the change in how Circles are described could be because how the Mage-Templar war ended but A) that's never actually addressed or even lamp shaded B) the worldstate removal means that the changes can't be a consequence for past actions because it happened regardless of whatever occurred in the last three games!

No, the number of times the word 'okay' is used doesn't inherently make the game poorly written. The change in the writing voice, anachronist word choices, and flattening of characters into marvel quip speak is just best quantified by word choice.

Perhaps most frustratingly, No, my trans ass isn't somehow scandalized by the mere existence of a nonbinary person. There is plenty of transphobic bs being flung at the game, at Taash, and at the devs but acting like being critical of how Taash is written is exclusively due to transphobia just isn't true and it does boil my blood just a little when I see a post claiming that everyone critical of Taash's character is antitrans.

[tikkunolamresistance]

i’m seeing a lot of people on instagram and irl praising president elect trumps most recent statement regarding the hostage crisis and middle east strife.

they say this should have been americas stance from october 8th 2023 onward. while i agree the focus on the hostages has waned globally and our concern should really be rescuing who we can and those responsible should be held accountable, the language of this post is rhetorically manipulative to the jewish community. he is telling a lot of us what we want to hear, we want someone to really stand up for us on the political stage (ritchie torres) and stay with their full chest that they are on our team— but this message is not doing that. this message is that of a war monger drumming up his base to create more chaos as the transition of power becomes an even larger public spectacle. i can tell because he says the world wants the hostages back. that it’s demonstrably false. for example, a staffer to the new york city mayors office was suspended without pay this week for tearing down hostage posters.

this statement from trump uses the hostages to bolster a hawkish sentiment that is growing into mainstream.

i don’t have answers or edits to his statement. it speaks for itself. i’m just very tired. tired of this rhetoric, tired of every day bringing conflicting reports of broken ceasefires and coalitions of global powers backing theocratic regimes.

the path to peace is fraught with violent traps and i see far too many of us falling into it over and over again. people i regard as brilliant are taking trumps statement as a net positive. i have a sick feeling its not.

[himeshifts]

no offense, but i really dislike c.ai.. yes, it can be fun to chat with people from your dr or even your s/o but it ultimately feels pointless. it makes you romanticize them and your dr, distorting your perception. you know what’s easier? to just shift. exactly.

[backjustforberena]

Corlys and Rhaenys at their daughter's wake, with their grandchildren. DO NOT REPOST.