#producing accepting dichotomy

[windudemon]

why 8th function should be much better than 7th

when i say 8th i mean si for intj and when i say 7th fe for intj.

what makes 7th function special? why it’s blindspot? why 8th function is not also very blindspotish? if this is about repression, how come intj’s te repress fe HARDER than their ni repressing si? is that even the case?

when this question asked, people will tell you “well, ni and si are both introverted perceiving functions so si is not alien to intj”.

funny thing is this line of logic can be applied to intj’s te too. “te and fe are both extraverted judging functions, they are more practical and general and heuristic”. how come this te auxiliary type, who understand the value of being practical and blabla, is not practical at all when it comes to fe?

BECAUSE there are layers to repression mechanic. yes, te of intj represses fe but fi of intj represses it much harder!

now you will say, “but intj’s se should also repress si much harder so equation doesn’t change, there are layers there too.” there’s one more layer though: all introverts and their introverted functions are bolder than their extraverted ones. so intjs fi is bold, edgy, individualistic, opinionated WHILE their se is cautious and cooperative and accepting.

naturally therefore a cautious and cooperative se won’t repress si hard but intj’s fi will destroy fe with every action.

there’s also producing/accepting dichotomy in socionics. for all types, not just intj, blindspots aka polr accepts informations which btw the word accepting absolutely doesn’t mean “yielding” to information. then tertiary function for all types is a producing function.

so intj receives/accepts with their fe: “oh you want me to behave, you want me to be politically correct, i see!” then with their tert fi they go: “fuuuck your political correctness, here are MY values, here are MY thoughts”

meanwhile, all types and their inferior function accepts information while their 8th function produces. so when intj realizes an se thing must be done, they produce an si solution for it. so they take their time, acclimate to the situation, “feel things out”, follow a gradual path as opposed to some entj or estp ka-booming. obviously though, their si still gonna be weak. they might take too long to prepare or they can miscalculate the complexity of si preperation. nevertheless, they are trying with si while they don’t, at all, with fe, due to the fi dominance over it.

[gendiebrainrotreceipts]

pls don’t send off anon

prefacing this by saying i’m gender critical, genuinely looking for answers & not trying to promote gender ideology

how do feminist GCs respond to the observation of 20 genes linked to being transgender? they’re variants of genes involved in neurologic development and sex hormones. does this lend more validity to self-id??

a teacher also gave me resources about there being six biological karyotype sexes, which seem somewhat common and can go under the radar. he says that sex is a continuum. is someone with xx male a man or a woman? male phenotype but they’re xx. seems like male but it’s being used to argue that sex isn’t as simple of a dichotomy as we think.

1. No because whether or not there are genes that make someone more prone to dysphoria/trans identification, it still doesn’t override the material reality of biological sex. That will always be the bottom line

2. Such conditions are exceedingly rare and none of them are separate sex in and of themselves(humans would produce more than 2 gametes if that were the case). They are a tiny minority and they do not invalidate the facts that are true for the vast majority. 99.9% or so of the population are unambiguously male or female; there is not a spectrum where we are all ‘more’ or ‘less’ male or female than each other. What is actually true is that there are a tiny amount of people with DSDs, and then there is everyone else who is without. Not so much a spectrum as a binary that very occasionally goes wrong and gets muddled(I’m not sure if that’s the best explanation, anyone feel free to explain it better). Better healthcare and public acceptance is needed for individuals with DSDs of course, but their existence does not invalidate the sex binary of the human species. Those who suggest that anyone could have abnormal chromosomes and could just not know it are being very misleading. The individual almost always will know because their body will exhibit atypical symptoms for their sex

[thydungeongal]

Hey there! I just say your post about dungeon crawlers. I was curious about your second bullet point, "Dungeon-crawling challenge games actually kind of own if you're willing to engage with them on their own terms! There's a lot of potential for cool gameplay if you let go of silly reductive notions like "roleplaying" being just being when you play-act your character or social interaction!" I was curious if you'd mind telling me more about how you feel roleplay should be handled in these types of games. I am genuinely interested to hear your thoughts. :)

Okay, first of all, I have a very broad and admittedly circular definition of role-playing (in the context of role-playing game): role-playing is when you're playing a role-playing game.

As said, it's circular, but ultimately, throughout my years of playing role-playing games I've found that all other definitions are unsatisfying. To conclude that role-playing is the parts where the mechanics aren't used (the roll-playing and role-playing dichotomy) implies that mechanics are somehow inherently contrary to a good role-playing game experience, which is simply untrue, because good mechanics can actually enhance the narrative! Saying that only the social parts of play are role-playing undermines the fact that players will be still making decisions for their characters in various other situations where the personal and emotional stakes can be even greater than in social situations!

Ultimately, role-playing games as a medium are defined by the possibility space, and specifically that possibility space being near infinite. There's an old line I keep bringing up from some painfully twee eighties RPG ad which goes like "Role-playing games are like board games but you can move outside the board!" and ultimately that is the thing that defines a role-playing game. It's a game where the players collaborate in a shared fictional space to produce cool little narratives although sometimes the cool little narratives aren't the point but it's literally like a lil challenge that the players try to overcome by interfacing with the fiction and engaging with the mechanics.

To tie this into dungeon crawlers: even a traditional dungeon crawler is ultimately a role-playing game because it has the players engaging, via their characters, with the shared fiction, sometimes mediated by the rules. A lot of people assume that a dungeon crawler must mean that the gameplay is nothing but a meat grinder, but this is actually ahistorical and not actually reflective of how old-school dungeon crawling RPGs play out!

Even the most basic dungeon is still a location in the setting it's part of, so there is plenty of narrative content to be found there. The characters might just be motivated by greed, but there is plenty of narratively satisfying content that can happen in the pursuit of that goal once one accepts that there need not be a linear narrative where the characters must hit certain story beats, but the story itself can just be "the characters went into a place, explored, interacted with the locals, found out some secrets about the dungeon, fought some monsters." That is still role-playing.

None of this is to say that the play-acting part of play (which I sometimes call characterization) is in any way bad: in fact, it can very much enhance the gameplay. But that is in and of itself not the end-all-be-all of role-playing!

Anyway role-playing is so much more than describing your cool elf kissing other cool elves, it can also be your cool elf finding a cool sword in a dungeon and giving it a name. Dungeon crawlers kick ass because the GM can craft a whole narrative about how the dungeon used to be and then reveal it slowly to the players through their characters finding fantasy audiologs and that is already narratively satisfying in and of itself!

[sandboxer]

Why Phoenix and Edgeworth are exceptionally well-suited for kink

The short answer: because they’ve been doing it together for the entirety of their professional lives.

The long answer: because they’ve been doing it together for the entirety of their professional lives.

After the events of 1-4 (and to some extent 2-4), Phoenix and Edgeworth regard one another as friends. Edgeworth begins to help Phoenix in investigations, they treat each other with (relative) kindness, and they see one another outside of work.

In court, though, little changes from their first encounter to their last. The two remain antagonistic—and at times, almost nasty—toward one another.

To me, this dichotomy looks a lot like kink.

There is nothing tender or kindred about their interactions in the courtroom. Their court scenes are seldom wholesome or sweet. Instead, each man pushes the other to the brink of their abilities so as to reach an ultimately Good goal—a climax, a just verdict. And often the path there is not paved in kindness. Edgeworth does not cease his insults, and Phoenix doesn’t lose the urge to triumph over Edgeworth. So does the courtroom magically trigger some kind of latent hatred in the pair?

Clearly, this isn’t the case. Rather, it is because of the profound respect they have for one another’s abilities that they are able to have heated arguments in court and trust that the other will turn the content into some sort of logical conclusion or use the momentum to piece together evidence. Their in-court personas maintain a sort of hostility/antagonism throughout their association, not only despite their friendship, but because of it.

And is this not kink? Is kink not the assumption of roles or dynamics that may be unpleasant outside of a scene, but serve a wonderful purpose within it? Is kink not the exorcism of strong emotions within agreed upon boundaries? Is kink not pushing one’s partner to the brink of their desires and abilities, armed with the knowledge that 1) it is acceptable to do so and 2) the activity will conclude in some sort of satisfying ending as a result of the exertion?

Consider this passage from The New Topping Book:

Play pushes both top and bottom out to the far ends of the spectrum. Each player, in traveling further out, supports the other in going yet further. Thus as a wonderful scene progresses, the bottoms get smaller, the tops get bigger, and the larger the territory we encompass: we move to the outer ends of the spectrum, generating something like centrifugal force, spinning further and further out while holding each other safe and tight.

In pushing each other out further toward the bounds of their comfort and intellectual abilities, Phoenix and Edgeworth generate this same kind of force. It’s like pulling a rubber band taut, only so that you may let go and feel it snap. The two-handed pull gets converted into energy. When it’s time to let go, both men let the band snap, and the energy they’ve created is released. The case is won or lost, whatever the result of their joint effort. Their reciprocal pull out to the furthest ends of their comfort is crucial to reaching the correct verdict. Such is kink—the eroticism of extremes and the otherwise unacceptable, so that the rubber band can snap that much harder.

I see a lot of parallels between their dynamics inside and out of the courtroom and a couple who gets off on, for example, sadomasochism. For these two, court is kink. It is a bounded realm of unpleasantness brandished for the heightened reward it produces. It is assumed personas that cut deep into the heart of their wielder. It is the trust that outside of that bounded context, those assumed personalities may dissolve, and the dynamic need not persist.

[my-autism-adhd-blog]

Why Temple Grandin is NOT my Hero

Hello everyone,

As the title says, I wanted to talk about Temple Grandin. I got to meet her when I was 12. She seemed very standoffish (which isn’t surprising). I did some research on her for some time and I’ve come to realize that she isn’t the best autism advocate. According to this article:

As a believer in functioning labels, Temple Grandin believes in preserving “high functioning” autistic traits while eliminating “low functioning” traits through Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) and cures and even special diets for autism, such as wheat free and dairy free. ABA is a harmful early intervention that causes PTSD in autistic adults and attempts to eliminate autistic behaviors and replace them with neurotypical behaviors, which causes distress and emotional and psychological harm in autistic children and adults who undergo ABA. The Association for Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABAI) even endorsed electric shock therapy at the Judge Rotenberg Center, the only care facility in the United States to use this horrific form of “treatment.” The fact that Temple Grandin divides autistic people into those that should be “preserved” and those that should be “cured” is a very harmful and ableist belief, and this view is damaging to the pro-acceptance and neurodiversity movement.

Article will be below:

Clearly she supports ABA therapy, which is harmful to autistic people. Plus she also mentions how she thinks autism can improve in time. Which…isn’t how it works. You can manage your traits and symptoms, but you can’t necessarily “improve”. Your autism is your autism. It’s not going to change.

While she did do some good work for the world, I cannot bring myself to support her advocacy. If you aren’t advocating for all autistic people, higher needs included, then you aren’t advocating for us at all.

Some autistic people have high support needs. And she doesn’t seem to understand that, and thinks it can magically improve is the gist I’m getting here. That’s not how it works. You don’t “improve” an autistic individual. You “support” them. No matter where they are on the spectrum.

According to another article I found:

Temple Grandin believes that "high-functioning" autistics are talented, intelligent, and necessary to human survival, while "low-functioning" autistics cannot function or live independently, and thus should be cured in the present and prevented from existing in the future. Both I and others have thoroughly deconstructed the false dichotomy of high and low functioning, but suffice it to say that such claims not only reinforce ableist hegemony, but also reinforce a capitalist notion of success and value in that only people who can produce are worthy of inclusion in society; all others are burdens.

That’s all I wanted to share. I will leave the source below if anyone wants to read it. I find this very disappointing because I looked up to her when I was younger.

[revlyncox]

Peace and Darkness

The darkness of the approaching winter solstice may help us get re-centered in the middle of the pressures of this time of year and these times in particular. Let the blessings of darkness call us to imagination, rest, and inner peace. This sermon was recast from earlier work and was delivered to The Unitarian Society in East Brunswick by Rev. Lyn Cox on December 8, 2024.

“Come into my arms and rest, child,” [said Night.] … You were born out of my darkness, billions of years ago, and you will return to me when all things end.” (From the story, “The Rebirth of the Sun” by Starhawk, retold in Circle Round: Raising Children in Goddess Traditions.)

I have to say, that sounds pretty nice to me. As the sun disappears from evening skies, I wouldn’t mind a little bit of respite with the timeless origins of the universe. December means a lot of things to people in our culture. It can mean bringing things to completion, or showing up to annual gatherings, or figuring out what to say in the holiday letter. Those aren’t bad things. Holiday busy-ness can call forth our creativity and remind us of our values. On the other hand, sometimes the season is so crowded with demands that we produce and perform, it’s hard to remember to simply be. Added to that, the pain and anxiety of the world are very much with us, and we may be feeling some pressure to make some grand gesture to save the world, if only we knew what it was.

Let us remind each other that, as Universalists, we know human worth is unconditional. Our place in this world does not depend on our usefulness, our productivity, our decorative qualities, or our ability to be entertaining. You belong here. When each one of us makes time and space to acknowledge ourselves as human beings rather than human doings, it is easier for us to practice acceptance of one another. Peacemaking in practical terms requires us to do a certain amount of letting go and practicing grace, for ourselves and for each other.

The dark days leading to the Winter Solstice make the perfect time to celebrate acceptance and renewal. It can be argued that axial tilt is the reason for the season, so let’s search for meaning in this time of chilly temperatures and late sunrises. With the next harvest so far away, we may be able to use this time to experience ourselves apart from tangible results.

If this is a time of year when we search for words to write in cards or to say in party conversations, perhaps it is also a time ripe for silence, to allow words to come to us. With the hope of growing light and fresh calendar pages ahead of us, perhaps we can connect with wonder and meaning as it happens right now, before we get caught up in planning for the future.

There is another element to celebrating the darkness of this time of year. White supremacy culture has elevated all things light and pale to mean good, and has put down all things dark and mysterious to mean bad. We may not make conscious connections between that dichotomy and skin color, but the bias operates on us nonetheless. Furthermore, equating the starkness of simple solutions and obvious choices with good and light leads us to reach for easy answers rather than allowing ourselves the learning experience of not knowing. That makes actual, practical peacemaking and cultural dialogue more difficult. Dark and light, good and bad are more complex than two flat sides. We need to go back and reclaim the divinity of darkness, the sacred place of mystery, and the open-heartedness of the unknown.

This Winter Solstice, let us rest in the heart of night, refreshing our spirits with imagination. Let us receive words and silence as they fall like snow, finding beauty in both their dance and their stillness. Let us attend to the year being born, holding off on answers as we honor the mystery of beginnings. 

Rest in the Heart of Night: Imagination

One of my colleagues is a certified facilitator in the Jewish Studio Process, which is an art-based spiritual practice. The purpose of the project is to cultivate creativity as a practice for spiritual connection and social transformation. It’s part art therapy, part study of sacred text, part group reflection. I have had a couple of opportunities to participate in this process at virtual UU minister conferences, meaning I was among my own art supplies at home while I was connected virtually with colleagues across the country. There is time for words, and a time for creating without words, which allows all kinds of insight and emotion to land in the artwork, there to be explored, experienced, discovered, and released. As they say in the Jewish Studio Project, “the page can hold it all.”

Creating art on my own during the non-verbal time brings me face-to-face with a number of personal obstacles. As with any contemplative practice, I have to return to my breath over and over, as worrying about products and outcomes distracts me from the present moment. I struggle with vulnerability, opening myself up to thoughts and feelings that aren’t especially convenient. My inner critic has some things today about my artistic abilities. But the facilitated process helps me make friends with all of those voices and lets me keep going. At the end of the session, I feel more accepting of myself and others, more attuned to the gifts I have to offer, more ready to learn what the universe has to teach me, and more prepared to take meaningful action for justice, kindness, and community building.

None of the things I create in the studio process are going to win awards. It’s not about the result. It’s about the experience of imagination and creation. It’s about opening windows to what is possible. To get there, I have to practice some humility. In a way, I have to let myself be in the dark. Being focused on the process rather than the product has created the space for finding a moment of inner peace.

For those who are motivated to work on external peace, the kind between individuals in conflict or countries at war, the value of allowing time for the darkness and mystery of creativity may not be obvious. I assure you that imagination is essential for the work of peace and justice. Theologian Walter Bruggeman writes:

“The prophet engages in futuring fantasy. The prophet does not ask if the vision can be implemented, for questions of implementation are of no consequence until the vision can be imagined. The imagination must come before the implementation. Our culture is competent to implement almost anything and to imagine almost nothing. The same royal consciousness that make it possible to implement anything and everything is the one that shrinks imagination because imagination is a danger. Thus every totalitarian regime is frightened of the artist. It is the vocation of the prophet to keep alive the ministry of imagination, to keep on conjuring and proposing futures alternative to the single one the king wants to urge as the only thinkable one.” 

Bruggeman urges us to expand on what is thinkable. There is more than one answer, more than one path, more than one perspective. In order to allow the imagination to flourish, we may need to quiet our linear minds for awhile. We might need the blanket of night, or the assurances of soft music. or the presence of supportive creative friends.

The winter holiday season often includes a lot of activity and deadlines and pressures. At the same time, the early sunsets and late sunrises, for many of us, cast a mood of contemplation. Perhaps we can allow these conditions to lead us into the here and now. This Winter Solstice, rest in the heart of night and allow your imagination to wander among the stars.

Let Words Fall Like Snow: Silence and Waiting

Like many of you, I spend a fair amount of time in waiting rooms. I keep discovering that, no matter what I bring to do, waiting simply takes as long as it takes. Lately, I’ve been finding that looking at my phone does not support my health and wellbeing, so I have conversations I wouldn’t otherwise have, or I rest my eyes, or I read all the signs on the walls. Not trying to escape from the waiting room seems to work better than filling those moments with the highs and lows of the internet. I forget, and open a book or a magazine or my email, and if I’m lucky I remember again and re-engage with the experience of waiting.

Perhaps these days of late sunrises and early sunsets create a seasonal waiting room. There are significant dates on the calendar that aren’t going to get here any faster. Some of us may have packages we’re waiting to receive or to be received on time. Even after the Winter Solstice, it’s still a few weeks before the effect of the year’s turning becomes obvious.

For me, the anticipation and the weather conspire to bring words more slowly to mind. I have to wait for words to form, like crystals growing on a snowflake. Again, like the snow, the words take their time on the way down, drifting where they will until they land in a place where I can gather them up. 

In her book, When Things Fall Apart, Pema Chödrön talks about the benefit of avoiding unnecessary activity and being present with a kind of “cool loneliness.” She writes, “Could we just settle down and have some compassion and respect for ourselves? Could we stop trying to escape from being alone with ourselves?” In other words, sitting and waiting might help us to find kindness.

My colleague Nancy Shaffer of blessed memory wrote a poem about this (from her book Instructions in Joy: Meditations, which is out of print but some of her poems are on the UUA’s Worship Web database.):

In Stillness

I have been looking for the words that come

before words: the ones older than silence,

the ones not mine, that can’t be found by thought—

the ones that hold the beginning of the world

and are never used up, which arrive loaned

and make me weep

The Christmas story is also one of waiting. The nativity stories portray a family and a culture, tired from living in oppression and from long journeys. They are expectant, waiting for meaning and direction to emerge from among them. In the book of Luke, when the shepherds relate what the angels told them about the child, “Mary treasured all these words and pondered them in her heart.” (Luke 2:19)

Mary has plenty to say elsewhere in the Bible. As you may recall from a skit that Marie and I did last year, when Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth, she has a beautiful speech about a coming time of justice, framing her words as if God has already done it. Her song includes things such as, “He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty” (Luke 1:46-56). Powerful stuff. Mary has a voice. Sometimes she directs her attention to contemplation. In the nativity story, as events are new and concrete, she ponders words in her heart.

There are gifts that the darkness and the silence have to offer. Theologian Howard Thurman wrote, "In the stillness of the quiet, if we listen, we can hear the whisper of the heart giving strength to weakness, courage to fear, hope to despair."

At times of great transition, waiting in silence may have more impact than words of cleverness or wisdom. Advice and pronouncements may fall short in the face of the heights and depths of life. When we face birth and loss, progress and starting over, it matters how we listen to ourselves and to each other. As the earth spins through the solstice, we face a transition together. If only a few flurries of words rest at your window, that is fine. Hold moments of silence and waiting in your heart as they come. Receive words as they fall like snow.

Honor the Mystery: Let Questions Go Unanswered

In this morning’s Time for All Ages story, the sun is reborn at the Winter Solstice. It’s a mythic story. The metaphor might mean different things for us at different times. What is clear to me, in season after season, is that there is always something being born and re-born at this time of year. Just what that is may not be clear at this point. We don’t need to know that in order to honor the mystery.

When I was in seventh grade, we had an exercise in science class that made a tremendous impact on how I see the world. The teacher put a slide on the overhead projector and asked us to name our observations out loud. We said we saw paw prints in the snow. There were two sets, one big and one little. We talked about the path of the paw prints. Finally, one of the students said, “I see black spots on a white background.” You could have heard a pin drop. That was a holy moment, with a roomful of young adolescents suddenly grasping the difference between observation and inference. We can get into philosophical discussions about how much we trust our senses, but for young scientists it was important to acknowledge that difference, and to realize how fast we jump to drawing conclusions.

In the moments of the sun’s rebirth, or gathered around the baby, or lighting the first candle of the menorah, we don’t yet know what will come to pass. Running ahead to answer questions skips the part where we connect with meaning as it emerges. If peace is going to enter into our hearts, it must pass through the door of unknowing. Predicting and controlling are rarely calm activities. Deep questions, sacred questions, do not require immediate answers.

Perhaps that’s part of the draw of winter lullabies and Christmas carols about sleeping babies. Pictures are painted in music of one profound, relatable moment, filled with love. For instance, in “Silent Night,” there are a few hints about what the writer foresees, “the dawn of redeeming grace,” but most of the details in the song imagine the nativity itself. We have the sense that a story is just beginning, yet right now we rest in the glory of one moment.

In the story of the Winter Solstice, the reborn sun looks out on the wonder of what has already happened. The sun sees and hears joy and gratitude from the earth. The next year may see a familiar turn around the spiral, some things repeated as the seasons turn. The next year may see something new. We don’t know for sure. Direction and meaning are still emerging as the sun is reborn. When we allow some of the big questions to go unanswered for now, we leave room for inner peace. That sense of calm, of openness to imagination, of being in the present moment, then equips us to create peace between neighbors and nations.

Conclusion

My prayer for all of us this Winter Solstice is that, like the sun, we find some sanctuary for rest and renewal. May we find in the sacred dark a connection to that which is timeless and accepting, that which binds us to the rest of the universe. May we take pleasure in the process of being human, realizing that our inherent worth does not depend on productivity. May we gratefully receive meaningful silence as well as words that fall to our minds and ears. May we leave open the doors of unknowing, honoring the sacred mystery as a new year comes into being.

So be it. Blessed be. Amen.

[cascadianights]

"Mental illness and neurodivergence aren't a physical disability" for SOME minority of people that is true! For the rest MAJORITY of people you're spreading the same gaslighting the worst doctors do when they tell you to exercise your way out of crippling anxiety!

"The brain isn't an organ/isn't part of the body" Wrong! I don't know how else to explain this!!! Wrong!!!!!!

"Mental illness/neurodivergence doesn't affect the body or physical ability" Are you??? A real person who's lived on this planet??? Are you being fucking for real with this??? Neurotransmitters and hormones affect EVERY SYSTEM IN THE BODY - in a panic attack your digestion is shut OFF, your whole body is burning energy and going through extreme duress. Depression and fatigue come hand in hand, and not because it's "all in your head." Not being able to leave your apartment for a week due to agoraphobia or schizophrenia affects every single part of your mental and physical health. Not being able to eat for a week because of exteme nausea (physical) from anxiety leads to the same shitty symptoms as if you couldnt due to not being able to physically prep the food (also something that happens with severe mental illness). Not being able to be in the moment or focus because of OCD and intense intrusive thoughts, not being able to concentrate enough to even read or process what's happening, you think those things don't in turn effect hormones and neurotransmitters and how you FEEL and how much energy you have remaining after being on high alert using every square inch of focus just to understand a conversation and communicate? You don't think emotional pain compounds and adds to physical pain and vice versa??? You don't think there's a reason Autism and ADHD have a million physical comorbidities that can be directly connected to living in a state of constant stress, organs shut down, brain and other organs in your body literally not producing the right chemicals or functions - IBS, CFS, stroke, heart attack, diabetes. Why can some of you understand being black or trans in America leads to direct physical health issues and Disability from the constant stress and gatekeeping and lack of resources, but not YOUR LITERAL ORGANS MALFUNCTIONING AND ORDERING EVERY OTHER SYSTEM IN YOUR BODY TO DO SO AS WELL????

The brain is an organ. The brain is one of many many systems affected and interconnected in mental illness/neurodivergence. Severe mental illness and neurodivergence are a full body disability. Full stop. Period. Excluding us is to exclude parts of yourself, it's cutting off the parts of yourself the doctors gaslit about your disorders in order to feel better, it's lateral violence, it's a false barrier since if many of us didn't start w "real physical disabilities" we will have them as a direct result of our mental ones within years. It's nothing but a way to falsely separate yourself from mentally ill and neurodivergent people, and WHY ARE YOU SO ///DESPERATE/// TO DO THAT??? What of those reasons don't come down to self hate or hate at the way doctors and others treated you or just fucking petty intergroup violence you refuse to accept as such based on an author from 50 years ago and some salty Opinions on other people's lived fucking experiences?

Nevermind how many people with mental illness and neurodivergence have other major physical disabilities and try to find community, and are greeted with constant constant separation and DNIs and assumptions? Literal attacks on people with mental illness cast as activism. Do you think your petty divide is WORTH the thousands of people seeing and feeling that immediate rejection of a place that should welcome them w open arms? "They talk over us" HOW MUCH OF THE TIME ARE YOU BLAMING AUTISTICS FOR BEING ANNOYING AND NOT READING THE ROOM INSTEAD OF YOU OR A MODERATOR COMMUNICATING??? AND HOW CAN YOU TALK OVER PEOPLE AT THE SAME LEVEL AS YOU???? Its false fucking dichotomies and lateral aggression and turning the harm done to you on others. That's it. I'm tired of people pretending it's flat out anything else.

[atopvisenyashill]

how do you think alysanne would feel about gay targcest? because while i can believe the conqueror trio and jaehaerys see their incestuous traditions as a means to establish dominance over non-valyrians and produce pure-blooded dragon riders, alysanne always came off like she bought into the "romance" of it all. like if baelon ever came to her and admitted that he loves aemon more than he ever could alyssa, would she internally accept that as real love (even if not a politically convenient love) or would she insist that real targcest makes inbred babies and two brothers fucking each other is just a step too far for some reason?

okay first of all. fuck george for never giving us explicit mm targcest. i love rhaena the lesbian i think she’s a fascinating insight in valyrian gender roles and also she’s just a wildly interesting character. but she’s not enough dammit we need more queers. george stop being such a jersey boy and write anal. stop being afraid of penises george you're a grown ass married man.

second of all and keeping in mind i don't have f&b in front of me bc it's always checked out on libby. okay see i need to caveat this bc obviously there are different reactions to gay women vs gay men. but our only frame of reference here is RHAENA. (and laenor but alysanne didn’t know he was gay bc he was only like 4 when she died, LAENOR probably didn’t even know he was gay yet) and the thing is. they all know she’s gay! and no one seems to…care? alysanne & jaehaerys are happy when rhaena married androw but that’s bc it means she gets to live with ELISSA forever now. j&a aren’t like androw stans they don’t give a shit about that dude. they all seem very aware of who rhaena’s various girlfriends are! there’s no report of alysanne ever having a problem with this! it’s not like she showed up after the poisoning and was like “well maybe if you bedded your husband more often this never would have happened” does she? her problems with rhaena are all rooted in their PERSONALITIES in their TRAUMA like she’s not even recorded to have made some sort of nasty comment about any of Rhaena's lovers. in fact, the people who had an issue with Rhaena's lovers were a) the fathers of her girlfriends or b) Rhaena's own husband. Alysanne (and, to be fair, Jaehaerys) seems to view this whole ting more as like. Well that's just Rhaena, she's a bit odd. I think it adds to the almost Inhuman Beauty of Rhaena in a way - she's so larger than life, even her love can't be confined to the simple dichotomy of husband-and-wife, no she prefers her ladies instead (I was thinking of like, Lady Hideko from The Handmaiden - how the con artist mentions that there's a coldness to her that she could never be seduced by a man. An almost ethereal beauty there that is tied to the fact that she is not attracted to men).

What I think is key here is that a) they're both Valyrians b) Rhaena is her sister and Alysanne loves her despite the issues they have c) Rhaena "does her duty" and has a child by her Valyrian brother. SO. In my opinion, I think the specific scenario of Baelon coming to her and saying he doesn't love Alyssa, he loves Aemon, I think she would buy into the romantic nature of it. I think she would absolutely insist that he marry Alyssa anyway, if only to protect him from rumors and keep it like, ~in the family~ the way Rhaena and Aegon did, but if they only ever had Viserys, I think she would be okay with that. I think she would paint Alyssa as his "protector" in her mind - that fondness she saw between them wasn't her and Jaehaerys reborn after all, but perhaps more of the dynamic Rhaena likely wanted with Aegon (but reversed). Which isn't to say this won't devolve into a weird dynamic - the thing about this is that Alysanne isn't just projecting her own relationship onto her kids, she's projecting Rhaena & herself as well (imo Viserra gets the brunt of this) and Alysanne wanting her kids to playact a scenario where Rhaena is happily brother-married and living her best lesbian life still has just, so many openings to get really deranged. I think Jocelyn would face a lot of issues here. I think Alyssa might be allowed a level of GNC-ness that she isn't allowed in the books, but there's a trade off here where Alyssa is essentially playing Aegon the Uncrowned's role - and if she isn't happy with that, Alysanne would get upset. I think it's not unlikely Baelon doesn't get that "the Brave" epithet because he gets very force-femmed as a way to protect Aemon's reputation.

If Baelon was in love with like, some random household knight, that imo would upset Alysanne. But in love with Aemon? I do think she could make herself happy projecting onto that one.

[gamerdog1]

Devilman Crybaby Review

The human body, for all its flaws, is surprisingly malleable. With the billions of people on this earth, living their own unique lives, one can find a variety of shapes and forms across our species.

But while the body can be beautiful, if twisted, it can also become monstrous. Stories of transformations and deconstructions of the human body have been around since ancient times, with each culture having their own that are passed down from generation to generation. Why is it, though, that we fixate on these tales of human transformation, of monster-hood? Perhaps they confront our fears head-on, tackling tough topics such as bodily autonomy, disability, racism, sexism, and the like. Whatever is the case, stories of humans defying their bodies and undergoing transformations have stayed in the minds of many for ages, and continue to be told and retold for generations.

All of this is to say, that when a major series concerning this type of story is brought to me, I'm sure as hell to pay attention. One of my favorite story arcs is tales of human transformations, so when this anime was assigned to me for this month's Anime Exchange, I was very excited. How could it not be good? Its a guy who turns into a monster! Unfortunately, things aren't so simple...

Devilman Crybaby is an anime series produced by Aniplex, and released by Netflix in 2018. The series, based on the manga Devilman, by Go Nagai, follows a highschooler named Akira and his best friend Ryo. When Ryo and Akira discover a burgeoning population of demons in human disguise, Akira fuses with a powerful demon, and the pair form a crime-fighting duo bent on eliminating the monsters. Along the way, Ryo's motivations become more and more sinister, and Akira struggles with his newfound powers and the responsibility he feels comes with them.

Akira's journey, from 'crybaby' weakling to monstrous hero is shown in a way that prompts audiences to weigh the pros and cons of his new powers. Akira's new powers come with a more conventionally attractive and muscular body, one that brings him unwanted romantic and sexual attraction from women everywhere. He's the fastest on the cross country running team, but is plagued with nightmares of monstrous women. Rather than giving Akira this new, improved quality of life with his demon powers, the anime goes out of its way to show that even though he's a superhero now, his life isn't any easier.

However, it would have been nice if the series pushed this dichotomy a little bit harder. On the surface, Devilman Crybaby is a textbook example of the 'Descent into Monster-hood' story: a plot in which an ordinary human is infected with or otherwise acquires a monstrous alter ego, which they can transform physically into. The human grapples with this newfound power, and must struggle to control their violent urges or incredible strength, as they hide it from family and friends. (gif relevant)

While the first chunk of episodes follow this plot archetype well, giving an interesting take on it, the series doesn't show enough of Akira struggling with his powers for it to feel satisfying. Sure, he has a massive appetite, and runs like a lizard on cocaine, but we never really get to see how his powers clash with his 'ordinary' life. This, then, makes his transition into accepting his demonic nature feel a bit rushed, skipping the most important part of the 'Descent into Monster-hood': the descent itself.

The visuals of this series are... perplexing. Equal parts graceful and beautiful as it is wonky and hilarious, the animation is something that you can't look away from, for love nor money. Characters that are standing close to the center of the shot look wonderful, and move with slick, sweeping motions, their eyes sharp, as if everyone is wearing mascara. But when the camera angle changes, and the shot pulls further back, characters turn into shapeless blobs of color, leading to important characters doing important things looking laughable. A scene where Ryo waves a gun around and beckons for Akira to join him becomes instant comedy once the camera moves to a wide shot, for example.

This, combined with the total lack of shading on any living thing in this anime, leads to a look hurts the series more than it helps. Its amazing how the art style of this show swings back and forth, between really stylish and nice, to ridiculous. At times, I wanted to snap a screenshot of a scene and see if I could fix it myself with shading and more solid shapes at a distance, but its not like that would help.

Adding shadows to characters wouldn't be enough to distract from the most glaring issue I had with this series: its portrayal of women. I know that its basically common knowledge in anime these days, that you shouldn't go looking for good female representation in shonen/seinen series, but I believe that genres and demographics can change with the times. Every modern adaptation of an older property has the chance to do justice where the original failed, correcting the mistakes caused by short-sighted ignorance and old-school biases. Dororo, a series I reviewed earlier this year, shows that this can be done without an issue, without affecting the plot in major ways.

And yet, we have this series, which only ups the ante in terms of making women the target of every crime and misfortune, going out of its way to portray them either as screaming victims or walking pairs of breasts. Out of all the female characters in this anime, the amount that were never shown naked, in sexual situations, or dying horribly is pretty low, possibly zero. Yes, its a dark and violent reboot of an already violent manga, meant to be a cautionary tale about humans being too quick to judge others and destroying the world because of it, but this also came out in 2018. Most people would expect a little bit of decorum, at least.

The first incident, the club scene in episode 1, was shocking, but made perfect sense. An underground sex club full of drugs, topless women, and neon lights is the perfect setup for Akira's worldview changing as he fights his first demon. Its wild, colorful, and the bass is loud and constantly thumping, like a heartbeat. It makes the carnage seem surreal and fantastical, like the audience is tripping alongside Akira.

But then we learn about Miki, Akira's childhood best friend, and her illicit model job which she feels that she must do in order to make money. In one scene, Miki travels to her boss' house, and uses his bathroom to rinse off after getting caught in the rain. Unbeknownst to her, the bathroom has a one-way mirror, through which her boss takes nude photos of her without her knowledge. Later, when Akira meets with Miki on her balcony, a scene that was probably intended to further their romantic chemistry is shattered when we see that Miki is wearing a see-through nightgown.

Then there's Miko, Miki's running rival, whose main characteristic that she is first introduced by is her large breasts that bounce when she runs. Unlike her rival, Miko has a more compelling story, revolving around her accepting a demon into her in order to prove herself against Miki, all for a nickname and a sense of pride. When Miko finally admits her jealousy to Miki, the two share some tears, in a heartwarming scene of acceptance amidst strife and chaos. Her arc, of rising above manipulation and sexual assault to become a powerful monster, had me worried at first, but had me in a good mood by the end of the series. Yet no matter how important Miko is, no matter how cool they make her 'Devilman' form, the show continues to emphasize her breasts, which expand to a ridiculous size and bounce around with each movement like water balloons.

Not everything is horrible in this anime, though. The music is stellar, full of thumping club songs, and a remake of the original Devilman no Uta, the theme song of the original Devilman series. A lot of the soundtrack is now on my personal playlists for writing, because they have this dark, yet energetic vibe to them.

As well, the violence in this series is top notch. In a show where a teen turns into a monster and beats up other monsters, you'd be a fool to not expect some bloodshed. Still, this series lays it on thick, bathing in a pool of yellow and red blood from the carnage of each episode. Akira's transformation in the first episode is a stand-out moment for me, just because of its sheer coolness factor. His eyes, the point-of-view shot from inside the demon's mouth, Akira's chest heaving with effort, its just a beautiful shot that I wish I could print out and stick to my wall.

At times, Devilman Crybaby reminded me of Castlevania, the other major violent, monster-y Netflix anime with critical acclaim. While both shows have vastly different approaches to pacing, monster design, art direction, and nudity, both hit that sweet spot of 'one guy killing lots of monsters in a shower of blood' that kept me coming back for more every time.

Devilman Crybaby is not a bad anime, but its not perfect either. Its visual quality is inconsistent, its main character's story arc could use a bit more polish, and as someone assigned female at birth, it made me pretty uncomfortable with how it treats it's female characters. At the same time, when it looks good, it looks great, especially during fight scenes, which are full of guts and glory.

Still, my mind can't shake this anime's apparent obsession with naked women. Any time they appeared on screen, I wondered what the purpose of them being there was. Is every topless, moaning woman necessary for each scene? Am I supposed to be feeling something other than fear, disgust, or annoyance when they appear onscreen? And would it kill these guys to give Miko a sport's bra when she's running?!

I went into this series with three memories of it, from when I tried watching it when it first released: drug-addled club scene gone wrong, ripping a snake in half, and a guy running weirdly. While I sure got all three of those, they also came with more bare breasts than a womens' locker room, with all the subtlety of a clown. At least, as the end of the day, I know understand all the people shipping Ryo and Akira.

[darklight572]

Lumity is my Favorite Ship

So far I've only talked about She-Ra, specifically, about takes the fandom have I find....uncritical of the media. Just talking about the negative and analyzing that is only half of the human experience though, and I really don't like contributing to the 'social media hate cycle' so to speak.

Lumity is my favorite ship in all of media, and -imo- probably one of the most well written ones too. For those unaware "Lumity" refers to the fictional characters Luz Noceda and Amity Blight's romantic relationship within The Owl House. Being too broad it follows the "enemies to lovers" format of taking two superficially opposed characters and having them slowly understand how one or both of them aren't actually opposed, comulating in a relationship. And yes, I do think enemies to lovers is about superficial differences, come at me.

Anyways, first I want to establish the context of the relationship- who are the characters, how they interact, and how do their interactions produce the best and most wholesome romance relationship in fiction? So- starting off, context

CONTEXT (Luz the Misunderstood) Luz Noceda is a 14 year old dominican americal girl who expresses herself blatantaly as neurodivergent. Dana Terrace has explicitly called Luz adhd, and as a adhd-er myself i absolutely think she nailed at least one version of adhd. Luz can be easily distracted or focus so heavily on something she neglects others, she goes off on tangents, and worries that her interests scare people off- cuz they do.

She's also incredibly creative and expressive, showing off her unique style and presentation to all without any hesitation. To the point she uses real life snakes in a presentation and has backup snakes (also fireworks, which, yeah). After the aforementioned presentation went... off the rails, her mother and principal decide its in her best interest to attend a place called "Reality Check Camp". Now, this has spawned a lot of discourse within the Fandom, but for now lets leave it at her mother wanting her to try to make real friends because "your (Luz's) fantasy world is holding you back."

This is key to understanding Luz as a character, her fantast world was in fact, not holding her back. While there is absolutely credence to the fact that Luz was planning to use fireworks at some point, and should probably be checking to see if her snakes were safe, the key point here is the framing of Luz's interests as "holding her back" from making real friends. This is extremely interesting due to the fact that her love of fantasy is seemingly inspried by Azura, a book her late father left for her. Its also notable that people can like all of the things Luz likes and not create dangerous situations. A key point here, regardless of if Camila is justified or not, is that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the problem.

All of Luz's interests are not what creates the conflict, its a lack of awareness for some of the consequences of her actions, which isn't unique to Luz at all- just displayed differently. I think this is something a lot of neurodivergent folk can relate to, believing that we are uniquely troubled people who hurt people. No, in fact, we are not. What Luz needed wasn't a "reality camp" it was a place where people accepted her, so that she could have the space to open up and the real problem could be addressed. Luckily for our protag, this is exactly what the boiling isles present.

CONTEXT P. II (Amity the Lonely) Amity Blight is a 14 year old witch of the wealthy blight industries. She starts the show as demeaning and cruel, and in some ways is that way, but is later shown as kind and overwhelmingly loyal. This is not a contradiction in her, but dichotomies and growth. Amity is abused her parents, this is just the objective fact of the matter, her friendship is weaponized to make her feel lesser and is actively threatening said friend's future.

Willow isn't the main point of this post, but she is vital as a perspective to view Amity, as children they were best friends. But Willow wasn't as naturally talented at magic as Amity was. Amity, being 4, didn't necessarily see this as a bad thing- but her parents did. They have a toxic idea that the Blights should only interact with those fit to interact with them, usually in the context of social or literal power- though an emphasis on social. So when it became apparent that Willow wasn't progressing fast enough, they threatened to have Willow never able to go to hexside (the magical school the characters attend).

This is- a lot- but afterwards Amity uses Willow's seeming powerlessness as the justification for the breaking off of their friendship, and as time goes on, begins to bully Willow from some amount of geinune distaste. It should be EXTREMELY clear however, that Amity's bullying is very directly linked to her mother's expectations. Lets get into that a bit, Odalia Blight expects perfection from Amity- her grades, her social standing, her appearance. All three of the Blight siblings must create an artificial layer to appease their mother.

Amity in particular is practically forced to die her hair green to fit in with the majority of the family, even if she doesn't particularly like her green hair. All of these are expectations, and more importantly, conditions for Amity to attain any sort of love or affection. Her father neglects all of his children, and her older twin siblings harass her with jokes. Her only form of attachments are Boscha and Skara, two people picked out by her mother as "appropriate options" for friends. That is to say, Amity actually has no one, she is- alone.

Amity volunteers at the library to read to children, and at least at some point, works there. She has a place where she can indulge in her fantasy books and not have to care about expectations quite so much. The person who treats her most kind before the start of the series is her librarian boss.... thats a very low point- especially for a 14 year old.

INTERACTIONS (The Enemy Part) Luz and Amity first collide in "I was a Teenage Abomination", and in fact, is the first episode featuring Amity at all. For context, in this episode, we see Willow belittled by Amity for her lack of skill with abominations, and Luz disillusioned by Eda's non-teaching brand of teaching. So they make a deal, Luz will pretend to be an abomination so Willow can make a better grade and Luz will get to see some of Hexside. Until this episode, Amity is the "top student" of the abomination track.

With Luz's ability to speak and do more complex orders (as...she's a person), Willow is granted the top student badge. We see throughout the rest of the episode that Amity is suspicious and eventually tells Principal Bump- who seems to ask Willow to disect Luz. When they run away, Amity chases after them, and its only Willow's plant magic prowess that allows Luz to escape. Thats- a lot- but some key points we need to remember: Bump, in the end, doesn't disect Luz- and later on is nonhostile to her- its fair to say that the dissection was just a ploy to get Willow to admit her friend was an abomination.

It should be clear why Amity is so upset based on the context we established earlier: Amity is pressured to be perfect, she is socially isolated, and she is mandated to keep Willow's and her ties cut at consequence of Willow's future at hexside (this is later shown to very much not be an empty threat). To me its clear that she's not actually upset at Luz here, she's angry that her only form of validation she can get- being the best- is taken by a cheater. She takes this so seriously because the ONLY affection she receives (calling it affection is overexaggerating even) is when she's perfect.

The next time they interact in a major way is in episode 5 "Convention," Amity is frustrated at Luz when she runs into her because she blames her for her loss of her "Top Student" status. Which isn't unfair, her actions afterward are, but Amity has a legitmate point here that Luz's actions have negatively impacted her. This is important for Luz's character development and for understanding Amity's actions. Luz is not perfect here, and we've seen throughout the beginning episodes how Luz struggles to reconcile her preconcieved notions with the reality of her situation, the consequences of her actions.

Luz accidentally accepts a deal that would permanently have her stop training in magic if she loses a duel with Amity, and then loses, sorta. You see both Eda and Lilith (Luz and Amity's mentors respectively) cheat to give their student an advantage. Luz knows and tries not to let Amity fall into the magic mines Eda plants but Amity does not know about the sigil on her neck until Eda reveals it. Amity runs away and blames Luz for humiliating her. Now, this isn't quite so fair, Eda was responsible- but as Luz explains her desires and that she geniunely didn't mean to Amity listens and we see the first tender interaction between them.

Its really not even calling them friends at this point, but it does start to shift them away from "enemies" and make them... rivals? Its complicated and messy, but Luz starts to understand Amity here- understands that she did harm Amity with her actions and learns what she has to do to be better.

INTERACTIONS P. II (Friends) The next time they have a major interaction is episode 7, "Lost in Language", this is when Luz see's Amity reading to children in the library and first seriously shows her desire to befriend Amity. This is possible because Luz has already gotten the "primer" so to speak in understanding Amity. Luz is able to see Amity more clearly because she was previously able to extend compassion past an apathetic or even cruel exterior and take responsibility for her actions.

Amity is hostile at first, but not aggressively so, and puts up with Luz much more peacefully than prior. Though she still doesn't necessarily like Luz due to Luz's previous transgressions against her, calling her a bully. Luz seemingly proves this when, after being peer pressured by Amity's siblings, accidentally reads her diary. After some Owl House shenanigans where Luz tries to save Amity, Luz reaches out and gives Amity her fifth Azura book. This episode is important in correcting Amity's impression of Luz- she wasn't trying to harm Amity, she just- wants friends and tends to be pretty reckless at times.

Seeing Luz's continued insistence also lets Amity reflect on her own behavior, while she's done so before in releasing Luz from their magical oath, this is the first time she outright states that her behavior isn't good. All of this is vital to slowly developing their friendship, maybe they aren't friends by the end of the episode, but they can firmly say they aren't enemies.

Next episode they interact is episode 12 "Adventures in the Elements" and is a pivotal part of their development. This Amity is the least guarded around Luz, while she still isn't showing her geniune emotions at first, she isn't hostile to Luz at all. The only conflict in the episode is caused by Luz stealing Amity's training staff and waking up a Slitherbeast (an otherwise neutral beast) who steals Amity's siblings and Eda.

Amity puts Luz in a forcefield to protect her, not believing that Luz is up to rescuing her mentor. After Luz shows her wrong and they save everyone, they have another positive interaction- at this point- it is fair to say that they have become friends. This isn't the first time Amity has tried to help Luz, she did in "Lost in Languages" too, but this is the first time she does so proactively and not when she is in direct danger. Amity cares about Luz.

The next three episodes they prominently interact in, "Understanding Willow" (15), "Enchanting Grom Fright" (16), and "Wing it like Witches" (17) all develop this friendship into something more- at least for Amity. Starting with Understanding Willow, this episode further illucidates Amity's issues, finally revealing why she cut off her friendship with Willow and her parents part in that. Willow doesn't immediately forgive Amity, but it does allow her to understand Amity better (as do the audience)- i think this is the episode where people start to align with Luz's perception of Amity.

its also the episode, imo, that Amity firmly establishes her crush on Luz. In this episode, despite Amity's blatant mistake and cause of the problem, Luz reaches out and gives her compassion. Not judging her, just asking her to take accountability for her actions. And although she does try to hide some things, ultimately what shes really hiding is what her parents did to her, very understandable. Its also notable that the reason Amity tries to burn that memory in the first place is no doubt trying to hide any relationship with Willow- as her mother might still be on the prowl and hurt Willow that way.

This is the second time Luz manages to make Amity blush, but even despite that, their friendship is still slightly rocky. Amity raises her voice at Luz when she tries to convince her to fix the core memory- we understand with the context of the memory itself that Amity is desperately trying to hide from what she did- from what her mother made her do- at least partially. Most importantly, at the end of the episode Amity finally takes full accountability. Even though her mother did make her sever their ties, Amity still bullied Willow- and its clear both of them know that.

Amity at this point has seen Luz make mistake after mistake, hurt people over and over, but she's also seen that Luz is always accountable for her mistakes- and always do her very best to make up for them. Luz, on the other hand, is learning to be more careful about what she does- though thats not fully driven through at this point, the embers are there. I think the compassion and her learning from Luz here is what first lets Amity begin to crush on Luz.

Next, and one of the most important episodes for Lumity, is Enchanting Grom Fright- where Amity is afriad to ask Luz to Grom - and Amity herself is slated to fight Grom- a magical creature one student has to fight every year that can manifest their worst fears. Given that, Amity of course is extremely grateful when Luz volunteers to be "Grom Queen" instead. This however, doesn't go as well as it could have, when Luz runs away when her mother is what Grom shows her- displaying Luz's fear: that her mother will find out where she's been and believe Luz was lying to her out of- a lot of reasons.

Amity goes after her and faces her fear with Luz to defeat Grom- Luz see's Amity's fear- vaguely being rejected - and isn't aware Amity wanted to ask her to Grom. Luz offers to be her date instead (she did not assume Amity wanted to ask her), and they dance and have a nice night. This is the first real time Luz really expresses any sort of romantic interest in Amity, and could be reasonably interpreted as her being bubbly and friendly. Though it is notable that Luz is very insistent on being Amitys friend even before this, so its not like its unreasonable to assume Luz was already- maybe subconsciously- crushing on Amity prior.

Finally, for this section we have "Wing it like Witches" episode 17- and the last time Luz and Amity majorly interact in season 1. In this episode Luz pushes her friends too hard when shes trying to help them, this pushes Willow and Gus away and Luz is in trouble without them. Amity rescues Luz by reminding Willow that Luz didn't have any bad intentions she was just trying to help. Luz still takes accountability though, and even begins to change the "enemies" by showing them compassion. This episode is almost like a mini-arc for Lumity- Luz messing up but always taking accountability, and changing those who would be her enemies into friends with compassion.

LUMITY (Partners!) Finally, we arrive at S2, and where things start to really head toward endgame Lumity. The first major interaction between the two is in episode 2 of season 2 "Escaping Expulsion". Odalia cashes in on the threat she made so long ago, after finding out that Gus, Willow, and Luz are Amity's friends she arrives and has them expelled from school. Amity is too frightened of her mother to speak back at first and doesn't help Luz when she wants to speak with her mother. This continues Amity's trend of trying to protect Luz in her own way, under the manipulation of her mother.

Later on, when Luz makes a deal with Odalia anyway, Amity-Willow-and Gus go to save her from her parents- as Odalia doesn't plan on letting Luz go (presumably she's going to MURDER Luz in front of her investors which- wjsdf yeah Odalia is a horrible person), Amity saves Luz and we see for the first time Luz blushing at Amity- this is probably when you can first say Luz might be crushing on Amity. This shows that Amity is willing to stand up to her abuser for Luz, and yes Willow and Gus- but i think its evident that she is especially willing- some might even say seeing Luz get hurt is the motivation she needs- to stand up to Odalia.

Episode 5, "Through the Looking Glass Ruin" is very very important- because here they practically both admit they like each other. So- some set up- at this point Luz had to destroy the portal back home so that Emperor Belos (the real antagonist) couldn't use it for his own purposes- after some research she's finally discovered that another human was in the isles before and donated his diary to the library. Amity offers to help Luz find it among the "forbidden stacks" where no one is allowed to go. This is also when Amity reveals that her boss is the one that gave her her secret hideaway.

Luz is too loud when they discover the diary has been eaten by an Echo Mouse and Amity loses her job. During this episode we see Luz try not to pressure Amity in, but Amity helps Luz anyway- motivated by her crush on Luz- and just, wanting to help her. In the end they both admit that "they do stupid things around" the other- and Luz goes back in to get Amity's employeship back- and has to do trials to do so. After explaining things Amity kisses Luz on the cheek and perhaps the most wholesome seen in all of disney plays, only challenged by later Lumity scenes. Anyway- take aways: once again Amity is reminded of Luz's never ending compassion and continued commitment to taking accountability for her actions and most importantly- her mistakes.

After this, we finally get to their relationship starting: Episode 8, "Knock. Knock, Knockin' on Hooty's Door" Hooty attempts to solves all of the Owl House inhabitants struggles- and in that quest- kidnaps Amity and makes Luz and Amity go through the tunnel of love together. In her embarrassment Luz tears things down and accidentally hurts Amity. At this point, Amity probably believes Luz hates the idea of being with her, but this is quickly slashed after Eda encourages Luz to just ask her. Both of them are reduced to blushing messes but they manage to ask each other out and hold each other's pinkie- in again- an incredibly adorable scene.

This works so well because of the consistent set up- both of them have developed so far to get to this point- both of them have learned and become better people than they were, and have become close friends willing to help and support each other when they need it. Its not just that its adorable, its that it helped develop both characters grander arcs and is healthy.

Relationship (The Pay Off) I could continue to break this relationship down episode by episode, and at some point i will, but this post is already long enough- so im gonna hit the major points. Luz and Amity's adventures going forward are so great because they continually show a healthy, adorable, and positive relationship. That is to say, they help support one another, they continue to be friends, and they both continue to develop.

In Eclipse Lake, Amity mistakes Luz's message (with some nudging from the Golden Guard- long story: he's an antagonist kind of, mostly just another abused kid) as a condition for their relationship, but comes to the realization with King's help that their relationship - unlike so many in Amity's life- isn't conditional. In the best episode of the show (don't @ me) Reaching Out, Luz learns to - lmao- reach out when she tries to hide that she's hurting by insisting on helping Amity. She ends up lying to Amity to continue hiding, and hurts her- but its revealed that its the anniversary of her father's death.

Luz, again, takes accountability for her actions- but Amity still comforts her and supports her- Luz learns (at least partially) to reach out for help. Every interaction of Amity and Luz isn't wholeness heaven with no bad things happening, these kids make mistakes and sorta tumble through their first relationship together, but... they learn. They take account for their mistakes and work together to fix the mistake, they learn to confide in each other, that their relationship isn't dependent on conditions.

The reason Lumity's my favorite ship? It shows two queer kids finding each other, starting off against each other, but through compassion and understanding they become friends and something more. Then, they maintain that relationship, while maintaining their indviduality. They are not absorbed by their relationship, instead they are helped and improved.

"We can fix this together."

[ckret2]

Ok I know this is all casual but now Im like, half the population be lines? Do lines, that are female in Flatlands logic, have a shape theyre still attached to genderwise? Can flatlanders tell that a line is like triangle- and it not be attached to marriage or class. Is it weird for Bill when Ford is like ‘Hexagon’ bc being a shape is a gender but also historically kind of also your class and social identity. Sorry I do find alien social construction really fun

Line is its own gender. If you're a line with some recessive genetic code for a triangle that you got from your dad, you're not a Triangle Lite, you're a line. If a line identifies with a different shape, they're probably trans.

I feel like the question "do lines (who are female) feel an affinity for any shapes?" comes from a place of "all the other shapes are Fun Alien Genders and I'm disappointed that only males get fun alien genders, I want females to participate in alien genders too"—but like, "line" IS a fun alien gender. When I say "their genders are shapes," I'm including lines. Their species isn't 50% Female/50% Assorted Shapes, it's 100% Assorted Shapes.

Flatland made a male/female dichotomy because Flatland WANTED to make a point about Victorian-era sexism, and I'm sort of stuck with those associations as a legacy of starting with Flatland as the base for worldbuilding—but like, I'm EXTREMELY not interested in a sexual dichotomy lmao. If I were actually writing a fic set in Bill's home dimension, I'd probably go a LOT further to homebrew the genders so that it's harder for people to say "lines, which are exactly the same as females." Make lines the same percentage of the population as other genders, for instance, rather than 50%. Or invent a new method of reproduction.

But since I'm writing fic set on Earth and Bill's dimension is only present in flashbacks, digging too deep into worldbuilding that plays no role in the story would be a superfluous distraction—it'd risk dragging readers' attention away from the details that matter for something that'll have no impact on the story because Bill's species is extinct. 🤷 So as it is I kinda have to go "nobody on his planet was male or female, trust me" and move on.

I don't think I've mentioned this recently, but "your shape is your class" is one of the bits of Flatland I've chucked straight out the window, for the same "Flatland did this as commentary on Victorian society, and I'm not writing about Victorian society" reason I've chucked other things out the window. It is an important facet of identity that can impact nearly every part of a shape's life—because that's what gender roles are like—but there's no rigid hierarchical ladder, no formal list of acceptable trades for each shape, no system of generational social climbing via having children with one more side. There's a possibility that it USED to be like that, over a century before Bill lived, in his world's "Victorian" times; but like, he grew up in "modern" times, he had fresh new social problems to deal with.

(And if "families aspire to produce one more side per generation until they start failing to have kids or getting weird mutations" did go on in his world, it wasn't a natural thing that happened each generation; it was society as a whole getting so good at selectively breeding for increased sides that they probably got, like, hella inbred nobility. Perfect circles woulda been like the Habsburg dynasty for sheer terrifying levels of inbreeding. By Bill's times people would've realized that's genetically ridiculous and any families still trying to arrange marriages for increased sides would be seen as creepy and out-of-touch.)

So being a hexagon is just being a hexagon. It's not assigning yourself a gender of baron.

[olreid]

it feels like this season would be a lot better if it was aimed snd described to be like. horror *themed* rather than actual horror. Like, D20 is at its core a comedy dnd show, and it's a tight line to walk to get all 3 of those to come together if you want something actually horrifying, but if they just went like. the Nightvale route where it's playing with horror stuff rather than attempting to be legitametly scary, it would work a lot better for their format. but alas :/

yeah i agree, a lot of my frustration comes from the fact that it was specifically billed as horror but isn't doing the work to deliver on that promise. although knowing what we know now, i honestly might still be having these issues if it was a horror comedy. one of my real problems with how the season has been handled is how this weird blend of horrific reality and comedic tone has served to reproduce hegemonic notions of the acceptable forms that bodies and persons can take. brennan introduces a monstrous npc and then makes them available to serve as a punchline, prompting players react to them dismissively and with disgust. there's not much critical interrogation of the circumstances which might produce nonnormative bodies and beings, nor much attempt to get to know these people as people rather than gimmicks and sideshows. rapunzel, for example, is not allowed the space to share her backstory in its full complexity, how the circumstances of her childhood led her to become what she is, because the party is too busy exclaiming at how icky it is that she can climb walls or listen with her hair or whatever. that ableism in horror post was going around again this week but truly one of the easiest shortcuts to take in horror is 'haha look how weird and different this is, isn't it gross and scary and bad?' this despite the fact that the season specifically set itself the task of troubling and critically interrogating the dichotomies of good/bad, hero/villain, monster/human set up in our cultural myths and fairytales.

when people try to emulate horror uncritically and without a working knowledge of generic history and conventions, i do think a lot of the time what happens is they end up just relying on the power of a series of horrific images rather than creating plots and structures that actually produce horror. they're literally supposed to be in a time loop but they're not being forced to repeat anything. instead of trapping the characters within structures social or philosophical, or turning them against each other, or making them question their reality, what happens in almost every episode is that the party encounters an npc they think is gross. they gag and shriek. they move on to the next. the party grows closer, having defined themselves by what they are not. their camaraderie, built on the backs of these people who have adapted to their circumstances in order to survive in ways that are not beautiful or easily understandable, is the force that will save the world, because that's how d&d works.

[seriousbrat]

Do you think some patronus forms can be stronger than others?

Harry's patronus is a large animal with antlers, Umbridge's patronus is a kitten, Hermione's is an otter, bigger than a kitten, but still a relatively small animal.

Do you think that says something about their power, or are all corporeal patronus created equal? Could a small corporeal patronus mean a somewhat smaller range of emotions that can produce it, even if effective?

I'm thinking how Harry's, Ginny's, and Lupin's patronus are quite imposing and powerful animals, and one thing I see in common between these characters is that they dealt with immense trauma. Harry and Lupin also share the trait of being self-sacrificing and being driven to protect others, and Ginny has the fierceness and perseverance of someone who never accepts defeat.

I might be trying to connect dots that don't exist - as Snape's patronus is also very powerful relatively large, but a doe is more associated with grace than aggressiveness or protection.

I wonder if any partronus would be as powerful as Harry's against hundreds of Dementors, in the time-turner scene where he saves Sirius - and if its power has anything to do with the stag's size and nature. Or better, if Harry's gigantic heart could only ever produce a Patronus like that - big, imposing, powerful and majestic?

Sorry, this ask got quite long!

Hmm, generally I would say that I don't think so, that it depends more on the strength of the caster and the strength of the happy thought. I also hope what you say isn't the case because I dimly recall I got a tiny little salamander when I took the test on Pottermore (i was happy that it was a rare magical creature lol, but she was so small) anyway joking aside, the fact that patronuses can change makes this somewhat unlikely to me.

I think Harry is just a particularly powerful patronus caster, and imo that would remain the case if his patronus changed to something smaller. Luna's hare is quite small too but I think she has one of the most powerful patronus moments in the books (much more so than Ginny or Lupin) when she gives Harry the hope and courage to cast his own during the final battle. Luna's patronus is the one that saves them here, and yes she's been through some trauma but I don't think it's that, it's that she still has as much hope and love as Harry, so much that it spills out to the others.

Also, the other thing is I don't think Lupin is a particularly powerful patronus caster (he's good, because he's a good wizard, but he's not as good at it as Harry) and that's because he's ashamed of the shape of his patronus and refuses to cast a corporeal patronus. His own self-hatred and hopelessness hold him back. Harry considers him 'Patronus Man' but that's just because Lupin is the one who originally teaches him to cast the spell-- Harry has surpassed him in this regard, because Harry understands the notions of hope, family, and love better than Lupin does, as is made clear through their conflicts in DH. Lupin was Harry's teacher, but in DH it's Harry who teaches Lupin.

Sorry this is only marginally relevant to your question, but I want to talk about Snape's patronus haha. While I always think it would have been a bat without Lily, my headcanon is that he actually couldn't produce a corporeal patronus until Lily's death. Linking a discussion I had where @said-snape-softly pointed this quote out:

Harry fully expected to receive low marks on his, because he had disagreed with Snape on the best way to tackle dementors

This is quite odd because it seems pretty obvious to us that the patronus charm would clearly be the best way to tackle dementors. As said-snape-softly theorised, Snape's preferred method is probably akin to Occlumency, similar to what Sirius does in order to survive Azkaban: "it wasn't a happy thought, so the Dementors couldn't suck it out of me." And this relates to the general intuition vs logic, emotion vs control, patronus vs occlumency dichotomy that is Harry vs Snape.

Before Lily's death, I think even Snape's happiest memories (which weren't many, let's face it) would be tinged by bitterness and regret, they simply wouldn't be strong enough. After Lily's death, it's obviously not that he's not regretful and bitter about it haha, but his love for her is so strong, she becomes the happy thought that keeps him going and that's more powerful than any sadness or anger he might feel. It's not that he wasn't talented enough, it's that he hadn't previously had the power of selfless love at his disposal, something that comes naturally to Harry.

Snape's role as a spy requires him to keep the true nature of his emotions hidden and under control, so that's what he considers important and that's his defence against despair (which is what the Dementors represent.) Hermione, who is also very driven by logic, has trouble with the patronus too and is the main person insisting that Harry learn Occlumency. Harry is the opposite of this-- when Harry manages to shut Voldemort out at last, it's not Occlumency, which involves clearing your mind of emotion, it's the opposite: feeling so much emotion that Voldemort can't enter his mind.

In a technical sense, Snape's method against Dementors is arguably 'best' because it can be done without a wand, as Sirius proved. If Snape had encountered a Dementor prior to Lily's death he would have certainly found Occlumency more effective, and after her death he might not have been able to cast his patronus without giving himself away. But Occlumency would never have worked for someone like Harry or Luna, who are intuitive, not logical, so is it really 'best'? Symbolically, both approaches work best for each character, and both approaches working together is what defeats Voldemort.

[panfritoo]

Exhibition Review: Women in Revolt! Art and Activism in the UK 1970-1990

Anything feminist puts me instantly on guard. Feminism sells. Sure. But can't female artists be recognised for anything other than having a vagina? Female artists in Britain did not occupy the spaces of museums and galleries, their work has been safeguarded under individual mattresses and home archives. So I approached Tate Britain's exhibition with a certain scepticism, wondering if the show would be a tokenistic gesture of promoting ‘inclusivity’.

From the get-go, there is one thing obvious. There are no Guerrilla Girls. There are no Mona Lisas. Each piece, interdependent, brings dimension to all the contradictions and experiences of women at a time of significant sociopolitical change. As a result, the exhibition is messy and fatiguing; it almost tries too much at once. However, this is no sign of failure, there is a feminist, non-capitalist politics which informs the curation of the exhibition. Women in Revolt! Art and Activism in the UK 1970-1990 showcases the works of over 100 female artists who used their work to campaign for women’s rights and whose contribution to British culture has been incredibly uncredited. 

Arranged chronologically, the exhibition begins with photographs taken by then-20-year-old Chandon Fraser of the First Women’s Liberation Conference that took place in Oxford. Unlike images of any male gathering, these images are intimate, women are smiling and some carrying their infants with them. These women are wives, mothers, activists and artists all carrying the burden of being a woman in each role. Maureen Scott's painting Mother and Child at Breaking Point supplies an honest reflection on being a devoted mother and at the same time, losing the sense of ‘I’. Or, Susan Hiller's "10 Months," where she documents her growing pregnant belly through photographs, along with text from her journal where she writes about being a woman artist. At the time, being a female artist and a mother were considered incompatible. These works demonstrate that while society accepts that there are good, bad, and they-went-to-buy-milk-they-said fathers, mothers are held to different standards. 

The works are witty and thought provoking, for instance, Monica SJOOS referencing phallic culture with a painting of a big penis overcasting a city or Rose Finn-Kelcey's 'The Divided Self' a self-portrait of her sitting on a bench at Hyde Park, bookended, appearing on opposite sides of the bench in conversation with her 'other' self. The photograph examines the dichotomy between the person we are in private and the person we are in public. 

The exhibition also recognises the influence of subcultures in their role of pushing the boundaries behind the theatrics of womanhood. In the 1980s, against London's depressive political backdrop, a bunch of working-class teenagers were determined to build their own swinging London and escape into an electric new counterculture. These kids would gather around cubs like Blitz's which made the ultimate test bed for new romantics, punks, fashion and lesbian squatters. The photographs by Jill Posner of lesbian couples inhabiting new places were a way to challenge traditional female beauty canons aimed at male arousal and defy sexual orientation attitudes. While others such as Jill Westwood’s photographs of her wearing a latex outfit or Liz Rideal’s self-portraits of her face in a photo booth as she reaches orgasm would use hyper-sexualisation as a means of declaring control over their bodies and acknowledging their sexual self. 

It becomes evident that women produced work on the fringes of the art industry, creating their magazines, putting shows at alternative venues and sustaining their work through collaboration. The postal art project supported by Monica Ross and Su Richardson is an example of the networks women built to disseminate their work. These works included in the exhibition are small-scale pieces of artwork using DIY techniques that women would produce on kitchen counters with random items found in the house. These collectibles were mailed between women creating documentation of their experiences. Forms of low-status art became a significant medium of feminist art, which is a direct reflection of women's precarious material conditions at the time. 

The exhibition does not focus on a universal experience of women, each room has the function to provide a new layer to the narrative of feminism activism in Britain. Marlene Smiths' “My mother opens the door at 7 am. She is not bulletproof” a portrait of Dorothy Cherry Grace who was shot at her home in Brixton documents the BLK Art Group's contribution to feminist activism and racism in Britain.  

Turning our view back to the present, what does it all mean? Perhaps this is the most important. One cannot stop themselves from making connections between women’s rights then and now. Abortion is being criminalised in my countries disowning women from their bodies, women are still inflicted between becoming a mother and pursuing their careers, walking alone at night is still dangerous, and social media algorithms have taken a role in exposing young minds to figures such as Andrew Tate and their “toxic masculinity” content. But at the same time, I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else in time but now.  

I’ve confessed to myself that I am not a feminist of my time, as a young woman I’ve become weary of the term. Women In Revolt has put into question why I refuse to recognise this history of my gender when it means everything I take for granted now. Despite my initial judgements, this exhibition is a revelation. 

[crooked-wasteland]

Micro Essay: Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics

Synopsis: Virtue Ethics and the moral obligation to “virtue” as a basis of privilege from the perspective of the Absurdist.

When Aristotle wrote about his philosophy in Nicomachean Ethics, he spoke of a variety of variability in what he called virtue. Specifically, he spoke at length of the epidemiology of ethics, talking of the potential of humanity and their capacity for good and how one becomes “good”. He wrote of how human nature exists as a dichotomy of man, both naturally inclined while unnaturally desired. With this foundation, Aristotle draws a distinct line between those who do good and those that simply are good, elevating the latter above the former. He delineates the difference when he writes, “These actions that produce moral value are not good in the same sense as those that flow from it … if the acts that are in accordance with the virtues have themselves a certain character it does not follow that they are done justly or temperately” (Aristotle 146-147). In essence outlining that acting in the expectation of good that goes against one's nature or is in so many ways a product of what Aristotle called “passions” and “faculties” (174), that the actions themselves are held up by nothing. When virtue is a product of one's character, they will be consistent in their actions while those who lack such character are feckless do-gooders who cannot be relied upon to be good.

While I recognize Aristotle's hesitancy towards those who cannot be trusted to do good, I find it outside of our moral duty to hold others to the standard of virtuousness, nor our right to judge how or why someone chooses to behave a certain way. Aristotle's fixation on achieving a virtuous character, however, overlaps slightly with my own beliefs born from Camus’ writings on what he called Truth. Aristotle’s philosophy hinges on this idea of something innate and pure that moves us to do good, but is not so innate as to be natural from birth. This concept requires the idea of molding oneself into a person who merely is virtuous for its own sake and not for the value of that virtue. Aristotle dog-ears the idea of what a virtuous character is by describing it as, “Pleasure in doing virtuous acts” (Aristotle 146). Whereas the absurd belief in Truth is more about accepting what is, and that this truth has a multitude of ways it will be understood by others. Aristotle grounds his philosophy in an unattainable objectivity that is fundamentally fluid, which is where I disagree with it. And that concept runs aground with Aristotle's claims of certain actions being deplorable at all times. While I don't believe there is ever a time to justify adultery, I must side with Camus again when he writes, “Supposing that living in this way were not honorable, then true propriety would command me to be dishonorable” (Camus 63). Aristotle claims theft is never justifiable, but would it not be deplorable for a parent to do nothing to save their starving child in poverty? Would it not be wrong to take no action at all if it meant saving a life, even if that action was generally seen as morally conflicted?

In how Aristotle devalues good deeds through the lens of true character, he still argues for dishonesty of those who do not meet his standards and judges the people instead of the actions. Whereas Camus is not judging the moral value of people. Actions are either altruistic or cause harm, and the intent behind such actions is wholly irrelevant. The type of people we are amounts to the actions we commit in the presence of every different person. The truth is neither our own, nor consistent, and Aristotle's philosophy of virtue tries to take that in account while still dictating an objective reality that can only truly exist in privilege.

[vvatchword]

So about a week ago i managed to enrage somebody about BioShock Infinite. Now, this was fair, seeing as i approached the subject in a smarmy way, but what struck me immediately was the performative fear of the person i angered, and how my own performative fear was woken. I started double-checking myself, asking myself if i hadn't asked enough difficult questions of the source material and so on, and in the process, I started getting flashbacks to early Tumblr.

Which is why I wanna talk shit about what makes well-meaning people get so fucking uptight about difficult elements in fiction (involving race, gender, sexuality, who gives a fuck).

Hint: it's because they're wildly terrified of being -ist/-phobic themselves. There's no easy way to signify lack of prejudice to others so it must be broadcast. Coincidentally, when I was a Christian fundamentalist, i noticed from an early age that we felt we had to be morally performative, since there's no easy way to signify you're "right with God." If there are no outward signs, how are you supposed to know what's good or bad?

Haha there's no fucking way at all because there are rarely people or organizations or media that fall fully on one side or the other. And that includes you and me and everybody on Earth.

You will fuck up. You will accidentally be racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, classist, nationalist. You will discover that what you thought was a harmless belief actually comes packaged with baggage of the nastiest vein. You will discover that no viewpoint is without sin (no, not one).

At some level, you've got to be gracious to yourself--and to others. You've got to understand what makes people shitty. You've got to look your own sins straight in the face, even as they burn you.

Performative morality will not save you.

Performative morality will not absolve you of your sins.

Performative morality is the doorway to puritanism.

Puritans are far more hung up about looking good than they are about doing good. They believe in a black-and-white world. If the answer isn't easy, 1/0, T/F, Y/N, they won't entertain it. They don't love people; they love being right. They don't discuss to learn, they fight to win. In the absence of devils, they'll invent them. They desperately need to fight because how else can you prove you're on the right side? It's so difficult to live a life of maintenance, it's so slow and unsexy and unclear, it hurts so much, it's awful discovering ways in which you have been the monster, but if you don't acknowledge your inherent monstrous capabilities, you will end up committing them. Attempting to force your environment into moral acceptability will do nothing but hurt other people--and people are the only things that matter.

There's a fear of vulnerability in Puritanism--the terror of admitting you don't have it all together, that you might never have it all together. You know the Puritans will not hesitate to destroy you in the same way that they have destroyed countless others; you long to belong; you long to do the right things in the right ways. But Puritans will save no one. Only vulnerability is what produces real change and real love.

I'm sorry it can't be easy. I'm sorry the answers are complicated, multifaceted, and endless. I'm sorry it's not easy to make snap judgements. But they aren't going to start being so just because you insist.

Welcome to the fucked-up universe. Leave your false dichotomies at the Sunday-School door.