#they understand each other more than anyone. they're so fundamentally different they will never get each other

[introspectivememories]

not to blue people post but neteyam and spider's relationship drives me crazyyyy!!!!

[comradeboyhalo]

i find the differences between skephalo and foolhalo so fascinating, because, while they both fundamentally understand bad as a person, skeppy is into it, meanwhile with foolish…well, it’s a bit more complicated than that. 

one of the crowning factors that make landduo so fun is the fact that there’s a degree of unrequitedness to it. foolish is less aggressive towards bad (it’s very rare that foolish bites back in general), whereas bad is more obsessive over foolish. foolish understands bad’s love language, but does he share it? well, he shares an immortal’s moral code - he views death in a more lax light, he misunderstands how other people view amoral actions (see: pac and mike’s kidnapping), and he generally lives his life, like bad, with the acceptance that mortals die quick. and it's in this understanding that we get the quintessential landduo dynamic: they can try to kill each other for all eternity, because that's just how it is. but that is not showing love, for foolish.

we see foolish's idea of romance in the way he treats vegetta. they take on a much more conventional romantic relationship, something that seems rather impossible for bad. foolish cherishes vegetta's gifts, he builds in his honor, they have complete trust in one another. they would never try to kill each other.

meanwhile skeppy? skeppy shares bad’s love language. skeppy routinely kills bad every valentine’s day. skeppy’s favorite hobby is terrorizing bad until he has a mental breakdown. skeppy teamed up with foolish, just to psychologically torture bad.

skeppy takes that foolhalo clash and turns it not into rivalry, but a married couple’s bickering. they'll try to kill each other, yet will also turn on anyone seriously threatening the other. they're both just fully in it together, regardless of anything (unless, of course, there's an evil egg, in which they will kill each other then the world). skeppy is the only one who speaks bad's love language and wholeheartedly reciprocates it to an equal, loving degree. and they're both so open about this, too. they openly will make their devotion to each other clear, all while knowing an argument waits right around the corner.

(and as an aside: this makes it especially hilarious how both bad and skeppy get offended and hurt when the other is mean to them. hypocrites. but it's all part of the dynamic for them).

[elvisqueso]

"Our warriors fought with courage, but none as bravely as Kocoum."

Pocahontas (1995)

long, rambling meta under the cut:

you know i've taken some light dips into the tags looking for content on kocoum and i never see anyone going into depth about him as a character. sure you see the posts that are all "omg he was so hot pocahontas should have picked him instead :p" but that has little to do with his character or his place in the narrative or anything. in fact, it's a further objectification of a guy who is already dehumanized in-narrative, which is so very sad to me. kocoum is a lot more than his looks, which is why they're the first thing about him you're meant to notice. he's handsome, and he doesn't smile. he's a warrior and a stoic kinda guy. but that's all surface-level stuff. he's a very complex person with an intense internal turmoil that circumstances aren't allowing him to deal with properly.

like, you really can't come to an understanding about his character and go on to say "and he should have been with pocahontas" bc the fundamental aspect of their relationship as characters is that they would have been terrible for each other. you could feasibly make an argument that, on some level, kocoum would have been good for pocahontas (the "handsome, sturdy husband" who could ground her), but there is no way in any universe that pocahontas would have been good for him, bc the one who actually needed and wanted a steady, reliable partner is kocoum and pocahontas is the opposite of that (which is one of the reasons she and john smith kind of deserved each other but that's a whole other post).

see, kocoum is like a hemingway protagonist. remember, at the start of the movie, everyone is returning from war; it's important to note how much emphasis the movie places on family as a representation of "the ordinary world." the same is done with the virginia company members at the top of the film. there, they say goodbye to their normal lives and start an adventure. here, the powhatan warriors are returning to theirs. but who does kocoum, the celebrated warrior, have to return to?

kocoum doesn't have a normal life yet. he still belongs to the battle. there's a lot to be said about PTSD as a character motif in this film: it affects a lot of the major characters in different ways. for kocoum, it means he's not allowed to depart from his wartime mindset until and unless he can start a family of his own, and for that he pins his hopes on pocahontas. why exactly he likes her goes unsaid; it's implied they aren't particularly close, but may be familiar with each other. pocahontas being the chief's daughter may be an element, but it may also be that he's harbored an admiration for her from afar for some time. whatever the reason, kocoum has a misplaced idea that being with pocahontas will bring him peace. like a hemingway protagonist, he's taken up with the notion that being with a woman, an angel, will fix him; but the woman he wants is neither interested in doing so nor able to do so, whether or not she cares for him.

and this is why his outburst of emotion when he finds pocahontas and john in the glade is so understandable. he's watching his hopes for the future being ripped apart before his eyes. he'll never get peace, and that breaks him and then kills him.

and when i say he's dehumanized, i'm talking about the way characters talk about him and then how he dies. he's fierce, like a bear. he's handsome, but doesn't smile. he's a tool, an obstacle, and ultimately fodder for both pocahontas's and thomas's character development (mostly thomas's). there's something to be said about how both kocoum and his foil john smith are objectified so differently. where john is the subject of pocahontas's female gaze, kocoum is also objectified through a masculine one (the tension-filled lens that marries fear and admiration for athletic, warrior men and rivals). and then, again, he gets 'fridged for plot reasons because he's also the paris to pocahontas's juliet.

basically what i'm saying is kocoum really needed someone to take care of him, and no one did nor could. and that's why he's so tragic and tbh deserves better treatment by the fans, too.

[fjordline]

ok i've been thinking about how to answer The Color Asks for so long now. Once I start talking about colors I never stop, it seems. This is just me attempting to explain my personal thought process and not any universal rules or anything like that.

None of this is going to look very realistic at all. You need to exaggerate a little. That being said, having fundamental knowledge on how shadows and ligh tsources work is very useful. Know the rules before breaking them and all that.

Boiled down to its basics, what I think of is: if a lightsource is cold toned, make the highlight bright blue. if a light source is warm, make the highlight bright orange. Then contrast the light with a complementary shadow color that does not compete for dominance with the light. Or alternatively make the light source more neutral with a complimentary tone for the shaded areas and then add a highly saturated color in the deepest shadows. Having both a highly saturated light source and a shadow color will compete with each other, instead choose one to be the dominant and one to be the um. submissive i suppose.

Just using a random doodle from my sketchbook for the purpose of throwing some color on:

^^^ Here the midtones and the areas in the shade are predominantly of a low saturated cool blueish tone, while the highlight is stark and warm with orange and red light bouncing off. The orange and red hues you often see in skin that is lit by a strong light is called subsurface scattering (sss), one of the most important concepts in art IMO. It livens things up so much.

^^^Opposite from image 1, here the shaded area is a saturated golden color while the light source is a dull blue with hints of more vivid blue throughout. the blue balances the strong yellows and browns. Since the shaded area is bigger than the highlighted area, the subject matter could look quite monochromatic without the blue hints.

^^^Get wild with it. Lets say your highlight is blue toned: instead of just using a blue, introduce purple, teal, turquoise, ultramarine, cyan, etc around where the light is hitting. Add several light sources in different colors, make it not make sense, get crazy.

Though what is important above all else is that the image reads clearly. Unless you're doing abstract art then you'd probably want the audience to understand what they're looking at. That's where values come in, probably the number one cause of confusing pieces of art. If you can turn the painting black and white and still see the subject matter clearly then the values are good.

I find that i love using colors that most people find garish, especially when they're on their own, for small highlights and points of interest. When paired with other more neutral colors, a bright orange or a chartreuse etc can really brighten up a painting. And colors are never what they seem, the human eye will interpret colors differently depending on what color they are next to. Make full use of this.

Hope this long ass post helps anyone who is struggling with color, I know I used to struggle severely myself xoxo

[lunaticli8rarian]

i don't know what temp takes these are, 8ut they've 8een on my mind all night. the whole thing that vriska figured out finally a8out how tavros and aradia live fundamentally different lives from her and literally do not understand things the way she does and quite frankly never will, is the same reason karkat fum8led terezi. for karkat, there is no real horrifying real8ty that you must enact violence in your life or else you're a failure. sure theoretically there is. 8ut it's more like a kid playing call of duty and thinking a8out how cool the military is. the real8ty is there's just scraping 8y. there is no violence to 8e enacted on his part, only surviving another f8cking day. whether that's surviving on alternia, or in sgru8. that's part of why he works so well as a leader. he just gets 8y. (this changes in the epilogues, 8ut that's complex and not what i'm talking a8out, i'm talking a8out original homestuck.) so like, he gets it to 8e on a similarly violent wave length as vriska and terezi, 8ut he doesn't "get" them like they get each other. this is why vrisrezi is literally the perfect pairing. they 8oth perfectly get it. no one else in their friend group gets it like they do. they more than anyone, have internalized every possi8le danger present for them and what they need to actively act on to survive. 8oth of them were raised on 8lood fearing a giant monster. whether that's a giant spider, or a giant monster judge guy. who will kill you if you do not properly give them the amount of 8odies they ask for. the 8iggest reason they didn't work out instantly is vriska just kinda accepted her life, and terezi denied it. she tries to pretend she isn't a killer like vriska. and tries to distance herself from vriska. until she gains the ultim8 distance from vriska, and realizes that this is the 8iggest misery known to man and the only one who could 8e close to understanding her is a f8cking murderous clown who a8uses her.

this is also why dave and karkat pair so good together. dave is not a fighter, he's a survivor. living in his own tiny world of daily violence that while he acts like he's super cool and tough and gets through, he's actually-just like karkat-scrapping 8y in a world that 8eats him down.

tl;dr vriska and terezi are endgame cuz they're 8oth killers traumatized 8y violence forced upon them.

side note: this is also why june vi8es 8etter with vriska than tavros. despite the fact she's also completely o8livious to the violence vriska's 8een through, 8ecause they're literally alien to each other most things are not so understanda8le. so there's a pre-existing understanding 8etween them which makes vriska just accept "oh ok on earth you can 8e a weenie and not 8e murdered that's crazy man." and june accepts "oh i guess trolls have to 8e violent murder machines. that's, scary 8ut i don't really have room to judge." same applies to june and terezi.

[some-pers0n]

Op what’s the ship you’re obsessed with? I’m curious now

These two idiots

Why? Short answer: their personalities reflect each other well and are really fun to watch interact

Long answer? Well... I guess you can read on

Engiemedic is something I still honestly struggle to describe. Funny considering the staggering amount of writing I've done in their name, but I suppose it's only natural to find it hard to define what you love.

I think one of the reasons they click well for me is that they're one in the same in many regards. I wouldn't say that they're "two halves of a whole", as both can exist and do fine without the other, but they flourish when together. They can properly be themselves.

They're two sides of the same coin in terms of presentation. Engie is more reserved and subtle about his nature and tries to keep up a good face. Medic doesn't care. Medic is brash and says exactly what he thinks, while Engie will oftentimes hide his emotions to try and win favour in a scenario. They're also obviously both scientists who study in fields that, while different, are very much similar. Something something...the flesh and the machine are not enemies but rather one in the same.

The enable each other, albeit in small ways at first. Medic influences Engie to get more in touch with his creative (i.e. maniacal mad scientist) side. He encourages him to indulge in every stray thought, whether it may be good or bad. Meanwhile, Engie gets Medic to lean more in-touch with his human side.

I don't think Medic has ever really been with another person, romantically or otherwise. Maybe that's just headcanons conflating with my thoughts (I like writing him as being a romance/sex-repulsed aroace)(cause projection ftw), but I never saw him as the type to get with anyone before Engie. Why would he? None of them understand him. Because he often comes off as rude, cold, and is generally pretty reclusive most people kept their distance. Good! He never cared for them either.

In Engie's case, I think he dated, but they never lasted long. Engie can't really keep up the facade of normalcy for too long. He's had boyfriends and girlfriends before, and while they were sweet, he never clicked with them. There was something fundamentally different about him that made them incompatible, despite being a pretty good boyfriend all things given. He never found a person who got him. Understood him, god complex and all.

It's why I think Medic and Engie work so well. I think them being together, doing experiments and whatnot, is what they love most. It's something they've craved. To be understood. To be seen, heard, and accepted. To be loved for who they are down to their very core.

I also just think they're fun lol. It's fun to watch these two pair up and do experiments. I love seeing them work on weird and wild projects, gossiping and chatting the entire time. I've mentioned before that I think they'd do parallel play sometimes, where they just work on separate projects.

I dunno. They click for me a lot more than, say, Heavymedic or Helmet Party. I think it's mainly due to how well they work with each other. They compliment one another perfectly. They're one in the same in many cases. They see each other as gods. Together, they create miracles. They defy the will of nature and physics. This spark, this feeling of innovation and creation, it is there when they work. When they share ideas. When they hole up in Medic's lab or Engie's shop for days, sustaining themselves on snacks, coffee, and beer, all to create some affront to mankind.

They make me think love is real. I don't know how else to describe it. I think of them and I think that, whatever they have, it is potent and strong. It's why I like the QPR angle a lot as well. It's something different. Something hard to define and unfathomable to a lot of people. Most look at them and see them as one thing or the other, but they themselves know the truth: they're partners, and by god do they love each other.

I dunno. I think every interpretation of them is valid and good, whether they be friends, romantic partners, or in a QPR. I just find myself gravitating towards the QPR one 'cause I think it's fun and, as previously mentioned, projection.

I just think they're great and perfectly flexible. You can make fluff, angst, humour, hurt/comfort, whump, etc and etc out of them so incredibly easily. I just also think they're cute and sweet and them holding hands makes me think that everything is going to be alright with the world.

There's a lot of nuances I could go on and on about, but honestly I think it's better to just glance over my silly goofy fics of them to get a better understanding of my perception of them. Speaking of which, man I need to get back to that...

[roxannepolice]

I guess brainrot over the idea of an ineffable husbands style tensimm kiss won't let me sleep so.

I think, leaving aside the general collective unconscious and David Tennant in a telepathic mode of transport, the main reason the dynamic hit as so similar is this kind of. Absolute versus relational morality? I mean, this is what's on the deepest level, because the most apparent aspect is the idea that one of these semi immortal entities believes the other can be kind of restored to the state of goodness? And not just this person specifically, I think Aziraphale in general and the Doctor mainly as Twelve tbh just have this worldview where good is somehow definite and in a way natural for the universe? Oh yes, Twelve will be making speeches about whether he's a good man but the very asking of such a question implies "good man" is something definite, something that one can be. And oh yes there may be villains and monsters but you know if we all just sat down and talked then sure everything could be figured out. And this is more obvious than ever in his attitude towards Missy, where y'know. She just never heard the music. Whatever that metaphor means. Just as Aziraphale assumes Crowley can just be restored to the angelic status, because sure it was just a misunderstanding right he means he's not actually evil right? In a sense, pre-time angelicness and childhood are parallel in that they both assume a mind that hasn't developed individuality yet and I guess this is why Moffat is obsessed with throwing children at the audience 24/7.

And I find it fascinating that where everyone sees Aziraphale is wrong (or, indeed just needs to figure out Heaven is evil), Twelve's clockwork orange vault is generally hailed as reaching out to the truth behind the Master that Missy got closer to than any regeneration we've seen. For some reason, because sure as hell not because of anything that happened in EOT. And that's writing for you: if it's intelligent enough you'll look at something fundamentally similar and see completely different things.

Now, Crowley and the Master have more relational relational ethics - and relational is not the same as relative. And sure as hell don't think the universe or any individual will "naturally" veer towards good. In fact, they're both pretty cynical about, at least human, nature. Difference is Crowley needs to get drunk from Spanish inquisition, while the Master thoroughly enjoys letting future humans go murder their ancestors for fun. I mean, Missy even calls the Doctor out for his absolute and sentimental idea of good, except that's framed as her being in the wrong. And then there's the whole "Paradise. You've destroyed paradise! - They were lazy. I made them hungry" exchange between War and Saxon Masters in Masterful. Serpent in Eden, anyone?

And I think that this is why tensimm give off those vibes that they were closer to understanding each other than ever before. Obviously, the moral divide is still there, as it has to be, but I think Ten, especially in EOT, is more aware of how easily one can slip into a vengeful god, and all this to SAVE someone, than ever before. So while the moral divide is arguably widest it's ever been, the perceptual differences between the Doctor and the Master are almost gone in those episodes. And I suppose the metaphor of the Doctor hearing the drums is pretty pertinent here.

Now, before there's any accusation of moral nihilism on my part - no, there isn't. I specifically wrote of moral relationality not relativism. An action or attitude can be good or evil, the thing is that every individual exists in a net of their relations to others that they can't get out of through spontaneous epiphany. And at the same time the idea of absolute good is necessary, precisely because the general momentum is towards... the opposite. At the same time, there is nothing vile that hasn't been done in the name of higher good. Again, dialectics.

Which is why I say the Master (the Simm!Master, reduced as he was) fell where he stood no less that the Doctor in season 10. Like, this absolutely wasn't the intended point and I still say the mutual suicide was peak contrivance, but. work's intent. And all of this goes back to platonists vs. sophists, you know.

So anyway, it's still Ten that desperately grabs Saxon's lapels and kisses him in hopes of making him stay where they can be happy together.

[actual-changeling]

i don't know why i had such an intense, visceral reaction to the last two episodes. I cannot get past "I don't think anyone's waiting for me" I just can't.

Ed was ready to leave the Revenge and, what, be alone? On a fucking island for the rest of his life?

But Stede came after him. Stede stayed for dinner. Stede stayed and Stede came back and followed him no matter how much Ed pushed and tried to get him to leave him again. I 100% understand why Ed reacted the way he did and it fucking broke me because I am him, I fully get the mental bullshit he is working through, all the complicated feeling he has towards Stede.

My therapist would say Ed has a child part in himself that never grew past that stage of being five, six years old, when you know that the horrors will not disappear if you close your eyes and hide under a blanket. But you hide anyway because it's the only thing you know how to do. The only thing that helps. Closing your eyes and praying that when you open them again, the world will be different.

And Stede was there, Stede did his fucking love confession and ripped by soul out by doing so, but it was exactly what Ed needed to hear. I know what you did and I still love you. You're still deserving of my life and I will never leave you again. Not just I was waiting for you but I was looking for you and now that I have found you, there is no place I'd rather be than with you.

I don't wanna get overly personal so I will refrain from adding more but there's an entire fucking essay I could write about "You wear fine things well". He echoes Stede's words back to him, telling him I understand you, I see you, we're on the same page. I can't tell you yet and we need time, but I love you.

They're learning to love each other in the way they need, it's soft and personal and silly, and Ed has finally found someone who not just takes what Ed has to offer but gives back just as much. Someone who fundamentally understands him and does not want to change him, he just wants him to be happy.

I am absolutely in awe at the way they are writing mental health issues and trauma this season. Never in my LIFE have I felt so seen and understood, and while it is opening all sorts of doors in my head and forcing me to confront and process some issues I'd rather completely forget about, it also offers hope, offers light.

This is, at its core, a romance story, and they are balancing this in such a talented way I don't think I will ever recover from it.

[forgeofthenine]

I also wish to simp over the tieflings😁

So I have a question for you. In your opinion, which would be the fittest class for being each tieflings batchelor partner?

My best friend and I were playing bg3 yesterday (both sipping for Dammon so the conversation was more focused on him) and the question came out.

My bf defended that for our fav blacksmith a paladin would be the best option for going on a date. Cause they're usually loyal to their beliefs, tend to have a kind nature and they're always in need of good armor and weapons. It was paladin for her.

But I differ. I firmly believe that a nice ✨Bard✨ would be the correct answer. And here's why:

1. Dammon is a kind, polite and (probably) organised soul. Most bards have chaotic energy. I believe that a bard partner would be a nice influence on him and vice-versa. He calming his partner when they get too overexcited and them trying to get him out of his comfort zone.

2. They're both artists in a way. I think that a bard would admire and see the beauty in Dammon's job. Maybe even getting curious about it, ask him questions and see him work. He would be so happy. And also Dammon would admire and enjoy the Bard's music, singing, drawing, etc. (whatever bardic gift you got people, it doesn't matter to him. He'll love it)

3. We all know Dammon reads smut and I sincerely cannot picture a more smut reading class than a bard. Like I can perfectly see the scene of the bard discovering "A pleasurable deal" (I think that's the name of it, if not I apologise) and being totally chill about it, read a few pages with all the calm in the world and Dammon finding them out, grabbing the book terribly ashamed of it... Just to see them mock him a little bit to finally say "Hey and if when you finished with it you need any recommendations I have a few that might interest you". (Insert all the fantasy young adult with spice novels here)

And finally but not last:

4. (And this is a more personal one) I have the personal belief that if you play a bard you are personifying the need of a traumatised being who always tries to feel better through music and a charismatic behaviour while being in need of a found family even if you're in denial. I might be wrong, it might be me who plays bards this way but it's just a single theory I have.

But guess what, we're having a Bard here. And what better option to have a family with than Dammon.

I REST MY CASE! THANKS FOR YOUR TIME.

🤣🤣🤣But really, I would like to hear your opinion on this debate. If you had to choose what would it be and why?

(All classes are equally nice and fitting, no hate here to any of them👌🏻)

I know that this got long ah so thanks for reading it. I love your blog and I hope that everything goes perfectly well on your day-to-day. Byeee!!💛💛💛💛

🎻- Anon

This is actually a very fun question because I've never actually thought about matching people based on classes.

I agree with both of you that either a paladin or a bard would definitely work well with Dammon thematically. However, I raise the option of him being with an artificer. While I love opposites attract tropes, Dammon is a fiercely proud and passionate man, his dedication to his work is enough to scare off almost anyone. So, who would work best with such a wonderful but independent man? Someone who understands his thinking on a fundamental level. An artificer that knows what it is to be an artisan, to dedicate yourself to 'making', to spend late nights working on various blueprints. I just feel like he'd work well with someone that understands him and doesn't fault his dedication to his work.

For Zevlor, I'm a big supporter of the Zevlor x cleric idea. I feel like as a paladin, having him with a cleric just works so well thematically. He's a paladin who believes himself to be disgraced and what's better to help 'bring him back to the light' and support him other than someone else that understands his relationship with his patron god and his intense need to protect everyone. It's easier to accept help from someone that you feel understands your issues, and I feel like being with a cleric just really suits Zevlor.

Rolan with a sorcerer. That's it. Imagine the sass, the cat fights, the endless bickering before they even realise they're attracted to each other. Rolan definitely does the whole 'sorcerors just can't control their magic and tried to make it a thing', specially with a wild magic user. It never quite ends either, even after years of seeing each other Cal and Lia still walk in on their little sarcasm spats. I don't feel like there's a deeper reason to this, other than the fact I feel like Rolan had very little guidance in learning magic (much like a sorcerer might) and is doing a bit of light projection to start with.

So here's my humble opinions, I'd love to hear everyone else's and I hope everyone is having a lovely day <3

[springcatalyst]

2, 10, 18, 25 for the relationship asks with Diana and who ever you think would be most interesting for these questions!!!!

yesss thank you beloved im feelin like the pepe silvia scene from it's always sunny but im just pointing to a picture of diana. im in love with her

most of these will probably be her and julian because that's the one thats. how u say. complicated.

2: How long have these two characters known each other?

Diana and Julian have known each other long enough that it doesn't matter. Since childhood. Sure there must have been a time before they were friends, but it's like the period before your sibling is born- can you really say there was ever a point you 'met'? They lived in the same town, they gravitated towards each other in the way that queer people do even (especially) when nobody involved knows what queerness even means. It would be false to say they're both outsiders, because Diana is very good at Doing What She's Supposed To, but they share a sort of alienation and ill fit and dread (ha) that ties them to each other. It grows with time, but at the same time it's almost unsteady, because it's built on more negative than positive. Who would they be if they weren't just huddling together beneath the jaw of something, you know?

10: What is one major difference between them?

They are structured fundamentally different, even as it's spurred by very very similar circumstances. Diana keeps herself safe with compliant passivity- she is polite and pretty and knows what to say and when to say it. She is actually rather well liked through the town because of this. Of course, they don't really like her, rather a smoothed-out version of her that has buried most of the genuine personality, but it grants her the grace to float through her life causing as little stir as possible. 'Causing little stir' is her 'safe'.

Julian, on the other hand, even when he's younger and not nearly as problem-causing as later on, is never as easy as Diana. He's stubborn like all his family, he gets frustrated easily and when he is he gets snippy and rude- which means he is often snippy and rude. He doesn't compromise. He doesn't like being told what to do. Diana has learned to live with everything that pisses Julian off, because the consequences for her are more immediate, while the consequences for him are more long-term. They are both trying to avoid the same thing, but Diana is punished for acting out and so spends much more time trying to avoid that, while Julian is largely left to his own devices for everything but that long-term result, which means he does anything and everything to obviate it, causing as much of a fuss as he can.

I hesitate to call Diana passive, though, because it's only half true. She is not unfamiliar with anger, she's just unable to express it. That, and she has a messier, closer relationship with her family, and so simultaneously wants to do right by them, and rightfully feels wronged when she is mistreated. She is very close to her father, and he protects her as she simultaneously tries to protect him. Her siblings care very much for her, but are first and foremost getting their own lives in order. They implore her to do the same, not understanding the kink in that system. She feels an obligation to her mother independent of what their actual relationship looks like. Where Julian's family is more distant and so he can place blame on anyone he wants without guilt, Diana has some semblance of a functional, meaningful relationship with hers (positive and negative), and so can't just get angry. It drives more of a futile non-action in her, because she doesn't think of anything as being anyone's fault.

18: Do they view their relationship as temporary or permanent?

They would have both figured it permanent right up until it ended. Even then, ended is a strong word, because what really happened is someone just disappeared. It had been just them for so long, and then Julian disappeared and that word is not an exaggeration- nobody even knew if he was alive or dead. Some were firm in their belief of one or the other. Diana fluctuated between the two. Thinking he was alive was better, obviously, but if he was then that means that he left without her. Without even telling her. She would have gone with him, if he'd asked.

Suddenly, she was alone in a way that she hadn't really thought would ever happen, even as bad as anything would get, she'd always thought it'd be the two of them going through it together. And then it just wasn't.

And this isn't about Julian but even for him- he didn't plan it like that. He didn't plan at all, actually. The decision to leave was impulsive and sudden and he followed through with very little forethought because he knew it he didn't do it now then consequences and promises would catch up to him. He didn't even think about taking Diana with him. It didn't even cross his mind. I don't know if that makes it better or worse.

25: If a stranger saw them together, how would they describe their relationship?

Well it depends because crazy enough they do actually cross paths again, years and years later when lots has changed. When they're young, though, back in Ereform, they kind of just go together. They're a matched set, where one goes chances are you'll see the other. Not always, because they both have their own responsibilities to their houses, but often. People who didn't know them well kind of thought Diana was being nice to him? Like- I said already Diana is very likeable because she is just what people want or expect her to be. Julian is not- he's kind of jagged around the edges and offputting and just kind of odd. So people looking in can safely assume that kind, sweet Diana has befriended the weird Kil girl and put up with her bullshit to give her a friend. But if you know either of them much more it's obvious that it's not nearly that one-sided. They do both care very much about each other and Diana would be just as lost without him as he would without her.

Later on though. Aha. Well. They meet by chance or luck (good or bad depends on how you look at it) or perhaps fate, once again, in the harbor closest to Ereform. It is very messy. Then when Julian (and Liliana but she's not a part of this get your nose OUT of their business girl!!) end up stuck in Acrofin, and when Diana turns out to be a method to get where they're going (or more accurately, to get where they're going to come to them) it gets! Messier! But there is still an odd sort of friendship that happens under really weird circumstances that I can't really get into because it would not only be spoilers (as if i've ever cared about that before) but also just really long. But safe to say they make an even odder pair than before. Julian is all his brash, cruel, loud sharpness that he's ever had x100, and Diana is still much of the sweet, kind, quiet woman she always was, because funny enough that's really hard to leave behind, even if everything else goes. I'm gonna end on a funny note, because if I have to be so for real with you, people assume they're fucking. Because why the hell else would she be hanging around him?

OC Pair Ask Game! i will do more of these for any two please please please please

[izder456]

A Ramble on Open Source Culture and Where I Feel It Fails

I feel like Linux's user base is stuck in this weird fanboyish space where nerds think they’re hotshots just because they stopped using Windows or OS X.

The BSDs—and especially OpenBSD—seem to attract people who love the systems for what they are, not for what they're not. This is the main reason I tend to avoid Linux's broader user base. How can we go about unifying our user bases when so many discussions start and stop with, "Well, it’s not Windows"? We’ll get nowhere if we only define ourselves by what we're not.

To start, yes, we will definitely need to discuss what Linux is and isn't. Many users come to it expecting something like Windows, and we have to clarify that it's not that. However, we need to steer clear of oversimplifying Linux into just a Windows alternative. Linux is so much more than that, and false advertising helps no one.

I feel like desktop Linux is following the same trajectory the internet once did. At first, the web was the domain of comp sci majors and hardcore nerds. Then AOL came along, and suddenly anyone could get online. The same trendiness feels like it's kicking the Linux user base in the gut.

Oldheads don’t like it. Just look at how some Linux distro forums treat newbies—it’s awful. Elitism is stupid. Just shut up, RTFM, hack, and share your knowledge with others. No one cares how l33t you are, y'know?

At the end of the day, people should use whatever OS they want—Windows, OS X, Linux, *BSD, etc.—but they should also understand the implications of that choice. This is especially important for systems like Linux and BSDs, which are fundamentally different in philosophy and purpose from consumer-focused OSes.

For example, *BSD is not going to behave like Linux, and even the various BSDs themselves don’t behave like each other. Linux is definitely not going to behave like Windows. And yet, YouTubers and bloggers keep marketing Linux as a "Windows alternative." It’s not. That framing leads to inevitable disappointment.

I'm not saying Linux can't be used as a desktop OS. It can. So can the *BSDs. Truthfully, they absolutely rip as desktops! But new users need to understand that Linux isn't a cohesive ecosystem; it’s a kernel that many operating systems (read: distros) are built on. The modular, decentralized nature of Linux development means that desktop usability basics can vary wildly between distros. This lack of cohesion is part of why desktop use will likely never be Linux's primary focus. In the case of the *BSDs, things are more cohesive, and thus have a bit more stability in mind. The *BSDs, however, are a little more DIY-ish than "normie" Linux distros are. And as such, jaded Linux oldtimers, often make the jump to the *BSDs 'cos of this.

Windows is not a general-purpose OS. Linux and *BSD generally is, however. That fundamental difference explains why these systems shine in DevOps, sysadmin tasks, or corporate development but often falls short as a plug-and-play desktop experience. Properly informing users what they are—and what they aren't—is critical for them to enjoy the migration experience.

These systems let you build what you want with them. That means work, usually. It's not a bad thing; it's just the reality of the system. Prospective users need to be ready to get their hands dirty, because that's where the fun is. Solving problems with quick hacks or scripts is deeply rewarding—like a drug, honestly.

And for users who get this—who appreciate that Linux and BSDs are about freedom, experimentation, and flexibility—they’ll fit right in IMHO.

I feel hacker culture can be healthy. I'm calling for a modification of hacker culture to bring in new users more openly and honestly.

I want new users to use Linux and the *BSDs, I feckin love these systems. OFC I want others to join me!

[rabbits-of-negative-euphoria]

Two questions; is your current fixation still Shingeki no Kyojin?

Secondly, if you have time, I want to hear your thoughts about a recurring thought I have. Would you agree that men don't tend to take media made for women seriously? Doesn't matter if it's made by a woman, but media or things in general made for girls. The two main things I think about is the Barbie movie and anything by Jane Austen. A lot of conservative bros I see have a legitimate hate for both of those things and ...Why? I think they're both really important for different reasons and I don't understand the perception of "silliness" around them. I mean, Barbie obviously is silly in a lot of ways but.... It's a Girls Girls movie, like how Braveheart is a Mans Mans movie and also is a bit silly in the way that men are (but it's still one of my, a girls, favourite movies).

Maybe it could be said that girls don't generally understand media made for men either, since a lot of girls hate reading Charles Dickens or Mark Twain. But neither of those author's really made them "for men," it's just that men seem to gravitate towards them -- and at the same time, you don't hear women saying they want to take Mark Twain's jawbone and beat him over the head with it (quote from Ben Shapiro about Jane Austen. He was joking but it still rubbed me the wrong way).

Yes, in the sense that I'm not fixated on anything else, but no, in the sense that I'm avoiding SNK content until I can reread/rewatch before (finally) viewing the finale.

Next, I think men do have a hard time taking women's media seriously, but part of the reason is that media geared toward solely men or solely women isn't generally setting out to be the most serious thing in the first place. I don't know anyone, male or female, who takes chick flicks and action movies seriously, and if we get the sense that a new film leans toward one or the other (even if it doesn't strictly fall into that genre), we reach a conclusion about it in that moment because there's only so much time in the day and money in the pocket we can devote to entertainment.

But then, not taking something seriously is very different from legitimately hating it. I can understand why a man would hate the Barbie movie, especially if he hasn't seen it. Like all feminist media, it's going to be about how all men are oppressors and all women are their victims, right? And that's obviously a despicable message worthy of hatred. And if he's already decided that's what it's going to be about, he's probably not going to change his mind when he watches it, because as I've previously explained, Greta Gerwig failed to send a consistent message, as she has failed to do in all her blockbuster movies. I've described her to my mother as "a conservative trapped in a liberal's body." She just can't reconcile the two belief systems that drive her. (Conservative men aren't the only people who hated it either, I know plenty of conservative women who hated it. And I know conservatives of both sexes who enjoyed it immensely.)

Very rarely do I see a man's film morally disparage women the way that so many women's films do to men, and this probably contributes to more men hating women's films than vice versa.

I think it's true that neither men nor women can fully understand the appeal of media made for the other, but because we are complementary, I do think we owe each other at least an attempt to understand. Which, by the way, is never going to work for you if you've accepted the premise that we are fundamentally the same in spirit and our differences are merely social constructs.

Finally, as concerns Ben Shapiro and Jane Austen, he actually was quoting Mark Twain in that segment, and this is a delightful background of Mark Twain's self-proclaimed--but spurious--hatred of Jane Austen. But for any guys out there who do think Austen is "chick lit," just about every homeschooled boy or homeschooling father I knew loved Jane Austen's work and considered Pride & Prejudice an invaluable tool for the raising of honorable men. Here's an article about why.

[shinidamachu]

Speaking of SessKik, I’m actually starting to really low-key get into that ship. Ngl, at first I thought they might be a little too similiar and cold to ever really work together but I remember someone explaining the appeal of the dynamic in that it’s basically two prideful racists coming together/clashing and having to subvert their preconceptions of the other’s race and each other. Plus the fact that they’re both fundamentally lonely people but extremely good with kids (Yashahime Sesshomaru will never be my Sesshomaru) could give them something to bond over. Also what’s more taboo than a Miko being with a hanyou? How about an honest to god full-blooded youkai instead?

The ship would honestly be great character development for the both of them because they’d be forced unlearn and unpack their prejudices by basically confronting their mirror self.

It's precisely because Sesshomaru and Kikyo are so similar that they would make such a great match. Inuyasha and Kagome are only opposites on a surface level. Deep down, they're actually very alike and that's why they work perfectly together: they're different in every possible way except for the ones that matter, the ones that could make those differences irreconcilable. Sesskik would the morally gray version of that.

The fact that they're both stoic, pragmatic, arrogant, self-centered and prideful characters allows them to understand each other better than anyone else ever would because they operate in the exact same frequency.

Not only that, but putting them together would have made perfect sense, story telling wise. They're both lone wolves with similar goals and similar ways to achieve them, acting on the sidelines. Plus, they share the same soft spot for children — as long as the children in question aren't related to them, it seems — and have special bonds with Kohaku and Rin. It feels only natural that they'd team up at some point.

Then, of course, there's the fact that Kikyo is dead and feeding off women's souls while Sesshomaru is the only character to have a sword that brings people back to life and a parent with ilimited access to an amulet that opens and closes portals to the underworld.

I know her situation is more complicated than simply snatching a soul from hell — for many reasons — but in a series such as Inuyasha, where everything is possible, is not really a reach to theorize that if someone had the means to really bring Kikyo back from the dead, it would've been Sesshomaru. Even if he couldn't, the idea of the two of them interacting is still thematically intriguing.

There are also rumors about an interview where Takahashi said Kikyo is the type of woman Sesshomaru would take romantic interest in and I can't help but agree, since the only woman who canonically caught his eyes was Kagura, an independent woman who was smarter than him — which isn't very hard —, had a lot of guts and just wished to be free, a woman he couldn't save even though he wanted to. It's not hard to picture Kikyo in the same role.

The tragic way Kagura dies by Naraku's hand, therefore ending any romantic development with Sesshomaru, could become a parallel with the tragic way Kikyo died by Naraku's hand, therefore ending any romantic development with Inuyasha, the brother Sesshomaru despises. The room for angst and conflict is amazing.

To me the appeal lies exactly on the point you made: the creative choice of putting Sesshomaru and Kikyo together would pay off in great character development for the both of them by subverting their preconceptions of each other and unlearning the prejudice they still held against each other's races.

I love the idea of Sesshomaru finally making enough progress to love a human in a romantic way, someone who would see him not as simply his father's son, but as his own person, like Kagura did.

I love the idea of Kikyo falling for a demon without the safety net of eventually turning them human, someone who, in the most extraordinary of ways, makes her feel evey bit the ordinary woman she always wanted to be.

They would have been able to see through each other's poker faces and feel actually seen, in a way they haven't quite been seen before: for everything that they are. Not just his father's son and not just the embodiment of purety and perfection in the shape of a village priestess.

Sesshomaru and Kikyo are equals. There are no power imbalances, no idealizing each other, no putting each other on a pedestal because they refuse to acknowledge each other's flaws. They're both intimidating people who can not be intimidate by each other and would be totally comfortable being themselves around one another without fear of judgement or putting their partners in a position where they have to constantly make up excuses for their behavior.

Basically, they could have helped to progress each other's character development and pushed the plot forward while still making thematic and narrative sense, with the plus of fixing most of the things that personally bothered me in Inuyasha and Kikyo's relationship.

It's funny because at the same time I have complained about how much I hate that Inuyasha doesn't feel like himself when he's with Kikyo, acting all reserved, sad and cautious, without his signature fiery temper and dog like mannerism, I've seen people gushing about how mature he is around her and outside I'm like "to each their own", but inside I'm screaming: Sesskik. You want Sesskik!

It also doesn't hurt that they're aesthetically pleasing to look at: elegant, lethal and composed. And Takahashi seems to agree there was wasted potential there because it very much looks like she tried to make up for it with these Mao characters. Yes, I know same face syndrome is a thing and so is coincidence, but come one, now.

Their separate personalities didn't call out to me but together they could have made a very interesting dynamic, even if it was only platonic, because asexuality, aromaticity and homosexuality still fits them very well and wouldn't be an impediment for the found family trope and being single is different from being lonely.

I understand the reasons Takahashi didn't go there, though, because it would have taken real work to make it right and to be honest I've always been more invested in the Inugang, anyway. But the potential was there.

[willow-schmillow]

Hello, all! I'm writing this about how in-system relationships function for me, in hopes of opening discussion and also perhaps offering clarity to anyone who feels confused by why a relationship between their alters appears the way it does :3

In-system relationships, for me, are dynamics that do not exist for me "externally" - i.e. as I am treated as one person interacting with the world (which doesn't know I have parts :P ). The most obvious example in my system are the familial relationships between alters.

Externally, I have a good relationship with my brother. I also have in-system sibling relationships occuring:

- Kit and Lee were (past tense due to a split + dormancies) brothers in the same way that best friends would consider themselves comrades in arms at the world's shittiest job. They were siblings and equals in the same fight to survive, and supported each other like they were dragging each other through Hell to the finish line.

This is fundamentally different from my external brother: I never want him to feel like he has to support me, and I never want him to understand how much I'm suffering.

Also:

- Gabriel and Monika are a big brother and a little sister: they protect each other against the rest of the world, and, to Monika, Gabriel is the princely big brother who saved her.

This is fundamentally different from my external brother as well: he's younger than me, and *I* feel a duty to protect and support *him.*

On familial relationships, we also have a parent-child dynamic:

- Ethan is the dad to Valentine and Kailey: he's supportive through their difficult emotional struggles, and reassures them that they're safe and capable.

... Given that I'm posting here, you can take a guess as to how this is different from my actual relationship with my parents.

The real sticker for me is in-system romantic relationships. These are so very, very different from my external relationship with my boyfriend:

- Kit and Cal's relationship allows them to work in tandem and fluidly switch, something that is an exception within this system. They're very attuned with each other's needs and limits: the separation between them is necessary at this point in time, but I wouldn't be surprised if they fused when we're more stable.

No matter how close I am with another person, I'll never be able to feel exactly what they feel and need - the in-system relationship fulfills a need for quick reactions, flexibility, and emotional validation in what's an awful job (the two of them are in charge of dealing with our parents).

Also:

- I (Kylee) have a relationship with Gabriel. For us, it's about supporting each other through the most difficult times. When we comfort each other, it feels less like leaning on another person for help and more like teamwork to make the whole system feel better and run as smoothly as possible. We're here to support and comfort *us*, because we're one team that has to get this done and we might as well do it in a way that we get along well in.

I hope this all made sense! I'd love to hear about y'all's thoughts on in-system relationships, as well :3

[kyouka-supremacy]

One of the reasons I love sskk is that you get the best of both worlds. One day I will analyse the way they are both mirrored versions of each other and the same and the next day I will clown them to hell and back because both are dumbasses (affectionate)

(Sorry if I'm sending you too many asks. I don't have anyone in my life that has read BSD, so this gives me a chance to talk about it [and my sons]. Love your blog ^-^)

THAT IS SO TRUE. They are a full 360° ship where you just can't go wrong. They'll be unpacking their deepest fears and bringing out the darkest sides of their minds and hitting and hitting and hitting because they hate themselves so much that they can't help but wanting the person that is most similar to them dead and then right after they'd be like “this riding experience is terrible” and “want to get some tea or something” and “you don't shop normally in normal places!” and whatever delightful thing their inexperienced attempts at plotting in chapter 85 was. They're profound and silly at the same time and it's so amusing and it basically forces you to want to pinch and pull at them untill you've seen all the forms their interactions can take.

Random babbling incoming but like. Their apparent stupidity and simplicity is exactly as important as the narrative symbolism and depth of their connection, because that's what makes them human, and relatable. We CAN'T all be supergenius, and sskk are so so ///so/// flawed, and it's so beautiful in its own way!!! Because humans are flawed, and it makes them feel all the more realistic and easy to sympathize with. And - crazy enough, listen to me carefully here - this duality of depth and simplicity is itself yet another side to the way the two mirror each other. Where Atsushi is always dwelling on his past and overthinking his actions, Akutagawa holds a way more simple, straightforward mindset: he's the “what a foolish question” and he's the “I don't need words, only actions”. I think they really work perfectly together, because Akutagawa often comes as someone who can help ground Atsushi from the ghosts that surround him, make him understand that the past is gone and what matters is here and now (see chapter 35 “The words of your past are fundamentally unrelated to who you are now”). Relating such concept, it's now been more than a month but I haven't been able to stop thinking about this reply from a fic author- quoting it directly because I wouldn't be able to explain it any better. (Please, make sure to read their works if you have the chance, they're incredible)

one of my favorite parts of bsd is how it addresses that 1. your emotional realities are valid and should be lived out and 2. sometimes mental blocks are solved not by indulging in them but by a reality check. sometimes when a person says “it feels like i’m drowning in my emotions”, “learn to swim” is a correct response. it’s silly and funny, but it’s also true. akutagawa engages with a lot of atsushi’s emotional realities by directly telling him: you have to move on. not in a “get over it” dismissive way, but in a “that’s just what you have to do” way. it’s a reminder that things are not hopeless, and they could never be, and indulging such a notion is mighty silly.

That's exactly it. I've particularly been reflecting over the “learn to swim” figure because it's. so silly and at the same time so serious and important in the way it perfectly‚ flawlessly exemplifies this aspect of the sskk relationship and in what Atsushi and Akutagawa are so different. The way they can actually, realistically help each other overcome their insecurity and fears, the way they unintentionally yet perfectly push each other to be better people every day makes me insane.

[the-everqueen]

001: Sandman - A random thought

002: Rose/Corinthian

003: Rose Walker

sandman - a random thought if the corinthian has multiple apartments, does he hire cleaners? or is there like, dreaming magic that keeps the places dust-free? or does the corinthian have a secret assigned cleaning day? (imagine him in an apron and rubber gloves scrubbing the kitchen.)

send me a ship - rose/corinthian when i started shipping it: i think it was after reading heavy lies the crown? that fic is just...mm. delicious.

my thoughts: coco/rose plays with so many themes i find fun. what does it mean to be a person. what do you do after a narrative has ended but you still have to live. what is the difference between devotion and love. can you ever truly love god or is that relationship fundamentally fucked. what if god was also just the girl whose brother you saved and she thought you were some kind of potential guard dog. what if god held your leash and you liked it. what if you bit the hand that feeds you and it still came back for pets.

what makes me happy about them: the thing is, i think rose fundamentally understands the corinthian as a person, in a way that dream never will, because dream knows what he really is was made to be. meanwhile the corinthian understands rose as both human and Endless (because that's his whole function). they get each other. also i'm a diehard believer in giving the corinthian to one of sandman's female characters, because frankly anyone is going to be better at handling him than dream once coco is outside the realm of "favorite" and it leads to Fun Shenanigans.

what makes me sad about them: the thing i'm grappling with in the la guard dog sequel is that, while they get each other, i'm not sure they can...fix each other. like, none of us can really "fix" each other, and both of them have deep-running trauma that goes beyond the other's capacity to heal. there's a part of me that could see a bad ending au where essentially the corinthian makes rose Worse, whatever that might look like. also, at least in canon, that they don't talk again before dream unmakes the corinthian. what does rose think about him, really, in the end? it feels very much like he's Trying with her, even if that's tangled up in his attempts to overthrow dream and save his own life, and even if inherently it's performative on some level.

things done in fanfic that annoy me: a lot of the wider fandom treats rose like a kid. which feels unfair, given that she's a) in her twenties, so a legal adult, and b) shouldering adult responsibilities plenty of her peers don't have to worry about. [insert rant about how Black girls aren't allowed to have childhoods but are also not seen as capable once they're adults.] most coco/rose people are already thinking about rose as a consenting adult and someone with very real trauma, but i guess the other thing would be it's easy to forget the corinthian is an inherently hungry thing.

things i look for in fanfic: ...fics of them at all? authors grappling with categorization of "thingness"? the absence of hob as some kind of uncle figure to the walkers.

my kinks: debates about personhood. pain play. unequal power dynamics. (this is a whole bhol characters thing, i think i just want someone to tie up that white dude.)

who i'd be comfortable with them ending up with, if not each other: again, too poly for this question to ever apply to me. i'd like to see more Rose ships in general.

my happily ever after for them: well, that's just the la guard dog au.

give me a character - rose walker how i feel about this character: big. i care about her. i want to hold her in my arms. i want to bite anyone who looks at her as just a prop for morpheus. tv!rose is SO fucking interesting, the show fleshed out so much of her character in relation to her positioning as a young Black woman, and that is DELIGHTFUL, and i want more people to engage with her.

all the people i ship romantically with this character: obvs i'm writing coco/rose. there's a whole other unwritten thing that is cori/matt/rose as a poly triad. rose/calliope has Potential. rose/barbie, of course, is adorable.

my non-romantic otp for this character: i think rose and lucienne could be such good friends. another storyteller for the librarian??

my unpopular opinion about this character: rose is a lot less naive than people think she is. she's young, yes, but she's experienced, she's intelligent, and she knows her values.

one thing i wish would happen/had happened in canon: i hope we see more of rose in subsequent seasons! she features as a recurring character in the comix. i do wish comix rose had been more nuanced as a character - she's so much the coming-of-age archetype that she's basically not really a person anymore.

my otp/ot3: apparently i am a coco/rose truther. (let the everywoman fuck the eyeball eating nightmare!) but mostly i'd like more people to engage with rose as a subject in general, rather than relegating her to the sidelines or ignoring her altogether.