#persuade people

[ceilidhtransing]

If you hear Republicans speak to other Republicans, you'll hear a lot of them say that they really don't like Trump for whatever reason (many of them aren't fans of the felony convictions, his personal manner, his business dealings, his family life, or whatever else) but that they'll still be voting for him because he'll get them closer to what they ultimately want. They're pragmatic; they don't demand purity in their candidate. They recognise him as their strategic choice so they'll set aside the issues they have with him and vote as a bloc. That's what makes them effective at getting their way. That's how they win elections.

And boy I wish we had more of that attitude on the left. Imagine what we could get done.

[uselessgaywhovian]

sorry, saw someone on reddit talking about how they "had" to kill shadowheart because they were playing a "good" character and she was "evil" and i'm like

not to make her too much of a little meow meow, but this little bitch wants to be good so much that Shar had to put a shock collar on her when she was like seven and like 40 years later it's still not working great

[themathomhouse]

this disability pride month, stop making jokes about people in wheelchairs standing up or walking.

can I stand and walk? sure, for a short while and with pain. the consequences for trying to be out all day without a wheelchair are that I'll be in bed for the rest of the week, too tired and in too much pain to move.

but the government won't give me my own wheelchair because they have the same attitude as these jokes - I can stand up, so I don't need one. exercise is good for you, you should walk!

it keeps me trapped in the house, unable to do anything more than short stints anywhere without borrowing or hiring a wheelchair - one that causes me pain to sit in and relies on someone to push me (usually with difficulty), because they're not going to have a high-end chair for that sort of thing.

it's not a miracle that a wheelchair user can stand or walk. it's something we should aspire to see more often.

[rainbow-nerdss]

"How come you never talk to me about sports?"

It's late in the afternoon on a lazy Sunday, and they're just curled up on the couch together. Eddie's got a book in one hand, and he's carding the fingers of his other through Steve's hair. Steve's got the sports pages from the morning paper in his lap, and he's looking through it idly.

He stops when he hears Eddie's question, though, cranes his neck back to look at him.

"Huh?"

"How come you never talk about sports? I just realised I don't even know what teams you support." Eddie dog-ears his book and sets his book aside as he asks.

Steve frowns. "But… you don't care about sports. Like, at all. Why would I bore you by talking about it?"

"Are you bored when I talk about D&D?” Eddie asks, hand stilling in Steve’s hair. Steve shakes his head. “I tell you about my sessions all the time. I tell you about the books I'm reading and music shit, and you always listen to me. You don't really care about any of that stuff, either."

Steve shakes his head. "Yeah, but that’s different,” he tries to argue.

“How so?”

Steve wracks his brain for the words to describe it. “I like listening to you talk about D&D because you get so excited. I like hearing you talk about something you care about."

Eddie smiles and kisses Steve’s forehead. He looks almost smug, like he’s won a debate Steve hadn’t even realised he was part of.

"So let me ask again. Why don't you talk about sports more?"

Steve is quiet, staring at nothing in the distance as he puts the pieces together.

"I never... Nobody ever.... I mean, except Lucas, but Robin and Dustin always rolled their eyes when I made references to it, so..."

Eddie cups Steve’s face and looks him in the eye. "Tell me something."

"What?"

"I don't know. What's the drama right now? How's your team doing in the league or the championship or whatever it's called? Tell me about the last game you saw on TV! I wanna hear you talk about your interests, too."

Steve feels warmth burst in his chest as he sets the newspaper aside. 

Eddie leans back against the couch, watching fondly as he listens. Steve is hesitant at first, stumbling over his words. A little voice in the back of his head keeps tripping him up, telling him Eddie doesn't care about any of this and you're boring him, wrap it up.

Every time he lets the voice win, though, every time he stops talking, trails off, or tries to change the topic to something Eddie might enjoy more, Eddie asks him a question.

"What does that rule mean?"

"How does team selection even work?" 

"What would your dream line-up look like right now?"

And Steve answers. And Eddie listens.

When Eddie finally runs out of questions, Steve's surprised by how happy he is.

"You're really cute when you talk about sports, you know that right? Your face lights up with it."

Steve leans in and kisses Eddie. "I love you."

"Love you too, babe. I really do."

[turtleblogatlast]

Something I like about Leo is that he’s honestly really chill? It’s easy to remember the moments where he’s being obnoxious or excitable but I feel like most of the time he’s incredibly “go with the flow” and has an overall affable demeanor.

[a-very-tired-jew]

I was talking with a gaming friend of mine about Leftist spaces becoming increasingly more antisemitic and hostile and the following exchange was too good.

Friend: Yeah, I'm seeing self identified Leftists that specify they're Marxists spout antisemitic shit.

Me: Well that's because they're likely MLs.

Friend: MLs?

Me: Marxist-Leninists.

Friend: I still don't follow.

Me: Tankies. MLs are Marxists who believe in Soviet era Marxism and are the authoritarian Left. Which means they're just tankies with more words. Hell, most Leftist ideology nowadays in those spaces is just some form of Soviet style Marxism/Communism with a different coat of paint.

Friend: Wait...wait... wait...So they're just using different labels to hide their authoritarian and fascist beliefs?

Me: And their antisemitism, don't forget that.

Friend: I'm going to make a meme real quick.

Friend:

Me: Hold on. I need to make one for you then.

Me:

Friend: Omg...that's so good.

Friend: You're going to put this on jumblr aren't you?

Me: Yeeeeeep.

So many Leftist spaces are just some form of Soviet Marxist spaces and are not welcoming to other forms of Leftist ideology like Democratic Socialism, Utopian Socialism, and so on (a lot of no true Scotsman fallacy in these spaces). Which, IMO, is why there's so much antisemitism that has risen from the deep like a sea monster. It's always been there, lurking in the depths of these dominant ideologies. Now that it's popular to be (((anti-Zionist))) the old antisemitic rhetoric from the Soviet days is front and center. At this point in time if I meet a Leftist that self identifies as a Marxist I know I have a high chance to be insulted, at the least, and hatecrimed, at the worst.

[taradactyls]

Something I love about how Pride and Prejudice is told through an omnipresent narrator, aside from the witty remarks and insight into other characters it allows even though it's usually focused on Elizabeth, is how it plays on the audience's own prejudices and assumptions.

The narrator tells us very early on, chapter 4, that Darcy is "haughty, reserved, and fastidious, and his manners, though well-bred, were not inviting." We've already seen that when we meet him the previous chapter, and will see more of it in those following. But it's the readers, along with Elizabeth, who take that observation as not only a list of flaws (despite only the first actually being negative) but presumes even more damaging flaws must be attached to it. Darcy can be off-putting, especially so in the setting we meet him in: he dismissed Elizabeth within earshot of her, didn't engage with people attempting to converse with him, etc. It's easy to assume the worst of him in a world so driven by social niceties, and because we follow Elizabeth, who is so lively and playful amidst the rules which govern society. Elizabeth thinks he's bad tempered? It would make sense - he hasn't shown consideration for others much socially, why would he care when he's angry? He acted from resentment and jealousy and went against his father's will? That's not such a jump after the conclusion of a bad temper, his own acknowledgement of implacable resentment, and evidence of pride. The awareness of one offensive trait so naturally leads to prejudice against it, that we easily assume still worse qualities must exist. We are as mistaken as Elizabeth.

Even the idea that 'No, Darcy was never haughty or rude, he was just shy and misunderstood, the narrator is wrong' is just magnifying that prejudice. Yes, we do find out later that Darcy is not at ease among strangers, and was always intrinsically good; his morals and core values meant he was never as bad as Elizabeth believed. But that doesn't mean he was without flaws, and it's so fascinating that some analysis of his character seek to completely remove the negative traits which he eventually overcame after acknowledging them in himself. The logic seems to be that they feel if he had them in the start that he isn't actually such a good person. It's just another example of being so prejudiced against certain flaws that it's impossible for some people to reconcile that there doesn't have to be more serious failings attached, and someone can still be a good person despite being arrogant and not always nice. It's, ironically, being prejudiced in the exact same way that Elizabeth was at the start of the novel. It's amazing that Jane Austen was able to tap into that aspect of human nature so deftly, and invoke in both in her main character, and readers to this day.

Now, of course, the story is so well known it's rare for anyone to read it blind, so it's less likely anyone will be unaware of Darcy's good qualities despite first seeing his worst. Even if they do, Pride and Prejudice has become so genre defining that new readers who are the slightest bit genre savvy will be more aware than contemporary audiences were. But even if we know the story it's still so understandable why Elizabeth feels the way she does. We see what she sees and feel her conclusions make sense. Just as, even though the narrator tells us Darcy is starting to catch feelings for Elizabeth, we fully comprehend her not noticing and believing there's a mutual dislike. And though that is concrete evidence of Elizabeth not reading Darcy and his motives correctly, we are still so sympathetic of the basis of her prejudice that her continued belief in Darcy's lack of virtues makes sense from her point of view. We can see, as she later will, that she takes it too far, and should have noticed evidence to the contrary, but her prejudice against him based on his early behaviour and her pride at reading people correctly is so understandable.

Basically, in a story about the characters' pride and prejudices, I love, love, LOVE how the narrator's voice brings out those same traits in readers the exact same way we see it presenting in Elizabeth. We're all on that journey with her, and we can likewise learn the same lessons about ourselves as she does. Pride and Prejudice feels timeless, because even though society and thus the nuance changes, the book is about human nature, and that remains essentially the same.

[mrusheronhiswaytotown]

i lied here’s more sharvey. HAPPY VALENTINES!!!!!

[mareastrorum]

Ludinus’s argument is going to be “the Prime Deities chose the Betrayers over us,” isn’t it? He’s going to focus on all the horrible things the Betrayer Gods did during this mission, that the Prime Deities refuse to end this war by killing them, and that they let the Betrayers destroy Aeor so the Factorum Malleus couldn’t be used against the Betrayers.

It’s going to boil down to, “the Prime Deities will watch millions of us die for hundreds of years so long as all of their siblings survive.” The Betrayers broke out of their prisons before; they could certainly figure it out again. How long before the next Calamity? How long before the next disagreement between the gods kills a majority of life on Exandria?

I don’t agree with that reasoning, but I can see that argument taking shape. I’m curious if we’re going to see something weaken it other than that Predathos won’t stop with the gods. (Ludinus is not stupid, but he is arrogant; I bet he has a plan to deal with Predathos, and—looking at what Aeor achieved—that may not be impossible.)

[doccywhomst]

okay so i understand that daleks are one of the main brand icons of doctor who, and that they represent a certain breed of fascist thought that can never be fully stamped out, but. :/

i think im ready for the daleks to die.

daleks have been central to doctor who from the very beginning (the second ever episode, the daleks, and season 2’s the dalek invasion of earth), embodying fear, hate, imperialism, and the darker sides of our own nature - but it seems that, for a while now, their continued existence has been maintained solely by the doctor’s mercy and/or ineptitude ??? which sucks as a theme imo

a great example is remembrance of the daleks, a seventh doctor story from 1988 - yes, the one where the doctor blows up skaro. or, davros fires a device the doctor boobytrapped at skaro’s sun, which goes supernova and destroys every dalek in that region of space. it’s pretty baller. anyway! davros and a few daleks hop in an escape pod and fuck off, and the doctor just lets them. k.

(skaro’s destruction was later ‘corrected’ by widely-detested EDA author john peel in war of the daleks, which is unhyperbolically the worst book i’ve ever read, and thus disregarded! but this heretical text explains that the planet was a decoy named antalin. it’s awful yeah. i tried to warn you)

exhibit b: evolution of the daleks (2007). ten confronts dalek caan, the sole survivor of the cult of skaro, at the top of the empire state building. the daleks have just created and annihilated a slave race of pig people, and it’s horrible to watch. you get the feeling that they’ve done this millions of times all across the universe, because they canonically have. they are inherently imperialist, racist, and genocidal. the doctor knows this.

and the doctor’s response is basically “killing you would mean that I commit genocide, so let’s just hang out and have a conversation.”

dalek caan gets away.

and you’ll never guess where he goes. that’s right! he hops the time lock and grabs davros, who escaped in remembrance of the daleks!!! and they make a bunch of new dalek babies together, out of davros’ gross old flesh. it’s a tentacle fest.

so he was right. killing dalek caan would’ve been a genocide- but because he didn’t, now there are ten thousand genocides. a clear improvement!

exhibit d: victory of the daleks (2010).

after a couple of false starts, the daleks manage to make more daleks after tricking the doctor into confirming their species to open their own device (??? okay sure)- but then they trick him again with a robot scientist bomb that he failed to detect even after talking to the guy, and it’s just like…. fool the doctor once, shame on you, fool them twice? damn, you must be on the merch.

exhibit e: the witch’s familiar (2015).

the iconic ‘only other chair on skaro’ scene where twelve and davros chat on the rebuilt dalek home world - super fun, so fun i forgot how the doctor folded like a house of cards. davros, the genocidal maniac, wants to live another day to see a pretty sunrise, so the doctor *checks notes* gives him some artron energy? that can’t be right, wh- oh- oh, but it’s fine because it affects all daleks, and through some contrived science magic, they all ‘learn the concept of mercy.’ on accident.

and it changed nothing. later stories retcon this. i’m too tired to even think about resolution, revolution, or eve of the daleks right now, but those episodes only further cemented my malaise regarding the doctor’s apparent complacency.

again and again, the daleks depend on the doctor’s mercy, and they get it, and they WIN- and it feels like the moral is that they should be eliminated like an unthinking, unfeeling virus, but the doctor is just too compassionate or inept for the job. certainly not the first doctor to lose to a virus, but perhaps the first to do so willingly.

beyond a loss in revenue, i can’t imagine why the doctor couldn’t destroy the daleks, or why they wouldn’t want to - there was a point when, allegedly, “the time lord’s continuity could not survive without the daleks” (“neverland” audio), but i think the weight and relevance of that harry potter type threat has long since passed.

so… it might be time to put the daleks away, for now. sure, they can come back as a concession to the persistence of fascist ideology, but watching the doctor lose or win to fascism for seemingly arbitrary (always sentimental) reasons isn’t really satisfying. the show addresses that daleks cause untold suffering, but again and again the only obstacle to no suffering is the doctor, who can’t get their shit together! it’s killing me.

[wifiwuxians]

hey! to any of you who are xuechao lovers or are simply enjoyers of the revival AU (that i have lovingly compiled over on @xuechao), it would mean a lot to me if you'd read this little ficlet here! it's an instalment of the AU that sort of flew a bit under the radar and i'd like for it to be given a little more love (: it's just a small domestic scene, but it features the two running scams and some casual nudity and closeness 😏 it's goofy, it's silly, and it's pretty darn cute!

let them into your heart!

[suusoh]

Hello! Do you think Johan would get jealous easily when it would come to his s/o? for example if some other man was talking to his s/o and/or flirting with them. If you think he would get jealous, how would he deal with the jealousy?

Thank you in advance and have a nice day/night!

I was gonna ask if yandere Johan or regular Johan but honestly they're both so sickly obsessed over you so nvm AHHHAHAH

Hmm. I think he'd be so good at rationalizing thoughts and circumstances so he wouldn't be too possessive. In a way, he's unfazed that people stare at you because he knows it's human nature to look at beautiful things. That's how it is.

He also believes that he feels secure with s/o. He loves intensely. More so than anyone. You've seen the stuff he's done for his sister, so you should definitely expect that same intensity. He knows, that you know, that both of you are devoted to each other. You're his and he is yours. Simple as that.

So why does the sight of seeing other people talk and flirt with you make a slight, barely present, unease start to form in his chest? Why does he keep his gaze on you despite knowing you won't truly leave him behind?

And he of course wonders. Why is it that, the person talking to you, isn't going away yet?

Have you perhaps not told them already? Told them that you're clearly not interested? That you are already taken, by him, your dear friend and lover, your confidante, your partner,— your Johan?

Do you need him to step in now, darling? What other reason do they need to still speak with you?

...Do you enjoy talking to them?

You can always talk to him, you know. He can be your conversation partner anytime you like and you should already know that. In actuality, he should be the first person you should always turn to if you need to share your thoughts.

You don't really need to find other people for that, do you? He can be anything you want him to be. He can be anyone at all, talk about anything and everything you want. You don't need to speak with anyone but him. So why? Why are you still talking with them? Why do you need to talk to them? Don't you you just need him? Wh—

—Oh.

He may actually be feeling... jealousy.

Ah.

.... How interesting.

A small smile tugs on his lips. That's certainly... quite a development. Another human emotion he has long since buried, beneath the layers of mental survival, emerging at last it seems. And all because of you, his dear. You did this. You... truly are quite something, you know that?

He walks over to you and gives you a kiss on the cheek.

[wavebiders]

Feeling very insane about the fact that, in a way, being a bad Sharran is what saves Shadowheart in the end

Because like. She's not supposed to be bad at keeping secrets. She's not supposed to be vulnerable, kind, or hopeful. She's not supposed to get attached to anything or anyone

Yet, it's these things that allow her to get close to the pc and the group as a whole. The more she fails to keep Shar's secrets the more she opens up to you, and the more she opens up to you the more you have the chance to build a relationship with her, and it's through having that relationship that she finds the courage to defy Shar

If she had been a better Sharran she never would have built that bond at all, she wouldn't have felt safe to make the decision she did, and probably no one would have trusted her enough to let her decide to begin with

Shadowheart is saved because she is loved, and Shadowheart is loved because she cannot stop being herself no matter how hard she tries

[ky-the-squiddy]

Every so often I come across people going on about 'queer is a bad word, I'm not a terf but we shouldn't use that word in community/academic/etc settings, don't call me queer' and just

Okay

You're not queer

I won't call you that, no one should call you that, and anyone that does is being an asshole regardless of their identity or minority status. It doesn't matter what reasoning you have behind not wanting to be labelled as queer, what trauma you may or may not have, what you've identified as in the past and present, and whether or not your preference just comes to not liking the vibe of the word for entirely inscrutible reasons. No one has any right to pry.

If you say you're not queer, then you're not queer, and that's okay.

It just also means that if I, a queer person, talk about the queer community, then I'm not referring to you. If an academic refers to queer history and queer texts written by queer people about other queer people, they're also not talking about you. If a corporation starts using 'queer' in their ads then they can eat shit because fuck 'em, they have no fucking right to use our words when they aren't and have never been one of us, but if a well-meaning ally uses 'queer' as a one-syllable shorthand for LGBTQIA+ in a verbal conversation, then there's no reason for you to get any more annoyed at them as you would if they used the word 'gay' instead.

You have every single right to be labelled or not labelled as you like, and I will stand behind you all the way. If someone is trying to shove 'queer' on you when you really don't want it? Then I will happily, metaphorically, deck them in the face for you. We are still family, whatever you choose to call yourself, and it's important that we stick together.

But

If you aren't queer, and you get frustrated when you see queer people talking about the queer community, take a deep breath, and consider:

They aren't talking about you

[zhivchik]

[the-gay-cousin-666]

I have an earth-shattering Andrew Minyard animatic to Nunemaker's Parable in my head... and I have a thousand more important things to do... but--