#that does not mean i'm endorsing it. it doesn't mean i believe this to be true it does not mean i would find this person sympathetic irl.

[danmeichael]

nothing is apolitical but the mechanisms of a story even when not punished are not necessarily indicative of the author's ideology. to not acknowledge the fallible author is ill-advised, but to assume you know the author is foolish. do you understand.

[peachylynnie]

wolf in sheep's clothing

word count: 2k

synopsis: in which xavier acts innocent despite his not-so-innocent touches.

contains: xavier x mc!reader (early established relationship), he kinda gaslights you (but with no bad intentions really), freaky xavier (not smut tho), suggestive themes, mentions of violence and death, and cussing.

a/n: i had to write for my second favorite lads man at some point. i read somewhere that the official chinese description for xavier is "wolf in sheep's clothing," (don't quote me on that; i could be wrong) and i wholeheartedly believe he is. do NOT copy or translate my work. xavier does NOT endorse plagiarism.

you're convinced your boyfriend is a wolf in sheep's clothing. sure, his pure cerulean eyes and tender voice might convince you otherwise (they did at first). but, with the way xavier's been touching you, you're sure of it. your boyfriend is a wolf in sheep's clothing, and you have the evidence to prove it. countless pieces of evidence, actually. but let's look at the most memorable ones, shall we?

evidence #1

"welcome home, starlight," xavier greets you with open arms and crinkled eyes. your heart can't help but swell at the sight. nothing compares to seeing your boyfriend in a cozy white sweater after opening the door following an exhaustive day of battling wanderers. you swear you were this close to losing it after dealing with lemonette's stupid limes for what seemed like hours. yet, xavier, in all his ash-gray-haired, blue-eyed, soft-spoken glory, takes your pains away with just one simple gesture of welcoming you home.

"hi, xavier." you fall into him, basking in the warmth of his tight embrace. you could honestly die a happy hunter from this. "i missed you."

xavier chuckles, pulling away so he can look at you properly. "i missed you too," he caresses your face. "i missed you so much." he crashes his lips into yours, ardently seeking your taste, your scent, your everything.

you're taken aback by xavier's sudden fervor. but, you return the favor by opening your mouth, eagerly granting his tongue entrance. it's not the first time your beloved boyfriend has initiated such a passionate kiss. after all, you two love each other very much, to the point you're willing to die for each other. a kiss like this is natural to come by; you're blissfully used to it. what you're not used to is what xavier does next.

he weaves his fingers into your hair and tugs.

"ah!" you pull away, panting with wide eyes. what the heck was that? he's never done that before. why did he do that? it felt so good.

xavier blinks at you innocently before asking, "you okay?"

"uh yeah," you stutter, trying to process what just happened. "i'm okay. are you okay?" seriously, is xavier, your puppy-like boyfriend, okay? why did he pull your hair? by no means did it hurt. it was a single, firm tug, yet it did so much, as evidenced by your shortage of breaths and clenching of thighs.

xavier smiles brightly and nods. you close your eyes, expecting him to resume the kiss, totally not hoping to feel his slender fingers pull on your hair. instead, this motherfucker he pecks your cheek and walks away, yawning. "i'm sleepy," he has the audacity to rub his eyes. "let's go to sleep, yeah?"

your jaw drops. did he seriously just suggest you go to sleep?! staring at your boyfriend, you expect an answer for his confusing behavior. xavier blinks innocently, again. "you sure you're okay, starlight?"

you frown, growing even more confused. he's not dumb. you know he's not dumb. heck, he's the association's best hunter. there's no way he doesn't know what he's doing to you. you sigh and shake your head, concluding that perhaps xavier was just caught up in the heat of the moment and was genuinely tired. after all, he battles wanderers too, even more than you. "yeah, i'm okay, xavier." you walk past him and towards your shared bedroom, trying to relieve your mind of certain thoughts. "let's sleep."

unfortunately, you don't catch the amusement in xavier's eyes when you bid him goodnight and turn off the lights.

evidence #2

"how's the food?" xavier asks, whispering into your ear.

beaming at him, you nod excitedly. "it's great. nothing like hotpot with friends on a cold night, right?"

indeed, little to nothing compared to spending time with xavier and your fellow hunters at your comfort restaurant. you and xavier were shoulder to shoulder, sitting across from tara and nero. everything was perfect. the food tasted amazing, your friends were enjoying themselves, and most importantly, xavier was right next to you, with a hand on your thigh, of course.

you don't mind in the slightest. it's assuring, actually. the warmth his touch provides adds more to this delightful atmosphere. content from both the food and the mood, you can't help but rest your head on your boyfriend's shoulder. "thanks for being here, xavier." you murmur.

xavier smiles softly, resting his cheek on your crown. "of course, starlight."

you giggle, nuzzling into him. you love it when he calls you that. "starlight." though, you can't help but feel it should be you calling him that instead. like an actual starlight, xavier shines brightly wherever he goes. from hunting hundreds of wanderers to protecting hundreds of civilians, xavier illuminates the world and you can't help but be blinded at times. not that you mind. you would gladly be blinded by him a million times over if it meant being in his presence.

"okay, that's enough, you lovebirds," tara teases.

you roll your eyes playfully, lifting your head from xavier's shoulder. as much as you would like to stay there forever, you understand the occasional nagging that comes with public displays of affection. hoping to sit up properly, you go to cross your legs. with a click of his tongue, xavier grips your thigh, hard.

yelping, you jolt in your seat. immediately, you cover your mouth, embarrassed over the borderline wanton noise you just made. you stare at xavier, mortified. what the fuck was that?

"are you okay?" tara says your name in concern. she tries to reach over the table, but xavier stops her by handing you some napkins with his free hand and adding another squeeze to your thigh. it's taking everything in you not to squeal.

"she's okay," xavier answers, smiling innocently. "she just spilled some broth, right?" he turns to you, expecting you to follow along.

"yeah," you answer shakily. "sorry, just got a little clumsy, i guess." after pretending to wipe yourself with the napkins xavier gave you, you down a glass of water, hoping to relieve the heat in your face and also in between your legs. you're not sure what is happening anymore. he's never gripped your leg before, let alone touched you so roughly. it felt so fucking good.

for the rest of the night, xavier continued to squeeze your thigh, leaving you a flustered mess. it was torture having to sit through the gathering without making any noise. every so often, when tara or nero wasn't looking, you looked at your boyfriend desperately, begging him to stop (not really) or at least provide an answer for why he was doing this. instead, he would just inch his hand higher and flash that damned innocent smile. by the time the waiter came back with the paid tab, xavier's hand was threatening access to your hip joint. you're not sure how he made his arm look like it wasn't doing anything.

after bidding tara and nero goodbye, you immediately drag xavier outside. "what was that?" you ask impatiently. the freezing air was doing absolutely nothing to cool your heated face, and you're not sure if that pissed you off more or xavier's calm expression.

xavier tilts his head to the right, feigning confusion. "what was what?"

you're want to scream so badly right now. "that!" you snap as you motion to your leg.

xavier tilts his head to the left, gathering his lips into a pout. "i just wanted to massage your leg since it seemed sore from training."

what the fuck? dumbfoundedly, you stare at xavier. there's no way those squeezes could be called a massage. but looking at his pouty face, you can't bring yourself to argue. well shit, now you just feel like a pervert.

you sigh, taking xavier's hand and heading towards the car. "thanks for the massage, xavier."

you miss the smirk growing on his face. "anything for you, starlight."

evidence #3 (happening right now, send help)

"whatcha making?" xavier cutely asks as he wraps his arms around your waist.

you were at the kitchen counter of your shared apartment, rolling some dough with your flour-covered palms. "i wanted to try making some pizza," you answer, entirely focused on the task in front of you. "i saw a tutorial on tiktok. seemed simple enough."

xavier hums, burying his face in the crook of your neck. you giggle, feeling him inhale deeply. it's the quiet and domestic moments like these that make you imagine another life where you and xavier aren't hunters. just people free from the constant dangers of hunting wanderers and protecting civilians. you sigh, reaching across the counter for the tomato sauce. at the end of the day, you and xavier are evolvers. having an innate ability means protecting those who can't protect themselves, even if it means risking your lives. but, both you and xavier can agree the look of relief on people's faces when reuniting with their loved ones is worth the risk.

the tomato sauce is within reach until you jump back into place. why? oh, because xavier's right hand is inching towards the waistband of your panties. "xavier!" you turn around immediately, facing him with widened eyes and flushed cheeks. "what are you doing?!"

you've had enough. the last couple of weeks have been a literal hell with how much your boyfriend's been teasing you, filling your head with dirty thoughts, and acting as if he doesn't know what he's doing. it's as if he's purposely avoiding following through with his actions, not giving you what you fucking want even though he's the one that's been initiating things. not to mention, his hand is still in your pants.

xavier rests his left hand on the counter, pinning you in place. your breath hitches, feeling him rest his forehead on yours. "i'm sorry," he sulks. "i just wanted to touch your belly button."

"stop lying," you say immediately. "last time i checked, my belly button is NOT at my fucking panties." you don't care if you sound harsh. you want xavier to answer for his crimes—crimes being leaving you hanging and making you question your sanity.

xavier chuckles. this motherfucker he dares to chuckle while you look at him with furrowed brows and twisted lips. "it's not funny," you scold. "you've been weird the last few weeks-"

your breath hitches as xavier dips the tips of his fingers past your waistband. holy fucking shit. what is this man doing?! "x-xavier?!"

he doesn't answer. instead, he presses short yet sensual kisses all over your face, slowly trailing down to your neck. you try to stop yourself from whimpering.

"you know," xavier mumbles. "i've been waiting for you to say something." he continues to mouth at your neck, causing you to squirm.

"s-say what?" you ask trembling. fuck, you think you just felt his tongue peak out.

"oh, i don't know," he switches to the other side of your neck. "something like 'xavier please' or 'xavier more'" and with that, he returns both of his hands to your waist, lifts you up effortlessly onto the kitchen counter, and dives straight into your lips.

"xavier! mmph!" there was flour on the counter, meaning there was flour on your pants now. "you're making mmph! a mess!"

"that's not what i want to hear, starlight," xavier shakes his head as he pulls away from you. "it's like you want me to stop."

his fingers rub slow circles into your thighs, causing you to writhe uncontrollably. so this is why he's been acting so fucking teasing the last few weeks. he wanted to do things with you—take your relationship to the next level. but you had to be the one to say it. why? you're not sure. maybe it stroked his ego or something. you don't care anymore. you're pent up from xavier's antics, and all you want right now is for him to follow through. if saying "please" and "more" is what it takes, so be it.

you grab xavier's shirt collar, legs wrapping around his waist and pulling him to you. his eyes widen at your sudden rough actions. but there's a hint of amusement in his eyes, teetering on the edge between curiosity and arousal. though nothing could prepare xavier for what you do next.

"xavier," you whisper into his ear, stroking his nape with your index finger. "can you please give me more?"

xavier inhales sharply, his grip tightening around your thighs.

"i thought you'd never ask, starlight."

[ylangelegy]

Hiii. Can I request a oneshot based on this HAHAHAH pleasee please like short oneshot will do!!! 🥰🥰 https://www.tumblr.com/svtsofthours/768423753034104832/seungcheol-jihoon-isnt-answering-his-phone?source=share

📞 do not disturb (jihoon x reader)

or: jihoon always answers. no questions asked.

★ footnotes: i debated the ethics (ethics?!) of taking this on, but i'm ultimately weak to anything and everything uji-related. prompt is fully by @svtsofthours ♡ word count: >980

Jihoon has a bad habit of leaving his phone on 'Do Not Disturb' mode.

In his line of work, getting in the flow was the most important thing. Inspiration could be dashed as easily as it came, and Jihoon's not about to risk his momentum being killed by a TikTok from Vernon or a 'wyd?' from Wonwoo.

His members call him vicious for it, but Jihoon is also the first to remind them that everything he does is for them. That's always the quickest way to shutting them up.

There are still ways to reach him, of course, when he's in the zone. Some members will drop by the studio unannounced. Some know to go through Jihoon's manager instead.

And some have begun to realize that they could simply just ask you.

It's another one of those long evenings, the type that has Jihoon feeling like his retinas are burning from all the time he's spent at his DAW. He doesn't remember the last time he looked away from the song he's working on, but it's a small price to pay for what he thinks is shaping up to be a potential title track. He just needs to tweak—

The thought is disrupted by the shrill ring of his cellphone.

Without so much of a second thought, Jihoon is reaching for the device and answering the call without even checking the ID. He has at least enough wits to know that he's been on 'Do Not Disturb' since he stepped into the studio, which means the caller could only be one person.

"Hi, honey," he says.

His voice is a tired rasp but the fondness bleeds through all the same. The sudden reprieve has him sinking a little further into his computer chair, like he's just registered how utterly spent he is.

That exhaustion pales in comparison to the warmth that floods his chest when you greet him back with your ever-so sweet, "Hey, darling. Still in the studio?"

You already know the answer, and yet you still ask. Jihoon feels a little endeared by it as he absentmindedly runs his free hand over his face. "You know it," he says. "What's up?"

"Seungcheol and Soonyoung have been trying to get in touch with you," you inform him.

Jihoon raises an eyebrow. He pulls his phone away from his ear to check his lockscreen and, sure enough, you're right. Six (6) missed calls from Coups-hyung. Six (6) missed calls from Hamzzi.

"I've been working," Jihoon says into the receiver as he brings his phone back up. "Are they with you right now?"

"Just Seungcheol. Here—"

Jihoon has half a mind to tell you, no, please, do not pass the phone over to Seungcheol, but the leader's whining voice is already piercing through the call. "You answered their call in less than ten seconds!" Seungcheol proclaims, the pout in his voice audible. "What the hell, Jihoon-ah?!"

"It wasn't less than ten seconds," Jihoon protests weakly, feeling the tips of his ears burn red at the insinuation of just how fast he could fold when it came to you.

Seungcheol doesn't give a damn about semantics. His point still stands. "You didn't answer a single one of my calls," the older boy complains. "I can't believe this!"

So help me, God. Jihoon knows he's already going to have to get the man one pastry or another to compensate for this misgiving. "Right, sorry, sorry," Jihoon huffs out. "Why were you calling, anyway?"

Seungcheol bitches and moans for a couple more minutes before eventually breaking the news about some brand endorsement that they need to sign on for. Jihoon promises to check his e-mail and have the contract in before the morning, which doesn't really appease Seungcheol.

Even as the leader passes the phone back to you, he's mumbling something like 'unbelievable' and 'ungrateful kid'. Jihoon rolls his eyes despite the fact that neither of you can see it.

His mounting annoyance ebbs at your voice, at your gentle question of, "When are you going to finish up?"

Jihoon lets out a low hum, eyeing the aborted song on his laptop. He had wanted to make changes on something— the bridge? the chorus?— but the idea was gone now, replaced only with the crick in his neck and the ache of longing.

"I think I could wrap up for the night," he decides. "We can order in some pizza and watch that drama you like. How does that sound?"

Jihoon can hear the way you try to tamp down your excitement in favor of tentatively asking, "Are you sure? I can always wait for you, darling."

And, oh, he loves you for it. He loves that your first and foremost concern is the disruption to his work, the easy way he throws it all aside in favor of a night in with you. Jihoon is usually much stronger than this, he swears.

But he's a weak, weak man whenever you come calling.

"I'm sure," he says. "See you in ten."

"See you. Take care." A beat. And then, you add in a whisper— almost like you're a little abashed to be saying it in front of Seungcheol— "I love you."

Even though there's nobody around to hear him say it, even though the words are yours and yours alone, Jihoon's voice softens to match your tone.

"I love you, too. Can't wait to come home to you, honey."

Jihoon ends the call at that because he knows you have a thing about not wanting to be the one to put down the phone. He stares down at his device and its Notification Center, where there's dozens of missed calls, texts, and e-mails. Evidence of what he's ignored in favor of the craft.

His 'Do Not Disturb' stays on, with only one exception to the rule: All notifications are allowed from you.

svtsofthours' post ->

Seungcheol: Jihoon isn’t answering his phone. You: I’ll call. Seungcheol: Soonyoung and I have both tried six times each, what makes you think— Jihoon: Hi, honey.

[brick-van-dyke]

You save shit for arguments?? Get a life lmao who does that...

Basic sources still would take a while to read through unless you want a need abstract summary of all my points compiled into one.

I really find that hard to believe since, again, you think sources can just be read in five seconds as if they're half a page and you'd know. Sure I can skim, maybe find a few for you but really? Again? Online arguments don't educate, they just throw weight around and doing that regularly is... so crazy to me??

Anyway yeah, I don't really believe you. At the very least, it makes me wonder about bias in the university, which I guess isn't unheard of with the privatisation of them these days and if it's in certain places I know there is suppression of certain content but??

Look, I'm currently studying so sure I'll admit I'm not a PHD professor in everything we're talking about but the idea of "oh just show me the saved sources you have on this" is so crazy. I'm on my damn phone and just here to say maybe grouping all Jews as Zionists is bad, but hey since you and the person commenting agree on that point, what is there to correct? You both are polar ends of the "all Jews are Zionists" idea and agree. Congrats, you're both equally antisemetic.

dear jumblr: STOP LOOKING DOWN ON AND CONDESCENDING TO CONVERTS.

this includes saying “ofc converts don’t notice antisemitism.” or “they’re a convert, they don’t know any better.”

i really don’t think a lot of you realize how many converts don’t reveal they are converts because of this kind of behavior. my own patrilineal convert parent refuses to publicly, not because they are excluded, but because of the condescension. the way converts are basically patted on the head even if they have ancestry, are patrilineal, were raised in a jewish environment, etc. or have none of these at all.

if converts are equals to you, treat them that way. most gerim learned more during their process than many of us learn in hebrew school, let alone what most secular “born” jews learn throughout their lives. so yes, converts DO spot antisemitism. they DO know things. and there isn’t an excuse for them to be bigoted, to spread lies about our people, or to side with our enemies or to otherwise harm their community. just like there isn’t an excuse for any other jew to do so.

you are not being open minded or accepting thinking and talking this way. you are actually engaging in exclusion and separation. you’re looking down on converts instead of treating them like they have equal standing.

if a convert doesnt know something or does display bad behavior? call them in instead of making excuses for them. treat them like equals, because that is what they are.

[frownyalfred]

Can I get clarification on your pro shipping post? The example you gave was a 20 year old with a 40 year old, and that's "problematic" (not really), but not really what I think of when I hear "pro shipping". Usually it's the shipping of minor/adult or incestuous relationships that I see getting defended. Does being against fictional works/ships that depict pedophilic or incestuous relationships as normal/romantic count as puritanism to you? Do you see the ship of Bruce Wayne/Damian Wayne as a personal preference with no moral implications?

I think there's a huge difference between being personally against something, and wanting to shame others or ban others from reading or writing something. The Puritanism comes from wanting to limit and ostracize others who don't share your beliefs. It comes from believing that your perspective is the only morally right one.

I think there will always be people who want to write or read about ships like that, yeah -- incest, pseudo-incest, everything in between. By moral implications, do you mean for the person interested in the ship? Or do you mean for others? Because I see that concern a lot on here -- this idea that somehow, by wanting to read/write about something, people are either 1) harming others by spreading this morally wrong ship or 2) harming themselves by normalizing the ship, and therefore making it more likely that they'll pursue similar relationships in their real lives.

We don't have much evidence for either of those claims. People have been clutching their pearls and wringing their hands over "morally wrong" books for ages -- and yet, Game of Thrones is still available in every bookstore. Am I a bad or woefully misguided person for having read Lolita in high school? Is a 16 year old reading a Bruce/Damian fic likely to turn around, shrug, and say "guess fucking my Dad is okay now"? Did an entire generation of fans shipping Wincest somehow have lasting, moral effects? I really don't think so. Not at the scale anti-shippers online seem to think, at least.

I think we need to separate how we moralize people from the content that they consume. And acknowledge that shaming and excluding people for wanting to read something doesn't exactly do much to prevent "moral implications." There's also a huge difference between reading a book, and endorsing the ideas/events inside of it. Same things with fics.

Anti-shipping is very appealing to people because it purports to protect people from harm. Until you look a little closer, and you realize that that protection comes at the expense of free expression, creative license, and agency to choose what we personally do and do not consume. And that that protection isn't really airtight out of your anti-shipping discord or tumblr community.

I think the best we can do is let people write and read what they want -- whatever they want, with limited warnings/etc like ao3 employs -- and ensure that those pieces of content are tagged, warned, and displayed accurately. We need to understand that the only control we have is over ourselves, and what we choose personally to consume or not consume.

I don't generally read those fics you mentioned, but I'm not saying they should be banned from ao3. Just because I might possibly think they're wrong or gross doesn't mean I think the person who wrote them is wrong or gross, either. The more we go down that moral slip and slide, like I said in my previous post, the worse off we will all become.

[mellosdrawings]

noooo not the n2 ship 😭 omg people can be so weird sob sob you have more drawings of them as adults and frankly why does it even matter?!? it's not even an illegal ship sob (eg. incest or smth else that normally turns heads in fandoms) if you don't like it, don't read it???? (i personally like it tons!)

-🥬

(About this post)

Well, you know, it's the usual Leojami age difference discourse. I just delete those comments anyway, but I'm glad you like the N2 squad :3

I won't develop too much since I don't want this blog to be about discourse (I'm giving my opinions plenty on my sideblog) but here's what I think about these topics:

-I'm vehemently anti-censorship. I don't think something shouldn't ever exist and I will never push for something to be censored, even if it's stuff that makes me uncomfortable. I think warnings about particular contents are great, but in the end it's my responsibility to curate my experience with banning # and blocking people, etc etc. Even illegal stuff should be portrayed. If people can draw/write about murderers and conmen without a fuss, then they can also do that about taboo/illegal sexual topics. Depiction is not endorsement.

-I believe the reader/viewer is the one who injects meaning to art/stories. I'm an artist and all the things I do mean something, but that meaning doesn't prevail over the meaning my viewers inject in my art. I regularly see people "misreading" my comics in the tags, but it doesn't matter. Their interpretation is just as valid as mine, and if they wanna see ships where I didn't mean to draw ships, or if they interpret a scene as negative when I meant for it to be positive, then it's either my role as the content creator to be more explicit/obvious with what I meant, or to simply let my viewers have fun however they want with my stuff. I don't believe in the "there's only one valid interpretation and everybody who thinks otherwise is wrong".

(That's also why I don't really believe in DNI. People you disagree with will interact with your stuff anyway, caring about those things will just anger and tire you for nothing. I try to avoid interacting with people who have DNI that probably include me? But considering "proship" means anything and nothing it's hard to tell whether N2/LeoJami is considered a proship or not.)

Tldr: I'm anti-censorship and I think everybody should make and enjoy the content they want, even if it's topics that are usually frowned upon. Imagination is the one place one should be able to go hogwild without fearing retribution.

[max1461]

@deaths-accountant I will, if I remember, think carefully about your thought experiment and respond to it soon (although I will probably change some details so that it is less similar to current events because I don't want people to misunderstand the nature of the discussion and get mad at me), but, in the mean time, here is a counter-thought-experiment for you:

Suppose there is a guy Bob, currently hanging out in the heavenly realm or whatever, and he is presented by an angel with the following choice:

Bob will be born into the world, and live an ordinary-seeming life. Over the course of his life, the net utility (under whatever form of utilitarianism you endorse; hedonic, preferential, etc.) which he contributes to everyone else in the world besides himself will be 0. In other words, the people of the world (not including him) will be no better off nor worse off for his being born. However, he himself, under the same conception of utility, will receive -ε net utils. He will have N (for reasonable large N) utils worth of joys, triumphs, etc., and -(N+ε) utils worth of pains, failures and so on. Thus, he will live a net-negative life.

Bob will not be born into the world, he will cease to exist.

Implicitly I'm discounting here all the thoughts and feelings that Bob experiences here in the heavenly realm before he is born (or not) as irrelevant, but if you don't feel comfortable with this you can just adjust the numbers so that the net utility of each choice comes out as intended above.

It is possible, I think, that in light of the above choice, Bob would select (2) and cease to exist. But I think it's also possible that Bob would say "no, I'll take (1), I want to have the joys and triumphs even if there turn out also to be a greater number of failures and losses". In particular, I am almost certain that I would choose (1), and not just for fear of death (the above scenario is an abstraction of choices that I have actually made, where no risk of death was involved).

The question is: would it be moral for the angel to override Bob here, "for his own good", and choose (2) for him?

By construction a utilitarian has to say yes. If ε is small the utilitarian might say "well, it's not a very big deal; the normative force behind overriding Bob and choosing (2) is low". But I can think of scenarios in which I would chose (1) even if (I believed that) ε was pretty significant, where this excuse doesn't work.

Also consider for instance... the archetype of the starving artist. The man who is committed to producing his Great Work even at significant cost to himself. Suppose that he has made many sacrifices in order to hone his craft, he's given up financial success and a social life, he lives in the mountains and, you know, carves statue after statue in pursuit of perfection. Suppose that he can rationally conclude that, when (if) he does complete his masterpiece, the satisfaction will be relatively small in the face of all the sacrifices he's made. I mean, yeah, he'll be happy, he'll feel fulfilled and genuinely, deeply satisfied. But on a literal, summative level, that just won't add up to the lifetime of late nights, missed opportunities for social connection, etc., either in terms of net pleasure or net preference satisfaction or whatever. But suppose also that on the day to day level he doesn't feel miserable, he's not suffering. He's toiling in pursuit of a deeply held personal goal, and it feels... well, "good" isn't always the word. But he is plenty motivated to keep going; he's out here in the mountains of his own accord. The fact that he judges that at the end of his life the utility tally won't come up positive for him doesn't weigh on him much. "Why should I care about some number?" he says. "Maybe I'd be net happier if I went out on the town and found a wife and settled down, but I don't want to do that. I want to complete my Great Work."

Is this artist doing something immoral by living his life the way he has? Would it be moral for a third party to step in and prevent him from pursuing his endeavors?

In both of these thought experiments, my extremely strong intuition is that the answer is "no", making choices for other people "for their own good" in this way is not moral. But this seems like a necessary consequence of any kind of utilitarianism, so I can't get behind utilitarianism.

The starving artist example gets to a more fundamental issue, too. I kept saying things like "he really wants to complete his Great Work, and it will make him very satisfied, but he will be more net satisfied if he gives up on that and lives a normal life". Well... what the hell does "net satisfied" mean? How do you measure the strength of a preference? He "really wants" to complete his Great Work, and materially that corresponds to a certain neural state, but how do you put a number on that neural state which is fungible with the numbers you put on all the other neural states of human life? You run into this problem in both hedonic and preference utilitarianism, because "preference" is a neural phenomenon. Is there even a well-defined abstraction here, is there even a coherent thing to which "preference strength" can possibly refer? Maybe, but I don't know that there is. And the problem is that if you pick the wrong abstraction, if you pick the wrong way of getting a fungible quantity out of a fundamentally non-numerical arrangement of matter, then what you have doesn't correspond to "ethics" anymore, right, it lacks normative force. It's just some number.

This is why I say that utilitarian-ish ethics are fine on the large scale, they're fine for the policy maker or the economist, who for methodological reasons simply needs to pick an ok enough abstraction on run with it. But on the scale of individual humans, individual minds, and what it "really means" to treat people right, I don't think utilitarianism can possibly hold up.

I might have made this exact post before somewhere, if so apologies for repeating myself.

[alexanderwales]

"His favorite movie is American Psycho, which is so on brand for him," snorted Quinn.

"Um," said Lucy. "I don't know what that means. You're saying it like it's a bad thing, but American Psycho is a critique of consumer culture, empty status symbols, and 80s excess and materialism."

"Well," said Quinn. "I mean, sure, yeah, fine, but it's also about a guy killing a bunch of women and a few men, and I don't think that all that other stuff is why he likes it." He folded his arms. "Like I just mean, American Psycho is like ... that's him."

"Okay, so you're doing that thing where you're acting like enjoying a piece of media that criticizes something means you're endorsing the thing it criticizes because it uses depictions of that thing. It's like saying that someone who loves 1984 must be in favor of totalitarianism." Lucy leaned forward. "The whole point of the movie is that Patrick Bateman is pathetic. He's not a cool antihero, he's a hollow shell of a human, riddled with anxiety about his place in a world that does not care about him or the other people like him. The movie is making fun of him, constantly. He's pretentious, insane, ridiculous."

"I mean, sure," said Quinn. "Right. The violence and degrading sexualization is meant to be disturbing. But that doesn't mean that everyone in the audience gets that, and it definitely doesn't mean that Ethan gets it. There's a thing that you can do when you're writing and directing a movie where you make the critique too subtle for people who need a brick to the face, and they end up embracing it, or where you don't believe in the critique enough and end up giving a mild endorsement to the thing you're supposedly criticizing, or worse, where you just use the veil of criticism to show a lot of transgressive and shocking things, which are the real point. And you can see that, right, where American Psycho is at least partly a base male fantasy of power, control, and wanton violence."

"I mean sure," said Lucy. "Except that American Psycho was written and directed by two women."

"Based on a novel written by a man," said Quinn.

"Sure, but I don't think that Bret Easton Ellis endorsed Bateman, he also thought that he was a pathetic character," said Lucy.

"I mean the point I'm trying to make is that an artist can't control the way their message impacts the audience," said Quinn. "And in many cases, the audience experience of the transgressive is rooted in that transgression, which is what draws them in, disconnected from any intended critique."

Lucy shook her head. "What were we talking about?"

"Ethan," said Quinn. "And how he's a dickhead."

"Right," said Lucy. "And he's one of the people that's going to die to a slasher tonight if we're not able to stop that from happening, except that the ripples through time of stopping any of this from happening might mean that I'm never born."

~~~~

Yes, that's right gentle reader, you've been reading Time Cut (2024) fanfic all along! There was this one line about American Psycho that bothered me, it's a movie that earned its 5/10 on IMDB.

[which-item-poll]

Heya! I post daily polls featuring items from various websites and ask "which item would you rather own?" Pretty simple!

Important Information:

- I just post whatever I find on the internet. You might notice a lot of Sanrio/kawaii stuff and that’s just because I’m obsessed, sorry whfjshf

- Occasionally, I will reblog donation posts here. That's just because this blog gets more reach than my main, and I'm a firm believer in that no one should be struggling to eat/pay rent. If that for some reason bothers you, unfollow or block the "donations" tag.

- Just because I post from a certain website does not mean I automatically endorse or buy from it. This includes sites like Shein, Aliexpress, etc. This is a poll blog, it is not that deep I promise you.

- THIS IS NOT AN ADVERTISING BLOG.

- There won't ever be a "neither" option, if the poll doesn't apply to you, vote randomly or just scroll!

- My queue is set to one post a day at 3pm est (and I post sporadically in-between)

- If an item/design that I've posted is stolen or has been proven to be a scam, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AND I'LL EITHER CREDIT THE ARTIST OR DELETE IT! (I will need proof though)

- Please do not come here to create drama...i literally just want to make polls🤠👍

- NO POLITICS

- Anon hate will not be responded to

- All the items are the EXACT ones you'd be owning, so try to take their color/style/utility and other factors into your decision!

- I do not accept links if you're on anon!

- I delete asks a lot (like an hour-ish after answering) because I dont like to flood my blog with non-polls, but i still wanna answer as many questions as I can! So if you send an ask, just be aware that it might not be up for too long. (same goes for donation reblogs)

- The websites will be in the tags & I will always credit Etsy/Redbubble/indie sellers! If you want to promote your store DON'T HESITATE TO ASK, I WILL POST A POLL WITH YOUR DESIRED ITEMS!

(Alternatively if you're an Etsy/redbubble/Indie seller that I've posted and you don't want your items up on here do not hesitate to contact me & I will remove it ASAP!)

Disclaimer: The reason why I don't ask indie stores directly if I can post their items beforehand is simply because I don't have the time. Imo I don't think it's necessary either, no store has asked me to take a poll down so far.

General Tagging:

As of July 1st 2024, I now tag all my items with the category that they are in. (appliances, t-shirts, stickers, home decor, etc). They will always be in plural form.

Examples:

Home decor

Home accessories

T-shirts

Appliances

Jewelry

Tagging For NSFW Polls:

- "Tw nsfw", and "nsft" (these will always be on NSFW polls)

- "Sex toys" (this will be tagged when I post sex toy polls. For example: Dildos, fleshlights, buttplugs etc)

- "Tw slight nsfw" (for very light nsfw content such as: chokers and anything with tiny implications of nsfw)

- "Tw nsfw language" (basically anything non-visual that's nsfw. for example, if I answer an ask about something sex related. this tag does NOT mean swearing, only sexual language.)

- "Tw bdsm" and "tw bondage" (these tags will always be on bdsm content such as ropes, handcuffs, gags, etc.)

RECOMMEND ME WEBSITES:

Suggest me websites here!

Sites that have already been suggested

Main blog: @nekopuff

[tonightillbeonthathill]

Bruce Springsteen endorses Kamala Harris for president

films7 on X/Twitter

Bruce Springsteen: “Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz are committed to a vision of this country that respects and includes everyone regardless of class, religion, race, your political point of view or sexual identity, and they want to grow our economy in a way that benefits all, not just the few like me on top. That's the vision of America I’ve been consistently writing about for 55 years now.”

“Hi, I'm Bruce Springsteen. Friends, fans, and the press have asked me who I'm supporting in this most important of elections.

And with full knowledge that my opinions are no more or less important than those of any of my fellow citizens, here's my answer: I'm supporting Kamala Harris for President and Tim Waltz for Vice President and opposing Donald Trump and JD Vance.

Here's why.

We are shortly coming upon one of the most consequential elections in our nation's history. Perhaps not since the Civil War has this great country felt as politically, spiritually, and emotionally divided as it does then at this moment.

It doesn't have to be this way.

The common values, the shared stories that make us a great and united nation are waiting to be rediscovered and retold once again.

Now that will take time, hard work, intelligence, faith and women and men with the national good, guiding their hearts.

America's the most powerful nation on earth. Not just because of her overwhelming military strength or economic power, but because of what she stands for, what she means, what she believes in: freedom, social justice, equal opportunity, the right to be and love who you want.

These are the things that make America great.

Donald Trump is the most dangerous candidate for President in my lifetime. His disdain for the sanctity of our constitution, the sanctity of democracy, the sanctity of the rule of law, and the sanctity of the peaceful transfer of power should disqualify him from the office of President ever again.

He doesn't understand the meaning of this country, its history or what it means to be deeply American.

On the other hand, Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz are committed to a vision of this country that respects and includes everyone regardless of class, religion, race, your political point of view or sexual identity, and they want to grow our economy in a way that benefits all, not just the few like me on top. That's the vision of America I’ve been consistently writing about for 55 years now.

Everybody sees things different, and I respect your choice as a fellow citizen, but like you, I've only got one vote, and it's one of the most precious possessions that I have.

That's why come November 5th, I'll be casting my vote for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.”

[th3-c0ll3ct3r]

Docm77 as well as MANY other have fallen face first into this media-related ragebait and I'm here to explain why you shouldn't be mad at Doc/be upset but not "wish ill things on your child" upset, which yes. I did see. Shame on you person. Shame.

Ahem.

So upon waking up in the UK/Europe, we didn't necessarily have the build up to the presidential election due to timezone conflictions, so for many people (myself include) 6am to 9am we woke up to Trumps victory speech on the trending tab. I'm not joking, that's how people going out and how I found out

There have been a mixed bag of reaction but Doc is getting hate for saying, and I quote "Lol... Really USA? This is what I wake up to?"

Alot of people say this was insensitive, and excuse my language and I don't mean to upset, it's because they're Americans and (again apologies) Americans have been socialised into to being quite emotional about politics and read into everything that happens regarding it. Which is something that the rest of the world kinda looks down on America for, because it makes you look like 'cultist' (this isn't my viewpoint however we do discuss this alot in certain class and this is how other people see you)

Doc's reaction is not trying being insensitive, because to literally anyone else it's a reaction of speechlessness and confusion. Which the majority of people saw it as.

Because we all woke up to that.

Doc isn't trying to be insensitive, but I do understand why people think he's being insensitive, his confusion and speechlessness is being written off as dismissive.

People are saying the word 'lol' is worth cursing at his family over

1. That's not tolerated here. Don't be sending threats or harassing him.

2. Lol, has cultural differences in meaning.

In the US countries, it means 'haha funny!' or it can be a dismissive reply (in text format)

But in other countries, lol, is also used as a 'your joking right?' or 'pretty funny joke'. An example being 'lol what?' (funny joke, but what does it mean)

Many people think the lol is dismissive but it's not. He, along with many other actually didn't believe Trump had won yet and learnt about it in the worst way possible

Secondily he made a comment about dealing with "another 4 years of insanity" which people also thought was rude.

But sadly, it's actually true to alot of people outside the US. We only see the "funny" or mildly annoying bits of your media (because of filters and blockers) and sadly, I'll admit we don't know the full picture other than the Americans insanity over politics

It's literally what your known for in the UK.

So the '4 years of insanity' is definitely an exaggeration but is definitely true in some way. We get the bud of all the "Americans drama" and it's mostly the insane stuff, heck that's how flordia man and ohio became memes. So it's not unrealistic for us to see the next year's as insanity because it is. Just very dramatised

Also quick point, people are saying that because of this he doesn't support the LGBTQIA+ and to that I say; Rendog + his entire fanbase respectfully

Now the big boy issue. Doc said he won't talk about politics and Palestine yet talked about politics now? Why?

Why didn't Doc talk about Palestine?

And for similar reasons as to why alot of other people didn't talk about it, including myself. Not out of fear or something. It's because of the scams.

Being "late" to new media is frustrating especially when it comes to supporting people, and genuinely by the time I heard about Palestine I saw the scams first.

Doc HAS a younger audience demographic, who are more likely to get scammed because they do look very realistic and they even have fake followers and everything.

Why not get one from a reliable source? Well what is a reliable source? Because if something goes wrong people will blame you because you endorsed them.

Why not go to charities? Sadly their are now currently many scummy charities that do take alot of the donation percentage. (including some gofundme pages)

So to address this, Doc just didn't address it. And YES he admittedly should have explained why, instead of leaving it up to people to infer because as we can see, some people took it the wrong way. And I can see how they took it the wrong way, he didn't communicate it very well.

But to me and many others, the intentions were clear and that's why their were no comments made. However I do believe he shouldn't have used the excuse about not wanting to talk about politics, because that does have consequences long-term. And that why I'm here today

And this brings me to my final point.

People are forcing opinions out of other people and when their opinions don't aline they get mad about it. So to avoid this people either refuse to comment or have their own methods of tackling it or simply blurt it out because of pressure.

A modern example of this would be Kim. K and her son (ik shocking). Her son talked about supporting Trump and she got mad about it, told him to take down the videos and allegedly made him sign a contract saying to never make a video about politics.

Kim. K is actively avoiding being pressured into speaking by not responding and keeping it in.

However, another example of this would be Vivziepop. Due to recent events regarding her shows being leaked and the recent elections that damaged the integrity of women's rights and healthcare, she broke down on twitter.

Letting some of her frustrations spill out. This was encouraged by people personal targeting her, and basically harassing her to the point of breaking down.

These same types of people are trying to do the same to people like Aismey, Doc and even Jimmy Solidaritygaming because of thier social media presence, and when they have a reaction but then change their opinion it's suddenly a "well you didn't say that before!"

So to be clear, the circumstances of Docm77 is brought upon by miscommunication and ragebaiting. Dont go and threaten his family, voice your concerns respectfully in this troubling time (even if you're frustrated, you should project that onto someone else)

IF YOU SEE ANYONE RAGEBAITING REPORT IT

And have a good night ya'll

[triviallytrue]

What do you think of Hamas or PIJ

I've saved this ask for like three months now because I think it's interesting, so here's an attempt at answering it.

I'm going to truncate this to being solely about Hamas - I don't have an independent opinion about the Palestinian Islamic Jihad that doesn't fall under their association with Hamas.

So to start with the obvious - Hamas is an Islamic fundamentalist militant organization, which is not a tendency that I have a very high opinion of. At the same time, I believe in the right of Palestinians to live without Israel's boot on their neck, and they are more or less the only game in town for anyone who wants that - the PLO is horrifically corrupt and collaborationist, and no one else has stood up to become a leftist secular organization in favor of the Palestinians. I think a Palestinian state governed by Hamas would be preferable to the status quo, but that is less an endorsement of Hamas than an indictment of the status quo.

Beyond this background, it's worth taking a look at October 7th specifically, both as a world historic event and the most significant example of Hamas' strategy in its war against Israel.

I tend to evaluate this kind of action on two axes - the morality of the action and its effectiveness at accomplishing the overarching goal. Unsurprisingly, I think the decision by Hamas to target and kill Israeli civilians is wrong, and I find the justifications that have been put out about why this would ever be okay to be both unconvincing and disturbing.

I also don't believe there is an argument that Palestine is better off than it was on October 6th. I want to be very clear about this - I do not hold Hamas morally responsible for the devastation that has been unleashed on Gaza. That responsibility rests entirely on Israel. There is no "justification" for doing what they're doing. But I do believe that when we evaluate an organization's effectiveness at achieving their goals, we need to take a blind eye toward moral culpability and examine cause and effect, and I don't think it's controversial to say that Gaza would not be in ruins right now if not for Hamas' actions on October 7th.

So when I examine Hamas, I see an organization that has done heinous things, not in service to a greater good, but rather to the ultimate detriment of the people they are fighting for.

And normally I would end the post here, and that would be that, but I think there's more to say here. When I critique an organization, I like to offer some sort of alternative path, a way that I believe they could be better or smarter. And the problem I have with "condemning" Hamas the same way I would another organization is that I just don't see a path forward for them.

I think Hamas could resist violently or peacefully or not at all and none of it would matter. If Palestine one day is free, it will be because of internal changes in Israel politics (vanishingly unlikely), internal changes in US politics (very unlikely), or collective pressure from the rest of the world against both (somewhat unlikely). The Palestinian people have been denied a say in their own future by Israel, the US, and the rest of the world (in that order).

Even if Hamas doesn't attack on October 7th, Gaza is still a very unpleasant place to live, and the noose just keeps tightening. The US is flipping the Arab countries one by one, relationships with Israel are normalizing, and no one seems to care. The fate of the Palestinian people is in the hands of politicians that would snap their fingers and kill them all, if they thought they could get away with it.

In this situation, then, it is not so surprising that Hamas does things that are violent, immoral, or counterproductive. When you are out of productive levers to pull, you start grabbing at the other ones, just in the hope that something will change. So, yes, I "condemn" Hamas, whatever that means - I mourn the Israeli civilians they killed just as I mourn the 30x (40x? 50x?) as many killed by the IDF. But I don't really think of Hamas or October 7th as surprising. I think it is an entirely predictable result of Israeli policy in Gaza.

[burningcheese-merchant]

Honestly I don’t understand the hate behind “toxic” ships in fiction, I personally couldn’t care less what people ship as long as it’s entirely fictional and they aren’t condoning the actions of the characters. Sure I’ll still block someone if their ships make me uncomfortable, but I have a “ship and let ship” type of view on these things.

Exactly. I'm just SO tired and so done with this shit. The Cookie Run fandom has always been shit to some degree, since CROB first came out, but CRK brought in whole legions of people who haven't seen grass in years and it's just sad at this point lol. So long as they're both adults (ZERO tolerance for adult/minor ships at all times, fuck that shit), why does it matter? It's fiction. No one is being harmed. Explore whatever concept or dynamic you wish. Wholesome, toxic, everything in between. Just remember to maintain a healthy level of detachment from it all; don't get mad if people don't ship the same ships you do, don't get wrapped up in discourse or arguing or anything. Doesn't do anyone any good, including you and me.

There are plenty of ships I don't like (in general, even outside of Cookie Run). I am anti-FireWind and always will be. ShadowSpice makes less than zero sense to me, like wtf are you people on about lol. Hollytaya gives me rabies and I hate remembering it exists (God I hate Hollytaya so fucking much it is absolutely unreal lmao). Guess what? I block the ship tags and go about my business. I don't go out of my way to look for ship art or fics, nor do I bother people who ship any of those (or any other ships I don't like). I have friends and acquaintances that ship these three that I've listed, and I don't think any less of them for it. It's all good in the neighborhood. All shipping is at the end of the day is playing dollhouse. Getting mad at people for playing with the dolls in the "wrong" way is dumb and pathetic lol. Live and let live. Hate the ship, not the shipper.

Just don't call me names. Don't accuse me of terrible things because I like hero/villain ships, the enemies to lovers trope, and/or exploring darker topics or relationships in writing. It's FICTION. No fucking shit that stuff is wrong and I don't condone it irl, the fuck is wrong with you? What kind of person do you take me (or anyone else like me) for? I get so goddamn irritated with the shit I see getting hurled at Beast x Ancient shippers regularly, especially on Twitter. People get harassed, people get outright doxed and threatened. All that over fictional talking cookies? You're the ones who need help, not us lol. You don't have to like BurningCheese, you don't have to like Beasts x Ancients, you don't have to like Heroes x Villains at all. That is perfectly understandable, that trope is not for everyone. But don't do that shit. Don't call us misogynists, or abusers, or anything else like that. Those are serious and damning accusations. You've got a lot of nerve saying that to people you don't even fucking know, especially from behind the comfort and safety of a computer screen. Frankly, you cheapen what those horrible things really mean by hurling them at random strangers so carelessly. You think words in a document or lines on a screen compares to real-world violence against innocent people? You think because I toy with the concept of some little buff spicy cookie dude having an evil crush on a little winged cookie lady, I want real people to be harmed? Fuck you for that. I am VERY familiar with the horrors of violent crime, BELIEVE ME WHEN I FUCKING SAY THAT. I hate bad people as much as the next guy, probably more so, because again, I AND MANY I KNOW PERSONALLY HAVE SEEN SHIT IRL, SO DON'T FUCKING COME AND TELL ME I ENDORSE REAL CRIMES WHEN I AM THE LAST PERSON ON EARTH WHO WOULD. Fiction allows us to bask in the light or be engulfed by shadows as much as we wish, while being able to safely disengage and return to real life without any pain or discomfort being inflicted on ourselves or others afterwards. All of this morality and media-enjoyment policing is just the newest incarnation of the fundies that tried to paint Pokemon as satanic, or those pearl-clutching dipshits on the news and in government that insisted that people would become carjacking homicidal maniacs because they play Grand Theft Auto. It's fucking stupid and a waste of time.

I'll say it one more time: YOU. DO. NOT. HAVE. TO. SHIP. BURNINGCHEESE. OR. ANY. OTHER. BEAST X ANCIENT PAIRS. You are entitled to your thoughts and feelings and ships. Block the tags and move along. Block users if you have to. Better yet, turn off your computer and go spend time with real people. There's more to life than Twitter or Tumblr or these wack ass games about cookies, I promise. None of this matters, man. I have a Bill Cipher plushie as my avatar. I post silly dumb memes half the time, and then just ramble nonsensically about Evil Spice Man x Pretty Cheese Lady the other half. This shit is stupid. We're all stupid for liking these games in the first place. They suck. We all suck. Write what you want, draw what you want, mind your own damn business and I'll mind mine

[hamliet]

Wait what, how did Attack on Titain's narrative get accused of being interlocked with fascism?

I'm sorry I'm new to this since when did AoT ever visualize direct support of such a thing? I'm so so confused, it's a story COMBATTInG that exact thing??

I think a couple things, two of which I find sympathetic but still incorrect, and the rest of which--the main reasons--I find exasperating.

Main reason: people can't read well and don't understand framing. This is a very real phenomenon among younger generations (Z and below). If a story is about something, it's automatically seen as endorsing it. Just look at social media and the anti movement, or at problems plaguing YA literature and harassment towards authors.

In this kind of environment, where portrayal=endorsement, the concept of a tragic protagonist is especially anathema to people--if a protagonist does something, surely it's endorsed! Except, Shakespeare would like a word. Historically, this isn't the case in literature, and it's not the case in AoT either.

Now, to be fair, something coming out in a monthly fashion may mean that parts seem ambiguous at the time since we don't have teh full picture. However, I don't think AoT was ever ambiguous and never made me feel like it would endorse Eren, so while I can understand occasional confusion, I can't understand ever thinking it was even close to endorsing it especially after Mikasa's "that's already... unforgivable" line in 101.

The parts I am sympathetic to are these:

Isayama, in like 2013, posted an image of a Japanese military figure in WWII or something. I forget the details. This man is taught as a hero to Japanese students. To the rest of the world, he's uh, a war criminal. Isayama I believe deleted this? and at any rate never did it again. Still, I'm not going to defend this. I empathize with people who still live under the effects of brutal Japanese imperialist occupation, for which Japan still hasn't taken responsibility. Yet as someone who grew up in America in a cult where I had to unlearn basically everything, I'm also sympathetic to a man who was in his young-mid 20s who grew up with a perspective that was very different and appeared to learn from it. It's like a lot of Americans grow up hearing great things about Winston Churchill and George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, only to then realize in your 20s the Bad Things they did, like slavery and assault and more. Also, these things were not as widely available (via the internet) to people growing up at Isayama's age (he's just a little older than I am) as they are now. So I see this as a man learning. Yes, there's privilege there, but that's not something he can help, and it's a project to do the work unpacking it--which to all accounts he appears to actually be doing. It's nonsensical to assume that someone who ever speaks positively of a historical figure is actually endorsing their worldview. If the story did endorse it, that'd be different--but it doesn't.

The armbands. I have talked about it before and won't get into it, but I won't ever defend that use of the armband (it's incredibly insensitive) while also thinking that its use is not remotely an endorsement (framing-wise, it isn't) and also thinking that someone raised in Japan, again, doesn't learn nearly as much about the Holocaust as someone in the west does.

Even with those things, being angry about them or offended is one thing, and thinking the story endorses fascism as a result of it is another. I can defend why I called BNHA a fascist-esque story in the end tying it into the themes and messaging. I've yet to see someone do this with SnK because it's blatantly anti fascist--though, it is a story told within the foibles and limits of coming from one man's background.

Also, to quote @aspoonofsugar, I think the most blatant evidence it's anti-fascist is looking at who hated the ending. Answer: fascists. Young, alienated men angry that their hero, who was written to represent them, turned out not to be the hero of the story and as a tragic, hurting child throwing a tantrum. Raise your hand if you recognize any of our real-world fascists in that.

Edit: An Anon gave the details for the picture of the Japanese imperialist: From Tv Tropes; Dot Pixis's character stirred an outrage among the Korean fanbase, especially when Isayama admitted that he was based off of Akiyama Yoshifuru, a historical general of the Imperial Japanese Army who has a complicated and controversial history in Korea. This resulted in a heated debate over the general's war record, angry messages and even death threats towards Isayama, as well as an overall decline of interest in the series in Korea due to what they saw as Isayama glorifying the man.

Thanks to Anon for the details; I'd forgotten. My opinion on it remains the same.

[purplebass]

I tried to analyze the complicated relationship Holland has with Kell and Lila. Why Kell doesn't want to kill him, why Lila does. The parallels between them. The way Holland and Lila remind each other of their demons the same way Holland reminds of Kell of his. And more. I suck at summarizing, I'm sorry.

Read more if you want to hear me ramble about antari and their complex dynamic, research paper style? haha.

@thevagabondexpress this is the long reply to the post you tagged me on, btw lol

Kell only killed Holland in adsom bc he had to, and in acol Kell risks to die to save Holland when he's put as bait. That's because even if their relationship had always been strained, he didn't want to kill the only other antari (until then), because it would make him more of an outcast and alone. Kell's reasons to spare Holland until he is forced to get rid of him are selfish. It doesn't matter Holland did what he did, Kell would only stop him if he thought it couldn't be helped (which it's what he does in adsom when Holland is compelled).

Holland comes back in acol and Kell sort of sees that as a way for Holland to have another chance. He isn't condoning what he did, because it can't be erased. He is trying to see things from Holland's perspective: Kell thinks if the roles had been switched, he would've done the same things to survive. To some extent, Kell also believed that it was a worse punishment for Holland to atone for his sins for the rest of his life. That's a meaningful punishment, and one he himself has been subjected for the whole of agos by the king. Kell surely doesn't shy away from ending lives, if necessary, but it's something he'd rather not do.

Which, in turn, is something Lila endorses. Lila thinks that the ends justify the means. And when someone hurts her or the people she cares about, hurting those who hurt her is her way to feel satisfied. An eye for an eye. Lila kills for selfish reasons, because she relishes in the high she gets when she kills. Despite what one may think, Lila is capable of showing mercy and think rationally. She doesn't just kill anyone. Those who don't hurt her are spared (think of Stasion Elsor. She could have killed him, Alucard's warning not to do it notwithstanding).

Lila tries to get rid of Holland several times in acol, but when she locks herself in the cell with him, she leaves her weapons outside, which means that she didn't want to truly kill him. Or she bet on herself that she could've killed him with her bare hands and magic, who knows. What is certain is that she wanted to unleash her rage and guilt and grief over Barron's death. Her rage wasn't just pointed at Holland but also at herself.

Early on, Holland told Kell that it was Lila's fault that Barron had died. He just did what he had to do, and since Lila stayed there, she lead him to Barron and she is an accomplice in his death. And this Lila also thinks about and is reminded of by Holland, and it sits heavy on her heart and she blames herself. So that's why Lila wants to get rid of Holland quickly: that's her way to cope with her grief and she deludes herself that by killing Holland, she will feel better about her guilt too and that she'd avenge Barron (which she also knows won't make her feel better but that's her way to deal with loss).

Holland is the only one who, throughout the end of acol, has the guts to tell to Lila's face that her violence against him is useless and that she, like him, has killed people for sport and she is guilty. Holland forces her to face her demons and Lila doesn't know that she is also one of the demons from his past. One of the hundreds who've wanted to kill him in his London ever since he was a child.

Holland also believes in the end justifies the means, but in his case, not for his own good but for his London as a whole. For the greater good. This is also selfishness. To Holland, if the sacrifice of one can benefit the majority of the people in WL, it has to be done. If he has to die for WL to rise and shine, then so be it. It is worth it. He also doesn't kill if it isn't necessary, as he tells Vortalis in one of the flashbacks (in this, he is like Kell).

This is the opposite of what Lila believes. To Lila, if the single she cares about has to sacrifice themselves for the greater good, say, to save a city, (we know Kell would do this too), she doesn't give a damn if everyone else perishes. She would rather live in a world where only she and the ones she cares about exist, rather than live in a world where everyone she loves is dead. In fact, it is no wonder Holland takes the brunt of their battle against Osaron in the end, and Kell takes it a little too (because they are also foil characters and Kell often has a softer - but not necessarily sweeter - taste of what Holland goes/went through).

Which leads to the last point. I talked about Kell's compassion towards Holland, and Lila's mercy towards those who didn't directly hurt her and her loved ones. Holland shows mercy not just to Kell (who actually killed him in adsom and took away his chance to kill the Dane twins, which is something Holland is still angry about) but also towards Lila when she is hurt in Rosenal. She is the character that among the group is the most undeserving of his sympathy: had the roles been switched, would Lila have showed the same mercy to Holland? I am not sure. Part of me thinks Holland saved Lila so the reader would see he is kind despite it all (just like Kell is) also because of Kell himself. The people Holland loved all died and he couldn't save them. Holland doesn't love Lila, but Kell does, and Holland sees himself in Kell. Kell is what he would have been had he not being born in WL. He doesn't want Kell to suffer the same fate he did. In a way, this is both mercy and love.

[girlcrushart]

I was admittedly disappointed when Chappell decided not to endorse Kamala. And a lot of people are, and they're being vocal and honestly nasty about it. I do think it's of paramount importance that she win, because if the other guy gets in, then a lot of the things Chappell is passionate about (from drag to basic human rights for the LGBTQ+ community) are in serious jeopardy. And, as a Canadian, who can't vote in this election, but who's life will unquestionably be effected by who becomes the next President, I get upset when people don't take the right they've been given seriously. That's where the hate that Chappell has received is confusing and obnoxious, because even tho her motivations are really obvious to me, people really seem to have missed the boat on this one. Right away, people accused her of "both-siding" it, when she said that there are bad people on both sides. That's not both-siding it, you guys. That's when you say there are very fine people on both sides and one side is Nazis. That's not what she was saying. Honestly, there ARE bad people on both sides. People also accused her of doing it because she didn't want to lose fans, or upset her family or whatever... those people are also confused. You really think Chappell has a lot of red-hat-wearing fans? You really think she cares at all about that? She had to clarify today that she is not voting for Trump, and while she didn't say who she was voting for she def kinda implied that she's basically not happy with either choice for some real reasons. Chappell has made it very clear in the past that she is unhappy with her government's position and involvement on what's happening in Gaza and that they are complicit in aiding and supporting a genocide. That's what she means by bad people. Genocide is bad, you guys. She doesn't want to enthusiastically support and endorse people who, while they may fight for things that are important to her that she believes in, are also contributing to something she believes to be inexcusable. And I think she's brave for sticking to that. For me, personally, I'd prefer it if she endorsed Kamala and helped ensure she ends up in charge—that would be best for me. But Chappell has already made it very clear that she's not gonna just do things because other people expect her to because she's a celebrity and there are unwritten rules that need to be followed. She's challenging so many of those rules (and I applaud and love her for it), and in this case, for her personally, she didn't feel like she could officially endorse anyone and she has perfectly reasonable reasons for doing that. I'm sad, I wish she'd do otherwise, but my admiration for her has only increased because she's clearly a deep thinker who does not make decisions lightly and is sticking to her values and beliefs. Today's girlcrushart guardian is Chappell Roan.