#there's another PFS scenario he's in but his role in it is far less interesting

[outeremissary]

So Lander Lebeda shows up as a youngish teen NPC in a Pathfinder Society scenario I did once. My character accidentally pissed him off and he challenged her to a duel LOL

Luckily, the rest of the party talked him out of it, but now she just hates the guy!

I've read that one, even though I haven't played it!! Love what an obnoxious little chuuni he is in it.... what a way to remember him. That's amazing. Here's hoping he experiences twenty years of misfortune

[maneaterwithtail]

Panda thoughts

We’re now in a Quantum state with the characterization of Panda on We Bare Bears. You could very easily change it so that he’s learning about his sexuality or gender identity or something. This is the type pf character and time/situation that tends to attract people to lionize a character in a form of identity. Sometimes this can be good, after all I’m promoting the comic that basically recast and frames the Fryman family as a combination of both stand-in and actual trans Folk or as bisexual or homosexual. When a character ultimately speaks to a group reinterpreting them for that purpose is another form of enjoying art 

However part and parcel of the entire slash phenomenon is in many ways a kind of sexism.As soon as someone is a man and they in any way leave the check list of traits that we very rigidly and commonly defined as heterosexual or masculine than they must be gay or queer in some way Now interpretation is always going to be differing line for some people. For me when a work has aspect that does it seem as if gay characters exist or even being considered. Because by defining that boundary you can indicate that you understand how each is supposed to work. We bare Bears is definitely a show where gay people could exist. We often see same sex pairings which may be friends or may actually be dates. Of course it’s set in San Francisco and I think everybody knows that bear is often slang for a type of gay man by now.  OK KO is the same with two subtle but rather explicit male/male relationships (Lord Boxman and Professor Venomous, Nick Army and Joff, possibly Brandon and Real Magic Skeleton)  As such though I’d have put money on Gar being gay he really seems into Carol/KO’s mom.  No need to reinterpret characters being gay if speculation or be open to the idea. Panda in particular has always given off two contrary aspects which works for a comedy character. He’s incredibly thirsty for female companionship and romance and even has some retrograde and selfish ideas about what it is to be a woman and wanting to have one for his very own. . At the same time he often shows interest and is very very often put in scenarios in which he’s more or less easily inferred as being sexually gratifying or romantically pursued or entangled with a male character. At first this was Grizz later this was Charlie.

The overall idea of Charlie and Panda getting together as a couple definitely has some appeal. In the fact that a lot of the things that we associate with a romance, namely attaining emotional maturity, interaction, and learning to cross boundaries are very much a part of pandas experience when he’s interacting with Charlie. However at the exact same time I feel in order to make this subtext happen people are often ignoring the full context of it. Would we really be comfortable with the idea- if we’re all being gender-blind or not being limited by gender assumptions- with a romantic pursuer that constantly violate someone’s personal space keeps on insisting on intimate forms of address at the person’s constant denial who often never wants to be intimate or physically near the person? Panda has a lot of anxieties that Charlie attacks. This is fun to see because it creates drama and Conflict for us as well comedy. But does this necessarily mean that the best person for panda is Charlie?  

In some ways I much prefer the idea that Charlie is certainly someone who’s helping Panda expand but he’s not necessarily going to be his romantic love interest. I like the idea ultimately that Panda’s Journey has been about becoming a full-fledged full rounded person. Someone who can appreciate a romantic partner and all that that entails as well as being seen fulfilling someone else’s needs. More importantly a lot of the Romantic elements that people Champion as being indicative of Panda’s deep down attraction to Charlie kind of bother me in the context in which they are presented in the show and then taken out in order to share among the fans

In Charlie’s Foot Panda does not want to be associated with Charlie at all. The only time he starts to reciprocate is when he’s been drugged out of his mind and been forced by his brothers in order to do so. It’s kind of off-putting because it’s implied that someone can be effectively harassing the person physically and emotionally they have to break down and eventually accept what’s happened. If Panda was a girl and Charlie was doing this I imagine that a great deal of fans would feel deeply uncomfortable by the subtext implied 

I’m uncomfortable with the subtext implied by fan interpretations of Charlie effectively getting through to Panda as a romantic interest. Panda is straight. It’s as simple as that so far. Maybe he is bisexual or gay or maybe his sexuality is fluid. All of these are things that I can advocate and if they end up going there in the show I’m going to be interested. But I feel as if in fan presentation there’s this overall belief that there only way that Panda can actually Advance is if he’s ultimately going to turn out to be gay and especially gay for Charlie

This feels off-putting because Panda shows not just a disinterest in male contact but repulsion towards male contact outside of very specific areas. More importantly I think we kind of crossed this kind of subject matter several times in the show with the encounter of Tom and the number of times he’s had to interact with Charlie, Grizz, or be seen as “Cute.” He started to get out of his shell, yes, but it seems weird to say that the only way that he can ultimately grow up is if he decides to date dudes. He effectively ended up dating with Tom and that didn’t solve any of his problems his relationship with him in fact that highlighted a lot of the problems he already had

Effectively Charlie is fulfilling the role that often a love interest or pseudo love interest does in stories. He’s effectively affecting pandas character growth helping him become more empathic and see the world in a different light.   

The one time he accepted Charlie’s advances sober was preceded by “ I’m just too tired to fight you off anymore.” Does that seem really all that romantic or respectful or a positive message? That said, the idea in fan circles is given a lot of good use. I love how one fan artist has had kids for them and their characterization

 and they have this really great comic where they have both kids talk to buy both parents and they explain how they ultimately ended up together.

(reference)

That all said I often feel as if people re-characterize Charlie so he’s just a manic pixie dream girl there to enable male loves male scenarios. He’s missing a lot of his full characterization just so that that way he can be romantic love interest and given the changes that this demands of Panda’s core characterization, motives, goals, and progress that also bothers me I really do like some of the effort that’s been put into Panlie idea. So I’m in this weird place where I really like the fan idea but I’m not sure if I ever wanted to become Canon because it feels off to validate or say that that’s appropriate behavior. A lot of this came to head for me and some of the on Tumblr reaction to Summer Love. Panda’s actually been advancing in terms of his lovelorn character traits. For one he’s can actually seem to expand Beyond just Manga and Anime. If anything his relationship with Amanda felt more appropriate. Yes he did a lot of the Romantic pining and projecting but in some ways a lot of this was based on him putting in actual effort and other things. The fact that he’s able to finally get it and the conclusion of how things are supposed to be and appreciate that someone else has their own aims in life to live shows genuine maturity on his part. More importantly compared to most of his other attempts where it was like, “pretty girl I want to have her” here he saw someone whom he had potential connection with and connected her plights with his.

 He often didn’t seem to want to do something for someone he acted to do something to get someone. By contrast and comparison hei returning of Amanda’s phone, while of course involving some selfishness, is ultimately about fulfilling her. it’s why he doesn’t try to push any further when he realizes that she’s going her separate way. Unlike the manga who he’s been imitating he actually doesn’t force her to stay or choose him. So overall this is just me thinking out loud about characterization and reception. What are your thoughts?

[changechest3-blog]

Dunc'd on Podcast suggest possible landing spots for Bulls' Jabari Parker

Dunc'd on Podcast suggest possible landing spots for Bulls' Jabari Parker originally appeared on nbcsportschicago.com

On Wednesday's episode of the Dunc'd on Podcast, hosts Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux wento over the current state of the Bulls and discussed potential teams that could be interested in Jabari Parker.

Duncan and Leroux are two of the more reasonable basketball minds, and they quickly came to the conclusion that it would be tough to find a team that necessarily needs Parker. But they nonetheless went through a couple of teams that could possibly make good use of the 23-year old forward.

Orlando Magic:

Duncan and Leroux weren't that into the idea of Parker on Orlando but acknowledged that they certainly could use some help in the scoring department.

The Magic are currently 26th in the league in PPG (103.5) but are hovering around a .500 record due to their strong defense and slow pace of the play-the same style of play that has improved the Bulls D while torpedoing their offensive efficiency.

But the Magic do have skilled offensive players like DJ Augustin, Terrence Ross and Nikola Vucevic. All three players have managed to be efficient scorers this season, but only Vucevic and Ross have been able to do it while also shouldering a big offensive workload. Outside of Ross, Jonathon Simmons is the only other Magic bench player who carries a decent usage rate. Parker-for all of his shortcomings-offers more size and upside than Simmons.

On top of that, the Magic are one of the more pass-happy teams in the league, averaging just over 25 assists per game. It would be a solid team to compensate for Parker's occasional penchant to develop tunnel vision when looking to score.

Parker's terrible assist-to-turnover ratio wouldn't hurt Orlando too much either, as they currently sit inside the top 10 in team AST/TO ratio.

Atlanta Hawks:

The Hawks are very short on quality forwards. And that is exactly what Leroux stated when trying to picture Parker on the Hawks:

"[Atlanta] needs depth basically everywhere on the forward line, especially with Taurean Prince out."

At full strength they place John Collins-a very solid young talent-at the four next to Dewayne Dedmon or Alex Len, with the latter being the much stronger tandem. But with Atlanta rebuilding at the moment, having functional lineups is much more important than having effective ones. And that is where Parker helps them.

According to Basketball-Reference play-by-play information, 41-year old Vince Carter is playing 61 percent of his minutes at power forward. So it is no shocker that he is posting one of the five worst individual defensive ratings on the team.

After Collins and Carter, rookie Omari Spellman and Taurean Prince play the most minutes at PF. Spellman is more of a center and Prince is good enough at guarding small forwards and wings to make it unnecessary for him to play the PF.

Slotting Parker into their rotation allows all the aforementioned players to return to their natural positions more often. At his natural PF position, Parker would be free to slide into a role as a (moderately) high usage player. Trae Young, Collins and Jeremy Lin could actually form quite a potent offensive combination with despite how bad that lineup would be.

But being bad at defense is another key to Parker's possible success with Atlanta. Out of all the likely NBA lottery teams, perhaps only the Hawks, Knicks and Cavaliers had less expectations than the Bulls, who some (not many) pegged as a possible dark-horse No. 8 seed in the playoffs.

New Orleans Pelicans:

The Pelicans are in the same situation as the Bulls in terms of needing a quality small forward and struggling to attract star free agents. Parker doesn't help with either of those issues and that is why Duncan suggested he could essentially be a nice depth piece for New Orleans, stating that Parker could help just by being on their roster as "a forward for when [Julius] Randle and [Nikola] Mirotic are inevitably hurt.

Though Pelicans general manager Dell Demps has had his fair share of misses, it is unlikely he would be looking to back up his oft-injured forwards with another injury-prone player. But if the New Orleans front office truly thinks Parker can improve from his current level of play, it would be worth it to part ways with Solomon Hill and salary filler for Parker. Whatever draft compensation Chicago wants would make or break this deal.

Story continues

But with fellow Chicago-native Anthony Davis drawing tons of attention on his dives to the rim, it isn't impossible to imagine a world in which Parker scores effectively as a pick-and-roll ball-handler with Jrue Holiday providing some floor spacing.

Philadelphia 76ers:

We'll keep this one short. Nate Duncan had perhaps the best line of the episode when he stated flatly "they don't need more usage on this team."

But while the Sixers certainly don't need more player who want the ball in their hands, Duncan himself brought up the fact that they need more quality players in general. Parker has glaring holes in his game but that doesn't mean he couldn't be good in a complementary role.

After the recently acquired Jimmy Butler and Wilson Chandler, the Sixers don't have many players who can hold down the forward spots. Ben Simmons can obviously play in the frontcourt in a pinch, but the point of Simmons' uniqueness is that you can keep him at the one and surround him with big, two-way guards and forwards.

So Parker would actually fill somewhat of a need for the Sixers. Again, for all of his shortcomings, I don't think anyone is going to strongly argue that Mike Muscala is clearly a better backup option at power forward than Parker. Muscala fits better because he is a great 3-point shooter, whereas Parker would cramp the floor spacing in Philly. But Muscala is a terrible rebounder for his position, averaging 4 rebounds per game compared to Parker's 6 boards a game, which actually leads the rebound-deficient Bulls.

And in a best case scenario where Parker is engaged on defense, he and Simmons could have some great success as a duo in transition.

They both possess the coveted "grab-and-go" ability that allows them to turn quick shots by an opponent into an easy bucket. Parker was around the 60th percentile as a transition scorer in his last year in Milwaukee (which is good) but has fallen off this year on an injury-riddled Bulls team.

A big reason for Parker's transition offense falling off is his high turnover rate. But the hope would be that Simmons-who also turns the ball over a lot-Butler and Embiid would have the ball in their hands so much that Parker's turnovers would decrease dramatically.

As far as the framework for this deal? Markelle Fultz, Muscala and Jonah Bolden would be enough to make the trade work. This trade wouldn't really weaken the Sixers in any way on the court. And off the court, Parker's expiring deal would be interesting for a Sixers team that will be trying to re-sign Butler while adding depth around the margins.

Source: https://sports.yahoo.com/duncd-podcast-suggest-possible-landing-212156236.html?src=rss