see now i know my cat knows Good vs Wrong behaviours because i caught her gnawing at a plant today, and i didn't say a single thing— didn't yell, didn't use a Tone, didn't even move at all. just stood there with my hands on my hips until she noticed me, and then she jumped and bolted out of the room, and is now doing the "ohhh hello mommy!! my best friend whomst i love dearly! look at how big my eyes can go, listen to how loud i can purr! :3 i am just your special little angel who would neverrr be bad :33"
465 notes
·
View notes
You know what? You know what I think?
I think that if we lived as we were meant to, in larger intimate ("extended family") groups and with more shared labor and time to do it (UBI NOW) people like me would not feel so useless and burdensome because there would be people around to help and to do what neurodivergent people can't while making valuable space for the neurodivergent to do what they ARE good at.
The way we live right now, all right, the way we live right now forces units of two adults to be able to do EVERYTHING or PAY to have someone come do it for them. I have to do the housework. I have to do it! But I am having to do a million different things and most of them I am not good at. I suck at them.
I wouldn't feel like shit, okay, if I had more than one other person around who was not a child and who could do the things I can't, like do the yard and cook and do repairs and basic maintenance; and someone else to split everything else that I like but is too much for me. It would free me to do what I am good at and enjoy. Cleaning, as in the sink and toilet, the windows, the blinds. Taking out trash. Folding, hanging, and sorting laundry.
But because all the shit I can do often relies on other shit being done first, and I can't do or have trouble doing those things, the shit I can do often can't be done. And even the shit I can do, I can't do ALL of it. So I can't keep up, and things get very bad.
We aren't meant to live like this. We are not meant to live like this.
That thought hurts so much because being able to flee the birth family is integral to survival for so many people. I'm so afraid that living in larger family groups would create more opportunities for, say, queer kids to be isolated, rejected, bullied, and abused. But if we gave people enough money to survive, and stopped considering children the property of their parents with no system in place to help them escape bad situations except a system that is often just as bad, just different.
I'm aware that communes and collectives aren't all that successful and are kind of a joke. I don't mean that. I mean a fundamental shift to multigenerational families where taking in "strays" (which my family did) is also normalized so people escaping abuse into existing households was accepted, with these families centered in maybe a couple of different larger residences so not everyone has to buy and maintain their own fucking washing machine and vacuum cleaner, and so people can benefit from large group meals that yield leftovers, and so child and elder care can also be centralized.
Then disabled people and the neurodivergent and sick and injured people, and pregnant people, and grieving people, would not have to either labor through all those stressors or consign themselves to living off an unlivable pittance or being put under legal guardianship.
I'm not saying anything new. People live like this in other parts of the world and maybe it sucks and I am wrong. But I'm just really mad right now because I can either do laundry or clean the sink but not both, and I really think we could improve society somewhat by making it so I did not have to choose one without sacrificing the other.
301 notes
·
View notes
Okay, let's finally talk about EPIC's Apollo
I feel very compelled to say, first of all, that I do not dislike Epic. In fact, I am very fond of Epic and have been following its production and status very eagerly! I attend all the launch streams, I watch all of Herrans' update videos; I am, at the end of the day, a fan and I want it to be known that my words are spoken out of love and passion as much as they are spoken from a place of critique.
So really, what my problem with Epic's Apollo?
In the briefest possible terms; the choice to have Apollo be defined by his musical aspect in God Games is thematically strange. And not in the 'oh well in the Odyssey, Apollo was important to Odysseus and his family so it's weird that that wasn't kept in Epic' strange, strange in the sense that Odysseus' character arc since My Goodbye has been getting more and more obviously Apollonian and so it is positively bizarre that when we get to meet Apollo, the god seems entirely disinterested in him and his affairs. So much so that he is not even defined by any station that would indicate that he has been watching over and protecting Odysseus and his family.
What do I mean by 'Odysseus has been following an Apollonian arc'? I'm so glad you asked!
Remember Them is the last song in which Odysseus explicitly uses his sword until Mutiny where he must use it to defend himself against Eurylochus' blade. He uses it to help enact the plan to conquer Polyphemus and, due to Polites dying in that battle, Polites who wished for Odysseus to put the blade down entirely and embrace a post-war life, Odysseus also retires his sword. This is an action that symbolically separates him from Athena - and the image of Odysseus as a traditional warrior set for him in Horse and Infant - as much as My Goodbye physically separates him from the goddess and her war-ways - from this point onwards, Odysseus will no longer be leaning on Athena's wisdom or methods to solve his problems. Likewise, he will no longer be able to rely on her protection.
Odysseus thusly solves most of his upcoming problems through diplomacy and avoidance. He approaches Aeolus - a strange and ambiguous god (both in gender and in motivation) and appeals to them for help. Circe too, he approaches not with wishes to conquer or for revenge, but for the safe returning of his men and an alternate way forward. In all of these scenarios, there is some Apollonian element which is subtly interweaved alongside the influence of other gods; it is with a bow and arrows that Polyphemus' sheep is slain (and thus it is this Apollonian element which is at the root of Odysseus' spat with Poseidon), it is a vision of Penelope that warns Odysseus that his men are about to open Aeolus' wind-bag, Circe's peace offering to Odysseus is to refer him to a prophet of Apollo who has since died.
In this way, Apollo is walking alongside Odysseus for all of his journey after Athena departs - even in the Underworld, he is guiding him. It is Tiresias' proclamation that is the last straw for Odysseus, it is by the power of a mouthpiece of Apollo that Odysseus decides to embrace his ruthlessness. It is with the bow and arrow that Odysseus subdues the siren who sought to trick him, likewise, Odysseus does not attempt to undermine or escape the fate of paying Scylla's passage price - he knows of the doom about to befall the six men and quite unlike the rest of the journey until this point, he does not fight against it. This all comes to a head on Thrinacia where it is a blade which sacrifices the sun god's cow and brings destruction upon the crew once more.
My point with all of this is that when I heard the teasers for God Games years ago, it made perfect sense to me that Apollo would be Round One - he is not Odysseus' adversary and has no reason to oppose Athena's wish to free him. From other teasers about what will happen in the climax of Epic, Apollo will still be walking alongside Odysseus - it is Apollo's bow that Penelope will give the suitors to string. Likewise, it is Apollo's bow that will prove Odysseus' legitimacy and identity. That bow will be the power by which Odysseus hunts his adversaries and cleans out his palace - it is Apollo who is the avatar of Odysseus' ruthlessness, not Athena.
So tell me, truly, what was the point of having Apollo raise a non-argument in God Games? Why have him appear unconcerned, aloof and slightly oblivious? Why have him appear in his capacity as the Lord of Music at all?? And if the intention was never to make Apollo an active player in Odysseus' life like he was in the Odyssey, why keep Odysseus as a primary archer?
The answer of course is that Apollo is inextricable from the fabric of the Odyssey - his influence and favour exudes from Odysseus just as much as Athena's. In Athena's ten year sulk, it would have been Apollo who kept Telemachus and Penelope safe. It would have been Apollo protecting Odysseus from Poseidon's gaze as he travelled the seas (according to the Odyssey anyway)
Forgive me for not being excited about something that I thought was being purposefully set up. I was extremely ecstatic about all of the little Apollonian details that litter the sagas because I know where this story ends up (loosely) but all God Games did was reveal that maybe those Apollonian details were not intentional at all, but merely the ghost of the Apollo who persistently haunts those he favours, even if he cannot explicitly come to their aide in an adaptation.
158 notes
·
View notes
regarding my post about perfectionist roman, another thing i've noticed is that people often portray logan as the one who values his work over his health and stay up late working overtime when. the logic vs passion video is literally all about roman telling thomas that it's okay to sacrifice sleep (and to ignore friends) in favor of working hard and getting to the top, and logan being the one desperately urging thomas to put his health and well-being first.
393 notes
·
View notes
I've got this colleague at my day job who keeps saying infuriating things, but they are so funny in the context of the fact that evenings and weekends I'm making a Sherlock Holmes computer game.
Me: Oh yeah I'm learning Javascript at the moment.
Him: Pff you don't want to do that. You're an artist and graphic designer, that's where your strengths are, I think you'll find computer programming really boring, it's not for everyone.
Me: *looks at fourth wall and shrugs*
Me: I read this really interesting paper about a project working with dementia patients, where they guide them through making a memory map of familiar places.
Him: Ooh, like Sherlock Holmes and his mind palace.
Him: See, Sherlock Holmes has a mind palace.
Him: But I'm sure you don't read those sorts of books, you wouldn't be interested.
Me: *Sitting on a zoom call, with my collection of Strand magazines and signed picture of William Gillette very visible behind me. Opens mouth. Decides I don't have the energy. Closes mouth.*
224 notes
·
View notes
"aroace people can still have relationships-" NOT ALL OF THEM CAN. YOU KNOW THAT RIGHT. WHY DO YOU WORD IT AS "aroaces can still be in relationships" AND NOT "some can have relationships, and others cannot."?
WHY MUST YOU INSIST THAT WE STILL CAN LOVE IN SOME WAY. WHY DOES IT MATTER. WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO LOVE. WHY, WHEN TALKING ABOUT AROACES, DO YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO IMPLY THAT IT'S OUR OTHER WAYS OF LOVING THAT MAKES US ACCEPTABLE? WHY CAN'T THE FACT WE DON'T LOVE MAKE US GOOD PEOPLE?
WHY IS THERE ALWAYS AN EMPHASIS ON THE OTHER WAYS WE LOVE, OR THE AROACES THAT CAN STILL DATE, AND NOT ON OUR LACK OF LOVE? IT FEELS TO ME, LIKE YOU ARE TRYING TO PUSH ASIDE THAT ASPECT OF OUR IDENTITY, BECUASE IT'S TOO STRANGE TO YOU. YOU MAY NOT SAY IT OUTLOUD, BUT THERE'S STILL A STIGMA AROUND LOVELESSNESS. IN YOUR MIND, YOU STILL ARE VIEWING LOVELESS PEOPLE AS LESS MORAL OR GOOD, AREN'T YOU?
OTHERWISE, YOU WOULD CELEBRATE OUR LOVELESSNESS, NOT SHOVE IT ASIDE BECUASE "THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO LOVE"
216 notes
·
View notes