#so they might not be the best examples. idk. | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

batsplat · 8 months ago

Note

hello, i have a question. what is the difference betwwen a hard and a dangerous racer? is there some sort of characteristics like how succesful a racer is or is more of a "a dangerous racer races on the limit and that's dangerous. a hard racer races on the limit but. its just a hard racer". thank you for answering!

completely in the eye of the beholder, I'm afraid. it's a perpetual debate, and one where everyone draws the line differently... very much a case of one man's dangerous manoeuvre is another one's hard but fair overtake... that being said! I'll have a go at coming up with a general framework with which people assess this stuff

let's bring in two strawmen, which feels like the most direct way to illustrate the possible stances you can take on this debate. to be clear, nobody really fits neatly in either ideological category - but, well, these are pretty much the two most extreme positions anyone could have:

when people are describing something as 'hard racing' (as opposed to... idk, 'clean' racing), they are usually talking about a) contact between the two bikes, and/or b) an action that forces the other bike to take evasive action. what constitutes forcing evasive action? well, this is all very nebulous and hard to define - there's crossing another rider's racing line, making them pick up the bike mid-corner, forcing them wide/off-track, not yielding in situations where one of you will have to yield to avoid a crash... but this is always an assessment that will depend on the specific circumstances. not every block pass is considered hard racing, for instance, even though you are quite literally 'blocking' the other bike. contact is the more straightforward one... if you initiate a move that leads to contact, then most people would agree this is 'hard' racing

so say you are in the 'A' camp. according to this line of thinking, pretty much every contact is 'dangerous' riding and should not be allowed. here's what gibernau said about jerez 2005, included in the sete post:

let's not discuss the merits of the jerez 2005 move specifically here - this is an expression of a broader ideological position. "this is not a contact sport" "it's not about hitting another guy"... so, according to this stance, actions that knowingly result in contact should not be acceptable and as a result need to be penalised. taken to the logical extreme, any and all 'hard racing' is dangerous

let's go to the other extreme, 'B'. let's say you're very pro-hard racing, to the point where you think that contact is more than fine and that it is unreasonable to call it 'dangerous'. sure, of course it is dangerous, but inherently all motorcycle racing has a lot of risk attached. racing that involves contact is basically acceptable. even within this extreme, my lovely venn diagram allows for some actual 'dangerous' riding - either behaviour that is wholly irresponsible during races... or stuff that doesn't count as hard racing because it's not 'racing'. here are some examples:

stuff that happens during races but is like... egregious misbehaviour. cf romano fenati pulling a rival's brake lever during a race - obviously dangerous and no longer really exists within the confines of actual racing

in either races or non-race sessions - not following proper safety procedures like for instance ignoring yellow flags. again, should be pretty obvious why that's dangerous

poor behaviour in non-race sessions,the general tag for not exhibiting appropriate care, awareness for your environment, all that stuff... the extreme example is marc barrelling into the back of another rider after the chequered flag had been waved in friday practise at phillip island 2011 (more on that here). it's also things like faffing about on the racing line, see the pecco mugello dramatics

so, yes, everyone will agree that there's some stuff that counts as 'dangerous riding' that's distinct from 'hard racing' just because it's not actual racing. that's the most straightforward stuff... but yeah, anyway, those are basically the two extreme positions you can take. you can say that all contact is bad and dangerous, that any time you're forcing another rider to take evasive action and are making a pass that isn't 1000% clean, you are putting others at unnecessary risk. or, you can say, hey, everything goes, rubbing is racing on steroids - sure, there's a small category of things that aren't acceptable, mainly stuff that isn't actually racing, but otherwise you should be allowed to brute force yourself past riders whenever you please

obviously, they're strawmen for a reason. basically nobody holds either of these positions in their entirety - and in race situations, there's always going to be actions that are seen as hard racing by some and as dangerous by others. so, unfortunately, we're going to have to dig a little deeper here, and figure out by what metrics people draw the line between hard and dangerous. let's... hey, how about we bring in casey stoner, just this once. as a treat. here's what he said after laguna '08:

“I’ve been in hard racing all my life, some very aggressive racing, but today was a little bit too much. I nearly went in the gravel so many times and I don’t think it was necessary.”

hard racing? casey's done that before. some very aggressive racing? no issue. but what valentino did at laguna was "a little bit too much" and not "necessary". the specific thing casey cites is nearly going into the gravel - and indeed, forcing other riders wide/off-track is one of the types of racing behaviour that most finely straddles the line between 'hard' and 'dangerous'. for other examples, see suzuka 2001 in which biaggi forced valentino off-track and valentino flipped him off when he eventually got past (a few more details here), qatar 2012 where marc forced luthi off-track and got slapped after the race (here) and sepang 2015, where... uh. you know. or how about argentina 2018 where... look, I think you get the point - plenty of controversy comes from forcing your opponent's bike into places where it's simply not supposed to be

while we're at it, let's throw in a little excerpt from casey's autobiography about the race:

A lot of it was fair racing, he was out-braking me on the inside and riding better than me around a lot of the track. If it had all been like that I would cop it sweet. But a couple of moves off camera added to my frustration. I risked running off the track, and racing at the limits like that as we were I even became worried about my safety.

(does have to be said that the pair of them spend... relatively little time off-camera, never when the bikes seem to be particularly close - but of course the problem this statement creates is that by definition you can't judge any footage you don't have access to)

so, let's strip away the details and think about what casey is actually talking about here. it's a risk/reward calculation. this is what's at the heart of this riding standards debate: what level of risk is acceptable for what level of reward? there are situations in which there is inherently a higher level of risk in a way that isn't caused by either party - influenced by the circuit layout, what the weather is like, how hard you're both pushing aka how much on the 'limit' you are, and so on. but even if that risk isn't your 'fault', if you are riding at very high speeds on a dangerous track, you can still be considered a dangerous rider if you're not exercising appropriate levels of caution

so, let's break it down even further and try and come up with some basic criteria by which people judge whether a specific move is 'hard' or 'dangerous'. how about this: (1) does the action have a reasonable chance of coming off, (2) is the risk you're taking proportionate to the reward, and (3) is the move likely to cause serious harm to you or the other rider. let's take them one by one

listen, it needs to be plausible that you're going to be able to pull this move off. if you're firing the bike from fifty miles back into a gap that doesn't exist, then this is by definition an unnecessary risk. you are not going to do yourself any good and you are also not going to do the other rider any good. (sometimes it might be in your interest to crash the other rider out so you might as well, but unsurprisingly this is frowned upon. see the 1998 250cc title decider.) obviously, this is going to be affected by your skill level - if you're a mid rider, there will be fewer moves that are 'plausible' for you than for the best riders

this is basically the common sense metric. if you are riding in a pack, make sure to keep in mind that crashing in this situation could get ugly. if you are fighting for p5, maybe a different approach is fitting than fighting for p1. if you can make an overtake a lap later as long as you're patient, in a way that's a lot safer than doing it now, perhaps just do that instead. don't be silly in the wet! this comes down to stakes, whether it's worth it, how likely the move is to succeed... and also what the consequences would be if you got it wrong, for both yourself and other riders. you're making an overall judgement based on all of those factors... sometimes you need to take risk, but it's better to make sure that risk is reasonably sensible

however high the potential rewards are, there's a certain level of risk that is no longer acceptable, where the 'risk/reward calculation' stuff has to be thrown out of the window because the reward no longer matters. this is basically the catch-all for 'wholly irresponsible riding' - anything that's just going too far

so, uh. obviously everything described above is super subjective... but that's what people are judging in my opinion, this is the standards they are using in their head to determine where they draw the line. so, as an example, to bring back the stuff from this post about the inter-alien ideological differences:

and again, this is also what the debate after aragon 2013 was about:

if you think aragon 2013 is unacceptable to the point of being dangerous, then you probably take quite a hard line view and think pretty much any action that could lead to contact needs to be stamped down on. while that contact did have unpleasant consequences for the other party (dani wasn't able to walk for several days and his title bid was basically over), it is perhaps a little worse than could have been reasonably expected in that situation. in that sense, there's a bit of surface level similarity with jerez 2005... there, valentino made the pass for the win at the last corner, knowing he would probably bump into sete while doing so. neither rider is knocked off their bike (though sete has to leave the track) and it is at a slow corner, with relatively 'light' contact. unfortunately, as a result of where valentino's bike impacted sete's body and sete's preexisting shoulder issues, it ended up injuring sete (see here for valentino learning of this perhaps a little later than was ideal and only after he'd taken the piss out of sete for dramatically clutching his arm). at aragon 2013, marc was harrying dani and sticking very close to his rear tyre as he applied pressure to his teammate before he made a small misjudgement, getting his braking a little wrong and clipping the back of dani's bike. he happened to cut a crucial wire in the process, causing dani to highside a few moments later

these aren't equivalent situations and each have their own risk/reward profile. but the basic point is this: inviting contact with another rider will always generate more risk, and can always have unintended consequences... even when the action is relatively innocuous and the rider would not have expected this outcome. if you are in the 'all passes should be clean passes' school, this risk is fundamentally unacceptable. even trickier - what if contact is made as a result of a move you initiated but the other rider could have avoided? of course, you started it, but they could have yielded... and maybe they should have, maybe that would have been the wise, the sensible thing to do in that situation. it's always important to remember that at least two riders are involved in all these situations - and there are many cases where contact and/or crashing is not 100% the fault of any one party. so, for instance, there are several moments in laguna 2008 that are so risky in part because casey is also refusing to yield. that's not to necessarily imply any blame or fault! of course, it might not be ideal for the most aggressive riders being able to bully everyone else as they please because they know they can generally rely on everyone else being more sensible and yielding. but the differing outcomes resulting from the choices made by the 'other' rider will always help influence perception of any race situation - a move that is seen as 'hard but fair' might have been seen as considerably more dangerous if the other party hadn't yielded

and yes... yes, there is absolutely a question of your success rate. this links back to point (1) - is the move plausible? there are moves that aren't really considered examples of 'hard racing' and certainly not dangerous... because they worked. take valentino's last corner move at catalunya 2009, at a corner where you don't traditionally overtake (remember, before the race jorge was going around tempting fate by saying that if you're ahead by that point you're sorted). sure, he goes for a gap that exists, but it could easily have gone wrong - and if a lot of other riders had tried that, then it would have. how do you think yamaha would have felt if valentino had taken both yamaha riders out at the very end of the race to allow ducati to claim an unlikely victory and an increased championship lead? here's another one: misano 2017 and marc making a last lap move in treacherous conditions to snatch the win. no contact required to make that risky as shit - and if stuff like that goes wrong too often they call you an idiot at best and dangerous at worst. of course, both valentino and marc have had moments where they very much did not pull off moves they were intending, which is how we get ambition outweighing talent and 'I hope he can learn from this one and improve for the future', among other hits. but, relative to the amount of risk they're regularly taking in their racing, they get a lot of reward for their troubles... because they're very good at what they do. the risk/reward calculation is one that they... uh, can both be very adept at, but it's also one that's fundamentally easier when you're skilled enough to pull off a lot of moves that would be beyond the capabilities of other riders. it's when you don't know how to judge your moments, when you keep trying moves that you can't pull off - that's where other riders will start having a problem with you

which is where we get to reputation! how different incidents are judged will also depend on the existing reputations of the riders involved and whether they are seen as 'fair' racers or not (an even more nebulous term, if possible), versus hard racers, dangerous racers... often, this is a question of quantity too - with certain riders on the grid, you will notice they're involved in controversial incidents disproportionately often. how likely people are to pay you the benefit of the doubt... how likely they are to believe you as to what your intent was in a certain situation, perhaps the most nebulous concept of them all. 'hard' and 'dangerous' aren't assessments that are made in isolation, and how severely riders are judged will often depend on their pasts and how those pasts are perceived by others

where you get into really sticky territory is... okay, both valentino and marc have more often than not (arguably) been able to stay on the right side of 'the line', where their moves might be hard but aren't putting anyone else in active danger - but that's because they are at least theoretically capable of exhibiting a good sense of judgement and are also good at what they're doing, as covered above. here's a question: do they bear any responsibility for when younger and/or worse riders copy their moves and/or general approach to racing, with worse consequences? when they have been criticised, when they are called dangerous, at times it's not just what they're doing in the moment... it's what they're inspiring. so you've got stuff like this from sete:

even more drastically than that, after the death of a fifteen year old rider in supersport in 2021, one of his fellow rider said this about marc (which marc unsurprisingly strongly pushed back on):

(just worth remembering, this is a rider who did walk away from the sport as a result and was clearly deeply affected by what happened - the marc comments were part of a longer statement that got overshadowed by this part and the resulting controversy)

setting aside the merits or lack thereof of these specific assertions, what of the general questions they raise... can you be a dangerous rider in an indirect fashion like this, by the very nature of your legacy? are riders who helped bring about a more aggressive baseline standard of racing in any way responsible for anything that happens as a result of this standard? (even worse, there's a line of succession here - after all, who was marc's biggest inspiration?) or does individual responsibility reign supreme here? athletes are by design only interested in their own successes, aren't they - and 'legacy' is so abstract, how can anyone know how others will be influenced by what they do? how can we even begin to assess how big an influence individual riders really are? let's not forget that there will be other factors - riders in the past have discussed how particular characteristics of the moto2 class have bred more aggressive racing, or the influence of the size of motogp bikes, or how difficult it is these days to overtake in a completely 'clean' manner, or the rules themselves and to what extent they have actually been enforced etc etc... maybe there's also an element of people focusing on the easiest, most visible explanation in the form of star riders, without giving proper consideration to the underlying factors that will influence an era's style of riding. again, how you feel about all of this will vary from person to person - but part of the hard vs dangerous debate is inherently forward-looking. and it's hardly just legacy... your hard/dangerous moves may also be setting a precedent in the present. to what extent is it the duty of riders to worry about that?

so then, that's what I've got. how you draw the distinction between hard racing and dangerous riding will come down to your individual ideological position and what you think racing even entails. do you think all contact is objectionable? do you think only the most extreme of transgressions - most of which don't qualify as 'racing' per se - should be labelled dangerous? somewhere in between? everyone will draw the line in a different place, according to the situation and their individual biases and understanding of events. it comes down, generally speaking, to how you judge the risks and rewards of a certain move, whether you think what a rider attempted was 'worth' it. all of which depends on whether the rider could realistically have managed whatever action they were attempting, whether the potential rewards were proportionate to the risks, or whether the whole thing was just too flat out dangerous to ever be worth it... of course, none of these are objective standards by which you can assess the racing, but they should give you a rough indication of what people are even talking about when they're distinguishing between hard and dangerous racing. riders as individuals are also far from consistent in their stances (surely not!) so you do have to play it by ear a lot of the times... and while there are plenty incidents where the majority can agree whether it is 'hard' or 'dangerous', there are plenty more where you're going to get a lot of contradictory opinions. no definitive answers here - unfortunately a lot of the time you'll just have to make your own mind up

#is this actually coherent? please write in if it's not coherent #tried to mostly stick to examples I've discussed elsewhere but still feels a bit short on details in places... kinda wishy washy... eh. idk #this is SUCH a vibes thing I cannot stress enough what a vibes thing this is #please don't judge the venn diagrams they were made in two minutes in google slides... not my best work but it'll have to do #smolnerdz #motogp #//#brr brr #batsplat responds #I do find this stuff really tricky myself because. okay so you might not have noticed this but I'm rather fond of both marc and valentino #and I clearly do derive quite a lot of enjoyment from their racing not *in spite* but *because* of their aggression #which is all well and good but it's healthy to always just... engage with the other side of things. ruminate on it a bit #a morally tricky sport to engage with in lots of ways - doesn't mean it all has to be done in only the most self-flagellating of ways #but personally I do feel like you shouldn't just. shut yourself off from the critiques. idk it IS a dangerous sport with real victims #and yet several of the races I've mentioned here made it to a list of my all time favourite races I posted *yesterday*. so now what hm #anyways #current tag

43 notes · View notes

spinnysocks · 3 months ago

Note

heyo spinny!! whats some of your favourite tlg ships? or just any you like in general

EHEHEHE rubbing my hands together. evilly. hehehe

well, kiburi is my pathetic wet cat blorbo and i happen to love all the crackships for him. kiburi x makuu? funny as fuck. kiburi x ushari? love them in nikki's pirate au they keep me up at night. kiburi x janja? the outlands brotp ever. my favourite character's stupid ships my beloved yknow?

in terms of other ships: reirei x goigoi obviously. baobabfruit ofc (thanks to you :] /pos). jasiri x kion because yeah. and as you could never tell (/sarc) i love poly ships so banzai x shenzi x ed, tano x nne x madoa, & kiara x tiifu x zuri are ones i really enjoy too. oh and i'll say timon x pumbaa too since they were my first tlk ship i suppose :]

#it's funny bc. sometimes i think about crackships more than my actual ships #like i got an ask about tamka x nduli and i kept thinking about it. in a /pos way #probably because im open minded to ships and i can see them in a queerplatonic light yknow #idk how to explain it. the best example might be through kiburi #in canon i see him as aroace. but i also enjoy various ships for him and all of those would be in aus #alternatively i could see him being in a qpr. but its kiburi so whoever he was with would have to be really right for him lmao #i like kiburi x ushari for that reason. if you put them in the right setting they just Work. for me #something something everyone has their own view of ships and how characters work with each other #therefore i will never be a ship hater. unless its fucking proship or whatever obviously #sail your ships! if i enjoy em i'll happily hop on board otherwise they can float on by it doesn't bother me #another ramble. i used to enjoy kion x ono a lot #it stemmed from way back when i first watched the show and ono was my favourite #i think i saw them both as demiromantic so they just. worked. to me #nowadays i favour ono x beshte x bunga so there we go #used to have a lot of janja ships back in the day too #idk man the world of shipping is interesting to me #and i ship a lot of stuff :] and im happy about it #endlessly rambles at u in tags hfgdjjdhdhd #thanks for askin :D #asks!!#the lion guard thoughts #the lion guard #tlg #mutuals

9 notes · View notes

puppppppppy · 2 years ago

Text

footnotes arent enough I need you to talk to me like im fucking Amelia Bedelia

#this isn’t about anything in particular btw. I just have to add a lot of memos when I’m doing things because some things are done a certain #way and it isn’t explained well in the instructions. like my mom has instructions on her baking recipes right #but when it says stuff like add dry ingredients to wet ingredients it also means you don’t dump it in one go you add it slowly by portion #this is probably why I find videos and demonstrations the most helpful when I learn something. like I almost always ask someone to show me #how they do it because there could be something they do that’s already second nature and wouldn’t really be considered in an explanation yk #I don’t think I’m an exception either. when the rice is done cooking I divide it into 4 quarters to bless it #but there are a million ways to divide rice and it makes me think that one persons way of doing it or not doing it all is just as valid #theres also technically no wrong way to divide rice afaik. this means either all ways of dividing rice is safe or valid until we find some #universally terrible way of dividing rice. until that happens nobody really thinks about specifying HOW you divide the rice #source: I have anxiety starting and doing things for the first time because I got way too many people yell at me NONONO WHAT ARE YOU DOING #THATS WRONG while I’m in the middle of doing the thing. I would rather have people think I’m either very stupid or overly specific #than go thru the panic inducing fear of ‘YOURE DOING THIS WRONG OMG WHY DIDNT YOU ASK AHEAD OF TIME THIS WILL BE FUCKED UP FOREVER’ 🧍#nothing wrong if you don’t give something a second thought because you’re so used to it. but I can and will ask about it and I don’t think I #really should feel bad about it if I don’t know enough to dispute it. idk #the other way around I try to be as specific as possible and word things in a way that people who might not get where I’m coming from will #understand. but the problem with that is my explanations tend to be lengthy and I lose them either way 🗿#Im. trying to work on that using examples and stuff because they seem to work the best #but if I could write everything down on a word doc and beam it into your melon that would save both of us time and embarassment #im rambling the short version is I have adhd #yapping

67 notes · View notes

everythingsinred · 1 year ago

Text

Family and the Institution of Alice Academy

Was thinking about this ever since someone (I forgot specifically who, sorry) posed a question like this in the GA discord, asking about (I think) Natsume's extended family or something like that. It was a really interesting concept that I've been thinking a lot about since it was brought up, so here are the thoughts I've accumulated. I'll try to be concise but I have a LOT of thoughts and my brain is messy.

My general opinion at the end of all this thinking I did is that I don't think Academy students typically have very close familial ties after graduating.

I think the most apparent reason for that would be that students are expected to graduate when they are twenty years old. Our main four are exceptions to the rule, coming to the Academy pretty late in life. Most children are taken early, as toddlers or even babies. Natsume, Ruka, and Hotaru's families did all they could to avoid Academy scouting. Mikan was entirely accidental--if she had never met Hotaru, she might have never even found out she was an Alice to begin with. That being said, most kids were separated from their families at a very young age, only to be allowed to reunite with them once they're already adults. For many students, they've been away from their parents for close to two decades.

On top of that, the Academy doesn't allow visitations or phone calls and severely restricts letter communications. Only one child from each class is allowed to return home for one week each year, and that one week does not do much to make up for all the time spent at school.

My point is that by the time students are allowed to see their families again, that familial bond has already been severed, for all intents and purposes. That feeling of closeness and protection no longer exists. Students will feel more closeness and connection to their classmates and even to their teachers than to their parents or siblings, and as a result, I can imagine many graduates not even bothering to visit their families.

While I was pondering this, I made the connection between Academy students and the real life example of a similar situation with Janissaries from the Ottoman Empire. Basically, Janissaries were children stolen from the subjugated people under Ottoman rule. They were taken for the purpose of a "child levy", also known as a "blood tax." Some children were even willingly given by their families due to the possibility of socially advancing, and because the children were promised first class status (sound familiar?). Essentially the children were taken, forced to comply with Ottoman standards and traditions (including forced conversions and circumcisions), and then trained for military service. These soldiers would actually end up being incredibly loyal and efficient, despite likely never seeing their families again.

(Edit: forced circumcisions are particularly heinous when you consider that the children were typically at least 10 years old at the time they were taken.... so.... uh.... not pleasant.... But also interesting that the Janissaries were typically much older than the Alice children at the time of being taken.)

That level of separation doesn't endear ties; it severs them. These Janissaries--very often forcefully taken from their families--ended up growing up with very little connection to their parents or siblings. The feeling of belonging to their previous communities was gone. Absence does not always make the heart grow fonder. This was done as a means of creating a strong military force but also to disillusion subjugated communities and tear away their hope. Their children could always be taken; their communities could always be crushed, even without the use of physical force. It's a very effective tool to oppress a group of people.

(There's actually a lot of similarities between Academy children and Janissaries beside the separation of children from their families. They were also paid for their service and were high ranking; the Academy students are given an allowance and many of them, despite being stolen from their families, have a sense of superiority over non-Alices. They feel like they are treasures, and are of higher value and rank. Additionally, Academy students, especially in the DA class, are highly trained and efficient child soldiers, much like the Janissaries. Janissaries are actually a super interesting historical topic and are worth looking into!)

We can even see the effect of this distance when Yuka escapes the Academy and runs away to her family. Yuka was essentially sold to the Academy, with her parents trading her in exchange for money and status. She was very young, far too young to really understand that her parents had abandoned her. As a result, she romanticized her bond with them, and the longer she was separated from them, the more that bond became fantastical. She made many attempts to escape the school to reunite with her parents and she fantasized about seeing them again. When she finally is able to, it's nothing like she imagined. They're cold, and unfamiliar. They don't recognize her. She doesn't know her brothers. They're related, but there's no real connection.

"I shouldn't have come here."

Yuka's is an extreme example, but I'm sure she's not an exception. For most Academy students, the almost 20 years of separation from their parents would be too much to ignore. They would not recognize each other, or be close. I'm sure many parents did not sell their children like Yuka's family did, but the bond between child and family had not been nurtured the way it should have been, resulting in coldness and distance.

Because of that, I doubt most students even bother seeking their families out, or even if they do, it's to visit a few times before starting a new life with a career. That familial bond, now broken, is difficult to repair. The connections people often feel with their families or hometowns is something Academy students instead feel with each other. They are all Alices, all in the same boat together. That feeling of superiority that many kids feel means they view each other as on the same level, and I'm sure that could interfere with family connection as well.

Thus, I don't think there's many multigenerational Alice families out there with close bonds. I don't think families like Natsume's have strong ties with grandparents and aunts and uncles and cousins. Even the sibling bonds at the Academy are stunted, with the Imai and Shouda siblings being the prime examples of that.

The Imai siblings have a significant age difference, yes, but additionally the Imai parents had a very different approach to Hotaru after seeing what happened with Subaru. They refused to hand her over as easily, wanting to show her important things in life and build happy memories for as long as they could. Even when Hotaru does enter the school, it's more than six months before she even comes across her brother, since the high school and elementary school are not integrated with each other and they do not belong to the same ability class. Similarly, the Shouda siblings are in different ability classes but they have a much smaller age gap. Despite this, Sumire refers to her brother very respectfully, indicating that there isn't a particular closeness.

The Imais fight against this divide, and put in genuine effort into rebuilding their relationship, but it's a difficult process, and one they struggle to admit to for a long time and for various reasons. Familial closeness is not encouraged, not even within the Academy.

(Though Natsume's bond with Aoi is exploited and the school does rely on him caring for her to take advantage of him, but ultimately he is kept from seeing her. Thus, that bond is also severed despite being exploited.)

Additionally, it would make sense to me if many Alice graduates decided to, upon having children, avoid scouting, like Natsume's parents did, and thus ended up moving around a lot to escape Academy notice. Moving around like that and laying low means that you're not going to be hosting huge family reunions or inviting relatives over often, even if all the other points were moot.

Finally, I think all this creates further obstacles for Yuka's wish to "have a family." At some point she says that, for normal people, the desire to settle down with someone and start a family is a pretty modest goal, but for Alices it's almost impossible. Escaping from the school, or even graduating, is a struggle. And you can have a kid, but it's likely that child will be taken from you, just as you were taken, and by the time the child graduates, they will have no connection with you. Wanting to be a potential grandparent, for example, might seem like a definite impossibility, since being a real parent is impossible.

It's even more proof that the Academy exists as an institution to subjugate and undermine Alices, as children and then as parents. Ultimately, an Alice never has control, not as a child and not even as an adult. The pain doesn't end once you've graduated; in fact, it never does.

#gakuen alice #ga #my meta #ga meta #azumi yuka #hyuuga natsume #alice academy #yes there are kids who lose their alices and thus leave early #i think those kids might find more luck reestablishing familial bonds #also there seem to be a few powerful and intergenerational families within the alice system #but those families seem rather to be in control of the school... theyd be the puppetmasters essentially #and thus might not be as victimized as normal families like natsume's.... he clearly has no power or control in the alice world AT ALL.#so yes i think those big and powerful families are exceptionally rare and thus not as relevant to this post #theyre not 'subjugated' like most other alice families are... idk how else to phrase that #feel free to hmu with ur thoughts on this topic! its super fascinating to me as yet another example of the academys many atrocities #and one i hadnt even properly thought of to this degree until recently!#its so very fun to discover and consider new aspects of ga lore or implications in the story! i love it so much!#i just cant see myself ever getting tired of analyzing this manga #i didnt actually narrow in on any one character but yuka seems to be the best example of my points so i focus on her the most #if u want we can talk abt other characters and families and discuss how the academy affected those bonds!#what an interesting concept.... im having a blast thinking abt all this rn

32 notes · View notes

sieglinde-freud · 1 year ago

Text

if awakening ever gets a remake in the next twenty years or so my number one want is same sex marriage + still having kids but my number TWO want is a scene after lucina’s judgement where whoever is robin’s kid confronts lucina. bc like from a player’s stand point, or really even just from robin as a character, its really easy to understand lucina’s thought process, sympathize with her, and forgive her. but if you’re one of the future kids, you came back in time to save your parents (and the world i GUESS), and your friend decides that your parent, yours specifically, is expendable, thats kinda fucked up!! her thinking is valid and potentially correct from a logical standpoint, but looking at it from like morgan’s perspective, it might feel selfish or unwarranted.

but my other thing is, unless robin’s second kid is lucina (or they dont have one), i think using their other kid over morgan would be more impactful if only because morgan lost their memories of the past and doesnt have as strong of a connection with lucina as say, someone like gerome or cynthia does. if its chrom!morgan then yeah, theres the connection, but otherwise wouldnt it be fucking wild to see the perspective of someone who went back in time with their friend who promised to go back and save the world, only to find them pointing a sword at your fucking dad? literally insane where is this confrontation. number three want is fix chapter two’s map design

#fe13 #ann writing paragraphs #realistically this might break up the flow of the story so i can fully understand why it might not be able to ever be a thing #but its an idea thats been bouncing around in my head for years #personally im a robin!owain kinda girl and ive tried putting how the scene plays out in my head to paper but alas #ive never gotten it quite right #but i dont even think owain would be the most interesting scene #gerome severa laurent and cynthia i think would be the absolute craziest to see react to this #and chrom!morgan tbh. like i’d do a chrobin file just to see that #i just think the potential variability could be so fun. its like the chrom post gangrel fight marriage scene except angst #i rly do just love when media gives you a template that changes depending on who you use for it #love seeing how different character reactions can change the exact same scene #anyways ive spent a lot of time going through pc supports and seeing the small miniscule changes that happens depending on the parent #best example i have is how ignatius’s moms in fates change a small part of the B support. super fun btw #im getting off topic #BASICALLY throw some second gen tension in there!#maybe i’ll revist that idea for owain. idk. we’ll see #my problem is that im so deep in my own headcanons i’d find a way to shove chrom!inigo in there too when it’s absolutely unnecessary #its a problem. ik some of u have stumbled across my ao3 account and ive only got one awakening fic up there #and it wasnt even good that was a vent fic in the form of inigo from fire emblem #but let it be known my drafts are full of delusional little stories tailored to me and my very specific interpretations of awakening #i think my tags might be longer than the post. see this is why i have to shove my rambles in here #sorry!

25 notes · View notes

airenyah · 9 months ago

Text

so for the past 2ish years that i've been taking this thai course i've been the youngest participant by far and also (mostly) the only girl

and because of that, even tho it's an online course so we're not super close with each other, despite that i still often feel like i have a bit of a status as the group baby (affectionate). and it shows in moments like earlier in class when someone asked about the word "inspiration" and then, when asked to give an example sentence, without batting an eye went "[airenyah] is my inspiration to learn more thai"

y'all. this man is one of the best (if not THE best) student in our course 🥺

#our teacher will also often use my name in his example sentences #or when he's asking the class a question and nobody replies bc nobody has an idea he'll sometimes call on me specifically sjkkjsf #i'm shy but i also LOVE being the group baby ngl #this is the kind of attention that i like skdjkfgjkfd #stories from my thai class #airenyah plappert #btw this is a man who's like 60 lol i feel like the 35 year age difference makes this even more endearing kdfkkjg #also when he said that i started laughing and went ''i'm sorry?? is that so? kdfjkdfj'' and he laughed as well and said ''i'm just kidding'#it was very amusing dfjkdfkdf #like. i didn't think he was being truthful bc as i said he might as well be our best student in class #(or maybe him and me share the no. 1 spot idk. i feel like he's better than me tho)#but the fact that he dropped that as an example sentence without batting an eye had me all dfkjkjdfkjdfg

6 notes · View notes

lesbovalentine · 1 year ago

Text

im thinking about tehanu again

#my reading for lesbian class as i shall hereforth refer to it said smth abt how trying to approach conflict with violent #is seen by the authors as a patriarchal form of control and it made me think abt smth i read from le guin abt wanting woman protags and #heroes who arent just women in the roles of men and i was like skeptical of it i was like #does she mean women cant like fight or smth and i think tbh it cld be worth digging deeper into what she said bc idr exact quote #but rn im thinking she probably meant. along these lines #but i think. what i didnt really realize st the time i read the le guin piece im thinking of.#that she might be referring to like. making women knights and whatever in a very patriarchal world without examining what that really #entails like pretending ur world isnt misogynistic in x way without actually thinking too hard and doing very much to show this #u know? i think like for example. tamora pierces lionness books i liked in middle school theyre a whole thing to get into for several #reasons all by themselves LOL but the books r abt women heroes while writing within the familiar framework of a misogynistic world and what #it meant for whatever-her-name-is to become a woman knight after shes outed or whatever #idk id im actually getting to the point of my thoughts here LMAO im still. doing homework #but like anyways tehanus examination of the earthsea world le guin had subconsciously made so deeply misogynistic #is still really neat. i think that le guins right and that just going look the girls can be the hero swords wielder too! arent the only or #even always the best way to show that ‘girls can be heroes too’ idea

10 notes · View notes

coolerdracula · 10 months ago

Text

I've also been thinking about systems with introjects with sources that are "problematic" in prominent, all-consuming ways, and the main thing is that you can't choose what you introject, but you can choose how you portray it to the outside world, and how much you communicate how comfortable you are with the actions associated with the source character. and that can say things

#bearer of the curse #this might sound like I'm vaguing about someone but it's more of a cumulative thing that I think about sometimes and am now posting bc -#-ritalin makes me more talkative #by prominent all consuming ways I mean like. idk. roy from fma. hard to separate him from the war crimes. not the best example but I don't #- want to say the char I was talking about earlier bc then it Will look like I'm vaguing about someone. he is a good example though :P #wait no it wont look like it bc there are So Many blogs I have seen with that source char and weird behavior irt the literal eugenics

4 notes · View notes

selfinflictedgunshotwound · 1 year ago

Text

i think i've finally come to understand why i'm so bad at communicating with friends 👍 at one point or another i've thought i was in love with every single person i've ever been friends with (for the most part, at least) because i don't expect other people to like me. OBVIOUSLY this is not true but platonic feelings are not dissimilar to romantic ones (baseline they're the same: you want to love and be loved by someone) but i always end up realizing that i'm not in love with them, just that they matter to me very much and i wouldn't know what do to w/o their presence in my life. BUT this brings me to facet number 2 of my awful communication skills: i hate it when things Get Real. i find myself retreating any time it seems like Something Could Change in my day-to-day life due to them being around and "forcing" the change. i run away from talking to one of my only irl friends on almost a daily basis bc i dread the idea of having to do anything she might want me to do. i think, at the end of the day, my problem might just be that i don't want to change... ANYWAYS

#i actually think the funniest example of this comes from the irl guy friend i think i actually DO have romantic feelings for #i never used to have feelings for him but i always kind of nursed the idea of such a thing (as i said i think i could be in love with most #friends before i realize i'm not - but with him specifically i never had a moment where i realized i... wasn't?) also my previously #aforementioned irl friend kind of insinuated he might have feelings for me or we might end up with one another and now every time i think #abt him i think about THAT so.#anyways a few years ago he came by my house and picked me up and we got ice cream and talked for hours bc we have a lot in common #and he actually manages to keep in contact with me despite how hard it is (how hard i make it) to talk to me on a consistent basis lol #like we don't talk a LOT but he's also the one who convinced me to contact my former other irl best friend that i hadn't talked to in 6 yrs #anyways back to what i was talking abt from a few years ago... it was 4 yrs ago at this point but after the ice cream - i got a job #and we talked a lot - he took me and my irl bff out but she had a HUGE fight with her bf and he tracked her down and it was. a disaster #but after that they made up (lucikly she broke up with him not too long after lmao) but me and him were put in the middle of it #and anyways we went to the mall with the annoying couple LMAO but we broke off and it was just... really nice to be with him?#and then we went to walmart and rented a movie and went back to my irl's apartment and i tried to dye his hair in her bathroom LMAO #and it just felt really natural to be close to him and whatnot. we really get along and i really don't dislike him and i'm not NOT into him #but yeah anyways a few days later he messaged me and asked if he could pick me up from work but i told him no because at that point i was.#afraid. because i had a dream that i had kissed hik and he turned into rick sanchez and drowned LMFAOOO IT SOUNDS RETARDED BUT.#like i think the point of the dream was that if i showed him that i had some kind of feelings for him he would change or die or disappear?#i always assume the worst. but yeah the dream literally put me off so bad that i cut contact with him for almost 2 years #because i was afraid of him and i was afraid of my life changing #idk. maybe i should give it a try now. i'm still scared but you never know.#i at least wanna say 'thanks' for him convincing me to message my friend from 6 years ago so 🤷‍♀️ who knows

5 notes · View notes

wileyfern · 1 year ago

Text

people who've gone to a renaissance faire before where do you get your clothes?

#i wanna dress up but idk where to find things #i know thrifting might be the best #and any ideas for what to go as or some examples so i can go off of them

3 notes · View notes

hoot-h00t · 1 year ago

Text

so turns out. finding out the thing you’ve been varying levels of paranoid about the past couple years wasn’t paranoia at all really sucks. :(

#turns out sometimes people really don’t want to keep being friends with you or be around you!#which is valid and whatever but. sucks to be told otherwise to your face and find out later that that wasn’t the case #also sucks to just. not know why.#not that there HAS to be a REASON ofc i don’t think i’m entitled to any of my relationships and in fact work pretty hard about it #but it’s still idk. disheartening #i feel like it’s pretty obvious to those who know me by this point that straightforwardness is best #i either might not pick up on something or be paranoid about things forever and either way it just seems #like it would be so much easier and less painful if everyone could just be honest about their feelings #which of course i know is easier said than done and don’t claim to be a superior example of #but :(((#also. embarassing to cry a little in the midst of a busy happy hour

2 notes · View notes

vamptastic · 2 months ago

Text

i'm very far past arguing about it anymore but i still think the term pansexual is stupid. it'd be one thing if it was a simple reworking of the term to have more accurate etymology, like phasing out transsexual and transvestite in favor of transgender and gender non-conforming. you should still let people use the old term if they want, but coming up with a new one that conveys the meaning more precisely is fine.

but instead it seemed to be suggested as an entirely newly coined thing of its own. which is ridiculous, because it means the exact same thing that the term bisexual has meant for as long as the word has existed- being attracted to men, women, and people of other genders. and of course it implies that bisexual people have a sexuality exclusive of nonbinary people, which obviously has just never been the case, beyond individual bigots. if i call a historical figure bisexual, i generally mean they expressed attraction to men and to women at the same time, OR that they dated someone of an indeterminate gender, OR sometimes that they continued a romantic relationship with somebody through a gender transition. like, that's what the term means, it is identical to pansexuality in terms of who you might actually date or have sex with.

the only place where the terms ever diverge is that sometimes people say bisexuals are attracted to people with gender as a component, so, say someone who is only into a specific type of woman and a specific type of man. while a pansexual would date lots of different sorts of people within the male and female gender, or one type of person across multiple genders. but that's retroactively applying a new definition to bisexual than how people used it before. it's nicer than saying that bisexuality must actually mean bigotry due to its etymology, but it's still using an inaccurate definition that nobody has ever used until you decided it meant that.

basically i think the term was created because bisexual history is difficult to research and most people are entirely unaware that it even exists to be read about in the first place. so instead, people looked at the most literal etymological meaning of the term and decided that definitely must be what people mean when they say bisexual, so let's invent a new sexuality that includes more than two genders.

some people call themselves pansexual because they just like how the word sounds better, which is fine. i also don't care about stuff like omnisexual multisexual etc, it's true that bisexual has a misleading etymology. but generally when i ask somebody why they prefer that term they misdefine bisexuality to explain it. and that greatly frustrates me, because it is not particularly difficult to find writing from the 70s where bisexuality is clearly defined. it's like saying lesbians need to call themselves femalesexual because the root of the word implies they're from the island of lesbos. it's stupid.

basically i don't care what you call yourself, but don't misrepresent what another term means to justify it, just because you don't know anything about bisexual history.

#this is repetitive and poorly written but as i said im not super passionate about this so im not gonna bother editing it #if anyone is pan and like very upset by this please know i genuinely do not mind whatever terms u use for yourself #i think neogenders and microlabels are perfectly fine and you should call yourself whatever you like the best #i simply do not want to see bisexuality misrepresented and misdefined to defend the use of a new label #also idk if transsexual was a good example to use here idk #honestly i like the term transsexual and i wish it was around more #because as somebody who is mostly transitioning due to physical gender dysphoria more so than a strong #internal sense of gender. i do like what the term communicates- a literal change of sex. i more so happen to be male than feel innately mal #but at the same time i would still want to socially transition if physical transition was totally unavailable. so transgender is also fine #i just think having both terms around is actually better bc some people WOULD consider themselves solely transgender #and some might even consider themselves solely transsexual if say you want the full physical transition package #but consider yourself to still be your assigned gender at birth #basically new terms are good shitting on old terms is generally bsd #at least when WE made the terms for ourselves or generally have a positive opinion of them #words like retarded or offensive names for medical conditions are a bit different bc the affected people don't always get to self #identify. or if they do it's because there's no other term available and when new ones arise they prefer those. obviously it depends tho #like i prefer fat over euphemistic language. it directly communicates what i am without implying it is inherently unhealthy #terms like overweight and obese are overly negative but terms like heavy large plump etc are too vague #but i totally get why other people want to use other terms #idk. tldr use what you want just don't knock older terms unless they have a genuinely horrific history #or carry exclusively a negative connotation both to call others and to call yourself

0 notes