#sorry if this comes off as stupid

[apolloenjoyer]

Question for the Morpheus worshippers out there, what items do you use for worship? What stones or decorations are suffice? What about herbs? I need help

[phoenxwright]

happy birthday my sweet prince 🎂

and others

[canisalbus]

As a survivor of abuse I relate to Machete so much. I've always felt unclean for no reason except being told I was unclean, and it made me feel worthless or revolting by default. Like, no matter what I did I would be filthy and unpleasant to be around.

Seeing that he can be loved, makes me feel like maybe I could be loved too.

.

[annt-i]

I start school up in TWO DAYS ,, but anyways; hit this request when you can or when you want, anyway.

We need more Alex Rider in School, he’s always in school which end up in bad situations in the series.

I NEED HIM WHIPPING UP THE MOST JUICY PAINTING OF ONE OF HIS MISSIONS, ASAP !!!!

I hope this is what you meant dawg, I've got Alex painting that scene from Point Blanc where Greif was telling him he is going to be dissected. I also hope school's been alright for you so far.

[froschli96]

You know what, fuck it, I have to speak my truth! (this is gonna be a rant, so anyone who actually likes assassin's creed revelations and/or the secret crusade, be warned or maybe don't read this at all)

remember how altaïr talks to king richard at the end of ac1, and richard is like "[humans] come into the world kicking and screaming, violent and unstable. it is what we are. we cannot help ourselves."? and how altaïr answers "no. we are what we choose to be." and how that ACTUALLY has meaning bc he himself was "violent and unstable" at the beginning of the game but he has learned and is now CHOOSING to be a better person who cares about others and humanity at large? remember how his calmness and gentleness was something that he ACQUIRED over the course of the story?

and remember how in revelations they then suddenly had a PRE-AC1 altaïr say about the first of his targets "no man should pass from this world without knowing some kindness." and be all wise and calm and collected during a nice little chat with al mualim, who suddenly acts all fatherly? (like, this is suddenly supposed to be a positive relationship? what??)

also, during the confession the target says to altair: "you put too much faith in the hearts of men, altaïr. [...] humans are weak, base, and petty." and altaïr answers: "no. our creed is evidence to the contrary." KJASJFJDKL???? like, it’s almost insulting how close this exchange is to the one with richard. you know, the one that was actually earned after a whole game of character development. like WTF??? cool congrats now that development means nothing. like, apparently that was just altaïr reverting BACK to being the exemplary assassin who understands and believes in the creed that he was apparently just born as. (i also hate how having a young inexperienced altaïr saying this implies that altaïr's faith in humanity is a sign of naivete instead of a sign of the wisdom he has gained after being confronted with counter arguments for a whole game, and also something that distinguishes the assassins from the templars who use humanity's supposed wickedness to justify controlling them like in AC1, but whatever)

altaïr’s development in AC1 mattered BECAUSE he is not NATURALLY a good person, it actually said something about humanity's capacity for both bad AND good and how humans don't have to be forced to be good through mind control bc they can by their own free will choose to be better when taught how and when allowed the freedom to grow. but no. apparently altaïr has just always been calm, wise and gentle. and he just sort of forgot about that during AC1 bc…. ? bc of adha?? bc of abbas???

oh don’t get me started on the whole abbas thing. (it doesnt even make sense that abbas is so hung up about his father and "his family’s honor", like what about the whole point of al mualim not allowing parents to be close to their children bc it would make them weak? like, my dude, you’re not supposed to HAVE any family aside from the brotherhood)

they used the throwaway character that had like 5 lines and made him into altaïr’s main antagonist in revelations… like, abbas wasn’t supposed to be this ONE dude who had personal beef with altaïr, he was just supposed to show how while altaïr’s revered by many, a lot of his brothers also hate him, bc 1) altaïr is a shitty person at this point and 2) bc there’s no real feeling of community and family in this version of the brotherhood, but just a pervasive sense of competition and jealousy — these assassins don’t care about their goal of safeguarding humanity bc they’re too hung up on petty squabbles and divided by rivalries (you know, the things that made malik hate altaïr even before solomon’s temple and that he overcomes in the end which enables him to forgive and to reconcile with altaïr so they can work together and stop al mualim? (you ever just think about "we are one. as we share the glory of our victories, so too should we share the pain of our defeat. in this way we grow closer. we grow stronger." and cry? bc i do. all the time. malik, the man that you are))

and now abbas is altaïr’s childhood best friend turned lifelong enemy?? like, bowden bent over backwards to come up with an explanation for why altaïr is an arrogant ass at the beginning of AC1, when the explanation is right there: he was raised to kill without asking questions and was constantly praised for how good he is at murder, which resulted in him becoming arrogant and disregarding human life. like, it doesn’t have to be some shakespearean family feud type shit. and guess what, this "simple" explanation actually plays into the story’s themes, who’da thunk!

(like, abbas might not have been a "fleshed out" character in AC1, but he had a specific function and now that function is gone. mr bowden, mr mcdevitt, you know characters are allowed to simply exist to tell us something about their worlds and the systems they live in and sometimes that’s more important and also more interesting than having every single character have a detailed backstory to explain all their behaviors, right?)

with all of this revelations loses all nuance in regards to the levantine brotherhood and also the creed in general. like, altaïr being a master assassin at the beginning despite being a terrible person and not actually understanding the creed is a criticism of the brotherhood and the creed itself. like, it said something about the order that someone like altaïr was able to get that high in rank, simply bc he's good at killing, which also tells us what is considered important in the al mualim era assassin order. when you make altaïr’s arrogance the result of his personal conflicts instead of how we was raised by a brotherhood that only valued one's ability to kill, you lose that characterization of the assassin order itself!

and by suddenly making al mualim a semi good "father figure" you also downplay his manipulation of not only altaïr but all those under his care. (altaïr says something about al mualim being "as a father" to him exactly twice in the codex, but he doesn’t mean by that that he WAS a father to him, what he means is that he was the CLOSEST THING he had bc HE DID NOT HAVE PARENTS, not because his mother died in childbirth and his father was executed when he was young btw, BUT BECAUSE IT WASN’T ALLOWED, like his parents actually lived but weren’t allowed to be close to him, he says he came to view al mualim’s "weak and dishonest" love as enough and even better BECAUSE HE HAD NOTHING ELSE, BECAUSE AL MUALIM ISOLATED HIS ASSASSINS FROM THEIR FAMILIES. al mualim "loved" him bc he was good at killing people for him! hm, i wonder if this could be trying to say anything about cults and indoctrination and the inherent contradiction in fighting for peace and free will by taking children away from their parents and raising them to become killers?? like, altaïr wasn't ~the special orphan boy~ taken in by al mualim bc his father died a hero's death, it was "the way of the order" to have al mualim be the closest thing to a parental figure for everyone to ensure absolute loyalty! altaïr saying al mualim was like his father is not supposed to make you go "oh, he must have actually been a good guy for altaïr to consider him a father", it should make you go "oh that's kinda fucked up that he considers the dude who made him into a killing machine and who manipulated him a sort of father figure"!)

and then in revelations they suddenly portray that relationship as positive and healthy??? like, it would be one thing to give it some nuance by delving into the psychology behind al mualim’s "love" and maybe showing how al mualim did care about altair in a complicated, fraught sort of way (like, you know, there’s a lot of interesting things you could say about al mualim at several points addressing altaïr as "my child" in AC1 and how that parallels Garnier referring to the people he drugged and abused as his "children", and what that says about how the templars view the people who they say they want to save and in whose best interests they supposedly act (in any case, al mualim doesn’t use that phrase because he has any real parental feelings but rather to patronize and to invalidate any objections, like in a "mother knows best" way))

but they even fucking DARE to parallel that relationship with that of altaïr and darim in revelations, by having the reflection in the puddle of darim hugging altaïr showing altaïr hugging al mualim…. like their relationship wasn’t inherently abusive but just tragically cut short because al mualim was just "corrupted by the apple"… like WHAT???? so it’s not the very real problems like grooming, manipulation and indoctrination and the hierarchical structure of the brotherhood itself (all of which are antithetical to the assassin ideology), it was just the evil apple all along. great. that’s DEFINITELY a lot more interesting.

god im sorry i really dont want to spread negativity but this is driving me INSANE. like, somebody please tell me im not crazy bc i feel like somehow most of the fandom is in agreement that revelations and the secret crusade have better storytelling and characterization than ac1.

SPEAKING OF WHICH, can we talk about how, even IF we completely ignore AC1 and treat revelations altaïr as his own character…. the narrative still doesn’t really work?

basically, the whole point of his story in rev is that "he gave his whole life to the brotherhood", this obsession led to him not using his time with his family which has him ending up dying alone in a dark library and this in turn makes ezio reevaluate his life choices…. except. he doesn’t? neglect? his family? or whatever? like, his devotion to the assassins is sort of painted as this tragic flaw that leads to a lonely death bc it supposedly comes at the cost of his family, but… his wife has joined the assassins, (at least) one of his sons is in the brotherhood and even when he goes to protect the assassins against the mongols, he takes his family with him (except for the son who stays behind bc he has a family of his own and who, ironically, ends up dying bc of that)… like, you can’t describe altaïr as a good husband and father in the database and have his son tell him that "everything that is good in me began with you, father" when they say goodbye, and then want to make us believe that he put his family behind the brotherhood and that that is a character flaw that leads to his tragedy.

because you HAVE to have a character’s tragedy be the result of a character flaw. like. that is how tragedies work. otherwise it just becomes tragedy for the sake of tragedy which is… boring bc it has no purpose. and we know it is SUPPOSED to have purpose bc ezIO FUCKING QUITS BEING AN ASSASSIN AFTER WITNESSING IT!

it’s like they want to have their cake and eat it, too — they didn’t want to actually make altaïr a bad husband/father, but still wanted to make his life a tragedy where he loses his family which is why instead they outsource all responsibility to abbas who now has to be the reason for ALL the deaths.

like, they try to make at least maria’s death kind of sort of the result of altaïr’s rashness or whatever but like… these guys KILLED THEIR SON and TOLD HIM THAT ALTAÏR HAD ORDERED HIS DEATH. like, altaïr losing it in response to that is not rash, it’s fucking logical and justified! if anything the scene made me angry at maria for trying to stop him. like, GIRL, he was YOUR son too??? but god forbid we give female characters actual real emotions, she has to fill the role of "voice of reason who dies for altaïr’s man pain" i fucking guess.

like, it’s this weird mix where his tragedy is simultaneously painted as his own fault but also not really bc abbas is the one responsible for all the shit that happens. it just… it just doesn’t really go together.

the only way to make his story make sense narratively and to give it actual purpose is by looking at it in the context of ezio’s story, bc the things he sees in altaïr’s memories are supposed to be a revelation (ha!) to ezio specifically. and i guess that’s maybe the crux of it all — altaïr’s story in revelations was conceived of first and foremost to support ezio’s story and development. which is probably also why many people maybe don’t notice bc, having skipped ac1 and started with ac2, the majority of people mostly care only about ezio and only really appreciate altaïr’s story in as far as it serves to push ezio forward. (tho i’ve also seen a few people say that ezio is also written kind of weird in rev, but i’ve never really been an ezio girly myself so i can’t speak to the truth of that)

like, altaïr dying alone in the library doesn’t really have to make sense for his character, i guess, bc it’s only really supposed to be a cautionary tale for ezio.

so, i guess, for once, they actually had a MAN dying for another man’s character development, which is pretty woke actually. ubisoft, i take everything back jksdsfjhgdsahfhsdhfghfdsgjhsdgjh

[bigmammallama5]

nothing like taking your car in to get brakes replaced only for the cost to double bc the mechanic found something else the dealership didn't "find" that genuinely needs to be fixed

[justewil]

this has probably been pointed out So Many times before but in eternal diva you can see some of the feathers come off descole's feather boa :)

which .i just think it's a really nice attention to detail ok

i don't know how i only just saw this after watching this movie (checks notes) 187 times

[tswwwit]

i have a counter argument to the 'only one person can boop bill' thing, mabel. she's the type of person to slap stickers on people, she would definitely be the type to also boop others occasionally and bill would be no exception. she probably doesn't do it to annoy bill like dipper would, but maybe as a form of a friendly gesture, kind of like those people who will lightly punch friends in the arm when they hang out.

You know what? Good point. Mabel would get away with more than most, as a fun-loving lady! Bill understands those impulses, and being a touchy person! He indulges in similar ones himself.

Though when Bill's not in the mood to be playful and gets booped anyway? The 'sister-in-law' status grants her considerable grace.

[sciderman]

I swear I have read your big post regarding Peter Parker's neurodivergence and why it is best to avoid labelling him, but he definitely has a weird brain

Can't find it and feel kinda sad about it cuz I deeply related to it

i know exactly which post you're talking about and i can't find it either! i've raked through my archive, and it's just - nowhere to be seen. i think tumblr eated it (it happens.)

really, tumblr's search functionality is so so useless, i don't know what to tell you. there are plenty of keywords i can search to find it that post, but the search functionality actually just does not work!

undiagnosed audhd-addled peter parker, my darling, my light, my life, my everything.

i think peter parker's such an interesting creature to write, because a lot of people will point to a certain behaviour about him and say "this is an autistic thing, right?" but a lot of those behaviours are actually, in my head, tied to certain traumas in peter's life too.

people say "oh, the food thing, peter's a picky eater because he's autistic" and yes, absolutely. but also it's tied to his trauma with his parents.

peter gets overstimulated, and yes, it's an autism thing, but also he was bitten by a radioactive spider and his senses are dialled to 11.

it's a similar case i've found for myself, too – where a lot of friends i have kind of diagnose me because i have autistic traits, but actually - i'm hesitant to claim the label or pursue diagnosis because, actually, i know where these certain behaviours come from, and they come from certain traumas. there are events i can pinpoint in my life and say "yep. that's where this behaviour comes from."

so - i think there's a lot of overlap between trauma and autistic traits. the brain is very complex! i think the reason for that overlap is maybe as simple as the fact that people with autism and people with trauma are both doing the same thing - developing behaviours to protect themselves or soothe themselves. so - i think it's nice to be able to see a character like peter parker, who may or may not be autistic, but recognise behaviours in him and see yourself in him.

people who go undiagnosed for whatever reason - people who are really good at masking - so good, in fact, that they have no idea they might be on the spectrum - everyone and anyone at all can look at peter parker and recognise themselves. because i think we discredit the thought that every single brain does the same thing! develops certain behaviours in order to survive. every brain has that same software - we've just all been faced with different hardships that we need to overcome, and that's were all the differences come in.

autism is a spectrum, i guess - everyone falls into it to some degree. and i think events in your life probably push you along on it. but i don't know, i didn't study brain science. probably what i'm saying is very stupid and uninformed. of course there's brain chemistry involved. but i know people in my life living with autism and certain events in their life have exacerbated certain behaviours or made coping with it a lot more difficult. so maybe trauma is a catalyst.

[diospore]

*post claims "this artist fetishizes trans people"*

*looks the artist up*

*the artist is trans*

[shiikiyun]

people into the heavily symbolic media when the media is heavily symbolic

im sorry but ill just never buy into this narrative. you dont have to agree with me when i say i forgive him or talk about the sympathetic traits i find in him but on this case i just cannot be swayed and im not taking talk backs. it doesnt make sense for his character nor for the story and theres a very easy very interesting interpretation of that frame anyway (he sees the funeral from the outside through his phone because his crime was entirely online and, unlike the other characters, there isnt a set location for anything pre/during/post murder. cause it was in his phone)

and on a personal opinion. taking this so literally and SWEARING up and down he physically showed up to the girl's house kind of defeats the whole point of his themes. every character has set themes and a societal problematic they represent (haruka- child neglect, the result of abandoning and outcasting someone from society all their life. shidou- dubious medical decisions, the ethics of very specific situations in the medical field. mikoto- overworking and masking, the consequences of a society that forces its people to conform to a norm, etc) and futa's is the mob mentality and shield enforced by social media that can easily corrupt anyone at all no matter how pure or noble their initial intentions/morals are. its about the twitter users that will kickstart harrassment campaigns before fact checking or over the most innocuous things (see: kpoptwt currently making up the most gross allegations en masse about the group lesserafim because of a made up rivalry with their label mate newjeans). if futa breached that line between online and real life by physically showing up to his victim's house (be it before or after the fact) the initial themes fall apart. cause then he's dangerous in. real. life.

at that point, what story do we want to tell? why is it that we need futa to be this horrible when his actions online are enough for people to be unable to forgive him? lets sit back for a second and question ourselves on the reason we have to turn him into a creep and believe he became a threat in real life to justify disproving his actions. why we cant simply judge him from his online behavior, that caused much harm than he couldve done in a face-to-face argument. cause that is the excuse people online will use. theyre not hurting anyone in real life, so why should their posts online define their character?

pd: you can bring up the fact that his professor situation was in real life. and youre correct. but that part of the story can easily be placed as the only needed merge of realities for his case: he didnt actually confront the professor, the university isnt as private of a place as a family house so he still has some anonimity (he made the post, but who took the picture? u could not tell if he did it himself or got it from other sources, we just know bc we saw it). not to mention it still correlates: hes brave through the screen, but a complete coward in the flesh. he took a picture of the scene whilst hiding and did nothing to stop it. as much as denouncing the professor is a good thing (and the only good thing he does in the mv), he was still a coward. as ive already explained, mixing the online actions with forced real life ones in the actual murder case he has misses this point

[scopophobia-polaris]

The fact I have to boot up totk AGAIN, honest to God yall after I make this one fuckass post it is au only I am not doing zelda discourse no more

[maxpadelchampion]

is lando like…. committed to having the most number of haters…???? what is going inside of his head????

[quietmonologues]

From my little perch on the outskirts of this fandom, seeing questions like “why do you ship these characters together when they don’t like each other?” or “how can you like this person when they did this bad thing?” (even though so many of this fandom's popular characters did terrible things or popular ships started off as hostile…) makes me believe that ACOTAR seems to be a lot of people’s introduction to young adult (YA) fiction, and their accompanying literary, character, and romantic relationship tropes. And because of that, this fandom seems really “young” yes in terms of demographics, but also in the sense that notions such as nuance and not taking things at face value are seemingly new concepts...maybe? There’s just something so “juvenile” and "robotic" about this fandom, and I think it would be interesting to dig deep into why that is.

I know that the series saw a huge spike in popularity due to tiktok aka “booktok” and because that platform is primarily geared towards teenagers and young adults, I do think that is one factor for why the ACOTAR fandom is “young”. That’s not to say that booktok is exclusive to young people, and that’s not to say that all of booktok is “toxic” since I’ve watched some great ACOTAR analysis videos there. However, in looking at the broader world of that platform, I see posts like this one and this one that basically outline the notion that booktok is basically “for the aesthetics”. Booktok promotes the type of reading that is quick and surface-level, and I think that perpetuates this confusion some fans have when things “go against the grain” from what's in front of them in the text such as, a group of fans liking a character who the narrative deems as “bad” or shipping two characters who are seemingly disinterested in each other and barely interact in the story. But there's nothing really confusing about those opinions…we just need to not read so fast, I think! So in a way, booktok is sort of like an introduction to a fandom space (again maybe many people's first fandom!) that exists without nuanced discussions and simply takes things at face value in order to satiate that quick rush.

I know not every fan is coming from booktok and being influenced by those trends. So then I also think about SJM as a writer and how this series is sprinkled with moments of “tell don’t show”, contradictions, and lack of nuance (like when a character says something contradictory to what was previously written in the narrative or when the narrative deems one character’s actions as “good” while condemning another’s actions as “bad”, even though they both performed similar acts). This type of writing makes reading easier to digest maybe, but I think it also allows (and maybe even encourages) readers to not think as critically as they probably should because again, it's “quick reading” and it’s easy to miss out on moments that don’t make sense. I think with the way SJM writes these books, we’re not meant to call into question some of those contradictions, especially when they are not acknowledged by the narrative. We casually believe that a character is “terrible” because SJM says so, even though they really aren't upon deeper introspection. So a lot of the initial reading is really “flat” and it contributes to that missing nuance.

I also see the “youth” of this fandom through the shipping. I do think the “ship war” contributes to warping a reader’s perception of events and characterizations in order to justify why one ship is better than the other. And going back to taking things at face value, there’s this interesting notion that if two characters like each other, then that’s it, there are no second chances for them to find a different romantic partner. It’s surface-level and it’s a silly thought to me because romance (in fiction and in real life) isn't always so cut and dry, so linear. There are countless YA fiction where a character doesn't always end up with the character they were initially attracted to. It's such a common trope and it begs the question of if ACOTAR is a reader’s first introduction to shipping, YA (or general) romance tropes and how formulaic they can be sometimes. I think the fandom being appalled by some of the ships (whether fanon or crack ships) shows a bit of that juvenile mentality too because sometimes…the shipping isn't meant to be that deep.

I will say that not turning things over in your mind or thinking critically isn't always a bad thing per se, because sometimes we don't want to think; we just want to turn our brains off and freely read the text. I have those moments too. But when it comes to discussions (which I think is crucial in fandom spaces) we run into so much hypocrisy and “bad takes”, and it just creates a pool of frustration within the fandom space. I think everyone should know that criticism is not negativity, and that we can question what we read while still loving it. That's all okay, we don't need to mindlessly adhere to everything in a book just because we're trying to follow trends on booktok or because the narrative says so or because we need our favourite ship to be superior. We're not mindless robots and we're not little children, but the fandom does come off as childish sometimes…

[fuckingfandomfreak]

Bro I saw that you said Arthur was in the right to kill that king in s4 (I forgot his name) and YESSSS omg everyone is always like it was wrong but I can never see how and I was starting to go crazy.

Genuinely, that episode irks me like nothing else. It drives me fucking CRAZY. Like it’s a perfectly good episode that I can’t enjoy bc it MAKES NO SENSE. I feel gaslit

Not even just bc im an Arthur girlie (but I am), but bc everyone fucking acted like executing the other king was a crazy decision that started a war. The show had me agreeing with AGRAVAINE 🤮🤢

Like just genuinely, from a normal perspective, King Carleon INVADED Camelot (not even the borders but deep into Camelot; they said in the episode) and took territory. That’s an act of war. Everyone in that episode (and eventually Arthur) acts like Arthur started a war, but Carleon did. You can’t invade another country and just expect the king to let you go. That’s crazy!!! It makes no sense 😭

And you got everyone telling Arthur that he shouldn’t murder a man in cold blood and that’s not like him, and then Annis calling Arthur a coward for executing her husband, and suddenly it’s Arthur’s fault there’s a war. When Carleon invaded another country and just expected to get off with a wrist slap????

Arthur was even better than he should’ve been about it. Carleon had to either secede land to Arthur as punishment for invading Arthur’s land multiple times (they mentioned Carleon kept taking border towns but this time was different bc this was little in the center of the country) or lose his head. And Carleon decided to lose his head, and everyone was up Arthur’s ass being like “Carleon would never agree to those terms. This is just an excuse to behead him,” and expect us to feel bad for CARLEON???

Like too bad, so sad, don’t invade other countries. Why was agravaine the only one speaking common sense?? Arthur had to be harsh with him bc Arthur kept sparing Carleon before and Carleon kept invading. And Arthur letting Carleon go with a slap on the wrist would’ve just shown every other king that he was a bitch, and they could keep invading Camelot until they succeed without any repercussions. Yes, Arthur should’ve killed Carleon. Obviously, Queen Annis was going to retaliate, but that’s not his fault. He didn’t start this. Carleon did.

It’s this weird thing that the show does where they have like zero tolerance for war, but they just makes everyone look like idiots. I love a good anti-war message, but the show wasn’t going for that. It just had stupid lessons. Like the multiple times some foreign king was going something shady, and Merlin went crazy trying to fix what they were doing while also keeping it a secret bc if Arthur or Uther found out, they would’ve started a war.

But a foreign king deliberately sabotaging a peace treaty bc he wanted two kings at the peace treaty to fight so that he could profit from the destruction is an act of war. It’s stupid to me not to tell anybody bc now Camelot just has an untrustworthy and shady ally.

[lyss-butterscotch]

Ah yes being an introvert and difficulty remembering faces is not a good mix