#tried to make this relevant to both book and show people

[amemoryofwot]

[watcherintheweyr]

'Rhaenyra is a bad mom bc she knowingly gave birth to bastards and she knew how much danger they'd be in!!!!'

1. She had no way of knowing those babies wouldn't pop out looking exactly like her, beforehand. And unfortunately she couldn't stop at Jace. The throne needed an heir. Driftmark needed an heir. And a spare was needed as well, given the sheer rate of Targaryen children dying untimely deaths.

2. She had to provide heirs to the throne, and to Driftmark. If she hadn't, society wouldn't have blamed Laenor, they would have blamed her- which makes her position even more unstable, bc then she 'can't fulfill a woman's duty' so why would men think her 'able' to fill a 'man's role' by ruling the kingdom? And she and Laenor tried. He was either unable (meaning infertile or impotent, or unable to get it up), or unwilling. (And they did try. We dont know what they tried but Rhaenyra is shown to be clever in the show so honestly i have no doubt she attempted what Margaery suggested with Renly.) Laenor was in on the entire thing. He was aware of every part of this. He wasn't duped, he wasn't cuckholded- it was a plan greenlit by him, bc this way he and Rhaenyra would both have their heirs and a family. This cannot in any way shape or form be compared to Cersei cuckholding Robert (fuck Robert Baratheon tho), seeing as Robert was **not** at all aware that his children weren't his, and wouldn't have been OK with that.

Either way- she chose not to maritally r*pe her husband and put him through more trauma after it was clear their attempts weren't working. Yall are always so upset for Alicent (rightfully so, bc show!alicent was maritally raped, even if it wasn't considered as such in that time), but you... WANT Rhaenyra to do that to Laenor? Hello???

[And no. Rhaenyra did NOT rape or coerce Criston Cole. The actors, writers, and directors have all stated their sex was consensual and 'an act of love.' It was Rhaenyra going to someone she felt close to and trusted after feeling abandoned and unwanted and betrayed. In that scene you literally watch, as after Cole tells Rhaenyra to stop undressing herself, she moves aside so she isn't blocking his way to the door. The director states that the moment they show Cole folding and setting down his cloak was him choosing his desire over his oaths. And Criston Cole has known Rhaenyra since she was 14. He knew damn well the sort of person she was- and she was not the person who would have harmed him for saying no. She was an intoxicated and emotionally vulnerable 19 year old- Criston was in his late 20s to early 30s. And it's explicitly stated in ep.9 that the ONLY person a Kingsguard cannot refuse is the king. In ep.7 Criston disobeys a direct order from Alicent when she wants him to mutilate Lucerys. Criston Cole was not assaulted. Stop trying to assign Aegon's sins to Rhaenyra so that you can feel better for supporting him.]

3. In the books, the rumors of their bastardry at large halted when all of Rhaenyra's boys' cradle eggs hatched. The ONLY people who continued to try and raise issue were the core green faction. But the realm at large *did not give a fuck* why? Because every actually relevant party claimed those boys. Repeatedly and without flinching. Laenor claimed and loved those boys even face to face with Alicent's bullshit. Corlys claimed and love those boys- he was proud of them, and it's been stated by the actor in the show that Luke was his favorite- that given the... events of ep.10, Corlys will be out for blood. And Viserys repeatedly insisted upon their legitimacy- because Laenor and Corlys claimed them, because he knew that by forcing Rhaenyra to marry Laenor in order to repair the damage his insults caused House Velaryon, that he had backed her into a corner.

Rhaenyras boys are remembered to history as Velaryon. Even **Green supporters** noted that they were good, capable, intelligent, and **worthy** princes. That their deaths were unfortunate *for the realm.*

Legally, those boys are legitimate. They cannot be proven illegitimate without Laenor renouncing them, and he never did. Furthermore, trying to declare children illegitimate due to their appearance is a stupid, dangerous precedent. The fact that it's people who have no ties to House Velaryon pushing these rumors and pushing for disinheritance makes it even worse, because they're meddling in the succession of a House that *is not theirs.* if that became a standard, imagine the feuds and conflicts that would erupt- lords pushing for the children of rivals to be declared illegitimate all for the sake of trying to grasp and steal land, power, and influence as a norm? The realm would tear itself apart. Not to mention the sheer danger that would place women in, in Westeros.

Furthermore, even whilst usurping her, even while calling her children bastards, the Greens also imply Laenor's homosexuality was inherited by the Velaryon princes- that they would use Rhaenyra's 'promiscuity' and Laenor's 'predilections' to turn the Red Keep into a brothel- ironic, considering that's more what Aegon would've done. So even while claiming that Rhaenyras children are bastards that shouldn't inherit, they try to state that what the boys inherit or learn from Laenor makes them unfit for the throne. They can't keep their own damn story straight- because their usurpation was never about what is moral, what is right, or the greater good. It was about greed. Power. Sexism.

It doesn't matter what those boys looked like, especially seeing as Rhaenys had dark hair in the books. What matters is that Corlys and Laenor and Viserys claimed them and declared them legitimate, and that they **never** deviated from that.

As for Vaemond, he was a second son. And he waited until Corlys and Viserys were dying and too ill to stop him to make a grasp for power. Youre not supposed to look at that and feel hes in the right. Youre supposed to look at that and see a man consumed by greed, and literally trying to bury Corlys' will and intentions before the man is even in a grave. He was NEVER Corlys' heir- he just wanted power. It wasn't about his House, or their legacy, it was about him.

(And before yall start shit about Rhaenyras boys stealing Laena's girls' inheritance... Rhaena and Baela are *TARGARYEN*. Not Velaryon. Their claim was to the throne or to any holdings in Daemon's name. NOT to Driftmark.)

Rhaenyras boys being betrothed to Rhaena and Baela tied up any issue of 'Velaryon blood.' Baela would have been queen consort of the seven kingdoms at Jace's side, and they very clearly adored one another in book and show. Rhaena would have been Lady of the Tides- which she never would have had a chance for, without Rhaenyra (and Laena) making those betrothals. She and Luke were also canonically very close- and in show she's very encouraging of him whenever he looks nervous or uncertain. They had a bond.

Rhaenyra stole nothing. She gave those girls more. And she loved them- they were the only daughters she got to have, seeing as the Greens treachery caused the early death of baby Visenya. If she hadn't loved them, she wouldn't have trusted Rhaena to look after Joffrey or give her Morning's egg from Syrax. She wouldn't have immediately invited both girls to the table when she was queen, which is something her father did not do for her until much, much later. He allowed Rhaenyra's voice to be silenced too often when she was first made heir. Rhaenyra did not repeat that hurt to her girls or her boys.

Anyways, moving on.

You lot do also remember that Rhaenyra herself has Velaryon blood, right? Jaehaerys I's mother was Alyssa Velaryon. Aegon, Rhaenys, and Visenya the Conquerors' mother was Valaena Velaryon. It's not immediate, but there *is* Velaryon blood through *all* of Rhaenyras boys.

Ultimately, Rhaenyras boys were only in danger because of the core Green faction usurping the throne. If they hadnt- no succession crisis or rebellion could have truly threatened Rhaenyras boys- because none of them would have had dragons. All of Rhaenyras children loved one another- her sons by Daemon would not have turned on her sons with Laenor (and Harwin). They were a true, loving family- possibly one of the healthiest and most close knit one House Targaryen ever boasted.

And another thing... 'her having babies with Harwin was stupid, she should have picked someone Valyrian!'

Here's the thing. Rhaenyra had to be careful as hell choosing who would father her and Laenor's heirs. She had to choose someone who was physically close, and who could be trusted. Someone who wouldn't try to publicly claim those boys in boast or jealousy. Someone who would keep their mouth shut and had no ambition of their own in regards to the throne. Do you really think Vaemond Velaryon (as I see him suggested a lot) would've kept his mouth shut? That he wouldn't have tried to use this to blackmail Rhaenyra and Laenor for more power and status? Do you think Rhaenys would have ever fought for or supported Rhaenyra if Rhaenyra had tried to have Corlys sire her children? And flying to see Daemon in Pentos and having a purely Valyrian child 9 months later would have made things look even more suspect.

Furthermore... she chose someone who cared for her deeply. Who clearly had a positive relationship with Laenor. She chose someone so she wouldn't have to traumatize herself- she took power over her body in a way almost no Westerosi woman has ever been able to. They were a family unit- Rhaenyra, Laenor, and Harwin. Those children were loved and cherished by two fathers and their mother. They were raised never doubting their mothers love, nor their father's- either father. They were raised and educated to be true, good princes of the realm.

Rhaenyra fought like hell for her children. She was an incredible mother. Yall just believe everything the Green faction says without looking at it critically, and that's unfortunate as hell.

[katzenklavierr]

Got an ask regarding the Restoration commentary track, so I'll summarize some of the interesting stuff in it for anyone interested who doesn't want to watch it/can't watch it at the moment and wants to know:

Overall, the direction they wanted to go with this was to provide some sense of closure for long-term fans of the show without de-legitimizing Joe Nicolosi & Jason Weight's trilogy. Thus, they wrote it in such a way where it can be taken as canon or not.

They consider RvB to have a comic-book-esq sense of continuity, where people can watch the parts they like and consider those the story, and leave the door open for fanworks and alternate interpretations. They say that fans often make connections to things they never even thought of.

They wanted to focus more on Red Team, which they acknowledged usually doesn't get as much plot-relevant stuff, but whom they consider to be important to setting the tone of the show and keeping it comedic.

They consider Simmons to be somewhat of the main character in the film and wanted to focus on his arc.

Wash's story arc was playing off of his arc in S17, but they wanted to take it in a different direction.

The main story is based on the original pitch Burns gave for S15, where it would have likely been expanded into a trilogy involving both stopping Tucker and trying to save him, but ultimately they went with Nicolosi's pitch instead. They condensed the story significantly for the movie.

The production team was very small, Hullum speculates the smallest one they've had since Season 8. They were also working under relatively tight budget and time constraints. Burns mentions working on the script as late as January 2023.

They said it was difficult to get the pacing right knowing it would be a single release rather than an episodic one. They also say that they did revisit some earlier seasons while working on it for inspiration.

They consider bringing Tex back to be Caboose's decision, not Church's. Church's plan was trying to bring himself back. They tried to imply this in the script without directly stating it.

There was a cut scene showing that Tex and Church spent a lot of time (relative to them) inside the memory unit before it was destroyed.

There's another deleted scene where it's revealed Simmons has access to Grif's internet history. Both of them are uncomfortable about this.

Donut is Geoff Ramsey's favourite character.

A certain website has been updated.

[amuseoffyre]

I was watching the bts videos yesterday including the making of the opening credits and Mr. Anderson said “We added plaques to the back of chairs and Neil chose who to honour on them”.

He’s referring to the chairs we briefly see in the theatre where Aziraphale is doing his magic act:

Left to right: A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens, Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen and The Crow Road by Iain Banks.

I want to focus on these three in a row specifically because Neil chose to put those books there in that order and I had something of an epiphany last night about it all when insomnia was chewing on my toes.

These three books have also been mentioned out loud in the show in episode 2 when Gabriel is reorganising the shelves:

“It was the day my grandmother exploded” - The Crow Road

“It is a truth universally acknowledged-” - Pride and Prejudice

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times” - A Tale of Two Cities

For those unfamiliar with the books, I’ll do a quick potted summary of each, with a focus on why I think they’re relevant and especially why the order of the chairs in the theatre feels relevant.

A Tale of Two Cities

Set during the French revolution with one lead who is an aristocrat who has stepped away from his class and background to support the less fortunate than himself because he disagrees with the way they did things. Also, he changed his name because he doesn’t want to be associated with the place where he came from.

The big culmination of the books is when said man is betrayed and set to be executed, but his friend takes his place. There is very literally a body swap by someone who looks very like him in order to save his life. This body-swap is done out of love.

aka - season 1.

Pride and Prejudice

Two people from very different class backgrounds have a very very bumpy start to their relationship because of misinterpretation, miscommunication and a lot of external pressure put on them by the rules of their respective societies. Both of them have different information and because of that, both of them are seeing exactly the same situation very differently. One of them tries to express his affection, but does it so badly that the other tells him there is no chance she will join him.

aka - season 2

The Crow Road

A young man tries to solve a mystery of someone’s disappearance using only the papers they left behind, with said young man’s background rooted in faith and belief in a higher power. There’s also a secondary plot about emotional growth into a more mature and more fulfilling relationship.

(And wouldn’t you know it, it’s the book handed to Muriel by Crowley, who tells them they’ll like it, and the Metatron comments on it)

aka - season 3

Needless to say, I am quite excited :)

[crime-scene-psychic]

I honestly think that the Nolan Batman trilogy was the best and worst thing to happen to the Batman franchise, because on one hand, it was the first live-action instance of trying to make Batman more gritty and serious (because while the Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney movies took the story much more seriously than the 60s television show, they were still goofy at times, which is why I honestly think they're the best rendition of Batman, because they were able to balance silliness with seriousness, which is what Batman is all about, but that's obviously an entirely different thesis) which then allowed for more people to take comic book movies serious, consequently leading to the rise of the DCEU and, obviously, the MCU (we would not have the MCU today and the actual good movies that came out of it without Nolan's trilogy, there's simply no argument there).

However, the Nolan trilogy also unfortunately made "dark, gritty Batman" the norm, meaning that once anyone tries to actually have some fun with Batman, they immediately get shit on by comic book dude bros. It also created the most annoying characterization of the Joker that everyone has been trying to replicate since and no one will be able to replicate, because they simply do not understand the character (I honest to God think the closest live-action actor who has ever made a Joker character work besider Heath Ledger was Cameron Monaghan in the Gotham television show, and he wasn't even really Joker??? but at least he didn't make it everyone else's problem and was a good mix of goofy and psychotic, not just psychotic) and will never be Heath Ledger (but they don't stop trying much to my forever annoyment).

And while I can recognize the cultural and significant impact on the comic and film community that Nolan's trilogy had, it is still by far my least favorite adaptation because of how serious it takes itself (and of course, the racism. The racism is actually the bigger one for me. Fuck Christopher Nolan for that. Ra's al Ghul is NOT a white man just because you want a plot twist, and you CANNOT just erase Bane being mixed race because you fucking FEEL LIKE IT because him being mixed race is extremely relevant to his origin). Batman has had serious moments in the comics, don't get me wrong, and I know things must evolve and change over time and that I cannot expect an 80 year old character to not be further developed throughout the decades, but it almost feels as if Nolan and Goyer (the writer) read a Sparks Notes version of the history of Batman, cracked their knuckles, and said "yeah, I think I got it."

Spoiler alert: they did not get it.

When I watch the Nolan trilogy (which I haven't in quite some time and I really don't want to, even to prove a point to people on the Internet) I notice how uninspired it feels, story-wise. While the action and cinematography is excellent, the story is lacking for me, and when you're telling a story like Batman, that has decades of content, you cannot just forgo storytelling for cool special effects.

I'd much rather watch a Batman adaptation that has the shittiest effects known to man with a writer who whole-heartily cares for the characters they're writing and has taken time to research. And that's honestly one of the biggest problems the comic book film industry is having now, both DC and Marvel. They're not hiring people who actually care about these characters to write them and they're focusing much more at appealing to everyone they can instead of who the movies should be made for: fans.

You're gonna have such a harder time convincing my mom, a woman who only cares about Wonder Woman, to watch the new Captain America film than you would someone who has read the Sam Wilson Cap comic run. And while this entire issue stems from the fact that the film industry is just that, an industry, and has become less about filmmakers making art and more-so how much money investors and producers can get out of ticket sales, it is still infuriating to see franchises you care deeply about be ruined by guys just there to cash their paychecks and be done with it.

And really, the film industry as we know it needs to be fucking demolished from the inside out, but that will never happen and now we're a bit off-topic. So, back to Batman.

I think another issue I have with newer live-action Batman adaptations is that they choose to forgo a VERY IMPORTANT character when it comes to Batman/Bruce Wayne's evolution as a character and story line.

Robin.

Since whatever the fuck the casting of Chris O'Donnell in 1995 was (why was he, like, a grown man?), people have been afraid to touch a live-action Dick Grayson with a six-foot pole (besides Titans, which I'm gonna get to in a sec). Which is ridiculous, because he is, like I said, an insanely important character when it comes to showing the growth Bruce Wayne goes through.

Bruce Wayne becomes Batman because he is so angry about his parent's deaths and the corruption of Gotham that he doesn't know what else to do. All the money in the world cannot change things for the better, his own father tried and died for his troubles, and he is left with no other option. Bruce Wayne works during the day to fight corruption via charity and his company, Batman works during the night and is able to do what Bruce Wayne can't (beating the shit out of people, mainly). The two are separate sides of the same coin.

And despite this seeming like a good arrangement, it's pretty obvious in most adaptations (at least they get THAT right) that beating the shit out of people in back alleys is not a good replacement for therapy. You're able to see the toll being Batman has on Bruce. He quickly becomes more occupied with being a vigilante than being himself. Bruce needs something to break through this internal struggle and help him balance both lives.

And so a boy named Dick Grayson comes along.

Dick's so important (and so are the other Robins, of course, but Dick being the first means I have to talk about him a bit more) because he forced Bruce to get his shit together. Here's a boy who's about the same age Bruce was when his parents died, who also just saw his parents killed in front of him, and is so full of rage he has no idea what to do. Sounds familiar...

Bruce is able to help himself by helping Dick. He gives him an outlet to vent his anger and frustrations while also looking out for him in the best way he can. While there are many issues with how Robin comes to be in various comic runs (and if this was real life it would be fucking ridiculous) Dick becoming Robin is extremely important. If he hadn't been taken in by Bruce Wayne, if he'd been allowed to let that anger continue to bubble up inside of him, he probably would have killed Tony Zucco and that would have been enough to set Dick down a terrible path he might not recover from.

The same goes for Bruce. If he were to set out and kill the person who shot his parents, he wouldn't be a hero anymore because that single event would shatter the entire point of Batman, which is that he is not meant to decide who lives and dies. If he were, how would he be any different than all the villains in Gotham that he fights as Batman? How would he be better than the corrupt businessman and politicians that he has to battle as Bruce Wayne? He wouldn't.

Batman needs Robin and Robin needs Batman, because they are yin and yang. Light within darkness, darkness within light. You cannot separate these characters and still tell an accurate story, it's impossible. I think that's a huge issue Nolan's movies have, on top of many others. You cannot accurately present to me a Batman story if there is no Robin, just as you couldn't give me a Robin story without Batman.

Every Robin is so important to how Bruce Wayne as a character is developed, and disregarding this as a creator is not only disrespectful to the character, it misses the entire point. I refuse to take your adaptation of Batman seriously if you can't figure out how important Robin is. He isn't just some kid sidekick, he isn't an optional side character, he is what makes Batman human. You cannot have gritty, Neo-noir Batman and forgo Robin just because you see him as the sidekick in tights. When Batman was silly and took itself less seriously, sure, there wasn't a lot to Robin nor Batman's troubling pasts. But now that you want to deep dive into Bruce Wayne's psyche and pick apart what makes him the way he is you wanna throw in the towel and erase the part that humanizes him? Fuck. You.

You can't make a complex Bruce Wayne and take away parts that help audiences understand his complexities, that's fucking STUPID!

Titans, for all its faults and problems, will always have my gratitude as it had the fucking balls to give, without a doubt, the best and most rounded live-action adaptation of Dick Grayson we have ever seen. Titans introduces Dick at a very important and rocky time in his character arch: him leaving Bruce.

If you're not in the know, there's a falling out between Bruce and Dick that's been written a couple different ways over the years, but all comes down to Dick being "fired" from being Robin and leaving Gotham. This is a bit of a newer story line in comparison to how long the character of Dick Grayson has been around, and eventually leads to Dick becoming independent from Bruce, signalling his evolution from "side kick" to his own hero, Nightwing. However, there's issues with Dick having to give up the Robin mantel, because it's something that is whole-heartily Dick Grayson. Robin wasn't something Bruce Wayne came up with, it was the nickname his parents gave to him. Even the colors are his, those were the colors of the Flying Graysons' uniforms. Robin is much more than just a vigilante alter-ego to Dick, it is the last link he has to his past and his parents. So when this is taken away from him and given to another, this causes a huge internal struggle for Dick, as he has to deal with the anger he now has for Bruce, a man he originally looked up to and idolized. This is Dick seeing how wrong it was for Bruce to do some of the things he did to Dick, despite at the time those choices being what both needed.

The way Titans is able to portray this extremely delicate time in Dick's story line in a way that not only makes sense for his character, but also allows for growth is really admirable. Like I said, the show isn't perfect by any means (can I PLEASE get a Romani actor to play Dick PLEASE) but it's the first time I feel that the character is wholeheartedly taken serious in a live-action setting. You can tell the writers have a better idea about how the characters should interact in a live-action setting and while some choices are questionable to me, the heart is there.

Nolan's movies in comparison feel soulless and devoid of all creativity and love. He does not care about these characters, no matter how much he tries to make you think that, and he never will. Christopher Nolan, you will NEVER convince me that you give two shits about Bruce Wayne. And if you, the director, can't bother to care, why should the audience? Why should I care about your adaptation if you can't even be bothered to put an ounce of individuality into it?

With Matt Reeves' Batman films underway, things are getting worse again. For a while, we only had to deal with the shitty Joker adaptations that tried to replicate Ledger's Joker, but with the Reeves Batman movies, the film bros are making themselves known again. I remember when the new design for the Riddler dropped and I said it was shit and people on Twitter and YouTube got SO PISSY at me and told me I just don't understand Batman and that I'm childish for enjoying the designs for Gotham Riddler/ Batman Forever Riddler and whatever and that I'm stupid, which none of those things are true, I hate to be confident in anything, but I think I know more about Batman than you do, Twitter troll.

The suit sucked and the character sucked. They just created a new character but gave him the Riddler's name. That's NOT the Riddler. That's honestly closer to Hush than Riddler, so just... do that? But of course, less people know about Hush than Riddler, and you're not trying to make a film for fans, you're trying to make money, so why would you ever be so silly as to do that! I'm not gonna talk to much about the new Riddler, just because it's super old news and it's not the point I was trying to make here, it's just something that continues to piss me off when it comes to gritty recreations of characters, because Riddler really never was supposed to be some Zodiac Killer wannabe, he's supposed to be a guy who leaves you riddles and makes you solve them and he's supposed to be a little silly about it. And I'm not saying you can't do a more gritty Riddler, because Arkham Knights did it super well imo! Just don't reinvent the wheel! Don't just make a new character and call him by another's name, that's a disservice to the character themselves and their creators.

This is a hard topic, because you have people who get the point of these characters (people who have actually read a comic before and paid attention to the story) but you also have insufferable film/comic bros who worship the ground Nolan and Reeves walks upon and who don't even take time to explore the rest of the Batfamily comics (his gang of vigilante children show up in the stand-alone Batman comics, though, so I don't know how they're missing this, unless they have the reading comprehension of a goldfish, which they probably do tbh). It's why I think a lot of these weirdos don't like Gotham Knights or Wayne Family Adventures, because they hate the thought of there being any semblance of fun in the Batman franchise. Not everything needs to be doom and gloom! Let Dick Grayson be bisexual and let Bruce Wayne have a PTA rival! You can have your cake and eat it too!

I know this seems like a silly sentiment coming from a person who just wrote an entire essay on this, but maybe don't take Batman so seriously? I don't mean, of course, that you can't care about these characters, I'm actually saying the opposite! I care very deeply for these characters, so much that I obviously spat all this out. I just think some people need to fucking chill when it comes to realistically portraying Batman. There's nothing wrong with taking a more serious approach to the characters and I have no problem modernizing them, but you can't just have action hero Batman, you have to have the human behind the mask too. And if you can't balance that, then I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be making Batman adaptations, because you obviously don't understand what the character is about.

I'm nervous to see where Reeves will go with the character, and only time will tell. I've heard rumors he plans to introduce Robin, I've heard rumors he doesn't. Either way, it's obviously out of my hands and I'll have opinions either way, but I really hope he has a better understanding of the history of the franchise than Nolan. While I appreciate, again, what Nolan did for revolutionizing not only the Batman franchise but the comic movie industry as well, I can still find faults in how he went about things. I truly don't believe we can have a worthy adaptation of Batman live action without Robin and without embracing the silliness of Batman's villains and I really hope producers, writers, and directors realize that soon.

Sorry if you read all that...

[tyrantisterror]

Your recent train of posts about you-know-who’s book series got me thinking. You once said “The Owl House works as a sort of rebuttal to Harry Potter in a lot of ways”, care to elaborate on that statement? Especially in regards to how The Owl House’s worldbuilding and themes clash with Harry Potter’s?

Oh man... I don't want my blog to be consumed by Harry Potter Hot Takes. I'd prefer to vent most of those feelings through my wizard books instead, it's more productive that way.

So, ok, short version: The Owl House is about a teenager from the mundane world discovering there's a magical world hidden away, goes there to learn magic, and in the process uncovers a plot by an abominable fascist to commit genocide. In very simplistic terms, that is more or less the same plot as Harry Potter.

But the devil's in the details, isn't it? Luz doesn't have any grand inheritance to claim, no prophecy to fulfill, nothing that makes her the most special specialest special person of all time. There's even a whole episode early on where a villain tries to lure her to her doom by claiming she's the chosen one, and the lesson is that NO ONE is "chosen" for greatness - greatness is something you make yourself, not something that's thrust upon you. She is not inherently gifted as a witch - in fact, she struggles harder because she doesn't have a a special bladder true witches are born with, and has to learn an ancient and forgotten method of spellcasting basically from scratch to cast spells at all. She is, emphatically and at times definitely deliberately, the opposite of what Harry Potter is.

So is her academic experience. There's a magic school in this setting, and (at first) it wants nothing to do with Luz because she's human, not a witch, and thus is believed to be incapable of casting spells. So Luz's primary mode of education on magic comes from a private mentor, Eda, who is also a wanted criminal and social outcast because of her disdain for the draconian rules of their society. Eda is an unconventional but magnificent mentor, one who is as willing to try new things and learn new methods as Luz herself, and who helps Luz discover ways to make possible what everyone else claims is impossible. Eventually Luz does convince the magic school to take her in, but in the process she changes how it runs, challenging a lot of its preconceived notions and forcing them to do better.

Which is vital, because the biggest problem facing the society of this magical world is narrow-minded reliance on outdated social categorization. Like HP, people are sorted into categories (covens here instead of houses), which they are then forced to stick to and never dabble in the others. It is explicitly compared to both the concept of tracking in real world education (i.e. forcing kids into a career path early and ONLY giving them education relevant to that one career) and the house system of HP:

And it's wrong. It's both presented as needlessly limiting, terrible for encouraging advancement and growth of both the students and society as a whole, and an immoral system that's only kept alive by the "Well, this is how we've always done it" inertia that keeps so many awful traditions in education alive. And I really do mean it's immoral, because it's the brain child and secretly crucial evil tool of a genocidal fascist.

I kind of cringe at writing those two words since I feel people have been WAY too quick to accuse cartoon villains from children's shows of fascism and genocide - like, Chairface Chippendale writing his name on the moon with a laser would probably kill a shitload of people in real life, but that doesn't mean he's an analogue to Hitler. But Belos, like fellow Disney villain Frollo, is clearly intended to be exactly that: a genocidal fascist. In a world full of magic-fueled absurdist black comedy beats, Emperor Belos stands out as a consistently serious threat, tonally dissonant with his surroundings in a way that makes him chillingly effective as a villain. And like real world powerful bigots, his power primarily comes from the fact that the systems of society favor his mindset over those of outsides like Luz and Eda - all the systems of oppression our heroes chafe against were either created by or worsened by him, with the express purpose of using them to kill everyone and everything in the magical world.

Luz could not be more thematically opposed to her enemy, and the story is incredibly consistent in showing how defeating Belos alone isn't enough, but that the systems that empowered him have to be disproven and dismantled. His enablers must be destroyed or humbled, the prejudices he encouraged must be torn down and fought at every turn, and innovation and progress must be embraced for the good of all. There's so much stuff you could analyze about the themes in that show regarding oppression and the othering of people who are different, and it's all so, SO much more consistent than the discussion of the same themes you'll find in Harry Potter.

[mythalism]

i think, anecdotally, canadians love to use land acknowledgments and Diversity(tm) a bit more than americans do, and have a degree of always pointing at the us and being like "well at least WE didn't do anything that fucked up! we're so much more enlightened and respectful 😌". and so any acknowledgment that racism exists, or that necessary societal change is often only brought by unpleasant disruption, or specifically that indigenous people live in terrible conditions because of colonization, is bracketed with this type of "but it's very complicated, and who's to say if there's a solution? we're thinking about it really hard, and holding space, and listening and learning, and maybe we will get to fixing it in like 50 years if people ask nicely" rhetoric. and there's a degree of apprehension that "land back" is a call for ethnic cleansing of settlers (somehow, despite this being both physically not possible and not actually anyone's demand) and that any movement towards that will be bad and overly radical.

which maps directly onto how bioware writes elves specifically haha. they'll sympathetically show how they're oppressed and living under the boot of a catholic church-esque entity, but then... ahhh noo, actually they had a very problematic pre-colonization culture, and they're too impractically fixated on the past and that prevents them from moving forward, and the church employees are sometimes trying their best and making amends, and the demands of the elven leadership are just too out there and violent... so really, it's very complicated. maybe it could be better to keep the status quo and only have Incremental Change, forever.

(they sort of didn't do this in the masked empire, but as always they had to throw in a bit about how Rude And Mean the dalish are. plus the ridiculously evil chevalier lore of each one randomly executing a few elves as a rite of passage, and then never mentioning that aspect again bc i guess it wasn't relevant to michel's story. as well as the insanely underwritten premise of what briala and celene's relationship actually was. there's ~toxic lesbians~, and then there's "extremely rich and powerful white noblewoman calls her younger servant class gf ugly for being dark skinned, lies to her for years, has her family and then entire community killed, then tries to seduce her back when she gets angry and leaves" lmao. i think weekes was going for a tragic morally grey starcrossed lovers to enemies vibe, but to me it was more of a horrific one-sided exploitation that the author did not seem to realize they were writing.)

and in veilguard i suppose they tried to avoid the entire issue by mostly removing those aspects of the setting, so you no longer even have the somewhat well-observed depictions of oppression combined with Justin Trudeau Moments, it's just kind of empty.

anyway thank you for appreciating my very long ted talk! i left tumblr after the whole "popular bloggers mass reporting pro-palestine people for terrorism" thing (i can get that treatment for free irl, don't need that extra stress from the Fandom Webbed Site haha). i've just been drifting back to look at dragon age posts bc i was curious about veilguard. i didn't expect much from bioware but it was surprising that they just went even further into tone-deaf bizarre race allegories rather than reading 1 (one) nonfiction book in the years since dai, or hiring anybody from a different background who could weigh in. :')

wow this is seriously so fascinating and insightful and truly does give me a better understanding of both canada and bioware LMFAO so thank you so much for sharing seriously. you are welcome in my inbox for more ted talks anytime and now im just gonna leave this here to marinate on it further and hope other people read it because its fantastic. xoxo

[covid-safer-hotties]

this might sound stupid or like i'm making it up, and i'm really sorry about that, but i have genuinely no one else to talk to about this. i live in a very conservative area in florida. i don't leave the house often (i can probably count on one hand the amount of times i leave the house per month) because i'm disabled and can't work. i'm also mixed, fat, and nonbinary, so i kind of have a target on my back in public already. i've been threatened multiple times for masking in public. there was even one time where an older white woman followed me around in the grocery store and started coughing at me on purpose. i honestly don't know what to do at this point. do you have any advice for this? it's okay if you don't, i just figured i would ask. i just feel generally very unsafe. i couldn't even get the most recent booster because i made an appointment at CVS (the only place that takes my insurance) and when i showed up, they told me they were all out of it and to leave. i'm scared.

It may not be what you want to hear, and it may feel odd to comprehend, but Florida has permitless consealed carry, right? If that's so, it's your constitutional right to own and carry a firearm for self defense. I know theres some Socalist Rifle Associations out that way that would be willing to point you to resources and maybe even help you get armed if that's a course you decide to take. Put simply, loudmouths and braggarts tend not to mess with someone with someone who has a pistol holstered in their pants.

Taken from the Black Panther Party's Ten Point Program:

Self Defense The Panthers decided to take up their constitutional right to carry arms and to implement Malcolm X’s philosophy of self-defense, by patrolling the police. They did this at a time when severe police brutality was common – the police would beat down and kill Blacks at random. They would even recruit police from the racist south to come and work in the northern ghettos. On one occasion, whilst on patrol, they witnessed an officer stop and search a young guy. The Panthers got out of their car and went over to the scene and stood watching their guns on full display. Angrily, the policeman began to question them and tried to intimidate them with threats of arrest. But Huey P. Newton had studied the law intimately and could quote every law and court ruling relevant to their situation. Huey stood there with a law book in one hand and a gun in the other and told the “pigs” about his constitutional right to carry a weapon as long as it was not concealed. He told them about the law and said that every citizen had the right to observe a police officer carry out his duty as long as they stood a reasonable distance away. And he told them about the Supreme Court ruling which defined that distance. A crowd gathered and watched this whole scene in amazement. The Panthers made it clear that they were not looking for a shoot-out and that they would only use their guns in self-defense. They took the opportunity to distribute copies of their ten point program, inform people of the Panthers ideology and invite them to their political meetings. Meanwhile, the flustered and nervous cop took the opportunity to get the hell out of there. The gun had a huge psychological effect, both on the Black community and the police. For the police, it reversed the fear that they so enjoyed creating in others. But for the Black community, it fired their imagination, people felt empowered by seeing Black brothers and sisters protecting their interests. There were two sides to the carrying of guns though, most people saw it as a positive move but others were put off by the militaristic image. On the other side, many brothers in particular, came to the Panther office purely for the gun, the Black uniform – the whole image. When this happened, the Panthers would simply explain that the Black struggle was about a whole lot more than just picking up the gun: it was about educating yourself and then others, about organizing the community programs, selling the newspaper and serving the people. At the same time, they would get the brother to work in the nursery for a while, looking after the children while other members went out on party business. In this way, they tried to make sure that people understood the Panther ideology and that they got a balanced view of what it was all about.

While Newton is discussing their ends here to fight and defend against racism, you can apply some of the same philosophy of self-defense for yourself in regard to covid safety. The biggest part is being brave, and that can be tough, but it can be learned.

I want to be clear, I'm not asking you to go shoot people who give you shit. I am saying that the presence of a firearm will temper their response. Someone gives you shit about your mask, you just casually let them get a glance of the grip of your gun. Having to deal with simliar shit as a trans woman, it's amazing how many jerks turn into cowards when they see something weapon-shaped in my purse. Non-lethal options include pepper spray, knuckle-dusters, extensible batons, and stun guns. Wasp spray is a cheap and painful option as well, but a bit clunky to carry. It makes up for that with range: Some cans spray up to 30 ft. Aim for the eyes. Find what works for you and keep it on you.

Also practice: Be sure you can use your self-defense gear when you need it. Especially if someone puts hands on you, do not be afraid to use it. The threshold for assault begins at unwanted contact. Some preperation will help to keep you safer if you're ever attacked again, and having the ability to deal with escelations will give you beter capacity to endure people's childish abuse. Even if you go the non-lethal route, the SRA would be a good place to find self-defense community that won't assault you for protecting your health.

[crossdressingdeath]

DAI does that with a lot of things. Morrigan gets to claim to be a Elven expert, even though you know that is far from the truth if you've played Origins where she didn't know shit. Cullen gets final say in his dialogue options despite you knowing that he's lying. Grey Wardens gets shit on and the Inquisitor can wildly overstep.

DAI has this weird mix of a) expecting you to have read all the books/comics so that they don't have to explain anything and b) assuming that you haven't played the previous games so they can try to rewrite what happened.

Yeah, the required reading for DAI was ridiculous. WEaWH is always the big one because most of the others you can get by without it (even Cole's backstory isn't necessary to appreciate and understand the character, and enough of it comes up in-game to get by), but knowing what Celene and Gaspard did is kind of fucking important, Bioware. And then even when Celene purging the alienage comes up it's used as a mark against Briala for being in a relationship with her at the time even though if I'm understanding the excerpts I've seen of TME Briala breaks it off as a direct result of the purge and (as Dorian rightly points out) that'd be more Celene's scandal than Briala's anyway. Like, they try to make Celene purging the alienage into Briala's crime because she was sleeping with the empress at the time and that's just... ugh. But it's like, I would argue that it would be fair and honestly best practice to assume that people playing the third game in a series have played the first two games? DA has an overarching narrative even if the connections aren't particularly close, if someone wants to start partway through they can but the writing should expect people to be familiar with the games' stories. Maybe have some codex entries summarizing the previous games or a little intro cutscene, but... I don't know, I'm worried about the fact that apparently DAV doesn't need you to have played the first three games when literally all the setup for it is in DAI. Expecting people to have played all the games in a narrative-driven RPG series and not to have jumped in partway through is fair! Expecting people to have read five supplementary novels and two coffee table lore books to understand the plot is ridiculous. At least Tevinter Nights and The Missing so far seem to only be relevant to DAV in that they show some glimpses of what's been going on between games and give us a point of reference for some of the new characters...

The thing that gets me with DAI is that the game really wants you to side with the Templars whether it makes sense or not. Like... let's take the choice between mages and Templars as an example. The game wants you to side with the Templars. It really does, it tries its best to dissuade the player from siding with the mages if you go that route (Cullen's little "Oh... it's so dangerous... we shouldn't do it..." routine is notable when compared to Leliana and Josie, both of whom favour the mages, being very professional about you picking the Templars), it does its utmost to claim that the rebellion was unwarranted when it absolutely was not, the rebels are constantly framed as weak or mean or evil or stupid while the Templars were just misled (by... a guy who told them he'd let them murder all the mages and left out the "in service to Corypheus" bit, they still joined his little walkout to murder people, but the game doesn't get into that), it even lets you switch quests well past what should've been the point of no return if you're on the mage route (WHY CAN YOU SWITCH AFTER LEARNING THERE'S A FUCKING MAGISTER IN FERELDEN TRYING TO ENSLAVE A BUNCH OF MAGES, BIOWARE, WHY THE FUCK IS THAT AN OPTION) whereas with the Templars you can't even learn what your advisors' plan for getting you in alive is until you're locked in. And I'm not going to lie, CotJ is legitimately the better quest. I did it once to see and god damn it is quality, I don't dislike IHW but... yeah CotJ is definitely stronger.

But then you actually look at the story and... why the fuck would you side with the Templars? They left the Chantry because the Divine told them not to murder people. That's explicit, people tell you that repeatedly. They're making excuses for it, but there's always an acknowledgement that... yep, that's why the Templars left, they wanted to kill people and were mad about being told no. Leliana (the most familiar face among the advisors and given Cassandra's previous appearance was threatening Varric and Cullen's was playing yes man to Meredith for nine years and only changing sides once she became a threat to him/because not doing so would mean fighting Hawke Leliana's the one people are most likely to want to side with) is pro-mage and dismisses Cullen's claims that the Templars could help close the Breach as speculation. Which... it is. This situation is completely unprecedented, no one knows what's going to happen. But given mages are incredibly powerful and Templars are repeatedly portrayed as mostly useless in any sort of real danger that doesn't involve children or indoctrinated Circle mages (it is not a coincidence that the only people locked in the tower in Broken Circle who survive with their minds and bodies intact without the demons actively choosing to let them live for funsies are mages; the only Templar who's alive and unpossessed is Cullen, and the demons very obviously could've killed him at any time and just chose not to because they were having fun toying with him) I'm gonna say the mages are a safer bet. Also because... they invited Quiz. That could be a trap, but you know what's definitely a trap? Walking into a fortress full of heavily-armed mage killers who openly want you dead. Meeting with the Templars is really, really stupid (especially if you're a mage) and you don't even learn the plan for getting you inside unharmed until you actually select the quest. Also that plan is basically just "if there are witnesses with societal power the Templars can't murder you unprovoked" because reminder: the Templars are the absolute worst. Why would you ever want these people around. And then if you meet with the mages first like "Well I'll figure it out once I've heard what they have to say, I don't have to commit if I do things this way so I might as well" you learn that there's a Tevinter magister serving an evil Tevinter cult just chilling in Redcliffe and why the fuck would you go to the Templars at that point this needs to be dealt with. The game wants you to side with the Templars but it gives you no reason to do so, I really wonder sometimes if the writers weren't talking to each other at all.

[tannertbosas]

rant to elaborate on my previous post …

so my point was, that tanner received the fandom treatment that reaper & jessup deserved, but this is just simplified.

reaper and jessup themselves are pretty popular and relevant characters in tbosas fandom, but most of the time when I see stuff about them, it’s very surface level.

meanwhile for tanner, which is way less relevant in the story of tbosas, probably out of every main tribute, i’ve seen people provide way more over-analysis of his character and behaviour (i am 100% included) that I feel like are a bit unnecessary and is, at the end, overlapping reaper and jessup’s character traits. one part of the fandom refuses to look past his dancing over lamina’s dead body in the book storyline, and the other part is trying *too* hard to make him seem entirely innocent. but that’s just common fandom behaviour, i’ve seen multiple other characters receiving the same treatment.

but tanner is depicted negatively in the book and in the movie, showed to be lacking of empathy and eager about killing (ranting about slaughterhouse methods in his interview) while reaper and jessup are characters that are depicted positively, and are both separately very interesting characters. reaper also tried to attack people, and in the book, apologised to the other tributes for having to kill them in the arena, but then promised that their death wouldn’t be meaningless, and he then performed a rebellious act in the arena by tearing down the capitol’s flag and forming a morgue with the deceased tribute’s bodies, which is the most important act of the 10th hunger games , but people seem to look past that. i have personally barely seen anyone try and give it an over-analysis like they would do to their favs!

jessup on the other hand was shown to be protective of lucy gray since the beginning, and jumped over lysistrata to protect her from the arena’s bombing. and he also had one of the most interesting character plots, having rabies, that he passed to reaper in the zoo, at least in the books. his death was also very interesting, on how it affected lysistrata, and her words about him.

as for fandom treatment, i’m mostly talking about pure “fandom” stuff. I can’t blame people for not having them as favourite characters, but it feels very exclusive to barely ever see reaper or jessup included in fanworks, such as fanfiction, which is very popular in the TBOSAS fandom. to continue about fanfiction, i’ve also been noticing a lack of pairing containing the two characters (separately), while both being very interesting and good natured characters, or if they are in a pairing, it is very overlooked. meanwhile people have no problem shipping tanner with, i could say, anyone, while being almost… antisocial.

this just doesn’t make lots of sense to me, how quick people will say oh tanner is actually very caring, oh he was kind, his dance over someone’s literal dead body had a deeper meaning, could be rebellious, etc… im all for headcanons, do what you want, but those headcanons that most apply to tanner, are actually closer to reaper and jessup’s characters.

this is NOT to force anyone to do anything. this is just my personal observation in this fandom. maybe it’s just since i talk a lot about tanner, most stuff I see is around him. i just find the lack of consideration for such good written and interesting characters such as reaper & jessup a big waste, especially if you’re gonna applicate it to a very less relevant character.

[guzhuangheaven]

This might not be a relevant question, but the internet has not been very helpful, so I'm willing to try my luck here. What are the treasures given to the Empress (most prominently seen in Ruyi, I suppose)? I know the edict and seal are two of them, but there seem to be more carried behind her whenever she uses the sedan and also some plaques of gold? At this point, any insight you could offer would be greatly appreciated!

The treasures given to the Empress includes:

jinbao 金宝 - the Empress’ seal. Others from the rank of fei and up also have their own seal but they are called 印 yin and not 宝 which literally means treasure. 

jince 金冊 - proclamation book. When titles are bestowed, the proclamation is recorded on golden tablets as a record, and in the Qing dynasty, these proclamation books are written in Manchu, Han, Mongolian, and Tibetan. This is why the proclamation ceremony are called cefeng. When the Step Empress was disgraced, Qianlong recalled both her Empress’ seal and the jince from her promotions to ranks of fei, gui fei, huang gui fei, and huang hou. 

These are the items that Li Yu tried to return to Ruyi in the drama at the end but she refused to take them back.

Ruyi also gets given a bunch of other stuff which makes up her guard of honour/procession later:

Which is basically all the stuff these people are carrying here:

The procession/guard of honour is basically just a show of status and the number of people/items they carry vary according to rank but generally includes various combinations of things like umbrella, fans, incense burners, gold vases, incense boxes, spittoons, basins, stools, gold cross-legged chairs, etc - i.e. to prove you have enough servants to just carry these things you may or may not need for a stroll down the lane. 

They definitely had more stuff when going out on longer trips. Here's a Chinese reference that lists things in full if you want muddle through some machine translation.

The name for the procession vary according to rank too:

仪驾 yijia - ceremonial procession of the emperor, empress, empress dowager

仪仗 yizhang - ceremonial procession for imperial noble consort and noble consort

采仗 caizhang - ceremonial procession for imperial concubine (pin) and consort 

(By the way, we must have gotten at least 5 asks over the years about the procession of honour and just been putting off answering any of them because the details are too complicated and requires too much brain power to detail. Here’s your short answer to anyone who ever asked this.) 

[lawisnotmocked]

Took me a while but! Canine imagery in volume 1 book 2 of Les Mis!

Similarly to book one, wolf imagery in book two is used to represent a character’s dangerous and violent intentions and/or a their relationship to society. When contrasted with dogs in Les Mis, wolf imagery is used to show the ways certain people are prohibited from being part of normal society, usually because they’re in extreme poverty or are a criminal. A dog is a domestic canine who is allowed to participate in human society and a wolf is a wild animal who isn’t.

In Valjean’s case, Hugo describes in 1.2.7 the process by which he is transformed from a man into a wolf through the abuse inflicted on him by the prison system.

The peculiarity of pains of this nature, in which that which is pitiless—that is to say, that which is brutalizing—predominates, is to transform a man, little by little, by a sort of stupid transfiguration, into a wild beast; sometimes into a ferocious beast.

He escaped impetuously, like the wolf who finds his cage open. Instinct said to him, “Flee!” Reason would have said, “Remain!” But in the presence of so violent a temptation, reason vanished; nothing remained but instinct. The beast alone acted.

I think both of the uses of Hugo’s wolf metaphor I mentioned above are relevant to Valjean’s time in prison - his personhood and his place in society have been stripped from him and his trauma and mistreatment have turned him from a rational man into an angry, scared, impulsive and dangerous wolf. Hugo already explains his metaphor pretty thoroughly in this chapter so I don’t think I really need to say much more here but these few paragraphs always really stick with me. Les Mis is just begging for werewolf aus I stg

Dog imagery also makes its first appearance in book 2💖‼️ Throughout Les Mis dogs are Javert’s Main Symbolic Animal, and they’re also associated with the police and law enforcement on a wider scale as the ‘guard dogs’ of society and social order. Even though Javert doesn’t show up as a character until book five I personally read a lot of the canine imagery in book two as foreshadowing for his relationship with Madeleine in Montreuil-sur-Mer.

The first appearance of dog imagery is in chapter 1.2.1 and involves Valjean meeting a real non-metaphorical dog when he arrives in Digne. After all the local inns have rejected him because of his yellow passport, Valjean tries to sleep in a dog’s kennel but is chased off by the dog who lives there.

Chased even from that bed of straw and from that miserable kennel, he dropped rather than seated himself on a stone, and it appears that a passer-by heard him exclaim, “I am not even a dog!”

If dogs in Les Mis represent people like Javert who are allowed to participate in human society without being fully part of it, Valjean not even attaining the social status of ‘dog’ shows how completely he has been rejected by the people of Digne and how his status as an ex-convict prevents him from being able to participate in society in a normal way.

The first time I believe the dog symbolism is actually foreshadowing Javert’s arrival is two chapters later in 1.2.3 when Valjean recounts his experience with the dog to Myriel:

I went into a dog’s kennel; the dog bit me and chased me off, as though he had been a man. One would have said that he knew who I was.

When we meet him in book five, Javert is the dog who knows who Valjean really is.

Dogs show up again one more time in chapter 1.2.11 when Valjean tries to sneak into the bishop’s room at night. A hinge squeaks loudly as he tries to open the door and Valjean imagines that the sound is a barking dog who has come to warn everyone of his presence.

In the fantastic exaggerations of the first moment he almost imagined that that hinge had just become animated, and had suddenly assumed a terrible life, and that it was barking like a dog to arouse every one, and warn and to wake those who were asleep.

I think this can be read as foreshadowing for his future interactions with Javert too, but it also shows how jumpy and on edge he is after his time in prison, and how much he’s expecting to be caught again (even though he hasn’t actually done anything wrong yet!) just like he was caught and punished every time he attempted to escape from Toulon. Either way, I’m pretty sure this is the last of the canine imagery in book two.

[argelladurrandaun]

no bc sansa is so annoying especially the show version like so annoying that makes me want to punch her. her fans are so biased because the show version was so far from iconic in comparison to dany arya cersei. the acting mediocre and sophie just gave those secondary character vibes that are shallow and annoying but that they have fans bc people feel insecure about actual powerful characters like arya and dany and olenna asha margaery little lyanna etc. and the show really started to go downhill in s5 when they tried to shove sansa in our faces everywhere and give her importance lmfaoo. plus sophie is such a loser and racist but she really was such a narcissist that she went to therapy just because people aren’t loving her and sansa as much as arya or dany lol. and now is trying to stay relevant by making a movie with kit for the jonsa fans😂😭 both are so annoying and they are friends bc only they can stand each other from the cast istgg

I don't like any version of sansa. But you are right the show version was the worst. They tried to make her centre of everything in the show while sansa is a secondary character at best in the books. They also gave her aryas iconic dialogs which are said by ned only to arya and only ever appear in aryas arc like 'the lone wolf dies but the pack survives' also they stole aryas needle aesthetic and gave it to sansa too. They stole so many things from aryas actual character and made arya a robot.

Arya and Dany are the protagonists and the showrunners wanted that for sansa too much when she is not. Sansa is not even on the same level as arya and dany. And she is not a part of key five characters dany, arya, jon, bran and tyrion.

And don't even get me started on 'jonsa' its a craship for hell and based on complete going against jons character. Of course for these people its about the actors. And didn't turner many times used the 'n' word? She is a proved racist and narcissist. That ship is cancer for me.

[checkdispleased]

thoughts on the webtoon rerelease and what it means for the fandom and author interactivity?

So I have to tell you, and maybe this is because I am turning 98 on my next birthday (July, mark your calendar), I don't understand what Webtoon does other than just be like, a fifth venue where this comic is available to read (after the Tumblr, the dedicated OMGCP website, the Kickstarter books, and the First Second ones)?

Here are two ideas I have:

Idea 1: Because Webstoon is actually built to host webcomics, it looks and functions for this specific webcomic much better than anywhere else it's already hosted? Tumblr is the platform it was made for but it also wasn't built for serialized storyteling and archiving, that website is ass and has never worked, and the comic wasn't made for the static medium of the graphic novel so there are some ways it's never translated. And, again, not to be in my 120s, but I was engaging with webcomics in the early-mid 2000s when platforms like Keenspot facilitated webcomics consumption. Webtoon is more similar to that platform than anywhere else you can read Check Please. Maybe it's even more ideal.

Idea 2: It seems like Ngozi has, over the past couple of years, intermittently tried to generate new interest in the comic. She has posted a few times about wanting a TV show. She has posted on her Discord about having new ideas for OMGCP stories and/or projects. I can think of two (not mutally exclusive) things she might be getting out of putting OMGCP on a new platform. One, she may miss the story/characters and, after three or four years away from the project, enjoy getting to think about and see people dicussing her OCs again. Two, if she does intend to do more with the comic, either by expanding the canon or adapting it (or having someone else do it), showing that it's getting engagement on a new, seemingly more relevant platform in 2024 might help her demonstrate that there is a current audience for it. And actually, I wonder if being able to say that it was popular when it was the most-funded webcomic Kickstarter in 2016 and is successful on this other site in 2025 might make the case that the comic is evergreen in its popularity and will always find an audience so it should be made into a show that can be sold multiple times to various streaming platforms over its lifespan -- or, you know, some shit like that. Then again, is 250k-ish views on that site popular? Just to clear I do not know.

Of course, I also don't know this woman, and these are only some theories based upon, like, how things seem to work. I've never truly engaged with Webtoon because like, I already read this comic 90 times. And certainly my initial reaction was "why would you read this week-by-week on Webtoon when the entire comic is totally free right now both here and here?" So maybe there is something about the community reading experience, week by week at a regular pace, that is appealing to readers. I never got that experience; I lived through a maddening yearslong cycle of anticipation and regret. But maybe this steady year or two of posting will be healthier for whoever is reading it there.

Then again,

I’m posting the Parse triology to Webtoon over the next few weeks how do you think Webtoons readers will handle it? Comment below! (doesn’t even wait for an answer) it’s been nearly a decade—I’m a decade older—the fact that some people reading in 2015 didn’t understand that Parse was a good character but a damaged person who was actively bad for jack

Wait, excuse me, HOW was he bad for Jack???? The comic never tells us this actually? You know what, NOT TODAY, I'll see all of you in hell.

[evenmorefatallyobsessed]

Non-RWBY/ MLP models I wanna do and how I'd explain them in Remnant.

01. Felix Argyle (Ferris)

Would Probably use a similar story to how he met his princess but set and altered to fit Remnant.

Felix was simply born with two physical Faunus traits. While I say simply this would be more on pair with a condition/ mutation like Polymelia a genetic anomaly that results in people having extra limbs.

The difference being that in Felix's case he's simply born with a extra trait. However the effects it has on him are more detrimental For instance racist see him as even more of a animal then most faunus.

While some faunus see him with contempt for seemingly being to them what Faunus are yo racist. His parents ashamed and afraid of redicue lock him up I their house

Things would play out similar to how they did in their book but instead of Crusch Jaune and the Arcs noticing the families odd behavior find and rescue the boy.

2. Toga (My Hero Academia)

Her circumstances can be similar to her series. Given that Neo can form illusions and Xanthe can quite literally transmutation seemingly anything to gold I don't see why Toga can't take on the apperance/ voice and even eventually semblance of those whose blood she ingest.

Though I would alter the reasoning to that of that she needs the others aura to mimic them. Blood is just the easiest way to injest it as while the blood cells are still there is no reason they shouldn't theoretically still retain their aura.

03. Najimi Osana (Komi Can't Communicate)

This one's fairly easy too, Najimi simply grew up with Jaune (Or one of his sisters) as a classmate. He befriended everyone like in his own manga/ anime.

And simply got a crush on Jaune convincing himself he'd confess at graduation... Only Jaune wasn't there and had left for Beacon.

04. Rebecca (Cyberpunk 2077)

Rebecca's is a bit harder but off the top of my head, I can see her and the gang she rolled with in Mantle. Not as techy as they had been in Cyberpunk though, or maybe they were. Not really too important for the relevance her, point is Rebecca nearly dies. And only survives because Pietro can't help but try and save her on principle.

Using his technology... And even his semblance he does manage to save the girl, though the result leaves her more mechanical then human. Rebecca as we know is loyal, arguably to a fault.

So once she hears the old man quite literally tore his soul apart to save her she grows attached to him and his... daughter Penny who insist on calling her sister.

05. Midna (Legend of Zelda, Twilights Princess)

Honestly, I got nothing for this one, doesn't mean I wanna make it any less. Maybe Jaune falls into the Twilight Realm instead of the Everafter... Or Midna is sent to Remnant instead of Zelda's world. Or Jaune and the Arc's as a whole could be Link's Ancestors who could be guarding the Mirror of Twilight to this day.

06. Amy Rose, Rouge the Bat & Blaze the Cat (Sonic Franchise)

Jaune fell into Mobius instead of the Everafter

07 Hideri Kanzaki (Blend S)

Him and Jaune come from the same village were his parents are farmers. Hideri unlike Jaune adored getting dressed up and praised and dreamed of the big city and becoming a cute idol.

Jaune supported his dream, encouraging his friend who in turn encouraged him to be a Huntsman as well. He left for Vale with Jaune who fought off several Grimm on their way there. He aimed to start his career as a idol while Jaune tried for Beacon...

Several months later he's crossdressing at a cafe and Jaune steps in to see how his friends doing.

08. Fujiwara Sisters, Maki & Nagatoro's Crew

These are actually super easy, their civilians, lets say Mistral, since both shows are based in japan and Mistral seems to be the asia of Remnant.

I can see two simple ways of doing it, Senpai and Shirogine can be related to, or friends of Jaune's parents. Hence why when visiting Mistral Jaune decides to see how his old friend/ Cousin are.

Also maybe I should give a brief summary of three others I've already maid.

Louise de La Vallière (Familiar of Zero)

this one as a commission already has a setting... Basically the Valliere family fought with the Arcs in the Great War where her grandfather fought besides Jaeger Arc.

The two grew close as brothers and agreed to marry their children, unfortunately Julius fell in love with Juniper and caused friction by cancelling his engagement to the two elder daughters.

Thankfully Jaeger did have a younger son, Jaune, who would become Beacon's Prof. Arc.

This is a reference to Louise fiancée Jean-Jacques Wardes

who looks about the same ages a my Prof. Arc model, the irony being that Jaune supported, trained and helped his fiancée however he could unlike his traitorous counterpart.

He never intended to actually make the young girl follow through with their wedding either. Perfectly willing to break his word and dishonor himself so she could be free to love whoever she chooses.

Because of Jaune's influence and the fact that she's not considered a failure magician in Remnant and in turn ostracized Louise isn't as violent as she is initially.

And while Jaune doesn't notices it, Louise doesn't see their engagement in a negative light.

Manami Aiba/ La Brava (My Hero Academia)

Born with dwarfism Manami always felt different, self conscious and misunderstood. She yearned for connection and affection from a young age and could always feel others look at her differently...

She was quite sharp and capable, but there was another facet to her... She Loved HARD. When she got a crush it wasn't a simple crush, but instead utter affection.

Her pure little heart was so filled with affection on her first ever that the immense emotion awoke her aura and semblance... Love. The ability to multiple the targeted individual dependent on her feeling towards them.

Given her semblance she saw it as proof that she needed to pursue him, cherish and learn about him. Unfortunately it resulted in her freaking said boy out, viewing her as a stalking, and rumor spread over the tiny lil' weirdo stalker.

She ended up leaving school, shutting herself off from others, and surviving in private using her impressive computer skills to make money. Whether that be a regular computer job, hacking systems for less savory people or selling information she managed to dig up to Hei Xiong.

But nothing healed her heart, made her reach out, there was no Gentle Criminal who filled her world with light in Remnant... No instead one day, where she'd been forced to leave her home on a rare occasion she was stopped by several thugs... And then saved, by a random, kind... Cute, tall... Knight.

Ilulu (Miss Kobayashi's Dragon Maid)

I'm thinking of doing something similar to the series but instead of Toru being injured and found by Kobayashi it's Ilulu who is found and healed by Jaune.

[tevanbegins]

Random musings I wanted to share with my fellow Buck x Tommy stans. Read and humour me, please. 😉

So being in this 9-1-1 ship war is kinda making me feel like we are in the film 'My Best Friend's Wedding.' Here's my analysis of the movie and how it is relevant to the whole Buck-Tommy-Eddie conflict in the fandom:

Julia Roberts' character Jules represents the B*ddies, Cameron Diaz's character Kimmy represents us Bucktommies, and the hero Michael represents Buck who is caught in the middle of it all.

So in the movie, Jules (B*ddies) tries every trick in the book to sabotage Kimmy (Bucktommies) and split her and Michael (Buck) up. But all her desperate attempts are ultimately in vain, because Michael truly loves Kimmy, and the film ends on a happy and positive note with Michael and Kimmy getting married and Michael and Jules staying best friends (or should I say buddies, pun totally intended 💀) as they always were.

You know where I am going with this rambling right? (Also, please watch the movie if you haven't. 😁) Below are a few noteworthy points and takeaways from the film:

• Kimmy came later in Michael's life, but there was practically nothing to hate about her and there was no denying that she was great for him. So, even though Jules thought Michael was rightfully hers because she had been a part of his life much longer and tried to paint Kimmy as the villain, she failed because Kimmy was never the bad guy in the story as she was hell bent on making her out to be.

[Takeaway: Finding your true love in someone doesn't always need a long history of acquaintance or friendship with that person. Also, the new person doesn't automatically become the wrong choice for endgame because of the lack of said history. Neither is the BFF entitled to your romantic affections just because you've been too close for too long. Platonic soulmates can be a thing too.]

• Kimmy never tried to undermine Jules' significance in Michael's life as his best friend. Even though Kimmy and Michael got their happy endgame, the film didn't dismiss the importance of Jules and Michael's friendship.

[Takeaway: Buck's thriving romance with Tommy is not a threat to his friendship with Eddie and vice versa. Both relationships are different and are beautiful in their own ways. In fact, Buck and Tommy's love story began with Tommy clarifying that he understood his deep bond with Eddie and so he never intended to get in between that.]

So, my point is, Buck x Tommy being endgame is never going to reduce the significance of Buck and Eddie's friendship. It will always be important because it is beautiful, and if the Tevan romance is hampering certain people's enjoyment of B*ddie, that is because they can't look past their desperate want of a romantic/sexual relationship between those friends. They themselves are sending out the message that Buck and Eddie's friendship has zero value if it doesn't end in a romance, that the multiple years/seasons of developing a strong bond between those two is useless if they don't eventually fuck.

The difference between us Tevan stans and those B*ddie truthers is that we accept and acknowledge how important Eddie will always be to Buck even if he falls in love with Tommy, whereas the BoBs so badly want to believe that Tommy is a villain because he is the cockblock to their delusions (pardon my language). If Buck-Eddie's friendship in and of itself genuinely mattered to them, Tommy's arrival would never have ruffled their feathers. So they can whine and cry foul all they want, but nothing is going to change the fact that Buck x Tommy is as beautiful and important a romance as Buck x Eddie is as a friendship on the show, just as the message in the movie depicts.

To conclude, I have faith that Tevan will keep rising and flourishing and winning over all the stupid hate! Hope you'll enjoyed my little piece of romcom-inspired wisdom!