#tell me how vaguely correct/incorrect I am

[insertbadpunhere]

I'm about to start chapter 62. This is when things pick up, apparently. Not gonna lie. I hope one of the characters gives me brain rot.

(I need that hit of a special serotonin that can only come from obsessing over a character.)

So. I'm gonna list a few predictions for the next 100+ chapters. That way, I can look back and see what I got right and what I got wrong. It'll be a fun game.

This is a no-brainer, but Tsuna starts to rely less on the Reborn. He learns to fight his own battles.

Reborn has to leave for an entire arc to do something plot wise.

The power of friendship convinces Tsuna to become a mafia boss.

Two antagonists decide to defect to Tsuna's side. (Basic shonen fare)

Kyoko starts to matter less or becomes a damsel (or both)

Yamamoto finally figures out he joined a real mafia group. (My man is such a himbo.)

A main character dies and adult Lambo has to confess he knew along. He had to conserve the timeline.

Tsuna has to fight the 9th boss of Vongola before he can become officially the 10th

Someone from Vongola tries to assassinate him to move up the ranks.

Hibari Kyoya never joins Tsuna's family

Kyoko betrays Tsuna. (Unlikely, but that would be wild.)

Bianchi gets a love rival for Reborn. (I don't want this, but it sounds plausible in shonen.)

Reborn dies. (Very unlikely, but it would be amazing if true.)

The love triangle Tsuna has gets needlessly drawn out. (This is not my first shonen rodeo. I know how these romantic subplots go.)

They go to Italy, but the plain/boat crashes and they have to travel there on foot. Jumpstarting a new arc. (JJBA style. Lol)

Time Travel has its own arc.

We have an arc dedicated to Hayato's secret back story.

One word. Zombies. (- Or anything undead.)

(Special bullet that reanimates the dead)

[adyophene]

lucifer x husk is something i never knew i needed and as a multishipper im screaming

literally. king of hell x some alcoholic furry guy

i love them i need to know how they wouldve met, fallen for each other and started dating. and how much thatd piss alastor off

Ooh I am so happy other people are enjoying this pair as much as I am! I've gotten a few asks about my headcanons for them, and I am happy to blab on and on. Fair warning. This is gunna be a long and rambling essay.

I'm gunna put it all under a readmore, just cause I want to insert the art I've done of them so far, since I've been half-heartedly trying to tell a visual story through the doodles.

Okay. On we go!

How they met;

We did see them technically meet in the show, where they shared their singular canon piece of dialogue, which was just Husk saying 'hey'. And then in the finale where we see a literal split second moment of Lucifer holding Husk's arm.

(also seeing the sweet looks huskerdust is giving each other here just makes me feel so delulu for writing this all, but crackships are silly by definition, so lets get back to the lucihusk) For me, what I imagined, is after the Hotel is finished its rebuilding, that is when Husk and Lucifer finally actually meet in a proper manner. I think Lucifer would be trying to make a good impression on all Charlie's friends at this point, endeared to all of them from their actions during the finale. Unfortunately, I think he is also the King of Bad First Impressions.

[Note. I think at this point Lucifer wouldn't even remember Husk's name quite yet. I think he would call him 'Keekee' ( by accident) or 'Dusk' (confidently incorrect) or just be like "Hey!.... Uh... You?" until Charlie or Vaggie finally corrected him. ]

Husk, on the other hand, I feel like maybe wouldn't gel with Lucifer right away. Wouldn't hate him, but also maybe not be enamored with him right away. Same as Lucifer, maybe he would have sweetened on him a bit through the hotel's rebuilding, but I think they'd start out at very neutral feelings. Maybe a vague sense of 'He's okay, but I don't know if we will really get along.'

Despite this, Lucifer is persistent, and he's going to be everyone's (except maybe Al, unless they start getting along by s2) buddy. He'd start hanging around the bar and participate in the redemption exercises.

Now, we know Lucifer struggles with depression, and I think he would be trying real hard to mask anything going on during this time. They defeated Adam! They rebuilt the Hotel! He believes in Charlie's dream, and he's more involved with her life and other people than he has been for years.

His only issue being Husk sees right through it, both because Husk is perceptive, but also because even the King of Hell can't help but have a lonely night or two at the bar where he ends up venting about his divorce and subsequent lingering loneliness.

[snapcube ref aside, )I really do think Husk would start to feel more positively toward Lucifer after Luci would drop the act somewhat. That they could bond over feeling both at their lowest of lows, while also being to admit that things seem to be getting better!

This would be about the point that I imagine Lucifer developing more romantic feelings! Husk would be a bit less prickly, and Luci would just absolutely eat up any and all positive interactions they'd have. I like to picture a lot of little shows of care at the this point, like Husk memorizing what Lucifer likes and even making up 'fun' drinks just to try and cheer the guy up. And Lucifer would fun a fun game in trying to get the grumpy cat to smile, and just, lighting up himself any time he was successful.

And that culminating into the two of them making each other laugh, with Alastor being an easy butt of the jokes, and a good way for Husk, himself, to finally get a chance to vent. I think Lucifer would be one of the only 'safe' options for Husk to do that with, in just so far as Al can't really threaten Lucifer, and Lucifer already sees Al as a bit of a manipulative bastard.

Falling for each other; At this point, Lucifer would start being a bit more caring toward Husk, though with that wonderful, oblivious flair of his. I don't think Lucifer himself would realize he'd have a crush up until he'd start feeling protective or jealous over Husk, and it would really throw him for a loop at first.

Because fake dating is one of my all-time favorite tropes, I have always had a idea for a fanfic (or comic) that I haven't gotten around to yet, based around Lilith coming back, and Lucifer panickily asking Husk to pretend to be his boyfriend, so he can appear well adjusted/completely over her. Of course the whole thing would backfire, as Lilith would see through it (as Lucifer wouldn't be as good of an actor as he'd think), and that Husk would end up kind of feeling hurt by the whole thing.

Husk, who'd go along with the plot with an eyeroll, would find himself seizing up through the whole fake date/encounter. Would find weird, sudden emotions bubbling up and absolutely hating it.

I don't think that man would think about the class difference between him and Lucifer up until someone would say something about it, maybe Lucifer himself trying to rationalize the (at this time still fake) relationship to Lilith. Now, Husk feels uneasy about the whole thing and ends up drinking heavily the whole night so he doesn't have to think about feelings. (Blitz and Stolas who? Ahaha. fuck.) Meanwhile, while the date would be fake, I think Lucifer would really rather like having Husk on his arm and feeling like he'd have a love-life again, while also not really getting why Husk's mood would be getting worse throughout the night. I think they'd still end up on good terms, but both of them would have their feelings in a jumble, and Husk would not like it. (he thinks he's lost the ability to love, after all)

I think somewhere at this point, as they are starting to develop feelings for one another, is when Lucifer finally starts really realizing how tied to Alastor Husk is, and he starts to make it everyone's problem. I do think Al and Lucifer would stay snarky at each other this whole time, but that it'd only get worse, as Al would poke back since he'd find Lu's over reactions funny.

I also think Al would be maybe the last person to realize anything romantic would be brewing between Lucifer and Husk, and he'd just think it'd be a purely platonic thing.

Beyond just bitching about Alastor, Lucifer would really be ramping up his attention towards Husk too. Fully in that 'puppylove/crush' stage, and trying his darndest to make Husk feel good and special. Husk would be resistant to it all, thinking it would just be Lucifer rebounding hard, and not wanting to get wrapped up in Morningstar family drama when he could happily (miserably) keep his head down and just keep drinking the days away.

But then Lucifer would find out about Husk's love of stage magic, and his history as a performer, and it'd be all over for the catman. It would become Luci's new pet project to rope Husk into some joyful self-expression, and after a song and dance number's worth of convincing, Husk would start to come around. I have to post all these images now cause- I drew them with the intention of mimicking a musical number! Husk starting off as a bit resistant before jumping in whole heartedly, and Lucifer overexcitedly dragging him along throughout the music number, hyping him up and just all around being smitten.

And this is where Husk would start really falling. Getting swept up in indulging his favorite, least destructive hobby, and having someone who absolutely loves it to bond with. Especially when it would be over. When they would just settle down and talk, and laugh, and bond over what they love about performing. The spectacle, the audience, the love of the craft. Its about the comradery!!!

@belladonazeppole wrote a wonderful series of fanfics based off these pictures, as well as the songs from 'The Greatest Showman' that really fit the ship! I would be remiss to not mention them here, because Bella and their fics are just wonderful!

How they started dating;

Now. Don't think just cause they both caught feelings for each other, that they'd immediately admit to it. No. I think both of them would drag their heels. I don't think Husk would admit to them at all, without some outside force effecting it. I think he'd stubbornly try to ignore the crush or drink it away, rather than let his heart become vulnerable to anymore damage.

Meanwhile, Lucifer would be struggling between his feelings for Husk and Lilith. (In the actual canon, I do think they might try to rekindle things, depending on what kind of person Lilith turns out to be, but I digress.) Part of him would be so swept up in a giddy kind of excitement, while the other would be set firmly in the camp of 'this is a bad idea, this won't work out, just look at what happened to your last relationship'. It wouldn't stop him from being outwardly more and more affectionate, but it would be weighing on him.

I do think Lucifer would end up being the one who would be thinking; "What am I doing. He'd never like me back." While Husk would be just sitting there (echoing what was said in the ask- sorry I went all wild and wrote this much about the ship dear god)- "I'm just some fucking furry alcoholic, what the fuck would the king of hell see in me??? Am I delusional? What the fuck is going on??" And I feel like this stage would go on for MONTHS and drive everyone else nuts. It would be clear to everyone (except Alastor, who again, would be just this meme

Though that wouldn't stop him from getting a little pissy about it) And then it would all come to a head during something benign, like a board game night. There would be flirting, there would be jealousy, there would be arguing, and then finally, loudly and with a lot of feeling, Lucifer would shout his way through asking Husk out on a date. A real Date. A capital 'D' date out on the town, dressed to the nines and a real good time. The board would be knocked over in the fray, game pieces raining down upon them while Husk would just stare blank faced, trying to process what just happened. An awkward half-minute would pass before he'd finally, trying to play it cool, shrug out a 'sure'.

How much it'd piss Alastor off;

In the aftermath, a radio static would just lowly grate everyone's ears as Alastor would be slowly coming to terms on how just annoying it would be to have his friend (/Unhealthy co-dependent pet friend possession??) romantically involved (ew) with the King of Hell (double ew)??? Then, either it would be something light hearted like 'he keeps trying to break them up but failing cause he hates interacting with romance' or a darker route where 'he keeps trying to manipulate them into breaking up by preying on all their worst insecurities in the relationship'.

And that, my friend, is all I have in mind so far for this delusional crackship au! There is more I could flesh out, of course, like Angel's role as a friend or potential third in the relationship, or what I imagine as Husk becoming like a stepdad to Charlie, but I've typed enough for the whole month. Hope any of that was coherent! I did not bother to edit or proof read it. Just pure stream of consciousness.

[fishing-lesbian-catgirl]

I am autistic. You would think that would make working in the heavily regulated and rigidly ruled field of being a lab scientist would be a great fit for me because of that. But it turns out it’s actually just infuriating beyond belief. Non-autistic people have no idea how to communicate, and apparently find joy in making everything unclear. I’m well aware of that from conversations and such, but I had foolishly assumed that it would be different for scientific lab work. When someone sends me their request for me to run tests on their experimental drug product, I would expect that they would provide clear details on what they want me to do. This was of course an incorrect assumption. And then when I reach out to them as ask if they could clarify what they mean, I assumed they could, oh I don’t know, tell me what they want me to do?!???!?

Apparently non-autistic people enjoy communicating by sending each other conflicting information and then being unable to answer when asked for clarity. I guess they probably like how when, I guess one of the many options of things I could do that fit their vague “instructions”, they then get the opportunity to tell me how foolish I was for doing it incorrectly. I cannot read minds, especially not ones as apparently labyrinthian as theirs.

And then when they are unable to clarify to me what I need to know via the extremely convenient communication method of text-based messages, they decide we need to schedule a meeting to “discuss”. Great. Now my entire day’s schedule is ruined. And now I have to meet with these people so they can be unclear on what they want verbally and we have to repeat ourselves at each other for an hour until I can somehow convince them to tell me what they fucking want. And then hope that I can actually process the sound properly and keep it in my memory in the time between it entering my ears and my pen moving on the page, because there’s no goddamn record of a conversation I can reference later and if I get a detail wrong I have to start the process all over again when I realize something is unclear.

And if I get an actual answer to the question, I will of course ask if they can verify that is what they meant, a simple yes or other word of affirmation to tell me that they did not misspeak or mistype or just to reassure me in some way that they wont have an excuse to change their mind later and say I interpreted it wrong. This seems like the most simple and reasonable request, but they really don’t seem to like it. I simply repeat what they said, and ask if that is correct, and for some of them that’s apparently a sin. I ask “oh that’s what you want me to do? Can we do that?” And expect a “yes” in response, instead they tell me to see the message I’m asking for their affirmation on. That’s not a yes! That’s not an answer to my question! I now have to go on with uncertainty in my feeble human mind because it’s apparently way too fucking hard to say yes. Fuck off

I need the whole world to be autistic. I’d rather endure 1 million heated debates over which way is the optimal way to format something argued by people who are so stubbornly stuck in their ways that the heat death of the universe will happen before they cede their ground, than have to deal with these non-autistics and their guessing games for the rest of my life. I can’t fucking do this shit. Why are you even requesting testing from me if you don’t even know what you want tested and how, why are you like this?!?????

[acearohippo]

Thanks to @/ilikedyourablogithere for finding these concept art pieces on ArtStation! 

I needed to know what is written. Thus, through the power of my undergrad degree (linguistics), 2 years of Chinese (mandarin), 5 years of Japanese, google translate, and lots of google research, I present these translations in English.

WARNING: Some phrases translated awkwardly in English (usually due to vocabulary) so I translated what I best thought was the intent of the sentence. I am an avid supporter of translating to make it feel natural, first and foremost, and then translating the meanings. 

With that being said, I want to reiterate I am not a native speaker of Mandarin, I just really love to research and thought there’d be some lore tidbits.

And I was right

You should be able to click on the picture and zoom in to see the words, but here are the phrases anyway, because I wanted to explain some of my thought process on each translation. If anyone speaks fluent Mandarin and English and finds an egregious error in my translations, please let me know and I’ll correct it!

[ Original Chinese will be in brackets ] The translation will be in normal font. Any notes will be bolded. Any commentary will be italicised.

ODETTE [Skadi Esper]:

1. [ 总是看起来很凶但自己没有意识 ] Always looks fierce, but doesn’t realise it

2. [ 作为猎户的女儿习惯性的保养猎具 ] As the daughter of Orion, she habitually maintains her hunting gear. Google translate tried to translate this to “As the habitual maintenance hunting gear of the daughter of the Orion”, but, as you can read, that don’t make no sense. Fortunately, this is where my vague recollection of Mandarin grammar and basic vocabulary comes in. This is one of the sentences I tried to make sound natural. This was the sentence that made me translate everything because I recognised the characters for daughter and was intrigued as to what it was referring to. Who would’ve guessed the Great Hunter Orion’s esper is Odette’s dad! :O EDIT 31.Dec.2022: Thanks to @/trikis-turntables for clarifying 猎户的女儿! It just means “hunter’s daughter”. Hunter is used to refer to Orion. I’m still gonna headcanon that her dad is Orion’s esper tho until proven otherwise ;P

3. [ 经常被别人拜托速冻饮料 ] She’s often asked to quickly freeze drinks. “速冻饮料”, sùdòng yǐnliào, means frozen drinks so this could also be translated as “Other’s ask her to make quick frozen drinks”. I chose the former translation because, in American English especially, “frozen drinks” usually refer to slushies, a beverage made by blending flavoured syrup (or juice) with a whole bunch of ice. Odette isn’t making slushies, she’s just freezing drinks to make them cold again. I’m American, so I went with the translation that made sense in that context.

4. [ 保持着野营狩猎的习惯 ] She keeps up a habit of hunting and camping. Was on the fence with this translation, as I couldn’t tell if this was a PSA to the readers or speaking through her perspective. Google translated this as “Maintain the habit of camping and hunting” which is a logical sentence, but it felt off to me. I ultimately went with the reading of it being Odette’s perspective to keep these translations consistent. Oh, I should also mention now that the original Mandarin does not have any pronouns and often lacks specific subject indicators, so forgive me if some of these translations are incorrect because I wasn’t aware of the correct subject.

5. [ 使用终极技能时的样子 ] How she looks using her ultimate skill.

NARMER [Ra Esper]:

1. [ 不自觉地展现出大佬气质 ] Subconsciously showing the temperament of a triad boss. Took some liberties with getting the intent behind the sentence. 大佬, dà lǎo, literally means “big guy”, with  佬, lǎo, containing the character ( 老 ) for aged/matured/old. This character is used for boss-  老板, lǎo bǎn- so google translates it to “big boss”. However, using context clues (specifically how Narmer is posed against the dark backdrop, looking sort of sinister), I researched it further and found that this is also a term used for gangster! I decided to combine both, to really indicate that Narmer is oozing power and authority, and poses as if he’s got an underground network working for him, that may or may not deal with shady business. This is why the English translation specifies “triad boss”. The word for the Triad is NOT in the original Mandarin.

2. [ 已经习惯了生活中有神性的帮助 ] I am used to having divine help in my life. Once again, no specified pronouns. Took the liberty that this is from Narmer’s perspective.

EDIT 31.Dec.2022: Thanks again to @/trikis-turntables for clarifying the correct pronoun. “He is used to having divine help in his life”

3. [ 经常阅读各种书籍 ] Often reads various books.

4. [ 终极技能释放时的效果 ] The impact of his ultimate skill. Another awkwardly phrased sentence. 效果, xiàoguǒ, means “effect”, specifically in reference to an action being performed, but using that word in this sentence sounds strange. However, after some research (Lord bless Reverso, a site that puts words into multiple contexts and compares them with their translations), I saw that it could also be translated (within the context) to “impact” and that sounded way better. The literal translation would look more like “The effect when the ultimate skill is released”, but that sentence is too bloated to sound natural to most native English speakers. Also, it would be understood that the skill is released, as we are seeing its impact, so including “released” would be redundant.

5. [ 每件衣服都是定制裁剪 ] Every garment is custom tailoured.

[lumi-klovstad-games]

On Shadowheart's faith and how it mirrors my own (some heavy topical talk of religion and faith, FYI)

I've seen Shadowheart get dragged for her faith and her cagey-ness and unwillingness to talk about herself and especially her religion, and on the one hand, YES, she does worship a deity who wants to dissolve creation back into primordial darkness out of a petty and childish grudge. Like, that isn't nothing.

But when I hear Shadowheart talk about what her faith means to her, what this goddess who everyone else calls evil (and from our outside perspective, rightly so) means to her... to be honest, I hear my own spiritual journey in her words.

I was raised a Christian and now primarily worship Lilith, one of many names Christianity considers a straight up demon. But... because my family and community doesn't share that faith, I have to live in their world. So I've gotten practiced at keeping quiet about this fundamental part of myself, at playing the game with my cards close to the chest. When the topic of my faith comes up, I do my best to deflect the conversation or give a diplomatically worded non-answer, and yeah, I do get flustered and irritated when pressed if I didn't choose to reveal these details on my own. After all, one's faith is a DEEPLY personal thing, a core function of who they are that in many ways defines them.

While I have the wonder and the pleasure to know plenty of folks for whom my faith means exactly nothing, or is at most an unorthodox point of curiosity and vague interest, that's not how things started. The first few years after I found my own faith were.... rough. I wasn't sure who I could trust with that part of me, who I could trust to not ridicule me or accuse me of doing it for attention. I can only imagine what it would be like for Shadowheart to live life as part of a cult that is actively suppressed and hunted, where, in fact, "they" ARE in fact out to get her.

My divorce from my parent's god came when I was disillusioned as a teenager. The incredibly likable and charismatic pastor who had overseen my Confirmation had moved on to a new church, and I realized that when I prayed, there really wasn't... anything there. Nobody on the other end, or at least nobody interested enough to listen. I don't think Pastor Dan was a bad guy or a charlatan or anything. I think he really had meant to help. But in his effort to make his faith accessible/relevant, etc., he'd oversold it, and without his likability to reinforce things, I found myself in a reality that was significantly darker and less caring than I was led to expect, and I was left feeling that kind of alone you can only feel in a room full of people who don't even acknowledge you. I can't speak to whether the Christian God is real or not, only that it never once spoke to me in all my years of praying to it.

And while Shadowheart isn't remembering fully or accurately, and she has been manipulated by the Cult of Shar far more than she's initially ready to accept, that doesn't mean how she feels is incorrect. We are the sum of what we can remember, after all. Our feelings and opinions in large part are determined by what we have experienced and can recall. When she talks about what Shar specifically means to her, and how through Shar she found meaning in her moments of greatest darkness and pain, I get that. Like, that's literally where my faith was found: when I was at my lowest point, in a period of incredible darkness, self-harm and nearly worse. And in that moment of darkness, I had an experience: "I am not the one you prayed to, but I will help you, if you let me."

To say that was a transformative moment isn't doing it justice. It's the kind of moment that changes a life.

And that's what happened to Shadowheart, at least by her recollection, her truth. The objective truth in-game is of course more complicated and tells a much more dramatic story, but to be honest, Larian could have left it there and had Shadowheart's account be 100% correct and true and found some other way to use her faith to challenge her and it would have worked just as well, because Shadowheart's tale is a realistic one at its core: a lonely, suffering, desperate child finds a VERY unlikely savior. To boot, said savior is an incredibly dark being that others purely have cause to fear and mistrust, one not known for compassionate action. Of course Shadowheart plays it close to the chest. Of COURSE she assumes others won't trust her if they know more about her. All she's ever known of sharing her faith with outsiders has been fear, mistrust, and even persecution. Their experience with her goddess is so, SO incredibly different from hers, they literally cannot understand why she would find meaning in or be loyal to such a deity. I know what that's like because I've lived that, if to a far less extreme degree.

And it was SO NICE to have a character who made my lived experience feel seen — even if the writers DID pull the rug out from under me later, the fuckers.

[dandyshucks]

Are forceful reality checks still harmful if someone is distressed by the delusion?? /gen

(sorry for the novel of an answer but it's so hard for me to cut corners in talking about this because it's kind of complex fdsjkl, also disclaimer that I'm only one person with one set of experiences and am by no means an expert! if anyone feels that I have said anything wrong/incorrect, please feel free to correct me!)

it really depends on the individual person and the way you would go about it, I'm sure there's exceptions to the rule, but as a general rule I'd advise against giving anyone a reality check unless they have explicitly asked or given permission for one! this includes even if they're experiencing distress from the delusion.

if you have a loved one who experiences delusions, asking them while they're not currently experiencing any (if possible) what they'd prefer for you to do in these situations would be the best way to find out. that way they are in a clear and grounded headspace to think about it and decide! they know themselves best, so they'll know best about what's going to help vs harm them!

people with psychotic disorders and experiences generally tend to agree that the best way to support people who are currently experiencing delusions is to just listen to them and be there for them, but don't feed into or encourage the delusion. simply listening to the person talk about it can be a really big help, as it'll make you a safe person for them to come to and therefore hopefully stop the person from isolating! there's some guides I've seen on tumblr written by people who experience delusions on how to be a good support, and I can see if I can dig those up if anyone wants! :]

a personal anecdote to try to give an example of this sort of thing (i am keeping it as vague as possible so I can hopefully not influence other's delusions!):

a good friend of mine wasn't aware that reality checks could do harm (I talked to them afterwards and explained it after I had managed to pull through and ground myself back in reality). I was experiencing a delusion that had a theme of "Something is puppeting reality to make bad things happen to me", which was,,,, very distressing as you might imagine LMAO. my friend tried to comfort me when I opened up to them by telling me that this wasn't true (aka a reality check), but this only convinced me that my friend must either be being puppeted to make me let my guard down so more bad things could happen or they simply did not believe me when I told them what I felt was the truth. this made me feel even more unsafe and distressed because it eliminated what I'd considered a safe person, so I was even more alone in my warped experience of the world, and it started feeling like maybe all my friends were part of the Something that was "causing" bad things to happen, so I ended up isolating pretty heavily and that only made things worse.

I think maybe the best comparison I could make is... say there was some kind of tornado on the horizon. You can see it coming, you notice the wind picking up, you know it's heading straight for you and your house. You panic and try to tell the others living in your house about it, so they look out the window but don't see it. They tell you that there's no tornado, calm down, everything is okay, we're safe, etc. Even though their only goal is to help calm you down and help you, this would be immensely distressing to experience and probably only cause you to panic more. Hopefully that kind of makes sense?

[autimind]

Myths about Autism #4 - Looking autistic

(with a side order of 'I don't hate people with autism.')

A dearly beloved aunt, who regrettably passed several years ago, flat-out refused to believe that I am autistic. Even after a full explanation of my struggles and diagnostic trajectory through the local mental healthcare system. I did not come across as autistic. She wasn't the only one.

Well, I say fair enough.

[long read. I won't discuss the actual myth. We are clear on that it is bunk. However, what should we now do?]

Let's talk about what autism looks like. Allistic people seem to have these amazing insights into what's going on in other people's minds basically on full-auto or at least they claim as much but for all I can discern they seem to judge inner workings of the mind by what the visible body does. They need our outward appearance in order to function.

What is autism? We know, dear reader, that autism is high, wide and broad. That it is called a spectrum does not mean that it behaves like the number line, not even like the complex plane. It is an insanely varied, multivariate affair. "If you have met one autistic, you have met one autistic," as the platitude has it. Yet autism is real. Although it does not exist as a thing, it is a valid label for a more or less well-defined manner of neurodivergent development. All of the divergence inside the brain is invisible, though. Can we fault the allistic people all around us for only looking at the conduct and mannerisms they do notice?

Society moreover has been and is ill-served by tropes mainly in entertainment but also in serious media. For a long time, autism basically equated Rain Man, from the eponymous movie starring Dustin Hoffman. I still find it ironic that the person who inspired the movie, the late Kim Peek, did not have autism at all but rather FG Syndrome. More recent is the example of Sheldon Cooper from The Big Bang Theory, who according to many people has Asperger's. It is interesting that almost no one judges his friend Amy Farrah Fowler in the same way as she shares many of his characteristics.

Again I ask can we fault allistic people their bafflement when we come out, so to say, as autistic? By far most of us aren't Sheldon Coopers and certainly a vanishingly small minority of us are even like Rain Man.

I tend to empty a box of matches onto the desk when speaking as an expert by experience to professionals. I give them three seconds to tell me exactly how many matches are visible and of course they always fail. Given proper experience, an estimation might of course be given but I tell them the exact answer. After everyone has had the time to be amazed at my 'autistic feat', I explain that I personally counted the matches before putting them into the box that very morning.

This is my way of upending their own cultural ideas on autism. Returning to my point, I really don't think we can blame allistics all that much. Cultural inertia on top of normal human cognitive laziness makes it hard to take on new and contra-intuitive notions.

Quite frustratingly, rather a lot of allistic people, once you have told them, still exclude us while saying they don't dislike autistics/autism. A good example would be.. well, almost everyone I come across. Basically everyone commiserated with me when I became open about my diagnosis and vowed to help and understand. They can't but they aren't aware of that particular disability. It is not their fault.

The point here is that they do keep responding negatively to an impressive array of ingrained traits. Stimming in the form of feet tapping of knee bouncing (my own go-to stim), data dumping about my SPINs, correcting vague or incorrect language, taking vocal utterances literally and so on and so forth. Really now, I am not much bothered about specific word choice but it is not okay to just hold on to your preconceived notions when an actual human explains their own mental state or makes a half-way reasonable request.

Those preconceived cultural notions do exist and they do cause harm. All of this creates much frustration and anger among autistics. This is easily visible during even a cursory inspection of #actually autistic and like tags. There is so much pain! People are crying out in sheer endless reblogs, venting and sometimes even ranting about the unfair position we have in society, especially if we are also non-white, female or belong to yet one more disadvantaged or non-privileged group. The amount of anger, sometimes even rage, on this forum is simply staggering. I have run afoul of it myself, mostly for responding to some post without thinking and naively assuming I was really helping. I have hurt other people's feelings.

It would be fairly easy for me to now wax eloquent about how I was misunderstood, that from my own blog it was crystal clear that.. and a dozen other excuses. I simply say this: I am sorry. However, we still have to do something. I strongly feel that venting to eachother is all well and good but if that is all we do, things will not get better. In that case, venting becomes just a way of blowing off steam before going right back to that very same society that can be so hurtful and indifferent.

It would be a grand thing indeed if I had all the answers at this point and I don't. I do have one answer. What I propose will sound cruel to some. I will put yet another responsibility in the autistic camp. Yet more adapting to do when allistics just breeze through their lives. (They don't, but never mind that. I understand the feeling.) Still, on sober reflection we will have to admit that this responsibility is already solidly on our side for the very simple reason that no one will do it for us. We may just not have been aware of it.

I am talking about actively regulating our own emotions in general and making space for negative feelings in particular. If we manage to pull that off, we can just be with frustration or sadness for a while and allow it to process itself. I know first-hand how impossibly vague and wishy-washy new agey that sounds. I also know first-hand the awesome power of such a skill if you can see it from the inside.

At least we will have control. To some extent. We will be responding from strength, not from weakness. We will be secure in ourselves, not beaten this way and that by the breaking waves of the ocean of demands and impulses of this life. We will know deep in our being that we are always welcome in the present moment. We will understand viscerally that emotions are not self, thoughts are not self. They may influence us but they are not us.

Will that make us feel better? Maybe. After a while. Unpleasant emotions and thoughts will not suddenly vanish. But it will help. For details, see my series on Reconnecting to our authentic selves.

[why-am-i-here-someone-save-me]

no brain, thoughts dead

but imagine adeptus!reader and human!zhongli

thats all have a good day/night

ASDFGHJKL YIN YOUR BRAIN IS MASSIVEEEE AAAA

Okay I’m not sure if you wanted headcannons or a one shot fic or what, so I decided on a bigger than intended drabble! I hope you enjoy it as much as I did writing it! 🤭 Thanks so much for sending in an ask, I was super excited to get my first one!

Teatime Talks

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Most of Liyue’s citizens believed that the adepti had all secluded themselves in Juyen Karst. Few knew of the Conqueror of Demons who still fought his eternal battle with the miasma of fallen gods, and fewer still knew of you. Out of the masses that passed through the harbor, only a select handful were aware of the adeptus that watched over the harbor itself. Only the half-adepti and your old friend knew of your true identity.

Speaking of your old friend, she put down her teacup with a mischievous smile. “Ah, that reminds me [Name] I had the most surprising thing happen the other day. A young man approached me and asked me if I could introduce him to ‘my young friend’. Isn’t that amusing?” You groan and shake your head. This wasn’t the first time that you’d been mistaken as Madame Ping’s ‘younger’ friend, despite being older than her. “And what did you tell them?”

You’re met with an uncharacteristicly smug smirk from your friend as she answers. “Why, I invited him to come and join us for tea!” You don’t get any time to respond, as a man with long brown hair politely inquires if he could join you. Ping makes a show of warmly agreeing, obviously amused by your hidden distress. If it weren’t for the fact that you care about her so much, you’d have already walked out on her shenanigans. But you relent, choosing to humor your old friend. What you had not been anticipating however, was for the man to immediately throw you for a loop. “You are not a human, correct?” Ping watched silently as your eyes become a small bit guarded. “…And if Im not? Why do you ask?” The man simply smiles, and the wariness in your eyes fades a little bit at the genuine expression. “Then I suppose if you’re not, my intuition would be incorrect this time. I’ve been told I have a knack for picking up on strange things.” An amused grin forms on your face. “Oh? Well, I’ll believe that I guess, seeing as how you’re correct. I am [Name].”

His eyes flash with recognition as a twinkle of excitement enters his eyes. “Ah, I’ve read of you. You are an adeptus who oversees the safety of the Harbor, correct?”

You are a bit surprised to hear that he knows who you are. The few books written about adepti that you had known of hadn’t ever mentioned you. You quite preferred it that way in all honesty. It was calmer. Yet seeing this man be so genuinely intrigued by you and your work felt… nice. Ping smiled mischievously as the two of you began to talk, slipping away while you were in the middle of telling your new companion who you were.

“It is an honor to meet you honored adepti;” You roll your eyes at his formality, having never been one who enjoyed such things, “and an even bigger honor to have been able to have tea with you. I do hope that I get to meet again sometime.” You laugh a bit at his solem tone, smiling a bit. “Hmm, sometime seems a bit too vague. How about you just join us again next week instead? Perhaps I’ll tell you a few stories that your books haven’t told you about.” The smile that breaks across his face is beautiful. “That reminds me though. I don’t believe I ever got your name.”

“My name is Zhongli. It was wonderful speaking with you [Name].” As he leaves you glance over and the once empty seat next to you, finding Ping’s smirking expression looking back at you. You’d be annoyed about how she left you if it weren’t for how wonderful the conversation between you and Zhongli had been. A huff makes it’s way from your lungs as you rolled your eyes at your old friend.

“I’ll admit Ping. You’ve found an interesting one this time…”

[bsaka7]

16, 18, 20!

16. Do you write by hand, on your phone, or on your laptop?

Laptop exclusively... I'll write notes on my phone but all actual writing is on the computer. sometimes I'll do prompts on my phone. And I'll sometimes outline (more like... make maps of connections?) on paper. But the real stuff is on the computer. You can tell when I'm on my phone because it's evil stream of consciousness like this.

18. Do you enjoy research?  Which fic of yours required the most research?

as a person... I very much do like research but I can get bogged down in it, you know what I mean? Like, I like things to be correct but I can't get too into it or I'll freak myself out. My coworkers dislike this about me but I HATE things to be wrong (if preventable) almost to a moral degree like I never want to give someone incorrect info.

with fic I'm willing to bend the contours a little more. It's like... How much research can I do so that I don't ruin the way I think about the fic? I operate a lot by asking myself: what do I need to do to make this easy for me? And getting myself worked up... Not the way. That being said, i love research!!! My next big fic project... I've already read four? Books for it? But it's all fun for me anyway so it hardly even counts so this is a nice balance for me.

On the other hand.... sometimes my desire for research leads things to languish (how much can I fake it? Scenes from an American artist was all faking it)... like i have a couple of different pirate au plots (thank u @kritischetheologie) and they would NOT be a long fic (under 15k easy) but I can't start writing because im like oh i don't know enough about pirates.

Of my posted fics... Idk probably echo of the future required the most because almost all of it is compliment with star wars universe trade routes and lore and stuff. EU of course and I didn't try THAT hard because there's a lot of fuckery. and I only watched one star wars movie as reference. Unless you count all the star wars content I consumed as a kid. Write what you know i guess?

20. Do you prefer writing AUs or canon fics?

This is kind of a funky one. I vastly prefer READING Canon to au's. I go back and forth on writing. I think... hm... I like the playing field of canon or real life much more. like the cards are all there. that's easier! and it's better for digging into relationships in some way i think...

But i can't deny it. I think aus are more fun. Obviously I lean toward the... fantastical in my writing this year (space au apocalypse au dragon au star wars au)... It's just undeniably fun to explore and come up. I am a pretty grounded person. I don't let myself think like that - don't let myself pretend I'm creative - outside of fic. But because it's already fic. I can knockoff Cormac Mccarthy. I don't need all the rules of Magic to be crystal clear before I start writing. It's okay to play in the star wars sandbox. So I like that a lot!!! I also definitely feel like writing au's (starting with the max/daniel fic taking some time even tho it's like pretty tame for an au. More Canon divergent) has helped me build confidence in my writing. So I guess the answer is aus are more fun to write even if I often like "what I'm doing" with Canon fics more. God i sound like I take myself so seriously (I guess I kind of do but LOL) but oh well hopefully this is vaguely interesting rambling ❤️

[salsa-and-light]

"This short commentary will take a look at the intended roles for male and female from a biblical perspective."

This does not exist, there is no indication in scripture that there are "intended roles" based on gender; so this perspective is not biblical, it is personal.

You can make your argument and I hold no malice for it, but it is horse of a different color to suggest that your thoughts are divinely ordained. Not only is that functionally impossible, it's hubris.

"Let me start by saying I am not a misogynist, I do not believe women are meant to be slaves in the home."

Well.

.. I believe the second part, but you're really setting yourself up pretty badly there bud.

"I say all this as a prelude because some of what the Bible says may be a bit difficult for the ladies if you miss the glory in the purpose for the female."

Yeah. - - This doesn't exactly read as "not misogyny" I have to tell you.

Generally it's not polite, for a man to tell women how they should think of womanhood, and it's also generally frowned upon to tell women what to do, especially in regards to some.. "purpose".

Also the fact that you have the preface this.. ‽ ‽

You Knooow, it's gonna sound bad.

I suppose you have your conviction, but you're also not doing much to correct the accusations of misogyny if you're still expecting to hear them.

"So let’s start in Genesis on the sixth day of creation where God creates man."

Point of order, God did not create man.. God created Man-kind, both male and female are listed as being created in the image of God.

You haven't mentioned anything about image bearers yet but I have a feeling it's gonna come up.

"This passage tells us that God created man in His image.  Men bear God’s image."

Penny in the air - and the penny drops..

It's a one two punch with this rhetoric.

So no, both male and female are made in the image of God, this is in the text.

What translation were you using?

..

(ESV) yeah.. they still incorrectly use "abomination" so I guess it's not too big of a shock that they'd fumble this too.

"It also says, “male and female He created them.”  This part of the verse does NOT say that God created female in His image, rather, it merely says God created male and female."

The text says that: "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them." - Genesis 1:27(NIV)

So you're analysis is based on an incorrect understanding of the text, and could have been avoided if you had thought to look at the ambiguous word "Man" with a bit more scrutiny.

I hope this isn't a pillar of your argument.

"There is a very important reason why there is this difference between male and female."

Are you sure? What's the difference?

God is infinite, it's not surprising that two people look -a little different.

"Ladies, please bear with me.  The good part for you is coming later on."

Man..

I don't know if this is helping you my guy.

"The following verse states the purpose of the woman is as a helper to the man. Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” – Genesis 2:18 (ESV)"

They were also Nude, Childless, Vegans-

We do not follow the social morays of Adam & Eve; living their immortal lives in a perfect garden.

And also, if we're being technical here, God said "I will make him a helper" None of us are Adam; servitude is not inherited.

"The concept is supported by the Apostle Paul: “3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ,"

It's a stretch to call this the same concept.

This is not a chain of command, it could just as easily talk about sources.

Besides, saying what is, is not the same as saying what ought to be-

Ancient Corinth was patriarchal, this is not a shock, but it's a different thing to claim that we must be.

Especially when this vague notion leaves the door open to.. whatever application you like. Do you think that women should take their husbands opinions into account if they have a husband, do you think that women should be treated like breeding lifestock with no agency.. both equally valid conclusions if this is your justification.

If men to women are comparable to God to men.. you really can justify almost anything.

Which is just another reason this passage is a dubious source for your claims.

God doesn't exactly check in with us to make sure we want to go along with his plan.

"...and the head of Christ is God."

That and if you apply that same logic to Jesus.. this portion would indicate that Christ is subservient to God.. and/or that God and Christ have a similar dynamic to men and women..

Really it is a bit opaque but I think you should have a consistent lens for interpreting a single passage, if nothing else.

"The above verses also give us some understanding of the glory of the woman."

No.. not really.

You're main take aways from those passages is a power dynamic..

If you're wanting to make it sound like "a glory" you're gonna have to give a bit of an explanation.

Because, as a person who has lived in this world these many long years, I get the impression that most people and women in particular aren't exactly thrilled with the prospect of being subservient.

It's not like.. a cool thing people want to do.

"Let me reiterate that the husband is the head of the household, not the wife."

That passage literally never mentioned households but -okay.

"This concept is supported in the following very well know verses. “Wives, submit to your own husbands..."

Yeah yeah, we can skip the rest.

Because for as well know as the verse are you seem to have missed how well-know the mistake is that comes along with it.

People always quote Ephesians 5:22-24 because it sound big and bold, never mind that right before that in Ephesians 5:21 it says:

"Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ." - Ephesians 5:21(NIV)

We're all supposed to submit to one another.

That is a matter of course..

If we're assuming that this applies to us at all,

I'm not an Ephesian.. neither are you- - we're reading someone else's mail, that's a relevant and oft-overlooked piece of context. Not everything is about us, or for us.

"And also: “In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives,"

And again, you're ignoring the context to focus on gender.

Those verses are specifically meant as function to win people to the faith, it's not described as a general practice.

As a general reminder for everyone, the chapters in the Bible were added long after they were written and while you started at the beginning of 1 Peter 3, the sentence structure is a blatant continuation of a previous thought("in the same way").

So we look at the previous chapter and we can see this.

"Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people." - 1 Peter 2:13-15(NIV)

This is once again something that is not gendered. And once again, it's not clear that this is even meant for us.

I don't know about you, but as a child growing up as a Baptist in the American South.. "Obey every human authority" was not exactly a popular credo.

And I'll tell you what else isn't a popular idea:

"Slaves, in reverent fear of God submit yourselves to your masters, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if someone bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because they are conscious of God." - 1 Peter 2:18-19(NIV)

So.

Using you're interpretational logic, where all of this still applies..

The American Revolution was immoral, slaves should accept their slavery and also women should listen to men "in the same way" as slaves - obey their masters.

..

..

It's not exactly the position I'd want to take if I were you.

"Are women to be doormats? The commentator Matthew Henry says about Eve: “This companion was taken from his side to signify that she was to be dear unto him as his own flesh."

..

.euuuhghh...

eaghh-

Listen, I can be chill- I'm not going to begrudge anyone their arithmomancy and their numerology or their ✨symbolism✨..

But can we at least acknowledge that this is, Tooootally subjective?

"but from his side, to denote that species of equality which is to subsist in the marriage state.”"

Who said that Adam & Eve were ever married⸮

It wasn't the teext~~~

"That wife that is of God’s making by special grace, and of God’s bringing by special providence, is likely to prove a helpmeet to her husband."

Just to clarify, because the language seems purposefully misleading, this is a commentary right, not scripture. It's an opinion.

"Peter says wives are to be honored! “Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.”  1 Peter 3:7"

Yeah.. notice how he also called women co-heirs, or at least "heirs with you"

But of course people should take care of and honor their wives, spouses are supposed to take care of one another,

This is not evidence of some gendered role.

"Scriptures tell us that a virtuous woman is her husband’s crown:"

Again.. eeeh, I don't think that you're helping your case when you talk like that.

You're also taking the presence of a gendered statement as evidence that there is a vacumm for the opposite sex. "Husbands Love your wives" doesn't mean that wives aren't supposed to Love their husbands.

"Are husbands allowed to mistreat their wives.  The answer is an emphatic, “No!!”  On the contrary, the Bible has this command for husbands:"

At the same time, the verse you've been using to support your claims that women should "submit" to their husbands are side by side with verses telling slaves to submit to their masters including quote: "not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh."

Which I would agree doesn't mean that women should deal with mistreatment, but it does mean that your interpretational praxis is.. odd..

"The love referred to above is a sacrificial love.  Christ sacrificed His life for mankind.  Men are commanded to love their wives with this same sacrificial love."

This is true, but once again you're taking one mention in the Bible and treating it as a gendered thing, it's not.

"“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”" - John 13:34-35(NIV)

This is something all Christians are supposed to be doing.

And it's really very bizarre to imply that wives aren't supposed to Love their husbands.

I don't know if this is your view but I hear a lot about how it's the "man's job" to do everything for their wives and not worry about themselves, which has always unsettled me.

Women are not pets that have no will or ability of their own,

And men are people, with needs and limitations. Treating their needs and wants as fundamentally less important is sick.

"In the above verse is another hint as to the glory of women. Ephesians goes on to say:...Ephesians 5:26-30"

Okay no.

The first part of that passage isn't even about women, it's about the church and the latter part is just talking about men Loving their wives again.

And no "The Glory of Women" is not the to be Loved by a man.

I feel like this should be obvious.

"Marriage between a man and woman is a picture of the Covenant God made with Abraham."

If you wanna be poetic about it, go ham, but that's not the point of marriage.

"Marriage between a man and a woman is meant to be a model of the relationship between God and His people.  Marriage is also a picture of the marriage between the Messiah and his Bride, the church."

Now this is where you cross over from artistic license to just making things up.

Marriage is not meant to be a replica of anything. You're misusing the analogies.

"Women represent His sanctified people in the model of marriage."

No, that's incorrect, the global church, both men and women, are included in the analogy as the Bride.

You're trying to turn an analogy into something literal, which it isn't, and then make that analogy a rule. That really doesn't work.

"Women represent the Messiah’s Bride, the Church.  That is their glory."

Even if you were correct.. telling women that they're subservient but it's okay because they get to marry God is not something that most women are going to take in stride. Especially when the idea is based on next to nothing.

"By embracing their husband’s authority and their role as their husband’s helper as defined in Scripture"

It's not even explicit that men have authority, it's certainly not defined.

"wives are helping their husbands walk in their role as head of the household and modeling the relationship between God and His people."

None of that is ever commanded by scripture.

"Let me end with this: Men who do not love and cherish their wives do violence to that same model.  Something to think about, guys."

That's barely a defense. You created this supposed model, someone with no more creative a stance than you could easily define this model however they liked.

...

Like I said from the beginning, you can argue for whatever you like, but this is personal supposition mixed with some just plain incorrect information.

Gender roles are never mentioned in scripture, and even if your interpretation were accurate, it's still far too vague to tell us anything.

Male and Female He Created Them

I see a lot of stuff written about traditional gender roles, who we are as men and women and how those roles and responsibilities fit within a biblical marriage.  Some of it, I agree with.  A lot of it, I don’t.  This short commentary will take a look at the intended roles for male and female from a biblical perspective.  This commentary is meant to be a blessing to both husband and wife, male and female.  Let me start by saying I am not a misogynist, I do not believe women are meant to be slaves in the home.  I despise those men who abuse women - mentally, physically or spiritually.  I say all this as a prelude because some of what the Bible says may be a bit difficult for the ladies if you miss the glory in the purpose for the female.

For those of you that have a problem with God (for whatever reason), Christians in general, or if the Bible is a show stopper for you then here’s your fair warning to jump off this train.  I can’t help you with any of your problems.  I didn’t write the Bible and I definitely am not God.

So let’s start in Genesis on the sixth day of creation where God creates man.  “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Genesis 1:27 (ESV)  This passage tells us that God created man in His image.  Men bear God’s image.

It also says, “male and female He created them.”  This part of the verse does NOT say that God created female in His image, rather, it merely says God created male and female.  There is a very important reason why there is this difference between male and female.  Ladies, please bear with me.  The good part for you is coming later on.

The following verse states the purpose of the woman is as a helper to the man. Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” – Genesis 2:18 (ESV)  

The concept is supported by the Apostle Paul: “3But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. 7For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. 8For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. 9Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.” 1 Corinthians 11:3, 7-9 (ESV)

The above verses also give us some understanding of the glory of the woman.  Verse three tells us the ‘head’ or authority of man is Christ, the authority of a wife is her husband and the authority of Christ is God.  Let me reiterate that the husband is the head of the household, not the wife.  This concept is supported in the following very well know verses.

“Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands.”  Ephesians 5:22-24 (ESV)

And also: “In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, 2 as they observe your chaste and [a] respectful behavior.”  1 Peter 3:1-2 (ESV)

Are women to be doormats? The commentator Matthew Henry says about Eve: “This companion was taken from his side to signify that she was to be dear unto him as his own flesh. Not from his head, lest she should rule over him; nor from his feet, lest he should tyrannize over her; but from his side, to denote that species of equality which is to subsist in the marriage state.” And again, “That wife that is of God’s making by special grace, and of God’s bringing by special providence, is likely to prove a helpmeet to her husband.”

Peter says wives are to be honored! “Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.”  1 Peter 3:7

Are women without value?  Of course not!  Scriptures tell us that a virtuous woman is her husband’s crown: “An excellent wife is the crown of her husband, but she who brings shame is like rottenness in his bones.”  Proverbs 12:4 (ESV)

Proverbs also tells us that a virtuous woman is worth more than rubies: “An excellent wife who can find? She is far more precious than jewels.”  Proverbs 31:10 (ESV)

Are husbands allowed to mistreat their wives.  The answer is an emphatic, “No!!”  On the contrary, the Bible has this command for husbands: “Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.”  Ephesians 5:25 (ESV)

The love referred to above is a sacrificial love.  Christ sacrificed His live for mankind.  Men are commanded to love their wives with this same sacrificial love.

In the above verse is another hint as to the glory of women.  Ephesians goes on to say: “26that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 28In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, 30because we are members of his body.”  Ephesians 5:26-30

Marriage between a man and woman is a picture of the Covenant God made with Abraham.  Genesis tells of humanity’s tragic fall into sin and death, and of God’s unfolding plan of redemption through His Covenant with Abraham and his descendants.

1When Abram was ninety-nine years old the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am God Almighty; walk before me, and be blameless, 2that I may make my covenant between me and you, and may multiply you greatly.” 3Then Abram fell on his face. And God said to him, 4“Behold, my covenant is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations. 5No longer shall your name be called Abram, but your name shall be Abraham, for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. 6I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make you into nations, and kings shall come from you. 7And I will establish my covenant between me and you and your offspring after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your offspring after you.”  Genesis 17:1-7

Marriage is a representation of God’s love for mankind and His covenant is His plan of redemption through the shed blood of His Son, Jesus Christ.  Marriage between a man and a woman is meant to be a model of the relationship between God and His people.  Marriage is also a picture of the marriage between the Messiah and his Bride, the church.  

Women represent His sanctified people in the model of marriage.  Women represent the Messiah’s Bride, the Church.  That is their glory.  Jesus is the Groom.  By embracing their husband’s authority and their role as their husband’s helper as defined in Scripture, wives are helping their husbands walk in their role as head of the household and modeling the relationship between God and His people.

Let me end with this: Men who do not love and cherish their wives do violence to that same model.  Something to think about, guys.

[iclaimedtobethebetterbard]

NOT A QUESTION ABT LORE but what r everyone's fave type of music / fav artists / etc . This is very important

oooooh this is a good question and i can probably not give it as good of an answer as it deserves because i grew up in a white evangelical community /neg and was basically not allowed to listen to anything but That Kind of worship music for the first like 14-16 years of my life. so since then i have been trying to figure out how normal-people listening to music works. i still haven’t really figured it out, i’ve just found a few artists that i like and i just kind of put them on repeat and am not sure how to go about regularly finding more new things i will enjoy. like. i listened to over 11,000 minutes of lil nas x last year. (which i am very proud of actually lol.) but like, that one artist was a full tenth of what i listened to the entire year.

[ask me questions abt the backstories/lore for my if you’re going my way, i’ll go with you fic]

answers in terms of general vibes below the cut, although i do not know enough about music as a whole to give really specific examples like u asked for i am sorry 😭 (if you have opinions on what they would listen to, you are Probably Correct and also I Would Like To Hear Them) (also cw allistic ableism mention):

so obviously virgil likes emo, because that’s the law when you write fanfiction with virgil in it lol /hj probably his tastes are a lot more expansive than just emo though. like you can tell that emo is kind of where he started out from, but he’s branched out a ton since his teenage years and he likes a bunch of different genres now.

logan i think likes anything that he can use as an audio stim. stuff with big loud strong rhythmic noises. technically i have not officially made him autistic in this fic but like. probably he is lol. im dragging my feet on talking about it in the fic a little bc,,, i feel like if random people in the fic’s universe find out he is autistic, they are definitely Super fast to draw incorrect connections between his supergenius power and the savant stereotype. which is gross and which logan haaaaates so much. i vaguely have a scene in my head of him like getting really annoyed by some ableist reporter talking to him on live tv and snapping that “actually i have only been a supergenius for 2/3 of my life. i have been autistic my entire life” but also like. ughhh i don’t want to put him through that. so im on the fence about talking about it in the fic or not. but yeah i think he really really likes audio stimming and is hyposensitive to audio in general (which also is part of why he likes to process his thoughts by speaking them aloud) so he likes music with lots of Noise in it.

patton mostly listens to Music Aimed At Little Kids. like disney soundtracks etc. plus anything child-appropriate that logan listens to, bc again, logan does not treat children that differently based on their being children and sees no reason to play entirely different music than normal when patton is around.

i don’t know what janus likes to listen to but i know it is very different from the like disney soundtracks and kidz bop or whatever that patton listens to (and that janus does also listen to because patton listens to it lol) (literally nobody is making them do this but they do it anyway and then complain about it a lot) (but only when patton is not around bc they don’t want to make him think they’re upset at him about it <3). possibly he is kind of snobby about his music taste? but like in a very oh-this-person-is-definitely-in-her-mid-20s way if that makes any sense (im not sure if it does). i have the least idea of what janus’s preferred music is tbh.

remus’s music taste,, again i don’t know what it is but i do know that you can Very Clearly tell that Oh This Man Is Extremely Mentally Ill from looking at what he chooses to listen to.

roman i think has honestly mostly not been allowed to listen to music basically at all up until now. like if his parents felt like listening to music, then he would have to listen to that, but he wasn’t ever really allowed to choose music or have any way to listen to it on his own. his experience with music has been whatever other people choose to play around him and that’s about it.

yeah!! those are the vibes!! i don’t really have a ton of specific genres or artists to name im very sorry 😭 but i am super open to hearing ideas for those if anyone has any!!

[isthisanything]

WC/DC Week - Accidental Engagement

WC/DC Week Day 3

Prompts: “Look who’s coming to dinner.” - Family/Romantic Partner Meets the White Collar Unit - Parent & Child - Reunion

Rating: Teen

Title: Accidental Engagement

Summary: Tim!Neal gets engaged in the middle of the White Collar offices.

@whitecollar-dc-week (sorry it’s a few days late, on here)

“Hey, Babybird.”

Tim nearly spilled his coffee at the words. He was sitting at his desk in full view of the rest of the White Collar unit, and apparently his dumbass wanted to visit him at work. Tim mentally cursed Jason for tempting fate to blow his cover.

“What are you doing here, Jaybird?” Tim replied.

Jason casually walked around the side of Tim’s desk and sat on the corner. Leaning into Tim’s personal space, he whispered, “I’m here to see you, Timmy.”

Both of them had been able to feel the eyes of almost the entire rest of the White Collar unit looking at them. Jason would jokingly say it’s because of his good looks, but Tim would tell you that it’s just a fact. Especially, in the White Collar offices. They would be wondering who this handsome stranger with blue eyes and black hair is, and why he was talking to Neal.

Tim pushed him away at those words. “It is too early for your,” Tim waved one of his hands vaguely as he tried to summon up the word he wanted. “…shenanigans.” Tim took another sip of his coffee.

“Neal, you feel like introducing me to your, friend here?” Peter prompted as he walked up to Neal’s desk, and the pair sat at it.

“Oh, Prettybird, I’m offended! We’re planning the wedding, and you haven’t even mentioned me to your coworkers?” Jason said with mock offense. Turning to Peter, he said, “You can call me Jason.”

Tim let his head hit his desk at Jason’s words. So, that was why he was here. He had found out that Tim was planning to propose. “How’d you find out, Jay?”

“Well, putting the ring you’re going to use to propose anywhere in our apartment was a dumb move, love. I know you’re smarter than that.” Jason said.

“Well, I couldn’t leave it with our siblings. They would’ve just told you.” Tim said.

Peter didn’t let the confusion at Neal’s wording cross his face. Our siblings?

“Cass wouldn’t have said anything. Dami would probably just throw a few knives at me and then not tell me why.” Jason responded.

Peter had to put in an even greater amount of effort into hiding his confusion at Jason’s words. Who’s sibling threw knives at them? And who talked about it so casually?

Tim just waved Jason’s response away vaguely. “Yeah, but if Cass slips to Steph, or Dami to Dick, they will end up telling you. Steph and Dick have no filter, remember?”

“Fair enough.” Jason said. A mischievous grin curled onto Jason’s lips, “Are you even going to ask me what my answer would be?”

“Considering the fact that you decided to come into my place of work to have this conversation, and you made a remark about us planning the wedding, I assumed that was your roundabout way of saying yes. Or am I incorrect in that assumption?” Tim’s voice didn’t bely his nervousness at what Jason might say, but his eyes did.

Jason could see, the worry in Tim’s features as he waited for Jason to tell him whether he was correct or not. It almost that there was even a small part of Tim that thought Jason might turn him down. They had been dating for almost 5 years now. Jason had been considering proposing for a while but wasn’t sure how to ask Tim if that was a thing he wanted.

“Of course, I want to marry you, Prettybird!” Jason smiled brightly and pecked Tim on the lips, just a quick kiss due to their angle.

The smile on Tim’s face was blindingly happy. On impulse, he stood from his chair and kissed Jason. Both of Tim’s hands cradling his face gently, as they kissed way more passionately than was probably strictly appropriate for a place of work.

They both separated at the sound of Peter clearing his throat. Tim attempted to look a little sheepish, but his wide smile ripped that look to shreds. “Sorry, Peter.”

Peter waves Tim’s apology away. “Congrats on the engagement, I guess.”

“Thanks, Peter.” Tim said, starting to reign in his features.

“Just because I’m congratulating you doesn’t mean I’m letting you leave early, Neal.” Peter told him. Both Peter and Neal still had more than a few case files to finish before they could go home.

Tim laughed, “I should’ve guessed, not even getting engaged, would get me out of work for a day.”

“Jason, you can have a few more minutes, but then Neal here has to get back to work.” Peter said.

“Fair enough.” Jason replied to Peter, and nodded his acceptance of Peter’s terms.

After he heard Jason’s agreement, Peter patted Neal on the shoulder in congratulations before he turned and headed back to his office. He would ask Neal about his siblings comment later.

As soon as Peter was out of earshot, Jason leaned into Tim ear and said, “We can celebrate later, Tim. I promise.” His voice low and purposefully seductive.

Tim hesitated at Jason’s voice before pushing him away playfully, “We better be celebrating later. I had everything planned out, and you decided to do this at my place of work.”

Jason promised Tim that he would make it up to him after work before he kissed him and left the White Collar offices. And Jason would keep that promise. Not long after their engagement, Tim told Peter the truth about who he was. Mainly, so he could ask Peter to be his best man at their wedding. Peter accepted.

The wedding was beautiful. Jason quoted some obscure piece of literature in his vows, and Tim reminded him of how they got engaged in his. It was the happiest day of both of their lives. It would take some nudging for Tim to admit it, but he wouldn’t have had Jason and him get engaged any other way. He loved Jason, and he couldn’t imagine spending the rest of his life with anyone else.

[karanoid]

about top joe discord

LET ME ADDRESS A FEW POINTS:

There has been many fear and anxiety regardless the top!joe discord I made. I understand how it gives my discord a bad reputation. Somebody has kindly reached out to me to ask me addressing several points, which I’m now gonna clarify:

1. I am racist, I asked why, and they said mostly because of my dismissive behavior to people who called me out for drawing yusuf adorned in gold jewelry which made their friends feel unsafe. So, I am a muslim and was raised in a muslim household and community. I am fucking brown.

I didn’t say it because you don’t need to know that about me. What bothers me is how some people feel the need to come to my inbox informing me “maam yusuf is a religious muslim who prays 5 times a day and do all the supplementary prayers all while he drinks alcohol and fuck nicky in the dailies, he wouldnt be wearing gold maam no maam.” as if I didn’t know any better. so please, now don’t do that. If you care so much about the littlest details like wearing gold then you’ll also call out yusuf because he draws living beings and drinks champagne. yes it’s true muslim men are forbidden from wearing gold AND silk but let’s not forget, nothing in the comic and movies imply yusuf has ever been religious. It’s easier to see nicolo as religious because he was a fucking priest. Yusuf was a fucking merchant, it’s easy to see that he’d be less faithful because he would have been travelling and seen many kind of people to broaden his horizons and not contained to a little bubble of hyper religious community. However, let me remind you: whether yusuf AND nicolo are religious or not is entirely UP TO THE AUTHOR/ARTIST. It’s totally fine to make him religious and if you can respect it THATS GREAT, I ALSO LIKE HIM THAT WAY, but please remember it’s not even canon and hey sometimes I just draw things because I like the aesthetics. Also please, do not harass writers for getting a thing or two incorrect, even white people cannot get christianity correct, even between two muslims could be a disagreement whether this fic’s yusuf is problematic or not. I wouldn’t even expect anything more and THAT’S OKAY. Just don’t be an ass to muslims of color in real life and don’t fall into the believe that it’s a religion of violence. you can say that greg made him that way bc he knew nothing better but hey, I have no problem with that. again, it’s fine to make him religious, I’d be delighted but it’s ALSO fine to make him not religious.

2. I think that people only write Top!Nicky out of political correctness. OKAY. I apologize for this. I thought like this because I have accounts telling me that they were pressured into writing top!nicky or they wanted more readerships so I make a BIG assumption. I realized this is only a small part of switch and top!nicky fics and the big bulk of this must be out of genuine care. So yeah, I apologize for thinking that people only write top!nicky out of political correctness. I think writers should be allowed to write whatever they want. Yes this includes top!Nicky. And in whatever kinks they want it. However, this still doesn’t change that the discourses do scare people away from writing top!joe. Write top!nicky however you want, but stop vague-blogging about top!joe. racism isn’t inherent to top!joe and you can always remind people to be mindful with their writings but discouraging people from writing top!joe is not the solution. 

3. Top!joe is racist and people in the discord are racist. Okay, I am gonna touch several aspects why top!joe discord is considered racist: (1) because I don’t like to switch them, therefore I am racist. Sorry that’s not how it works. I have a clear preference and that’s just how I roll. Besides, a lot of people in the discord (including me) think either they switch (because they are 900 yo) or joe just doesn’t like bottoming. I’m not the kind of people who refers to reality for fiction I consume but people who prefer to top or to bottom exist (2) i want to be away from accountability and responsibility. Nope. The reason I made it is because I wanted to gather people with same interest as mine. 

4. I paint Yusuf as aggressive and the whole discord like him being an aggressive top. I think this is the only reason why the discord is seen in a negative light. Because wow what a coincidence that someone vagueblogged my discord at the day I celebrated about Nicky suggesting 20 years and wrote a post about how Joe is allowed to be angry. And beside someone made the WRONG assumption that we are focusing on Joe’s anger and violence (what). Okay, I don’t know how to break this down. But I will try. First, yes I was overjoyed at the news. Because I’m one of the people that do not like feral!nicky headcanon. I liked it at first bc it was funny but then it was twisted into Nicky being cold. So I don’t like it (lol), I still like it though but like I don’t seriously think that way. However, I never liked the idea that Nicky suggested higher than Joe. Because then his character just doesn’t click with me, there was a cognitive dissonance for me because joe clearly says nicky’s heart overflows kindness, you can see nicky as a medic in the credit montage. Also, from their body language and from the way the movie set em up, I think Joe is the one who suggested higher and I am glad to be proven right. Second, I did write a post about how Joe is allowed to be angry at Booker. People agreed with me, so I was not alone. But the reason I wrote that post is not because I wanted to paint yusuf as aggressive, but because I’m tired at people who think Joe shouldn’t display any negative emotions. I think it’s out of character. I do NOT think Joe is aggressive. That is NOT his wholeass personality. If you looked at my tog art tag, never once I portrayed Joe as anything aggressive. If I do, please show me. Third, people are conflating this with my post where I reblogged with a comment that implies aggressive Joe isn’t racism. Okay in this, the context is IN BED. It’s Joe being aggressive in BED. It’s literally BED ROLES AND FANTASY. I don’t even have a particular scenario in my head when I reblogged that, the original post clearly refers to bed roles with manhandling and kinks etc. like, why would you spank someone in public? Lastly, about the discord, NOPE, most people in the discord agree that Joe is either a GENTLE DOM or SERVICE TOP. But in my opinion, if someone likes Joe as an aggressive top (again, bed roles baby) I really don’t think it’s racism. It’s just... projection? 

anyway, back to joe’s emotions, these are posts from a moroccan man (paragraph #7) and a brown woman whose posts I agree with. Let’s be real, people of color are expected to shut up in favor of white people’s fragile feelings.

Now, about racism in fandom. I understand the concern because muslim men are painted as violent and aggressive. You know what I will never forgive those radicals for taking away innocents lives and to leave a lasting damage in how muslims are perceived in the west. However, you have to keep in mind, Joe in the movie is far from being stereotyped. I mean, Gina and Marwan practically greenlit him? Now, you might have concerns that writers are gonna turn him into a walking stereotype which is... okay, I understand that concern. But the solution is to communicate this ‘hey I think you make him too stereotypical in this etc etc’ not “write more top!nicky AND shame top!joe” because again, top!joe is not inherently racist.

also some people mentioned that they hope I recognize racial bias in the ship. dude, that goes without saying, all aspects of your life will be influenced by racial biases. however, this kind of thing is not specific to fandom/shipping. Like I said I’m fucking brown, friends and families with facial features that cater to white expectation are treated better. I did say at the bottom of this post, yeah I did notice why it’s always a brown character who’s always openly mad. And that’s in itself a form of racial bias. Racial biases affect everyone, white or POC, it doesn’t matter. But I got an issue with how people think this is racism. like how convenient, if by falling to racial biases mean you are a racist then what about those white people who created this racial biases in the first place? and I noticed the persons who got the audacity to cry about everything in this fandom is white?? I mean okay, they don’t know what I am, but not everyone is comfortable with sharing their private information like ethnic group, faith, etc. what if they really don’t want to share it? Because like you said, racial bias, whether good or bad will affect me. Now, I don’t know what white people are feeling, I’m not white. However, based on my interactions with them. We’re all just people sharing same interest, it could be they fall into racial biases, but all we shared about are just regular HCs. Even people making a conscious effort to combat racial bias still in essence fall for racial bias. You just cannot escape it.

According to this post, fandom assumes that the bottom is the proxy of writers, I don’t think this is applicable to everyone but let’s just say it’s true and people tend to write about their projection better so I’m gonna assume the racism part comes from the fact that..yeah I do think the bottom usually gets more fleshed out as a result of them being the writers proxy, so somebody posted this in the discord which I agree because yes I do think there’s a lack about yusuf’s background especially when it comes to crusade era:

but since I know most writers aren’t muslims, to me it’s not so much about racism but they simply know nothing about it, and not always out of ignorance either but in this climate, if you get a thing or two wrong you’d get harassed. so *shrugs* I understand the reluctancy. But here’s the thing, this is not about top/bottom issue but because most of the fandom are white so they have more freedom in writing the white character. Anyway, plenty of people have projected themselves into yusuf already, the whole “top/bottom” thing in this fandom is not even a thing. Yes, some writers project on the bottom so if you prefer bottom!joe that’s fine, somebody in the discord is doing a research and it turned out top!joe wasn’t even a CLEAR majority in JULY. So clearly they got their share already?

so please, let’s stop with the vitriol. if people are preferring top!joe it’s clearly because of different preferences. it’s not that deep. it’s the same way with how some people are preferring top!nicky. But we’re being driven out based on a hypothetical scenarios? like what do you want? for us to cease existing??? don’t be ridiculous.

I know people won’t listen to me. So this is my suggestion: LETS JUST IGNORE THINGS YOU DON’T LIKE. LET’S ALL JUST AGREE TO DISAGREE. 

[artist-issues]

Please don't think me rude, because I am enjoying this very much, but I have to point out the the arguments you're making are starting to get nonsensical:

Stories don't have a right to anything, least of all existence. They're not sentient, they're not people. So it's no good trying to explain to me that a story doesn't have to "change someone's life to have a right to exist."

In your example of telling your friend a "frivolous" story about a crush, it is to teach your friend something. It is to teach your friend that you once had a crush. You are communicating truth to that friend through the narration of events, whether you want to call that "expression" or "communication," or "sharing." This is why the Oxford definition is both accurate, yet not enough: it is a narration of events, fictional or real. But for what? Why narrate those events? To communicate. To argue against this point is, again, like saying "a hammer is a long handle attached to a blunt piece of stone or metal." You've said exactly what it is, yet not enough. What's the hammer for? What are stories for? After all, it's called storyTELLING.

Where, in knowing that something can "be" without having to "perform a particular use," is the peace found? Especially with stories! My word, that phrase sounds nice, but there's nothing to it when I examine it. Ever tried to add to a conversation and gone completely unheard? At best, you'd feel amusement; after all, you got to hear yourself. At worst, you'd feel embarrassed, or even dissatisfied, or even hurt--because nobody else hears you. But either way, when you opened your mouth and what was inside of you came out, the point was to be heard. You can feel many things when you communicate and nobody (including yourself) receives it for what you intended, but it'd be nonsensical to say "peace" was one of those feelings.

Stories are Communication

You're arguing a specific type of semantics here that doesn't seem to have a point, especially not in connection with your point of view, so I'm politely not going to comment on the Oxford definition of communication.

The person who gets the incorrect message out of Prince of Egypt is free and capable of coming up with that incorrect message. It doesn't change the fact that it's incorrect; it neither lines up with the reality that the storyteller was describing, nor the reality of actual reality.

To your Prince of Egypt point: You seem to be returning to this point over and over. I am saying: what an audience member may understand a story to mean exists. But that understanding is either correct or incorrect--because the storyteller meant to say something. Whether audience members hear it or not.

You continue to say that stories are "more" than communication but you can't demonstrate how without listing the consequences of communication--or falling back on the vague idea that subjectivity is a good thing.

Again, all you're really saying is that "there's no such thing as right or wrong, good or bad, correct or incorrect."

I don't recommend Birth of a Nation. I don't. It is an incredibly well-told story, and for that reason it should only be watched by very discerning viewers, who are willing to take responsibility for understanding the objective thing that the storyteller is telling, and then just as willing to hold that up to objective reality and discard what has been told, as wrong.

Your example of telling your friend about lunch: it's still a story. You're communicating a point, and the point is: "I had lunch." Now, it might not make your friend feel any particular way--and that's because it's a poorly-made story--but it's still a story by definition.

"This is where the honorable interaction of between author and viewer comes in. There has to be an unwritten pact that both author and reader agree to - that the author writes with an intention to share, and the viewer reads with the intention to understand. The balance of how far as possible the viewer should line their interpretations with the author's is something that varies depending on the story, or simply depending on personal preference.

Everything that you said in that paragraph was correct, and lines up exactly with what I'm saying (but not exactly with what you've been saying)--until you reach this point:

"If a viewer then condemns the author for the messaging that they interpreted from the story (speaking with my definition of story interpretation which is in an of itself a subjective notion), it would then be a breach of this unspoken pact, and therefore unfair and unethical. The separation between author and creation is a fine one, but it is a separation nonetheless."

That's the opposite of sense. And it's why I chose Birth of the Nation to illustrate my point:

If a story tells viewers: "racism is good" then the viewer shirks their responsibility only when they saying "I'm not going to condemn that."

"Condemnation" is not the same as "silencing." But condemnation is vitally important when it comes to storytelling. In fact, the only good that comes from a story like "Birth of a Nation" is that the viewer can learn that the storyteller genuinely believes racism is good--then have the opportunity to reject such a telling--then go out and convince others that "racism is good" is a false statement. They've understood the storyteller. Now they can correct the storyteller for putting out a morally wrong, and reality-ignoring story. And if the storyteller won't be corrected, at least the viewer knows more firmly where they stand in relation to reality. Because again, that's the point of stories.

"It can just exist, as grass exists, or as the universe exists."

Yeah, I figured we were going to have to get down to this once I realized you don't believe in objective reality or truth.

You're right, my response is: Grass has a use. It creates oxygen, it provides a habitat for microscopic organisms, and it is a source of food. The universe has a use, too. But I have a feeling our overall worldviews will cause us to disagree on that. Do you really believe that nothing which exists has an objective purpose?

See, the "chief end," the point, is not for something to exist. Things only exist because there is purpose. That includes stories. Stories do not spontaneously come to be: they are chosen to exist by the person telling them, and that person, as they tell it, as they create the story, has a purpose for that story. Without the purpose, the story doesn't exist. So your reasoning here doesn't make sense: and what's more, I can't understand the peace in it.

Unless it's the kind of peace that a child finds when they cover their eyes, hoping that this means the adult won't be able to see them. (I don't say that to be insulting--I say it to communicate clearly the apparent difference between you and I's definition of "peace.")

"Seeing to Understand" and "Seeing to Be Right"

I'm not going to repeat myself here, except to say you se to be misunderstanding me--or yourself. You created the opposition (that is, the supposed contradiction, the supposed differences between) "understanding" and "being right" in the first place.

All I did was respond to them.

About Tangled:

@loneswaggingranger...what?

This is exactly, exactly, what I'm talking about. Mother Gothel is not a mother! In the Tangled movie (alone) she is not the mother of anyone--she is the kidnapper of Rapunzel. She only pretends to be Rapunzel's mother. She's not concerned at all for Rapunzel's safety--NEVER is that hinted at in the film. She is concerned with the magical hair's safety--that's as plain as the English I'm typing in!

You are making plenty up here. There is no evidence for your "interpretation" in the Tangled film. In fact, there's evidence to the contrary. And it's in spite of that that you're coming to these conclusions on Mother Gothel.

You just illustrated my point: you didn't come to Tangled to understand exactly what the storyteller wanted you to know--(which is demonstrably that Gothel is a kidnapper with no genuine motherly feelings)--you came to give yourself something to talk about with...yourself. While you ignored what the storyteller was actually saying.

It's the equivalent of standing in front of a friend, and as they try to tell you about their day at the carwash, you smile, nod, and respond, "I'm glad you had such a great day at the rodeo!"

I mean. I said "you aren't actually looking for new understanding from a source outside yourself if you're going to a storyteller and making up your own story."

And then you proceeded to tell me about how you literally (forgive me, I know you shared something personal) imposed a message that Mother Gothel was not created to communicate on her--using your own personal bias and experience. You took what the storyteller was saying, ignored it, and made it about you.

That's the opposite of understanding.

Mother Gothel's not a real person. She does not gain from your "understanding" attitude toward her, and if she were real, she wouldn't be able to gain from the motives you're assuming she has without evidence, either. Nothing about what you're saying is "understanding."

It's just uprooting and re-planting everything that is outside of yourself into a context that fits inside of yourself. Changing what it actually is, so that it has no power to change you. You told yourself that message about parentage. Tangled didn't tell it to you. You imposed it on Tangled.

That is bad. Because the ends don't justify the means. The next time someone comes to you and says "I think you should try to drink more water," and you don't find that message applicable to you (even if it IS) you'll simply say, "thanks for reminding me to drink more coffee!"

That's not real learning from anyone--except yourself. Dangerous.

I'm not trying to hurt or insult you, but keeping you feeling comfortable during this delightful conversation is not my goal, either. I really believe this stuff--I believe it matters for all of life. So you'll have to excuse my urgency.

Conclusion

"I wouldn't say that I "don't believe in objective truth", but I suppose I wouldn't say that I do believe in it either. <- Do you believe you wrote that sentence? If so, you're acknowledging objective truth. If not, your only option is to say "I can't definitely say that I did write that sentence...I also can't definitely say that I didn't! 🤷‍♀️ " You don't live your life that way, do you?

Listen, it is incredibly, beautifully simple:

A storyteller says "Dogs and cats are mammals."

An audience member can say:

"You said 'Dogs and cats are mammals' and that's true!"

"You said 'dogs and cats are mammals,' and that's not true."

"You said 'dogs cars beetles horses" and that's true!

"You said 'dogs cars beetles horses' and that's not true."

But only what's in yellow is a correct interpretation--of reality. Both the reality of what the storyteller actually said, and the overall reality which the storyteller's saying was referencing.

You can try to make it more complex--but nothing else makes sense, or is powerful, or is true.

How to Stick to the Point About Rachel Zegler and Snow White

"Rachel Zegler is just an actress doing her job, Disney is the one to blame for the Snow White changes!"

Just because she didn't write the changes doesn't mean she's not responsible for the words that come out of her mouth and the tone in which she says them. If anything, her skills as an actor, which usually include control over intonation, make her even more responsible for tone and attitude, not less.

Disney didn't write her a script for her interviews that said "now include a childhood memory that insinuates a negative opinion of the original Snow White!"

If you want to make it about how well she's doing at her "job..." She's not being professional: if her goal is to promote the new movie, alienating fans of the original is the worst way to accomplish that goal.

"Why are you attacking her just because she doesn't like the original? Lots of people don't like the original!"

The problem isn't that she doesn't like the original. Harrison Ford didn't like Han Solo, and he did a great job playing Han Solo anyway: because he understood the character, even if he didn't like him. Zegler is demonstrating that she doesn't understand the original movie, and doesn't like it based on that misunderstanding.

"You're just criticizing her because you're racist!"

Not really, because the point of Snow White as a character is pure love and pure innocence: and that point has been retold across all cultures. Rachel Zegler's skin color takes very little away from the role: it has nothing to do with her comments. Why are you making everything about a person's race? Kind of racist of you.

"You're just criticizing her because you hate women!"

If I hate women, why am I defending one of the greatest female characters of all time?

"Snow White is a movie where the Prince has to save Snow who does nothing but sing and dream of being rescued. It SHOULD get an update!! You're just worshipping the old one because you hate empowered women."

You don't understand the original movie. Snow White is a movie where the main character has faith that pure, innocent love will find her even when the odds are impossible.

She is the only character in the movie, contrasted with Grumpy and the Queen, who is genuine and doesn't hide what she is, because she's not afraid. She has several lines in the movie pointing that superpower-of-character-strength out. The Queen is afraid everyone will see how ugly she is in the inside if she's not Fairest of All. Grumpy is afraid his tender heart will lead to heartbreak so he hides it with grumpiness. Snow White hides nothing. She's the strongest character in the movie for that reason.

Again: Snow White IS an empowered woman: she's empowered with strength of character that can't be broken or twisted by circumstances even as a child. My definition of power is just different (and truer, and more powerful) than yours.

The Prince has two scenes: one where he falls in love with Snow White and promises to give her his heart in one meeting because that's how amazing she is, and the other where he fulfills that promise. His "effect" of waking her up wouldn't have happened without her "cause" of being a worthy enough woman to love.

They're not just "reimagining" the old version: they're replacing it. They're claiming to fix what's "broken" about the original. Therefore attacks on this movie are not attacks against the patriarchy or attacks against bigotry: they're attacks against the previous VALUES of faith, innocence, and the worthiness of pure love. Love that doesn't have to fight because it's powerful enough on its own. Faith that isn't corroded by circumstances. Innocence that doesn't turn bitter and inspires others. That's what they're saying is "broke" and trying to fix.

Do not let people derail the actual argument. Stories matter because they represent values. Values shape a culture. Rachel Zegler isn't a target: she's an example of what's happening in the culture, and makes a good entryway into talking about it. Don't get it twisted.

[aethylas]

For anonymous: a series of answers/clarifications/amendments on The Goldenrod Revisions! (I've answered these all in one post just to make it easier). Thank you so much for the asks, this helped me a) clarify my thoughts b) solve some canon continuity issues so I really appreciate them!

THANK U for agreeing to answer my questions! I'll have to ask them separately so they're not in 1 super-long impossible-to-read ask. I have 3 about 15x19, 1 about 15x20, 2 about 15x21, 2 about 15x22, and 2 about 15x23. quick disclaimer: i don't mean any offense at all by my question count! I didn't even notice these oddities the first time I read this; once I read it and accepted it as the true canon, I took a closer look and then noticed. but plz don't think these made your fic any less great!!

No worries anon! It is literally my pleasure to answer them and I am VERY very happy to find discrepancies with canon in the fic - then I can hopefully fix them and make the fic better :) Also I really appreciate the very systematic way you laid all these out, it really helped me reply, and also subsequently make a couple of edits to the fic!

For 15x19:

1. Why did Chuck trust Michael with the task of killing Jack? As God he should know Michael betrayed him in 15.08; did he expect Michael to disobey him again?

I think in this case we're/Chuck is relying on knowledge from the canon 15.19, i.e. Chuck would assume the outcome predicted by the show - that Michael WOULD betray the Winchesters/the world in order to please his father. So God assumed Michael would act the way he did in Inherit The Earth. But additionally, Chuck isn't actually very keyed-in to his own characters' motivations (esp. when love is involved) or very attached to certain results - he basically sends Michael and Lucifer to kill Jack because he figures it will entertain him no matter what happens - whether Michael and Lucifer kill each other, whether they kill the Winchesters/Jack, etc. - either Jack dies this way or Chuck will think of another way to do it.

2. How was Sam able to kill Lucifer? It was said only an archangel could kill another archangel with the archangel blade; was this a total lie or could Sam do it since he's Lucifer's true vessel? (plz don't change it to have Michael kill him; Sam being the one to do it was perfect, I just wanna understand how he could do it).

So glad you raised this because I honestly totally forgot! But now that you have, I have corrected that lore continuity with a line about biblical metaphors.

3. How is Rowena alive? She said she was dead in 15.08, so I initially assumed as a witch and the Queen of Hell she found a way to travel between Hell and Earth despite being dead. But then Sam says "Michael could've killed you" and then Chuck kills her twice in 15.21, both of which indicate she's alive here - does this mean Michael resurrected her when she summoned him?

God okay this is like - please call me out if this is incorrect or still confusing - but it's kind of like, based on the very inconsistent and confusing lore of the SPN afterlife that I assume Rowena is 'dead' but also 'alive' in the sense that Crowley was 'alive' and is now 'dead'. Does that make sense? She's not 'alive' as a human but rather as a demon (or something like it). So as Queen of Hell and a presumably demonic-adjacent entity, when she's 'killed' she gets sent to the Empty now vs. being 'killed' as a human and going to Heaven/Hell. (Based on when we see her in Hell, I assume she possesses her own body? Unclear. Just go with it. They've never been great with what it means to show vessels in Heaven/Hell etc.)

4. I thought asked all I wanted to know about Goldenrod but I just thought of 1 more thing: I don’t get why some dialogue implies Michael was dead? He mentions how he “found himself back on Earth” and tells the Empty it couldn’t stop Chuck from resurrecting him & Lucifer, but prior to 15.19 we last saw Michael leaving the bunker with Adam alive and well in 15.08, and it seemed like he was gonna stay on Earth for Adam’s sake. So what happened to him?

Oh that's a great point! I think that is actually just a confusing choice on my part that Chuck killed absolutely everyone including Michael/Adam in 15.18 Despair and THEN chose to resurrect Michael (but not Adam) alongside Lucifer when he was bored/wanting to kill Jack. I made some slight adjustments in-text to hopefully make it less confusing because I know that's different to the lore of canon 15.19 Inherit the Earth.

For 15x20:

1. How did the angels and demons in the Empty wake up? Did Michael use the last of his grace to wake everyone up? Were they already awake thanks to Jack blowing up in 15x18 or did they somehow sleep through that? (Not expanding on the Empty's claim that "you made it loud" is one of countless things I'll never forgive the actual show for, so THANK YOU for taking the show back to the Empty in the first place; I was just curious about this one element.)

So the Empty was already 'loud' according to canon, but since canon is vague on what exactly that means (thank you writers!...) I got the impression it meant the Empty wasn't 'peaceful' anymore but still powerful enough to suppress the beings inside, like the beings in there were awake and suffering but unable to rebel. Sort of what we see with Cas in this version of 15.20. Maybe like, additional suffering in sleep paralysis? Regardless, Michael does expend his grace to weaken the Empty enough that other beings wake up and/or are able to fight back and exist outside their own personal nightmare chamber. So whatever your impression of 'loud' is with regards to the other beings in there, assume Michael was able to free them from the Empty's control.

For 15x21:

1. Having Jack & Amara take out Hell & Purgatory was a BRILLIANT idea; I love that they ended all the places of suffering and changed the system. I just wonder - what happened to the souls and the demons still in Hell at that point, and the Leviathans and other monsters still in Purgatory? Were they just wiped out completely and sent to the Empty? Or did Jack turn them human and add them to the cycle? (I don't think the show clarified whether or not Leviathans have souls, so...)

No matter whether they were monster or demon or even angel, they would eventually be given human life. I broke it down to 'human enough souls' vs. 'not human enough souls'. Human-enough were immediately brought to life with memories and versions of their original bodies, and not-human-enough were sent to the Soul Queue to be born as infants. I assume Leviathan and most demons fall into 'not human enough', therefore, whatever tiny microbe of personality/soul they had was added to the cycle of rebirth and would be translated to a new human soul. Of course this might have a WILDLY different impact on the world depending on how many people go to hell in this system, how many people were 'human enough', etc.... But we're basically fudging those numbers a bit one way or another just to give certain characters the revival they deserve haha.

2. Did Cas drown and die after Chuck threw him in the lake and Jack left their limbo-dream world? If so, did he go through the same question-&-answer situation with Death that Sam & Dean did? Or was he with Jack & Amara when they rebuilt the world?

Cas was already dead/dying even when he was talking to Jack, he was sort of in a different version of the 'Veil' per se. VERY wishy-washy, but basically he and Jack were on a different dream-plane that they were jolted to in the chaos of the disorganised no-Death world.

I think Cas, Rowena, Lucifer, Michael, etc. as beings who were killed after the snap is a bit ambiguous. Rowena and Lucifer, I think, as entities who were demonic-dead or Empty-level-dead pre-Snap probably went through the reincarnation Yes/No Death questionnaire. Cas and Michael might not have since they were technically 'alive' and human before the Snap. Regardless, I think they probably wouldn't remember the interaction even if they had it.

The reason the question happened to the Winchesters AND that they remember it is Main Character Syndrome... they were the only people left alive when Jack and Amara did a hard reset, and that honestly Death took time to chill/exposition at them because he likes them. Really. Despite all appearances. Or respects them enough to let them know what's gone down, anyway.

Metatextually, it was really just to reaffirm to the audience that Dean (and Sam) want to live, in contrast to 15.20 Carry On 😅

3. Did all the snapped people (Eileen, Adam, the Waywards, etc.) also go through the Death question-&-answer process but not remember it, or did Jack & Amara just send them back?

Snapped people were reset automatically! Normally the new-humans also wouldn't remember their interactions with Death/reapers, just like in canon lore when someone like Dean has a near-death experience.

I realise this whole section and various other lore reformation parts of the fic aren't SUPER clear on specific logistics but on some occasions I'm like, I've done enough info-dumping, I don't want to overwrite exposition. But if you think it's worth clarifying certain points let me know and I can try to do so!

For 15x22:

1. The twenty something blonde guy in sunglasses getting hot tea, is that Belphegor? sure sounds like it but I wanted to confirm.

Yep!

2. Since Death mentioned that Jack only resurrected the angels, demons, and monsters from the Empty who had enough of a soul, and since all the human souls from the Veil went to Heaven as confirmed by Kevin's presence, how exactly are Anna's human parents and Bela alive now?

Great question - 1) I SOMEHOW FORGOT ANNA'S PARENTS DIED? Complete screw up on my part, I don't know how that happened. I fixed this so it's her grandparents now. 2) Bela was sent to Hell as part of her deal, so I was assuming she was a demon by this point in canon (since it would be... MANY Hell-years since she died.) Therefore she had a 'human' enough demon soul to be put back as a human.

3. Oh, and the tall woman with the flyer in 15.22; who is this supposed to be? Hannah I’m guessing?

To be honest I didn't have anyone in particular in mind for that scene; it was kind of a catch-all for missing characters like, it COULD be Hannah. It could be Raphael. Hell, it could be Abbadon. I didn't want to do a full shot of every single person missing from the cast who had died (esp since like - we wouldn't know who they were anyway! Their bodies would be different). So this one is literally just fill-in-the-blank. But if I had to assign a character there I'd say it would probably be one of the more arrogant angels like Raphael or Uriel.

For 15x23:

1. How is Bobby in the Roadhouse with the gang? 10x17 seemed to imply the angels were about to throw him in the dungeons to punish him for helping Cas; did Ash hack him out of prison, or was he never imprisoned at all? Also, is Jack not surprised to see another Bobby in Heaven because the boys already told him there was another Bobby besides the one he knows from Apocalypseverse? (I was half-expecting him to comment about that and confuse Bobby).

Oh that's a great point! I think that's another sort of fill in the blank since it's been five years since 10.17... even if he was in prison of some kind, I think it's likely either Ash helped him get out in the same way he helped everyone else, and since the angels were extremely short-staffed I doubt getting Bobby suitably imprisoned/punished was their top priority. But honestly I'm not super clear on how the angels intended to punish Bobby, I don't think canon is clear either... like, We Just Don't Know.

Finally I'd like to know, has Sam proposed to Eileen yet by the end of the final episode? The script doesn't mention a ring on her finger, and as Sam's fiancee, I'd assume she'd also have carved her name on the table. Sam mentions the innuendos Dean has said "in the past year," so it's been a while since Jack's prayer scene, yet Cas says Dean & Claire's argument was the last time they spoke, and it doesn't seem likely to me that Dean wouldn't call Claire in a year given how close they are...

Nope! I think Sam is saying 'I'm going to marry her' as a declaration of certainty of his feelings and faith in the future, not neccessarily as something that immediately happens. With regards to 'in the past year', that referred to the period when Eileen was alive during s15 as well! I assume Dean did teasing off-screen (and I mean, he did plenty on-screen too.)

I honestly think that Sam and Dean are just very very busy in the aftermath of the events of the 15.20 reset, like they have to deal with the new world AND try to wrangle all these hunters into this new system of collaboration. I didn't put Eileen on the table because she isn't there in the finale and because I do think the Sam/Dean/Cas/Jack family unit was a bit more central and important to the show, but maybe they add her (and any possible kids, if they have any) later on. God, imagine generations of hunters and/or Winchesters carving on that table. Sacred Artefact...

(1) Ok that's all the questions I have. Again, so sorry to blow up your inbox - I really appreciate your willingness to clarify these things! If there are some things you'd rather not explain and leave ambiguous, I totally get that. And in spite of these aforementioned confusing parts, I still ADORE your fic and will continue to read it whenever I feel like re-"watching" how Supernatural really ended! Thank you so much!! .... (2) I’m SO sorry to overload u! I know I asked a lot and I didn’t mean to sound like a hater saying “none of ur story makes sense”; that’s not what I meant at all! If this was a regular good ol fix it fic I wouldn’t have said anything but since u said u wanted it to wrap up the show as replacement canon, I thought maybe I should point out places that didn’t line up. But take as MUCH time as you need! Good for you working to meet your deadlines; I hope you succeeded!! And again I really appreciate you taking the time to answer whenever you have time—absolutely no rush!! Have a GREAT Memorial Day Weekend!!!

Anon thank you SO SO much for all these questions, as you can see it really helped me identify problems or straight up errors in my work wrt continuity and I'm so happy that means I can improve it. If any of the answers weren't clear or you think I should modify the fic to make certain things clearer than they are right now (other than the things I said I'd fix in-text for sure) let me know! It's really been a pleasure answering them too, I'm sorry it took me so long to get around to it, I actually went back and proofed/edited the whole fic as part of adding some of these corrections in (and that took like... three weeks...) and as you said, it's very important to me to get it as true to canon as possible so - yeah, just, once again, thank you!! You're wonderful! ♥♥♥

[goatsandgangsters]

do you have any writing tips pls 🥺🥺

Ohhh big question! I’m flattered that you want my writing thoughts, anon!

So. Are we talking about tips on getting through writer’s block/sitting down and actually writing? The mechanics of writing itself, the individual sentences and word choices? Developing a plot? Characters or dialogue? Drafting and revising? If there’s a specific part of the process that’s angsting you, let me know, I’m happy to say more on that. For now I’ll try and touch on as much as broadly as I can.

Writing is a process, a craft, a practice. A joy and a trial. The act of hitting some keys with your fingers but also making something out of nothing. Which is to say—it comes with practice, it can be frustrating, it can be rewarding, and however you’re feeling about writing, you’re not the only one.

Inspiration/actually sitting down to write:

I find that writing is like exercise. Yes, in the sense that it takes practice to build up those muscles, but MORE IMPORTANTLY writing, like exercise, makes me groan and go “but that’s haaaaard I don’t wanna doooooo it, what if I just siiiit here insteaaaad.” And then I grudgingly get started. And I start to get into the rhythm. And then “oh goddammit. This DOES feel good.” I’ve still never experienced a runner’s high, but I have experienced “no I don’t wanna write. well I guess I’ll write. oh hey I’m writing. oH HEY!! I’M WRITING!!!” Sometimes you just need to push yourself through to start.

That said, sometimes you don’t need to push yourself to start. Sometimes it’s better to let something sit. It’s okay to pivot to another project if you’ve stalled out on one. I saw a post once that called this “crop rotation” and I think that’s true. Sometimes the challenge is getting started, but even when you can’t get started, the time away can be valuable, because it allows you to return with fresh ideas and fresh ideas.

I love using Fighter’s Block for when I can’t get started. It curbs my perfectionist tendency to write the same first sentence over and over again by forcing me to write consistently and quickly without refreshing tumblr between every sentence. Once I’ve got a paragraph, I’ve got enough of a rhythm going to keep writing on my own. You can use it for longer stretches of time, but I find a couple rounds of 200 word count goals is enough to get me through the inertia of getting started.

Read a lot:

Reading makes you a better writer. You will absorb aspects of the craft in the process—sentence structure, rhythm, plot beats.

Then think about what you read. Think about what works. Think about what doesn’t. Notice sentences that you love—not by meaning but by sound. Think about how the story is told, how the plot elements come together, how the themes operate, how the narrative is structured. Did the flashbacks works or were they superfluous? Did you love the metaphors and descriptive language, or did it feel vague and unhelpful? What parts grabbed you, what parts didn’t?

Being able to identify what does and doesn’t work in someone else’s writing will help you apply it to your own. It will also help you craft your own voice and style.

Use writing tips as a challenge, not a rule:

We’ve all seen those “writing rules” like don’t use adverbs, don’t say feels or thinks, don’t say said. Never listen to writing “rules”; instead, see them as a writing “challenge.” You don’t need to jettison every single adverb or permanently strike certain words from your writing. Sometimes, an adverb is the best word. And sometimes it isn’t.

These tips are useful, but not as hard-and-fast rules that must be obeyed every time under every circumstance. Instead, use them as tools to challenge you to think about your writing in new ways, to see if there’s a better way to say something (and maybe there is and maybe there isn’t), and to bring a freshness to the process.

I actually do really like to challenge myself to minimize feels and thinks. “He feels sick to his stomach” will pretty much always be less powerful than “His stomach lurches.” But sometimes feels and thinks work better, either because I need quick exposition or because it specifically emphasizes a thought or a feeling as perception. Again, it’s not about rules. It’s about challenging your habits to breathe new life into your writing. 

Revising tools:

if you’re a tactile person and you own a printer (which I am but I don’t), I like to print out a draft and sit on the floor with a pen and a highlighter and highlight anything that sounds clunky or that doesn’t quite fit. Then I massage those specific sentences, looking for other ways to say them, and narrow in on those parts rather than trying to edit everything overall.

The hemingway app method (as long as you know you’re allowed to disagree with it) can be good to catch certain things. Sometimes I use it and think “yeah that sentences IS too long and awkward, I should rephrase it” and sometimes I think “nah, that sentence is long but it’s controlled and it works.” Sometimes it’s useful in pointing out that I used the word just way too many times; sometimes I’ll keep my adverbs thanks.

Retyping the entire thing in another word document is another revising trick. So is reading the entire think out loud to yourself (your actual ear will catch awkward rhythms or typos that your inner voice glossed over).

(Note: I don’t do all of these all the time. I revise with whichever method I happen to be feeling at the moment)

Character interactions:

Overly expository character interactions are probably my #1 writing pet peeve. People don’t say what they mean. They don’t calmly and carefully and eloquently articulate exactly what they feel. If your characters are conversing in well-practiced monologues where they’re able to objectively analyze and express their exact feelings, it’s not believable. It’s also not fun for the reader, because Explanations of Emotions are being used as a stand-in for actual emotions.

Example: You don’t have a breakdown because you’re stressed about losing your job and you had a fight with your sister and you’re also the protagonist who has to save the entire world. You have a breakdown because you can’t find your fucking pen. It was here a moment ago, you know it was, you put it THERE because that’s where you PUT things but now it’s gone and the pen is gone and you can’t even find the fucking pen so how are you going to save the world and everything is going to SHIT because you can’t FIND your goddamn pEN.

Your character is probably not even an expert on their own feelings, let alone able to objectively explain them to someone else. There are things we can’t make ourselves say out loud. We deflect. We put all the big feelings into small things. We squeeze someone’s hand and say come on, let’s make dinner because you can’t say everything is going to be okay I promise you and I love you so much and one day you’ll see that it’ll all work out.

What are your characters saying with their body? What are they saying with what’s left unsaid? And when are they saying something Else that’s really about Them? (“You did what you had to do,” character A assures character B, because character A’s own guilt weighs on them. They’ll never say this out loud. They don’t even need to specifically think “just like my own guilt, which weighs on me.” We know it by what they say, about other people and about other things, because these are the times when you’re really talking about yourself)

Also, the size of the emotion displayed does not translate into the size of the emotional impact on the reader. A big sweeping declaration of I love you shouldn’t be used as a stand-in for real chemistry or a moment of love that is specific to those characters. An absolute sobbing breakdown isn’t inherently more tragic for its size. You don’t need torture porn to evoke angst. Emotions are a lot more subtle than that. Using a caricature of emotion in the extreme often cheapens the emotion for the reader, rather than enhancing it. 

Other assorted tips:

Write notes! Sit up at 3 AM and write down a snippet of dialogue in a note on your phone! Jot down the plot idea for later! Note the phrase you heard someone say that sounds like it would be a good title.

If you can’t figure out how to end your story or your section or your chapter, it might be because it’s already over and the story has finished telling itself. If the beginning doesn’t feel right, if it feels slow and clunky, it might be because your starting place is too early. If the character interaction feels wrong or the scene isn’t going right or you can’t make that line of dialogue work, the problem is probably about 5 or 10 lines up where you took a wrong turn.

An em dash—like the one I used here—separates out a part of the sentence that couldn’t be a sentence on its own. Semicolons join two independent sentences together; this is an example.

The dialogue tag is part of the sentence. Correct: “I love dogs,” he said. or “I love dogs.” Incorrect: “I love dogs.” he said. or “I love dogs,” He said.

That’s everything that comes to mind immediately. If there’s another part of the process that you want me to focus on, let me know! I’m happy to go more in-depth on specifics!