#this is a societal problem we need to address

[protobrieile]

ooooooo i am feeling particularly riled up about marginalized community infighting today

[chronicbitchsyndrome]

so: masking: good, unequivocally. please mask and please educate others on why they should mask to make the world safer for immune compromised people to participate in.

however: masking is not my policy focus and it shouldn't be yours, either. masking is a very good mitigation against droplet-born illnesses and a slightly less effective (but still very good) mitigation against airborne illnesses, but its place in the pyramid of mitigation demands is pretty low, for several reasons:

it's an individual mitigation, not a systemic one. the best mitigations to make public life more accessible affect everyone without distributing the majority of the effort among individuals (who may not be able to comply, may not have access to education on how to comply, or may be actively malicious).

it's a post-hoc mitigation, or to put it another way, it's a band-aid over the underlying problem. even if it was possible to enforce, universal masking still wouldn't address the underlying problem that it is dangerous for sick people and immune compromised people to be in the same public locations to begin with. this is a solvable problem! we have created the societal conditions for this problem!

here are my policy focuses:

upgraded air filtration and ventilation systems for all public buildings. appropriate ventilation should be just as bog-standard as appropriately clean running water. an indoor venue without a ventilation system capable of performing 5 complete air changes per hour should be like encountering a public restroom without any sinks or hand sanitizer stations whatsoever.

enforced paid sick leave for all employees until 3-5 days without symptoms. the vast majority of respiratory and food-borne illnesses circulate through industry sectors where employees come into work while experiencing symptoms. a taco bell worker should never be making food while experiencing strep throat symptoms, even without a strep diagnosis.

enforced virtual schooling options for sick students. the other vast majority of respiratory and food-borne illnesses circulate through schools. the proximity of so many kids and teenagers together indoors (with little to no proper ventilation and high levels of physical activity) means that if even one person comes to school sick, hundreds will be infected in the following few days. those students will most likely infect their parents as well. allowing students to complete all readings and coursework through sites like blackboard or compass while sick will cut down massively on disease transmission.

accessible testing for everyone. not just for COVID; if there's a test for any contagious illness capable of being performed outside of lab conditions, there should be a regulated option for performing that test at home (similar to COVID rapid tests). if a test can only be performed under lab conditions, there should be a government-subsidized program to provide free of charge testing to anyone who needs it, through urgent cares and pharmacies.

the last thing to note is that these things stack; upgraded ventilation systems in all public buildings mean that students and employees get sick less often to begin with, making it less burdensome for students and employees to be absent due to sickness, and making it more likely that sick individuals will choose to stay home themselves (since it's not so costly for them).

masking is great! keep masking! please use masking as a rhetorical "this is what we can do as individuals to make public life safer while we're pushing for drastic policy changes," and don't get complacent in either direction--don't assume that masking is all you need to do or an acceptable forever-solution, and equally, don't fall prey to thinking that pushing for policy change "makes up" for not masking in public. it's not a game with scores and sides; masking is a material thing you can do to help the individual people you interact with one by one, and policy changes are what's going to make the entirety of public life safer for all immune compromised people.

[wifelinkmtg]

TUMBLR POST EDITOR WON'T LET ME TITLE THIS POST ANYMORE SO I GUESS THIS IS THE TITLE NOW. WEBBED SITE INNIT

So let's say you grew up in the nineties and that The Lion King was an important movie to you. Let's say that the character of Scar - snarling, ambitious, condescending, effeminate Scar - stirred feelings in you which you had no words for as a child. And then let's say, many years later, you're talking about it with a college friend, and you say something like, "oh man, I think Scar was some sort of gay awakening for me," and she fixes you with this level stare and says, "Scar was a fascist. What's the matter with you?"

The immediate feeling is not unlike missing a step: hang on, what's happening, what did I miss? You knew there were goose-stepping hyenas in "Be Prepared," but you didn't think it mattered that much. He's the bad guy, after all, and the movie's just pointing it out. Your friend says it's more than that: the visuals of the song are directly referencing the Nuremberg rallies. They're practically an homage to Riefenstahl. This was your sexual awakening? Is this why you're so into peaked caps and leather, then? Subliminal nazi kink, perhaps?

And then one of your other friends cuts in. "Hold up," he says, "let's think about what Scar actually did in the movie. He organized a group of racialized outcasts and led them against a predatory monarchy. Why are you so keen to defend their hereditary rule? Scar's the good guy here." The conversation immediately descends into a verbal slap fight about who the real bad guy is, whether Scar's regime was actually responsible for the ecological devastation of the Pride Lands, whether the hyenas actually count as "racialized" because James Earl Jones voiced Mufasa after all. Your Catholic friend starts saying some strange and frankly concerning shit about Natural Law. Someone brings The Lion King 2 into it. You leave the conversation feeling a little bit lost and a little bit anxious. What were we even talking about?

INTRODUCING: THE DITCH

There is a way of reading texts which I'm afraid is pervasive, which has as its most classical expression the smug obsession with trivia and minutiae you find in a certain vein of comic book fan. "Who was the first Green Lantern? What was his weakness? Do you even know the Green Lantern Oath?" It eschews the subjective in favor of definitively knowable fact. You can't argue with this guy that, say, Alan Scott shouldn't really count as the first Green Lantern because his whole deal is so radically different from the Hal Jordan/John Stewart/Guy Gardner Corps-era Lanterns, because this guy will simply say "but he's called Green Lantern. Says so right on the cover. Checkmate." This approach to reading a text is fundamentally 1) emotionally detached (there's a reason the joke goes, oh you like X band? name three of their songs - and not, which of their songs means the most to you? which of them came into your life at exactly the right moment to tell you exactly what you needed to hear just then?) and 2) defensive. It's a stance that is designed not to lose arguments. It says so right on the cover. Checkmate.

And then you get the guys who are like "well obviously Bruce Wayne could do far more as a billionaire to solve societal problems by using his tremendous wealth to address systemic issues instead of dressing up as a bat and punching mental patients in the head," and these guys have half a point but they're basically in the same ditch butting heads with the "well, actually" guys, and can we not simply extricate ourselves from the ditch entirely?

So, okay, let's return to our initial example. Scar is portrayed using Nazi iconography - the goose-stepping, the monumentality, the Nuremberg Lichtdom. He is also flamboyant and effete. He unifies and leads a group of downtrodden exiles to overthrow an absolute monarch. He's also a self-serving despot on whose rule Heaven Itself turns its back. You can't reconcile these things from within the ditch - or if you can, the attempt is likely to be ad-hoc supposition and duct tape.

Instead, let's ask ourselves what perspective The Lion King is coming from. What does it say is true about the world? What are its precepts, its axioms?

There is a natural hierarchical order to the world. This is just and righteous and the way of things, and attempts to overthrow this order will be punished severely by the world itself.

Fascism is what happens when evil men attempt to usurp this natural order with the aid of a group or groups of people who refuse to accept their place in the order.

There exists an alternative to defending and adhering to one's place in the natural order - it consists only of selfish spineless apathy.

Manliness is an essential quality of a just ruler. Unmanliness renders a person unfit for rule, and often resentful and dangerous as well.

And isn't that interesting, laid out like that? It renders the entire argument about the movie irrelevant (except for whatever your Catholic friend was on about, since his understanding of the world seems to line up with the above precepts weirdly well.) It's meaningless to argue about whether Scar was a secret hero or a fascist, when the movie doesn't understand fascism and has a damn-near alien view of what good and evil are.

There's always gonna be someone who, having read this far, wants to reply, "so, what? The Lion King is a bad movie and the people who made it were homophobes and also American monarchists, somehow? And anyone who likes it is also some sort of gay-bashing crypto-authoritarian?" To which I have to reply, man, c'mon, get out of the ditch. You're no good to anyone in there. Take my hand. I'm going to pull on three. One... two...

SO PHYREXIA [PAUSE FOR APPLAUSE, GROANS]

We're talking about everyone's favorite ichor-drooling surgery monsters again because there was a bit in my ~*~seminal~*~ essay Transformation, Horror, Eros, Phyrexia which seemed to give a number of readers quite a bit of trouble: namely, the idea that while Phyrexia is textually fascist, their aesthetic is incompatible with real-world fascism, and further, that this aesthetic incompatibility in some way outweighs the ways in which they act like a fascist nation in terms of how we think of them. I'll take responsibility here: I don't think that point is at all clear or well-argued in that essay. What I was trying to articulate was that the text of Magic: the Gathering very much wants Phyrexia to be supremely evil and dangerous fascists, because that makes for effective antagonists, but in the process of constructing that, it's accidentally encoded a whole bunch of fascinating presuppositions that end up working at cross-purposes with its apparent aim. That's... not that much clearer, is it? Hmm. Why don't I just show you what I mean?

Atraxa, Grand Unifier (art by Marta Nael)

In "Beneath Eyes Unblinking," one of the March of the Machine stories by K. Arsenault Rivera, there's a fascinating and I think revealing passage in which Atraxa (big-deal Phyrexianized angel and Elesh Norn's lieutenant) has a run-in with an art museum in New Capenna. The first thing I want to talk about is that, in this passage, Atraxa has no understanding of the concept of "beauty". A great deal of space in such a rushed storyline is devoted to her trying to puzzle out what beauty means and interrogating the minds of her recently-compleated Capennan aesthetes to try and understand it. In the end, she is unable to conceive of beauty except as "wrongness," as anathema.

So my first question is, why doesn't Atraxa have any idea of beauty? This is nonsense, right? We could point to a previous story, "A Garden of Flesh," by Lora Gray, in which Elesh Norn explicitly thinks in terms of beauty, but that's a little bit ditchbound, isn't it? The better argument is to simply look at Phyrexian bodies, at the Phyrexian landscape, all of which looks the way it does on purpose, all of which has been shaped in accordance with the very real aesthetic preferences of Phyrexians. How you could look at the Fair Basilica and not understand that Phyrexians most definitely have an idea of beauty, even if you personally disagree with it, is baffling. This is a lot like the canonical assertion that Phyrexians lack souls, which is both contradicted elsewhere in canon and essentially meaningless, given Magic's unwillingness or inability to articulate what a soul is in its setting, and as with this, it seems the goal is simply to dehumanize Phyrexians, to render them alien, even at the cost of incoherence or internal contradiction.

Atraxa's progress through the museum is fascinating. It evokes the 1937 Nazi exhibit on "degenerate art" in Munich, but not at all cleanly. The first exhibit, which is of representational art, she angrily destroys for being too individualistic (a point of dissonance with the European fascist movements of the 20th century, which formed in direct antagonism to communism.) The second exhibit, filled with abstract paintings and sculptures, she destroys even more angrily for having no conceivable use (this is much more in line with the Nazi idea of "degenerate art", so well done there.) The third exhibit is filled with war trophies and reconstructions from a failed Phyrexian invasion of Capenna many years prior, which she is angriest of all with (and fair enough, I suppose.) But then, after she's done completely trashing the place, she spots a number of angel statues on the cathedral across the plaza, and she goes apeshit. In a fugue of white-hot rage, she pulverizes the angel heads, and here is where I have to ask my second question:

Why angels? If you are trying to invoke fascist attitudes toward art, big statues of angels are precisely the wrong thing for your fascist analogues to hate. Fascists love monumental, heroic representations of superhuman perfection. It's practically their whole aesthetic deal. I understand that we're foreshadowing the imminent defeat of Phyrexia at the hands of legions of angels and a multiversal proliferation of angel juice, but that just leads to the exact same question: why angels? To the best of my knowledge, the Phyrexian weakness to New Capennan angel juice is something invented for this storyline. They have, after all, been happily compleating angels since 1997. We could talk about the in-universe justification for why Halo specifically is so potent, but I don't remember what that justification is, and also don't care. Let's not jump back in the ditch, please. The point is, someone decided that this time, Phyrexia would be defeated by an angelic host, and what does that mean? What is the text trying to say? What are its precepts and axioms?

Let me ask you a question: how many physically disabled angels are there in Magic: the Gathering? How about transsexual angels? How many angels are there, on all of the cards that have ever been printed for Magic: the Gathering, that are even just a bit ugly? Do you get it yet? Or do you need me to spell it out for you?

SPELLING IT OUT FOR YOU

There is a kind of body which is bad. It is bad because it has been significantly altered from its natural state, and it is bad because it is repellent to our aesthetic sensibilities.

The bad kind of body is contagious. It spreads through contact. Sometimes people we love are infected, and then they become the bad kind of body too.

There is a kind of body which is good. It is good because it is pleasing to our aesthetic sensibilities, and it is good because it is unaltered from its (super)natural state.

A happy ending is when all the good bodies destroy or drive into hiding all of the bad bodies. A happy ending is when the bad bodies of the people we love are forcibly returned to being the good kind of body.

Do you get it now?

ENDNOTES

It's worth noting that the ditch is very similar to the white American Evangelical hermeneutics of "the Bible says it. I believe it. That settles it," the defensive chapter-and-verse-or-it-didn't-happen approach to reading a text, what Fred Clark of slacktivist calls "concordance-ism". I don't think that's accidental. We stand underneath centuries of people reading the Bible very poorly - how could that not affect how we read things today? We are participants in history whether we like it or not.

I sincerely hope I haven't come across as condescending in this essay. Close reading is legitimately difficult! They teach college courses on this stuff! And while it is frustrating to have my close readings interrogated by people who... aren't doing that, like. I do get it. I find myself back in the ditch all the time. This stuff is hard. It is also, sorry, crucial if you intend to say something about a text that's worth saying.

I also hope I've communicated clearly here. Magic story is sufficiently incoherent that trying to develop a thesis about it often feels like trying to nail jello to the wall. If anyone has questions, please ask them! And thank you for reading. Next time, we'll probably do the new Eldraine set.

[ohnoitstbskyen]

Jokes aside, it's legitimately sad how many people can't comprehend that love isn't strictly "romantic" and thinking you can't be in love with someone AND be friends with them at the same time. I'm ace myself, and I never realized how much of a wide-scale problem this was until I came to terms with my lack of interest in sex. IDK if this is a societal problem, a fandom problem, or a people in general problem, but it definitely needs more addressing, and I'm glad to see you come at it with such ferocity. 🫡

Things must be either the One Thing or the Other Thing. They cannot be things that aren't one of those two things.

If something isn't the One Thing, then by the transitive property it MUST be the Other Thing, and if something has properties of both the One Thing and the Other Thing, then we need to have a fight over which of the two things it REALLY is, so we can discard the bits of it that aren't the thing we've decided it is.

Most importantly, if you are or identify with the One Thing or the Other Thing? The thing you like MUST be like the thing you like it to be, or else it is being violently denied to you, ripped away by the cruel forces of the thing which isn't the thing you like, whose vile dominion must be resisted as a matter of moral courage and justice.

Deceitful voices will tell you that the thing can be both the One Thing and the Other Thing at the same time. Wormtongues will slip poison into your ear that some things aren't either of the two things which we've decided are the things that something can be. Resist them! Things can be only one of two things, and it is vitally important that you lash out with spite and anger to ensure that these categories are preserved and enforced.

[beemovieerotica]

sorry to start discourse again but I'm going to keep making the comparison between maleness and whiteness when other transmascs try to genuinely argue that they're being discriminated against because they're male, until it sinks in

conversation that just happened: guy acknowledged that society is set up to let men succeed, and minorities are upset about this. sometimes they direct their frustration at individual men for being complicit in the system. guy argues that this is something that needs to be addressed and we need to fight back against anti-male hatred.

conversation that is also happening amongst white people: society is set up to let white people succeed, and minorities are upset about this. sometimes they direct their frustration at individual white people for being complicit in the system. white people also argue that "hatred toward white people" is a substantial problem that needs to be addressed.

what's the difference? both are reactions to immense structural power, and the perceived aggressors are acting on isolated impulse without societal support. they face consequences for challenging someone who has maleness / whiteness on their side and are fighting upward against embedded cultural pressures. for all intents and purposes, the hatred is occurring in smaller communities outside the mainstream, where those expressing animosity do not determine the material conditions of the recipient, e.g. access to housing, job opportunities, etc.

there are intersections with each of these identities that will alter the circumstances, but with all other things being equal, two people expressing animosity toward each other who differ on one of these axes will experience the asymmetry of societal / institutional power. society will favor a white able bodied trans man over a white able bodied trans woman. society will favor a white nonbinary autistic person over a brown nonbinary autistic person. you can qualify your specific experience with other facets of your identity but you cannot outright negate the benefits ascribed to you by maleness and/or whiteness, no matter the level of attachment you feel toward that label.

does it suck to have people dislike you? sure does. does it suck to have people assume you're part of the problem when you're doing your best not to? of course. does this warrant a response on the level of "I'm facing *discrimination* for being white/male"? no, and I'm sorry that people in your community are being rude. but you need to understand that using terms that allude to widescale inequalities for something that is happening to you on an interpersonal level is at best naive, and at worst minimizing the constant struggle that other marginalized people go through on the other side of the axis - and someone's occasional lapse in composure when they say something harsh to you in response to their daily confrontation with mind-numbing bigotry is not the point.

this equally goes for measures meant to correct for historical institutional & social inequalities: if you are genuinely looking at support services and opportunities for women and thinking that it's a point of discrimination that you're not allowed to access these now that you're a man, please also consider the majority opinion in this country where white people believe that colleges reserving spots for black people is unfairly discriminating against them. the reactions to institutional inequalities, and the efforts to re-balance the scales, are not themselves discrimination warranting your contempt.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Oct 14, 2024

It was hardly a plague of locusts, but it was disruptive nonetheless. During the annual LGB Alliance conference at the Queen Elizabeth II centre in Westminster on Friday afternoon, teenage activists unleashed thousands of crickets into the auditorium. The inconvenience was only temporary. The crowd simply relocated to another room and the event went on as before.

As those responsible were apprehended, many people were struck by just how young and posh they were. By this point, it should surprise precisely no-one that anti-gay activism in its current form is a predominately bourgeois pursuit. The symbolism of the crickets was, of course, deliberate. It was an attempt to dehumanise those in attendance, to suggest that they were akin to parasites, vermin, spreaders of disease, a common trope of those who seek to demonise minorities.

The perpetrators were children, and so it would be unwise to speculate too much on their motives. It is likely they were being manipulated by the group that has claimed responsibility, calling itself “Trans Kids Deserve Better”. As Bev Jackson, co-founder of LGB Alliance said on my show last night:

“Trans kids do deserve better. They deserve better than to be told lies that that they might have been born in the wrong body. They deserve better than to be told that these hormones and surgeries that they are clambering for will somehow solve all their problems. Many are on the autism spectrum. Many are struggling with their sexual orientation. We know that. They deserve better than to be told that we hate them. And they deserve better than to be labelled trans when they’re going through all the turbulence of adolescence, when your feelings about yourself are in constant flux.”

Irrespective of the intentions of the teenagers involved, this was anti-gay activism. To attack a group of lesbian, gay and bisexual people who have assembled to discuss the ongoing threats to their civil rights could hardly be defined in any other way. Likewise, to refer to groups such as LGB Alliance as “anti-trans”, “transphobic” or “hateful” - as activist media outlets such as the Metro and the Guardian have been known to do - is also an anti-gay strategy. In order to address a problem, one needs to label it accurately.

Gender identity ideologues are, by definition, anti-gay. They are campaigning to force their pseudo-religious belief-system onto the rest of society, one that claims that same-sex attraction is a myth, and that a mysterious spiritual sense of “gender” is the defining feature of homosexuality. Even if they have convinced themselves that they are “pro-trans” and “compassionate” and “progressive”, the implementation of their demands would result directly in the demolition of gay rights. And so “anti-gay activism” is not only an accurate description, it also cuts to the heart of what is at stake.

The trans activist movement in its current form is dominated by this belief in a material and stable “gender identity”, what one trans campaigner explained to me as an “essence of male or female”. This is a departure from the theories of Judith Butler, who posits that “gender identity” is an illusion created performatively and repetitively in accordance with societal expectations. For all their deification of Butler, the trans rights movement is insistent that she is wrong on this key point, and that an individual is “born trans” when there is a misalignment of body and “sexed soul” (to borrow Helen Joyce’s phrase).  

This belief is wholly incompatible with the struggle for gay rights, which has always been predicated on the notion that there exist a minority of people who are innately attracted to their own sex. Activist groups such as Stonewall now argue that “homosexuality” is based on gender rather than sex, meaning that it is possible for a man to be a lesbian. He may have been born male (or “assigned male at birth” to borrow the voguish parlance), but his “gender identity” is female and this should be the salient factor when it comes to sexual orientation.

It is no easy feat to explain the contortions of logic on display here. Lesbian dating apps are now replete with men who claim to be women, many fully bearded and bepenised. Likewise, sex clubs for gay men now routinely admit women who have had their breasts removed and believe themselves to be male. The gay male hookup app Grindr even prohibits its users from filtering out women. As the company’s website puts it:

“When designing gender settings on Grindr, it was important to us to not further perpetuate discrimination and harm for the trans and nonbinary community. For this reason, we allow filtering based on gender - you can specify that you want to see men or women - but this will include all men or all women, because trans men are men and trans women are women.”

In other words, a company that has made a fortune from gay men’s sexuality is now shaming its customers for being gay.

The situation is so confusing that we now have mainstream celebrities such as Billy Bragg effectively campaigning against gay rights without realising it. He is not homophobic (as far as I’m aware) and yet he is assiduously promoting a movement whose end goal is the eradication of homosexuality. Bragg’s 1991 song Sexuality included the lyric: “Just because you’re gay, I won’t turn you away”. Perhaps a more appropriate version would be: “Just because you’re gay, I’ll have you surgically corrected in order to better conform to heterosexual paradigms”, although it wouldn’t scan or rhyme.

This is why to grow up gay in 2024 is considerably more risky than during the time of Section 28 in the 1980s. We have gay conversion therapy being promoted by the NHS in the form of “gender-affirming care”, and children who are gender non-conforming (and therefore statistically far more likely to be homosexual in later life) are being medicalised and shamed for their orientation. Moreover, the very organisations that were originally established to fight for gay rights are now actively working against the interests of gay people.

To release bags of insects into a gathering of homosexuals is the kind of tactic we might once have seen from neo-Nazis and extreme religious fundamentalists. Just because those responsible now claim to be “on the right side of history” does not justify their behaviour or make them any less regressive. These are the new reactionaries, espousing a particularly toxic form of anti-gay ideology because it has the approval of the corporate, media, political and managerial class. Homophobia never went away, it just took on a fresh disguise.

==

[ Source. ]

Gay men are not allowed to filter out women from their dating pool.

[ventique18]

Twst's writing is so good actually because instead of setting up some big bad evil god as a common enemy for conflict, they actually tackle real life problems and integrate it into character development. It tackles interpersonal and societal issues like abuse, bullying, ostracization, slavery, poverty, the effects of conquest and also intrapersonal things like insecurity and depression and grief and desperation. They're never explicitly labeled that way, but we as readers know they're there.

Although it's not an exact reflection of our real world, it scales these problems into digestible bits that encourage deep reflection. That these conflicts are indeed a problem that needs to be addressed. That nobody deserves to go through them, yet it's not so easy to pull someone out of them. That people try to recover but frequently regress. The world is not made of rainbows and roses and twst doesn't shy away from that.

I really love how they set up convincing conflicts. They're not just some entitled kids with made up problems in their heads; they are people caught up in realistic problems that they have little to no control over. They have issues and they're often insufferable-- but it's believable why turned up that way. The narrative also emphasizes that hardships aren't an excuse to be a terrible person, so the characters actually try to change for the better; as difficult as it is to do so.

[persephone-s-moon]

Yap sesh because I believe The Lost Boys NEEDED to die

I totally understand where some of y'all are coming from when you say that The Lost Boys shouldn't have died or they should have gotten a better ending, but that's kind of the whole point.

Their deaths were pointless. It didn't do anything, it didn't help anyone, it was meaningless, and that's why it happened.

I've talked a lot about The Lost Boys (1987) and how it relates to queerness, but as a refresher: it was directed by a gay man and came out during the height of the AIDS epidemic when queer people were left to die because they defied societal norms.

AIDS was medically recognized in 1981, but because it was primarily affecting queer people (sometimes referred to as "the gay plague"), it was left completely unacknowledged by the Reagan Administration until it took the life of Reagan's friend, the famous American actor Rock Hudson, in 1985. It still wasn't until 1987 that the epidemic was addressed because, as Reagan stated, "maybe the Lord brought down this plague."

(I fully believe that The Lost Boys (1987) is a criticism of the Reagan Administration, both their response to the AIDS epidemic and the ideal of the perfect nuclear family, and I WILL write an essay if prompted, but that is completely beside the point.)

Leaving queer people to die didn't get rid of AIDS or solve any of the world's problems because we were never the source of the problems. It was pointless, and that's part of why The Lost Boys also had to die. Because it solved nothing. Because we died, and we put ourselves in our art to highlight the injustice of it.

While I'm very pleased that we want justice for imperfect victims (because let's face it, The Lost Boys were NOT good people), I think that we should still recognize that the same message wouldn't have been conveyed narratively had they lived: we died and it was pointless, so take out the old man in charge to start fixing shit.

[moghedien]

lae'zel, permission, and what she actually wants

the thing about Lae'zel is that she's always looking to someone to give her permission

basically her entire life up until the beginning of the game has been a fight to be allowed to live. she has to prove she's better than her peers. she has to prove that she's worthy of fighting for Vlaakith. hell, even when she was an egg, she would have had to prove she was worthy of hatching because if she'd been a bit late she wouldn't have even been allowed a chance.

she doesn't really do anything unless its what her goddess and her society allows and she'll do exactly what is prescribed. she bristles at any attempts to find a cure for the tadpoles that aren't going to the creche because that is what she is supposed to do as a good githyanki. anything else is a deviation from what is allowed, even if it might work.

so you look at her romance through that lens, it really sort of pulls everything together.

In the act one scene, she's still following the rules like a good devoted of Vlaakith. She will sleep with you one or two times if you ask her to, but will bristle at anything more than that. She's a totally typical normal githyanki after all (she isn't), and it isn't normal for githyanki to have any kind of serious romantic relationships. "love" isn't even a real thing, and is just a strange mental illness that cowards use as an excuse (all of these are things she actually believes at the beginning of the game based on various bits of banter and dialogue where she's reflecting retroactively on her previous beliefs). Straight up, anything beyond casual sex is not allowed, so she doesn't even question it as an option.

Then by the time you get to the Act 2 romance scene, Lae'zel's entire world has been upturned for unrelated reasons. She did everything as she was supposed to and nothing she wasn't and Vlaaktih betrayed her. Her entire culture and society betrayed her despite her never doing anything without their permission.

It seems like she is somewhat quick to accept that and switch her allegiance. Her entire existence was because Vlaakith gave her permission to exist, and then Vlaakith betrayed her no matter how devoted she was. So Vlaakith is a liar and she learns that Orpheus is a possible answer to solve the Vlaakith problem, so now she's committed to Orpheus.

It seems like a quick turn, but if you look at Lae'zel as someone who needs permission, then it makes more sense. Vlaakith can't give her that anymore, so she needs someone else to tell her how to live, so that becomes Orpheus, who of course conveniently isn't there to actually tell her to do anything. So she does as Voss says to try to save him and that becomes her entire life motivation. Because what else can she possibly do? She needs someone's permission to decide how to move on now.

By the time you get the Act 2 romance scene, Lae'zel is on this path, right? If you look at the actual Act 2 romance scene, its basically her asking for permission again. Not in the way you'd immediately expect, because while she is asking like, your permission to develop your relationship into something further, its not just you she needs permission from. She needs her societal expectations to give both of you permission.

To elaborate, you're a fucking wrench in all her expectations of what is right. You were supposed to be a one or two night casual fuck, and then she went and got fixated with you. She calls it an obsession. She says its bothering her more than Vlaakith's betrayal, more than her people hunting her, more than the worm in her head. Those are all problems that she has some instruction on how to address. You, she has no fucking clue what to do about. Rebel githyanki aren't exactly giving instructions on how to pursue romantic relationships with people while planning on how to take down Vlaakith. Even if they are more lenient and accepting of those kinds of attachments (which we have no idea if they are or not), she hasn't been around any of them long enough to figure that out.

In her feelings for you, she's confronted with feelings that to her culture are perverse and which she has no societal context for. Even if there was someone who might give her the go ahead to pursue that relationship, she has no idea who they might be. She's someone who's entire life has revolved around what she has permission to do within her society, and she finds herself drawn to do something that she has no way of even figuring out how to approach in an acceptable way.

And despite all of that, and all the complications around what asking more from you would mean from a githyanki standpoint, she still gets to a point where she wakes you up in the middle of the night and begs you to do something about it.

She's frantic and confused and its clear she doesn't even really know what she wants from you, so she asks you to prove yourself and fight her. Its not because she thinks you're too weak for her. She admits she finds you strong the first time she comes onto you. Alternatively, she basically negs you after having sex with her by calling you weak and a coward and she is more than pleased to have sex with you again after doing so. Strength or weakness has nothing to do with why she needs you to fight her.

She needs you to fight her because that's how she's always had to prove herself worthy of existence. Her entire life has been a series of peers and comrades she had to fight in order to prove that she could go on. So when she doesn't know what else to do about you and there's nothing else to tell her how to proceed, she needs you to fight and prove that you (and her) can go on.

But the thing about the duel you have, is that the outcome doesn't actually matter. Regardless, it does give her what she needs to know to go on your relationship, but not in any ways she expected. Regardless if you win or she does, she gets overwhelmed and realizes that she wants you and she wants you to want her. Something definitely starts to shift in her mindset after the fight.

If you win, she's alarmed by the contradiction that she should feel ashamed for having lost. If you lose, she's alarmed by the contradiction of feeling no joy in having beaten you. She realizes that she doesn't want to be doing the thing she's supposed to do (fight to prove her worth) and instead wants to protect you. She also says that she wants you to protect her, which is something that she only says if you lose the fight, which I think is notable and makes the shift a bit more obvious.

Because she only says it if you lose. You lost. You just showed you were weaker than her. And she still wants you to protect her. By all githyanki standards, you shouldn't even be worthy of living if you couldn't win the fight, but she not only doesn't want to see you hurt, but she wants you to see that she doesn't get hurt. Not only should this not make sense because you lost, but it is maybe the first time Lae'zel has admitted she doesn't want to have to rely only on her own strength. She wants to rely on you, even if you're weaker and couldn't beat her in a fight. That challenges everything she has ever believed in her life probably as much as being betrayed by Vlaakith did.

If you win the fight, she doesn't admit that, but I think the sentiment is still there. It just isn't something that she has to directly confront in the moment because you proved that you can protect her. In that instance, she's coming to terms more with the fact that she should feel weaker or ashamed but isn't. In either instance, she was asking for permission from her ideals on how to deal with the You problem. In either instance, she's confronted with something that challenges that. Either you fail to meet the expectations she thought she had, and she finds out she doesn't care, or she fails to meet the expectations of a githyanki soldier and she finds out she doesn't care. Because either way, she figures out she wants you more than she wants to be the good githyanki that does what she's supposed to and act like she's supposed to act. Being "obsessed" with you should be perverse and wrong, but she embraces it whether she has permission (from her society) to do so or not. That is an extremely big deal.

And even before we get into Act 3, there are some interesting beats here about Lae'zel's romance in Act 2 still. One of the two things I want to discuss is the kissing. After the main Act 2 romance scene, you get new dialogue options, including asking her to kiss you.

This is kinda where we get into my opinions on the best choices to make with her romance, and I'm aware that these are my opinions and people deciding to do other things isn't incorrect. I'm pointing this out because I'm gonna start talking a lot about choices soon and which ones I think are the best thematically and from a character standpoint. They are my opinions. You are allowed to disagree. I will however be defending and arguing my opinions here. You don't have to get angry or defensive if you did something else or don't agree with my conclusions.

Now, back to kissing Lae'zel. The notable thing about asking Lae'zel to kiss you is that her initial reaction is embarrassment. It's somewhat of a turn from how she is open about talking about your sexual encounters before this. The entire fight scene, which may have ended up with the two of you making out in the middle of camp until it faded to black, was seemingly in front of everyone and she had no concern about that.

Kissing just out of the blue though? She's shy about that.

Because just kissing for no reason is soft and pointless, really (and if you watch the Lae'zel kissing animations, they are all in fact very soft and sweet). You don't really need to do it. Before hand with the sex and whatnot, she fully has arguments about why that was ok and even beneficial for the overall task at hand. Soft little kissing though? There's no reason to do that unless she wants to. Hence her embarrassment.

Now, she won't kiss you in Act 2 when you ask because of her embarrassment. Not unless you persuade her to do it. You only have to persuade her once and if you succeed, the first time she is clearly nervous and looks around uncomfortably. In all honesty, it seems somewhat uncomfortable to persuade her especially given her initial reaction. I do, however, think its the best thing to do for her.

Yes, she's uncomfortable. She's uncomfortable with your entire relationship now because she's has no experience even knowing about a situation like this and from a githyanki standpoint, affectionately kissing in public for no reason is basically outing yourselves as being perverts. She also very, very clearly wants it. The way you persuade her, is by pointing out that she probably wants this. And if you succeed in pointing that out to her, she is smiling and afterward when you ask her to kiss she is clearly happy and very soft about it all.

If you don't persuade her, I believe you can still kiss her without the check if you wait until after the Act 3 scene, so she is clearly comfortable with it at some point. Persuading her might seem like you're pushing her past her comfort zone. That's honestly why I didn't do it for a while. But looking at how she reacts after the fact and what happens after, I do feel like its not so much pushing her out of her comfort zone. Its more challenging her to push against her initial ideas of what she thinks she should do and instead encouraging her to do what she wants. More on that later.

The other romance beat that happens in Act 2 occurs some time after the main scene in camp, when she get about as vulnerable as she's been yet. She asks you for softness. She wants to be with you and she doesn't want the rough, passionate, hedonistic type of night that has been all of your relationship up until this point. She asks for gentleness, softness, and she's terrified. She says outright that its terrifying for her to ask this and she's been working up the courage to do so.

This is meaningful in multiple ways, because its not only a sign that your physical relationship is becoming something more than just sex. Its a sign of how much Lae'zel has changed. Because Lae'zel is someone who needs permission in everything. Up until this point, we haven't seen her ask for permission, she simply waited for her betters to give it to her and denied herself if they didn't. When it was someone who isn't above her, she makes demands. She doesn't ask permission. Ever. Now she outright asking you for permission to be gentle and soft. She didn't just need to build up the courage to be soft. She needed to build up the courage to ask to be allowed something she wanted.

As I stated before, I think Lae'zel's instinct is to not take into account what she actually wants, but to just go ahead with whatever she thinks she's supposed to do. That's how she was raised and indoctrinated after all. Gently pushing against her first reactions to things allows her a chance to push against that instinct of behaving how she was indoctrinated to behave. I think her asking for a softer touch is a sign of this changing for her. The Act 3 scene is even more so.

The Act 3 romance scene is sort of the height of Lae'zel's character growth. One thing that makes me sort of sad is that I feel like you don't really get to see the fullness of her character unless you romance her. That's true with other characters I've romanced so far to some extent, but not as much as with Lae'zel.

But here you romanced Lae'zel, so you get to see her admitting how much her perceptions have changed because of you helping her see things differently. She has different perspectives and she finds beauty and bliss in things she used to find dread in. She loathed the sun, and now drags you to a roof top just to stare at it coming over the horizon (please don't stare into the sun). She finds herself liking Faerun and the colors in it. She admits all of this before she brings up what she actually wanted to talk to you about.

Lae'zel has no terms in which to describe your relationship. She doesn't know about dating (or courting) or marriage and she doesn't actually even know what the word love means. She doesn't ever say the word until six months later in the epilogue, but what she's describing to you on how she feels is without a doubt love and what she's asking of you is more or less marriage. She doesn't have the terms or any cultural context to make it easier to ask, but she wants you to stay with her, whatever happens. That's the only way she can really describe it. Staying with her. Because even if you've only actually known each other a short time, you might be the most constant thing she's ever had in her life, and she's probably terrified of what it means when the Absolute is dealt with and there is no mission keeping you together. She isn't asking for permission now to stay with you, but is asking for you to stay with her. Where you might be and doing what, who knows, but she is for the first time just pursuing something she wants that she hasn't been given explicit permission for beforehand.

And then, we get to saving Orpheus.

This is where my thoughts might get controversial, but as I said, you're free to disagree but I'm arguing for my ideas here.

I'm not sure how any of this changes if you go a different route in the final parts of the game, so I can really only speak on the options you get if you saved Orpheus and he became Illithid.

So you do the thing that Lae'zel has been lead to believe she needs to do and free Orpheus. I personally cannot blame the man's attitude given his being imprisoned for who the fuck knows how long and the fact that he is still willing to sacrifice himself. However, it is clear that he is perhaps not quite as understanding as Voss lead you to believe he would be. Given that he tells you that you should have let his guard kill you if you were actually on the same side as him, which notably would have doomed everyone and lead to the Absolute's victory. But again, centuries of imprisonment, we cannot blame the guy.

The point I want to make with bringing that up at all, is that, even in these little bits of conflict that don't really amount to anything in game, its a crack in the ideal of Orpheus. He isn't every grand thing that Voss promised you and Lae'zel he would be. He's not bad here and gives us no reason to think he is, but its a crack. Lae'zel didn't have any reason to doubt Vlaakith or see her imperfections until it was too late, after all. I'm not saying the two are equals, but Lae'zel went from worshipping an evil false-goddess to holding up that goddess's enemy in similar reverence in a shockingly short amount of time. The girl jumped from a cult that worshipped one powerful figure to a radical rebel movement that held up another. And we immediately see little tiny cracks in the facade of Orpheus.

Lae'zel won't. Lae'zel doesn't know how to be anything but utterly devoted to the highest figure of authority she sees as worthy to follow. Lae'zel won't know to be wary. But you should be wary as fuck about what Orpheus is going to ask of her.

Cut to the end. We win, the absolute is defeated, yay! Mind Flayer Orpheus is asking Lae'zel to kill him and take up his mantle and lead his rebellion against Vlaakith.

In that moment, you have really two options. Technically there are multiple dialogue options, but really there are two. You can let her go (and potentially go with her) or you can persuade her to stay. If you tell her to do what she wants, she and you will leave on dragons to fight the rebellion against Vlaakith.

I do not think this is what Lae'zel wants.

When Orpheus is giving her this duty, she doesn't look happy about it. She just finished the single most traumatic event of her life, which turned everything upside down and completely shook who she is as a person. Now she is being handed what she had said she wanted. The means to free her people and defeat Vlaakith. She has a silver sword. She's being given not one, but two red dragons. And she just looks fucking sad. She looks exhausted as Orpheus is commanding her to do this.

She is someone who has never lived a life where she was able to want her own goals or life. She was Vlaakith's. Now she's being ordered to carry Orpheus's legacy. And I do believe she wants to stop Vlaakith and save her people from her control. But she is being given all of the burden of doing so and commanded to begin immediately upon completing her previous ordeal.

Lae'zel has been following orders her entire life. She isn't one to even consider what she actually wants and instead does what she thinks she's supposed to do. So when Orpheus tells her to do this, she is going to obey the authority figure like she was been indoctrinated into doing. When you ask her what she wants, she will say you're coming with her because she's at least broken away enough to do that but not to consider that she doesn't want to go.

Gently pushing against Lae'zel's immediate reactions, as I said, is I think the way to get her honest, genuine desires. If you persuade her to stay and disobey Orpheus, she does seem suddenly energized. She will then say that her destiny is not for Vlaakith or Orpheus to decree. Her destiny is hers alone. Neither Vlaakith nor Orpheus will give her permission to do that, but you can. She doesn't obey you. You aren't an authority figure and you have probably shown yourself to be weaker than her at several points in the game. But you still give her permission to choose her life and she accepts that.

And this, is how you break the Lae'zel out of the cycle that she finds herself. in. The only way she isn't perpetually bowing down to some authority figure is if she stays in Faerun. Because she escaped the authority of Vlaakith and immediately went to Orpheus, who now she can't even escape because he's dead and she is the one holding up his legacy on his behalf. She can't choose to leave once she's accepted that responsibility, and she frankly does not look like she wants to accept that responsibility.

If she stays on Faerun, she is still fighting Vlaakith. Not only because she is literally hunting down and murdering Vlaakith's forces, but she's living completely free of Vlaakith's influence in a way she couldn't otherwise. She isn't living under Vlaakith's rules, nor having to live in direct antagonism to Vlaakith's rules by forming a new society from scratch for the githyanki. She's just living. Occasionally going and massacring Vlaakith's soldiers as a means of survival, but otherwise just living how she wants and with who she wants. And in theory, she could go and join the rebellion proper any time in the future. If she stays, her future isn't certain, and that, I think, is the best thing for her.

In the epilogue, if you are with her on Faerun, its clear she doesn't really let herself rest still. She busies herself (and you) by tracking down Vlaakith's forces to eradicate, and she tells you of another one she found, noting that she can't rest for long. You have the option to push against this gently, suggesting taking some time off. No persuasion needed. She not only agrees to take some time off, but she immediately has a vacation suggestion which she has clearly been looking into and is excited to check out. But Lae'zel is not someone who is going to consider what she actually wants. She's going to suggest what she thinks she should be doing, but with some gentle push back, will let you know what she actually wants.

Because you're not really rejecting her ideas when you push against the instincts that have been indoctrinated into her. You're giving her permission to decide what she wants to do, and Lae'zel is always someone looking for permission.

[ihateliterature]

Not many people know what amatonormativity is and I think that's a shame because it's a very useful concept to keep in mind

So let's do a crash course

What is amatonormativity?

A term coined by Elisabeth Brake in 2011 in her book Minimizing Marriage: Marriage, Morality, and the Law, used to explain the societal assumption that all people seek romantic relationships in the form of long term monogamous relationships. Easy, right? No

Nothing in life is so easy, especially not something like an idea taken as absolute truth by most people for as long as we can remember

Let's take it from the top

Amatonormativity intersects with cisnormativity, heteronormativity and patriarchal gender norms. What amatonormativity tells us is that EVERYONE wants and needs a committed heterosexual monogamous romantic relationship that usually ends in children. The American 50's ideal is a good example of that

The reason why the other terms I mentioned are not enough to talk about these issues is that they don't target specifically the nature of relationships under patriarchy. They are obviously talked about (especially in discussions about gender norms) but they are not the focus. There is also the problem that many don't recognize the insistence of love as a measure for one's humanity as a problem at all

We live in a world where love is considered to be the very proof of humanity. This is obviously a problem because there is no universally accepted definition of love outside amatonormativity, which claims that only romantic and familial love exist. There is no acknowledgement of alternative ways to love or of humanity existing apart from this concept

What is love? This is what I want to ask you, and I want everyone to think seriously about this question. Is it the idea of a soulmate, of finding your "other half"? Because then comes the 'why?'. Why should anyone find their 'other half'? Why can't people be whole on their own? Is there any weight to this idea at all?

But wait! Some will say! That's not all there is to love. Love is the affection and care you hold for other people. And that is a fair answer. But now I want to ask you, why should that be the measure for someone's humanity?

This conversation goes in circles. Philosophers have tried to find a way to define humanity since Ancient Greece and probably longer, and I'm not here to attempt to answer this question

But there is another question I can answer: why is it important? Why is amatonormativity and being aware of it important? Several reasons. Not only does it affect the lives of aspecs, polyamorous people, childfree and infertile people by making them feel less human for not participating in it's rituals, it also implicitly supports cisnormativity and heteronormativity

The model proposed by amatonormativity is ripe for exploitation, manipulation and abuse. It cuts off people's support networks by devaluing all other kinds of connections, it keeps people from leaving abusive relationships by eliminating all kinds of alternatives to happiness and fulfillment, it makes people enter relationships they don't want because it makes it seem like there is no other alternative, it blinds people to potential or ongoing abuse because it makes us believe that love can only be good and pure

Amatonormativity is often talked about in aspec and polyamorous spaces, but many others are unaware of its influence, and I think this is a mistake and another example of amatonormativity (blinding people to the flaws and alternatives to the ideal it proposes is another way amatonormativity works). And this is a shame, because the queer and feminist movements (along with all the other progressive movements) can't ever attain their goals without addressing amatonormativity

[inkskinned]

im gonna start a fight; and, at the same time, i need you to take this in the most good-faith way possible, but:

videos that involve body-checking and intentionally (and uncritically) show a mealplan of an unhealthy number of calories are just a revamped version of pro-ana food diaries.

and yeah, i know there's arguments. i address some of them under the cut. but at the end of the day, we're just coming back to romanticizing mental illness; we've just found a better platform for it.

this is already something we've done. we knew it was wrong and tried to stop it. and tbh. it just wasn't enough.

there are people who argue "well, what if you have an eating disorder, you can't help it if you don't eat!" except that as someone with an ED; we are not infants. we know what we're doing. part of having an ED is that you are like, maybe too self-aware. even if we can't help our own food choices, we don't need to fucking romanticize the disorder - something we've been warning you about since 2013. there are hours of setup, filming, and editing that go into these videos. they do not happen to fall into place randomly. there is a reason they are pieced together to be beautiful, bright, inspiring.

there's this woman who pretty much only posts daily plans under a normal amount of calories, and everyone defends her saying but it's better than nothing! and i'm like. except she opens those with images of her showing off her body and provides no context in the video or caption that suggests that she believes what she's doing is unhealthy. she has hundreds of thousands of followers on a platform designed for young kids and teens. i refuse to believe that by accident her content just happens to be cheery advice on "healthy" versions of starving.

for any other symptom of mental illness, we would be incredibly enraged by this kind of placid acceptance of a "tips and tricks" fast-start guide. imagine if people posted pink & pretty videos saying "best places to cut yourself" as if it was a fucking storytime. we, as a society, are so fucking fatphobic that we would rather accept blatantly harmful displays of self harm than admit that we are obsessed with a hyper-thin body type.

i am not suggesting someone never talks about their disorder. i talk about mine. actually, it's a plot point in my book.

here's the difference: i recognize it's a fucking mental illness. i am very careful to never mention a specific weight, eating pattern, or calorie plan. i always make sure to position it as something that ruined my fucking life. i do not put cheery music in the background and hearts and sparkles over my worst moments. i do not film it in bright light. i do not start each passage with an image of a thin body followed by "here's how to look like her."

eating disorders should not be framed as aspirational. and the problem is that society worships the "after" image, so long as you don't get too sick. there is a reason so many people who quit being "influencers" will later admit - i wasn't eating well that whole time; an obsession with food was completely destroying my life.

we let any uncredited, uncertified person write the most backwards, fucked up shit about how to get the body you desire! because the underlying, secret belief is: well, at least they're thin! and the real thing that fucking gets me each time - they make fucking money off of it. their irresponsibility and societal harm literally pays off for them.

"why do you care so much." "don't like it don't look." "so what if people experiment with new ways of thinking of food?"

thank you for asking. we're about to get extremely personal. it's because when i was 18 i discovered "thinspiration"/"thinspo." and it absolutely influenced, shaped, and codified my pre-existing eating disorder. i went from having some troubling habits and traits to being incredibly unwell within what felt like a matter of days. there were actual pages designed to train me on how to have an ED correctly. it was all so suddenly easy. i was sick; and the nature of the illness meant - i wanted to be sicker.

it takes an average of 7 years for a person to fully recover. i know this personally - even now, 10 years from the worst of it, i still fucking struggle. i am so much happier now and i eat what i want and i literally don't think about food at all (19 year old me would shudder) and yet - i still fucking know the calories of plain toast with butter.

an eating disorder is one of the deadliest types of mental illness. over 1 in 4 people with an ED will attempt suicide.

and i'm sorry. i just do not see the exchange rate of "high rate of engagement" versus "the value of a human life."

[nynyhaha]

Phantom Troupe - failed robinhoods?

As the new chapters told us,the Spiders started out as a revenge based organisation. That’s also what made them the way they are now.

But no one talks about the huge responsibility they have to carry to help their whole town.

Kurapika’s task for instance is to avenge the dead rather than changing the world to better treat the living. He doesn’t have a community whose situation he is concerned with. It’s tragic,but in a way that limits his responsibility. Leorio wants to treat people for free and actually addresses a bigger societal problem that was born out of a personal one.

The phantom troupe are very much concerned with avenging specific people,but they work on utilitarian principles. They’re ready to sacrifice themselves for the whole of Meteor City,so that no kids will be kidnapped again

For that they’re ready to throw away their own morals. Because kid Chrollo isn’t yet evil. He can’t think the same way adult Chrollo does,he’s not hat capable of committing a massacre but he already knows he will kill many people,without really understanding what that means. If you were to say something like this,would you know what it means? I wouldn’t. So in short,they’d chose to pull the lever and sacrifice one person for the five.(Unless it’s up to Paku and Chrollo is the one person)

If this wasn’t a revenge mission,what would it be?

Meteor City needs two things, protection and material goods.

Before the Troupe gained sufficient strength to have a say, the elders made a deal that exchanged people for the mafias “protection”. It seems heavily implied that the very same mafia who agreed to protect them was the one behind the kidnappings to begin with,they just exchanged children for adults.

In chapter 105 Leorio says the following:

Many years after the original deal,there was a second one, but this time the mafia offered goods. Why couldn’t they kept the “protection” deal?

Because the City no longer needed protection. Something must’ve happened for the mafia to take a step back and actually pay Meteor City rather than just not stealing their kids.

See how it’s a forced decision?

And the Troupe abolished even that.

Not only did the Spider scare off the criminals terrorising their town,they also put a stop to the mafia buying Meteor City’s loyalty.

Maybe it’s already pointed out by someone,but we need to talk about that more!

Suddenly their quest to steal makes much more sense. They’re not only scary guard dogs,but providers. It simply can’t be argued that the Troupe’s existence has no positive effects,when it changes everything for Meteor City!

Why then are they “failed” robinhoods? Because while they’re effective,they can’t change the world. They can only scare off the Mafia while they exist,should the Spider die it could all revert back. And also because they can’t help everybody. The cost of their constructive ends is destruction.

While I believe the Kurta clan massacre had other reasons,would it not be the perfect way to show the elders the Troupe is both capable of cruelty for the sake of their community and fit to provide money? “Oh you think you need the Mafia? Watch this.”

In that way they wouldn’t even need to hate the clan,it would merely be killing outsider children for the sake of Meteorian children.

It perfectly shows how trying to achieve radical change in an unfair world can drive one to insanity. “Robinhoods” seem noble. The work that the Troupe does can’t be noble. Just like Kurapika’s quest isn’t righteous,as much as he wishes it was.

Wanting safety for the kids of Meteor City is natural,but it seems unattainable.

Is the thesis here that you can’t help Meteor City without killing someone? Yes. It doesn’t mean killing the kurtas,but it means killing the Mafia. And killing the Mafia often= normalisation of killing. The more often you do it the easier it is,and the lesser justification is required. Eventually,that means killing the Kurtas.

The idea is that they couldn’t keep doing what they did without eroding their morals to the point they’re at now.

They can’t remain pure. But they have to do something.

Meteor City seems like an unsolvable tragedy. It’s sucks up all the misery and filth of the world, and while it’s supposed to represent hope and be a safe place for all the lost,that’s an unattainable ideal.

There will always be people in need is such a place. It’s like the shadow of the World, which is the actual problem. Meteor City is everything that is right and wrong with humanity.

And the saddest part? Any state of peace is fragile. ALL of the Troupe’s achievements might be lost once it’s gone.

So it really was all for nothing? And how is Chrollo supposed to keep caring about human lives back at home when he has ended countless lives himself? How can he feel any attachment to humanity when he uses bodies as bombs and sees himself as a worthless hostage?

If he doesn’t feel it tho..what’s even the point? No wonder bro is lost

[therainscene]

Stranger Things is fundamentally a story about being an outcast: coming of age while using the healing power of love to deal with abuse and pressure to conform.

And these are all very queer themes. Stranger Things isn’t necessarily about queerness, per se, but its themes do happen to encapsulate the queer experience perfectly -- so it’s no coincidence that the boy who got the story rolling and whose coming of age will be a focus in S5 also happens to be gay. A satisfying ending for him will be a satisfying ending for the whole show.

So let’s examine Will’s arc without our shipping goggles on and ask ourselves:

What sort of outcome for Will would best fit the themes of Stranger Things?

If he dies, then all those times he was saved by the power of love will have gone to waste.

Perhaps you could argue that he’ll sacrifice himself in an act of love and gratitude for those friends who saved him in the past... but he's already done that, multiple times, and it never permanently solved the problems plaguing him or Hawkins. Will needs to try something new if he wants it to stick this time.

If he becomes a villain, then he’s giving in to the cycle of abuse.

That’s too out of character. Will is Henry’s narrative foil -- they have a lot in common, but their roles in this story fundamentally contrast one another. So even if Will allies with Vecna -- perhaps out of some well-meaning effort to sacrifice himself again -- that’s not going to be the end of his story.

If his defeated acceptance that queers like him never Get The Boy in the end is proven correct, then the narrative will be rewarding his conformity to homophobic ideals.

Yes, nobody is entitled to Get The Boy in real life... but nobody gets eaten by Demogorgons in real life either. This is a story, and its job is to explore ideas through metaphor, not to be a perfect mirror.

And yes, Stranger Things is set in the terrifyingly homophobic 80s and chooses to take a realistic approach in depicting queerness... but it’s still a modern story intended for a 2020s audience.

So why should we learn the lesson that the best ending a gay boy can hope for is bittersweet at best? That queer self-actualization is rooted in waiting to be accepted by straight people instead of forging your own queerness for yourself? How is any of this consistent with the theme of resisting forced conformity?

But if:

Will overcomes his internalized homophobia and openly admits his love for Mike, and Mike likewise shakes off the shackles of compulsory heterosexuality and admits he feels the same way...

...The joy of actually getting the romantic love he thought he never would inspires Will and gives him strength...

...To finally face Vecna, symbolically addressing the abuse and societal homophobia that almost prevented him from getting that romance in the first place?

We satisfyingly resolve all three themes in one tidy, self-contained swoop.

[felixora]

Baldur's Gate 3 Companion!Tav Ask List by @paarthursass 

Please check their List here, it's literally a top tier list

(contains major spoilers for the game, and for some dark urge runs as well)

Had to redo this, but finally I'm satisfied with the result. Here's my drow Soulknife Rogue (please oh please adapt this subclass for the game) Arnafein Rilynghym.

General

1.Where can your Tav be recruited?  Are they first encountered on the Nautiloid, or in the Nautiloid crash region?  Or are they not recruitable until a later act?

He can be recruited not too far away from the Blighted Village area, in the forest outcropping.

He’ll be there with a pair of poorly equipped young tieflings and a group of goblins, trying to cool things down between the two and convince the goblins to leave the tieflings only to him. The player/party members might catch on some details in his facial expression that would be giving away a lie, as well as his attempts to place himself between tieflings and goblins.

As the player’s group comes closer, the player (and other companions, which is important) and Arno are connected through their tadpoles, though much more painfully than in other cases (the narrator might even comment on that). Arno would recognize in you another survivor that escaped the nautiloid and through pain would telepathically ask you to play along. After that with more demand addressing the goblins as “another True Soul came to look for them, so would they finally let them do their fucking job?” The player might choose the Deception/Persuasion route to play along with Arno, to simply attack the goblins (in which case both tieflings and Arno would help out) or attack Arno and tieflings under the guise of him “being the survivor, that Absolute cultists are looking for” (in this case tieflings would die and Arno will be captured and interrogated by Minthara).

2.Do the other companions have special comments or reactions upon recruiting your Tav?

Gale – A friendly drow! That’s a rarity in this place, as far as I can tell. Let’s hope this won’t be a double-crossing situation though.

Shadowheart – Arno seems well versed in dealing of these cultists. I just hope he won’t stick his nose in other’s thoughts – we have more than enough mind-probing as it is.

Astarion – Well that was a spectacle. I hope our newest addition won’t stop to help any stray or poor thing in need.

Wyll – It takes a lot of inner strength to stand by those in need, especially under the weight of your own troubles. Arno would be a good addition to our group.

Karlach – Well Arno seems to know some shit around here. Now we don’t need to blindly walk around in search of the bad guys place.

Lae’zel – The elf’s knowledge of this place seems useful. Can’t say the same of his handling of tadpole’s effects. We ought to be careful.

3.Does your Tav have any comments or advice when you recruit other companions?

Gale – Having a wizard around should improve our chances of survival. Though I’m sure as hell won’t be asking him about any teleportation.

Shadowheart – It’s good to have a helping cleric’s hand with us. However, the choice of name does bring a bit of ominous feel to this acquaintance.

Astarion – The whole knife play was a bit too on the nose for be, but I can understand his reaction. Let’s hope his bloody tendencies will be the problem of our enemies, and not ours.

Wyll – The Blade of Frontiers… Well, the name does sound grand, though cannot say I heard of it before.

Karlach – Karlach’s spirit sure will brighten up our company. I just hope we won’t wake up to the actual hellfire.

Lae’zel – The gith looks like a tough fighter. But don’t expect me to go on errands for her.

4. What sort of general actions raise or lower their approval?

Raise:

Empathy and Compassion towards weaker or struggling.

Supporting freedom, autonomy and choices that align with his desire to break free from societal expectations.

Sharing a sarcastic sense of humor can lead to a bond with him, as he appreciates this attitude. Engaging in witty banter and humor is a plus.

Illegal activities aimed at helping others.

Lower:

Disregarding or belittling others' struggles or doubts, particularly in moments of their vulnerability, resonating with his own past of self-doubt and anxiety.

Yielding to controlling individuals or behaving subserviently in the face of authority.

Aggression towards the weak.

5. Are there any instances where your Tav can permanently leave the party, depending on player character actions?

The first instance is tied to letting Minthara join a party (murdering of tieflings would significantly lower Arno’s approval, but letting Minthara join the party would be the point of conflict, in which Arno will go a separate path).

The second instance would be tied to possible betrayal, around end of Act 2 – a group of drow agents, which would represent the house Rilynghym (Arno’s family), will ambush the party. They are tasked with bringing Arno back home, as well as extracting Githyanki prism.

Depending on the level of approval, the player can persuade Arno to go about this peacefully (understand that there was more at stake and they needed the Gith’s prism), persuade Arno to attack the spies or Arno will turn his back on the group altogether.

6. Do they have any secrets that can be revealed?  What are the prerequisites for this secret coming to light?

The Player would find out in Camp that Arno has partial amnesia, and remembers some parts of his childhood and his family, but not the last 3 months since he left home. As the adventure progresses, he’ll start to remember more and more, as well as start having a repeating blurry dream of his mother calling out to him, but he would understand any of her words. 

As the game progresses, he would remember that his house (a drow house Rilynghym, that settled on the surface, in Neverwinter), that specializes in espionage and infiltration, sent their agents to infiltrate the cult of the Absolut and acquired information about some sort of artefact.  The spies disappeared in Baldur's Gate, and as Nathiira received the news, Arno (who wanted to finally prove to his mother that he is worthy of her trust and can help the house on an equal footing with everyone else) suggested that he could investigate the matter. This provoked the conflict between mother and son, which ended in Arno being put in a cell. He escaped the imprisonment and ventured to Baldur’s Gate on his own.

In Baldur's Gate, Arno found out that the spies were supposed to steal a specific artefact for their house, but they were discovered by the cultists and taken as prisoners. All but one.

The spy, named Tsabran, a loyal servant of Matron Nathiira, managed to avoid the cultists and got in touch with Arno, telling him everything that happened. He explained that the spies, were trying to steal an artefact of incredible power created by the cultists. However, their hideout was discovered, and the cultists caught all the spies except Tsabran.

The artefact was supposed to have a power of a mini-version Elderbrain, allowing its wielder to enhance telepathic influence on intelligent creatures, and even subdue large groups of creatures to their will. It had to work in the hands of those who have psionic abilities, enhancing them tenfold. (Note: the artefact can unlock the ending, where instead of someone becoming an illithid, Arno will use the artefact and his own psychic skills to suppress Elderbrain) Together, Tsabran and Arno devised a plan to steal the artefact and bring it back to Matron Nathiira. They managed to get to the room with the artefact through secret tunnels. However, before Arno could check the artefact for traps, Tsabran lifted it off the pedestal and thus activated the alarm. The two had to flee, but Arno was wounded during the escape. He hoped for help from Tsabran, but the latter left him behind, running away with the artefact. That's how the cultists captured Arno.

7. Do they have their own personal quest that spans the course of the game?  Can it take different branching paths depending on the choices the Player Character makes?

Arno’s personal quest would be focused on him slowly regaining his memories of past months, and in the process fighting the memories of emotional abuse and neglect from his mother, that led to his anxiety and feeling of never being enough. As he would regain memories he would have more and more doubts, if chasing after mother’s approval is really what he wants from life, especially if it goes against his moral code.

Player can help him find confidence in himself, support his attempts to make his own decisions in spite of what was drilled into his head for decades (and became part of his sub-conscious behavior; for example him having a sweet tooth but denying himself any sweet food due to previous prohibitions from his mother)

Alternatively, Player can insist on the notion, that Arno’s mother was right, that he wasn’t ready for any sort of adventure like this, and specifically his lack of skills, patience and knowledge were the reason of his troubles. That Arno’s mother only tried to protect him and their house, to give them a better life.

Toward the end of Act 2, MC with Arno is ambushed by members of House Rilynghym, who were sent by Nathiira to bring Arno home, as well as retrieve Gith's prism with him (when asked, the spies would answer that Nathiira found out about the prism and its influence through telepathic connection with Arno).

At that moment, Arno will remember the captured spies in Baldur's Gate and tell the newcomers that the situation has become much more important and dangerous than possessing some artefacts and gaining more power for their house.

Depending on the Player's actions and the level of approval with Arno, the situation will go in different directions:

Arno confidently tells the spies to go back home, because the existence of the cult threatens their house as well.

Arno and the Player fight the spies to keep the prism. Arno does not approve of this, but is persuaded by the Player to fight on their side.

Arno joins the spies, having more faith in his mother's judgment. He and the spies will die in the battle.

In 3rd act, as the group reaches the Baldur's Gate, during one of the nights, Arno’s mother will get in touch with him via telepathic projection – all of the companions infected with the tadpole will see and hear her as well, as part of their shared connection. She will say that she is very disappointed that he did not return with the spies when he had the opportunity.

Nathiira says “I've been very patient, considering your completely stupid and irresponsible behavior. Go back home, now.” Аrno exhaled, nervously gesturing towards his mother “Can't you listen to me for once? I'm trying to explain, that what's happening in Baldur's Gate is a threat to the entire region. And our family, too.” There is a tense pause. As Nathiira looks at him with her familiar calculating look, Arno looks down, slightly lowering his head as well “Just, listen. I can't just leave, not with this... thing in my head. So I can look for Tsabran and the artifact. Show you that I can do this.” Nathiira is silent for a few moments, closely looking at her son before finally exhaling: “You won't just drop this, would you? Fine. This is your task now. The last time Tsabran sent us a message, he mentioned that he was hiding somewhere deep and wet.” Arno breathes a sigh of relief and Nathiira speaks again: “Arnafein” there is a long pause, where she considers what to say before finally settling on her choice “Don't let me down.”

The group will go in search of Tsabran in the underground part of the city.

When the group finds Tsabran, it turns out that the artifact has begun to negatively affect his mind, making him more neurotic, full of paranoia and hallucinations. Because he was not a psionist himself, the artifact could not find enough power in his mind and his brain literally began to melt from it.

At that moment, Tsabran was obsessed only with the idea that he was the one who had to deliver the artifact to Matrona and receive her recognition and gratitude. The group had fight to get the artifact. In battle with Tsabran, he’ll have control over some civilians and creatures from sewers, all while screaming about how he will prove the Matron his loyalty and usefulness. Arno will recognize some of the civilians from the 1st day they entered Baldur’s Gate.

As Arno defeats Tsabran and takes the artifact, the telepathic projection of Nathiira appears, noting that she felt the artifact’s power through their connection.

The projection of Nathiira comes closer, with fascination looking at the artifact “Incredible isn’t it? Imagine how much influence we might gain with this in our hands. No-one will ever dare to even think of harming our house ever again.” Arno shakes his head “Mother this artifact won’t bring us any good. It breaks people, strips them of their will, it’s not-” Nathiira interrupts him “It’s exactly what we need to survive, Arnafein. This will finally give us the protection we needed. Any politician, any noble, any rival of ours now can be brought under our control. They won’t be harmed, they just won’t think about harming us” Arno exclaims “It will harm them, mother, this is exactly what taking away freedom of their mind is!” Nathiira huffs and waving him away with a hand “Oh, don’t be such a child, they will be fine! It’s better than getting rid of them all-together.” After a moment, she adds, more steel in her voice “You wanted to prove yourself to me. This is your chance. Do as I say - bring us the artifact.”

Depending on Players choice, Arnafein either will agree to bring the artefact home or will say that he’ll give the artifact to the Harpers for protection.

Choice “Arnafein agreed to bring the artefact home”

Arno closed his eyes, battling with his own doubts in his head. But moments later his shoulder sagged down, and he bows his head and finally said “As you say, Matron.” Nathiira looks pleased, relaxed. “Good. I’m glad you saw reason. Now, our agents should be nearby...” Arnafein raises his head slightly, looking at his mother with confusion “What? I... I thought you sent only me.” Nathiira patiently sighs “They were here just in case, to assure that the mission was successful. Don’t think too much about it - it was still all you. And our people will know it as such.” After a pause she continues “Now, I won’t take anymore of your time, the faster the artifact will be brought here, the better. Go.” With a slight pause, Arnafein bows, and Nathiira calls for him one last time. “And Arnafein. I’m proud of you, son.” As the group exits the chamber where they battled Tsabran, the spies meet them right at the exit. One of the agents steps forward “Sir, we’ve just received the message from Matron - we’re at your service. If you’ll need our assistance in upcoming battle, you can count on us ” Arno absentmindedly nods “Good. Make sure that the artifact is delivered as fast as possible to Neverwinter” and he gives the artifact to the agents before adding with more presence “As for everything else - I will call if you are needed.”

Choice “Arnafein refused to bring the artefact back home”

Arno closed his eyes, frowning, battling with his own doubts in his head. But moments later he takes a deep breath and looks up at his mother. “I’m sorry, I won’t do this. This is not our way. I will give the artifact to Harpers and they’ll make sure no-one gets harmed anymore because of it” Nathiira looks at him for a long moment, her jaws clenched, her eyes hard and cold. “Just as I thought. You would pass on a golden opportunity to put our house out danger forever, just so you can play a hero.” She steps forward, her telepathic projection getting right in the face of Arno, before she sneers. “You are not a hero. You’re just an arrogant, naive child, who thinks he knows better than everyone else.” She continues looking at him, as Arno meets her stare with his own sudden resolution. Nathiira spits out “Well you don’t.” She takes a step back, turning away from Arnafein and adding, “We'll have a long talk about it when you get home” Arnafein let’s a moment pass, before, with deep sadness saying “No. I don’t think we will” As Nathiira stops and turns back to him, Arno raises his hand and her eyes widen in understanding and shock. Arno sliced the air with his hand and permanently severed their family telepathic connection. As the group exits the chamber where they battled Tsabran, the spies meet them right at the exit. Arno, not expecting to see them, will take a step back before asking “What- What are you doing here?” One of the agents steps forward, slightly bowing his head. “Sir. The Matron ordered us to keep an eye on you and intervene in case of imminent danger to your life” Arno dumbly looks at him, repeating his words “Keep an eye? Aha. Hahaha” He bitterly laughs, rubbing his hand over his face “she didn’t even... Of course she didn’t.” As Arno says with utter betrayal and disappointment he once again turns to bewildered agent, and says “Well, as you see I’m fine and dandy, so you can return home and report as such” The agents exchange glances, before with a doubt in a voice one of them says “Sir, we were also told to retrieve the artifact” Player can choose what to do - “Let Arno handle this” - (Deception) The artifact was destroyed by Tsabran in the battle. - (Intimidation) The artifact stays with us, want it or not. In case of failure or letting Arno handle this, Arno will say: “There was... a change of plans. Matron knows of this, so you’re in the clear. Return home, agents”

8. What do they say when the Player Character asks them to stay in camp?  How about when the Player Character asks them to come adventuring again?

Stay in camp – “You sure? I might hear the danger coming from miles away. Well, the thoughts of danger, more precise.” And after confirmation “Well, suit yourself.”

Come adventuring again – “Knew you’d come around”

9. Does your Tav have any escalating conflicts with one of the other companions, like Lae’zel and Shadowheart’s knife-fight?

No.

10. Are there any unique NPCs associated with your Tav that can show up during the course of the game?

In act 3 in Elfsong Tavern the group can meet Arno’s older sister Maliara, which would be trying to draw as little attention as possible. She’ll tell Arno that she and their uncle went behind mothers back and their uncle made a deal with Lorroakan to open a portal from Neverwinter to Baldur’s Gate and allow Maliara passage to the city. Maliara will try to persuade Arno to return home with her (depending on the previous encounter with the spies Arno’s reaction to this would differ, but he will say that he can’t return yet – not with the danger of Absolute cult behind their backs). Maliara would be gentle with her words, but also vocal about her worries for her brother, even going as far as offering her help in this whole quest, despite Arno’s own worry for her. If the Player invites her to join Camp, she’ll become a permanent addition to it, as an Artificer (trading different alchemical supplies). 

11. Are there any moments in the game that trigger unique dialogue for your character? (Like Gale’s anecdote about the barfight after you save the goblin prisoner)

In Moonrise Towers, while looking at some of the battle and floor plans of Shadowcursed lands, Arno will recognize them. “We’ve had this floor plans for months before the spies went missing...” “My house knew about the inner dealing of the cult. And told no-one. How many people we could have saved if we just warned, I don’t know, the Harpers or the city governments. Instead we were chasing after some stupid artifacts.”

In act 2, when meeting gnolls and other creatures mind-controlled by the other cultists, Arno will express his genuine disgust for this, saying that no-one should go through such violation of autonomy. He might recall going through the same thing, when he was still little and some slavers tried to abduct him and his sister, and how terrified he was over losing control of his body.

Story Specific

1.How does your Tav advise the player character when it comes to the Dream Visitor?

“I can see the advantage we’ll have with these powers, but you always have to pay the piper. And our friend does sound like a skilled musician. Let’s just be careful with the help they are providing.”

2. How do they advise the player character on Raphael?

“One blink – and there goes your freedom in those clawed hands. Not even one story has a happy-ending when it comes to deals with the devil. I don’t think we’ll be the exception to the rule, so let’s not gamble with our lives more than we already do.”

3. How do they react to Astarion biting the Player Character?

“Huh, well that explains all those thought-wishing about having a taste…” “I have no problem with him staying, as long as he remembers his manners”

4. How do they react to the Player Character letting Abdirak whip them?

“That’s um… An interesting… View. Right”

5. How do they react to the Player Character taking their first tadpole power?

“You know, when I said “be careful but curious” I really had more emphasis on the careful part. Although, you seem alright… at least for now. Just give me some heads up next time, I might prepare the knife just in case.”

6. Will they stay with the Player Character regardless of siding with the goblins or the tieflings, or is it possible for them to leave the party permanently?

Arno will stay with Player if they side with Goblins, but he’ll strongly disapprove of this.

7. What can they be found doing at the tiefling/goblin party?

On tiefling’s party: He’ll be staying near Mol, bouncing back and forth with her ideas regarding how to get the most profit from drunk adults (“They leave a lot of their belongings unattended, who’s to say you won’t be the one to find them and be oh-so-kind to return them for a small price for such lost-and-found services.”). The reason for that is partially due Arno wanting to be a bit far away from so many drunk people, as his head starts to be in huge pain from all of their thoughts.

On goblin’s party: He’ll be staying very far away from any possible party participants, possibly in the shade of the trees, closed off and gloomy. When approached, he’ll say that he hopes the lives of all those innocents were worth this “blast of a party” and that this arrangement better pay off with finding the cure. If questioned by the Player further, Arno would admit that there is someone back home who came up in his memories – two small tiefling kids with dark skin, his sister’s kids. He’ll lament that he can’t stop imagining all those slayed kids in the grove as his nephews.

8. Do they have comments on who the Player Character chooses to spend the night with? 

Gale – I see you have your hands full of our local wizard. I’m sure you’ll sleep soundly after his lectures.

Shadowheart – Hopefully we won’t find your cold and lifeless body somewhere in the ditch tomorrow. Jokes aside – do have a wonderful night, I’m sure Shadowheart will leave her poisons for more desirable targets.

Astarion – Astarion is… A spicy choice. I honestly hope I will be far enough to enjoy a quiet night without playing a witness to any… lewd thoughts. Or bloody ones, pick your poison.

Wyll – Seems like our local monster hunter already took your attention.

Karlach – Well someone’s in for a warm night. I just hope you’ll be responsible and all of that stuff and won’t burn our camp in flames of accidental passion.

Lae’zel – You sure do have interesting taste in company. Hopefully, we’ll see you in one piece tomorrow – otherwise, don’t expect me trying to avenge you.

9. Do they have unique dialogue if the Player Character lets them die when they steal the Blood of Lathander?

-

10. How do they react if the PC licks the dead spider in the Gauntlet of Shar?

1st time. No. No-no-no, stop thinking that, stop.

2nd time. Oh for gods sake… Is it only the “Underdark knowledge” to not lick the damn spiders?

11. What do they say if the PC tries to force them to go up on stage with Dribbles the Clown?

1st time “Ha-ha, what a wonderful idea (telepathically “don’t you fucking dare”)”

2nd time “Right, on stage. Dreamed of this all my life (telepathically “you better sleep with your eyes open from now on”)”

12. Is it possible for your Tav to be kidnapped and replaced by Orin?  How is Orin's deception revealed?

-

13. How do they react to the PC either allowing Astarion to ascend or convincing him to spare the 7000 spawn?

Astarion ascends – “So… He did it. Looks quite pleased too. I don’t know why, but it makes so … angry. He did break from his Masters control, found his ultimate freedom but it all feels so wrong… I just hope this finally brought him the life he desired”

Astarion remains a spawn and spares the 7000 spawn – “I don’t think I saw Astarion that sincerely happy and relaxed, like, ever. It suits him. Do you think he would appreciate congratulations? Or am I “biting off” too much with it? Oh yes, that one is perfect for teasing.”

14. How does Tav react to the PC becoming a mind flayer?  Can they offer to become one themselves?  Does their reaction change if they’re romanced?

If not romanced – Arno would be saddened, but thankful towards the Player, accepting this as a necessary sacrifice.

If romanced – still saddened, but determined that he’ll stay by your side no matter what, as you were there for him, and he’ll do the same for you.

He will not offer to become a mindflayer.

15. How do they react when the Dark Urge first reveals their amnesia and murderous thoughts to them?

“Huh. Well I can calm you down a bit, as amnesia seems to be something the two of us share. Can’t say the same about a bit of… murder? Anyway, I’m sure there will be plenty of enemies to release your murderous tendencies on.”

16. How do they react to the Dark Urge killing Alfira?

“Now. I don’t even need to be a mind reader to figure out what happened. Another question is why? And you better start explaining now.”

After explanation.

“Well. Let’s pretend we’re friends again – but from further distance.”

17. If romanced, how do they react to the Dark Urge trying to kill them in Act 2?

When woken up – “Hm? Someone’s in mood for a cuddle?” “Although I do sense a bit more tension in you, than usual, love. Are you alright?”

After confessing to what’s happening – “Oh dear, I knew we should have tried reading your memories… Hey, look at me, it will be alright. Whatever it is, you’re so much stronger”

Trying to help the bounded Player “Focus, dear, listen to my voice – (telepathically) “you can overcome this. I won’t let you fall””

“Save the gratitude and focus. I’ll have your back no matter what.”

Romance

1.Is your Tav a romanceable character?  Are there any specific requirements to romancing them?

Yes.

2. Does your Tav need to be flirted with to start the romance, or will they approach the PC themselves if approval is high enough?

Arno needs to be flirted with to start a romance.

3. Are they a polyamorous or a monogamous option?

Can go Poly

4. Do they have a special romance scene at the tiefling/goblin party?

Yes (note: romance scene would be only on tiefling party). Arno would ask the Player to join him after party for “little rendezvous”. After everyone goes to sleep, they’ll meet on deserted part of the river shore, where Arno prepared a small place for them with blanket, wine remains and some light food. As Player comes closer to Arno, who is using his much more controlled than before telekinesis to skipping stones across the water, Arno would turn to them:

“Much quieter here, isn’t it?”. He’ll throw another stone without his telekinesis.

Player either can

Try throwing a stone themselves (success / fail) – “You’re full of hidden talents / Not as easy as fighting, yeah?”

Comment that they preferred the lively atmosphere of the party – “Oh nooo, we have a party-goer among us. Horrific.”

Simply agree with Arno. – “A kindred spirit”

Afterwards Arno invites them to sit. As they sit, Arno starts talking:

“I “borrowed” some wine from Mol – thought I’d indulge myself, but then thought better of it. Don’t want to create another telepathic mess with so many drunk bodies around.”

Player could try to persuade Arno to share a drink with them, drink themselves or ask about him if that was his reason to stay away from the party (“Well yes and no. It’s good to be part of celebration, but I generally enjoy not being in the spotlight”)

Arno’ll continue:

“When I found this place, I remembered how when I would be overwhelmed I would leave our family house and spend some time near water, just skipping stones. Helped me focus quite a bit. Silly, but I thought I’d help me remember something from past months. Some name, or a place or… something. But there is nothing”

Player can

Ask them about what they actually remember - (and Arno will suggest to share images from his past, where he stays in large room, near a table covered in maps and plans, listening to some women (his mother) giving orders regarding something), and afterwards comment - “Huh. Not as painful this time”

Reassure them it will come back with time - “Perhaps. Never been good with waiting, but I suppose I don’t have a choice”

Say they might never come back. - “True. Can’t say it brings me any comfort”  

“I don’t know what will awaits us in the future. But right now, I’m glad to have “this” in my memories.” And then he would hastily add “I mean, this, your general company. And others of course”

Player say to shut up and enjoy the moment, or that the sentiment is mutual, in which case Arno will nervously laugh, saying “Yup, ok, good, I’m shutting up”

After which they’ll spent the quiet night observing the river water. 

5. Does the romance have different branching paths, or just one route to take?

There are a few different paths, depending on how his personal quest will progress.

6. How do they react to the player character breaking up with them, or choosing another character over them?

He’ll let a small “Oh” and take a step back, as if slapped, lost for words for a couple of seconds. After which, he’ll try to start talking, with a bit of cheer to his tone at the beginning “Well that was…expected. Though I thought we had more time.” After a pause “Can I ask if there was any specific reason?”

As Player confirms, Arno will say “Well. I will cherish our memories together all the same. Thank you, for giving it to me”.

7. What questions can Zethino ask the PC about Tav in the Love Test? 

What brings Arno the most comfort?

What future does he see for himself?

What brings his heart the most pain?

8. If they’re poly, do they have a reaction to the PC engaging in a relationship with Halsin?

“Well that’s definitely one of the times when I’m glad I wasn’t snooping around in someone’s thoughts.” He’ll laugh, but with some discomfort and turn his sight downwards. “I mean, if this is really something you’re interested in…  Halsin is definitely a catch, with all that gigantic wall of muscle and natures passion. Can’t judge you for desiring that.” And after a pause. “Although I must ask – does it have anything to do with us?... with me, more specifically? Did I do… or didn’t do something?” After assurance from Player that everything was alright. “Ok, ok, good to hear” “Well, in that case go right ahead. Just please return to me in one piece after all that throwing around and riding and … Ok I’m shutting up.”

9. How do they react if the PC has sex with Mizora? The Emperor?  Haarlep?

Mizora – carefully curious, might ask to share the memories with him via link.

The Emperor – disgusted, when he tries to connect with you telepathically he winces and says “let’s just never speak of it. Never”

Haarlep – Arno would check up on Player, ask is they are alright and if they just need silent company and support – he’ll be there for them.

10. Will they join in with the PC and the Drow Twins, or no?

No. Arno will be feeling very uncomfortable in the brothel, due to remembering that his mother had to work in a brothel in Amn in the past just to provide him and his sister with some roof over their heads, and was treated poorly by the customers.

11. What are Tav’s plans for the future?  Do they propose to the PC, or is marriage not something they’re interested in?

Depending on how his personal quest developed, Arno would:

Travel back to Neverwinter to become a spy on a permanent basis, always under his mother's control (no matter how many unacceptable things he had to do), helping her take direct control of minds of the nobility and small gangs of the Neverwinter region.

Travel back to Neverwinter and agree with his mother’s plan for him to settle down for a quiet, though unhappy, aristocratic life. He’ll become the public face of the house Rilynghym, but will always feel out of place.

Travel the world and build his own name by helping those in need and captivity.

Stay in Baldur's Gate, help rebuild the city and become the city's protector.

Organize his own web of spies that investigated and sabotaged authoritarian regimes and tyrants.

12. Free space! Share anything from your companion!Tav au!

Arno has nearly perfect visual memory, that helped him memories many maps and images (such as his family tattoos, that he tattooed his skin with after leaving home)

He’ll occasionally would lose control of his psychic powers (that are going sideways due to tadpoles influence) when heavily focusing on something which would lead to him extending his telepathy on others and accidentally sharing his thought with them, or start telekinetically levitate things or even small/medium creatures around him.

In 2nd scene of the romance he’ll suggest to the Player to use their psychic connection and would strengthen it to the point, where they both would clearly feel each other’s emotions and touches as if they were their own.

He would joke to hide his nervousness or uncertainty. 

During conversation with MC, Arno will recall good moments from his childhood. How he was raised most of the time by his older sister Maliara and sometimes by his uncle (a psychic wizard). He will recall how, as a child, when all the adults would leave them and go out to find them food/any money, Arno and Malia would sit on the roofs of houses together, watching the sunrise or sunset and getting used to the burning sensation it left on their eyes.

If questioned, Arno will tell about his family, how all of them are psionists, with special gifts in telepathy and telekinesis.  He’ll tell about his uncle, a Neverwinter wizard who could raise a whole house with only his thought. His sister, who is a talented artificer, working on different kinds of living blobs and explosive concoctions. And about his mother, who learned how to influence others and even bend them to her will, though temporarily.

Arno tells there were very little privacy in their house, as their mother wanted to know everything that was going on. If the MC says that’s messed up, he’ll say “Yeah? I never really thought about it that way, I mean - it was typical for us. We kinda were used to it.” He’ll apologize for snooping in others thoughts, as it comes easier to him than to others. Growing up in a household where your every thought was scrutinized and corrected by his mother did give him an impression, that it was alright with everyone else.

If questioned, Arno will tell that he actually has a sweet tooth, but he was forbidden to eat any sweets or sweet fruits at home. He’ll jokingly recall one scene from his childhood:

"I was really upset over some argument with my mom and as always, when I was like this, my sister Malia, came around and brought a whole basket of peaches. I have no idea where she found them, but we spent the whole evening munching on them until we were sick. Then mom returned home, and we kinda missed that. So when we heard her going upstairs to our room, we panicked and hid al peach pits in the plant pot we had in the room.” He laughs. “It took my mom years, before she noticed a peach tree in the room. She was really pissed.”

Despite his difficult and emotionally charged relationships with mother, he really cares for her and genuinely loves her, his older sister and uncle, feeling deep connection to them, that extends even over their telepathic abilities. Arno often finds it difficult to go directly against someone's opinion and generally tries to please others (unless it is in strong conflict with his moral principles of freedom and helping others). He often doubts if his own decisions, but is sincerely grateful when asked about his opinion or help.

The final scene for their personal quest, depending on the outcomes:

If Arno declined to bring artefact home:

Arnafein is sitting on the roof of the inn. The sky is slowly brightening, preparing for the dawn. MC comes closer behind him, and Arno slightly turns his head to their side, nodding his head towards free space near him with a small smile. MC sits; there is a moment of silence.

Player:

*Stay silent.* - Arno sighs "I thought this would be easier..."

"Are you alright?" - Arno "Yes. Just been thinking."

"Cozy place" - Arno smiles "Good for clearing head after messy day"

Arno continues "I breathe more freely than I did in decades. Actually feel like I can go anywhere and there won't be even a fleeting feeling of a leash around my throat. I'm happy." He pauses, his smile turning sour. "I just hoped mom would be happy for me too."

Player:

"Maybe she'll come around" - Arno "You sound like Malia. Maybe you both are right."

"She made her choice, you made yours" - Arno "True. I suppose I wasn't expecting the consequences of my choice to sting so much."

"Seems like she only wanted to control you" - Arno "I think there was love too. Just, her own version of it."

"It's just. We had bad days. But we had good too. I hoped... that good ones mattered more. That deep down she trusted me and was happy for me to find my own path. But she never planned to, has she?"

Player:

"I'm sorry" - Arno "Don't be. You showed me there is more to life than chasing after someone's approval."

*Hug him* - Arno let’s himself be embraces "Thank you. For everything."

"She might have want to, but was too afraid to lose you" - Arno "Perhaps. But I can't sit and wait for her understanding anymore"

"I found my path. With my choices. And my damned consequences."

(If romanced)

He turns to MC, laying hand on their hand.

"There will be bad days. But there will be good days too. And I hope I'll meet them with you - with all of the terrible choices and consequences that entails."

Player:

"Terrible choices, huh?" - Arno smiles "Absolutely wicked"

"Likewise" - Arno smiles "Good to hear we're on the same page"

He kisses the MC, laying hand on their cheek. Kiss will be meek at first, turning more passionate by the second, before they break from each other, grasping for air. Both brightly smiling, and gently grasping each others hand.

"Maybe that's a bit too early to say" - Arno "Well, we have all the time in the world to think on it. And make our own, considered choices."

And as so, the sun starts to rise, basking them in the dawn light.

If Arno agreed to give artefact to agents and bring to mother:

Arno sits on the bench in the outdoor alcove, shielded from the night and people. As MC comes closer they can see, that Arno uses his psionic powers to fully control rats before him.

Arno absentmindedly says "These ones easy to control. It won't be as easy with smarter creatures..."

Player:

"With more time you’ll get a hand of it." - Arno wryly smiled "Yeah, practice is the base of mastery."

"You ok with bending creatures to your will now?" - Arno "My mother wants me to. She thinks it will be useful, back at home."

"You seem troubled." - Arno "This... Is not the most pleasant thing for me. But I’ll get used to it."

"We have a saying back at home... Ilharess zhaun alurl. Matron knows best. For so long I've been trying to get her approval, to make her see me as an adult, not a child. Yet I continued to behave like one."

He makes the rats stand still, in attention. "But I know better now. I know to trust in my mother's judgment."

Player:

"And you'll be content with that?" - Arno "I have to. I will be."

"She seems to know what she's doing" - Arno "She always did, I was just too stubborn to see that myself."

"And what if she'll be wrong?" - Arno "No-one is perfect. But to survive, one needs to trust and obey their leader."

"Ahh look at me, overthinking stuff again."

He let's go of the rats, making then scatter around. "I didn't actually want to... burden you with my stupid troubles."

Player:

"It wasn't an issue at all." - Arno "But it was. It wasn't your problem to solve."

"Yeah, too late for that." - Arno laughs "True, and yet..."

"You were quite whiny sometimes." - Arno "And I apologize for that, as I’ve said it wasn’t your troubles to deal with, so I’ve been unfair."

"What I'm trying to say is... Thank you. To be of use to my house and mother. To be worthy of being her son. I have it - all thanks to you."

(if romanced) He'll lean his head against the MC, trying to kiss them but then will flinch and nervously laugh.

"Well, ok, she, uh... Seems like that will have to wait for later times."

Player:

"Is your mother still in connection with you?" - Arno "Comes with growing up in family of telepaths."

"Wait, what, who?" - Arno "My mother. Still checking in on me and not really approving something... intimate. Ruins the mood a bit."

"Well that's awkward..." - Arno nervously laughs "Yeah, you tell me"

"We can just. Stay here then. Together."

And they stay sitting there in the night.

[utilitycaster]

@notstinglesstoo replied to your post “The thing is, and I haven't gotten a chance to...”:

I saw someone not long ago say cr has always felt like a product to them vs D20 feeling organic and I protected my peace but I did want to ask them if they were brain dead

​Oh man I wanted to address this at length because I feel this. My posts have been centered, again, specifically on published journalists picking Daggerheart aprt critically and applauding themselves for doing so despite it being within a couple of hours of its release and therefore any analysis is necessarily going to be based on at best, a skim, when they just as frequently will claim D20 seasons/Kollok are flawless works of genius based on only a partial read, but man D20's got a fandom problem too. (and all of the following comes with the caveat of "I really enjoy D20, and Dropout, and while we're at it WBN and NADDPod which both are half D20 Intrepid Heroes cast, and think Brennan is a particularly brilliant GM, and also it's obvious that the D20 and CR casts are on great terms, and wish the fandom for D20 were more welcoming and enjoyable because I feel it wasn't like this when I first started watching, as a CR fan, in late 2019 and has since curdled into something really weird and bad.")

The first point is the obvious one: technically speaking these are both products. These are performers doing an art form; it is also a portion of how they make their money with which they can buy goods and services. Believing that art is inauthentic when the artist gets paid and acknowledges that is a thing that happens is a fucking libertarian position at best. Like cool, you think only people who are independently wealthy by other means can make art, because it's not real labor, my kid could paint that, etc etc.

The second point is also pretty obvious. I have pushed back pretty hard on the "uwu CR is just watching friends! it's like we're in their living room" mentality among the fandom, which has decreased, thankfully, but like...it did in fact start organically as a private home game, and they decided, when invited, to make it A Show For An Audience. D20 was created on purpose as a show for an audience. This doesn't make it bad or fake - reread the previous paragraph - but in terms of "this is an group of people who really played D&D in this world together even before the cameras were rolling," Critical Role literally is that, and D20 is not.

I think beyond that...my biggest issues with the D20 fandom are first, the level of discourse is abominable. The tag is almost always just shrieking praise and the most surface-level readings possible. I keep bringing up the "Capitalism is the BBEG" mug but it genuinely sums up so much of how I feel; people who want their existing beliefs fed to them as surface-level no-nuance takes. I mean capitalism is fucking terrible but I do not need every work I watch to have a character turn to the camera and say "capitalism is bad" to enjoy myself, and indeed it makes it harder due to the lack of subtlety and grace. For all D20 fans complain about how unhealthily parasocial CR fans can be (and some can be), I find that a lot of the most unhealthily parasocial "how dare they BETRAY my TRUST by having a ship I don't like or not speaking up about every single societal ill" ex-CR fans move over to D20 and then pull the exact same shit; it simply doesn't get called out. Every time D20 fans are like "we don't want to become the CR fandom" it's like "your toxic positivity and unhealthy parasocial behavior exceeds the HEIGHT of what I've seen in CR; the main difference is that CR started in 2015 when D&D was still shaking off the raging bigot dudebros and so in the early days it acquired more of those fans, whereas by the time D20 came around the landscape of who played D&D and watched Actual Play had shifted wildly, and you need to judge September 2018 D20 fans in parallel to September 2018 CR fans, not September 2015 CR fans."

I also feel, and I alluded to this in the post about journalism, and other people have said this better than I have, but the pedestal people have put D20 on does feel like a single...not even misstep, but just, difficult choice that doesn't capitulate to the loudest fans will bring a good chunk of that fandom crashing to the ground. And that includes the journalists. For all the fans of CR can still be obsessed with the cast to an unhealthy degree? The cast and company have put up pretty strong boundaries and have not budged. D20 hasn't, and I think the second they do - and I think it will be for their benefit as a company and a channel - a big chunk of their most vitriolic CR-hating portion of the fandom will viciously turn on them.

[siryouarebeingmocked]

i gotta say i agree that exposing children to algorithmic content feeds is going to make them grow up with one billion new kinds of mental illnesses and it's a serious societal problem that urgently needs addressing but it makes me v. v. v. uneasy when i see posts going around that identify this issue and come to the conclusion 'this is why it's important for parents to know what their kid is doing online' and uh girls there are a lot of kids out there who would be dead if their parents knew what they were doing online

"yeah this aspect of capitalism is extremely alienating and traumatizing" and im nodding and smiling and then they add "which is why we must retreat to the safety of the family" and i start abruptly high-pitched screaming like a fire alarm

It's really amazing how txttletale almost comes to the right conclusion, and then veers off at the last second.

And is basically asking for validation about their irrational, highly emotional knee-jerk reaction. 

Also, how exactly can one tell that a lot of kids would be dead if their parents knew what they were doing? Hypotheticals aren't proof. 

Even if I assume this is hyperbole, maybe the kid is doing something that's actually harmful, and parents need to keep them from doing that. That;s literally the job.

Why are you just completely ignoring that idea? How can you go "social media is harmful for kids" and then immediately go "parents should have no control over their kids online lives"? 

>capitalism Oh, yeah, clearly it's the algo and capitalism that are the problem, not what people are actually doing with social media. Individuals bear no responsibility at all. 

Couldn't possibly be TX trying to WD-40 a square peg into a round hole. 

Also, notice the lack of any specific measures, just vague "this needs to be addressed". Given her prior leftist leanings, five bucks says most of her ideal solutions involve government regulations. 

You know, the ones that often come from people who are even more out of touch with the internet than your average modern parent. 

Also, it's kind of hilarious that someone who blocks over the slightest disagreement and unironically spouts the "Tolkein's orcs are racist" argument thinks they're opposed to bigotry and know how to deal with massive Internet problems. 

We know that both traditional and social media work closely with the government to shape public opinion, so blaming the harm of social media entirely on capitalism is stupid. 

PPS: , this is coming from someone whose claim to e-fame is being a smug, toxic, insular jerk even by the standards of this infamously toxic social media site. No wonder she wants to blame the algo and capitalism.