#those are examples of ethical influence

[xiexiecaptain]

Been listening to a lot of Dr. Steven Hassan (expert on cults/authoritarian control tactics and licensed mental health practitioner) talk about coercive influence lately.

And a huge thing is sleep deprivation. Sleep deprivation is a key factor in influencing peoples minds because when you are sleep deprived, your prefrontal cortex is highly impaired. This is important because this part of your brain is responsible for functions related to critical thinking, logical reasoning & reality testing, decision making, and emotional & behavioral regulation, among other things. This makes you much more suggestable to others' whole-cloth agendas and potentially coercive ideas.

According to the CDC, nearly 1/3 of American adults are chronically sleep deprived and the NIH reports nearly 40% of American adults have reported falling asleep during the day without meaning to. Roughly the same amounts (1 out of 3 and 1 out of 4 depending on the age group) of Canadian adults are chronically sleep deprived.

Getting enough sleep FOR YOU is a HUGE protective factor against people and groups influencing your thought patterns. (Sleep needs DO vary among individuals due to a number of factors but the average adult needs between 7-9 hours while teenagers ages 13-18 need 8-10 hours, again according to the CDC.) This "influence" could be something as intense and insidious as cult recruiters, but also something as "minor" as non-straightforward advertising, reactionary politics, or black-and-white thinking.

Getting enough sleep (as well as enough food and non-sleep rest) helps you think for yourself and practice critical thinking to your full potential! This protective factor cannot be understated. If a group/religious organization/company/etc you are in is consistently pushing to deny you adequate sleep, that is a RED FLAG.

For people interested in learning more I highly recommend Dr. Hassan's books including and his landmark Combatting Cult Mind Control: Guide to Protection, Rescue, and Recovery from Destructive Cults.

For people more multimedia-oriented, he has many many wonderful interviews he's done (found easily by searching his name on Youtube) about his personal experience being coerced into and rescued from a cult in his early 20s, and the analytical tool he developed called the BITE Model to help assess any kind of group or movement for various types of unethical/coercive influence factors! He also has a wonderful podcast that interviews people who have left cults/high control groups called "The Influence Continuum" that you can find pretty much anywhere you get your podcasts!

There's tons of free resources including his BITE Model and his Influence Continuum Model (which helps people place influencing factors on a scale from ethical to unethical) which can be found on his website freedomofmind.com)

[frailsituation]

Tips for writing internal conflict

1. Define the Core Dilemma

• Internal conflict occurs when a character faces a choice or emotional struggle within themselves. This dilemma should challenge their values or identity.

• How? The struggle should feel deeply personal and tied to the character’s motivations.

• Example: A character who values independence but must rely on others in a life-or-death situation.

2. Make it tied to their core values

• The conflict should challenge what the character holds dear—whether it’s their morals, desires, or goals.

• How? The inner conflict should push the character to re-evaluate their beliefs and priorities.

• Example: A soldier torn between duty and personal ethics, forced to choose between following orders and doing what’s right.

3. Amplify with external consequences

• Link internal conflict to external consequences that impact the character and those around them. The choices they face should have significant repercussions.

• How? Show how the character’s internal conflict influences their decisions in the real world.

• Example: A character haunted by guilt must choose whether to admit their past mistakes, risking their career and relationships.

4. Show the pressure building over time

• Internal conflict intensifies when it’s compounded by time, increasing stakes, or mounting external pressure.

• How? Create scenes where the character feels the weight of their choices growing heavier with every passing moment.

• Example: A character whose addiction threatens to ruin their life, struggling to break free but tempted by old habits every day.

5. Conflict arises from competing desires

• Internal conflict often stems from having two equally strong desires that cannot coexist.

• How? Put your character in situations where they must choose between these desires, both of which seem vital.

• Example: A character torn between pursuing their dream job across the country or staying to care for a dying parent.

6. Explore their fears and insecurities

• Internal conflict can also be driven by the character’s deepest fears or insecurities, which affect their actions and decisions.

• How? Fear of failure, rejection, or loss can prevent them from acting, making every decision feel like a battle.

• Example: A character who has been hurt before refuses to let anyone in, even though they deeply crave connection.

7. The power of self-sabotage

• Let the character’s internal conflict lead to self-sabotage. They may avoid decisions or create obstacles to protect themselves from facing their own feelings.

• How? Show how the character's fear or internal resistance undermines their progress.

• Example: A character constantly pushes away someone they care about because they fear their own vulnerability.

8. Use internal dialogue to show the battle

• Let readers hear the character’s internal struggle through thoughts, doubts, or justifications. Internal dialogue can make the conflict feel more immediate and real.

• How? Keep the internal dialogue sharp, reflective, and in line with the character’s voice.

• Example: “I want to tell them the truth, but what if they leave? Can I really risk that?”

9. Drive change through resolution

• The internal conflict should lead to growth or change in the character. They should evolve, learn, or make peace with their internal struggle.

• How? The resolution should feel earned and reflect the character’s journey.

• Example: A character who fears commitment learns to trust and embrace vulnerability in the face of love.

10. Let it affect the bigger picture

• The resolution of internal conflict should impact the story’s larger arc, showing how the character’s inner change leads to progress or a new direction.

• How? The resolution should tie back to the theme and forward momentum of the plot.

• Example: A character who learns to forgive themselves is able to take the final step in reconciling with a loved one, mending broken relationships.

Follow for more!

[avelera]

Viktor and Jayce both need to take some non-STEM classes

I'm joking but also a little not-joking that this is in fact, a theme in the show.

In Season 1.08, Ambessa meets Jayce for the first time after he's become a councilor. One of the first questions she asks him is, "Do they teach military history at your Academy, Mr. Talis?"

Jayce takes this as a set up for an insult against him. He's rattled by the bathhouse and braced for a fight. He's so riled, in fact, that he completely misses what Ambessa is probing him for there.

Ambessa wasn't setting him up to make him feel small, like Jayce feared, she wanted to know if he had a military history background or even the beginnings of the skills needed as an engineer to understand or counter some of the political manipulations she's about to pull on him.

Jayce answers: I'm not sure.

Not only has Jayce never taken a military class, he as a scientist doesn't even know if his school offers it.

That made him easy pickings for Ambessa. She wouldn't even need to be subtle, she could use the most basic tricks in the book against a proud young man with only a scientific background and know he wouldn't even begin to have the tools to pick up let alone counter what she's doing to him.

And then we get to Viktor in S2. Now, I think "How much of Cult Leader Viktor is even Viktor?" is a fair question. But the whole Machine Herald ethos he seems to be working towards in his inner monologue in 2.06 is yet another example of "Won't someone PLEASE make these boys take some sort of liberal arts class? An ethics course? SOMETHING?"

Viktor is working his way (Hexcore influence or no) to the conclusion that many frustrated young activists have hit upon when their activism doesn't work.

He tried to help people. But people didn't want to be helped or didn't cooperate with the way he wanted to help them.

His conclusion? Clearly it's the people who are wrong. It's the people who need to be changed.

To quote Pratchett, "“People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn't that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people.”

And of course, once you start to see people as the problem, that people need to be fundamentally changed, added, or subtracted from, when you treat people as things, that is when the real evil begins.

You have to accept people as they are and work within those bounds, because otherwise you have to change people and that pretty much always leads to the sort of atrocities that the Machine Herald seems gearing up to do. Namely, add and subtract away the people, or the characteristics of people, that don't fit his vision for the world.

And all I can think is: won't Piltover Academy please for the love of god make your tech bros take some goddamn history and philosophy classes please??

[botanicalsword]

Indicator for Entrepreneurs

In today’s landscape, personal branding, self-promotion, and networking have become significantly more accessible, thanks to the metaverse. 

We find ourselves interconnected in myriad ways; however, this connectivity often leads to a self-centered focus, where the aspiration to become influencers and promote our own products and services takes precedence.

Yet, we must not overlook the essence that establishing a successful business requires strong networks (11th House). This means delivering real value to those who engage with our services while simultaneously addressing their emotional, physical, and practical needs and desires.

Businesses are constantly seeking new ways to engage with their audience.

Some examples of digital business that related to the astrological placements:

Impressions (Venus, 1st House, Chart ruler)

Engagement (7th House, 11th House, Mercury)

Content creating (Mercury, 3rd House, 9th House)

Storytelling (Mercury, 3rd House, 4th House, 5th House, Neptune, Uranus)

Digital marketing strategy (Uranus, Jupiter, 9th House, 11th House)

Metrics eg. engagement, click-through rates, conversion (Saturn, 2nd House, 10th House)

Cultivating an entrepreneurial mindset is important for navigating this journey.  To thrive as an entrepreneur, one must be decisive and possess a holistic perspective. Without an open mind and a sharp, analytical approach, it becomes increasingly challenging to realize their vision and achieve lasting success.

✧

Certain astrological houses play a pivotal role:

1st house - the self and self-awareness - with prominent placement, they often resist being controlled by others, thriving instead on independence.

8th house  - resources and financing - the ability to leverage others' resources or collaborate in business endeavors.

10th house - career aspirations and the broader vision necessary for success. Entrepreneurs must possess a grand perspective to navigate their ventures effectively.

✧ Some key astrological indicators for aspiring entrepreneurs:

Strong10th House (Sun/ Moon in 10th House / 10th House Stellium) - strong drive for success and a deep desire to achieve - find entrepreneurship more appealing than traditional employment

10th House ruler in 1st House - a powerful ambition - Those with influential planets in their chart often strive for independence in their careers, leading to a respected and prestigious professional life - Leadership roles may also suit you well

1st House ruler in 10th House - highly ambitious, with dreams of fame and success. Your ideas or decision may frequently revolve around becoming a business owner and achieving personal recognition.

Saturn in the 1st House - face challenges in life but possess a strong sense of responsibility. Through relentless effort and determination, they strive to prove their worth to the world. With their unwavering willpower and diligent work ethic, achieving success is almost inevitable.

Strong 8th House (Sun, Moon, Venus, Jupiter / 8th House Stellium) - an ability to access resources easily - excel in securing funding and attracting investments, which can significantly enhance their chances of entrepreneurial success.

Strong 11th House / 11th House Stelium - strong social connections and a supportive network - with good relationships and abundant resources, you’ll find that others are eager to assist you in your endeavors. >> Career • what kind of content creator are you?

✧

>> Career • work a job or start a business? ✧ Natal Chart Observation >> Career • A Sudden Change - What Happens Next? ✧ Solar Return / Lunar Return >> Career • Indicators for your potential and talents (Part 1) >> Career • Indicators for your potential and talents (Part 2)

>> Back to Masterlist ✧ Explicit Content

Exclusive access : Patreon

[rebeccathenaturalist]

Today I present to you not one but TWO examples of selfish people who keep treating wildlife like pets. The first shows the consequences of their actions; the second is a tragedy waiting to happen once that deer becomes aggressive and that poor kid ends up injured or worse, or the deer has to be euthanized.

The proliferation of "cute wildlife" pictures and videos showing people in very close contact with wildlife has led to the expectation on the part of many people that they, too, can get their Disney moment as a "wildlife whisperer". Unfortunately this leads to more people trying to force contact with wildlife on their own terms with no care for the impact on the animal or their own safety.

While habituated wild animals are generally more tolerant of human contact, they are absolutely NOT domesticated. Domestication is a long process that leads to significant physical and mental changes in a lineage of animals until they are a separate subspecies/species from their wild progenitors; a dog is not a wolf, a domesticated cat is not an African wildcat, a cow is not an aurochs, and so forth. A wild animal may be tamed to a certain extent, but it is still fundamentally wild and has wild instincts and behaviors.

They do not have a desire to be around humans bred into them the way domestic species do, and any habituation is at their own expense. Habituated animals often do not learn proper foraging or hunting skills, particularly if they were raised by habituated parents, they don't get to socialize with their own species and are less likely to successfully reproduce, which can affect the local population's gene pool, and they are more likely to be injured or killed when they come into conflict with humans due to their lack of fear of us.

The absolute selfishness that leads people to want to force wildlife to tolerate them for their own ego boost robs these animals of their autonomy and wild lives. And it is selfishness; we do this because WE want the animals to like us and entertain us, not because we care about their long-term well-being. Those who actually care about a wild animal's quality of life look at the negative impacts of feeding them improper food, habituating them to humans, and interrupting their life's progression in the name of our own agendas. This is why good, ethical wildlife rehabs are as hands-off with their patients as possible, so that they minimize the chances of habituation and maximize the animal's wild instincts and behaviors for a more successful return to the wild.

It's not enough to choose to not feed or pet wildlife; we also have to criticize "rehabs" and "zoos" that make their money on up-close-and-personal direct physical encounters with wild animals, rehabbers that take pictures and videos of them cuddling with animals in their care (or any other contact outside of immediate medical/feeding support), and influencers who get clicks, likes, and shares by getting footage of them too close to wildlife. We also need to call out those "Oh, how cute!" pictures, posts, and news articles showing how humans and wildlife can be "friends", and keep educating people on how habituation is dangerous both to the animals and humans alike.

[astra-ravana]

The Necessity Of Baneful Witchcraft

Baneful magick refers to any spellwork intended to harm, manipulate, or obstruct a target, whether for justice, retribution, or personal defense. While some witches avoid it due to ethical concerns or spiritual beliefs, others see it as a natural and necessary aspect of the craft. Baneful magick has existed in various cultures for centuries, from the hexes of European cunning folk to the protective bindings of African diasporic traditions. It is neither inherently good nor evil; rather, its morality depends on intent, consequences, and perspective.

There are several schools of thought regarding baneful magick. Practitioners who follow the Wiccan Rede (“An it harm none, do what ye will”) generally avoid baneful magick, believing in karmic consequences or the Threefold Law, which states that any energy sent out returns threefold. Some witches believe baneful magick is justified when used to restore balance, enforce justice, or protect the vulnerable. In these traditions, curses and hexes are seen as rightful retribution rather than malicious acts. Many practitioners see magick as a tool, neither good nor bad. They believe in personal responsibility, understanding that every action carries consequences, but do not impose rigid moral codes on their spellwork.

Examples of Baneful Magick

• Binding Spells – Used to restrict an individual’s actions, preventing them from causing harm.

• Reversal Spells – Sending negative energy or a curse back to its sender.

• Curses & Hexes – Magick designed to inflict misfortune, pain, or long-term suffering.

• Jinxes – Short-term spells that cause minor inconveniences or bad luck.

• Poppet Magick – Using a doll or effigy to influence or harm a target.

• Gazes – Using a method such as the Evil Eye or overlooking to curse with the eyes.

Why is it Needed?

The necessity of baneful magick in witchcraft is a topic of debate among practitioners, but those who advocate for it argue that it serves several essential functions within a balanced magical practice. Here are some key reasons why baneful magick is considered necessary by some witches:

• Protection and Self-Defense: Baneful magick is often used as a form of spiritual, energetic, or even physical protection. Many practitioners believe that not all threats can be dealt with through passive means, and sometimes, direct action is necessary to deter harm or prevent further attacks. This can include curses, bindings, and hexes against those who pose a danger.

• Justice and Retribution: Some witches view baneful magick as a means of enforcing justice when mundane methods fail. If someone has committed harm without consequence, certain magical traditions believe that spells can be used to balance the scales, ensuring that the wrongdoer faces the repercussions of their actions.

• Maintaining Balance: Witchcraft, like nature, operates on the principle of balance—both creation and destruction. Baneful magick is seen as part of the natural cycle, ensuring that energies remain in harmony rather than allowing unchecked positivity to enable harm. Just as nature has predators to maintain ecosystems, some believe magick must include baneful aspects to keep equilibrium.

• Empowerment and Boundaries: Engaging in baneful magick can be an assertion of personal power and boundaries. It allows practitioners to reclaim control over their lives, particularly when they have been wronged or oppressed. It can serve as a psychological and magical declaration of sovereignty.

• Shadow Work and Personal Growth: Baneful magick forces practitioners to confront their own darkness, ethics, and the consequences of their actions. It requires deep self-awareness, ensuring that spells are cast with full knowledge of their impact. Many believe that working with darker aspects of magick leads to a more complete and mature understanding of power and responsibility.

• Dealing with Persistent Negative Forces: Some believe that certain entities, people, or energies simply will not respond to healing or banishing techniques. In such cases, baneful magick may be seen as the only viable solution for neutralizing a persistent threat or malevolent force.

While baneful magick is not necessary for every practitioner, those who incorporate it into their craft see it as a tool—one that, like any tool, should be used responsibly, ethically, and with careful consideration of its consequences. Just like nature, magick is neither black or white, it just is. As a witch, it is your right to use your magick to defend yourself, and then some.

[fanganfessions]

Something I find hilarious about Damon, is just how he's completely wrong about talents. His isn't better than everyone else's. Its probably on the same level as most of them.

Jean has to know first-aid, weather patterns, memorise multiple sea routes, keep group morale high and actually save people from drowning in order to qualify as an Ultimate. Diana has to have the skill to be able to instantly identify what kinds of makeup looks good on her client, probably transform people's faces into something entirely different, and make sure to never make a mistake as she'd have to redo everything. Her eye for detail isn't something you'd find everywhere. Heck, even Kai has to memorise algorithm trends, do partnerships and such, and according to his FTEs, he manufactured an entire zeitgeist from one account, when he was doing an online marketing job his coworkers were cheating off of (even Damon thinks this is impressive), and also influenced the marketing strategies of companies that try to seem more "friendly" and "casual" on social media accounts. Wolfgang's work changes the course of lives, helping innocent people who could've gotten live sentences live freely. Wenona's responsible for basically all the food in the country.

Not to say Damon's talent isn't also extremely impressive. He has to memorise the details of any kind of topic in order to have an expert's opinion in an incredibly short period of time, and weigh it's pros and cons in order to argue for or against it. He's pretty good at the thing too, judging by his Ultimate title. Him winning enough competitions that his parents don't have to work anymore, and supposedly paying for the welfare, groceries and overall living expenses for three (or more if he also pays for any siblings or uncles and aunts) people is pretty damn impressive. It's just that most of his actual arguments about talents are so far-fetched that it's impossible not to poke holes in them.

Yeah, sure buddy, you can argue about ethics and politics, but so can literally everyone. Has he ever went outside near his country's election day?? Or ever went to a family gathering?? And that's only talking about politics. Beause he's definitely not the only one to ever have an opinion. Yeah, his arguments are backed up by actual data and stuff, but he's not the only person to ever do that, and like 99% of those people probably work office jobs. Intelligence also doesn't make his talent superior cause you have to be intelligento for every talent. He also admits in Wenona's FTEs that he wipes his memory clean in order to prepare for his next debate, so he doesn't actually learn anything.

Some talents are obviously more useful to society, like entrepreneurship or law, but debate isn't one of them. In fact, it barely changes society as a whole. It's extremely important to Damon's life and his family's, but unless he goes straight into being a politician or something, odds are he's not changing anything. Damon is pretty impressive as a person, probably more intelligent than most of his classmates, but his talent simply isn't betters than their's. Like I mentioned above, all Ultimate talents are impressive, but comparing a cosmetologist to a entreprenur, an influencer to a historian, or a debater to a lawyer... doesn't make that much sense.

Personally, I think all the characters are extremely impressive in their personal talents (because they're ultimates, duh), but tons of characters like Damon and Eva (most obvious examples) definitely aren't defined by their talents in regards to how intelligent they are, even though their characters do revolve around their Ultimates.

⠀

[fellshish]

I have a question, and my name is Sal.

I grew up watching Coraline as a kid. It was my jam. I loved that movie, and I will forever say Henry Selick deserved more attention for making it.

I like the Dresden Dolls and Evelyn Evelyn (Amanda Palmer projects) I still have the songs stuck in my head. You know where this is going.

I know you said that fans of works should still enjoy the work even if the creator sucks. And I can do that with Kubrick and Aaron Fechter, but that’s because Kubrick is dead, and most of Aaron Fechter’s IP got ripped away from him and is gladly in the hands of the public (despite how much he likes to sue).

Gaiman (and Palmer) are still alive and/or profiting off their stuff. Not to mention, I want to bring attention to the situation and help bring justice to the victims. Yet everytime I post about it or reblog what someone else put into words what I think, I feel like I’m virtue signalling.

How do I handle it and is it bad that I keep thinking of the art that influenced me by them instead of what they did (in a way to soften the blow to how horribly they abused these women)?

(You can respond to this publicly, as I am sure people are thinking the same thing somewhere. I am sorry for dumping all this on you.)

hi sal!

sorry, this got long. your ask was so genuine and i was afraid of getting it wrong. 

i want to start this off by saying i am not the boss of anyone’s fandom experience. everyone gets to decide for themselves how they proceed after learning about the numerous women who have come forward against neil gaiman.

the things you mention are things i’ve struggled with too — last year when i first learned about it, when i listened to the podcasts and recently again reading even more detailed (and horrifying) news reporting.

these are also struggles shared by many fans in many fandoms of creators who were accused and/or controversial and/or convicted. for example many (trans) people i know have grown up loving harry potter, and have had to deal with their favourite writer waging a vendetta against trans lives. some still participate in the hp fandom without supporting her. they can’t help their hyperfixation and still find a lot of good and a lot of friends in the fandom. 

because yes, i do believe that someone can stay in such a fandom as ethically as possible. as in: i try the best that i can to make sure no further financial gains go to the creator. that means i avoid watching official streams, buying official merch, going to official cons, going to plays based on his work etc. i also amplify the women’s voices by spreading the article. 

the thing to keep in mind is: there is a difference and a distance between a creator and a fandom of what they created. a huge wall even. fandom is about community, friendships, creativity, … i am on a playground playing with the characters with my friends. sharing art and fics and gifs etc. and what those characters and stories mean to me are positive things. 

the core is this: if you have to live your life only consuming art by morally pure people (and who determines that?!) then you will have very little left to enjoy. 

and of course i understand the urge to want to help the victims, and the guilt/worry about virtue signaling. i’m going to break those down separately.

i think the idea of ‘helping bring justice to the victims’ is good but it also puts an unreasonable amount of responsibility on your young shoulders. here’s what’s already happened: the women’s voices have been heard, there is now more widespread media covering, he has lost his reputation, hasn’t been on his platforms since last summer, he’s losing (film) projects of his work, … what else consequences are yet to come, legally or otherwise, we’ll have to see. the responsibility for that lies not with you as one single fan but with lawyers etc. and you might find it important to keep vigilant that the story doesn’t get buried (again). in that case reblogging isn’t virtue signalling but useful.

but it’s also unreasonable to expect someone to continually do that for days and days. that’s a quick ticket to depression. ultimately tumblr is, to many, a fandom space. some people use it only for pleasant fandom activities. and what if they do? you can’t know a person’s whole life: maybe they are survivors who are too triggered to participate, maybe they’ve donated to causes that help survivors, maybe they have shared the story on other platforms etc

you asked “is it bad that I keep thinking of the art that influenced me by them instead of what they did”, and i found that the most heartbreaking part of your ask. it isn’t helpful to you or to anyone to keep torturing yourself with guilt. you’re aware of the allegations, and that’s good. but don’t burn yourself out trying to live up to the impossible standard of a morally pure activist that doesn’t exist. please stop being your own thought police. 

i think the fact you struggle so deeply, shows what a beautiful person you are.

now you’re going to be reading a lot of opinions. some very different from mine. am i right in continuing in fandom? i don’t know. this is my first time living life too. but i AM right that you’re a good person.

that said: protect your heart. block freely and curate a fandom space that makes you happy. avoid engaging in endless internet discourse that is bad for your mental health. step away for a while if that is what you need.

these are some intense days but i promise it gets better. the kid who loved coraline can still love coraline, but is just more informed now. 

the main rule of fandom is: does it spark joy? if yes, embrace it, because that’s a wonderful and rare thing to have.

[elumish]

I said I was done talking about this for the moment, but it turns out I have one more thing to say (I am happy to have more conversations about this, but probably not right now):

Here's what I mean when I talk about harm and about doing what you can to avoid harm in your writing.

I believe (and I think basically everyone believes) that there are some narratives and viewpoints that are harmful. We don't all agree on what those are, but I think virtually everyone has some set of things that they think are harmful viewpoints. These viewpoints and narratives lead to actions. These narratives and viewpoints are supported and reinforced by stories, among many other things.

For a fairly neutral example, there's a narrative that Paris is a romantic city. This is supported/reinforced by books/movies/TV shows/etc. showing Paris as a place to travel to with or find a romantic partner. As such, many people travel to Paris with a spouse to have a romantic getaway.

For a less neutral example, there is a narrative that torture is a successful way to get vital and accurate information from suspects, and that the ends of torture (that vital and accurate information) justify the means. This is supported/reinforced by books/movies/TV shows/etc., which has had real-world impacts. In 2007, Scalia cited 24 in his defense of torture (for example).

Obviously you can debate all day long to what degree impacts are based on viewer/readership, the method of publishing, etc. but the fact of the matter is that fiction does influence how people think about things.

So back to the idea of harm. Harm through writing, to me, is about what narratives or viewpoints your writing is supporting, reinforcing, or perpetuating and how it is doing so.

If you write a gay or trans character who is a pedophile, there's a good chance that your story is going to reinforce the narrative that gay or trans people are pedophiles. Can you write a story involving a gay or trans pedophile that doesn't perpetuate that narrative? Probably! But you have to know what you're writing and what you are or could be implying and then actively work to mitigate that risk.

If you write a story with a police protagonist, there's a good chance that you might reinforce some pro-police narratives, just by virtue of writing them as the protagonist. Can you avoid those narratives? Sure! But again, you have to know what you're saying and then do the work.

There are places that this obviously gets a lot more complicated, and there are places where the medium or genre that you are writing in make a huge difference in how the same thing is framed. For example, framing unethical (e.g., nonconsensual) implementations of BDSM as erotic in a romance novel is, in my opinion, different than it is in a story that is just intended as erotica. They have different genre expectations and norms, and so the implications are different.

And this is all where your own understanding of the narratives and of your own morals and ethics and standards are key. You are the writer! It is ultimately up to you to figure out and decide what you think is harmful and how to address that.

But doing all of that means knowing what you're writing, and it means putting thought into what is harmful.

[girlactionfigure]

Some hard facts no one will tell you, but if you care about truth, you’ll want to know.

Let’s start with the most fundamental lie you’re being told. 

“Israel occupied an Arab Palestinian state and stole their land.”

Sit down for this. 

Such a state never existed in the history of the world. Don’t believe me? Try to find a date that the Arab Palestine was established. Try to find out who the president was. What currency did they use? What was their national anthem? 

I’ll save you the time. 

It never existed. 

Onward…. 

The next blatant lie is “Israel occupied Gaza before October 7th, which is why Hamas attacked.”

Really? 

Here. I’ll help you. 

Open your web browser. Open Google. Type in “The Disengagement.”

2005. Israel forcefully removed 10,000 Israel from Gaza, dug up its dead (Yea, you read that right!) so Hamas wouldn’t rape (Yes, that’s a thing. Hamas raped corpses on October 7th.) the dead bodies, and handed the Palestinians Gaza on a silver platter for them to build a state. 

The Palestinians pretty much immediately elected Hamas to govern them and chose a terror state over what could have been paradise. 

There were zero Jews in Gaza on October 6th. 

That’s not an opinion. It’s an indisputable fact. 

Next… 

Genocide. People love to use that word when describing the war in Gaza. 

So there are a few ways to address this. 

First of all, the numbers everyone keeps quoting are from Hamas, a terrorist organization that raped little girls and burned families alive. 

Have you considered that maybe they’re lying? 

But you know what? Let’s go with Hamas. What ridiculous number are they up to? 30,000? 40,000? You know what? Let’s go with 50,000. 

50,000 dead in Gaza? Sure. How many of those were terrorists? Because according to the Gaza Health Ministry, out of those tens of thousands, zero of them were terrorists. 

Cool. Makes sense…

But forget the numbers. Just kindly explain to me why Israel has lost hundreds of its soldiers in Gaza. Why didn’t Israel just attack from the air and flatten Gaza if genocide was what Israel was after? 

How long would this war take if Israel didn’t send in soldiers and just dropped bombs on Gaza? Spoiler: It would have ended on October 8th. 

Finally, do you know how those numbers, again, even according to Hamas’ fake numbers, compare to other wars and conflicts in the world? Syria, for example. 

If the numbers in Gaza are so microscopic compared to other wars, why is it that you haven’t heard about a genocide going on anywhere else but Gaza? 

“Ceasefire now!”

Here’s a little secret for ya. 

There was a ceasefire! Wanna know when? On October 6th. Then Hamas broke it and attacked Israel. 

Want a ceasefire? Great. So do I. Right after Hamas returns all the hostages and surrenders. 

If you’re calling for a ceasefire and looking at Israel, you must be confused. Israel has offered a ceasefire so many times in this war, all of which Hamas rejected. 

We all want a ceasefire. Don’t look at Israel. Look at Hamas who broke the ceasefire then proceeded to reject offers for a ceasefire over and over. 

Ok, moving on… 

“Jews love to pull the antisemitism card. There is no antisemitism. It’s just anti Zionism.”

Really now…?

Because antisemitic attacks, against Jews, not Israelis, are up over 300%. 

Kindly explain to me why Jewish influencers are getting thousands of comments about the war when they haven’t even stepped foot in Israel. 

Kindly explain to me why synagogues are being vandalized and attacked. 

Kindly explain to me why Jewish events need extra security or why Jewish speakers require body guards. 

Kindly explain to me why there are marches around the world in which thousands chant antisemitic chants about Jews, not zionists. 

I’ll wait for your explanation. 

Ok, next. 

“Israel is ethically cleansing Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and has been for 75 years.”

Fascinating. 

So if that were the case, you’d expect the Palestinian population to be on a sharp decline. 

Wanna take a guess how many “Palestinians” (added the quotes because they didn’t call themselves that till Arafat hijacked the word that previously just meant Israelis.) were in Israel in 1948 and how many there are now? 

Take a guess. 

5,462,888. That’s how many Palestinians there are now. ()

You know what? Forget numbers. Here, I’ll give you a visual. 

Does that look like ethnic cleansing? 

Want to know what real ethnic cleansing looks like? Go choose any Muslim country and notice how many Jews lived there 50 years ago and how many live there now. That is ethnic cleansing.worldometers.info/world-populati…

“Israel is an apartheid state.”

That’s so interesting because I was just watching an interview with a member of Knesset, Israel’s parliament, who is not only a Muslim Arab, but he’s also anti Zionist. That means he opposes the existence of Israel and yet, he has a seat in the parliament. 

If Israel was an apartheid state, why is every road sign in Israel written in Hebrew and Arabic? 

If Israel was an apartheid state, why are there Arabs who are judges in Israel?

If Israel was an apartheid state, why do Arabs, Muslims, and Christians have total freedom in Israel? 

If Israel was an apartheid state, why are there Arab doctors, lawyers, soldiers, actors, athletes, and CEOs in Israel who are Muslim?

Israel must really suck at this apartheid thing. But since there are so many people out there who are experts in apartheid, maybe some of them can train Israel to up its apartheid game…

🤣

Moving along… 

“Give them a state. They deserve a state. If only they had a state, the terror would stop.”

Wow, how did we not think of that?

Oh wait, I forgot one thing. 

They had a state given to them once or twice. Or 15 times. 

1937, 1947, 1967, 1991, 2000, 2001, 2005, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2013, 2019, 2020. 

Perhaps they don’t want a state… 

What else we got…?

“End the occupation and the “Resistance” will end. 

First of all, let’s just clarify some terms. Resistance. What is legitimate resistance? 

Because Hamas beheaded babies, raped girls and old woman, burned families alive, and committed other unspeakable sexual crimes and they also made sure their family members watched their loved ones get raped. 

Is that valid resistance to you? 

But let’s address the premise. 

Put on your logic hat for a second. 

If occupation —-> terror

Then logic dictates 

No occupation —-> no terror 

Right? 

So if I show you that Arabs were massacring Jews before any so-called occupation, this whole argument falls apart, right? 

What if I showed you that there was Arab terror against Jews before there was even a state of Israel for them to oppose? 

1929. Hebron. Arabs massacred Jews. 

Great. Glad we cleared that up. 

Next… 

“Israel is lying about October 7th. There was no rape and Hamas only attacked soldiers. The rest of the people were killed by Israel.”

Um. Where do I even begin? 

Ya know what? I can’t even. Go watch the GoPro footage. Go listen to Hamas who is so proud of what they did. 

So you don’t believe Israel and you don’t believe Hamas. Got it. 

Must be nice to live in a fantasy world. 

“Israel is indiscriminately killing Gazans.”

Wow, had no idea. 

So is Israel strong and therefore should act with restraint or Israel so weak that even though it’s killing indiscriminately, the numbers don’t reflect that. 

Shouldn’t there be hundreds of thousands of dead Gazans if the mighty Israel is just trying to kill as many of them as possible? 

Make up your mind. Is Israel strong or is Israel weak? It can’t be both. 

Cmon you’re better than that. 

Let’s see, what’s next… 

“Islam is a religion of peace and the only reason there is so much radical Islamic terror in the world is because of Israel.”

Awesome. So it has nothing to do with the Quran encouraging violence, right? 

Cool cool. 

I’ll just leave this here. 

Don’t worry, we’re nearing the end…

“Israel is a white colonial state that wants world dominance and is only starting with Gaza.”

Wow, so crazy how I didn’t know. 

So how many wars has Israel started? I would assume all of them, since Israel is the aggressor. 

How about none? Not a single one. 

Israel has never started a war and attacked an enemy first. 

Maybe those same people can teach Israel how to be better colonizers. 

Also, you don’t have to spend more than 24 hours in Israel to see how many “Not white” people live there. 

Ok, I’ll stop here even though I can continue for hours. 

Stop spreading lies about Israel. Words matter and if you stand against Israel, you stand with rapists and pedophiles. 

History will remember that. 

Besides, siding with the Jews, history will show, is the smart thing to do. 

Otherwise you join ancient Egypt, Rome, Greece, Nazis, Soviet, Babylonian, and so many other empires who messed with the Jews and are now extinct. 

This isn’t just another war. This is a war between the dark forces of radical Islam and the western world and all that it stands for. 

This is good vs evil and there is no nuance. 

• • •

Hillel Fuld

[opencommunion]

via RNN:

The eternal martyr Basil Al-Araj wrote abundantly before his ascension in March of 2017. In his posthumously published book, "I Have Found My Answers," (a line from his will) he spoke of war during the 2014 zionist aggression on Gaza, just prior to the IOF ground invasion on July 17.

Basil guided us with eight rules and insights on the nature of war. He wrote:

—

Since there is talk of a ground operation, several points must be considered:

1. The Palestinian resistance consists of guerrilla formations whose strategies follow the logic of guerrilla warfare or hybrid warfare, which Arabs and Muslims have become masters of through our experiences in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Gaza. War is never based on the logic of conventional wars and the defense of fixed points and borders; on the contrary, you draw the enemy into an ambush. You do not stick to a fixed position to defend it; instead, you perform maneuvers, movement, withdrawal, and attack from the flanks and the rear. So, never measure it against conventional wars.

2. The enemy will spread photos and videos of their invasion into Gaza, occupation of residential buildings, or presence in public areas and well-known landmarks. This is part of the psychological warfare in guerrilla wars; you allow your enemy to move as they wish so that they fall into your trap and you strike them. You determine the location and timing of the battle. So, you may see photos from Al-Katiba Square, Al-Saraya, Al-Rimal, or Omar Al-Mukhtar Street, but do not let this weaken your resolve. The battle is judged by its overall results, and this is merely a show.

3. Never spread the occupation's propaganda, and do not contribute to instilling a sense of defeat. This must be focused on, for soon, we will start talking about a massive invasion in Beit Lahia and Al-Nusseirat, for example. Never spread panic; be supportive of the resistance and do not spread any news broadcast by the occupation (forget about the ethics and impartiality of journalism; just as the zionist journalist is a fighter, so are you).

4. The enemy may broadcast images of prisoners, most likely civilians, but the goal is to suggest the rapid collapse of the resistance. Do not believe them.

5. The enemy will carry out tactical, qualitative operations to assassinate some symbols [of resistance], and all of this is part of psychological warfare. Those who have died and those who will die will never affect the resistance's system and cohesion because the structure and formations of the resistance are not centralized but horizontal and widespread. Their goal is to influence the resistance's support base and the families of the resistance fighters, as they are the only ones who can affect the men of the resistance.

6. Our direct human and material losses will be much greater than the enemy's, which is natural in guerrilla wars that rely on willpower, the human element, and the extent of patience and endurance. We are far more capable of bearing the costs, so there is no need to compare or be alarmed by the magnitude of the numbers.

7. Today's wars are no longer just wars and clashes between armies but rather are struggles between societies. Let us be like a solid structure and play a game of biting fingers with the enemy, our society against their society.

Finally, every Palestinian (in the broad sense, meaning anyone who sees Palestine as a part of their struggle, regardless of their secondary identities), every Palestinian is on the front lines of the battle for Palestine, so be careful not to fail in your duty.

[i-love-your-light]

too many thoughts on the new hbomberguy video not to put them anywhere so:

with every app trying to turn into the clock app these days by feeding you endless short form content, *how many* pieces of misinformation does the average person consume day to day?? thinking a lot about how tons of people on social media go largely unquestioned about the information they provide just because they speak confidently into the camera. if you're scrolling through hundreds of pieces of content a day, how many are you realistically going to have the time and will to check? i think there's an unfortunate subconscious bias in liberal and leftist spaces that misinformation is something that is done only by the right, but it's a bipartisan issue babey. everybody's got their own agendas, even if they're on "your side". *insert you are not immune to propaganda garfield meme*

and speaking of fact checking, can't help but think about how much the current state of search engines Sucks So Bad right now. not that this excuses ANY of the misinformation at all, but i think it provides further context as to why these things become so prevalent in creators who become quick-turnaround-content-farms and cut corners when it comes to researching. when i was in high school and learning how to research and cite sources, google was a whole different landscape that was relatively easy to navigate. nowadays a search might give you an ad, a fake news article, somebody's random blog, a quora question, and another ad before actually giving you a relevant verifiable source. i was googling a question about 1920s technology the other day (for a fanfiction im writing lmao) and the VERY FIRST RESULT google gave me was some random fifth grader's school assignment on the topic???? like?????? WHAT????? it just makes it even harder for people to fact-check misinformation too.

going off the point of cutting corners when it comes to creating content, i can't help but think about capitalism's looming influence over all of this too. again, not as an excuse at all but just as further environmental context (because i really believe the takeaway shouldn't be "wow look how bad this one individual guy is" but rather "wow this is one specific example of a much larger systemic issue that is more pervasive than we realize"). a natural consequence of the inhumanity of capitalism is that people feel as if they have to step on or over eachother to get to 'the top'. if everybody is on this individualistic american dream race to success, everyone else around you just looks like collateral. of course then you're going to take shortcuts, and you're going to swindle labor and intellectual property from others, because your primary motivation is accruing capital (financial or social) over ethics or actual labor.

i've been thinking about this in relation to AI as well, and the notion that some people want to Be Artists without Doing Art. they want to Have Done Art but not labor through the process. to present something shiny to the world and benefit off of it. they don't want to go through the actual process of creating, they just want a product. Easy money. Winning the game of capitalism.

i can't even fully fault this mentality- as someone who has been struggling making barely minimum wage from art in one of the most expensive cities in america for the past two years, i can't say that i haven't been tempted on really difficult occasions to act in ways that would be morally bad but would give me a reprieve from the constant stress cycle of "how am i going to pay for my own survival for another month". the difference is i don't give in to those impulses.

tl;dr i hope that people realize that instead of this just being a time to dogpile on one guy (or a few people), that it's actually about a larger systemic problem, and the perfect breeding grounds society has created for this kind of behavior to largely go unchecked!!!

[mywitchyblog]

Why Having Multiple Significant Others in Different Realities Isn’t Cheating

Reality shifting, a concept rooted in the idea of moving one's consciousness between different realities or dimensions, has garnered significant attention in recent years. As individuals explore these alternate realities, questions arise about the implications of forming relationships across these different worlds.

In our conventional understanding, fidelity and commitment are core values in romantic relationships, often defined by exclusivity within a single reality. However, when relationships exist in multiple, independent realities, the traditional boundaries of what constitutes "cheating" may no longer apply.

This essay seeks to explore why having multiple significant others in different realities should not be considered cheating, by examining the nature of relationships across parallel dimensions and redefining ethical considerations in this unique context.

Masterlist :

Part 1: Understanding Reality Shifting and Its Implications on Relationships

1.1: Defining Reality Shifting and Its Context

Reality shifting, though once relegated to the realms of science fiction, has increasingly become a topic of interest among those exploring consciousness and the nature of existence. At its core, reality shifting refers to the practice of intentionally moving one's consciousness/awareness from the current reality to an alternate one. These alternate realities are often perceived as parallel universes or dimensions, each with its own set of rules, circumstances, and inhabitants. Unlike lucid dreaming, where the dreamer is aware of the dream state, reality shifting involves fully immersing oneself in a different reality, where the experiences feel just as vivid and authentic as those in the current reality.

The concept of multiple realities plays a crucial role in understanding reality shifting. According to this idea, there are countless realities, each existing simultaneously but independently of the others. These realities are often described as parallel worlds where different versions of ourselves might live entirely different lives. The choices and events in one reality do not affect or interfere with those in another, making each reality self-contained and distinct. This multiplicity of realities forms the foundation upon which reality shifting operates, offering individuals the opportunity to explore various versions of their lives in different dimensions.

1.2: The Nature of Relationships in Multiple Realities

In a single reality, relationships are typically understood as exclusive and monogamous, based on the shared experiences and commitments between individuals. These relationships are bound by the constraints of the reality they exist in, with societal norms and ethical considerations guiding behavior. Commitment, trust, and fidelity are often seen as cornerstones of a successful relationship, with any deviation from these principles considered a breach of trust or "cheating."

However, when relationships are considered across multiple realities, the dynamics change significantly. Each reality operates independently, meaning that the experiences, relationships, and commitments in one reality do not overlap or influence those in another. For example, a person might be in a committed relationship in one reality, while simultaneously being in a different relationship in another. Since these realities do not intersect, each relationship is valid and complete within its own context, without infringing upon the other.

This separation of realities introduces a new way of understanding relationships. Rather than being bound by the exclusivity required in a single reality, individuals can form multiple significant relationships across different realities, each fulfilling different aspects of their emotional and psychological needs. In this context, the conventional definitions of commitment and fidelity may no longer apply in the same way, as each relationship exists in a distinct and non-overlapping realm. This understanding lays the groundwork for reevaluating the ethical considerations of having multiple significant others in different realities, which will be explored further in the following sections.

Part 2: Ethical Considerations of Having Multiple Significant Others in Different Realities

2.1: The Ethics of Commitment and Fidelity Across Realities

In the context of a single reality, commitment and fidelity are deeply ingrained in the concept of romantic relationships. These principles are guided by societal norms that emphasize exclusivity as a key component of a committed partnership. Cheating, in this context, is defined as a breach of trust where one partner engages in an intimate relationship with someone outside the committed relationship without the other partner's consent. This violation is considered a betrayal because it undermines the mutual understanding and promises that define the relationship.

However, when we consider relationships across multiple realities, the traditional views on fidelity require reexamination. In a multiverse where each reality is self-contained and operates independently, the ethical framework for commitment might shift. Since the realities do not interact or influence each other, the emotional and physical experiences within them are isolated. Therefore, the exclusivity demanded in a single reality may not be applicable when a person is navigating relationships in different realities.

Redefining fidelity in this context involves acknowledging that each reality represents a separate existence with its own unique set of experiences and commitments. A person who has significant others in different realities is not violating the principles of fidelity as traditionally understood, because the relationships exist in entirely separate contexts. Each relationship is authentic and genuine within its own reality, and there is no overlap or conflict between them. As such, the ethical boundaries that govern relationships in a single reality may not be sufficient to address the complexities introduced by reality shifting.

2.2: Why Having Multiple Significant Others Isn’t Cheating

To understand why having multiple significant others across different realities is not cheating, it is essential to revisit the definition of cheating itself. In a single reality, cheating involves deceit, betrayal, and the breaking of agreed-upon boundaries within a relationship. The act of cheating is harmful because it damages the trust that underpins the relationship and causes emotional pain to the betrayed partner.

In the context of multiple realities, however, these elements of deceit and betrayal are absent. Each reality exists independently, with no awareness or influence on the other realities. The relationships in these different realities do not intersect or interfere with each other, meaning that there is no deceit or hidden behavior involved. Each relationship is conducted openly and honestly within its own reality, and the individuals involved are fully committed within the context of that reality.

Moreover, the non-overlap of realities means that the emotional and physical experiences in one reality do not affect those in another. This separation ensures that the ethical considerations that would typically define cheating in a single reality do not apply. The absence of harm, deceit, and betrayal in the context of multiple realities suggests that having significant others in different dimensions does not constitute cheating.

An important aspect to consider is that when shifting between realities, you are not abandoning or leaving a significant other in one reality when you shift to another. This is because you continue to exist in the reality you leave behind, with your consciousness simply shifting focus to a different dimension. Your relationship in the original reality remains intact, and the version of you that stays behind continues to live and engage in that relationship. In essence, the version of you in each reality remains committed to the significant other in that particular reality, without being aware of the relationships in the others.

This concept challenges the notion of cheating because it highlights that no relationship is being neglected or abandoned; rather, each relationship is fully maintained within its own reality. The individual is not consciously aware of the other relationships while engaged in one, and therefore, the ethical breach associated with cheating does not occur. Each reality is a complete, self-contained existence where the relationships are genuine and unimpacted by the others.

Additionally, personal autonomy plays a critical role in navigating relationships across different realities. Reality shifting allows individuals to explore various aspects of their identities and desires in ways that would not be possible within a single reality. This exploration is a form of self-discovery and fulfillment that respects the independence of each reality. The ethical boundaries are thus shaped by the understanding that each relationship is valid and complete within its own context, without diminishing or violating the commitments made in other realities.

In conclusion, the concept of cheating is inherently tied to the idea of betrayal within a single, shared reality. However, when relationships are spread across multiple, independent realities, the ethical framework shifts. The non-overlapping nature of these realities ensures that having multiple significant others does not violate the principles of fidelity or commitment. Instead, it represents a broader understanding of relationships and personal autonomy in the context of reality shifting, where each relationship is fully authentic and legitimate within its own distinct dimension.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the concept of reality shifting challenges our traditional views on relationships, fidelity, and commitment. When relationships are formed in multiple realities, each existing independently without intersection, the ethical boundaries that define cheating in a single reality become blurred. Since these relationships do not overlap and are confined to their respective dimensions, having multiple significant others across different realities does not equate to cheating. Instead, it reflects a broader understanding of personal autonomy and the complex nature of relationships in a multiverse. As our comprehension of reality expands, so too must our ethical frameworks, allowing for the recognition of diverse forms of relationships that transcend the limitations of a single reality.

[gowns]

i had a cup of coffee and started writing stream of consciousness about "the good place" and more things that bugged me

ok, so like, the thing with *all* sci-fi and fantasy is that it is necessarily constrained by the lived experience and imagination of the writer. so you always have to keep in mind the context of the person who wrote it (e.g. jrr tolkein, gene roddenberry, douglas adams, etc).

but i think what bugs me about "the good place" is that it's a whole team of writers, which should expand the imagination of the show (and i think you can see a good example of that in a show like "star trek," for instance, which also had input from its performers)...

but the whole time i'm like, i'm just inside michael schur's head. and i gotta give him props for trying to translate philosophy for The Masses, but the ... the... the NPR-ness of it all!!!! bugs meeee!!!! i notice it in the writing for every character...

i think michael's character ends up the strongest and most consistent, but there are so many anomalies within eleanor, chidi, jason, and tahani that it bugs me... so many "they would not say that / do that." even with being rebooted so many times

and tbh, speaking of the rebooting, one thing that i just cannot get over in the show's concept and later-season story arcs is the question of human consciousness, the biology of being alive and being dead... in the afterlife there's so many references to body things, body comforts, the 5 senses, and the entire time i'm like, that's all predicated on chemical responses from having a living body... so then what exactly does their afterlife consciousness consist of... hm?! this is me being very literal-brained but i just cannot stop saying "what does your consciousness consist of" at the TV screen. i like the moral / ethical puzzles they ask but it's just too much like "it's exactly like your (middle class american) life on earth in every single way except also a little bit of magic."

i think that, weirdly, even though "hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy" is very much written by a british guy in the 1970s, it still has a broader imagination than "the good place." i would have to re-read it to compare more closely... douglas adams is the benchmark, for sure. and there were some clear douglas adams influences in the good place. i just kept feeling like, for as long as that show is (14 hours!), they kept circling around the same limited ideas and i wanted so much moreeeee. like the hitchhiker's guide sequels. those got so weird. so i know that "the good place" could have gotten weirder. and gayer.

all that being said, when i check reddit, it did blow a lot of people's minds, and the ending really upset people just from suggesting "a nothingness after the afterlife," let alone the nothingness after this life (which is real), so, maybe it was as weird as it possibly could have been for a sitcom in 2015-2019.

[jane-d-ankh-veos]

Some people aggressively tried to convince me that it's 100% canon that the Hexcore has its own malicious will and fully controls Viktor, and, well... usually I'm only glad when there is a wide variety of theories – I love exploring them and can peacefully ignore those I don't agree with – but I really can't stand this kind of arguing (especially when it resorts to calling any alternatives stupid and illiterate just like the Archie-September fanonists were called). Leave others some freedom to have their own interpretations, please...

So, why persuading me into adopting this one is a waste of time and effort: I don't like that it deprives him of responsibility and meaningfulness of personally taking it. The mage admitted that he had chosen a wrong way and attempted to set it right, and this is such an admirable rare strength. It's an important part of his character: staying true to his "in the pursuit of great, we failed to do good" and desires to lessen humanity's suffering, his intentions were always for the best, so he is able to consciously renounce evil when he sees that the consequences betray his ethics. This requires immence willpower and intelligence. His own. He isn't simply cleaning up some unruly magical orb's mess after being its possessed puppet, he acts like a complex personality.

(Just imagine, for example, how boring BG3 would be if instead of its interesting vivid characters all the communication/flirting/teamwork was in fact happening only between their illithid tadpoles...)

Even the original Machine Herald, despite being devoted to the Glorious Evolution for a longer time and certainly not going to abandon it, is also capable of genuine self-introspection and honest abidance by what he thinks is right. (My precious ironclad cinnamon roll ❤️)

As for the argument that the Hexcore recoiled from him in S1 like a living creature, even our own world's nature has a lot of things that can react to a potential threat without necessarily having sentience. Some of them can even learn and distinguish:

What I could somewhat accept is the version that the Hexcore was given life by his blood. If its alleged independent mind is a direct creation and part of Viktor himself, then at least it's more logical than appearing from nowhere (or from the Void that is almost a whole continent away and would have already destroyed Piltover and Zaun long before these experiments if it was somehow involved), has actual on-screen basis and doesn't take away his responsibility so entirely.

Anyway, even after their fusion, there are so many scenes clearly showing that it's still this same Viktor who speaks, watches and makes decisions:

Or his monologue at the end of S2's sixth episode. The character himself explains his reasons, that's why I don't get those saying that there were none so the eldritch influence can be the only possible explanation.

Speaking of which, I do get his logic in some of my own personal ways. The heavy burden of empathy... The constant frustration... The feeling that only some near-impossible universal change would be able to make things better because life is so fundamentally injust and so tragically vulnerable to evil/violence/illness/death/pain... But this would require a whole another post, I'm afraid, and would be highly subjective.

What I see as actual villainizing influence is his own despair. First he had already been about to take his life, then he was horribly killed within an arm's reach of achieving a better future for Zaun, then his hopeful commune was destroyed, a close friend/lover shot him, etc... Anyone in his place would run out of patience to act rationally and nicely, so I understand and forgive him wholeheartedly.

[tomorrowxtogether]

TXT Debut a Sparkling New Chapter — and Reveal Which Previous Era Their New Album Is a Throwback to (Exclusive)

PEOPLE spoke to Soobin, Yeonjun, Beomgyu, Taehyun and Hueningkai about making "The Star Chapter: SANCTUARY"

Tomorrow x Together's latest release is an evolution and a nostalgia play all at once.

The Star Chapter: SANCTUARY (out Monday, Nov. 4), is officially the start of a new era for the K-pop group's five members — Soobin, 23, Yeonjun, 25, Beomgyu, 23, Taehyun, 22, Hueningkai, 22 — who spoke to PEOPLE ahead of its release.

They're moving out of "The Name Chapter" — two albums that reveled in the freedom and occasional chaos of youthful indiscretions — and into "The Star Chapter." Represented by a bright, shining logo rebrand, it carries messages about finding true love and lasting happiness.

“To some extent, I think it really reflects us growing up,” says Hueningkai.

"In our past installments, it was more of those magical moments, like ‘Run away together with me,’ or something that could be a little bit less responsible," adds Taehyun. "But this time around, it's romantic, but in a sense that it's grounded and more realistic.”

Sonically, SANCTUARY has a sweetness that recalls some of the group’s earliest releases.

"I think you're spot on about talking about how you thought of The Dream Chapter when listening to this album," Huengingkai confirmed while discussing their influences with PEOPLE in October. "It's something new, but it's something that also provokes nostalgia as well," he adds.

The lead single, "Over the Moon," is dreamy pop but includes some very grown-up themes with lyrics about living under one roof and planning for the future. Other tracks, like "Danger" tip into funky Bruno Mars-like territory, or in the case of "Forty One Winks," more upbeat R&B.

While there's no real rock or pop punk moments (something they've leaned into with great success in the past with songs like "LO$ER=LO♡ER"), "Higher than Heaven" does have a romping pop-rock bent.

The album's sound isn't just a reflection of the group's shifting tastes. “We have this big narrative that overarches every installment in our musical journey," Hueningkai explains.

Their discography, and the larger lore of the group, incorporates a sprawling fictional backstory that can feel intimidatingly complex for the casual fan. But the themes — the pains of growing up, the reality of facing adulthood, and the heartbreak that so often goes along with it — are universal enough that they come through easily in their earworm singles.

While TXT has shared in the past that their music is often informed by personal experience, they often keep a distance from speaking about their own relationships, instead telling the song's stories of crushes or lost loves as the tales of a “boy” (representing all and none of them) directed at “you,” an embodiment of their fans.

Explaining the meaning of their latest album, for example, Beomgyu says, “It’s a chapter where the boy finally recovers his name and remembers the promise he made with you. And they finally reunite in this album. So it's the rejoicing that they all feel with this reunion.” 

All five members wrote lyrics and music on SANCTUARY, something they've been increasingly passionate about over the six years since their debut.

Taehyun admits to doing most of his writing in the car and on planes, amid their busy schedules. They still find space for collaboration though. "We tend to work separately on lyrics, but when we get stuck, we ask for help from the other members," says Soobin.

Seemingly non-stop promotions can be draining, but they're candid about how they keep their minds and bodies healthy. "Sleeping well is the best thing you can do for yourself," says Beomgyu. Adds Soobin, "We eat a lot of supplements, too, and try to work out a lot so that we can stay healthy and keep up our stamina."

That work ethic has gained them a mountain of accolades in relatively short career.

In 2023, they headlined Lollapalooza in Chicago, then performed at the VMAS in New York, where they also took home the award for Push Performance. Their last album debuted at No. 3 on the Billboard 200, making them only the second K-pop group to enter the chart 10 times, with the only other being their label mates BTS.

Asked if that sort of accomplishment is exciting or intimidating, Yeonjun explains, "We feel both. We feel both elated, and also we feel a sense of responsibility. And I think both are needed, because only when we feel that responsibility can we grow as artists and evolve as artists. So because so many people are giving us love and support, It's our duty to grow and evolve, and show new sides of ourselves as artists."

Adds Taehyun, "We are eternally grateful to Global MOA who always provide us with a lot of love and support. And with this album and the albums going forward, we're going to pay back to them by providing really good music and performances."

The Star Chapter: Sanctuary is available to stream now.