#tbh I would argue that applies to a LOT of people

[pluralsword]

Yaay! We're glad you did!! it really is an enjoyable read, and yeah it was nice to see him write this, and yeah she does think a lot like her from what we've read (we haven't read as much as her as you have), does remind us of IDW Arcee also, particularly the cynical about the world while determined to do something good outlook that first appeared in Phase 1 and is given so much interiority by other writers in Phase 2 and 3.

Yeah we love that! The art and plot are fun, and we totally get preferring internal thoughts to verbal monologue, we enjoy both and think those can be played to different story aspects, the inner thoughts for Athenia in #2 were fantastic.

I think our one criticism (and not even a full criticism more just, an observation of what we wish was different) of it is that the Captain Xenophanes (that was his name right? don't have the comics on hand rn) talked Athenia out of gunning down Argus and Atlas with the other guardsbots 'because vengeance isn't what we do', dear Captain, Athenia told you what they were going to do to Lyris (we haven't read in many months so we'll have to check her name), this isn't solely about vengeance, it's about justice, just like how Arcee trying to take down Jhiaxus's network was very much about saving the galaxy, she literally says so in the comic to Ultra Magnus in the first few pages. So on that part, we kind of wish Athenia had gotten to rampage, y'know, because she it was the right thing to do to save her friend. we hope this wasn't because of feeling like it shouldn't be written, and more because in order for the plot to go on Atlas would have to be alive a bit longer. kind of worried that Astrobots #6 isn't going to happen... :( we really liked this comic and wanted to see Athenia and Artimis connect with each other. We've had a figure of Athenia for a while actually she's adorable and don't have the money for Artimis, but someday

love that she basically scales with 6" humans lmao

(also as fun as it was to use the oversized t30esque swords with threezero Arcee we advise that you don't do that, the thumbs can pop out. was totally worth multiple photos involving the swords though, she's happy with that, we're gonna apply some floor polish to see if the thumb will stick in better that way)

like. as a figure it's amazing how well she can balance on a heel strut without assistance

she does have a heel strut assist also but if you pose her with balance and a flat surface you don't need it

and her swords let her do stuff like this!

tbh it's very striking to us how much she (mayhaps accidentally?) resembles both Gaea and in color scheme the Rust Renegade / Torchbearer team that forms Victorion. Green and red are great colors to do with add-ons of grays, grey-blue, yellow and orange! when one of us was playing around years ago with coming up with a transformer representation of self she went for mostly deep green and pink so, relatable. red and green and pink and green are complementary as it turns out so we're billing to bet the people who designed her for Astrobots just thought she looks cool in those colors

astrobots really went lets have a cynical thoughtful determined robot catgirl sword mom protagonist and we are here for that:

anyone else on the edge of their seats w/ patient anticipation of what's going to go down in Astrobots #6? We are. the story so far lays out a complex world where mass produced bots r stratified by hardlined code thanks to humanity, hierarchy therein inherited from them too...

reading that in issues #1 and #2 alone for both atlas city & the persephone ship gave the impression that something was deeply wrong that would be the source of conflict (see: atlas being a jerk). also was nice 2 be able 2 see the overlaps between athenia & arcee, & references to transformers such as solus, scylla, and xaaron

#5 ends on such a massive cliffhanger. the conflict is laid out sure, but how is artimis going 2 be psychologically throughout the series? r her clashes with athenia going to have some level of homoeroticism, and can the latter help her? will atlas's bioessentialism end him?

his whole shtick of trying to make a genetically improved humanity without hate he learned from them & attempting to coerce a specific line of bots to do it may not seem like him being a misogynist at a first glance but when you account for humans making that line that way, well. a greek goddess-named line of bots who r sword wielding curvy bipeds w/ cat ears & hardlined coding to nurture with skills to raise humans no other line got (it is unclear at present if multiple genders exist per bot line or not, we genuinely hope for the former) sure does feel like humans had a particular idea about what kind of fierce parental figure they wanted to mass-produce that raise even more questions. one that leaves one realizing humans made the bots of all lines without thinking about programming modularity. frames too. they all have heels, no body type variety, gave us a feeling of the humans in charge not quite having humanity's or robotkind's interests in mind so much as perpetuating a specific kind of society especially since the one body type only thing is true of every other bot line because of adherence to an alienated concept of function (its still unclear whether the remaining humans in the sol system are capitalists or collectivists or what but we have a feeling which one it is). and atlas making the threats he does thus does come off as him having recreated a form of discrimination a few times removed from human context.

the other thing we like is that astrobots doesnt simply do humans vs robots. it is instead robots vs robots who are both custodians of different kinds of humanity, following up on conflict of genocidal reactionary humans vs robots and humans living in harmony responded to w/ dirty nukes, after exodus from earth.

we do genuinely think this very easily some of Furman's best writing. there's an earnest revisiting of older ideas with new ones in a new setting that carries a great deal of nuance and delicacy. Athenia and Apollo's insightul valiant outlooks are entwined, minor characters r fun

[eldritchamy]

🐯

I'm only intimidating if you haven't met me irl, then you realize I have the world's most terminal case of Nonthreatening Dork disease

because meeting me irl means you're in range of my cognitohazardous properties

is that a joke? you don't know.

[echthr0s]

my toxic trait is that whenever people start talkin about how such-and-such is an allegory for some real-life social ill or whatever I can physically feel myself losing interest

[blackpilljesus]

The rise in popularity of single childfree women should signal that we need to start preparing. I've spoken about this before but want to address a common concern of safety regarding maIe retaliation. At this point some women may think they'll be safer trying to get a maIe but the statistics show otherwise. There's a reason women fought for rights in the first place, we all know that maIes as a collective are horrible beings. If maIes were pleasant to be around & reproduce with, they wouldn't need to force women into it.

Now I dont have all the answers in terms of what to do in the face of maIe retaliation but where to start:

1 - Move in silence. MaIes dont need to know our every move. MaIes have enough power as is, them knowing our strategy on top of that wont help. Hell, play dumb sometimes. This also applies to other women, if they push marriage & kids bs be measured in your response, in the end you know your truth. At the end of the day most of these women are also aware of the danger maIes pose.

2 - Organise. This is tough, extremely tough i can't lie. For one we're scattered all over the world & people in our real lives wouldn't have the committment to this nor believe in deviating from the nuclear structure but it is something needed. Even if it's just online, find or build networks with likeminded women. I say this as a lone wolf but infrastructure & network is needed because the government will make it harder to survive alone so some would need to be able to lean on each other for support even if it's just verbal. Disassociate from maIes as far as you can. Take up learning how to defend yourself. If you're serious about this; be prepared to break the rules at some point because playing nice & by the law wont work. These things are set up by men for men and it wont help us. I'm not saying go out there & purposefuly break the law or put yourself in harms way, just saying prepare. It sounds far out now but the current system cant be counted on, blind eyes are turned when maIes abuse women, women are punished for defending themselves under the system. Even if you dont want to go down the route of community, learn to take care of yourself & hold your own down.

3 - Stop arguing with maIes. This doesnt mean that xys are right, I say this a lot but maIes are fully aware of everything. Arguing with maIes online is a waste of time, time that can go to building for yourself or likeminded women. MaIes denying female oppression is part of the game to keep you wasting your energy on them as opposed to working on yourself. It's to keep you in their hands; doesn't matter whether you're right or not, how many statistics you throw at them, you're still biting their bait.

4 - Stack up on resources & money. If you have resources & money and the priviledge to save then start now. If/when things go downhill it wont be a snap thing but a transition so this window needs to be used to the best of our advantage. Take advantage of the privileges you have now to set yourself for the future because that could very well be gone.

I doubt we'd win tbh but I'd rather die trying than live submitting. I will mention that I know it's scary but we have to think forward. Bear in mind the system has never worked for women, some will say things like "but when women leave maIes get more violent" but there is no safety in the first place. Women are sexually harrassed & assaulted any where at any time with no protection already. Women are constantly told of all the things they should or shouldn't do to avoid maIe violence and it doesnt work anyways, maIes will continue to abuse women & girls. No amount of listening & obeying has helped women because it doesn't matter what the reason for maIe violence is, if they cant find a reason they'll create a reason because their motive is to make women suffer in addition to reproduction & having labour.

Now I know many will speak about the violence of maIe retaliation which I'll address in part 3. This is part 2 of 'the rise in single childfree women' group of posts.

Part 1

[thecoolerliauditore]

saw you mention gender for a bit - i wonder why grian is feminized so much? it's of course because of the feedback loop of fanon but how did it snowball so much? it would be funny if it's from him using the alex player model

I'm probably not the guy to ask for this just to be clear right off the back. I love observing fandom trends but I'm just not keeping an eye on Grian stuff more often than not. Grain (lol) of salt, blah blah blah.

So first off I think we should tackle what "feminized" means in this context because I can see that argument being made for both the default-ish generic young anime guy grian I have in my head when I think "fanon grian" and. well. arianna griande and the like (I'd argue cuteguy falls into this latter category)

I'm gonna start with the first one and use my own Grian as an example because I think he's pretty much as standard as you can go in the former category, and that's more or less on purpose. Pictured here in all of his tiny anime twink glory (next to Joel and Cleo who are also meant to be pretty short!)

So while I can't read the minds of other Grian artists, I can offer what went through my head when I designed mine and try to have a guess at how much other people thought the same.

First things first I do think this specific brand of Grian is "feminized" -- if you compare him to the CC. The goal at least for me was more to communicate youthfulness than femininity, but those traits tend to go hand in hand with male characters due to them having pretty much the same features (no facial/body hair is a big one).

Artists in this fandom tend to swing on the younger side, and people tend to base their designs unconsciously (or consciously tbh) on themselves or media they like, the latter being very likely to be media aimed at their age group and thus having a cast of characters around their age. Doesn't help that most popular animated things are made for younger audiences, so chances are most people are basing their art styles in media where the casts age range is 12-25.

For me I do think most of my designs have a little bit of added in youthfulness/femininity unless I Really want to get across age/masculinity. It's a lot easier to separate the 30 year olds from the 40 year olds if the 30 year olds look a bit closer to 20, doubly so when most of the stuff I like (and thus reference from purposefully or not) has casts full of 15 year olds. Alot of this also applies to the other younger men in my designs aside from Grian, like Joel who's next to him.

But Joel is still drawn with stubble and a bit taller than Grian, so what gives about Grian specifically?

For me personally, I draw everything with the Life Series in mind, especially Third Life in Grian's case. And the character who Grian plays off the most in that series, especially in Third Life, is Scar.

While I do think the aforementioned age factor also impacts a lot of Scar designs (as well as younger artists' tendency towards shyness when drawing muscles), I think most people see Scar's masculinity as a key trait of his. I think I'm kind of unique in that I take descriptions of their appearances ingame as somewhat canon (e.g. Scott being canonically referred to as "handsome") but Scar really lays it on thick with "Hot Guy" and the abs and so on that it's pretty much screaming for acknowledgement when you're designing him.

Grian is also short irl and this even gets mentioned by Joel in the first WL episode, so it made enough sense to me that should be something exaggerated with Desert Duo's designs to make them look better next to eachother.

This is also maybe getting a bit into headcanon territory but when I think Grian I don't necessarily think predator or brute force, I think of him setting his traps and giggling maniacally and manipulating what he wants out of people with his words instead of his sword. And him just being like. a little gremlin thing compared to his Big Strong Man partner in crime whilst also, actually being arguably the more dangerous of the two feels harmonious.

If we do a layer deeper into headcanon land, I've also always seen him as more frail and physically weak due to Martyn's concern for his safety and his own more anxious nature in 3L as one of the first players to really consider having to defend himself -- if you're dropped into a death game arena and you're the smallest one there, you would naturally be a lot more nervous than the big guys and come off as more "insane" for wanting to set up seemingly unnecessary defenses or striking first. (<-- this is why I don't talk about Grian much btw all of my thoughts regarding him are seeped in headcanons lol)

Alot of Grian artists are also Desert Duo artists and while they might not be operating by the same logic I am I have to assume there's some common points.

I've seen this meme used a lot when people make fun of other peoples DD art and it's almost always people with very little self-awareness. it's funny to me (and this probably could be its own discussion about queer tropes and xenophobia, but whatever haha funny it's literally them so true so true.)

One final note on this is I think this specific brand of twink Grian might be dipping in popularity? I've been seeing a lot more Grians that are chunkier or entirely throw out his anime-main-character-ness by making his glasses or curly hair heavily exaggerated. Which is cool I especially loveeee the more cartoony puff ball grians that have gotten more popular. Idk if it's necessarily in response to the anti-twink-propaganda or if it's just a new stage in Grian design development as we get further away from the Third Life Desert Duo meta, but it's fun and I think speaks the feminizing not really being an intentional trait and more of a consequence of other things.

As for CuteGuy/Griande I can't really offer as much insight since I don't really get the appeal either lol except that I think it's fun in the way drag is fun.

I think what a lot of people need to remember when they ask for more masculine designs is that masculinity irl is often synonymous with less customization. Alot of it is practical (like short hair obviously you can't style like long hair) and especially outside of queer circles a lot of it is just gender roles -- alot of men will refuse to wear literally plain mens t shirts if it's an eye-catching colour.

There's a great Derek Guy interview where he talks about how men tend to misunderstand what "fashion" is and how most cishet men actually care deeply about fashion. He makes the example of offering two pairs of jeans -- one is a regular pair of blue jeans that costs fifty dollars and another is free of charge but happens to be pink, and how most men despite "not caring about fashion" will go for the fifty dollar blue jeans.

If you want an example of mens fashion and its "boring" aesthetics made more to fit into a crowd than to stand out, just go on instagram and look at pictures of the Empires CCs together and watch the guys get absolutely mogged. This isn't me calling the men badly dressed (in fact I've actually noticed before that CC Joel is like. super well put together) but more of a statement on how womens clothing is designed vs how mens clothing is designed.

I know where my eyes go first, at least. (self indulgent note: Pearl is kind of an exception to the rule for reasons but I cannot say lest I betray my own moral code. however my eyes go to her first anyway because she is stunningly beautiful she could wear a potato sack and it'd work)

And while I don't agree with this sentiment (I actually loveee menswear deeply it's. a thing), in the world of fandom artists who typically are big fans of the gay gay homosexual gay and more into high-decorative, sexier stuff, clawing at any ounce of femininity that these men exhibit is probably an opportunity hard to pass on. This also happens with Jimmy on occasion I think, with stuff like the maid dress. And Ariana Griande is like Drag Drag, not just a dress but a whole persona, so that in combination with feeding into yaoi tropes for popular ships like Scarian and Grumbo, I'm not surprised there's such a gap between actual screentime and fanmade content.

Also is Griande even like. That popular anymore? I also don't think I've seen CuteGuy all that much unless it's DDVAU stuff specifically.

I'd be interested to hear my artist friends comment on this too since again I feel like I'm not the right person to ask lol. Take this as an invitation to yap I would be fascinated hearing your perspectives.

I also think his popularity and younger audience might be playing a big part in this especially in conjunction with the first point about drawing characters younger-looking but this is getting fairly rambly already lol

Go follow the menswear guy (@/dieworkwear) on twitter if you're interested in menswear btw he's very insightful and funny

[langernameohnebedeutung]

Thinking about writing a 14 year old girl who starts out bratty and grows and changes, but thinking about the best way to write her in a bratty manner without seeming like I'm bashing on teenage girls in general, any thoughts?

Oh, that's actually something I have quite a few thoughts about!

the shortest answer I can think of is to look at teenagers you know in real life and their behaviours - that's a good start to make that character authentic. A lot of people get age milestones wrong when writing kids (personally that's why I avoid writing kids) and especially with girls, it feels like a lot of authors can only write 'basically an over-sized toddler' and 'she only cares about boys and sex'. Now, teenagers are also tricky because they are all very different. I think learning about what actual 14yo do in their freetime, what interests them, what music they listen to, what jokes they make - or to maybe look at some of the things you did at that age - can be very helpful to avoid being too "how do you do, fellow kids!

Tbh, I always feel like the biggest issue with the way people write the 'bratty teenage girl' is that she's always there to be the 'reaction character'—because she's written by adults, and it reflects how adults feel dealing with teenagers, especially teenage girls. Usually, you have a main character, typically a middle-aged man, who is doing something, and the teenage girl character is standing on the sidelines, chewing gum and telling him he's boring or uncool or be like 'urgh, old people'. At the end of the story he wins her over and, in a heart-warming scene, she will say something like, '…actually, you're not that bad,' or '…okay, maybe you are pretty cool.' It mostly just feels like the adult author feeling insecure about their own age and whether they're still in touch with The Youth, and it's been done A Lot.

Then you often have teenagers as damsels to be saved—and the bratty factor often makes them more difficult to save. That's also a very common trope that often results in people hating on the character, even though, in my opinion, that's often unfair (and very often especially unfairly directed at female characters).

If you think of teenage girl characters who work really well, I think it's the ones that sincerely reflect the experience of being a teenage girl (or a teenager in general). Or whose experiences serve as a good allegory for those experiences. Think of your classic 'teenage detective' stories where the adults just. don't. listen. In those stories, 'bratty' is often a label assigned to the main characters BY adults who ignore them—we understand the context of why they are bratty. It makes perfect sense for them to be that way. Or think of your YA protagonists who stand a little outside society, who often try to do what is right but get very little recognition for it. Or think of all those shows featuring teenagers that have aged well and are still popular with adults—shows like Avatar or Kim Possible. They are usually stories that take the problems of teenagers and the world they face quite seriously - by placing them side by side with actually world-threatening events. While at the same time, the dismissive way adults treat teenagers is a giant threat to these worlds.

Now, obviously, these were shows specifically FOR kids—but I would argue that similar rules apply when writing a teenager in any other genre, especially if you want to avoid bashing them. Take their issues seriously. Explain why they are 'bratty.' Explore what it means to be 'bratty.'

For example, right now I'm rewatching Gotham (a show not for kids), and a major character is Selina Kyle, the young Catwoman, who is living on the streets as a homeless girl. She has a flippant, careless, often mocking demeanor and doesn't really let people in. A lot of people see her as a 'brat'—but because you see her in many situations, you understand what her life is like. You see how people treat her (she's frequently referred to as 'street trash'), and you understand perfectly why she acts that way.

When she does show that she cares about someone, when she lets people in, or when we find out, for example, that she takes care of other kids on the street or the stories she tells herself to feel better about her family, it’s not just to make some adult character feel better. In those moments, we actually learn something about her, build a meaningful connection with her, and see what makes HER tick. She is more than just the 'bratty teenager.'"

Obviously, it doesn't always have to be a giant tragic backstory. That really depends on the story you're telling. Personally, I would argue that even being a teenager (especially a girl!) in normal middle-class society comes with enough reasons to be a 'brat.' There you are, 13 years old, and old men are cat-calling you on the street. You're in your training bra while the beauty industry bombards you with insane beauty standards. Your parents are divorcing, and when you want to understand why, everyone talks to you in a baby voice. You get bullied in school, someone makes deepfakes of you and shares them on Snapchat, and when you try to explain that to the teacher, you can see their eyes glaze over because they don't have a clue what you're talking about.

One very common statement I hear about teenage girls is "they do it for the attention" - which, to a point, is true. Obviously, they want attention. Everyone wants attention to some degree. But notice how this is the same language often used to ignore and neglect the needs (especially medical needs) of adult women. Teenagers also often don't have the language to communicate the complex feelings and situations they are dealing with now. Being bratty or sulking or similar behaviours are they way of trying communicate their feelings. A good way to write a teenage girl like that is to explore her character and to be true to the motives and reasons why she is acting like this.

For example, I think a lot of teenagers are in a very alienated position in society. They're in a very difficult phase in their lives: They are growing into adult problems and adult feelings, adult routines. But those are still VERY big shoes for them to fill. It is overwhelming. This is also why they make convenient main-characters for these kinds of YA novels - because these are not yet integrated into society. They often have an outside perspective. They question the status quo. And this also appeals to teenage audiences because they are in the position where they start questioning the world around them, their family, school, gender, religion, politics.

Teenagers want to have an identity for themselves, make their own decisions, and explore who they are—but very often, the adults around them still treat them as kids, limiting them without even bothering to explain why. Much of the environment created for teenagers is out of touch with their interests—it's often condescending, lecturing, and not very empowering. Every time they have new hobbies - Pokemon Go, Fortnite, some new band, they are always mocked relentlessly by the same adults who don't even know how to entertain them. Some kids on youtube are eating tidepods and suddenly their entire generation is being blamed. The same messages are repeated over and over at teenagers and they're preached to in this way regardless of their own experiences or behaviour. If you are a teenager, no one cares about YOUR life, situations, or struggles—which, at this time, can be quite serious. You want to take charge of your own life, start captaining that ship—but very often, you stand by while some adult does it for you, telling you not to start smoking (it's dangerous!! Don't listen to your friends!!). (again, doesn't it make sense why teenagers see themselves in girls fighting dystopian governments?)

When kids become teenagers, their parents often stop being the most important go-to people in their lives—this is when their friends become their social bubble, and they share many things ONLY with them. So, the things adults often mock about teenagers (like 'But daaaaad, I reaaaally want to go out tonight!' or 'Muuuuum, I really need that One Direction tattoo!!') genuinely are that important to them. 'But everyone is going!!!' really is a valid reason in their eyes. And they often experience adults who not only don't understand but are extremely mocking toward them. Another reason why they might seem bratty to adults - when their behaviour might seem perfectly sensible to them.

Also, consider that when teenagers are portrayed as dumb or naive, that's usually the adult perspective on kids being less cynical and experienced than adults - and that's why they get angry when you say no to something or get bored and annoyed when you lecture them. They might genuinely believe that a new top or a trip to the clubs will help them win new friends, or that this boy might really like them if they do what he says. It seems real to them because they haven't lived through it yet. They have hope that these things will work, and they're a lot less worried about risks because they haven't seen things go wrong as often as adults have. (Just recently, I walked down a narrow street on a steep hill that I used to skate down at breakneck speed without any helmet or protection as a teen—where I could never have slowed down or avoided a car—and back then, it hadn't even occurred to me how dangerous it was. As an adult, I had a 'how am I still alive??' moment seeing that place.)

You know how we often say, 'Be nice to toddlers and babies, this really is their first time on a plane/in a car/in a supermarket'? The same applies to teenagers when it comes to things adults find childish. Wearing THAT outfit or going THERE really is that important to them. And do you know who they hang out with? Who some of their most important social contacts are? Other teenagers, who also think THAT is important. That romance book with its familiar tropes or those song lyrics we've heard a thousand times really are That Deep for them—because it’s new to them

They also don’t live within the same contexts as we do—they don’t have jobs, they go to school, and they don’t get money or immediate rewards for what they do. Is a teenager sulking during a trip or on holiday? Well, they worked just as hard at school this year as you did at work, but they don’t get a say in where the trip goes, most of the time. When they mow the lawn, they don’t really care what the garden looks like—because it doesn’t impact them. So of course they roll their eyes when you ask them to. They live in a world where they constantly do things without seeing any direct benefit, while the things they do find rewarding are often mocked or forbidden by adults

So yeah, one way to make a bratty teen sympathetic is to explore why she is bratty and to show her side of events.

Also: You can explore what makes her less bratty! Perhaps she's nostalgic for simpler times or she really loves animals or she moved and misses her old home or she is passionate about a hobby or music or drawing. These things might make her more approachable to people who also respect them and we see the personality beneath the brattiness.

And also you can explore what bratty means! There are many different flavours of "bratty teenagers". Some are already well-established tropes like the rich brat* or the goth kid. But the real challenge to making a bratty teenager likeable, imo, is to give them a distinctive personality and to make their bratty behaviour reflect real life motivations. In which way is she bratty? Does she disagree with everything you say? Perhaps there is a bigger thing she feels she's not listened to about. Is she reclusive? could be there are a lot of arguments happening around the house she wants to avoid. Does she have specific opinions and viewpoints she stands in at all times? Or is she contrarian on principle? Are there people she's particularly bratty towards? How does she act around her friends, teachers, strangers, neighbours, parents etc. I think the more you explore that the more she becomes a person and the more she becomes a person, the less it feels like you're bashing or mocking teenagers.

On the other hand, you could also write a character who really is a huge dick or even a villain. There's also many flavours of that - anything from the pissy older sibling to the mean girl bullying people in school to the Creepy Kid. (Think of characters like Joffrey from Game of Thrones, that's how far you can go with an evil brat villain even in adult story.) In these cases, I would also explore why they are who they are - even if the answers to this might be less sympathetic.

If you do that, you could also include other teenage characters with very different personalities to show that you are not making general statements about teenagers but that this is just one character you are describing. Or you could give her parents who act similarly. Or maybe it's a question of schooling - that's another popular trope for teenage villains, they might be a reflectin of a dysfunctional social environment like their school or the place they live.

*the thing about the rich brat trope: As someone who worked as a teacher at a boarding school for very wealthy kids, I often have issues with the very shallow depictions of this that basically boil down to "this kid gets everything they want so they suck". There are some very specific forms of neglect that are common among rich people and tbh, I think if you want to go in that direction, I would also look at what life this kid lives and WHAT they are lacking.

[mangled-by-disuse]

#you guys are so weird and obsessed #do you understand that I'm talking about women and their FREEWILL in their sexual behaviour right?

"... And in this context, I can't possibly see how the limitations of free will (sorry, FREEWILL) for a minority of women might be a relevant topic."

buddy friendo pal a thing does not need to be a universal experience to be a relevant one. Rape and coercion affect enough women (AND men, why is it always the pro life crowd who assume reproductive rights are a Women Only Zone) to make "nobody forces you to have sex" a comically out of touch statement.

This is WHY people bring up rape, coercion, and mothers who are underage or otherwise not able to give meaningful consent. Not because we think they're the majority of reason birth control and abortion are needed, but because if any of those cases exist, then "just don't have sex then" ceases to function as an argument to reduce reproductive healthcare access. I'm not actually fighting for reproductive rights for my own hedonistic lifestyle, there's a very real chance I'm infertile and also I actually was celibate for a good number of years. My investment in reproductive rights is that birth control and abortion have always been part of society because THEY ARE NEEDED, and if they're only needed for a minority of people, so the fuck what? You need the infrastructure in place for people who have no other recourse, as well as for people who took necessary precautions but found themselves in an unpredictable situation. Even if I agreed with you that celibacy was a necessary precaution, you still need a backstop for when precautions fail.

(also may I present to you the radical notion that free will doesn't stop at the bedroom door, and people should also have the free will to use the tools at their disposal to mitigate risk. Or to provide them. you know, because free will )

Anyway, point is: I'm not obsessed with rape, you're literally the one who made an argument based on "all sex is freely entered into".

also to be clear this is not the biggest issue with your argument it's just the most obviously silly one

waiting for a politician to asssert your "bodily autonomy" "reproductive freedom" or whatever lingo those people use those days is CRAZY because literally no one forces you to have sex with anyone

You are de facto "free from sex" by your own very decision to not engage in sexual activity with anyone

What you guys actually want is "sex without reproductive consequence" access. This is a better term to objectively convey what you want.

But I get why some of you may be uncomfortable with it because it debunks the feminist ideal of being in "control" of their sexuality. Truth is many of you are not any more sexually disciplined than men. You want to have accesss to casual sex as much as they do. Just without the risk of pregnancy. That's why it's so funny to see (radical) feminist screech about how men are too sex obsessed...and then turn around begging to upkeep birth control & abortion : if you guys weren't obsessed with accessing to sex you wouldn't make those cause the crux of your movement. You love & need sex as much as those moids.

And by enabling casual you de facto allows to mediocre men fancying acess to women's body. Which somehow pisses you off because "how dare mediocre men think they deserve access to female body for sex??!" right? But you can't whine about the consequences of a cause you cherish.

And yes, more & more feminist are speaking up in favor of celibacy and more against sexual liberation, which is good. But the fact a significant portion of them still get veeeery uncomfortable if not angry when (non feminist) women argue that celibacy is actually a form of birth control and that "reproductive control" is irrelevant to the access to chemical substances or procedures altering your reproductive system. This behavior makes me believe this whole "vive la celibacy" is nothing but a posture and that self proclaimed feminist are aren't as much interested toppling the status quo as they pretend to be.

[olderthannetfic]

I think the discussion about if loli guys are into actual children misses the point tbh. Even when they’re well aware that it’s not actual children and they don’t WANT it to be and they’re specifically into the non-realism of it…. A lot of loli (and moe, which is not unrelated since it’s rooted in the aesthetics of it but applied outside the specific genre) in anime is still about this fantasy of women as helpless and innocent and needing to rely on you and, above all, not having real world problems. Granted, a lot of romantic fantasy is like that, arguably especially stuff about women aimed at men…. But I think that is what personally makes me not really want to deal with guys who are super into it that in my own personal life. Like, let’s not pretend that a certain kind of guy getting used to expecting women to be like that in anime and video games hasn’t had some real consequences for women in nerd culture who insist on being full human beings over like, the past decade and a half lol. Like it’s just hard to imagine that being the fantasy of a guy who specifically wants a take-charge, dominant, independent kind of woman over like…. Idk, lady villains stepping on his face or something, lol

I’m hardcore anti-censorship and don’t believe that preferences in romantic or sexual fantasy in fiction has an exact relationship to what we want in real life…. But it seems strange and anti-intellectual to argue that media *never* has that influence. Like, just divorce this from arguments about porn and “problematic shipping” for a second. There are a ton of people, of multiple genders but especially over age 20 or so they’re more likely to be men, who seem to think that if they’re friendly enough to someone of their preferred gender (or really, opposite gender, since this is based on an “everyone of my preferred gender is a potential partner” norm that people into the same gender just can’t assume) they’ll eventually reciprocate their feelings, or they *should*. The Nice Guy thing. Do you really think that the numerous romantic comedies that have that as a dynamic, or the video games whose “romance” mechanic is “give them gifts and talk to them enough and they’ll eventually be a love interest possibility,” doesn’t play into that at least somewhat? Like, we’re all smart enough to know that Stardew Valley and Harvest Moon aren’t like real life romance, I think…. But did you know that yet when you were 13? Do you think *everybody* who plays those knows that?

Take it out of the context of romance at all. If you’re a lawyer, how many times have you heard people who have misconceptions about what you do based on legal dramas? Or for doctors, about medical dramas?

And that doesn’t put any responsibility on the creators to change stuff (I mean, the “reward = romance” thing is just a very easy video game mechanic for instance, and programming in something that more closely resembles actual romance would be impossible, and it’s not like it’s any less realistic than like, how you fish or mine or farm in those games), it’s still on consumers to think critically (again, that the video game that has you fighting slime monsters in mines or where you grow broccoli in just a few days and harvesting crops is just one click isn’t going for realism perhaps. People wring their hands about the general popularity of farming games like it’s yearning for some political/cultural thing, and forget that the specific fantasy is it without all the toil. Just like plenty of people love playing restaurant games who work(ed) in restaurants irl and hate(d) it). But like, we talk about “society” influencing people in terms of stuff like racism and sexism. Mass media is part of society. This is why a lot of feminist criticism over the years has focused on critiquing broad patterns that recur in media, to the point that they become societal trends — and a lot of people take this in *unconsciously*.

I think what that one earlier anon meant with “especially with porn” is that porn shouldn’t be like, an exception to this. It’s kind of weird how people who are all for media analysis of problematic patterns in other kinds of media think it suddenly doesn’t apply if it’s media designed for the purpose of getting off. And sure plenty of us are into things in porn we have no desire for IRL (I love mpreg and I love kidfic, I have less than zero desire to have kids and especially be pregnant irl, to the point that it’s actually a squick for me in *het* fic), plenty of people are into specifically the fantasy version minus the Issues they have with that stuff in the IRL version. But… that’s not everyone. Some people’s porn preferences do match up with what they’re into irl. Even when they don’t, as with the loli example there’s often some other particular reason they like that

I don’t think it’s right to go around asking strangers to go around explaining their porn preferences to you, but I think it’s fair to think about it yourself (in the interest of introspection if nothing else), and to critique broad patterns in fandom, same as we would for any other kind of media. Why is porn the special exception for which all the other rules about 101 media analysis don’t apply?

--

[gayhoediaz]

Another sexuality headcanon: How would you describe the gap between what Buck thinks about his sexuality and what it is. Less the gender of the people he's attracted to and more: what he enjoys and doesn't, what he's good at and not, his beliefs about the range of sexual pleasure that are possible for him.

Where Eddie has very little sexual experience, he's fully aware of his inexperience and (thinks he) is fine with it. Buck thinks of himself as sexually experienced, but is severely limited in his imagination about what's possible. Eddie knows what he doesn't know, whereas Buck doesn't know what he doesn't know, if that makes sense.

ooooh this is such an incredibly interesting question i’m immediately setting it to a draft because i know i’m going to have a lot of sporadic thoughts throughout the day before i’m ready to post it.

personally, i don’t doubt that buck is good at pleasing his partners, as fun as that storyline was. even when he was buck 1.0, he had a massive need to be useful, and really i think that’s what made him turn into a “fuckboy” in the first place. i think he is similar to eddie in the sense that he is used to being the one to give. unless it was a really really quick hookup, i think he always ate those women out, because it’s famously one of those things that is seen as selfless, and something that a lot of men won’t do or won’t do often.

i would argue that buck isn’t all that adventurous in bed because he knows what he is good at and he knows what works. (we’re specifically talking about pussy right now because from what we know it seems as if his bisexuality is going to hit him like a truck. but if your belief is that he’s been with men before i would argue a lot of these things would still apply.) he knows how to eat, he knows how to curl his fingers, he knows how to fuck - knows how to not go too fast or too slow, knows how to read his partner’s body language when they want him to go harder or softer, etc.

i think buck is confident in a handful of sexual acts he has carefully perfected over the years, however i do not believe that he is confident when it comes to sex period. because i would argue that people who are kinky and/or confident in the bedroom are happily willing to try absolutely anything (within reason - as in the only thing that would stop them would be them not wanting to do it, but not them wanting to do it, but being nervous to do it, that they won’t be good at it? if that makes any sense?) i think if someone asks him to do something different from what he’s used to, i think he would hesitate because he just simply wants to be good.

i think buck thinks of himself as experienced because he is good at these certain things (and i think perhaps he considers himself kinky because of vanilla-kink like cockrings, fuzzy handcuffs, etc.)

the other day i got an anon that asked me if i thought that buck liked being pegged and without thinking twice i said yes, but now i’m thinking… i don’t know that he has ever tried it? i’m not abt to die on the hill that he hasn’t, because i think it’s one of those things where it’s technically not his responsibility to make it “good”? if that makes sense? at least that would be my thinking if i was pegging a guy who had never been pegged before, i would just want him to relax and make sure he’s okay and having a good time - but that brings me right around to “buck likes sex to make other people feel good and to get their approval” the only way i can see “straight” buck getting into pegging is because he meets a girl who really really wants to peg him and i think that goes for a lot of sexual acts tbh.

i also think most women he has been with just like the women eddie has been with (and i’ve heard this from similar guys irl - buff, masc, etc) just kind of don’t pay a lot of attention to them in general outside of their dicks.

quite frankly, i think buck is going to go through a little bit of a shock the first time he is with a man (whether it’s eddie or not) and i think it’s just from the simplest things like suddenly he’s being… kissed? like a lot? they’re telling him he’s beautiful - not just hot but… beautiful. and they’re palming his dick through his boxers, and it’s not new, sure - but the way they’re doing it is new. they’re doing it softly, teasing him - not to reach a goal of a hard dick so he can get inside them and please them but just… palming him to slowly tease him, make him feel good.

then they’re asking him what he wants, which i also don’t think is common.

and i think buck comes to the conclusion that while he does like to give, being on the other side of things is also pretty good. allowing himself to have enough belief in himself that they’ll still want him even if he takes a moment to just lie back and enjoy himself.

however i also think that once he and eddie get together and he starts to notice eddie getting kinkier and more of a cockslut, buck simultaneously realizes that being controlling in bed is pretty good too - which is also something i think he has never allowed himself to be because most of the people he’s been with have been so much physically smaller than him. but when eddie starts do want it harder, starts to want more - i think buck finds himself enjoying it a lot, and yes a huge part of that is that he just loves giving eddie what eddie needs, but i think it’s also an outlet at the same time, not needing to be so careful all the time (although they’re careful enough of course.)

and i have talked to @queerbuck about this at length, but as far as both of them go, i think they just grow to be absolutely disgusting together, and exploring a million things neither of them have ever considered before and i think it’s going to be beautiful.

[illegiblewords]

Serious talk about meta under the cut.

I don't know who might need to hear it, but fwiw mental flexibility is a huge part of analysis (and interacting with other humans lol). You need to be able to account for multiple possibilities when examining a work, or understanding a social exchange. You need to be able to separate what is objective fact from your own subjective interpretation and judgment. The most negative interpretation is not automatically the most worthwhile or true. Someone throwing accusations around in-line with their own worst interpretations does not guarantee those accusations are warranted. You are not a bad or stupid person for disagreeing. Shit needs to withstand scrutiny. I don't always strike the right balance myself. I do the best I can but I'm definitely not perfect. Tbh I'm not beyond pettiness either--although I try to keep that out of actual analysis lol. There have been times I've griped to friends privately or blogged about how I felt (sans tags, with spoiler blocks so people can opt out). I've griped recently. I'm bound to gripe again in the future. Some level of griping is inevitable imo and I figure no one is 100% immune.

All that said, even if someone’s take isn't canon AND even if it's something I really dislike--I'd personally rather people follow their passions anyway. Hands down. I could be in the middle of a rant and my answer would still be that the subject of my frustration gets to exist. I'm not the boss and odds are we're going with different versions in our own heads. Discouraging another fan from creating due to my preferences or narrative approach would horrify me. I've seen fandoms where gatekeeping like that killed the creative community and it was fucking awful.

Not everyone is confident in their own judgment. Not everyone faced with a pissed off person trying to use lore and accusations like clubs will feel okay continuing with their own vision. Elitism and manipulation (especially through rhetoric) can be present within analysis. People are not being taught how to recognize those things properly. Analysts aren't always aware or invested enough to even be careful. It’s legit easy to get caught up in ideas or feelings to the point of forgetting about other people’s, and adjusting to account for alternate approaches takes some work. For me at least, I think having a 'no insults' policy and being super careful when it comes to absolute claims (assertions not qualified by 'I think' or 'it could be argued') helps.

Anyway. Just because a person calls something ‘meaningless’ doesn't make it meaningless. Someone pooh-poohing an observation you made doesn't make your observation less true or important. Employing a literary term doesn't mean that individual actually understands the term, how it works, or how to apply it. Which is to say nothing of romantic chemistry or whatever. I encourage readers to extrapolate on this. ‘Shallow’ could apply as much as ‘meaningless’. Denying parallels exist by itself doesn’t actually negate those parallels. Your version of a character may not be the same as the fan next to you’s and that difference doesn't have to detract. There's more I could say on the subject (I've edited out a lot) but basically--just because another fan isn't into what you're doing doesn't automatically make what you're doing wrong, immoral, shoddy, or otherwise less.

Seriously, vet shit. Question the entire premise an analyst tries to establish then decide for yourself if it holds water. Turn over word choices and assertions in your head before deciding if they're appropriate. Do it to me too. I don't care if someone is the holy goddamn emperor of analysts. Just because a person says something is good or bad, true or false, whatever the hell doesn't make it so. Just because a person uses a technical term doesn't mean they're discussing it effectively. Quality of argument matters beyond the packaging it’s wrapped in. It's important to protect yourself from people whose priority is enforcing their own preferences, including dismissing things they aren't partial to.

I just don't want anyone shamed silent man. Not even people whose takes drive me up the fucking wall. Neither I nor any other analyst is an authority here. And there are people who are absolutely ready to take advantage of other people’s insecurities to assert themselves. Might not even be malicious, just indifferent.

For me, analysis feels kind of like uncovering a dinosaur skeleton. I want to share the cool and exciting things I find with other people. Sometimes I might be sorting out what my own thoughts and feelings are. It's also possible to examine why you're uncomfortable with something, or why you love something another person hates, while making very clear what is YOUR READING and not THE READING. Offering a variety of possibilities is very different from presenting yourself as the only correct one. One note at the end when everything else was insulting and intolerant is like a band-aid over a wound.

EDIT: As a last point, that I'm throwing in just-in-case. If anyone reading this thinks they may have overreached and done stuff I've mentioned + feels shitty about it… that's still not the end of the world. It’s okay. This is hard stuff to learn and I really don't think anyone's perfect at it. Worth the effort though. Just gotta take a deep breath, acknowledge you're a fallible human same as everyone else, and do the best you can going forward. Life goes on.

[mathlann]

Heinrix :3

How I feel about this character

Uhh....I will link [here] for a much longer answer on how I feel about that man and my answer later down the line, but he is a ragged chew toy to me. He's genuinely such a good microcosm of the role of "privileged" psykers in the Imperium and all the identity issues that come with that and also the inherent cross-purposes between the State Power of the Inquisition and the Frontier Authority of Rogue Traders. And I say this as an expression of love: I want him to fuck off and out of the airlock.

All the people I ship romantically with this character

Heinrix x Cas but only in the way that is toxic, or in an AU where they have different jobs that aren't at each other's throats. I know I only ever seem to post mean about him but I genuinely was almost swayed by the allure of the No Jealousy mod.

Heinrix x My Mutuals' Rogue Traders 💕

Heinrix x Therapy (20 year minimum)

And ofc, I am a Heinrizhai hatefuck truther from day 1 so...its not romance but I ship it. I think they could defeat Slaanesh.

My non-romantic OTP for this character

If Heinrix and Marazhai can't fuck nasty I need them to at least kill each other.

Heinrix and Abelard are a fun duo. I'm a firm believer that Heinrix is only maybe behind Abelard by a few decades at most. They have the kind of energy that says they've both been found sleeping with their arms crossed in front of the Cogitators while watching the Space!Blood Bowl.

Heinrix and Jae can hang as well but only when he's chill and not being a cop about it. I honestly would love to hear them talk religion. He needs some of her "chill out about The Exalted One" energy.

My unpopular opinion about this character

Okay, I've spent too long on this answer so, linked post for more controversial thoughts but the current Bugbear chewing on my mind is that I feel like the fandom kind of treats him being in the Ordo Xenos as just like...a job that has no bearing on his character outside that he's a workaholic about it. And that does so much disservice to the analysis of his character as an institution man™.

Like we cannot discuss Heinrix's Mercy path and inner iconoclast core without acknowledging that his development there is intimately tied to his struggles as a psyker within the framework of the Imperium's Dogma. Which, if he was a member of the Ordo Hereticus or Malleus, would be smooth sailing. But he's Ordo Xenos, which notably has not much to do with his issues as a psyker. Plus, Aeldari are people too, and the narrative I feel is pretty intentional with showing how Heinrix's xenophobia is more often than not wrong. And not even to say "Aeldari are always right" but rather Heinrix follows a pattern emblematic of the Imperium's xenos policy that values short-sighted blanket mistrust and paranoia of slights real and imagined, that often agitates and makes situations worse especially when it comes to harms ultimately originating with other humans. And so you can't discuss the ways Heinrix shows or feels mercy towards someone like Emelina, without discussing the people he actively chooses to not to extend those feelings towards. And I feel like that gets swept under the rug because a lot of the notable incidents involve Marazhai the Instigator and Yrliet, the local Bitch Eating Crackers, and so for reasons fair and not, a lot of the fandom is predisposed to seeing them as unreliable or deserving of ill treatment for their behavior in ways that don't get applied to the humans.

And honestly, if I had the time to soapbox about it I'd argue that the issues of Heinrix's job-dependence, impotent anger at his circumstances, and self-loathing are all things that make him a perfect match for the Ordo Xenos because it allows him to channel those feelings onto creatures and populations* that Dogma has taught him are unambiguously good to harm! That's intrinsic to the character to me tbh.

*Creatures and populations here acknowledging that not all xenos are "people" in the way that can be reasoned with but Aeldari are and that's who the game deals with.

One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon.

On the silly side: DLC where if you follow Heinrix's advice on how to handle the Drukhari, the Ordo Malleus shows up to try to beat your/Heinrix's ass. Genuinely they are having such a bad couple of months/years on a Dogmatic Rogue Trader run lmao.

On the serious side: Okay I'm conflicted about this because Heinrix xenophobia is such a core part of his character but also I do wish, especially if you romance him, the game acknowledged how out of pocket he gets if you keep the xenos? Because he absolutely is overstepping both your rights as Rogue Trader and Calcazar's orders to let you be. Like, if you decide to keep Marazhai, as is your God-Emperor-given right, he will use words with you that cannot be found in the Lectitio Divinitatus, but outside telling him "no" in the moment you never really get to address his behavior. I've said it in the past in another post but the fact that romanced!Heinrix will apologize to you for having sex but not for repeatedly undermining your orders...in front of your retinue and crew....insane man. Owlcat let me shake him.

[reasoncourt]

if anyone is wondering why i care about taylor swift discourse it’s genuinely just because i think people lose their point in their hate for her. and they lose perspective.

like she’s actually not the most evil woman in the world. she gives her workers insurance (bare minimum) and good bonuses (she’s mega rich so also bare minimum) and she buys carbon credits (bare minimum but also opens an interesting convo - i.e. how much should we value carbon credits?). she doesn’t use her voice enough imo but she also doesn’t speak out of turn (i.e. she doesn’t pretend to be well-versed and authoritative on topics she has no knowledge in (arguably she should educate herself on certain topics but tbh i’m inclined to view it as a positive that she doesn’t introduce global political issues beyond “trump bad” to her crazy af fan base… like she could do more but i also don’t have much faith in her politics cause she’s so so so out of touch so i prefer the silence)).

an important note here is that i do think she’s absolutely fucked for not condemning the genocide of palestinian people (especially when she’s supposedly close friends with the hadids who are outspoken on the issue and would greatly benefit from her public support (obv she shouldn’t just speak out bc it affects her personal friends but the fact that she isn’t speaking out when she has personal friends is honestly bizarre to me)).

but she's not unique for any of this. she does more than most of her peers and also way less than she should. that's all i see.

and yet ultimately it’s like - people side with kanye when he put a naked wax figure of her in his music video without her consent when she was 25. that situation was obviously misogynistic but people hate her so they largely glossed over it and decided she deserved it for "lying"about a phone call she didn't lie about. people also seem to think it’s funny that football bros are making ai porn of her (arguing she “deserves” it) despite that line of thinking obviously being detrimental to all women and especially those who are so much more vulnerable than her. people got angry at her for donating $250,000 to help with kesha’s legal fees in her case against ‘Dr. Luke’ because they considered it a publicity stunt even though taylor swift wasn’t the one to make that donation public. people called her performative for taking a man to court for sexually assaulting her and only asking for $1. and obviously they would’ve criticised her for asking for more.

the thing that really aggravates me is that there is so so so so so much to criticise her for. but it’s so so so so so obvious that a lot of people just hate her and don’t actually have any legit problem with the things they say they have a problem with. their favs could do the exact same thing and they won’t find any issue with it. cause they just really hate taylor swift and won’t step back a bit in order to just critically think about what their principles are and how those principles apply to this situation with taylor swift and whether they’re actually consistent with those principles and will apply them to someone other than taylor swift.

there are such valid points and important discussions i see being completely missed because the complaint is about Taylor swift and people seem to be incapable of thinking beyond the fact that they just, first and foremost, hate her

and let it be said that this is not a taylor swift defence post. i could not give a single shit about her specifically. i do find her music fun and nostalgic but i also think it deserves more criticism than it gets (but that’s not what this post is about). it’s just that she’s one of the most talked about people in pop culture and i feel like legitimate and productive discourse is rlly hindered by people’s disproportionate focus on her

[the1975attheirverybest]

How do I try not to argue with my family about politics? (non 1975)

Tbh perhaps I’m the wrong person to ask because I would say argue with them! My dad used to not be great on queer rights. But for years we kept talking about it over and over. Finally he came around haha. I mean he’s now more like “everyone should have equal rights including queer people.” Which….good enough for me I guess.

One thing I have learned is to stay away from identity politics and to use tangible examples. I’m American so I’m using American scenarios but this applies elsewhere too.

So, like, instead of saying “Trump is sexist” (at this point people who vote for him already know he’s exist. They either don’t care or they love it cuz they’re sexist too) it’s more helpful to say “he has banned abortion even in case of rape and incest.” Instead of saying he’s racist (again, his voters know that he is) you can correct his claims that “you get shot and raped by illegal immigrants crossing the border.” Only 23 undocumented immigrants committed murder in the US in 2023. The rhetoric he uses isn’t true.

When we say stuff like “that’s racist/ homophobic/islamophobic” I feel like it shut down the other person and they become antagonistic. Or they start thinking “the woke left is pushing their beliefs on me.” So you wanna avoid that happening as much as possible by staying away from theoretical stuff or identity politics and sticking to real issues. it takes time. Cuz like you can’t undo programming and ideology with one conversation. But a lot of the time it can be helpful!

DISCLAIMER: obviously if you feel like you might be in danger, like if you’re queer or trans and your family is homophobic, don’t put yourself in situations where you could get kicked out or hurt etc. in those cases DEF AVOID THE SUBJECT FOR YOUR OWN SAKE.

[rottentiger-art]

is it true that logan had a crush on zoey? I read it on the fandom wiki

There was an implied mutual attraction in the show, but I think they dropped that idea around season 3, maybe season 2 (thankfully)

I don't think Logan's crush on Zoey was ever that serious, I think he just found her attractive and wanted to make out with her, same way he wanted to make out with most girls. He grew to like her as a friend later on, and the make out jokes never felt like he meant them since then.

I really believe he fell for Quinn on season 3, so he completely got over any left over attraction for Zoey by then. And she also seemed to drop that as well, way earlier. The fact that they both annoyed the shit out of each other probably helped get rid of it.

You didn't ask about Quinn but I'm gonna talk about Quinn

Before their kiss, Logan described Quinn as "smart, pretty and kinda fun". Those things could apply to Zoey too, so why didn't he fell for Zoey instead? Well he might have said only those things, but those were not the only reasons he fell for Quinn. She's much more than that.

Quinn also annoyed him and challenged him, like Zoey, but he ended up falling for her still (dare I say, because of it). Quinn had other attributes that attracted him, I think Quinn's weirdness/quirkiness and personality played at hand for why he feel for her but not Zoey. Like Erin and Matt mention recently mentioned Quogan have more in common than people think. I think their shared interest in science was something that drew Logan in, despite himself. They're also both romantics, again, despite himself. They have mad chemistry, something that just comes naturally with couples, and something that wasn't really there with Zoey.

She's different from Zoey on many things, and I believe Logan loved every single one of those differences.

Quinn is kinder and less self-centered than Zoey. She doesn't make every issue her problem, yk? and she is actually a pretty sweet girl.

She's not self righteous like Zoey, something that often causes Logan and Zoey's fights (even tho he kinda is also, in a way that he always thinks he's right too) Oh, actually that last part just made me realize another reason why Logan and Zoey never developed feeling*.

Quinn is always willing to help her friends, when asked, unlike Zoey who simply inserts herself in the situation and give advices without asking first.

Quinn took revenge on Logan as well, but I don't think she ever went as far as Zoey had, like in Anger Management, for example.

Quinn is not as judgy as Zoey either, probably bc of the fact that she's an outcast tbh.

Zoey has a serious communication problem, connected to her self righteousness, where if she feels wronged, she never let the other person explain themselves (it's mostly Chase), while Quinn makes things less complicated and expresses those things (like when they were laughing behind her back and she told them it hurted her, bc she expected it from Logan but she thought of them as her friends, no one made a move to apologize or talk so she left). Basically both Quinn and Zoey are confrontational, but in completely different ways.

*What I realized, is that Zoey and Logan have a lot in common too. Like how they both want to be in charge at all times and have troubles accepting their wrong doing. The things they have in common are their flaws, while with Quinn, they have their better parts in common. I don't wanna bring Dana into this, but I believe this would have been the case for her and Logan too if she had stayed. So, I guess Quogan would still had been endgame (now I kinda want a fic where while Quinn was with Mark, Logan had a messy relationship with Dana, Quogan is still endgame at the end, I think it'd be more dramatic and make Logan also experience what's like to have a healthy relationship after coming out of an unhealthy one)

One could argue that Logan's attraction to Quinn's less dominating qualities and attitudes in comparison to Zoey could be attributed to his sexism and his own dominating personality at the time, but then again, Quinn is a dominating girl too, we see that in her relationship with Mark, so I don't think it's only that, I think at the end, it was more about Quinn's healthier way of dealing with things drew him in. He really needed someone that was at his level on that aspect but would match him and work with him for the better instead of someone who made things worse.

Logan and Quinn balance each other and bring the best in the other. Logan and Zoey, despite their moments of friendship, bring out the worst. They're too similar to like each other while Quinn is has the right amount of similarities and differences to make their relationship work and generate an attraction that later turned into love.

Now he's not only too in love with his wife to still harbor a crush on her, he also doesn't seem to like Zoey very much.

TL;DR: kinda but it wasn't that deep, Zoey and him weren't compatible like that.

[sivavakkiyar]

What do you think of video game jazz? I’m getting into jazz right now and it’s how I got it into it but it feels kind of cringe to admit that

Ahhh tbh this is one of those things I’d want to give a more in-depth answer to. By which I mean I fantasize about having the talent and ability to do a 4 hour Folding Ideas style video essay about the entirety of ‘video game music is real music’ as a phenomenon. The most relevant backdrop to this is that I think people forget that the early 2000’s, when this discourse (in the West) started picking up steam was reactionary, by which I also mean probably not inline with the aesthetics by which we love video game music now. I mean ‘it’s not just beeps and boops!’ was the rallying cry: Anamanaguchi and chip tune stuff, even the fetish for those old hardware sounds wasn’t particularly widespread. So they loved the melodies they grew up with in games, but also thought of them as being ‘hobbled’ by the hardware, as opposed to sounds in their own right. So they were arguing that the music was legitimate now—-by which they very explicitly meant ‘performed on real instruments, often the instruments of the Western Orchestra.’ And I’m not saying ‘Western’ as a kneejerk thing either: a lot of those early attempts are embarassing because they take music obviously based around Japanese timbres and apply them to Western instrumentation in a way no one would be happy with today. So we no longer share that aesthetic—-we recognize that the moon theme from Ducktales on the NES is gorgeous, not in a ‘imagine what it could be!’ way, but specifically in and of itself. The orchestrated version of Mother’s Fallin Love is somehow not as intensely moving as the NES original, etc, and even if tastes differ we can agree on the possibility of that.

So I’d argue that this is kind of an important backdrop to the cultural phenomenon of what ‘video game jazz’ is, and has a lasting influence on it’s appeal: a legitimization for melodies and pieces we love. Jazz traditionalists and gatekeepers might occasionally dismiss it as ‘not real jazz’, but that involves a whole host of other assumptions. It obviously is jazz—-but what kind? overwhelmingly, it’s either tightly performed big band medleys or smooth jazz—-closer to the infamously Kenny G.

And that, to be honest, is kind of the point! People attend video game jazz shows to hear those melodies, that’s the point—-they’re not interested in jazz as such. Normally the argument for it’s potential legitimacy is ‘jazz has always used popular music of the day’, and I agree! But that’s clearly not the singular draw of the stuff, and I’ll give this example:

Mahanthappa is objectively one of the major figures of contemporary jazz. This was his arrangement of the New Horizons theme, recorded shortly “after COVID” (you know what I mean, god save us). It was relevant, popular, and significant, and made no headways in the video game jazz scene. How is this possible? Because the assumptions are different, and a good amount of the video game jazz specific audience didn’t respond to it: this is Mahanthappa bringing that music into jazz, as opposed to what amounts to an arranged revue. And so in a weird way there’s actually something like mutual disinterest, and reason why people tend to think of them as like fundamentally different.

It is stupid though. I have an old OneUps CD.

Sorry that coulda been shorter lol

[padme-amitabha]

I don't like how TCW took away the classic, fairytale elements of Anakin and Padmé so they could be more "relatable" as a couple. That was neither necessary nor did it make any sense for their romance because that was never the point of them to begin with. They were the type to quite literally jump off a bridge for each other, call each other sweet names, always wanting to be close, the passion, the dreamlikeness, etc. They were more of the mythological, fairytale, classic literature type of couple. The ideal couple that, due to numerous unfortunate circumstances, it was doomed. Some people also argue that they would not have lasted, but they don't get that the rules that apply in the real world don't always have to apply in a fantasy setting. I've been seeing this kind of "remake" of fantastical, classic, fairytale(-esque) couples so they seem more realistic and modern, and it just saddens me (which is also why most Disney LA remakes also piss me off). It's because of what that series's portrayal of Anakin and Padmé that people either have this "bff" conception of their romance or that Padmé was always annoyed by him when she would have thrown away everything for him (and viceversa, ofc, I mean lol). Smh

I agree. TCW for me just goes against the original authorial intent. Although GL did make a lot of the decisions, he was not alone and ofc eventually Filoni and co took over. But when he started out he always said he didn't care about fans liking it. It was always about the story he intended to tell, whether they liked it or not. And that's so admirable to have a story be told just for itself and not for fanservice and it shows GL was passionate about it and he just had to retcon or brainstorm more because of the backlash. He always said SW is a homage to all the movies he loved. It's reminiscent of the cheesy soaps he grew up with and in the PT appreciation video I shared recently, it shows so many scenes are similar to older films. GL was even aware of the dialogue and how it wouldn't resonate with modern audiences but he needed it to fit in a specific style.

It's funny how fans appreciate how "classic" the OT is but expect the PT to be hyper modern when it should be even more rooted in mythology. The OT is fairytale-like too. I mean when you think about it the big bad is defeated by the power of love and Luke just forgives a man who killed so many people because he's his father who he doesn't even know? Vader even goes easy on him and he never actually is threatened by him. It's not very realistic either nor is it for Obi Wan to be hiding out in Tattooine and waiting to hand over a magic quest to Luke but it does work in fairytales because it is the hero's journey - like the prequels is similar to a Greek tragedy unfolding in three parts. It's supposed to be cheesy with morals and messages and recurring themes. And without any war when the galaxy is at its golden age so to speak, of course Anidala would be more of a Shakespearean romance with a dash of tragedy mixed in it. If GL can call them space Romeo and Juliet, he is acknowledging they are young and naive and impulsive and the audience isn't suppose to view them as ideals or think of RL relationships to be similar. None of the OT characters are particularly complex either and the ideologies are even more black and white. Ultimately, it's the message about family and love and yes it is very simplistic and fairytaleish because it's suppose to feel good. I don't get the point in trying to make it modern and realistic when it was never supposed to be one. It's space opera and fantasy - not science fiction. And tbh TCW makes the characters even more generic and westernized than they ever were in the prequels. Don't get me started on Chadakin and Girlboss!Padme (or discount Han and Leia) when they were much more imperfect, multifaceted characters in the movies while seamlessly fitting in with the fairytale-ish narrative.