#was very fun to dissect

[shorlinesorrows]

don’t be a coward

*aroaces your rottmnt leo*

[dykedvonte]

why do you hate Joshua Graham or Honest Hearts so much?

This DLC and character represents a bigger issue with fandom spaces I have but particularly fallout fandom in general.

Fallout tends to tackle a lot of topics controversial and not. The first two games it’s heavy cause they are the most satirical and direct with how anti-war, nationalism and etc… they are. 3 loses this as it’s very clear once you play or learn about all the games that Todd and a bunch of guys at Bethesda just liked the 50s post apocalyptic aesthetic and refuse to actually critique the ideals of the time period like the earlier titles.

New Vegas is the game that really gets back into it a degree it almost seems like it’s taking too much on. There are things done exceedingly well while other things are done horribly wrong . I’ve made posts about it before and plan to make a big series of posts (it’s a lot of writing) but my biggest gripe is with Honest Hearts and all the gross and white savior esque depictions it has of indigenous peoples. The entirety if FNV does not do the injustices faced by indigenous people correctly on any count. My two biggest complaints are with the Khans and the tribes in Zion but I’ll talk about the former on a different post.

Both characters of Daniel and Joshua are the most accurate depiction of white saviors I’ve seen and I hate how the DLC tries to justify and defend them. The DLC treats Joshua like this man who has repented for his past actions when he is just retracing his steps after his cruelty bit him in the ass. He was one of the worst parts of the Legion and it is all but explicitly stated that if you don’t force him to be non-violent he will turn the tribes of Zion into the legion 2.0. The Dead Horses and the Sorrows are horribly infantilized by both Daniel and Joshua who both use them for self serving purposes guised by religious duty. The White Legs are the horrible stereotype of violent and savage indigenous and I personally think a lot of their interlinking with Ulysses, his hair and Ulysses character in general are distasteful and very telling of how BIPOC or POC where involved.

But outside of the game it’s the weird obsession people have with these characters ideologies and trying to make them seem more interesting/philosophical than they are. Tumblr is an echo chamber and many fans of Fallout are not the people on this site. Many people are not educated in the issues these characters convey and how poorly they do or used these characters as a poor introduction for their takes. Contrary to what a lot of people believe in, fallout has a prediomeny white cis male fanbase. More importantly a large portion of the fanbase is white.

You can joke how FNV made you trans or see the numbers on post/fics or diverse headcanons but these are kiddy numbers compared to the millions that consume the franchise and aren’t in those more aware spaces or don’t engage in the spaces the same way someone like me does/has to. Their views shape a lot more than people realize and it’s exhausting to be in a space where people don’t correct the more subtle yet toxic aspects of it but also adopt them into some weird quirky view point on the characters or issues. Some people don’t realize and some people don’t care.

My main issue is just the idolizing of these sort of thing in this fandom space and people try to acts like a game like fallout whose tagline is “War never changes” and has never had a game not revolve around political or militaristic factions issues isn’t that deep or doesn’t relate to real issues. I think it’s mainly caused by how over powered you can become and how you can strong arm your way past these learning moments as majority of people who play this game do play it as a power fantasy where they can do so as they please (which of course, go ahead it’s fun) but never take in parallels or lessons in the story as if it was just another first person shooter.

Also like another personal gripe is Cazadores spawn like hell whenever I’m there and I have not found a mod that works to mod them out so I have to play Indigenous Racism the DLC while getting jumped by giant wasps WHILE helping Mormons. Like I cannot catch a break.

[twentyfivemiceinatrenchcoat]

People acting surprised when a morally grey character is actually morally grey 😲

THIS ….. i feel like a LOT of people consume media under the assumption that morally gray characters are characters who always perfectly tiptoe the line between black and white, and not…… characters who do horrible horrible things but still treat one single person with all the care in the world. or characters who are on the ’good’ side of the story and do good things while also being fully willing to cross any line they’re told to cross. and etc. morally gray characters are complex and can be anywhere on the morality spectrum except right at the very end of either side. they’re not a perfect shade of gray, they just aren’t completely black or completely white. sigh…….

[takiki16]

Jack Aubrey, walking past the men who framed him for a crime, ruined his life and career, and directly caused his public humiliation in the pillory: “I wouldn’t kick him if I had the chance. I feel contempt and nothing more. I have my job back.”

Stephen Maturin, already planning how he is going to slit Wray’s throat in a dark alley and dissect his body while roasting his personality with a fellow anatomist: “me neither, my soul.”

[i3utterflyeffect]

Do you think untitled-3 would ever confess to user!Alan "I am you"? It would probably take a lot for that to happen though.

depending on what happens in ava 6? i think it could.......... maybe.........

[lollytea]

The Blight family are so interesting IN THEORY. In execution they are....😬

[ottosbigtop]

In other news ive finally started playing baldurs gate 3 and despite being a glorified hater about it when it got mega-hyped i am enjoying myself a lot actually. They weren’t kidding about the level of detail in this game we love to see media living up to the hype.

[rockgodklav]

so...... [devious. and i mean DEVIOUS. stare. Like if apollo was percieving, but evil. Malicious.]

Wanna go out on one date??? BUT. not *like that*. I want to see.. a very specific defense attorney's reaction.

[Ooc: YOUR TAGS ARE SO FR MOD😭😭😭 brody ngl has an influence on how i be seeing them too ]

“I fear I may have gotten myself into something more complicated than I thought, ja. Not that I’m complaining.”

That’s a yes, if only to gage Apollo’s reaction.

[sysig]

He deserves a bit of everything, as a treat (Patreon)

[diospore]

Rant below the break bc I was mad at 3 am last night.

People kinda need to learn how to criticize someone's skill (writing/art) without mocking them for their kinks or identities or other things that don't matter.

(This is about a specific post trend I've been seeing, where I have seen on multiple occasions people's kinks and identities being brought into a conversation unnecessarily where prior to that the discussion was about the quality of their skill. And even then why the fuck do you care. The art isn't FOR you.)

Like you aren't inherently Cool and Epic for making fun of someone who likes feet or omegaverse or pregnant men or something. You're not Awesome and So So Smart for mocking someone for identifying as a catboy or something. Get over yourself. Learn to properly criticize writing/art without mocking someone, because your entire argument becomes worthless with insults like that. You think I'm going to reblog you even if I agree with you once you pull that shit? No, I'm fucking blocking your ass and everyone in the replies who agrees with you.

And god, if you purposely misgender someone over their art, holy shit. Gendering someone properly isn't something that can be Taken Away for Being A Naughty Naughty Horny Person. You see how fucked up that is right? I don't have to explain that, right???? What is this, 2014? Stop mocking people for being bunny boys or puppy girls. The fuck is with you? God forbid people have fun with their genders in 2024. Oh the humanity, bunnyposter likes his large chest and sexualizes himself and reclaims his features. How will the world recover from this tragedy of- gasp! A trans person having a semblance of acceptance around their appearance that they can't fucking AFFORD to do anything about and not wallowing in misery 25/8.

Get a hobby, damn.

[vynnyal]

Ever since I learned that you had to actually teach your kids how to do stuff, it's been so much fun having them around. It's very cute to watch them play with something they've never seen before, or only do something after they see me do it first. Idk how much is code and how much is coincidence, but they're undoubtedly better at living now. And their personalities are so unique!

[palukoo]

I know I’ve made other posts talking about or alluding to this but like. obviously there are like the old hollywood movies in the sort of dyke subtext canon (all about eve, rebecca, johnny guitar, etc) but like. there are so many movies that like 10 people have seen but I have such a clear gay vision or interpretation for it. most of them aren’t even GOOD. and yet!!

like the great lie is the one that haunts me the most (or the women but I think that one is kind of different for me perhaps bc I’ve already talked about it here a lot or perhaps bc I think of it as being more well known and watched than I think it actually is? actually it’s probably that I think it is an overall good and well executed and entertaining movie which isn’t really true of most of these tbh). but I also think a lot about like when ladies meet, or old acquaintance, or sadie mckee, or the shining hour, or the model and the marriage broker, or a woman’s secret, or the bigamist, or craig’s wife, or born to be bad, or separate tables, or even dark victory to a degree. others too certainly those are just the ones that come to mind. for half of these it’s not even like oh these women are gay together it’s just like hey I think she’s a lesbian. and I’m right. but my genius will never be fully appreciated in my day unfortunately.

[vampyroteuthid]

impromptu beef heart kitchen table dissection. tuesday evening fun

[myaoiboy]

The Boss being John's emotional pillar and base to what he thinks relationships are supposed to be like/end up really fucks him up and i dont think people talk enough about that...

and yea she definitely slept with him at some point and all that, theres so many implications that she was more than one thing at the same time (master, mother girlfriend thing) and it just makes sense yknow? I wonder if part of his attraction to Ocelot is motivated by the fact he looks so much like her,,,, ouch

Anon you have no idea how much you fed my brainworms today lmao

Like, we definitely know the Boss and Snake were involved. We hear people talk about it on Mother Base in V, and when asked if she was his lover Snake doesn't deny it but says it was "deeper than that"

But ALSO Kojima literally said this:

so I mean idk maybe we're all crazy and The Boss would never fuck the kid she picked up as a replacement for the one the Philosophers stole, and we're the sick ones. lmao.

I love The Boss bc she really is this all-encompassing icon of femininity and nurturing (naive Maiden/mature Mother/wise Crone roles vs Lover/Mommy Figure/Mentor) while being completely untameable. You've heard of a domestic housewife? The Boss is a feral wildwife.

And then you bring me to the thing that I think is the most hair-pulling, teeth-grindingly tragic thing about Bosselot: the fact that they're just perpetually loving *past* each other. Big Boss wants a solution for his mommy issues, and Ocelot just wants to be seen and cherished, even used, for just a fucking taste of love and appreciation from Big Boss (that he doesn't even get in death, god i will cry about this forever).

The worst part is, Ocelot is by far the Boss's son that has the most inherent capacity to be most like her, but he has neither the environment nor the inclination to foster that in himself.

If he had ever listened to anything BB said, he would know that the fact that he lived with the Boss as an equal, someone who challenged him, was exactly why he loved her. He had the capacity to be exactly what BB wanted, but instead he went the low risk/low reward route of making (or trying to) himself indispensable as a tool, a weapon, an attack dog for BB to command, a possession instead of a partner.

But it's better to be appreciated by the love of your life for what you aren't than potentially lose them for what you are, right?

Also the same people who want to talk about how Bosselot is the better mgs3 ship bc of the mommy figure situation totally ignore the fact that that makes them like...adoptive brothers? Wouldn't be a Kojima game without a strong undercurrent of incest themes.

[shesmore-shoebill]

Hello I absolutely LOVE reading all your thoughts about smosh dynamics. Your Gracie-Savannah post recently - magnificent. Sometimes if I find myself on your tumblr I inevitably lose quite some time dipping into your tags- especially the Courtmangela dynamics which are my fav. Idk I just thought you should know it’s appreciated by a random internet stranger who loves smosh too

:OOOOO Oh thank you so much that's SO flattering to hear!!! :'D <3333

I LOVE thinking about/appreciating interpersonal dynamics, and Smosh has so many fun and unique dynamics between the cast, its a blast to get to highlight and appreciate them. :) Courtmangela is great, every combination of the three is golden. They all like each other so much and clearly have a super fun time together, its great we get to witness some of that. :D I'm glad my tags help people other than me haha.

Caveat being, obvs with actual people its easy for analysis/assumptions about dynamics to spin into overanalysis/confirmation bias/projection in a way thats not productive. Or healthy! much less accurate lol. So its also very fun for me to get to dig in on some entirely fictional characters in a story, where I can actually do analysis and draw conclusions or use assumptions to talk about themes, and generally treat the characters as elements of the story as they are lol. Im glad that people seemed to like the Grace/Savannah post! I had a blast writing it. This was a really sweet ask, thanks anon :)

[when-we-drive-away-in-secret]

alright, so this is a question about netflix series which i've recently watched and now i'm suffering from asoue brainrot. there is an obscure moment in the penultimate peril (s3ep6) where frank locks olaf in the closet before the trial, and just as frank is about to close the door, olaf says, "one last thing", as if intending to say something. what do you think he wanted to add? is it something that is maybe more clear in the books?

OKAY so after rewatching that scene (several times) and rereading the corresponding scene in the book, I now feel at least partially equipped to answer this question! (But please bear with me because my research did send me on a bit of a tangent)

So first off, I don't think dealing with the book scene will be of too much help here (although not entirely unhelpful, either), because, as much as I love the netflix adaptation—and I do wholeheartedly adore it—it changes so much that the comparable scene is functionally unrecognisable in several key aspects. The main one being the lack of hostility towards to Baudelaires—Olaf is solidly isolated and supposedly running out of options at this point in the show, whereas his mentality in the books is entirely different because things appear to be going much more his way. He has a crowd at his back and the Baudelaires are seen as far more guilty, which doesn't really translate into the show!verse at all.

So, if we're looking at the show from a more isolated standpoint, I had to consider the possibility that it was a deliberate "what if" moment, without having anything else planned to say, purely for the purpose of getting in the Baudelaires' heads. However, I do feel like the most likely answer is that Olaf did in fact believe he would be heard out, so that's what we'll be assuming from here on out.

The fact that the Denouement in question calls him "buddy" and yet treats him roughly could have made him believe that this is Ernest playing the long con—pretending to be an ally to the others because they were outnumbered at the time, or simply for his own ends. However, he could also genuinely believe that it's Frank, and that he'd be heard out because it's the "noble" thing to do—VFD and the general society in the snicketverse is routinely governed by politeness over logic, and so cutting him off is simply impolite, so he may have believed he'd be able to talk his way out of being locked up. The use of "buddy" could be a generic, positive moniker used by Frank, or a genuine sentiment expressed by Ernest; the rough shake of his arm could be simply how Ernest behaves on any given day, or genuine righteous anger from Frank—just as it's impossible for us as the audience to be sure, Olaf has to try and figure this out in mere moments.

Regardless of what he thought would happen or who he thought he was talking to, though, I have to believe that whatever he was going to say would have been targeted more at the Baudelaires than the Denouement currently getting in his way, so it would likely have been an extension of what he'd already said, and what he'd go on to say at key moments for the remainder of the series—another attack on the Baudelaire parents, a critique of VFD's intentions, or something equally ambiguous to sow the seeds of mistrust in the minds of the children. Despite his general demeanour, he is actually a terrifyingly capable villain, and the human embodiment of the "either I'm god, or truth is relative" soundbite. If he's allowed to talk for long enough, he can convince just about anyone of anything (which is exactly what happens when he takes the stand during the trial), and I wouldn't be surprised if he was expecting to be allowed to run his mouth until both the adults are on his side.

What I think is a very interesting point to consider, though, is one useful comparison from the books—the number of the room he's sent to. As we all know, the rooms in the Hotel Denouement are arranged according to the Dewey Decimal System, and people are categorised above just as the records are categorised below. In the book, the Baudelaires are confined to room 121, and Olaf is locked in room 165 to await their trial. In the Dewey Decimal System, 121 refers to Epistemology—the theory of knowledge. A quote taken from the wikipedia page for epistemology reads:

Epistemology asks questions such as: "What is knowledge?", "How is knowledge acquired?", and "What do people know?"

Having the Baudelaires placed here shows that they aren't sure what people know about them, or what will be revealed at the trial, or what will happen to them (as clearly illustrated by the their conversation at the end of chapter ten). Olaf, however, is placed in room 165: Fallacies and Sources of Error. This could imply that he's in the wrong, but perhaps more likely foreshadows that other people are wrong about him. He will not go to prison, he will not be convicted, and, perhaps most crucially, he is not as completely evil as the Baudelaires believe. He has done terrible things, and he is a terrible person, but—as discussed during The End—they are wrong about the most crucial of his evil deeds (to them). Because he didn't kill their parents. He represents everything that VFD pretends it isn't, but at this point the Baudelaires believe (and have been told) that he is the complete antithesis of what the Volunteers represent—and so, he is categorised as a source of error.

However, in the show, both parties are placed in entirely different rooms, and therefore entirely different categorisations. The Baudelaires are placed in room 342: Constitutional and Administitive Law. This is a choice I absolutely adore, because at this point in the narrative they are quite literally trapped in bureaucracy. They fail because the system is rigged, and they are literally imprisoned by the law—not in the sense that they have already been convicted, but in the sense that they will be no matter what they do. If they stay, the High Court will pronounce them guilty. But, when they run, they're supposedly only proving their own guilt—damned if they don't, and damned if they do.

Olaf's is perhaps the more interesting change, though, because he's no longer seen as a source of error—despite the claims he makes about the Baudelaire parents and VFD immediately before being locked up (once again implying that he isn't lying to them, just using convenient truths). And it carries through to the trial, because he uses the truth (albeit a very deliberately and pointedly edited version) to make the Baudelaires seem just as guilty as he is. In the show, he's placed in room 170: Ethics (moral philosophy). And he is given the chance to talk at the trial, and talk he does. He twists the truth, spins it so that the Baudelaires seem guilty, but that is the exact point of moral debate! He trolley-problemed his way into screwing with the Baudelaires' heads, not because he needed to (he knew he was never getting convicted, because he knew who was on the High Court), but to prove a goddamn point. Yes, he's done terrible things, but did anyone think to ask him why? Of course, to us, the reader, the viewer, the third party observer, it doesn't matter. Because at a certain point, actions speak for themselves. Reasons can explain, but not necessarily excuse—that is the reasonable stance to take, and no matter his reasons, the explanation will never be an excuse for him.

But he's an actor. That's why Klaus calls him up to the stand in the trial, because he knows he'll want to talk in front of an audience, and can't imagine any way he wouldn't incriminate himself. And despite the Baudelaires' personal opinions of his ability, we've seen time and time again that he must be a good actor, because people always believe his performances. And as any good actor could tell you, it's crucial to be able to read your audience. If you want the best reaction, then you need to work out, as quickly as humanly possible, how they'll respond, and play up or tone down your performance accordingly. And he's spent so much time with VFD, with the Baudelaires, that he knows just what to say. He knows that, regardless of their reasons, they will feel guilty—in both the book and the show, they question if they're not just as bad as him! They did what they did to survive, and they genuinely worry that they're the same as the murderous, fortune-hungry beast that's been hunting them through their grief and fear. And he knows that. He wants to get in their heads, maybe just for fun, but mostly to get them to come to him. And the worst part is that it bloody works! They end up escaping with him, burning the hotel and potentially letting him out into the world, turning away from the good-hearted people trying to help them because if they can't trust anyone to be on their side, at least they can trust him not to be.

All this to say that, looking at his character, the writing of the show and the way the events unfold, while I can't give you a verbatim quote of what I think he would have said, I will say this: I wholeheartedly believe it would have been a short, targeted line to the Baudelaires, attacking them, their belief system, their very moral character. Because he didn't know he'd be allowed to speak at the trial—remember, it was only Klaus' fear and paranoia that put him on the stand in the first place—and as far as he knew, that could have been his last chance to ensure they'd come to him. He wasn't sure his previous words had been enough, and we all know he has a flair for the dramatic. Think back to one of the most chilling moments of the entire series, both in the book and show, at the end of the Bad Beginning. When the lights go out and he makes his escape, the Baudelaires would have still lived in fear of him, knowing he was on the loose, but that wasn't enough. He risked capture, risked losing his window of escape, all to torment Violet one last time; to plant that final seed of paranoia and fear into her mind, to whisper threats in the dark. And I have no doubt that, had he been given the chance, that is precisely what he would have done here.

By cutting him off, the Denouement gave the Baudelaires hope; hope that it might be different, hope that people wouldn't listen to him this time. But after all they'd been through, they couldn't risk not letting him talk—everyone always listens to him, in the end, and they had to make sure that everyone would finally believe them instead. And that very act of cutting him off, of not letting him give that final threat, is perhaps what sealed their fates. If Olaf's threat was fresh in their minds, they might have been too fearful to address him. If, like in the books, he'd eluded to his acquaintance with the High Court, they might have known what would happen. But he didn't get the chance, and neither did they.