#sorry the citing is inconsistent

[theplasticman]

The Drama of Skyler White

Breaking Bad (2008-2013), prod. Gilligan | Othello (4.3.23-25), Shakespeare | Ophelia, John Everett Millais (1852) | The Last Duel (2021) dir. Ridley Scott | Othello (2.3.60-61), Shakespeare | The Tale of the Two Brothers (8,5) trans. University of Houston | "Sexual Violence in Serial Form: Breaking Bad habits on TV". Feminist Media studies 2019:1, p. 125. Stuart Joy | The Execution of Lady Jane Grey, Paul Delaroche 1833 | “Old Man,” Stella Donnelly |

[volfoss]

im very normal about media i assure you

[captainlordauditor]

That’s weird because in my copy Babs breaks up with him in #87 of Nightwing and he’s raped in #93

Yknow, i always thought it was genuinely insane how people laugh at the time when Cass threw Dick out a window.

Bc, like, iirc Barbara dumped Dick because she saw Dick being SA'd by Tarantula (non-consensually kissed) and went "he's cheating on me!"

So like. The whole reason Cass threw Dick out a window is bc Barbara dumped him for being SA'd, if I have my timeline correct.

And uh... how the fuck is that funny?? It's actually kinda messed up imo. Granted in-universe you can't really blame Cass bc iirc she didn't have the full picture, but still.

Its just... it's not funny to me and I don't see why people think it's hilarious

[velvet4510]

A Very-Long Untangling Analysis of the Fox X-Men Continuity

Here’s my attempt at making sense of it all. All of my thoughts and ideas about continuity discrepancies and time travel piled up in one big info dump.

Please bear in mind that this interpretation is heavily biased in favor of the Days of Future Past Rogue Cut and against Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix, which hopefully won’t cause too much upset.

It also mentions Cherik as if it’s official canon because duh.

It also will cite links to various other posts I’ve made in the past which support my claims.

It also is gonna get long. Very long. Very very very very long. So proceed at your own risk.

So here’s my thesis:

The series depicts 8 separate timelines within 3 different universes.

UNIVERSE 1

Timeline 1: First Class (Charles & Erik are lovers in 1962; Moira recalls some events) ➡️ Origins: Wolverine ➡️ X-Men ➡️ X2 ➡️ The Last Stand ➡️ The Wolverine ➡️ Days of Future Past Rogue Cut dark future

Timeline 2 (divergence of Timeline 1): First Class (Charles & Erik are lovers in 1962; Moira recalls some events) ➡️ Days of Future Past Rogue Cut 1973 events ➡️ Erik remains true to himself in the aftermath ➡️ Days of Future Past new 2023 with history-teacher Logan

UNIVERSE 2

Timeline 3: Events similar to the OG trilogy ➡️ Deadpool ➡️ Deadpool 2 Original Events (Russell becomes a killer) ➡️ Logan ➡️ The New Mutants ➡️ Cable’s family dies ➡️ Laura gets pruned

Timeline 4 (divergence of Timeline 3): Deadpool ➡️ Deadpool 2 main events (Cable time-travels, Vanessa dies, Wade stops Russell and dies)

Timeline 5 (divergence of Timeline 4): Deadpool ➡️ Deadpool 2 climactic time-travel (Cable saves Wade)

Timeline 6 (divergence of Timeline 3): Deadpool ➡️ Deadpool 2 post-credits scene (Wade saves Vanessa) ➡️ Deadpool & Wolverine

UNIVERSE 3

Timeline 7: First Class (Charles & Erik remain just friends; Moira recalls nothing) ➡️ Events similar to OG trilogy ➡️ DOFP Theatrical Cut dark future

Timeline 8 (divergence of Timeline 7): First Class (Charles & Erik remain just friends; Moira recalls nothing) ➡️ DOFP Theatrical Cut 1973 events ➡️ Erik betrays his values and settles down with Magda ➡️ Apocalypse (part or all dream) ➡️ Dark Phoenix (dream)

Now I will elaborate.

TIMELINES VS UNIVERSES

First off, “timelines” and “universes” are confusing terms in Marvel. Some say they’re the same thing, others say they’re separate things. But I believe the ultimate answer to this question can be found in What If…? Season 1 Episode 4, in which the Ancient One creates a split that forms two timelines (and thus two variants of Dr. Strange) in one universe. Since this is canonically possible, I think it explains many of the X-Men series’ discrepancies.

THEY CANNOT ALL BE IN 1 UNIVERSE

Secondly, I’m sorry to Deadpool & Wolverine, but there is absolutely no way that every film in the Fox series takes place in the same universe. There are way too many inconsistencies for that to be possible. I know such a notion takes away a bit from the impact of Wade and Logan’s efforts to save that universe, and Logan replacing the anchor being, but still. It just doesn’t add up. The film’s events are direct follow-ups to DP 1 and 2, and to Logan. Wade’s universe is dying because of Logan’s death in Logan. OK, so those 4 films happen in the same universe for sure. But none of the other films do.

DIFFERENT TIME TRAVEL RULES

One major reason there are multiple universes at play here is that the series depicts two different kinds of time travel that have two different repercussions:

Kitty Pryde’s consciousness projection, which rewrites history

Cable’s device, which causes timeline branching and universe-hopping (just like MCU quantum time travel)

So Logan’s time travel in DOFP overwrote/erased his original timeline (the events of Origins, the OG trilogy, and The Wolverine) … whereas Cable’s time travel in DP 2 split his universe into multiple timelines. (This is proven by the fact that even though Wade lives in a timeline where Vanessa is alive in DP&W, the universe is still dying because of the events of Logan. So none of Cable’s time traveling in DP 2 overwrote/erased Logan.)

These are two different rules of time travel, which makes it all the more likely that they happen in different universes.

Therefore, any universe in which Logan time-traveled to stop the Sentinels is NOT the same universe as the DP/Logan universe.

OTHER CONTINUITY ISSUES

Wade is in his 30s in Origins, which is set in 1979 … and Wade is in his 30s in the DP films, which is set in the 2010s.

Warren Worthington III is 12 years old in 1996 at the beginning of The Last Stand and a young adult during the main events in the 2000s … and he is a young adult in 1983 in Apocalypse.

Colossus has an American accent in the OG trilogy and a Russian accent in the DP films.

Mutant children are seen thriving in 2023 at the end of DOFP, whereas in the world of Logan, mutants stopped being born in 2004.

Which brings me to one of my most major arguments here:

THE CONSEQUENCES OF LOGAN’S TIME TRAVEL

Logan’s time-travel in DOFP only changed history starting in 1973; everything that came before 1973 stayed exactly the same in that universe. So we cannot possibly say that DOFP caused Wade to be born decades later or Warren to be born decades earlier in its new timeline. That is impossible.

Also, the children at the end of DOFP are irrefutable proof that Logan did not wake up in a world where mutants have been dying out since 2004 and where he and Charles are destined to be killed by X-24. That is impossible.

Therefore, neither Apocalypse nor the DP films nor Logan can possibly take place in Universe 1 (the same universe as the OG trilogy or Origins).

WHAT ABOUT THE DISCREPANCIES IN FIRST CLASS?

DOFP firmly establishes that despite the continuity errors, First Class is absolutely a prequel to the OG trilogy and occurs in the same universe. In this post, I lay out in detail how the few plot holes between these films may be logically explained.

THE X-MEN’S CAMEO IN DEADPOOL 2

All I can say is this is obviously a meta joke created in Wade’s head for the audience. In no possible version of events do the ages of the X-Men in their brief cameo in this movie make any sense.

UNIVERSE 1 vs. UNIVERSE 2

Ok, so now we’ve firmly established that:

Universe 1 consists only of FC, Origins, the OG trilogy, Wolverine, and DOFP. Its history is fully rewritten starting in 1973, so in both versions of history, Wade Wilson is always born in the 1940s and thus in his 30s in 1979 … and Warren Worthington III is always born in the 1980s and thus a child in the 90s and adult in the 2000s. Colossus emigrates from Russia to the U.S. at an early age and grows up with an American accent.

Universe 2 consists only of DP 1, DP 2, Logan, and DP&W. There was no time-travel in this world, and yet no Sentinels were created. Instead, Transigen put mutation-killing poisoning in food, which drove mutants to near-extinction by 2029. This makes 14-year-old Russell in DP 2 one of the last mutants to be born before the poisoning took effect. Cable’s and Wade’s time-traveling created multiple branches, but they all coexist in this universe. Wade Wilson was born in the 1970s, and thus he’s a thirty-something in the 2010s. Colossus grew up in Russia and thus maintained a Russian accent. After escaping the Void, Laura relocated from her original timeline (Timeline 3) to Timeline 6, while staying in the same universe.

THE DIFFERENT CUTS OF DAYS OF FUTURE PAST

But wait, you may say. DOFP and Apocalypse also must exist in the same universe since Apocalypse is a direct sequel to the 1973 events of DOFP. So doesn’t Apocalypse have to happen in Universe 1, as well?

Well, here’s the explanation for that:

Consider the existence of two different cuts of DOFP: the theatrical cut and the Rogue Cut.

Also consider the alternate ending filmed for DOFP, in which Logan is pulled from the river in 1973 by the real Stryker, a perfect lead-in to him being Weapon X in Apocalypse … whereas the actual DOFP ending shows Raven rescuing him that day, which changed his fate and kept him out of Stryker’s hands.

If you go beyond the meta and think about the multiverse, it becomes extremely plausible to assume that there was more than one universe in which Logan time-traveled via Kitty to stop the Sentinels.

In one of these universes (which I’ve labeled Universe 1 out of my preference for the Rogue Cut), within the dark future, Kitty’s wounds forced Erik, Charles, and Bobby to rescue Rogue to replace her, Bobby was killed, the mansion was blown up, Rogue took over Kitty’s job, and Kitty pulled Erik through the wall back into the temple when the Sentinels attacked him. Meanwhile in the past, Raven chose to stop by the mansion, steal a moment with Hank, and break Cerebro on her way to DC. After DC, she went undercover as Stryker, rescued Logan from the river, and most likely sent him to safety at the mansion with Charles and Hank.

In the other universe (which I’ve labeled Universe 3), Kitty kept Logan in the past through to the end, Bobby stayed and died in the temple, and Blink sent Erik back into the temple with a portal. Meanwhile in the past, Raven flew directly from Paris to DC and Charles used Cerebro to deduce her destination. After DC, Raven went her own way, and Stryker himself pulled Logan from the river and turned him into Weapon X.

APOCALYPSE AND DARK PHOENIX AS MERE BAD DREAMS

Now you’ll also notice I wrote the word “dream” next to Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix in my outline of Universe 3. And here’s where the bias comes in. Apocalypse and Dark Phoenix make so little sense that, as I also mentioned in this post, I declare they are no more than bad dreams in Erik’s and Charles’ heads at some point after 1973 in Universe 3.

Dark Phoenix in particular, just unfolds like a dream. None of the characters’ actions make any logical sense based on what we know about them. It all just feels like Charles’ worst nightmare of being suddenly abandoned and betrayed by everyone he loves, via either death or rejection … because IT IS.

Apocalypse is more complicated. It’s not as bad as Dark Phoenix but it’s also pretty darn stupid in many ways.

I laid out in great detail in this post why Erik’s family plotline makes zero sense for his character, Cherik or no Cherik. This is why I wrote that in Universe 1, Erik “remains true to himself in the aftermath of DOFP.” This fic and this fic and this fic (none of which are mine) are examples of in-character behavior for Erik which I imagine resemble his post-DOFP actions in that reality.

I also feel it doesn’t make any sense that Peter isn’t already a student at the school in 1983. There’s literally no reason why Charles wouldn’t have sought him out as his first student when he reopened the school in 1973, after the events of DOFP. It’s totally implausible that it would take 10 years for Peter to get involved with the X-Men again.

The abomination that is the fridging of Magda and Nina speaks for itself.

The abomination that is Peter not telling Erik they’re related at the most opportune moment also speaks for itself.

So this movie might be entirely a dream as well; I’d be fine with that.

APOCALYPSE AS PARTIALLY A DREAM

However, I included Apocalypse in Universe 3 as possibly “part dream” for a few reasons.

Despite the film’s stupidity, I expressed in this post the missed opportunity that is Nina Gurzsky. And in this post and this post, I expressed my fondness for a version of events where Nina survived and grew up thriving at the school with her siblings. Nina’s very existence stems from Erik behaving totally OOC after DOFP … and yet I can’t help but love her as her own character. If the writers were gonna make Erik behave in an OOC way for her to exist, then they should’ve gone all the way in letting her actually be a damn character.

I also expressed in this post how Erik settling down with someone who isn’t Charles makes very little sense if they got together during First Class. It could be somewhat more plausible if this is a version of events where they did NOT get together then.

I also mentioned in this post the inconsistency of Moira’s memories at the end of First Class and in Apocalypse. This could only be fixed by there being two different versions of events: one where Charles only erased some of her memories, and one where he erased all of them.

Which is why I labeled Universe 3 as containing “First Class (Charles & Erik remain just friends; Moira recalls nothing)” and “Erik betrays his values and settles down with Magda.”

It also could be that in Universe 3, the deleted scenes between Charles and Moira in First Class canonically happened, thus explaining his fixation on her in Apocalypse. In 1962, Charles & Erik remained on a river in Egypt, and Charles was with Moira. Thus in the 1970s, Erik finds himself capable of settling down with a random woman (even though my other reasons for this making no sense still stand, but for the sake of allowing for a world where Nina lives, I’ll let it go just for that).

NINA’S “DEATH”

Therefore, it’s somewhat possible that in Universe 3, the first third of Apocalypse is real, leading up to the moment Erik agrees to surrender himself to the Polish police.

From Nina’s death onward, the rest of the film is a nightmare of Erik’s, in which his mind envisions that he lost his beloved daughter that day and then was coerced by En Sabah Nur into becoming a mass murderer and hurting Charles and he never learned the truth about Peter.

If you think about it, Nina’s death scene in the film actually plays out like a nightmare would. Notice how even though she’s crying and screaming for her dad, she doesn’t move. She doesn’t struggle to pull away from her mom and run toward her dad. When her mom kneels in front of her, she doesn’t resist. No 8-year-old kid would be standing totally still in this situation, without flinching. Also Erik doesn’t make any more efforts to comfort her as she’s crying. He just silently stares at her, watching her scream, then silently stares at the attacking birds. Nor does Magda do anything effective; her words translate to “stop, Nina, stop!” No “we’ll be ok,” “he’s not gonna get hurt,” nothing that would actually calm Nina down. Then of course, the arrow hitting TWO people when the dude ISN’T EVEN LOOKING defies all logic and all reality. The whole thing only makes sense as Erik’s nightmare. We’ve all had those bad dreams where we want to move but we can’t, we’re frozen and unable to do what we want to do as something scary is coming at us. That’s exactly how Erik, Magda, and Nina all behave in this scene.

In reality, when Erik gave himself up in Universe 3, basically, the events of this fic unfolded. This isn’t my own fic, all credit belongs to its author WaxRhapsodic, but it is so unbelievably great that I declare it’s what really happened in this world.

To summarize, Nina was injured but not killed by the arrow that killed Magda, then Erik & Nina moved to the mansion, where Nina bonded closely with Charles, Peter, Wanda, and Lorna, and Erik & Charles finally got together.

THE OG TRILOGY AND LOGAN

Lastly, you may notice I also put “events similar to the OG trilogy” in my outline of Universe 2. Why did I do this?

There are many hints in Logan that something similar to the OG trilogy happened in that world.

Charles references the Statue of Liberty incident from X-Men 1, which never happened in a world where Logan time-traveled.

In a deleted scene, Charles claims Logan was married to Jean before he killed her. This could be true or it could be Charles’ confusion in his dementia.

Jean’s absence from the story is glaring: considering her power level, it is quite unlikely that Charles could’ve killed her in the Westchester Incident.

Thus, in this world, the events of the OG trilogy including The Last Stand must have happened. But instead of Sentinels, humans weaponized the anti-mutant food poisoning to wipe out mutants once the cure proved to be a failure. So by the time of the Westchester Incident, Jean was already dead.

This explains Charles’ condition in Logan. His disease is not the result of mere old age. It is a result of 3 things:

The impact of the food poisoning on his mutation as well as his overall health.

His mind struggling to remain in harmony with his twin brother’s body which he inhabited in the post-credits scene of The Last Stand after the Phoenix destroyed his original body. (In Universe 1, the Sentinel apocalypse unfolded before the negative longterm side effects of his consciousness transference could take hold.)

Erik’s absence, which can only be explained by his death prior to the film’s events. In this post and this post, I theorize in more depth that his sudden death was the final straw for Charles’ mental health that triggered the Westchester Incident.

[mamawasatesttube]

I’m having trouble getting a straight answer on whether or not Kon can use TTK under a red sun. The answer from googling seems to be “depends on the writer”. You’re kinda my go-to Kon expert, so I was wondering if you knew

yes.

i'm sure canon is at least kinda inconsistent about this (dc does, after all, stand for "dunno consistency") but here's the logic i follow when it comes to ttk. you'll have to forgive me for just referring to certain issues without actually citing numbers or anything, i have a migraine and a half this morning and don't wanna deal with checking i'm so sorry but if you want me to find a specific one i mention at some point later just remind me and i'll try in a few hours if my brain stops hurting!

but anyways. yes, i do believe kon can use ttk under a red sun. why? ttk is established as a metagene, not a kryptonian power. even before he's got any of his sunlight-processing powers (which are repeatedly established as coming in as he grows up, both before and even after the geoff retcon), he has the full extent of his ttk.

now, wf3 and also the aftermath of sins of youth do both suggest that he is still tied to sunlight-processing in some way (after all, why else would kryptonite have affected him in wf3?), so that's definitely an inconsistency. however, i posit that since ttk is a metagene, even if his body is powered by sunlight, he should still be able to access it. (depowered kon arc post-sins of youth still works in this way if we assume he was just Really Fuckign Tired and also the magic was still impacting him.)

but honestly the biggest reason i say that yes, his ttk still should work even under a red sun, is in supergirl vol 5. kon himself isn't there at the point i'm thinking of, but there's an arc sometime before last stand of new krypton (the hunt for reactron, iirc, but don't quote me on that) in which kara, thara ak-var, and chris kent all get slapped with red sun projector collars. this neutralizes their kryptonian powers, but chris specifically says he can still use his telekinesis.

now people who know more about editorial impact on the superfam than i do can definitely chime in here, because i'm just going to refer to stuff i've read but don't have sources on immediately on hand, but. why does chris have ttk? well, because before infinite crisis killed kon off, kon was supposed to be nightwing. (i know there was an artist who tweeted about this. i don't remember who.) in fact some of the dialogue written with the nightwing in new krypton reads kind of like kon, specifically the way he introduces and brags about his ttk, imo. this was later retconned into being chris. therefore, chris has ttk, which is explained away as being some general phantom zone related weirdness. (as a matter of personal taste i think it kind of diminishes the POINT of ttk being to imitate kryptonian powers to give it to chris, so i like to pretend that he has some weird psychic stuff going on instead, to keep chris and kon distinct, but thats kinda beside the point.)

SO. all of that to say. it's sort of a matter of opinion because you can construct an argument based on canon both ways, but i personally fall into camp ttk is a metagene and therefore can only be suppressed by meta-suppression tech, not red sun.

[transmutationisms]

i just seen that you watched DS9 a few years ago so wanted to say that i think that type of science fiction is so fun to evaluate and to think of what the writers could have done-- star trek has really made me realize that its as fun to critique plots that are racist, for example, as it is to critique characters who are written to be racist as a critique of racism (ie when the story is racist and is treating it as a good/neutral thing vs when the story says racism is bad, hahah), saying this as a black man. love the augmentation plot, there is so much they could have done with that and its interesting to see the writers unapologetic eugenicist thinking combined with the struggles, the systemic violence, that bashir and other disabled people face in canon text as a result of not being mentally fit for life, as framed by the praised "utopian" society they live in (not trying to give the writers too much credit for this because this is commented on as briefly as possible and is mostly discredited by eventual eugenicist bullshit). i wish they wrote that as violent miserable at its core eugenics instead of bashir becoming the template of a objectively superior human. they could've done so much with sloan; he was kind of like the men in black you hear about in UFO conspiracies but instead of just working to eliminate people who pose a threat to the government, military, etc, he also just showed up in bashir's room to tell him that he's more of a living being and less of a living being because he was eugenicized and like cites random events to make bashir think he's the worst person alive, incidentally making bashir see how fucked up the federation is but this as well they do almost nothing with, nothing is done with this plot bashir just moves on after "overthrowing section 31" aka "killing sloan and doing nothing after that". love raging both on behalf of and against text. anyways, do you have any DS9/star trek or science fiction thoughts?

ok bashir was my fav so i thought the execution of the eugenics plot was so disappointing lmao they like forgot to write bashir in half the episodes by that point and then all the characters were also kind of inconsistent the way tv writing often is. i will also say like. i enjoyed ds9 well enough but i really thought it was going to be more politically daring the way people talk about it on here sksjsjsjs like sci fi gives obvious opportunities to problematise things taken for granted and the show like kind of uses that but not even really. like all of the earth scenes for example are so bad in this way and also the entire conception and framing of colonialism like in general lol... sorry i don't really have that much coherent to say bc i think with shows like this you kind of have to look at it episode by episode like there's not a ton of consistency across them bc they weren't really made with the assumption that people would even watch every week lmao. wait also i always though sisko and eddington should hatefuck godbless

[lokiinmediasideblog]

Because I've been seen posts that only Loki was to blame for Jotunheim, and claiming inconsistent Odin characterization in TR (I will only use Thor (2011) for that matter).

But my take on whether or not Odin allowed and promoted negative views of the Jotuns/Jotunheim is that he did (even if you exclude TR).

The way Thor (2011) is structured, there were some very EASY changes that would have cemented Loki as being the ONLY one in the wrong and absolved Odin, but interestingly, this is not what happened.

Instead of giving some answer out of a self-help book that doesn't address child Thor's proclamation that one day he'll eradicate all Jotuns in front of his secretly Jotun son, he should have said that the Jotuns have a right to exist/aren't inherently bad and such to the impressionable child heirs.

Yes, Odin didn't want to start a war but not because he didn't hold negative views of Jotunheim. I see this cited as "proof" Odin was a wonderful anti-imperialist King before TR. Wars have costs like Einherjar lives, supplies, and such. There are practical reasons why he wouldn't want a war rather than assuming he didn't hold or promote negative views of the Jotun, and him not starting a war was a practical and strategic decision. He had already taken what he came for (the Casket and got a free baby). Why go to war at that point?

So you don't think Loki is reliable with "Because I am the monster parents tell their children about at night?" But somehow the deflective answer Odin gives to child Thor is evidence he didn't hold and promote negative views of the Jotun in millennia? I'm sorry, but Loki's words are stronger evidence in this case because they're not deflection. And I find it annoying to dismiss them as hyperbole and lies. Yes, Loki lies, but he's not the only one that lies and it's ridiculous to be saying this when it's been proven Loki has also been lied to by both parents.

Loki's reasoning in killing his biological father and his own species are based on the assumption that Odin was only against war with Jotunheim because it would cost Asgardian lives. So he finds a way to destroy an entire realm indirectly without the use of warriors. When Odin wakes from the Odin-sleep, Loki PROUDLY proclaims that he caused all the devastation in Jotunheim for him. An easy way they could have made only Loki in the wrong is to have him do this in secret because he didn't believe Odin would approve. HOWEVER, Loki proclaims this proudly to Odin. He clearly thought this would get him into Odin's good graces and prove that he's a "trustworthy" Jotun. Loki's behavior here doesn't make sense if Odin didn't hold and promote negative views of Jotunheim. IF Odin was a good anti-imperialist King, it would be under Loki's best interests to deny the attempted genocide rather than proudly proclaim he did it all for Odin. Loki is a millennia-old manipulator; it's ridiculous to think he'd lack the common sense to act on behalf of his best interests.

Odin could have told Loki he was a Jotun even if he didn't wish to use him for diplomacy. Why do people act like Loki being told means Odin didn't abandon his plan to use Loki for "diplomacy"? They're not mutually exclusive! And yes, I do think Odin loved Loki in some fucked up dysfunctional way and wanted to keep him.

[genericpuff]

This is why people get suspicious of Rachel tracing over her own drawings to pass off as "sketches"-

(sorry I'd upload these as actual gifs but Gyazo is being a pain with letting me save them :/)

They're just a little too 'close' to the final panels which still wind up being inconsistent all the time despite Rachel's attempts at making it look like she puts effort into her roughs. When we've literally seen her legitimate roughs that show otherwise - even her refined sketches aren't the exact same as her final pieces.

And then we even have weird contradictions that show up in the sketches themselves that imply they were completely redrawn/traced over the finished drawing rather than organically made.

That said, the last two are cited by Rachel as being thumbnails, so she could very well be going in and changing them, refining them, etc. to get a better final composition, but as we've seen from the comparison of her older pieces (pre LO) even her fully detailed sketches are made up of more mess and visual processing than what's seen in the book sketches. It feels like the "mess" in those sketches is more just to try and make it look messy, not with the same trial and error that's evident in her legitimate roughs.

Again, none of this is definitive 'proof' or meant to accuse Rachel of performative sketching, so PLEASE take this with mountains of salt, but these are some of the reasons why people are suspicious. All of the sketches provided in the books these days just feel like they were traced and thrown together for the sake of providing incentive to buy the books. Her actual final panels are way too inconsistent and we've seen too many instances of her actual roughs to make it believable that these were the real sketches that her assistants worked over.

[jasper-book-stash]

Okay...regarding Witchcraft For Everyone by Sam Wise...

Well, firstly, if you're the author...I'm sorry, you probably shouldn't look at this post, I'm not fond of this book.

This was a deeply frustrating book. I have so many margin-scribbled notes expressing my frustration as I read it.

The most frustrating parts for me was in the editing and formatting: The inconsistency in the capitalization, formatting, and spelling of chapter titles, paired with the lack of page numbers and a non-existent table of contents, drove me absolutely bonkers.

So many chapters have bold claims with nothing backing them up within the text, which could have been fixed by citations and sources to back them up. And the author does do this in some places - citing specific books or podcasts or people under specific chapters within the text itself.

There are claims that many witches do or don't do something with seemingly no realization that one's experiences aren't universal, along with bold claims in subjects that the author themself claims they know nothing about.

There are also several separate instances of the author putting essential oils into water (sometimes bath water) without proper dilution. And I'm not just biased because of my anti-essential oil stance! My coworker, who uses essential oils herself, backed me up on this being a bad move!

And can someone please, for the love of whatever, tell me how we came to this organization of chapters?

Honestly, this is a 5/10 book. It's not the worst beginner book I've read, but it's far from the first I'd recommend to a beginner.

I just...wish it was a little better.

[delusion-of-negation]

Hi, I really need help staying afloat right now as I just got kicked out and am wondering if you could reblog my pinned post so more people could see it? Sorry to bother you, it's perfectly fine if you can't, and thank you for your time!!

your earliest post is only a couple months ago

your archive doesn't work and your blog is hidden from the web

in the rare original posts, you're tag spamming unrelated stuff

you've been sending this to everyone, mostly strangers afaik, it follows the same formula as scams, eg the "rb my pinned post"

and yet you haven't thanked a single ko-fi supporter, the site will notify you to do it whenever people donate, it takes ten seconds

additionally "My parents found out I was trans last month so they kicked me out and fired me from their shop, where I’ve been working to support my family." they own a shop where you worked to support them? help me with the maths there. and "I can’t get a job because there’s none where my friend lives and I don’t have a car to be able to commute, and I can’t borrow my friend’s car because she’s using it for her own job. I’ve seriously tried to find any solution out of this, but I can’t [...] I need money for either some shitty car so I can commute, or rent so I can leave my friend’s place and get my own where I could find work." you're asking for 4k, my dude. that's a lot more than a shit car or a couple months rent, and I can't understand it. cars on ebay vary from a couple hundred to a couple thousand, my family could never afford more than that and they would get cars there. you could uber or taxi or take the bus, or get dropped off by your friend, or otherwise carpool, or so on, and ask for a fraction of this to supply your friend with some food and to pay for your journey until you're settled in. it's been a month since you even left and you've already established there are zero jobs nearby unless you buy a fancy car, what about remote work? and you say your friend wouldn't kick you out and can afford rent, so why not raise money for food shopping to help her out (which you cite as the issue here) while you look for a work from home job or a means of transport? and you took days to make a vague post about a confrontation with your friends' parents? no vent nearer the time, just a vague post spammed into unrelated tags? the timing and "logic" is all over the place. I'm sorry, this isn't adding up at all. I've been literally homeless multiple times, and I've had to ask for help myself a couple times - I have my bro's fundraiser pinned, and I have my own ko-fi in my bio, and I have a post explaining about how I could become homeless again unless I meet inconsistent and unreliable demands of my landlord, something I've talked about for over a year on here venting and stuff. so I'm no stranger to these situations, and the lack of supporting info for yours is weird enough, but there's also the scam-like practices, and the fact that 4k doesn't check out at all, that's more than the deposit to rent outside of big cities (where you would have no issue with job quantity or lack of public transport, so we can assume you're not in one). you have no breakdown of why the high asking price or where you got that number for a car or anything. I checked the notes of that pinned post and the ko-fi and scrolled through your entire blog, and I couldn't find any additional information of the sort. I really wanted to believe you weren't a scammer taking advantage of people's kindness, but with all this in mind that's understandably difficult for me. I'll let others make up their minds on this one.

[spuddy-buddy]

(Disclaimer: in no way related to this post)

Dunno what possessed me to do this, but I got to thinking about some DST skins that I didn’t particularly enjoy the execution of last night and how I thought they could be done differently. In my infinite wisdom I decided the best thing to do was do edits by hand until like 3 AM. For the sake of easy comparison my edits are on the left and the OGs are on the right.

Thought process and explanations for each under the cut.

Wigfrid’s GoH is pretty good in theory, but suffers from being literally the first skin collection in the game’s history; the art team at Klei had no way of knowing how skins would evolve as time went on. That being said, it’s still really inconsistent with other metal/armor-type skins, being completely flatly colored and lacking highlights. Her circlet is also inconsistent with other headdresses from future skins, being more or less completely flat instead of bowing upwards to imply depth. The point of this edit was purely to bring it up to the standard of more modern skins.

Maxwell’s GoH was another simple one. His trousers are colored weird and he looks fucking miserable instead of posh(which is what I think they were going for). Another really basic edit, just to fix the trousers and un-depress his expression; admittedly this is the one I’m most iffy on. If I’d have thought about it at the time I probably would have also unrolled his sleeves since we have skins like that now, but c'est la vie.

There wasn’t anything really wrong with Snowfallen Wurt per se, but I really hate it when people give rabbits dog-like noses. After editing the nose the pink inside the ears threw off the colors so I changed that to be more in line with the rest of the skin. For funsies I added lil paws on her feet since Klei changing Wurt’s feet isn’t unprecedented(Abyssal, Verdant, and Victorian).

I’m sorry, fellow Woodie mains, but they really did our boy dirty with his Snowfallen. It’s a bad skin when compared with both the other Woodie skins and the other Snowfallen skins. The mountaineer theme is fitting to Woodie, but he’s just so boring to look at - just a mass of grey and brown and gold, a far cry from the blues of the Snowfallen collection. Aside from Treeguard it’s his only skin that completely changes his hair color, which also doesn’t help it sticking out so badly(also warm cream greying with cool grey hair? blech). The main goal here was to bring the skin up to speed with the rest of the collection. Every color was sampled from another skin already in the game to help produce a coherent design(if you ask politely I’ll tell you what’s from where). The blue hair, I feel, still looks a bit out-of-place when put next to the other Woodie skins, but it plays nice with the rest of the collection. As for the addition of more brown when I cited that as a bad thing in the original, the main problem was that it was such a warm color compared to his grey hair that it looked very out of place; using a cooler brown and distributing it across more of the design helped with the color balance I think. The most extreme edit was changing the sleeves completely; I just couldn’t find a good balance with the more plain sleeves, plus I feel adding a bit more fur sells that this is an outfit for trekking across freezing mountain peaks.

[todayisawthewhxlewxrld]

I’m in love with a boy I hate

status// ongoing

updates// inconsistent (sorry)

warning// profanity, ooc characters probably, gojo is a slight playboy (kinda not really) and too cocky for his own good, gojo can be an asshole, gojo & yn are angsty/edgy, yn helps gojo gain his whimsy back, kys jokes, suggestive at times, emotionally constipated characters, friends to enemies(?) to lovers

☆ this smau wasn’t inspired by a song but the title was!! ‘twas inspired by she's a lady by forever the sickest kids, but yeah besides the title and lyrics on here the song holds no relevance :) ☆

☆ header created here ☆

he's attractive but bitter

a traitor—I'd trade him in a second

action 1. romcom

cut 2. reputation

action 3. cancelled

cut 4. table read the remix

action 5. hit list

cut 6. walking curse

action 7. last resort

cut 8. what’s the worst that could happen action 9. personal jester cut 10. pick me up i’m scared action 11. wow cut 12. freaky deaky action 13. tbh n rate cut 14. just what friends do action 15. maybe next time cut 16. a rat action 17. (EMOTIONAL) cut 18. sleep with them action 19. lil fangirls cut 20. worms for brains action 21. brain damage cut 22. interested action 23. most brilliant plan yet cut 24. born for this role action 25. hop off cut 26. death wish action 27. deja vu cut 28. taught u well action 29. post this on main cut 30. FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT action 31. doing this for u cut 32. in the trenches

action 33. willing to do this

cut 34. secret masochist

action 35. lovers quarrel

cut 36. too real action 37. act romantic cut 38. taking initiative action 39. prepare yourselves cut 40. first kiss action 41. fix it cut 42. worse to worser action 43. committed to the bit cut 44. truce or no truce action 45. fist fight cut 46. proving a point action 47. suicide watch cut 48. nitty gritty action 49. hate you too cut 50. elevator music action 51. yeah cut 52. nonchalant action 53. does he know cut 54. anyway action 55. that’s oomf cut 56. connection action 57. only you cut 58. wattpad writer action 59. drunk visions cut 60. uncanny action 61. siren’s song cut 62. freaky friday action 63. okay cut 64. only option action 65. broken cut 66. pathetic action 67. degradation thing cut 68. no more problems action 69. drive you away cut 70. normal and sane action 71. cite your sources cut 72. me when i lie action 73. do your job cut 74. kk action 75. too honest cut 76. a rope action 77. friends again cut 78. don’t do this action 79. cut 80.

[coochiequeens]

A violent man killed his 7 year old daughter and now wants to be placed in a women’s prison

A trans-identified male who beat his 7-year-old daughter to death has been handed life plus 75 years after pleading guilty to her murder.

The Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney has announced that Michael Deon Wash pleaded guilty to the abuse and murder of his 7-year-old daughter, Kamarie. Wash now goes by the name “Milan” and has recently come out as a transgender “woman.”

Kamarie’s body was found floating in Lake Allatoona by two fishermen on June 29, 2016. When examined, investigators found that the girl’s head had been shaved and her hands had been burned in an apparent effort to make it more difficult for her to be identified.

Wash had called 911 and reported his child missing the day after her body was found, claiming the girl had “wandered out of the house” in her polkadot pajamas at some point. Wash told the operator “she was last seen here in my house, here this morning or last night,” adding, “I’m sorry.”

Wash also claimed he had seen Kamarie in her bed sleeping the previous night, but gave unclear and inconsistent details.

Within just hours of responding to Wash’s apartment, police announced they were treating Kamarie’s disappearance as a homicide investigation. Shortly after, Wash and his live-in girlfriend, Lasherae Davis, were charged with two counts of cruelty to children in the first degree, cruelty to children in the third degree, making false statements and concealing the death of another. Wash was later charged with murder.

Kamarie’s cause of death was determined to have been blunt force trauma, and examiners established the girl had died long before Wash made the call reporting her missing. 

Investigators would determine Wash and Davis had regularly tormented Kamarie, physically assaulting and withholding food from the girl. On the day of her death, Wash had beat Kamarie until her jaw broke.

Kamarie’s biological mother, Kashira Pettigrew, did not live in the residence, and Wash had been in custody of Kamarie for little over one year. The reasons for the arrangement were unstated. 

In 2019, Pettigrew was in the news after driving under the influence and causing a serious car accident. She was sentenced to prison time and lost custody of her other children for her role in the wreck which left them all injured. During her hearing, Pettigrew cited the grief of losing Kamarie as the source of her addiction.

Following her death, Kamarie’s family penned an obituaryfor the girl that beamed about how she was “born a star,” and that she loved to sing and dance. 

“She was a member of the Junior Choir at Church of the Living God, the C-Uperstars, and a dance group with Ted Cooper and her mom. Kamarie also loved to help others and always enjoyed leading and having fun with her sisters. Aside from her singing career, she liked to cook and read as well. She was full of life and had a big heart and will always be remembered as a loving, caring person.”

On Wash’s guilty plea, which was submitted on September 15, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis issued a statement to local media.

“A 7-year-old baby girl was brutally abused and murdered by a person who should have been her greatest protector. Wash not only beat Kamarie badly enough to kill her but went to great lengths to cover up the crime. It is an absolute shame that a young life was so violently cut short by a parent.”

Willis also noted that a previously-filed intent to seek the death penalty had been withdrawn as a result of Wash’s plea. He has been sentenced to life in prison plus 75 years to be served in confinement consecutive to the life sentence for murder, first degree cruelty to children, false statements and concealing the death of another.

According to jail records, a grand jury declined to prosecute Lasherae Davis on murder, but she is still set to stand trial on the other charges related to child abuse, concealing the Kamarie’s death, and making false statements to law enforcement.

Wash is still currently being housed in the Fulton County Jail where he is listed under his birth name and sex. He will likely be transferred in coming days to a correctional facility, though it is unknown at this time if he will be accommodated in a women’s prison.

Media reports on the case uniformly referred to Wash by feminine pronouns.

[sapphos-catpanions]

Hi!

I’m reading the first article you linked on your pinned post, and to add to your remarks: the very first sentence of the abstract is conjecture.

“Biological causes underpinning the well known gender dimorphisms in human behavior, cognition, and emotion have received increased attention in recent years.” I looked for the source they cited (Johansenn-Berg and Behrens, 2009) and I couldn’t find it. The citation link took me to a list of diffusion MRI studies unrelated or peripherally related to sex.

Anyways, sex-based dimorphism has not been demonstrated in the case of emotions. And no scientific consensus exists on a dimorphism in human behaviour and cognition that’s based strictly on sex or gender identity.

Another study cited (Inano et al, 2011) specifies that the differences that they mapped in white matter integrity between the two sexes (either regional brain differences or global differences) were inconsistent with previous studies. In fact, no two studies on sex/brain structure reviewed in the Inano article are in agreement. I find it misleading on the part of Kranz et al. that they didn’t include the contradictory evidence behind the sexed brain hypothesis. They present it as a matter of fact and conduct their whole study on that basis.

Now, as regards the controls. The control for a MtF is not a woman. The differences are too many; a more appropriate control might be a transgender male who’s undergoing hormonal treatment, normalised for hormonal regimen and treatment length. Moreover, the authors shouldn’t just make the assumption that “the transgender identity in these subjects results from a mismatch between gender-specific brain development and the development of body and genitals” because, again, the evidence on gendered brains and fetal hormones’ influence on the brain-sex dimorphism is largely conflicting.

Finally, I don’t understand why the authors would relate the differences they found to sexual orientation. No link has been made between sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation so why would they pointlessly complicate their study?

I’m sorry for the rant 😭 this was just a frustrating article to read.

never apologize. what a detailed, thoughtful, and knowledgeable message.

we are being asked to believe that we are the beneficiaries of a recent rash of scientific discoveries proving that 1) everyone has a gender identity, an internal sense of being male, female, both, or something else 2) some people’s gender identities don’t match their physical reality and 3) in these cases, the person must take whatever transition steps they need in order to avoid suicide. these are the foundational claims at the heart of the trans rights movement.

but even a dilettante like me can see that the foundation is built on sand, that we started from the desire to transition genders and worked backward to a gender identity hypothesis, and then “discovered” “scientific” evidence to support it. and an intellect like yours can spot the specific structural problems that mean the whole thing has to be condemned. and the wider public will notice when the whole rotten structure collapses.

[fuck-edfrugs]

I was looking into it with my dad, we genuinely couldn't find much of anything that wasn't people talking about bechdel. There was really only one quote from her which seemed to be in support of trans people. There just isn't anything concrete (other than attending much fest BUT she was apparently under the impression that they had reverted their position on trans women for at least a portion of the time she attended due to a false statement she was given in an email. One of her comics is about this) at least as far as me and my dad could find in a few hours of looking into it even going to the sources linked in the previous ask you received about this.

And actually the citing of her friend (last name is rich but I can't remember her first name I'm just brain dumping right now) and Rich's status as a terf is questionable and the primary citation for it seems to be her involvement in a book written by a terf but every source is inconsistent on what her involvement actually was, ranging from she was quoted in it to she proofread it and helped write it. And due to her literary work previously she really doesn't seem like a terf.

But also none of this is definite and I'm definitely not an expert researcher so I could very well have missed something or a lot of stuff.

Overall I don't think bechdel is a terf, but she definitely has criticizable actions.

I'm sorry for rambling but I got really into this last night

I do think it sucks that Alison Bechdel continued to go to Mitchfest and I understand why people find that deeply hurtful and troubling. It's also true that she was in support of camp trans and contributed comics to Transsisters(a journal of transsexual feminism) in protest of the policy. It's also true that she collaborated with and worked with trans women in support of their struggles. She had friends that were transmisogynistic feminists and she's consistently advocated for trans rights and inclusion (Especially of MTF dykes in dyke spaces).

It strikes me as deeply dishonest for anyone to call her a TERF and I don't think Riki Wilchens would characterize her in that way. I think there are problematic aspects in her model of feminism and she can be clumsy when it comes to these issues. I also think it's relevant and valid for people to criticize transmisogynistic bias in her work. I do think she's said and done things that demonstrate transphobic bias...I don't think it's healthy to conflate that with a committed ideology based in hatred and exclusion. I do get that it's disappointing that she kinda tries to have it both ways.

Starting in 2006 MWMF shifted more towards a don't ask don't tell policy (still bad!) and Trans women ran workshops on trans inclusion within the festival. Yellow armbands activists also worked to build support and solidarity for trans women's inclusion within the festival. I don't believe it's true or accurate to say that TERF was created as term to talk about anyone that attended MFWF.

that's very important context, thank you so much for providing this!

i didn't think it was appropriate to call her a terf either, so i'm glad to hear that it's not as bad as it could be. people are not perfect. some one you agree with often can still do questionable or shitty things sometimes. it is human to be flawed. i really appreciate the additional info!

[sforzesco]

hi! i cannot say i have read too much about brutus beyond the ancient sources, so i was wondering what your opinion is on him and specifically in relation to cassius? i saw your take about how cassius is often used to make brutus "look better," which i definitely have picked up on and is clear in the texts, although i was wondering if you have any posts you could direct me to, or could recommend anything in general that expands upon this idea? its really interesting, and i had not considered it very much before since i enjoyed the dynamic as it is presented

YES!! YES!!!!! this is what I live for, oh man because

and I love untangling them from each other.

so as far as modern reception for Cassius goes, a lot of the opinion on him comes from three places: Shakespeare (and by extension, Plutarch, although Shakespeare does subvert popular characterizations of Cassius in JC) and Dante (or more accurately, a fuck ton of really complex renaissance scholarship around the republic/empire, including and largely focusing on, but not limited to: Dante’s placement of Brutus and Cassius in hell). To absolve Brutus of Cassius makes for interesting themes, but it kills the nuance of the fact that these men knew each other from childhood, and Cassius had effectively married into the house Junia. Shakespeare has Brutus see Caesar’s ghost, when the ancient source that records Caesar’s ghost has the ghost appear to Cassius. Ancient sources were pretty hostile to him as well, and even as close to his life as Augustan era writers, there was a tendency to sanitize Brutus at the expense of Cassius. It was acceptable to tolerate the memory of Brutus, but to do so, you had to push all of Brutus' harsher traits off to Cassius.

a lot of that contradicts aspects of Cassius as a person from the glimpses of him we can catch in those sources. In Plutarch's Life of Brutus, he laughs and jokes, his exchanges with Cicero are covered in affection while Cicero's own opinions of Brutus vary, and Messalla Corvinus was the one who stubbornly kept the memory of Cassius alive, despite his own closeness to Octavian's circle of friends. Titinius killed himself on Cassius death, calling himself a companion in Cassius' fate (valerius maximus 9.9.2).

Which isn't to say that he's without flaw, he is, along with literally every political figure out of ancient Rome, but instead it’s about that the fraction of information we have of him gets whittled down further to reinforce an image of Brutus that's unfaithful to his historical person, so both Brutus and Cassius suffer for it.

And I don’t have anything particularly against how popular tradition portrays them, or how a lot of people tend to enjoy their dynamic, since it’s less about them historically and more about

(M.L. Clarke)

but specifically untangling Cassius from Brutus compels me because it feels lonely that so much of him gets lost to Brutus, and also I crave variety in their portrayals. I also have an insatiable curiosity and so far haven’t hit a wall with this topic.

Alright! Enough of me, I’m getting off track, let me give you some texts that I think about daily from people who are significantly more qualified to say things than I am! This is going to get long, but I’m going to do my best to stay on the topic, so under a cut:

also so sorry for the visually inconsistent citations, I was using the beta post editor but apparently it cuts you off at 10 images so I switched back to the regular post editor and gave up using the small text, but I could not figure out how to un-small text the rest without going into the html and oh boy was that a nightmare, so all the texts are also cited in the bibliography in order of appearance!

ON CASSIUS AND SHAKESPEARE this is going to be real quick, so I'll do it first

has cassius been misinterpreted?, david klein

M.L. Clarke, The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus And His Reputation

CASSIUS, THE MAN, NOT THE MYTH OR LEGEND, AND HISTORY

Cassius and Brutus: The Memory of the Liberators, E. Rawson

servilia and her family, susan treggiari

alternative memoirs: tales from the ‘other side’ of the civil war, kathryn welch (PLEASE, THIS ONE IS ONE OF THE BEST ONES ON THE ENTIRE SUBJECT OF CASSIUS' RECEPTION I CAN'T RECOMMEND IT ENOUGH)

ON DECONSTRUCTING BRUTUS' REPUTATION

a comparatives post I made, another comparatives post I made on the exact same topic

M.L. Clarke, The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus and His Reputation

senatorial wealth and roman politics, israel shatzman

ON ABSOLVING BRUTUS FROM CASSIUS AND HOSTILITY FROM ANCIENT SOURCES

Shakespeare’s Cassius: A Critical Re Appraisal, Dean Anthony Alexander

Empire and Memory, Alain M Gowing

Brutus, the Noble Conspirator, Kathryn Tempest

ALTERNATIVE TAKES ON THE “SEDUCTION” OF BRUTUS

has cassius been misinterpreted, david klein

brutus the noble conspirator, kathryn tempest

conspiracy narratives in roman history, victoria e pagan

Shakespeare’s Cassius: A Critical Re Appraisal, Dean Anthony Alexander

(for fun: this video)

CASSIUS, ANTONY, AND THE EAST aka Antony And The Ordering Of Names

Cassius and Brutus: The Memory of the Liberators, E. Rawson

(for a more in depth discussion regarding slavery, Cassius and Antony in the East (43-40 BCE), Fabian E Udoh)

The Bibliography

-Has Cassius Been Misinterpreted?, David Klein -M.L. Clarke, The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus And His Reputation -Cassius and Brutus, In Memory Of The Liberators, E. Rawson -Servilia and Her Family, Susan Treggiari -Alternative Memoirs: Tales From The 'Other Side,' of the Civil War, Kathryn Welch -Senatorial Wealth and Roman Politics, Israel Shatzman -Shakespeare’s Cassius: A Critical Re Appraisal, Dean Anthony Alexander -Empire and Memory, Alain M Gowing -Brutus, the Noble Conspirator, Kathryn Tempest   -Cassius and Antony in the East (43-40 BCE), Fabian E Udoh

Bonus Round! Media that has Interesting Dynamics at play

-The City War, Sam Starbuck -HBO Rome -Cléopatre La Dernière Reine D'Egypte (listen, I can justify this one, I swear) -RSC's 2012 and 2017 JC Production -Takarazuka Revue's Rome At Dawn -The 1908 Julius Caesar short film -The Destiny of Rome...."documentary," but just the Brutus and Cassius moments

an EXTRA bonus round, the brutus, cassius, and homoeroticism text I wrote that has some more recommendations in it, including the title for that Voltaire text where Brutus doesn’t even show up for the assassination and Cassius plays the main character and it gets delightfully homoerotic in parts

I have most of these things as pdfs, so if anything here is hard to find, let me know off anon!