#possibly controversial statement?

[m-a-d-e-l-e-i-n-e]

Holy fuck Broadside once again proving that they are one of the best bands, if not THE best band in pop punk right now

[mylonelydreaming]

I'm all for platonic relationships, but I just think romantic suits botw zelink the best. Let other zelinks be platonic, this one is about one hundred years of yearning and shared trauma and tension and forbidden love, and an actual positive version of the knight and princess trope.

[meliake]

Am I the only that really is not a big fan of Cyclop's 90's uniform? Like I undertand it's a classic and everything, but just look at it-

What do those thigh belts do?? and don't get me started on the uneven belt thing across his chest. I can forgive the underpants, but even in the realm of superhero suits, this is a stretch.

And generally, I think Cyclop's suit is allowed to change style over the years, and there are so many good styles to take inspiration from.

And if they wanted to keep the hair out instead of the cowl like i prefer, at least make it look cool dude.

[rowan-e-ravenwood]

oddest take i've seen lately was someone saying "i hate how puritan all americans are because they always go straight to pearl-clutching when they hear a curse word". and everyone in the notes was agreeing??

[frogtender]

hi tumblr users i'm sorry to be an editor a linguistic hater but can we as a collective PLEASE stop starting passionate sentences with a wistful sighing "Oh," in an attempt to sound irreverent or deep... it's such a tumblr and fanfic specific writing quirk and every time i read it i fight the urge to roll my eyes. maybe once upon a time it was effective when used incredibly sparingly in only the most dramatic contexts but it has been overused by the melodramatic gay writing community to the point of unintentional parody. i say this as a lifetime member of the melodramatic gay writing community trying to save my brethren

[hiraethwrote]

Nanami is more of a listener than a talker, and would happily listen to you ramble on and on about anything that would pop into your mind. And no matter how little it really concerns him, he’ll always pay attention to when you explain something so enthusiastically — even if it’s a silly internet trend or drama.

Nanami is definitely not the guy to have TikTok, but would on occasion lift his attention from his book when you’re both laying in bed to quietly watch along for a few minutes.

Nanami is not the type of guy to really form any defining opinion on said internet controversies — except the videos of grooms disrespecting their brides at the alter in their vows. When you tell him about the men who only spew vulgar statements to their future wives, you witness Nanami get incredibly angry, going on a long and serious tangent about how these boys are immature and have no business getting married at all.

Nanami is the type of guy who would spontaneously pull you out of the chair in the calm hours of the evening to slow dance with you around the living room. Sometimes he’d put on some calm and beautiful melodies to play in the background, but sometimes he would just slow waltz without the music, casual chatter filling the void instead.

Nanami is the type of guy who’d pull your feet in his lap to massage them after a long day, without you asking for it.

Nanami is the type of guy who looooves to cook for you, and he does it as often as he possibly can. And when he does, he loves to feed you small bites during the process for you to taste everything.

Nanami is, of course, a respectable man — meaning he doesn’t engage all that much in pda. But he’ll happily walk beside you with your fingers intertwined with his, or he’ll have a tender hand on the small of your back to guide you when has to let go.

Nanami however, has one physical need and that is kissing the back of your hand, which he will do wherever and whenever. Walking the grocery store; lift your hand to his lips. Meeting up for lunch; lift your hand to his lips. Waiting in line for a restaurant; lift your hand to his lips.

Nanami is the type of guy that would love being a girl’s dad. It would be the highlight of his day to come home from work, only to squeeze into one of her small chairs in her bedroom and would put on the most convincing act of sipping tea from the empty cup, a pretty tiara at the very top of his head.

Nanami is the type of guy who would love planning the wedding along with you. He hates the idea of loading all the responsibility on the bride, because he wants to celebrate your love just as much as you do.

Nanami is the type of guy, who once he falls in love, he’s settled.

©hiraethwrote 2024 . all rights reserved. reposting, translating and otherwise plagarisim is prohibited

[reasonsforhope]

It’s an open secret in fashion. Unsold inventory goes to the incinerator; excess handbags are slashed so they can’t be resold; perfectly usable products are sent to the landfill to avoid discounts and flash sales. The European Union wants to put an end to these unsustainable practices. On Monday, [December 4, 2023], it banned the destruction of unsold textiles and footwear.

“It is time to end the model of ‘take, make, dispose’ that is so harmful to our planet, our health and our economy,” MEP Alessandra Moretti said in a statement. “Banning the destruction of unsold textiles and footwear will contribute to a shift in the way fast fashion manufacturers produce their goods.”

This comes as part of a broader push to tighten sustainable fashion legislation, with new policies around ecodesign, greenwashing and textile waste phasing in over the next few years. The ban on destroying unsold goods will be among the longer lead times: large businesses have two years to comply, and SMEs have been granted up to six years. It’s not yet clear on whether the ban applies to companies headquartered in the EU, or any that operate there, as well as how this ban might impact regions outside of Europe.

For many, this is a welcome decision that indirectly tackles the controversial topics of overproduction and degrowth. Policymakers may not be directly telling brands to produce less, or placing limits on how many units they can make each year, but they are penalising those overproducing, which is a step in the right direction, says Eco-Age sustainability consultant Philippa Grogan. “This has been a dirty secret of the fashion industry for so long. The ban won’t end overproduction on its own, but hopefully it will compel brands to be better organised, more responsible and less greedy.”

Clarifications to come

There are some kinks to iron out, says Scott Lipinski, CEO of Fashion Council Germany and the European Fashion Alliance (EFA). The EFA is calling on the EU to clarify what it means by both “unsold goods” and “destruction”. Unsold goods, to the EFA, mean they are fit for consumption or sale (excluding counterfeits, samples or prototypes)...

The question of what happens to these unsold goods if they are not destroyed is yet to be answered. “Will they be shipped around the world? Will they be reused as deadstock or shredded and downcycled? Will outlet stores have an abundance of stock to sell?” asks Grogan.

Large companies will also have to disclose how many unsold consumer products they discard each year and why, a rule the EU is hoping will curb overproduction and destruction...

Could this shift supply chains?

For Dio Kurazawa, founder of sustainable fashion consultancy The Bear Scouts, this is an opportunity for brands to increase supply chain agility and wean themselves off the wholesale model so many rely on. “This is the time to get behind innovations like pre-order and on-demand manufacturing,” he says. “It’s a chance for brands to play with AI to understand the future of forecasting. Technology can help brands be more intentional with what they make, so they have less unsold goods in the first place.”

Grogan is equally optimistic about what this could mean for sustainable fashion in general. “It’s great to see that this is more ambitious than the EU’s original proposal and that it specifically calls out textiles. It demonstrates a willingness from policymakers to create a more robust system,” she says. “Banning the destruction of unsold goods might make brands rethink their production models and possibly better forecast their collections.”

One of the outstanding questions is over enforcement. Time and again, brands have used the lack of supply chain transparency in fashion as an excuse for bad behaviour. Part of the challenge with the EU’s new ban will be proving that brands are destroying unsold goods, not to mention how they’re doing it and to what extent, says Kurazawa. “Someone obviously knows what is happening and where, but will the EU?”"

-via British Vogue, December 7, 2023

[ghostinthetumbchine]

This but i also feel like it's important how they're starting from very different footing with very different slates.

(Im sorry OP im about to go into a yap session on your great post, hope you dont mind)

Stranger does not know who he is nor do people around him. In many ways he's a blank slate. He has no preexisting tendencies and convictions and people around him have no hangups nor reasons to have them other than maybe him being a bit strange. Its easy to love him, even when he makes mistakes because he just seems like an innocent baby lost in the world. And people do love him, and that makes all the difference.

We also know he is Olorin, a maia who has remained in valinor and spent his existence serving Manwe, Nienna aka caretakers, leaders, people who tend to and nourish what already exists, rather than focus on creation and progress and invention.

In comparison, we have Sauron with all the existing baggage, his own knowledge of his past and others justifiable hatred and prejudice towards him. He has thousands of years of living in darkness and brutality, negative conditioning and enforcement of ruthless, nihilist perspective. He's for sure cynical, disillusioned to the extreme and he already had a distincly non-incarnate perspective on existance before that. This position - which, granted, he mostly put himself into by switching to Morgoths side in the first place, ensures that he has no option for honest connection with anyone in vicinity.

And so maybe Im nitpicking, i don't mean to get in your parade op because your post is amazing, but i feel like its also making an inevitable - even if not intended - point about circumstances and context.

When you are innocent and do not actually have a history of doing really wrong things to people and watching them be done to others and to you and justified, this kind of messaging from your friends or "guides" - in this case I guess we can say Nori and Diarmid - will be valuable and it is for Gandalf and the viewers. And Sauron simply functions as a narrative mirror/negative example of someone who has already been making bad choices.

But i would love to see more exploration of the fact that to rehabilitate a genuinely bad person who on top of it has very self-righteous and cynical perspective on the world and has been in a brutal war with a significant part of it for a long time based on those principles, you would need an entirely different/more detailed approach. But ofc its not that kind of story, nobody truly awful for all the "i believe im right" reasons ever got that treatment in tolkien, they just get killed of or get the "maybe one day he will manage to redeem himself but hell if i know how"

The Stranger (Gandalf) and Sauron

 The thematic parallels in their storylines are one of the key threads of the show. Save or rule? Why action carries more weight than intent. Choosing every day to do good. To be good. Your actions reveal your nature.

Season 2 opens with Sauron given the opportunity to choose a new path. He seems to have moments where he leans toward repentance, as seen in this scene with Diarmid and “Halbrand”: 

-“Find forgiveness. You are alive because you have chosen good.” -“But what of tomorrow?” -“You have to choose it again. And the next day. And the next. Until it becomes a part of your nature.”

Consider then these scenes with the Stranger and Nori: 

-“You're not a peril. You're good.” -“I’m good?” -“You're good. Because you're here to help.” -“Get away from me. Or I wi… I will hurt you. Again.” -“What? What have they done to you?” -“They showed me what I am.” -“Only you can show what you are. You choose by what you do. You're here to help. I know it.”

In such conversations, there is an acknowledgement of harm caused: Sauron’s “I’ve done evil” (something he says to Galadriel as well in Season 1) and the Stranger’s “I am peril”/“I will hurt you again”. Throughout the season I think you see them both struggle with this. The difference being in season 2 that it may be Sauron’s intent to choose good (and maybe he thinks he is) but his actions are causing harm. The Stranger has the intent and acts congruently. He does not mean to cause harm and he does try to avoid it, because he recognizes that his actions can cause harm. 

In season 2 - Friends over power

The stranger chooses to save his friends over what power he might learn from the Dark Wizard, the promise that they would succeed Sauron (save or rule - he makes the choice to save)

Sauron calls Celebrimbor “friend” mockingly, tortures him and impales him with a spear. Calls himself the Lord of Eregion while he torments Celebrimbor into serving his purpose. He thinks he is healing Middle-earth while he causes destruction and he cannot see the difference. 

The Stranger sees the difference between “save” and “rule” and he chooses to do good. 

One is a peril to Middle-earth, the other an instrument of salvation. The irony being that Sauron sees himself as Middle-earth’s salvation and the Stranger calls himself a peril.

(Not sure I love the narrative choice to pair the morally questionable man with a woman whose purpose it seems is to guide him toward goodness, but that may be a little reductive of me, so I digress…)

[samcarter34]

Since people seem to once again be having trouble remembering the order of operations, let me just remind everyone:

The ability Laudna possesses to feed Delilah is Hunger of the Shadow. In the fight with Bor’dor, Laudna used that BEFORE Orym’s head nod. Bor’dor attacked them and her response was to do the thing she knew would give power to Delilah. Matt even makes the sound of Delilah’s heartbeat.

The spell she used after the head nod? Whither and Bloom. The same spell she later attacked Orym with, which isn’t even a warlock spell.

And speaking of the head nod, you want to know what’s it’s prefaced with? ‘Laudna you can do whatever you want.’ And Marisha responds by saying that Laudna is ‘barely present’ because she’s having ptsd flashbacks to all of the times something horrible happened to her and she couldn’t do anything about it. So she kills Bor’dor because it makes her feel in control of the situation.

And yeah, the 4SD where Liam says Orym thought Delilah might come back. Except y’all somehow took that and made it seem like he’s the one who shoved Laudna over the edge when what actually happened is that Laudna flung herself off it because betrayal is triggering to her.

And the sword. The sword which apparently wasn’t triggering enough that Imogen contemplating whether the Vanguard were good guys didn’t cause any reaction. Or for that matter, make her object to Ashton’s ‘this is permission statement.’ But she saw Orym wearing it, got uncomfortable and then all it took was one sentence from Delilah for her to decide to steal it. Delilah, who mutilated her, murdered her, has been possessing her for decades, and who basically held her soul hostage when BH wanted VM to resurrect Laudna. But what Delilah didn’t do? Tell Laudna to steal the sword.

I wasn’t around for campaign 1, but in campaign 2 I definitely noticed a trend that people who were all ‘I love women! Female characters rock!’ would, the second one of their alleged faves did something controversial (or just something they didn’t like) would find a way to shift the onus onto someone else so she could remain blameless. And that is definitely continuing this campaign, and if anything is getting worse (which, not to get into speculation, but I wonder if it’s because all of the female characters this go round are more traditionally feminine than last campaign.)

I think the reason Orym’s been getting raked across the coals so hard by certain parts of the fandom is actually because of this. Because Imogen’s repeatedly gone ‘what if the Vanguard have a point’ and Laudna agrees with everything she says, whereas Orym’s been pretty consistently ‘no, the murder cult that murdered my family are bad guys.’ And well, can’t go around admitting that our faves did something wrong.’

And so we have a situation where Laudna attacks Orym, but somehow that’s Orym’s fault because the possibility of Laudna doing something wrong ruins people’s lesbian cottegecore fantasy. But the thing is, that whole thing was all Laudna. She chose to listen to her first murderer when Delilah said ‘maybe it’s cursed’ and then she chose to blanket the room in magical darkness (sorcerer ability, not warlock) chose to cast an area of effect spell to destroy the thing Orym was using to sheath the sword (sorcerer spell, not warlock) and, upon hurting Orym, chose not to drop said darkness, which meant Orym couldn’t see who attacked him. And when she got caught, she tried to downplay what she did, tried to say that because she didn’t mean to hurt him it didn’t count, refused to apologize for actually hurting him, kept shifting her argument (and even low key got called out on it by Imogen when she asked Laudna why she’s want its power inside her if she thinks it’s so evil.)

There is an alternate universe where Laudna wakes Orym up and they have what probably would have been an intense discussion about the sword (and that might even have been what Marisha was aiming for before Delilah got involved) and THAT truly would have been the ‘both sides are equally right’ scenario, but that’s not what we got. And you can say Orym shouldn’t have taken the sword unilaterally (but somehow Laudna’s allowed to unilaterally steal and absorb it?) or that she’s being manipulated by Delilah, but the fact is that Laudna’s an adult and is responsible for her own decisions. Yes, Delilah is a powerful and malign presence that they all downplayed/ignored, but, to use Marisha’s addiction metaphor, making amends with those you’ve harmed is a part of recovery for a reason. Because ultimately, you are the one who did that. Yes, it does immensely suck for Laudna that she’s been handed the cards she has been, but it’s up to her to make the best play she can.

Wow this got long, but my overall point is that Laudna is a character with her own agency and makes her own decisions (well, Marisha makes them, but at this point y’all should know she’s not conflict averse and is willing to have her characters make controversial character choices). And really, take all that away, what’s left? How much onus can you take from a character before you might as well go look at a painting?

[genderkoolaid]

I come late to organizing as a transgender activist. In doing so, I’ve learned a lot. I’ve learned transgendered people truly are everywhere and not just in New York, San Francisco and Washington D.C. I’ve learned many want to quietly assimilate into the white, heterosexual, middle class status quo that is the dominant culture of our nation. I’ve learned quite a few of us have no wish or desire for such assimilation — that for some of us, our greatest desire is to shake up that dominant culture, to question gender and identity on every level — social, biological, political and personal. I’ve learned that perhaps right at this moment there is a transgendered person — most likely an MTF transsexual or crossdresser, most likely a person of color, being brutally murdered. I’ve learned people much younger than I are coming out as transgendered in ways I never believed possible when I was their age and are challenging not only the status quo, but also calling on “old” activists like me to take another look around and see the world through their eyes. And I’ve learned that, perhaps like all other communities, we love to eat our own. Some of you reading this are aware of the controversies and conflicts swirling within the transgender community, most of which focus upon the organization GenderPAC. For those of you who aren’t up on it, here’s an abbreviated version. A significant number of transgender activists and community organizations have taken issue with GenderPAC’s expansion of its mission and vision to incorporate a larger view of gender rights rather than a specific and focused emphasis upon civil rights advocacy for transgendered people. Depending on whom you ask, this reinventing of GenderPAC is either the logical extension of its organizational vision to secure the rights of all people to free gender expression — or the cold-blooded abandonment of the very community by whom and for which it was created, nurtured and financially supported. Being the baby TG activist I am, I come to this drama late. Long after the battle lines were laid down. Long after sides were chosen, opinions formed and set in stone. Long after wounds (both real and imagined) were inflicted.

I’ve watched carefully for the past couple of years as the battle has played out online, in internet chat rooms, and on mailing lists. I’ve read statements from individuals and organizations that have taken a stand on the issue. I’ve received press releases and announcements from one camp or another; a battle of media propaganda that would make the veterans of the Cold War proud. And through it all, I’ve tried to be a rather casual observer, if one can be casual as they watch some of the best and brightest of their community consumed in an internal battle that threatens to tear the entire community apart. Of course my being a casual observer hasn’t stopped a few folks from demanding to know where I stand. I’ve been pulled aside at conferences and been given “information,” primarily innuendo and accusation, so I am up to speed on the situation. I’ve been directed to websites that were little more than character assassinations in badly laid-out HTML. And I’ve been emailed privately and off-list by those concerned I was going to make the “wrong choice.” Want to know what my answer to these people is? Okay, here it is — I really don’t care. That’s right. I DON’T CARE. You see, I believe almost everyone entangled in this controversy is acting in what they believe are the best interests of the community with which they feel most closely aligned. I believe they’re doing the best they can with what they have. I believe mistakes have been made by everyone involved, that the personal has become political in the most destructive of ways. I also believe in change and evolution; that even organizations that have had to be forced to listen to me and to consider my issues can learn from their mistakes and realize they must make a seat for me at the table if they are to truly realize the dream of civil rights for themselves and for others. But most of all, I believe in hope. I was asked point-blank whose side I was on. This is my answer: I am on the side of whoever has the guts and initiative to end this thing and make a real effort to move our community forward out of this debilitating and destructive conflict. I’m on the side of anyone who is more interested in healing the wounds than in proving who is right. I’m on the side of those who have the ability and the willingness to put aside their personal and political animosities and seek some way to bring together everyone involved to begin a healthy dialogue, one without finger-pointing and name-calling. Until that happens, I guess I’m on the side of those who are the most negatively affected by this dysfunctional family feud. In case anyone needs a refresher course as to who those folks are and the issues they are dealing with, allow me to introduce just a few of them. The transsexual FTM who has lost custody of his child when he began transition; the butch lesbian who lost her job because she refused to wear makeup or shave her legs; the crossdresser whose wife is seeking a divorce and custody of the children he adores; the effeminate gay man beaten to death and crucified on a fence on a lonely Midwestern plain; the 17-year-old MTF doing tricks in the back alleys of San Francisco because her parents kicked her out when they found “him” wearing dresses; the FTM who died of uterine cancer because he couldn’t get insurance approval for a hysterectomy after he had completed sexual reassignment. Ultimately, it is these transgender, transsexual and gender- variant people who have the most to lose if someone doesn’t step up to the plate to end this.

"Gender, Identity Politics, and Eating Our Own" by Alexander John Goodrum (2001)

[thearchercore]

charles is a PR genius. and here's how he's trying to slowly rebrand his persona to strenghten his personal brand:

recently, especially after the triple header, you could notice charles had a period of time when he distanced himself from ferrari and clearly changed his public statements about his goals. he went from saying he wants to win with ferrari to saying that at his core, he just wants to win. and that he would leave ferrari if he didn't believe the project.

he also changed the way he communicated with fans, through social media. you can notice the change of wording in his post descriptions:

both posts are from the same year, but the wording is now different. he refused to use the ferrari branding and stopped using the typical ferrari-PR wording he was conditioned to use.

fast forward, he started interracting with ferrari by abu dhabi and seemed to be finally happy with the direction the team was taking. however, he still managed to build something from this anti-ferrari period -- the slow rebrand from being "charles, the ferrari driver" to "charles, the f1 driver".

charles is slowly, but surely working to increase the value of his personal brand to possibly gain more negotiating power, and other bonuses that come with having a strong personal brand not tied to any team in particular.

in general, the goal would be to outgrow the team so you are known as an individual athlete, not just someone who drives for the particular team and has their identity tied to the team only.

he also signed with WME for advertisement purposes, he started wearing his personal clothing brand CLACE again after ferrari banned him to do so. he clearly regained more confidence in what he can do as an athlete within the contract (that's usually very limiting from ferrari's pov).

how does he otherwise work on his personal brand? relatability. charles is a gen z child first and foremost, he knows parasocial relationships play a huge role on social media. he works on side personal projects like the LA vlog -- the vlog that had little to do with racing but still showed charles completely SUCK at basketball.

why would you include it, you may ask? it makes him relatable, it makes his personality more interersting. more fun.

his first public post from winter training then was him falling

why did he post that? well, a) he's a silly guy. but more importantly, b) he's not crafting up a perfect PR image, he's aiming for being relatable, showcasing more of his personality. he wants to stand out as an individual in the sea of other f1 drivers who posted more pre-planned content during their winter training.

in the LA vlog he also left in a little dig at carlos. why? because he can. he also used his twitter likes to like controversial things that ferrari wouldn't let him say. he very much knows how to navigate online spaces and how to create more boundaries between his personal brand and the ferrari brand.

additionally, he also now hangs out with people like max publicly even if they don't benefit the ferrari brand. max, in general, isn't liked by the tifosi or ferrari in general. but charles still makes sure to hang out with him on track and outside of it, once again, securing his personal brand and not pushing something that ferrari would prefer.

it's all very interesting to watch, seeing how carefully he's rebuilding his public image and how he communicates on social media with the world.

[afeelgoodblog]

The Best News of Last Week - June 26, 2023

1. California's Lake Oroville now at 100% capacity following megadrought; 1st time since 2019

Once a stark example of the drastic effects of California's yearslong megadrought, Lake Oroville has rebounded and is once again filled to capacity, data from the state's Department of Water Resources shows.

Lake Oroville, the state's most beleaguered and second-largest reservoir, is at 100% of its total capacity and 127% of where it should be around this time of year - a huge boost after the climate-change-fueled megadrought sucked away nearly all its water supply.

2. Blue whales are thriving in California waters – the story of their amazing comeback

If you’ve recently taken a Southern California whale-watching tour, you may have been lucky enough to come across earth’s largest animal. Pacific blue whales grow up to 110 feet long and can reach a weight of 200 tons. Decades ago, blue whales were nearly hunted to extinction, and although still listed as protected under the Endangered Species Act, marine biologists and researchers are heralding a “conservation success story,” unlike any other.

According to a study published in 2014 by researchers at the University of Washington, the West Coast blue whale population has bounced back at tremendous levels, recouping 97% of its pre-whaling population

3. Newborn left in Florida Safe Haven Baby Box adopted by the firefighter who found her

Zoey is now 5 months old. Courtesy Zoey's family

A firefighter in Ocala, Florida, was pulling an overnight shift at the station in January when he was awakened at 2 a.m. by an alarm. He recognized the sound immediately. A newborn had been placed in the building’s Safe Haven Baby Box, a device that allows someone to safely and anonymously surrender a child — no questions asked.

“To be honest, I thought it was a false alarm,” said the firefighter, who wished to remain anonymous to protect his family’s privacy. But when he opened the box, he discovered a healthy infant wrapped in a pink blanket.

That baby would become his daughter, Zoey.

4. Iceland suspends whale hunt on animal welfare concerns

Iceland's government said Tuesday it was suspending this year's whale hunt until the end of August due to animal welfare concerns, likely bringing the controversial practice to a historic end.

"I have taken the decision to suspend whaling" until August 31, Food Minister Svandis Svavarsdottir said in a statement. The country's last remaining whaling company, Hvalur, had previously said this would be its final season as the hunt has become less profitable.

5. He wanted to pet dogs for his 100th birthday. Hundreds lined up.

Alison Moore had a unique idea to celebrate her father's 100th birthday: a pet parade filled with as many dogs as possible. Her father, Robert Moore, has always adored dogs and wanted to pet every one he saw. So, Alison took to social media and invited the community to join in the festivities. Little did she know that over 200 dogs and their owners would gather for the heartwarming event.

The parade brought immense joy not only to Robert but also to attendees like Rodger, who has Alzheimer's disease, and his daughter Denise, who hadn't seen her father smile so much in a long time. It was a day filled with wagging tails, smiling faces, and love that made Robert's milestone birthday an unforgettable celebration.

6. Historic decision: Estonia legalizes same-sex marriage

Tuesday, the Estonian government has survived a vote of no confidence in the Riigikogu tied to amendments to the Family Law Act and related legislation, which is granting same-sex couples the legal right to wed. 55 members of the Riigikogu voted in favor of the measure, while 34 voted against.

It is proposed that the institution of marriage, as defined by family law, be modified so that  any two natural persons of legal age, regardless of gender, may marry. The words "man and woman" will be replaced with the words "two natural persons."

7. US approves chicken made from cultivated cells, the nation's first 'lab-grown' meat

For the first time, U.S. regulators on Wednesday approved the sale of chicken made from animal cells, allowing two California companies to offer “lab-grown” meat to the nation’s restaurant tables and eventually, supermarket shelves.

The Agriculture Department gave the green light to Upside Foods and Good Meat, firms that had been racing to be the first in the U.S. to sell meat that doesn’t come from slaughtered animals — what’s now being referred to as “cell-cultivated” or “cultured” meat as it emerges from the laboratory and arrives on dinner plates.

----

That's it for this week :)

This newsletter will always be free. If you liked this post you can support me with a small kofi donation:

Support this newsletter ❤️

Also don’t forget to reblog.

[the-loststone]

HotD Team Green Defense

The amount of people who fail to grasp Team Green's perspective is honestly staggering to me. So many people are Team Black, maybe out of some (misplaced) belief that they are being feminists and advocating for female power, or something like that, and choose to ignore the very legitimate worries and motivations of Team Green. Admittedly, the show has gone out of it's way to villainize Team Green as much as possible, while victimizing Team Black, and deviating from the source material for this narrative. (I would tell them to be suspicious when showrunners do that because they did the same thing to Daenerys in GoT and everyone was surprised when she turned around and burned a city down in a rushed ending because the show never properly developed her arc.) Nevertheless, despite their efforts to make Team Green the less appealing side, if I had to compare motivations, Team Black is the more villainous.

So many people dismiss the fact that for Rhaenyra to secure her throne, she would have to kill her siblings. They write it off as paranoia of Alicent, or ambitions of her and Otto, that they are making excuses for Aegon to be made king instead of Rhaenyra. But that's just not true. These are very real likelihoods. Even if Aegon did not seek the throne, or he and his brothers decided to gracefully allow the succession to pass to Rhaenyra, it would never be peaceful. Just look at Rhaenys and how Corlys is still bitter and Viserys has been worried that they may come after him since she has a right to the throne. That's one of the main benefits in having Rhaenyra marry Ser Laenor was to join their claims. Or look at how worried everyone was of Daemon, and how he may seize power after Viserys. The only thing keeping him alive was his brother's love for him, the fact that their house was dwindling, and no one was fighting on his behalf over Viserys. So if there is every another claimant, it would be a great worry that the side in power may be kicked off by another claimant. And Aegon and his brothers are men, and just by virtue of having dicks, they have a better claim to the throne. All laws, precedent, and cultures in Westeros have male heirs before female heirs. The king's word does not change that. And note that the King only made Rhaenyra his heir over his brother. So technically, the King said "all my children first, including my daughter, then my brother." (Something already controversial because if it was accepted before, Rhaenys would be Queen and he would be nothing). But he never again made a statement for the lords after his sons births. He never reinforced Rhaenyra's succession as his heir outside the privacy of their own quarters. Alicent even said, let the lords come and decide, and make vows, and he and Rhaenyra reject it because they worried the Lords would choose Aegon.

Rhaenyra knows, to inherit without rebellions every few years from lords who are unhappy with her and want to supplant her with her brothers, she would have to kill her brothers and make sure there are no people who can contest her right to inherit.

And this is just Rhaenyra's succession. Now add in the fact that she's claiming illegitimate children as her heirs. Very obvious illegitimate children. Even if Rhaenyra managed to successfully inherit with no push back from anyone, and no one wanted to supplant her with her brothers so she didn't have to kill them then... well guess what, she'll have to kill them to secure her son's ascension to the throne. (And if she won't then Daemon certainly would). And then, even if she does kill all the Greens, then there's the issue of her legitimate children vs. her illegitimate children. Even if the kids grew up to love each other, someone may say, well the first three shouldn't inherit, let's put the legitimate ones on the throne. And then you have a completely different succession crisis.

Viserys' actions may seem to the viewers as promoting girl power and feminism, but that's not what's happening. He's being an abusive, neglectful shit. He's deliberately putting the rest of his children's lives in jeopardy, and even the Strong grandchildren he claims to love, because by keeping them in the succession despite their obvious illegitimacy invites people to contest that. And that's not to say he couldn't have taken steps to remedy this. He could have changed the rules so that succession passes to the eldest child, regardless of gender. But he didn't. He could have acknowledged that his grandchildren were illegitimate and forgiven it and legitimized them as Targaryens, but he didn't (conveniently usurping Valeryons - and people may argue that Baela/ Rhaena can still rule being married to Jace/Luke, but that's not the same as being able to rule in your own right, otherwise, why not take the offer for Rhaenyra to marry Aegon).

But since he didn't do any of these things, the only way to stop the Dance would have been for him to make Aegon his successor. Something that everyone would have been relieved by because it would have prevented war. But he didn't. And so, Alicent has to fight to keep her kids alive. The Greens have to push their claim to survive. Whereas, had Rhaenyra graciously backed off her claim, saying that yes, she had 3 brothers, and while they were younger, the laws and precedent are in their corner to inherit, then she would have lived. People wouldn't have fought for her claim if she hadn't pushed it. Nor would they fight for an illegitimate heir.

But some may say... Well Rhaenyra has more supporters. She does. She has the Velaryons and countless other houses backing her. So do the Greens. (the Greens have the wealthiest houses). But once it becomes a fight to throne, it's less about who has the right, and more about who can offer you the most. Notice the Starks and the Baratheons agree to fight because they'll get a wedding out of it (and the Starks because they'll have somewhere to send people during their current famine). The Vale because of the blood ties. The Lannisters because of past insults. Once it's decided to be a fight, it's never about who actually has a right to the throne, it becomes about who can give you the most so you can help them win it.

And this is what it really comes down to. Rhaenyra had a choice. She can back off, and her family can survive. Her brothers can live. Her sons will live. Or she can inherit, and her brothers can die. And she is perfectly willing for her brothers to die. And some may say that that's a very jaded view to take on Rhaenyra and she would never kill her family if she could help it... but it would be out of her hands. It would be necessary to protect her son's right to inherit and to keep away possible rebellions.

And you know, fine, that's okay. She wants to fight for the throne, more power to her. She can go after the throne and kill her brothers. But I don't think it's right that people say that she's the aggrieved party. She's not. She's the aggressor.

And that is why I'm team Green. Because Alicent is right. Just by living and breathing, Aegon and his brothers are threats to Rhaenyra. And this would have happened no matter who Viserys married. Sure people can be upset that Alicent married her bffs dad (something that only happens in the show because in the books, Alicent is 10 years older than Rhaenyra and they weren't close), but that doesn't mean her children should die because Rhaenyra is the preferred child. That doesn't mean the realm should be thrown into war because Alicent 'seduced' a widow. (And I say that with heavy sarcasm because Viserys is a grown ass man.)

And then there's the argument of who's the better house because of blood purity. It's a ridiculous argument and I'm honestly annoyed by people who are Targaryen purists and believe in the whole, dragon supremacy. Hightower is badass house. A lot of people don't realize that they've been around since The Wall and Winterfell were built (Bran the Builder built Hightower, commissioned by the Lord / King of Hightower). They've been around since before Targaryen's rode dragons. So spare me the ridiculous arguments of who's got the most Targaryen blood. If anything, Team Green is more Westerosi, you know, the country they are trying to rule.

In the end, the show will do what it does best, and disappoint you. Either they'll continue pushing this narrative of girl-boss queen and fail to show the complexity of the political situation that result from Rhaenyra's decisions. Or they might stick to the book and have a complex issue actually displayed and show both Aegon and Rhaenyra's descent into madness.

There are more issues one could delve into. Like the fact that Rhaenyra married Daemon. That either Corlys Velaryon has so much unhinged ambition that he's ignored deaths in his house to side with those who have literally murdered his family (cough cough Vaemond and Laenor) (and the whole Laenor excuse in the show makes no sense because no way in hell are Rhaenyra and Daemon risking that he's ever found and that their kids are declared bastards; it is much cleaner for them to do it like they did in the books and kill him) or there will be serious repercussions from the deaths of Velaryons and continued discussion of the succession of Driftmark/High Tide.

But that's the main summary of my thoughts. 👍

If you made it to the end of my rant. Thank you.

[pommunist]

ANOTHER STATEMENT - THIS TIME FROM A QSMP TWITTER ADMIN - @/ibobidou on twitter.

« Just know that NO twitter admins is getting paid. And if you think we’re only writing tweets that isn’t true. We do the work of a community manager for free, for people who have zero recognition for our labor. 

We have to find memes, know how to do picture and video montage, translate, cover streamers until sometimes crazy hours, collect clips who can sometimes not even be selected, so graphic design, collect fanarts and more.

Sure, we agreed to work for free. But to write tweets, not to work as community managers. We agreed to be volonteers, not salarymen. If we aren’t free for more than a week, they make us understand that it shouldn’t happen again.

What pisses me the most is that QSMP is supposed to be a server based on sharing cultures and dialogue. But we can’t talk between us admins. I wanted to make a MC server just for the admin team, and they made me understand that it wasn’t possible. 

We can talk between french speakers but not with the other teams. It’s forbidden to create a group chat. They never communicate with us. You want to know ? The events, we learnt about them at the same time that you did.

It’s impossible to organise. Purgatory ? We knew about it 2 hours before it started, and they had changed ALL the tweets schedules. I recently left because they asked us not to talk about controversies on our PRIVATE accounts, a few hours after Wilbur’s empty excuses.

After all the work we did for you, hours working for you for free, you want us to shut up about the violences, really ? You make me wanna puke. »

They then added this screnshot which i assume was sent to them by the admin teams higher ups about the wilbur situation.

[necronatural]

Context on Project Moon discourse

I did some digging and watched some internet slapfights between Korean users, and collected as much context as humanly possible, trying to avoid hearsay where I can:

Misogynistic dudes start complaining about how sexless and non-waifu-female-heavy the game is, feeling the skimpy Sinclair outfit with the thotty little collar VS the fully covered Ishmael outfit is pointed feminist jeering (a law Hawkeye Initiative). Korean anti-feminists are really sensitive to pointed feminist jeering. More on that in a bit

Upon learning the identity artist is male, they trawl the rest of the staff to prove their stupid-ass theory.

They latch onto the lead CG artist, who has tweeted about feminism before.

Project Moon receives countless threats and people marching on their office IRL demanding to speak to the CEO.

The resulting hate campaign leads to Project Moon firing the lead artist for violation of contract; it was specifically requested by the company that all users delete political statements and controversial topics before joining, and the tweets the incels are using seem to prove that the worst case scenario for not adhering to the request has come to pass.

The thing is, she did delete the tweets.

This user has screencapped incels scrambling to justify their belief the game is for man-haters, including a statement that he had dug up deleted tweets. These are old records.

These are the retweets, all made before joining the company (but again, the policy was that the tweets like this should be scrubbed). Most of them are just being catty. The most extreme statements are a scathing satire even a child could understand, and some general feminist sentiments which are not incendiary in any way. It seems they were screencapped to cement a pattern of passionate feelings on feminism.

In Korea, feminism is considered a wedge issue, which means basic activism becomes extremely politically charged. Think of it like how trans issues are being treated in America at the moment, or how "Critical Race Theory" was a wedge issue like 2 years ago. Nevertheless, the most hateful statements in these tweets are not "feminist", but rather annoyance at misogyny, and pretty obviously jokes.

The tweet that the incels are latching onto here states "if being a feminist makes me Megalia, I am Megalia. If being against patriarchy makes me anti-social, I am anti-social". Megalia was a scumbag leftist radfem group originating from Korea's 4chan (anonymous messageboards). It was bad enough that banning gay slurs created a splinter group. Megalia was well-known for mirroring misogynistic behaviours back onto men. They were reviled. An actress lost her job for wearing a T-shirt this group sold, even though the funds were going to supporting women seeking legal actions. Association with Megalia was reputation poison.

Notice I refer to them in the past tense, because Megalia shut down in 2017. The tweet was in 2018. You could not get any more obvious that the statement being made was "you can insult me by calling me Megalia, but I still believe in feminism". There is no association with this incendiary group.

Incels "supported" their argument with an image of Yi Sang holding a vial in basically one of the only 2 ways you can hold a vial, calling it a reference to 🤏, an emoji used as the Megalia logo interpreted to mean "men have small penises". This insane interpretation is being used to cement the whole company as misandrist.

Therefore: Project Moon fired their lead artist even though she didn't violate her contract because insane incels did a "how dare you say we piss on the poor" bad faith misinterpretation of deleted tweets in order to justify their belief that Project Moon is a man-hating company, and as a man-hating company deserves to be annihilated, leading to threats to staff.

The artist for Leviathan later stated that Project Moon pushed the comic forward with no buffer, and when the schedule became unbearable, they just cancelled it. They were told there was an issue with production (supported by the fact the company dropped the translation in favour of focusing on the game), but this news has made the artist pessimistic about the company's treatment of their art team. (Update: deleted, with a statement they feel they felt attached to their debut work, and struggle with feeling like they ran away.)

Here's the artist Vellmori's twitter if you would like to support them through this period.

[naeshira]

See, if I were a publishing academic I think I’d write a whole thesis about the use of primary sources and the records the narrator of Les Miserables uses to tell the story. The Brick is full of references to notes, letters, personal accounts, etc, to give credence to the telling of the story. I think part of it can be attributed to the story being historical fiction, but also because it lends a level of distance where the narrator can declare a possibly controversial statement and say it isn’t his opinion, he’s just relaying what the record states!

Additionally, this book has a really interesting sense of humor. I’m picking up so much more of Les Miserables than just the musical gives me. I’m having such a good time reading it.