#this can be read multiple ways

[pinkbirddiaries]

Logan: You’re the opposite gender for 24 hrs what’s the first thing you do?

Ashlyn: Get my girlfriend pregnant

Tyler: NO!

[dxc-95]

Doflamingo: What if you met just the right man, who worshipped and adored you, who'd do anything for you, who'd be your devoted slave? Then what would you do? Tenshi: ... I'd pity him.

[manfred-volkarin]

Tfw you ask your newly undead teammate to please keep his skin on, and he immediately takes his skin off.

[sergle]

I always think it's funny when I see one of those posts from someone going I can't BELIEVE people talk about Ghibli films as aesthetic comfort sweet soft movies, these movies are about DARK FUCKED UP subject matter and heavy topics like DEATH and WAR and then you can scroll a little further and you can see reblogged clips from Ghibli movies of slow pans across sprawling meadows and beautifully rendered alien fauna or cozy villages with the most beautiful piano score played over it, sandwiched between moments of genuine human compassion and connection, quiet sequences of people performing mundane tasks, and I'm like yeah man that's crazy, definitely people are crazy if they associate these things w their corresponding movies. personally, I sit down to watch Kiki's Delivery Service stone-faced as I meditate on the Loss Of Innocence and I don't experience any other parts of the movie. only the serious bits. I don't reblog a single aesthetic gifset from the movie because then that means I would be Missing The Point

[vamptoll]

"Aminata watched Baru kiss her, promptly, like a signature on a promissory note. It felt weird to watch her friend kiss a woman. Not good weird. But weird like eating cantaloupe, which Aminata hated. You could see, theoretically, why someone else liked it."

[13eyond13]

The thing I respect most about Griffith Berserk is actually how ridiculously unsubtle with his hitting on Guts he is. Just IMMEDIATELY going up to him and literally grabs his face like "I realized I WANT you, now let me tell you exactly why." Like this isn't your typical suggestive homoerotic innuendo, this is just what he actually says. To the point Guts is just like, oh you mean like, in a gay way? And Griffith's just like... "*gay silence*" like idk you certainly can't blame the frustrating star-crossed lovers mutual piningness of their relationship on him being a bit too ambiguous about things or too cowardly to shoot his shot lol

[rainbowberriesandcookies]

"Orihime being afraid of Ichigo's hollow power shows she doesn't fully accept him."

I see this take and similar ones pop up from anti fans of Ichigo and Orihime and try to say that Orihime is bad, in the wrong, etc. for being afraid of his hollowfication powers when her first encounter with a hollow was her brother Sora.

I know the anime did a lot of damage to Orihime's character - especially by taking these scenes out and altering them compared to the manga - but when Ichigo begins to undergo the same process as Sora, it only makes sense that she's afraid.

Not because she's afraid of Ichigo but because what he can become.

And just like Sora said, "It would be [her] fault"

Also - this is to counter the whole "Ichigo and Orihime were never close/barely friends/just acquaintances" that I see floating around often too.

But all in all - Orihime was never afraid of Ichigo. She was afraid of what he could have become.

As Acidwire, Sora targeted Orihime because of her growing bonds with Tatsuki and Ichigo. He even says that he attacked them because they tried to tear him and Orihime apart and that she already knew why.

For clarity - what I'm about to say isn't me saying that Sora was abusive in life and I'm going to specifically try to use his name as a hollow "Acidwire" as much as possible to express the slight separation between Sora as he was while he was alive and Sora as he was when he became Acidwire.

Especially since early on, it established that hollows - while they were once former humans - often end up being twisted versions of the people they once were.

Now onto the point -

The "You already know why" isn't dissimilar from how abusers, manipulators, etc. often talk to their victims when they're angry or upset. It's similar to the silent treatment in a way where it implies that the victim intentionally made the abuser upset.

He references her prayers for him every day helped ease his own suffering before she became friends with Tatsuki and entered high school before she stopped praying for him altogether. He then says how it hurt him that when she got home, all she would talk about was Ichigo.

For one - the fact that Acidwire knows this proves that Ichigo and Orihime were at least already friends by the time the manga started. In contrast to the anime where Ichigo outright says to Rukia that they've "never had a real conversation"

Anyways - this here in and of itself proves Ichigo and Orihime at least knew each other beyond just acquaintances - because they were close enough for Acidwire to notice and be hurt by it.

She tries to defend herself but he cuts her off before attacking Ichigo again

Acidwire tells her to come with him back to when it was just the two of them. In the context of the story, this would basically be him killing her.

However, this is also a tactic abusers use known as isolation.

When she questions why she should go with him and why he'd hurt Ichigo and Tatsuki before saying that the brother she loved would have never done anything like this.

I feel like in the anime, it kinda breezed by these moments which are honestly heartbreaking in hindsight and key for the leadup to why Orihime was afraid when Ichigo would use his hollow mask.

but Acidwire's response to her refusal and saying that the brother she loved would never do this is to not just harm her, but blame her and say that he is going to kill her.

In the time that she's become friends with Ichigo and Tatsuki and slowly grew happier, Acidwire blamed her for his own despair and sadness.

The kind, loving older brother that she had always known became a monster that would kill her and everyone close to her, and it would be her fault that he did because she stopped praying for him.

Here, it shows how Acidwire views Orihime not as a person who should live her own fulfilling life, but as an object who should live for him because he gave up his entire life to raise and protect her.

Once again, not to say that Sora was an abuser or abusive person, but this line of logic is the same one that abusive and toxic parents often use when it comes to emotionally abusing their children. Saying how the sacrificed so much for their children to control how their children live their own lives when the child never asked to be born. Similarly, Orihime didn't ask to be born or ask for Sora to raise her.

Sora did because that's the kind of person that he is, but Acidwire turns these loving traits of Sora's into a manifestation of abuse.

And even though she has nothing to be sorry for... She apologizes to Acidwire because that's the kind of person she is.

It also shows how she puts on a smile so that way others don't have to worry about her. She didn't want Sora to think that she was sad and hurting, she didn't want him to worry about her so she buried and hid her own sadness.

She apologizes to Acidwire for making him sad and (in what she thinks are probably her last moments) says that she loves him and that she didn't mean to hurt him.

As he's slowly regaining himself, Sora admits that he already knew that Orihime was just trying to shield her sadness from him but still wanted her to pray for him because it was only in those moments that her heart was his.

Ichigo then tells him that it's the same, those who die and those who survive are just as sad as the other.

It's in this moment Sora had fully regained himself, enough to know that he couldn't stay in a form like this or else he'd come to hurt Orihime again. If he killed the little sister that he raised like a daughter over his own heartache, would he have been any better than their own abusive parents?

And finally, the two get to say goodbye properly.

Also - a side note - a lot of people criticize Orihime's passive nature and how she never seems to fight or argue with anyone but it's because the one time that she did have a fight with someone, they died and became a monster.

This entire sequence emphasizes why Orihime always tries to reach out to others in need and never argues or fights. She doesn't want her friends or even strangers, to become like how Sora became Acidwire.

Now, Rukia had changed/erased Orihime's memories following this event but it likely didn't work as intended since during the Rukia rescue arc, Orihime mentions that she's been able to see hollows and spirits ever since the encounter with Acidwire.

Now let's go ahead and jump ahead to VL Ichigo -

Going to Hueco Mundo - Ichigo already knew without having to be told or convinced by anyone that Orihime was in danger. Aizen did his best to make it look like Orihime was a traitor to the Soul Society and Ichigo never bought it

It's being put in plainer and plainer terms that Ichigo transformed as a response to Orihime's call for help.

Even if you want to argue that there was a mistranslation or that Ichigo doesn't directly reference Orihime, even if you remove all of the text the sequence of events goes

Orihime's cries

Ichigo began to move and get up - functionally coming back from being dead

Once again, even if you want to remove the text avoid arguing about whether or not it was properly translated - nevermind the fact that in Japanese pronouns are often omitted and there is a big assumption to just know who/what you are talking about -

Even without text, the images show Orihime crying, and Ichigo beginning to come back to life.

Both she and Ulquiorra question whether that is Ichigo

Now that said, I think that Ichigo vs Ulquiorra is one of the most brutal and best fights in the series. Both Uryu and Orihime know that this isn't Ichigo.

Yet remember how it is established that hollows often become twisted versions of the people they once were? This is a power that Ichigo can't control and yet uses it to protect the person who called out to him.

While I don't disagree with the notion that this is also White protecting Ichigo, it doesn't change the fact that Kubo intentionally drew Orihime and Ichigo rising side by side multiple times. Even without text, Kubo places emphasis on her and her cries for help against VL Ichigo - not White or Zangetsu.

And when Uryu tries to bring him back to his senses what does Ichigo do? Put a sword through him.

Once again, even if you want to remove any and all text, Kubo puts VL Ichigo paneled side by side with Orihime, and when Ichigo comes back to his senses

The first person that he sees is Orihime.

As much as I want, I'll save my yapping about Ulquiorra for a separate time.

But for a moment, even if only briefly, his desires to protect were twisted in a way that hurt those around him, and once again - Orihime was the catalyst.

Ichigo says that he didn't want to win like this - showing that he views fights as something more honorable than what White/VL Ichigo had done. His last memory being that he had a hole put in his chest, also shows that he more or less "blacked out" and had no control over his actions.

What is one of the things established when people become hollows?

That they lose control of themselves and their desires are twisted.

The difference between Ichigo and Acidwire is that Ichigo wants to protect Orihime while Acidwire wanted to own her - which is why Ichigo never directly harms Orihime even as he loses control of himself.

But - all of this yapping is to show how from Orihime's perspective, hollowfication and hollow powers aren't good. They turn people into monsters that hurt their friends and loved ones.

It's also established that Orihime is the type of person who will internalize her own thoughts and feelings (it isn't ""hubris"" as some people call it).

Whether or not you want to argue that it was an assumption that Ichigo became a VL because she cried for help, it doesn't change the fact that she still cried for help and that Ichigo became a hollow/VL.

From her own perspective, she blames herself regardless of whether or not you think that it is an assumption on her part that Ichigo became a VL to protect her.

And after all - why wouldn't she blame herself when her first encounter with a hollow - Acidwire - blamed her for the monster that he became?

I know I skipped over him using his mask in the fight with Grimmjow, but I already yap too much and wanted to try to keep an already long post short(er).

Anyway - all of this illustrates the trauma that Orihime has regarding hollows and hollowfication. It's not truly her fault - yet in both instances she blames herself.

And not just Kubo, but Ichigo himself is fully aware of this.

Which is why when he tells her not to worry and that he's still himself is so important - because it shows that Ichigo has learned to control that side of himself while at the same time, being aware that Orihime is someone who has been traumatized by hollows and hollowfication.

Ultimately - she doesn't want Ichigo to become a monster like Sora. For Ichigo, it's growth in his own ability while for Orihime it's comfort in knowing that Ichigo won't lose himself fighting to protect those he cares about.

In short, she isn't afraid of Ichigo - she was scared of him becoming a monster like Sora had.

[serpentface]

Wardi singular pronouns

Wardi language has a large set of pronouns, which are mostly differentiated along lines of gender and social familiarity and/or deference. Some older predecessors of the Wardi language were heavily gendered (with most parts of speech having a linguistic gender, trending towards -a sounds being masculine and -e/-i being feminine). This feature has been greatly reduced over time, but has trace remains in many nouns and is still present in verb and pronoun forms.

Here's most of the singular pronouns.

notes:

- a vowel with a diacritic (ä ë ï ö ü) indicates that this vowel begins/forms a new syllable where it otherwise wouldn't (within the spelling conventions I use). IE: 'oüye is pronounced [oʊ u: je] with three syllables, while 'ouye' would be pronounced [oʊ: je] with two syllables.

-a (') symbol indicates two words/parts of speech contracted and spoken as one (often with a glottal stop).

-a (-) symbol indicates two words/parts of speech spoken separately, with meaning formed in their adjacent positions.

I/me

[masculine]: Ya

[feminine]: Yi

ex. "I'm from Odkoto" = "Odkoto-ande (yi) oüye" (1:1 literal english: "Odkoto from I (I) am") Odkoto- city Ande - postposition meaning 'from' Yi- "I" (feminine). This is wholly optional in this sentence, as the verb already implies "I am". Both options are grammatically correct, but including the pronoun sounds highly formal and unnatural for everyday speech. Accessory pronouns like this will typically only be added for heavy emphasis, and often only in formal register. Oüye - the verb 'ouy' ('to be', constant state) in its I-feminine form.

My/mine (possessive)

[masculine]: A'ya

[feminine]: A'yi

ex: "my eyes are brown" "Jië-achital a'ya oüta wareg" (1:1 literal english) "(dual) eye mine are brown" Jië-achital - 'achital' is the anatomical eye, 'jië' is a plural article always denoting dual quantities. A'ya - my (masculine), possessive Oüta- the verb 'ouy' ('to be' (constant state)) conjugated in its object-neutral form. Wareg- a color word for dark brown

Me (receiver of an object/postposition)

[masculine] : Ya-(postposition)

[feminine]: Yi-(postposition)

ex: "bring the olives to me" " As'aloga ya-on basatse." (1:1 literal english) "(the many) olive me-to bring" Ya-on- me (masculine) with the postposition 'on' meaning 'to' Basatse - the verb 'basat' ('to bring') in its 2nd person masculine informal) conjugated form. As'aloga: 'aloga' is olive, in plural form via the prefix article 'as' (denotes a quantity greater than two). (Some words will register as plural with the otherwise singular article 'a' (if you're talking about a field of barley, you can say "a'wainyota" (the barley) instead of "as'wainyota" (the many barley) unless you Really want to emphasize just how much barley there is)

---

3rd person forms are divided by gender and level of familiarity and/or deference. Exclusively high-deference 3rd person singular pronouns exist, but are somewhat antiquated and rare in common vernacular. These are the ones an average person will use in their daily life.

3rd person singular - He + She

He- (familiar/nondeferential): At

He- (unfamiliar/deferential): Ataya

She- (familiar/nondeferential): Et

She- (unfamiliar/deferential): Eteya

Ex: "He is a lowly thief" - "Cu'dagiba sonetil (at) oäye" (1:1 literal english) "a thief lowly (he) he is" Cu'dagiba- 'dagiba' means 'thief', 'one who steals', the 'cu' prefix functions as 'a/an'. Use of the 'cu' article is antiquated and only tends to be retained in formal register, most people will just say 'dagiba' here (the function of 'a'/'an' is strongly implied by using any noun unaccompanied by a 'the/that' or plural article). Sonetil - 'lowly', 'disgraceful' At- non-deferential 'he' pronoun, not necessary in this sentence. Oäye- the verb 'ouy' 'to be' (constant state) in 3rd person non-deferential masculine present tense form.

3rd person possessive - His + Her

His- (familiar/nondeferential): a'at

His- (unfamiliar/deferential): a'ataya

Her- (familiar/nondeferential): a'et

Her- (unfamiliar/deferential): a'eteya

Ex: "Her brother is handsome" - "Hittiba a'eteya oächuya emsut" (1:1 literal english) "brother her is handsome" Emsut- "handsome", "good-looking", usually implies masculine beauty. The word "coutomara" can work here too (this one specifies facial features). Hittiba- "brother" A'eteya - deferential possessive form of 'her' Oächuya- 'ouy' (to be, constant) conjugated in present tense 3rd person masculine deferential form.

3rd person him + her (receiver of an object/postposition)

Him (familiar): at-(postposition)

Him (deferential): ataya-(postposition)

Her (familiar): et-(postposition)

Her (deferential): eteya-(postposition)

Ex: "Give the medicine to her" - "A'jenum eteya-on gaibeyatse" or 'A'jenum eteya-on goëye" (1:1 literal english) "The medicine her-to (you) give." "the medicine her-to (you) GIVE." A'jenum - 'jenum' means medicine, the 'a' prefix places it in 'the' singular form. Gaibeyatse- the verb gaibeyat ('to give' or 'to provide') in present tense non-deferential second person masculine form. This version of 'to give' is non-urgent and can describe both literal and figurative acts of giving. Goëye- the verb 'gouy' ('to give') in present tense non-deferential second person masculine form. This version of 'to give' is squarely practical and commanding, and suggests urgency. Eyeta-on- 'her' pronoun with the '-on' postposition, which corresponds to 'to'.

---

There are three other major 3rd-person singular pronouns.

Neutral (personified): Ou

Ou/A'Ou/Ou-(postposition)

This pronoun doesn't translate very well. It is used for people/animals/spirits of unknown gender, plants, weather, bodies of water, landscapes, etc. Anything considered to have a soul, living spirit, or to be an aspect of God's living spirit (which is essentially everything) can be referred to as such. Most things referred to with 'ou' (for any reason outside of simple gender uncertainty) might instead be given male/female pronouns instead, context depending.

This is only used for humans when the gender is completely uncertain (usually referring to an unknown individual). If someone's appearance is androgynous, the average Wardi speaker will just make a guess rather than using 'ou'.

Neutral (non-personified): Tlay

Tlay/A'Tlay/Tlay-(postposition).

This functions as an 'it' pronoun, and is only used in cases of complete non-personification. This is often on a subjective basis, the same object or concept may be referred to with 'ou' instead depending on the context.

Deified neutral personified: Ouyii

Ouyii/A'Ouyii/Ouyii-(postposition)

Translated as the capital I 'It', used for direct invocations of God and Its aspects.

---

There is only one standard form of second person pronoun, which is non-gendered (older gendered 'you's are fully obsolete) and always expresses familiarity.

You: datse

Ex: "You look beautiful." - "(datse) Dachetse jaimara " or "(datse) Uyetse jaimara" (1:1 literal english) "beautiful you appear" "beautiful you are" Jaimara- 'pretty' or 'beautiful', usually describing feminine qualities Datse- you, not necessary in this sentence Dachetse- the verb 'dachat 'to appear' in you (familiar/nondeferential feminine) present tense conjugation. Uyetse- the verb 'uyat' ('to be' (impermanent state)) in present tense 2nd person feminine-familiar conjugated form.

Your (possessive): a'datse

Ex: "Your fucking dog bit me!" "Chin dlacoupiba a'datse ya kotagare!" (1:1 literal english) "Dog sodomizer your me bit" Chin: dog Dlacoupiba: translates closer to 'buggerer/sodomizer' than 'fucking', but translation as 'fucking' is more tonally accurate (both are being used as adjectives, both are expressing intense disdain, both are utilizing sexual vulgarity) a'datse: your (possessive) ya: me kotagare: the verb "kotat" ("to bite)" in 3rd-person neutral past tense conjugation.

You (receiver of an object/postposition) : datse-(postposition)

Ex: "The horse belongs to you" = "A'tsimouna datse-on toleye" A'tsimouna: "horse" with the "a" ("the"/singular) article prefix Datse-on: "you" with the 'on' (to) postposition. Toleye: the verb "toluy" (to belong, in a sense of being owned as property) in its 3rd person present tense feminine non-deferential form (gendering the horse).

Use of the datse/"you" pronoun implies familiarity and is inappropriate to use in situations requiring deference or with unfamiliar company. In these situations, it can be replaced with a person's family name or an honorific.

ie:

"Odebinae uyetse jaimara" (polite, non-deferential, uses family name) (while a 'you' pronoun could be entirely omitted in this sentence (thus avoiding the need for 'you' avoidance to begin with), including the name in its implied place is very polite and emphasizes this compliment)

"Chin dlacoupiba a'hachata-Haidamane ya kotagare!" (polite(?), uses both the highly deferential 'lord' honorific and family name, while still calling the dog a sodomizer)

"A'tsimouna amsa-on toleye" (polite, uses deferential 'amsa' ('sir') honorific)

[valentronic]

SAVE AS I SAVE! JUDGE AS I JUDGE!

Saw X? Never heard of her can I interest you in fanart that is somehow simultaneously for Saw IV and Saw VI? How I managed to forget about my all time favorite murder man I have no idea

[urfavcrime]

dsmp is still SO insane to me. still not completely convinced it wasn't a social experiment. it is something that can never be replicated again due to the really specific circumstances that attributed to it's creation and popularity

[slutforpringles]

Daniel Ricciardo on his love for the sport in an interview with Road Book Magazine during the 2024 Belgian GP [translated]

[smartzelda]

Sorry guys I gotta speak my truth on this one

I'm not kidding when I say that I think that blaming shit media literacy from fans on shipping/shippers avoids the actual root of the problem to throw people you can easily throw under the bus (simply because it's not unpopular to consider people who post about ships or ship characters in media as having lesser or derivative tastes by default)

And here's why.

I think when you blame people who are "shippers" or "consume media through shipping lenses", the true root of it all is a mindset problem.

In actually, putting on shipping lenses can be helpful when trying to analyze a piece of media. When analyzing media you're supposed to approach it through a number of mindsets and put on different lenses (both to deepen your personal understanding of the media, and to pick it apart and see what you can find there (whether intentional or not on the author's part)), and different ships can be some of those lenses

When it comes to ships between main characters (for those who are genuinely willing to see what the narrative is showing with their relationship and what it's doing), there are times when analyzing it from a shipping lens may be helpful. As someone from KH fandom, I have seen people come to deeper understandings and pick canon apart in the process of analyzing a relationship that is genuinely integral to the story (platonic or not). I've also seen people get into rarepairs of characters who barely interact or who just suffer little screen time, and I've seen them come to better understandings of those side characters and how they potentially fit into the world of the media simply because people are now focusing on these characters and how they fit into the narrative.

Frankly, I resent the idea that the only way to truly objectively analyze a piece of media is by turning off the part of your brain that gets excited over relationships and individual characters. Don't get me wrong, that is a way to approach a piece of media and a valid one at that, but the truth is that we cannot be free of bias.

For instance, I was watching House MD with my parents circa last year. At some point I started heavily tuning into what was going on with House and Wilson's relationship. My parents, on the other hand, were largely watching casually. They're not thinking of character relationships or getting heavily invested in most characters, they're watching because they like watching. One of them in particular did try to analyze things that were happening in the show as they happened. However, when it came to the scene late in the series where House threw out Dominika's letter approving her American citizenship, my parents could understand that he was doing that because he didn't want her to leave, but not much beyond that. I ended up explaining to them that House's fake marriage for Dominika was an explicit parallel to when Wilson was living with House in the early seasons. Both situations started with House being none too happy about it but ultimately letting them stay, spending a considerable amount of effort getting them to leave/getting this situation to be finally over so he didn't have to deal with it anymore, and then by the time a piece of news comes through that would mean the person in question actually leaves, House hides this news as long as he can. Because he doesn't actually want them to leave and has grown attached. And by doing this he became a self fulfilling prophecy. By reacting to the truth of Wilson and Dominika leaving him the way he does, he seals his fate and they ultimately leave anyways. Maybe I ship Hilson, but becoming open to how their relationship was handled allowed me to transition to doing character studies and recognizing patterns/parallels that I wouldn't have noticed if I didn't particularly care about the characters or their relationship.

Likewise, I've seen mutuals complain about how people who don't like or don't care about certain characters often overlook these characters (what they're actually like and their place in the narrative), while the mutuals in question (by default) are able to come to deeper understanding of what the writers/story is trying to do because they care about this funky guy

You can't eradicate bias when you're engaging in media analysis, but you can consciously put on a range of lenses and observe the media through different povs with the goal of understanding the media better or bolstering your reading of it. And those lenses/povs can include focusing on specific relationships or the perpective of certain characters

And this is why I say it's actually a mindset problem. Shippers and people who have this one blorbo they like a lot aren't inherently terrible "fandom brained individuals" who are the root of media analysis problems. The problem only arises when people's readings/analysis of a piece of media are inherently restrictive/narrow and self centered. Your problem is with people who view a piece of media through a ship they like but don't keep an open mind about it, and whose "media analysis"/views on canon cannot be split from fanon and their comfortability levels. These are the people whose "media analysis" starts and ends with justifying their fanon as canon, whose views on media revolve around sorting characters and relationships into categories they personally enjoy rather than trying to understand what's going on.

Here's another example.

Here we have a fictional ship we'll call uhhhh...Blanebin. this fictional ship I made up on the spot for characters that don't exist named Blane and Corbin

Person A is super into Blanebin. They're part of the main cast of characters and canonically childhood best friends, so person A (as much as they enjoy fanart and fic) is also enjoying analyzing how narratively important to each other they are. Recently, Corbin started dating another character in canon, but Person A is enjoying watching how Blane is reacting to this. "Is this potentially a tell that Blane is jealous or is having complicated feelings about this? What if he was, how would that contextualize his behavior this season? Here's what I think based on how Blane dealt with explicit jealousy last season in a different situation". It's not impossible that person A is still missing further understanding due to their obsession with Blanebin, but at the end of the day this obsession has allowed them to start picking through the characters both in and outside this relationship. It has allowed them to see potential subtext and theorize on what might happen next with these characters' relationship. Not to mention that with addition of Corbin dating someone else, instead of trying to erase this fact or state that Corbin canonically isn't into that person, Person A is trying to factor in how Corbin's current dating life affects his relationship with Blane (irregardless on personal views on the nature of Corbin's relationship with the person he's dating).

Person B is also super into Blanebin. They really enjoy fanart and fic of the characters, love obsessing over their moments together, and just feel like there's really something between the characters. To person B, every moment between them is just further proof that the writers are ship teasing them. But Corbin getting together with someone else this season? Oh that pissed person B off. They cannot believe that even though Corbin and Blane are CLEARLY gay for each other the writers had Corbin get with someone else this season. Perhaps, they think, it was even a decision specifically made to spite fans. How evil of the writers to tease a perfectly good ship and then have them not get together first? They must have been just doing those teases to get views from Blanebin shippers those scoundrels. To Person B, since Corbin started dating someone when he obviously has some chemistry with Blane (even though the series is far from over) means that Blanebin can never get together now and Corbin x person he's dating is ruining Blanebin by existing. In fact, they think, this is terrible writing for Corbin to be dating someone else because they don't like that relationship and don't see the point. Obviously if the writers were good then Corbin would have started dating Blane instead because this was supposed to be the Blanebin show.

Person C despises Blanebin. Don't get them wrong, they've always enjoyed the character's childhood friendship, but they actually have always thought Blane would have been better off with Victoria. They have a lot of moments too! But they're tired of seeing people ship Blanebin. Corbin just got together with someone else, so obviously that's not gonna work out. Plus Corbin and Blane totally has always given person C bro vibes. In fact, person C thinks, sure Corbin and Blane have a close friendship, but people shouldn't be shipping them. Person C likes Blanetoria and Blanetoria can't be canon if Corbin is in the way of it. So Person C likes to read Blanebin as siblings anyways. Sure they're canonically friends, but obviously their friendship turned into brotherhood. This means that nothing can be in the way of Blanetoria and Corbin can keep dating the person he's already canonically dating. Actually, now Blanebin just straight up makes Person C uncomfortable. Don't the pesky shippers understand that Blanebin are sibling coded because they're childhood best friends and that they're important to each other because they're brothers? It's obvious to anyone with eyes.

Sure, ships are involved here, but is the root of this problem shipping? Character A isn't as knowledgeable of other characters in the plot due to this lens they're using, but at the end of the day they're dedicated to analysis. Their love of the characters is pushing them beyond what they like or dislike to try to understand what might be happening through their lens. Not perfect, but they are slowly broadening their horizons. But Person B and C's problems here are their restrictiveness. What is or should be canon to them is tantamount to what they personally like or find comfortable. Is person C actually analyzing the this fake show when they decide to "read" Blanebin as basically canonically siblings (and this all of their moments are totally a bro thing) just because they don't like Blanebin and the idea of them getting together over Blanetoria makes them uncomfortable? Is person B actually analyzing this fake show when their "analysis" of Blanebin goes only as far as asserting it's being ship teased and deciding anything short of canonizing Blanebin is a targeted attack or "bad writing" because it's not what they wanted personally to happen?

This is what I'm talking about. This is the mindset. Shipping isn't the problem. The problem is when people marry fanon and canon to the point where they have a vested interest in superimposing their fanon over canon as "a reading" and trying to make "collective decisions" on what is canon (or what canon is trying to say) based on what does or doesn't make them uncomfortable. The problem is people being restrictive and centering their own likes and dislikes in the conversation, so they can only interact with canon "analysis" wise by deciding what is canon or should be canon "as obviously agreed on by everyone". You can't simply claim you like media analysis. To be able to analyze media and bolster your views on any given canon, you must be open to looking at it through multiple povs, to studying characters without trying to pretend things you don't like don't exist or do like do exist. There is a balance that must be kept between trying to keep objectivity and putting on specific focus/bias based upon the lenses you're putting on. You have to be willing to try to figure out what a media is doing or saying, not saying you're trying to figure out what it's saying while in actuality trying to define the narrative around what people believe it's saying in ways that suit you.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk.

[canisalbus]

Different Italian anon, but the thing with Tuscan C is that it's pronounced like a very strong H sound, which is extra weird cuz the letter H makes no sound in Italian, normally. It sounds the way Spanish pronounce the J. We say it's "aspirato". So then people from there will say things like Hoha Hola (coca cola), and it's funny. It's also extremely contagious, I got family in Florence, you spend 3 days with them you start doing it too before you even realize.

.

[bookhobbit]

I'm reading Spinning Silver by Naomi Novik and like 40% of it is exquisitely described, phantasmagorical scenery, jewelry, clothes, etc. Terrible book to read if you don't have much of a visual imagination, therefore. I'm sorry, Naomi, this is wasted on me. It must have been so much work to think it up all and create this atmosphere and it's just going in one eyeball and out the other.

[its-me-hals]

"I was ready to take the treasure and go."

"Then why didn't you?"

"Peter cal-.... I have a life here."

yeah man. uh huh. totally normal to (almost) name drop the guy who is the reason you backed out of your plan. and not just say. i realized i have a pretty good thing going here. neal i see you. ive been seeing you. ive read your diary.

[nicorobinphd]

stg, being an enjoyer of jane twdg is like being forced into an expert-level course on the way misogyny manifests in video game spaces.

god forbid a woman be complex or difficult or provably mischaracterized (see tags) at the end of her arc to service the culmination of a man’s storyline.