#we have the makings of incredible discourse here

[braddourifscareertrajectory]

part of me is slightly worried at how this all is going to play out, the other worse part of me is waiting with popcorn to see if the fandom somehow ascends to even greater heights of intrafandom cannibalism than it did in 2015

[pyrosomatic-metamorphosis]

I read that same fic earlier and I just straight up muted the person so their works don't show up for me anymore lmao

there was also another one like that posted yesterday because the person was mad at something qBad did a couple of days ago while not at all in his right mind and amnesiac, it was odd (not shitting on the person just confused and slightly concerned)

yeah there’s. a lot of misconceptions around qbad rn lmao. It’s one of the reasons Im so obnoxious about him, tbh, so that it’s not JUST the negativity that gets spread. He’s a really good target for the hate rn, because he has a smaller fanbase and his pvp playstyle + lore lead him to all that antagonizing during purgatory, and that gets vented out into fics.

It’s genuinely really interesting, the dichotomy that seems to exist between tumblr and twitter regarding him. Ive heard nothing but slander about bbh from twitter (again, he is not faking his illness, that is a lie), but he’s got a solid enough foothold on tumblr that ive seen more hate towards the fans that the cc, here. which makes sense, given how we take over the tag almost ever day when he logs on. genuine o7 to people who find that obnoxious but thats one of the reasons i overtag so much, for blocking purposes.

anyway i think all the bbh mischaracterization means that we just need to write about him more >:D please this is a call for more bbh centric fics from people who do not hate him/know a little bit about his lore. blease he’s such a fun pov to write i promise

[leidensygdom]

The ways in which being asexual feels isolating

I've been pondering whether to post this or not, but I figured out I wanted to explain a bit of this experience.

So, I could go on a very long tangent on how being asexual is usually a lonely experience, and how much I've been otherized here and there- Specially in real life. How the same people that claimed to be queer (or allies) had been much weirder about my asexuality than they were about me being bi/pan or whatever.

But I think I wanna talk about how something like that bleeds in every aspect of socializing, even down to something like fandom. I stay away from fandom usually- I like to look at cool fanart and that's about it. I hate discourse, I hate drama, I hate reading people getting worked up because they're treating fanon as canon. But there's one thing I've noticed, over and over, that just sends me off my rails.

And it's how fandom tends to treat asexuality (or aromanticism). So, you get a character in some piece of media that explicitly, unequivocally, states they're either ace, aro, or both. "I do not have interest in a partner", "I don't desire to have sex nor do I enjoy the topic", whatever. And as an ace person, I do appreciate being able to see myself in media- There isn't many chases where something is established that bluntly.

Now, you decide you want to check some fanart for that. Fandoms have this tendency to make absolutely everything about shipping, even when the media they're basing it in does not revolve about that (and it's annoying, because a lot of times people aren't interested in the actual themes- It's all reduced to shipping). Suddenly, you notice people treating the aforementioned character as anything but aro or ace. It's all about shipping. "This person interacted with this other person in a way two friends would, but we gotta make this their entire personality now". Some people may instead go for "well, maybe the character is not having sex, but they're probably an absolute freak about it, studies it extensively, has encyclopedic knowledge about it-"

Now, there's of course sex-favourable aces, and that's completely valid, but it's already straying from what, canonically, the character had mentioned. Asexual or aromantic characters aren't really allowed to exist as themselves. People often see them as a blank slate to fill, to change, to fix. I could talk forever about how people react to real life aces like that. I've had people asking me incredibly invasive questions because they saw my lack of sexual attraction as something broken, something they could fix.

And I hate that! I think I'm allowed to say that I hate that! It's hard and unusual for media to cement an aro/ace character, because they're defined by the lack of interest for something, which is often hard to show. But when it does- No one seems to care. It's all shipping, it's all "well, he's gay in denial", "well, she's probably super repressed". If you took a canonically gay character and made them straight on a fanfic, you'd get angry people. Which is bound to happen when you erase representation that people identify with. But aro/ace characters are NOT even seen as queer, they're not even seen as "representation" by most people. You can erase that bit of it, put some god awful shipping on top, and people will applaud you. And it sucks!

I wish people would see being aro or ace as an identity worth respecting, not an identity that needs overwriting. It feels a bit too close to how people often treat aro/aces irl, and it sucks. It reeks of this sort of exclusionism, where "aro/aces are technically queer but it's queer lite at best, it's less interesting than being gay, and we kinda don't want them near us anyhow". Again, I've had far worse experiences about being ace than I have about not being straight.

Sorry if the post got long, but I hope this experience may at least resonate with other people who have been struggling with this, too. It has always felt just kind of lonely to be ace, and see how little people do even consider it an identity, even when it comes down to something like fandom.

[heartofbusan]

Best laid plans of stomach bugs and men.

The chemistry is the point.

Some people underestimate the effort and toll it takes on ones body and schedule to fly 14 hours to visit another person. 14 hours to spend 72 hours together means commitment. It means bro's before ho's and I am frankly HERE FOR IT.

The discourse I am seeing is extremely telling of how fickle people are about their support for jikook. People watch too much scripted reality tv 🙄 bcs they really expected this relationship, this reunion if you will, to play out in multiple angle close ups and medium shots and several wide angle shots with dramatic zooms and heavily directed post-moment recaps with dramatic silences or eye rolls to play up the drama? The lack of moments, the MUNDANITY if you will IS THE POINT. They are so real to me, so life like, so domestic goals!

Being quiet with each other. No uncomfortable silences, but comfortable togetherness.

That's what leads to horny bed fighting, which in my eyes could lead to more if not for the cameras 👀 just me?

When they said unscripted, this is what they meant. When they said unplanned, this is what they referred to. Not directed, not scripted, not fanservice 🙄 to fit a planned narrative. This is how their relationship plays out. I'd go so far as to call it a documentary instead of a reality series. While documentaries have tons of genres within itself, this genre is one where there's a broad range of planned activities, but where the narrative is constructed in post production: editing. Id know, since im an editor. This tells me that they counted on the natural chemistry between 'JeonJi' (SO CUTE) to 'lead the way' instead of a multitude of directed interactions that they (the producers) would have needed to tick a dramatic narrative box.

So what does that lead to? In my professional opinion as a director/editor the first two episodes lacked a dramatic arc. There was little directing going on to force one

the chemistry is the point

The flirting, the lulls in conversation, them being together, seeing them have fun, and reconnecting is the point. Instead of what they're doing or what they're talking about. The episodes, therefore, are kinda boring in the sense of entertainment, but wildly exiting in the sense of what we get to see play out. And it's incredibly nuanced. And nuance often flies over people's heads..again, the crowd that expects to be held by the hand when it comes to drama: reality tv.

It's a huge risk to take as a production. Let's not underestimate that! 'Are You Sure' was so unscripted that they didn’t even have a title until halfway into the second or third day. Again: they were banking on JeonJi to build upon their chaos to lead to a narrative and a title, etc. That is so telling to me. That them being together is the raison d'etre of this show. Jimin 'sacrificing' his time to fly to the US, Jeonkook making space in his busy schedule time to spend time unwinding, JeonJi making good on their need to finally spend time together after the booked and busy year they've had.

Jimin enjoying the hell out of Jungkook having fun.

Because that is who Jimin has always been: his adventurous spirit takes him places because he loves exploring and being in tue moment. He'll willingly travel to have those moments. Jungkook on the other hand doesn’t. He dislikes leaving the comfort of his surroundings because he doesn’t see the pot of gold that being adventurous brings him while he's comfortable in his home. I relate 😩 so much. Just planning trips alone makes me enter a comatose state, so I'd rather not go than sacrifice my rest to plan an adventure. I don't even know I'll get anything out of. That is, until Im actually on that planned trip and having the time of my life! They've always been like that. Jimin had to be the incentive to get Jungkook out on that trip. Take.him.by the hand if you will 😭😭

And then there's the stomach bug. YOU DAMMNED CURSED THING. It threw a HUGE wrench into their plans, and if anyone doesn’t take that into consideration, then you haven't had a stomachbug EVER while still having to face up to your commitments. Park Jimin will NEVER back down from his commitments, his promises *pinky promises* are sacred to him, and this bug took away the catalyst of this duo. Jungkook suddenly had to be the extrovert of the two, and boy, does he struggle in that role. He was to me his usuall baby elf self. So adorable and cute with his nose focused on food and Jimin’s care. But my man loves to rely on Jimin to lead the way in shenanigans and to make any moment entertaining, and you could just tell Jimin wasn't in his feels enough to overcome his lack of energy. Poor baby. Really, he's the best of us because I would have straight up refused to be filmed in that moment. A whole night of diarrhea and still showing up to film the next day?! NO MA'M NOT ME.

If you've read up to this point, I commend you. It was just supposed to be a short rant, but it became an entire essay because I can not with the overly reactionary nature some people show. Drawing entire conclusions based on two hour long episodes. I know, I might be contradicting myself here but extenuating circumstances and all. Jimin wasn’t on his game, and Jungkook was also recovering. When a show is banking on the chemistry between two people to shoulder the brunt of this show and said people are extremely sick, well then what can I tell you?

We need to sit back and enjoy the fact that we are getting such access to them, so unfiltered. Jikook enjoying each other, come rain or shine, in sickness and in health, whatever the mood brings, because that to me is more valuable than DRAMA or NARRATIVE. We'll probably get a bit more of that once they're going to Jeju, and they're both hopefully healthy. We're even getting a new element for them to play off of: Tete shows up! Like a jack in the box, and Jungkook seems to not be having it, lmao...see..unscripted and natural. I love that for them!

Idols are people first, and we need to celebrate that, not demand more.

[jozor-johai]

Sometimes I think it's underrated how much of Westeros we see during wartime. Amidst all of the discourse back and forth over whether the brutality of ASOIAF has a "realistic" basis in real-life feudal history, I think the fact that we're seeing Westeros in a very atypical and specific circumstance should not go overlooked, and I think in that regard there are parts that are "realistic" to modern history, let alone feudal.

For instance, in regards to the complaints about how many women are sex workers in ASOIAF—I think that has more to say about the nature of the wartime economy.

War breaks out; as a result, the regular economy halts. This is the result of various blockades, as well as from the workforce being redirected away from production and towards standing armies—fewer farms are being maintained, and fewer still are making it across wartime boundaries. Another side effect, then, is the trouble when this economic situation interacts with the practical existence of a standing army: massive amounts of young men, either single or separated from their families, drawing disproportionately on the limited resources of the farmland around them (which is being worked at a less-efficient rate than usual to begin with).

The army—comprised of young men—creates a demand for sex that interacts with the overflowing supply of young women without stable income (since this is an incredibly patriarchal society and the men in their lives have been taken away from work for military service). Without better jobs available, and with the market right there, these women turn to sex work, which syrockets. But of course they would, and of course it seems like every smallfolk woman we meet in ASOIAF is doing it: because people have to eat and feed their families, and the fields to plow have been burned by war, and the people who would work them have either been taken for military service or killed by war. It's exceedingly likely that sex work wasn't as widespread before the war so the increase in the need for sex workers represents the failing economy—consider the overabundance of sex workers in ACOK King's Landing, which was under a trade blockade from almost all fronts.

Then, the pendulum swings back the other direction: this is an unsustainable economy and an unsustainable way to live, so there is a reactionary religious response demanding a return to the way things were before (pre-war, in effect, but never separating this from the "social ills" that war results in). The women are blamed for their behavior, despite being demanded by the men around them and made necessary by the economy, and so this reactionary response leads to a religious condemnation of the "wanton" behavior of women.

The religious response in particular gains traction because organized religion offers several very meaningful things that otherwise solve these problems. We see from Septon Meribald toting his goods that the Faith offers charity to the starving. We see with the Sparrows, and personally with Lancel how the Faith offers a sense of meaning to those disenchanted by this strife. We see from the Sparrows and the rise of the High Sparrow how the organized religion of the Faith also offers a means of returning power to the disenfranchised.

So GRRM is achieving something unnervingly realistic here, showing what happens to local economies under wartime and the lingering horror that is left behind—a scenario that is still true of modern war, even if Americans don't have to see it personally. GRRM lived through Vietnam, and the influence is obvious in how the invading American military practiced rape and forced dubiously-consensual sex work onto the local economy.

It's also realistic how organized religion gains traction in scenarios where disenfranchised peoples need sources of hope and methods of organizing to regain what little power is available to them, and how organized religion can leverage a desire for better times into moral condemnation that fuels its rise to increasing levels of de jure power. It will be interesting to see in TWOW and beyond where the trajectory of the High Sparrow leads these people (and what that says about GRRM's observations and interpretations about modern historical parallels).

[talxns]

Academic Articles that Analyze Queer Readings of Batman and Robin (Brudick)

There actually exist multiple!…but the ones I want to introduce right now talk specifically about how the creation of the batfamily was DC’s attempt to dissuade brudick readings. and that it can be argued that DC is still doing the same thing today.

The first article is called “All in the Family: Homophobia and Batman Comics in the 1950s”, published in the International Journal of Comics Art in Fall 2000 by Chris York. It was not available for free online, but I bought a digital copy of the volume it was published in and provided screenshots because it’s been 24 years and I hate the fact that academics are behind paywalls so I’m sharing.

This article was actually infamous because DC refused to grant permission for the use of their panels in this article.

Click for better quality.

Notable Quotes:

“National [Periodical Publications]’s biggest step, however, was the introduction of other members of the Bat-family, which would give them permanent female counterparts and solidify their heterosexual status.”

“It is clear that, although Batman and Robin remain partners, their interests are no longer as the Dynamic Duo, but as a Bat-family.”

“Taking the focus of the comic away from Batman and Robin was exactly what these superfluous characters were designed to do.”

The second article, published in the Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies in 2005, is called "Domesticity, Homosociality, and Male Power in Superhero Comics of the 1950s" by Mark Best.

Good news! This article is available online for free and it’s a great read.

Notable Quotes:

“In contrast to the Marvel family, however, the Batman and Superman families were modeled more after the familial relations of the nuclear family and the gender expectations of the domestic ideology.”

“One way the genre attempted to contain any “subversive” potential, including the possibility of homosexual readings of the comics, was through the narrative device of the “super­ hero family.””

Here is more academic reading with the themes of Batman and homophobia, written in 1991. This article is referenced in the former piece.

In summary:

(lest we forget) Batman has had queer readings since its inception, specifically between Bruce and Dick.

The creation of the batfamily served to curtail those brudick readings

It seems pretty obvious that the same attempts are STILL being made by DC, now with the exaggerated push for explicit familial titles like “father” and “son”. And are still working if you see any discourse online from fans who strictly oppose brudick on the basis of their “father/son” relationship (which seems to me a more modern emphasis compared to in the past, maybe i’ll make a different post about that later.) They are unknowingly parroting Freddy Wertham’s concerns and eating up DC’s new strategy of distancing Bruce and Dick, just under an accusation harder to argue against nowadays. It’s gauche to criticize queerness nowadays, but consider it incest and suddenly it’s acceptable to bash again.

I just find it incredibly fascinating that brudick had been discussed and analyzed in multiple academic articles! And reading some comments I saw lately of people exclaiming “I can’t believe Brudick is this popular!/Who on earth is shipping Brudick!?!” made me sigh and really want to pull these out. Brudick has been a thing before all of us were born. DC’s propaganda/internet purity culture has been doing too good of a job lately. We have to remember our roots.

[sad-chaos-goblin]

Lil rant incoming. I was watching a clip on an insta fan account of when Aziraphale and Crowley arrive at the theatre in 1941 and Azi is being all cute and excited and I noticed someone commented this:

And seriously I felt so shocked because I'm so used to our cozy little echo chamber here where we all adore the ineffable husbands.

The ineffables are dorky af, we know that. They are unapologetically ridiculous and goofy and that's part of what makes them so compelling. They are hilariously cartoonish but also have such profound depth and complexity. These characters are so incredibly special that they have impacted all of us here in an intense, visceral manner.

I'm rambling here but my point is... mah point is.... mah point IS... dolphins Silliness is important. What will feel cringey to the wrong people will be perceived as an endearing part of who you are by the right people. Be as weird as your nasty little heart desires. 

@ineffabildaddy - I remembered our "cool" discourse again while typing this!

[drdemonprince]

One thing that pisses me off about the project 2025 discourse is how painfully obvious it is that these people aren’t in any kind of community with southerners because this shit has been happening on the state level for over a decade. I’m from Texas where there aren’t gubernatorial term limits and governor Abbott would 10000% be considered a far right dictator if Texas was its own country. And this is all without the delusion that the DNC gives a single fuck about us. Even when Abbott or one of these governors do something illegal (like take over one of the biggest school districts in the country HISD to basically crystallize the school to prison pipeline or withhold disaster relief funds from cities with dem mayors who don’t suck his dick hard enough) the DOJ will give them a slap on the wrist and nobody intervenes. And when they do it’s to dump millions to keep actual progressives from getting into office.

Southern leftists are some of the best organizers around, even on the fucking electoral level my congressman is a socialist and we have a bunch of mutual friends in the Texas leftist organizing scene. And yeah fuck electoralism but if Texas can elect pro Palestinian socialists what’s everyone else’s excuse to keep pushing this lesser evil bullshit. Making the reality of political tyranny but also razor sharp organizing totally disappear from conversations about project 2025 does everything to obscure the real political reality and potential of this country. We have people on the ground already dealing with the worst case scenario for everything: abortion, trans healthcare, trans panic, censorship, immigration human rights abuses, constant threats of mass deportation, incredibly dangerous prison conditions, climate change, unionizing in the most legally hostile environments in the country. Idk it’s like….i wish people could really grasp this. It’s already been here. And that sucks but it also means……….any person can get involved in the resistance infrastructure that already exists.

fucking YES!! I love you for this anon. Thanks for the message.

[simpingland]

Sōnar Māzis// Jacaerys Velaryon x fem!oc.

Summary: arriving at Winterfell was the main mission for Jace and Gaella. Cregan likes Jace almost instantly...Gaella doesn't have it that easy. She counts with Jace's support on her, but jealousy and insecurity gets on the way. Part 1, part 2 and part 3 here.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It was intensely cold, and Gaela's lips, her fingertips and her cheeks were freezing at every instant. If Jace was feeling the same, he certainly did not look like it. Vermax roared the second the three of them reached Winterfell, and the relief of touching the floor made the cold a bit nicer. The last week, during their stay at The Vale, Jace had been playing his part as Prince incredibly well. Gaella could see in every discourse, in every decision, in every polite glance he made his dedication to his title as Prince. He had gathered the men from the Vale, he was gonna gather the men from the North. The approval of Lord Stark was the approval of almost half of Westeros. Gaella had regretted not entering that room where Lady Arryn and Jace had discussed the war. Was this her way of helping? By standing behind the Prince and reassuring him only when he had nightmares? No, she wanted to be part of history, and Lord Cregan Stark was just that.

The place was humble, nothing rich and somehow, incredibly beautiful, leaving Gaella with no words to describe it. And so it happened, when Cregan welcomed them at the gates, the Princess was too stunned to speak.

"Winterfell for sure is simple..." she muttered. The Lord gave her a strange glance, not sure of the compliment. "Lord Stark, Winterfell is not at all like how I imagined."

"For sure it's poorer than The Red Keep, Princess. But it is the happy people and community that makes it the great land the Crown has come to visit. Seeking for help I assume..."

Jace gently pushed Gaella aside, almost instantly, pushing away someone so they didn't step on the mud. He smiled at the Lord, charming as always.

"Indeed, my Lord. Princes Gaella and I have traveled a good distance to discuss an urgent matter. The House Targaryen needs the House Stark at this moment."

"Prince Jacaerys Velaryon. You are not as I expected you to be. Sure you are serious, I just thought of you a bit..."

"Taller?" Interrupted Gaella, a playful yet nervous smirk on his face. Both men looked at her, Cregan amused, Jace annoyed.

"I was going to say blondier, Princess."

"Well, these things are amystery. My mother's hair is auburn color. And me and my siblings are blonde. Hair means little to nothing."

"Gaella," Jace stopped the girl. "I think we should talk about other matters."

"Sure... Apologies."

Cregan gave her a small smile, almost a mocking smile. And before she could realise, both men walked before her, leaving the Princess completely behind. The small talk of Lord Stark's wife made Gaella feel out of the entire mission. With a polite apology, she upped her pace trying to reach the men. They were already deep in a conversation.

"We wanted to discuss matters of loyalty, Lord Stark" you interrupted.

"I know, Princess, the Prince has already commented the same."

Gaella stared at the other boy, it was getting annoying for the young Lord and Jace could tell.

"Princess Gaella, Lord Stark was mentioning to me that there were a lot of duties he needs to attend before a proper chat" said Jace.

"But there's nothing more important than the Realm."

The Lord signed, and Jace tried his hardest not to scream at the girl. Was this her way of helping?

"Well, we are the ones interrupting Lord Cregan's duties as the protector of the North. We might as well wait."

Gaella looked at Jace looking for a signal, he could not be serious...he was the Prince of the Seven Kingdoms and Lord Stark could not put on hold some chores? But she knew better, it was a bad impression to contradict the Prince. So she left it for the privacy of the hall where their rooms were assigned.

"I wonder, what are Lord Cregan's duties? Putting salt on the neighbor's doorstep to melt the ice? Ripping of animal skins so the woman could knit their cloaks?" Gaella rolled her eyes, trying to gain a smile from Jace. She failed.

"Simple? You called Winterfell 'simple'?" He scolded her in a whisper.

"You did not let me finish."

"'Taller'?"

"He was going to question your legitimacy!" She protested again. Jace took a second not to scream.

"He was going to make a jest, Gaella."

"Well, good thing I made the jest myself, then."

That did manage to get a smile from Jace. Soft and sweet, he tried to hide it. He took a deep breath.

"I'm sorry, my Prince. I should have not commented on something so stupid. Not about Winterfell...not about you." Gaella stared at her hands, still colder than usual.

"Do not worry, Gaella. I don't need someone to point it to know who I am...what I am." He lost the smile, and he stared at Gaella's hands as he lowered his gaze.

She knew at the instant what he was talking about, and as a reassuring gesture, she stepped closer to him, put hand on his chest and searched for his eyes.

"Oh, Jace...being this short is not a problem when you own a dragon."

He pushed the girl away with a mixture of offence and amusement, Gaella laughed at him before going separate ways.

Lord Cregan asked for Jace to accompany him to some of his duties, and Gaella knew at the moment that it was a strategy from the Lord to show the future King how the North worked. Maybe he wanted his help in the future, or wanted to warn him to stay away from his Kingdom. Sure it was simple, but impressive. An ambient much sweeter and safer than the beautiful streets of King's Landing. They left Gaella, once again, behind, but she saw the people's reaction to Jace's presence. They stared with a polite and honest curiosity, no one reached to beg for money or favours, and Cregan even saluted a few of them using their names, and Jace saluted back. Oh...he was going to be such a loved king, of that Gaella was more than certain. And Baela was more than fortunate to be betrothed to the best men in Westeros.

Something that Gaella did not notice was the quiet stares Jace caught of her wherever he could afford. He looked back at her, she was listening a bit impatiently to the men trying to impress her, or maybe she was listening to the woman sharing their daily lives and gossips, and the children staring at her silver hair and fancy jewelry. He could also hear the men getting confused at Gaella's smart responses to the flirting, the laughter of the woman as she gave them her opinion, or the children's awe at her narrations of the Targaryen's history. How much he had missed her soulmate.

At supper time, the girl was styled by the Lady Stark's maidens, and, unable to dress her in southern fashion, Gaella accepted to put on a simple gown, with a simple hairstyle that made her natural curls and snowy hair shine at the light of the candles. When she entered the room, Jace's chat with Cregan got lost in the wind. They stood in the presence of the Princess, Jace being the first one when he, indeed, was not required to stand before her.

"My Prince..." Cregan called him. The boy turned back at the Lord. "May we sit?"

He had stared for too long, and Gaella was confused and blushed by that point.

"Sure. Let's eat."

The music soundsd calmly as a background, never distracting enough, and Jace took the opportunity to sell Team Black a bit more to the Lord. Gaella decided to do the same, with the people around her, hoping they would pressure the Lord in case of future doubts. At a certain point, a melody crossed the room, a special tune. Gaella recognised it at the instant and Jace did as well. They locked eyes, and for an instant they were kids again, in their dull dinners with Lords, hoping for an opportunity to cross words. Jace excused himself before standing up, signing to Gaella to stand with him.

"I hope you got better at this, my Prince...I did not" Gaella whispered to the Prince's ear. He smirked.

"Let me lead."

She tried her best, but still, she stepped on him multiple times. The people around decided to join in but the couple did not notice. Jace's smile was contagious, and Gaella blushed and giggled every time she felt trip. They would quote the instructions learned as kids, disagreeing with a few of them.

"How much I have missed this, Jace" confessed the girl.

"Maybe as much as I have missed you."

When the dessert was announced, the people started to leave the dancing, and Jace and Gaella found a sign, that they should concentrate again on their major task.

He kissed the back of Gaella's hand, led her back to the table and with a polite apology, he suggested Lord Cregan to swap seats on the dining table, leaving Gaella to sit beside the Lord and Jace beside his lady wife.

"What are you doing?" Gaella whispered at a moment of chanting and movement.

"I have talked enough with him today. Now it's your moment to try and show your charms."

And so Gaella did. A bit nervous at the beginning, Lord Cregan seemed to forgive her clumsiness and comments about his land, lending his ear to Gaella's discoveries made that day. She managed to make him smile in genuine amusement, with the gossip of the woman close to his castle, retelling stories that House Stark got wrong about the Hightowers and Targaryens, anecdotes of Jacaerys being a kid on the Red Keep and his fantasies of becoming a secret knight on tournaments. She even taught him how to say "winter is coming" in Valyrian.

And at those giggles being shared, Jace started to feel a pang of jealousy, and he felt even dumb for having the idea of putting them together in the first place. The most beautiful woman of the Seven Kingdoms with the most important young men in Westeros. He tried hard not to show it, but...his urge to finish his cup of wine was a showing, and Gaella caught it but did not understand it.

"Thank you for letting me have a second impression with Cregan, Jace" Gaella spoke behind the Prince right before he could lock himself in his room.

"I am more than sure you got what you wanted..." his tone was desperately trying to be kind, but his dead eyes were betraying him.

"Aren't you happy we are securing the North for a lifetime?" The poor girl was losing her joy by the minute.

"Yes I am, Princess...I'm just tired, I want to call it a day." He was about to close the door.

"With all that wine you had today no wonder you feel dizzy" she cut, harshly, making sure he knew it was not a joke. Jace opened the door wider, frustration sober him up a bit.

"Don't you dare judge me, Gaella..."

"I am not."

"YES...Yes you are. Like everyone else is."

"Jace--"

"And you have no right to do so, because, just like the Hightower that you are, you pull a veil of dignity and superiority to make yourself stand out. But to get what you wanted you need to flirt and swing your hair in the right direction. And then, you have all you want."

"I can't believe you are jealous of me."

"I am...jealous." But not of her...of Cregan, but she did not need to know that.

They had a strange and painful silence. Gaella had many thoughts, and the anger she kept all that day was about to disappear forever, but then Jace decided to get drunk and speak. But Gaella was tired of arguing, of screaming to a boy she had always loved in some type of way, no matter where they were. At this point she was just sad.

"Jace...you should know it has offended me, deeply, that you did not count onme throughout the day. But what hurts...what pains me... is that you are the only person who knows me in every single way. And you see me just as a Hightower with nothing more than shallowness and manipulation skills. Just when I was begging to think the world of you."

A tearfelll down her cheek.

"You thought the world of me? That is why you humiliated me in front of Cregan?"

"Gods no!"

"I tried to get you in the conversation, but every time I did it was a mistake. At the Vale, at the gates of Winterfell, at this dinner with Cregan!"

"He liked me!"

"THAT'S NOT ENOUGH!"

"And what advice would you give me, my Prince?" Gaella's tone changed to a raging and sarcastic one.

"Can I please be respected? All those stories...all those jokes...I think it's more than obvious I will not be a legitimate monarch, and I can't keep my thoughts away from that every single day. If you loved me as much as you claim you do, you might as well leave it to rest? At least in front of others...or me."

"Well I did not know--"

"Yes you did. Just let me rest for the night, Princess Gaella. It won't sit right with me to shut my door in your face."

He stared at her for a second, letting a sight of pure deception, maybe on himself, and finally closed the door softly, almost gently. He left Gaella outside, a pity feelinginn her gut. How could someone be as foolish and careless as her? She had been a participant in that pain, as a kid and a young woman. She wanted to knock on his door so bad...but she decided to give him this one night. As a punishment, she felt unable to sleep.

And therefore, Gaella woke up from something so poor she couldn't call it rest or sleep. When she walked out of her room, she had the terrible luck of running into the one and only Jace. Eyes tired, strangely awake and proper, not at all hungover.

"Jacaerys, please--" the girl muttered, completely unprepared and with the urge to gain his strange friend back.

"I'm afraid our conversation has to wait, Princes Gaella. Lord Cregan in waiting for me."

"May I accompany you?" She asked, a tiny hope in her voice.

"I don't think the top of the Wall is a proper place for a lady."

"As you wished, my Prince..."

And so he left, Gaella behind, with her wishing to hit him and hug him. Maybe both, one after the other multiple times. What they did not know, as the Prince distracted himself with Cregan, learning about the North and listening to the story of the Night's Watch, Gaella would open a letter. A black raven, sealed with Rhaenyra's stamp informed of the terrible news. This news where read by the Princess, who abandoned her breakfast, running around the castle, begging a guard to take her to the Wall. She rode there, she cried on her way up on the elevator, alone in the cold. How could she word it? How did this happen? Poor and sweet Jace.

"Jacaerys?" She called once she reached the top, running as fast as she could in the snow. She even tripped, and she stood up again to keep on searching. "Jacaerys!"

He heard the girl, her voice getting louder. But once she saw him, she went mute.

"Gaella? I told you..." he saw her eyes, full of tears about to fall. Her mouth was upturned Jacaerys nightmare became true as Gaella finally spoke.

"Luke is dead."

Taglist: @mariaelizabeth21-blog1 @bellstwd @kuroladykana

[sensorydephrivation]

Amatonormative assumptions and the language of a hard launch: a rambly DnP essay thing

I have a lot of Discourse Thoughts about hard launching and all that, but there’s not much I can say that hasn’t already been said. This fandom is one that generally has significant representation on both sides of any major issue; any take you look for you can find someone genuinely believing. What I am interested in analyzing is how some people are insistent, whether or not they want it to happen or believe it will happen, that they haven’t Hard Launched, and others are equally insistent that they have. Because on the surface those should be completely contradictory takes, but a large amount of people believe each to be true.

I’ve seen posts making comparisons to PJ and Sophie, and I definitely think that’s a useful tool because it brings up the real question here: how do we speak about romantic and platonic relationships, and what underlying assumptions are at play when we use or don't use certain words?

Firstly, this issue is obviously mostly to entirely due to homophobia. Why do people assume PJ and Sophie are a couple just because they live together, even though they've never used the words? Because they're a man and a woman. Why couldn't DnP be publicly open about their relationship back in the day? Because they're gay. I'm not going to spend too much time on this point because it's obvious, but I feel like it's important to remember that Dan and Phil's relationship wasn't some Great Secret for no reason. They weren't no-homo-ing because of privacy or whatever, but because they weren't yet ready to face the immense challenges being publicly out sticks you with, especially in the early 2010s. If homophobia wasn't a thing, everything else I'm going to say in this post would still be true, but it would all be significantly less charged. Just remember that gay marriage wasn't legal in the UK when DnP met each other, and that 2000s pop culture overall was routinely, openly, virulently homophobic. Just keep that in mind. (Also, everything I talk about in this post refers to 2019 onwards, after they came out. I wasn't around for the no-homo era and can't speak on it. I'm also not going to be talking about the speculation around their relationship, because that's been talked about so much. It definitely is a factor in all of this, but you know that already)

Onto the main point of this post. The reason DnP haven't "hard launched" (that term itself is incredibly vague, but its popular meaning in this fandom seems to be explicit confirmation of a romantic relationship, which is how I'm using it here) while also having clearly done so is because their use of language does not line up with conventional expectations of how language around romantic and platonic relationships should be used.

The concept of "dating" as we think of it today is relatively recent, and language around it is even newer. The terms "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" only became prominent in the mid- to late- 20th century, and it took a while for them to gain the connotation (of almost always meaning a romantic relationship) that they have today. And yet people have still had romantic relationships for forever! How these things were described would depend on the society's norms around marriage and sex and often on the exact social dynamic of the couple. Today, we think we're better than all that and can find words for anything.

I'm no expert on what makes a relationship romantic vs platonic or even how to define those terms. I find it hard to define the concept of romance in a way that doesn't bring with it centuries of heteronormative amatonormative assumptions. And boy are there assumptions. (No, people who live together for life do not have to be romantically involved, that's a silly thing to believe.) When people see a relationship that lines up or does not line up with those assumptions, they expect it to have a clean, simple label. But the words we used for romantic relationships outside of marriage, due to how new they are, are completely not simple!

While these days they seem to be the most "unambiguous" terms to describe a romantic relationship, "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" are essentially euphemisms that can seem infantilizing and demeaning of the seriousness of a relationship. It's easy to see how they aren't for everyone, even if many people are fine using them for serious committed relationships. "Partner" is kind of ambiguous on purpose, thought like bf and gf, I think it's on its way to becoming a word with mainly romantic connotations. The term "significant other" is out of fashion these days, but just like bf, gf, and "partner," it's basically a euphemism that doesn't mean much in and of itself. We have no words to describe an unmarried romantic couple that aren't on some level unclear or unindicative of the actual nature of the relationship.

Dan and Phil have acknowledged that they were once in a romantic relationship, have made many many jokes about having sex with each other, and are committed life partners. On some level, you can take the combination of these things as a very clear confirmation of a current romantic relationship, which many do. Yes, this requires making a few assumptions, but they aren't the craziest assumptions in the world. In fact, as one can see from the PJ and Sophie example, they are assumptions that are often normal and expected to be made in social situations. So why do so many others not see it this way?

Well for one, we are a mostly queer community that understands the complexity of queer relationships and how these assumptions do not get applied equally. We see how these assumptions are often used against queer people to devalue their identities, especially those on the ace-aro spectrum and/or in queerplatonic relationships. We also are an extremely online community, familiar with the complicated layers of discourse around RPF and shipping, and hesitant to make assumptions in a way that could potentially damage relationships or invade someone's privacy.

But honestly? It's because DnP don't call themselves boyfriends. They don't explicitly frame their activities in romantic ways (e.g. call things dates). The terms they use and jokes they make, even in 2024, are not the sort of things we expect from the set of assumptions that go with a committed romantic relationship. (This is also where the discourse about whether or not they're open/poly comes from, but that's a topic for another day.)

The Date Night video stretches this to its absolute max. The game is full of cards about kissing and other things that fit cleanly into the set of romantic relationship assumptions, but they didn't use any of those cards. They only used things that were ambiguous, and tried to downplay the romantic implications as much as possible aside from the lampshading of it at the start of the video ("this is a great game to play with your best buddy as well" "phil says no homo" as well as the entire "ugh i can't believe they send us this" tone of the intro). The use of "partner" in this video is the clearest example of this. The game uses this word exclusively- after all, it's a standard, accepted, gender-neutral word for people in a romantic relationship. Phil confidently reads it off the card, with the "I don't care which set of assumptions this assigns us" attitude that's been prevalent over the past year and past few months especially. Dan avoids it half the time, and at the end of the video, seems to clearly mock the term, saying it in a silly voice and then comparing it to how stereotypical cowboys use the word. This stuck out to me; it made it very noticeable that they don't use that word at least in videos, and made me think about the connation of the word they do use-- "friend." That term, unlike any of the words I've mentioned so far, implies literally nothing. "Friends" can be people with a barely positive relationship or people with an incredibly meaningful relationship they center their life around. With no other qualifiers, it also implies that the people in question don't have a romantic relationship (are "just friends"), or even (because of amatonormativity) that their relationship is not especially deep or meaningful.

Dan and Phil have defined their relationship in quite a few ways-- or rather, Dan has, in BIG and in his interviews for WAD. These quotes circulate on here constantly as people discuss the meaning of them. I'm not really interested in talking about those as they've already been talked to death. I do think it's worth noting that we only get these things from Dan-- the one time Phil has ever spoken on his "current dating life" it was just to say "I don't want to talk about that, the door is closed." Obviously some of this is because the interviewers were pushy, but also I'm sure Dan enjoys his elaborate poetic metaphors enough to not be able to shut up about them haha. (Very unrelated but I wonder if this will come up if they end up doing interviews for TIT?) The thing is, these definitions show a deep, meaningful, complex, committed relationship. They include directly romantic terms like "husbands," "soul mates," and "normal gay relationship." You would think being willing to call someone your husband, even with a million other words around it, would mean you wouldn't have a problem calling them your partner, right? Yet these words do not reflect the language they use when speaking about each other in videos!

There are times when they say "friend" "buddy" or "mate" in a clearly humorous, ironic way, and seem aware that it isn't a term that makes people think of a committed, long term relationship. Other times, they use the word as if it is a fully accurate descriptor of their relationship-- in the glue story, Dan jokes about being ashamed to be seen as "the friend of the glue guy," and in How Phil Nearly Died, he quotes himself telling the hospital staff he is looking for "my friend." I use the hospital stories as examples because they are high-stakes (or seemingly high-stakes in the case of the glue story) situations and examples of how other people in their real lives perceive them. The way they choose to tell these stories to the internet is one in which the fact that a random hospital worker would likely interact differently with Dan if he was Phil's friendly roommate as opposed to his life partner doesn't matter. In other words: if they actually do call each other "friends" irl around strangers, those strangers probably have a very different impression of their relationship than we do. Their consistency in describing themselves doing so just means that they want to consistently use the term "friends" in their videos, not that they actually do that in real life. But to a viewer who is unsure about their relationship status, the fact that they are clearly life partners, no matter platonic or romantic, but in all situations opt for a word that does not imply that seems to be confirmation that their relationship is not clearly romantic, or at least that they don't want to refer to it as such.

If I have to draw a conclusion from all this, it's that DnP consider their relationship very complex and unusual (ymmv on if it is, lol) and have had to deal with a ridiculous level of scrutiny about it nonetheless. Again, Phil has almost never spoken on this, but Dan clearly dislikes any descriptor that carries with it a sense of assumptions about the nature of the relationship, hence why he uses like fifty contradicting ones or strange metaphors instead. "Friend" carries with it no assumptions. You can be "friends" and be in a romantic relationship-- plenty of people say "I married my best friend." But our society considers romantic relationships to be more meaningful and important than platonic ones. People assume that if you are in a romantic relationship, you would want to describe your relationship exclusively using terms that carry that set of assumptions, because that is the most important part about it. I honestly think Dan is being quite subversive in refusing to do so.

I have no idea if or when this will ever change, but I hope I've given enough context for those who are convinced they've already hard launched to understand why others are still waiting, and for those who don't think they have to understand why the issue is more complicated than it seems. This topic has fascinated me ever since I first started watching them, and I hope this post can help people reach a bit more of a understanding, rather than inciting more discourse.

[rachelzeglertruther]

Why You're Wrong About Rachel Zegler

This is a long post, but there's a lot of context missing from the Rachel Zegler "discourse" that I thought I could add with my history of watching this unfold from the beginning.

The Snow White Thing

You probably know this part. There's a curated video of Rachel going viral, framed to make her seem like she's never seen Snow White, she hates the story, she hates the character, she's ungrateful, and single-handedly ruined Disney's brand. The clips from these videos are not new— they were released nearly a year ago in September 2022 and nobody cared about them at the time. Why? Because all the full interviews she did that day at the Disney Exo in 2022 showed a young, charming woman who was excited and proud to be cast in an iconic role. The interviews were very well received and it was a non story. Now that it's been edited down and cut together in a malicious way, and the people sharing them are purposefully misquoting her, they've twisted the context. Normally, this would be a non controversy. Even if that video wasn't taken out of context and spliced together to make her seem like she hates the film, most people wouldn't care. The issue is the response to the video.

Let's get this out of the way: Rachel Zegler doesn't hate Snow White. She relayed that she was afraid of the forest scene as a child and didn't revisit it again until after she was cast in the role. She has since then watched it several times and has expressed for YEARS before that interview came out that she was incredibly honored and grateful to be playing such an iconic Disney princess. If you watch the full videos that those clips came from, this comes across immediately to anyone with their own mind. If you hate someone for being scared of something as a child, I don't know what to tell you. If the role was being given to the biggest Snow White fan, you would be correct that she doesn't deserve it. Unfortunately for you, this role requires talent and Rachel has the Golden Globe and critical acclaim from people who matter within the industry (her peers and critics).

You know who does hate their beloved characters in beloved franchises but the general public still applauds them? Harrison Ford, Sean Connery, Daniel Craig, and Robert Pattinson. They've all expressed outright contempt for the roles and the films they were part of, but nobody cared. People had fun with their quotes but they still respected them. Rachel said nothing even closely resembling their remarks, but she's being torn to shreds. Are we seeing a pattern here?

Rachel never said a single bad thing about the character or the animated film— she said that it was outdated and that set people over the edge, foaming at the mouth to have her burned at the stake. If you think it would be perfectly fine to have a movie about an abused 14 year old girl run away to play housemaid for a bunch of men, get kissed in her sleep/death by an adult man, and then wake up to fall into his arms in 2024, that's certainly a hot take. If you're against remakes, direct your ire at Disney. But if you truly think that plot would work with young girls today, you're the one who's out of touch. It would do far more harm than good to portray a young woman in that light.

She also never said that there was anything wrong with romance or love. She said that the new Snow White wasn't only dreaming of that. I can't stress enough that this wasn't her decision… she was describing the plot of the new film that was written by Greta Gerwig and approved by Disney. There's a prince in the film and he will also have a more developed personality and storyline. If you have a problem with the writing, wait until it comes out so you can write your strongly worded letter to Greta. If you have a problem with the concept in general, take it up with Disney. There's no need for you to be defensive over hurting the legacy of a multi-billion dollar company or a 87 year old cartoon written by a proud racist antisemite. This is the most confusing part of the hate campaign to me because it wasn't even her opinion— she was literally describing the plot of the film she had nothing to do with. It also isn't a new thing. Disney actors have been promoting their newer films this way for years.

It's perfectly okay to like things that are problematic. It's becoming an issue that we refuse to acknowledge that maybe some things we love are harmful. What we can't do is justify why it's not problematic, and in fact everyone who calls it out is the problem and NOT their precious cartoon. The 1937 Snow White was an amazing feat of animation. It's a classic for a reason. But it was also Hitler's favorite film and was directed by a white supremacist (the one who is "rolling in his grave" due to Rachel's existence, according to his son). Things don't exist in a vacuum and we can't ignore the bad parts.

How We Got Here:

The thing that everyone is missing is the source of this campaign. This started in September of 2020 when transphobic actor Gina Carano made fun of trans people by changing her pronouns to beep/bop.boop. Rachel indirectly called her out by coming to the defense of the trans community.

She never called out Gina by name (though she rightfully could have). Mind you, Rachel's first film hadn't come out yet. Nobody knew who she was outside of those of us who were anticipating West Side Story and were fans of her covers on YouTube. She was a "nobody" in the industry. Take this part with a grain of salt because I can't confirm it, but Gina and her fans directly blame Rachel for her being banned from Twitter. Again, I really don't think that matters as she's harmful to the trans community and shouldn't have a platform. What does matter is that fans of Gina (which, let's be real, are just fans of transphobia) have been stalking Rachel's every move since then. Unfortunately for them, there wasn't much they could use against her other than to call her woke and #snowbrown when she was cast a year later as the Disney princess. The noise has always been there, but unless you were a fan of hers, you probably didn't hear about it. It wasn't until two years after this that they had something else against her.

If you've recently seen a video of Rachel crying circulating that claims to be her reaction to the recent Snow White backlash, it's an old video. It's from a vlog from her youtube channel posted in June 2022. It was in response to these exact same transphobic anti-woke conservatives who thought that they had something when she did an interview on the red carpet of the Shazam premiere. When asked why she joined the DC universe, she responded "I needed a job." It was generally well received by most people who thought it was cute and funny, but those who were waiting in the shadows latched onto it as an excuse to send her death threats.

The video was also about a month after she was invited to present at the 2022 Oscars and was made to seem like she bullied the Academy (as a no name newcomer, mind you) into letting her attend. In reality, a fan left a comment on her Instagram asking what she was wearing to the event. She responded that she wasn't invited but would be rooting for everyone from her couch in her boyfriend's pajamas. It was the public who demanded she get an invite and the Oscar's must have agreed that it was very odd that the lead actress of a film that was nominated for Best Film wouldn't get an invite. Whether it was an oversight on their part or a scheduling issue with Rachel's filming, I truly think there was no malicious intent from either party. Keep in mind, she used to be very active with her fans (she's a huge fangirl of things herself and has always had a strong relationship with her fans) and she wasn't used to her comments becoming articles and national tv segments. This was the first time it happened to her. It appears she learned that she's not just a girl who posts on YouTube anymore and she's going to be put under a microscope for every move she makes. She has since shut down her Instagram comments and rarely interacts with fans outside of liking comments these days because of this.

I know this is long, but I need people to understand where this is all coming from. It didn't just happen out of nowhere. It's an orchestrated campaign built by violent conservatives, and thousands of women who saw Barbie this summer are hopping on the bandwagon to beat another woman into submission because they have a lot of internalized misogyny to deal with. She's not smug, you just hate women. It's okay to find people annoying, but it's valuable to look into why you think that. If you see a confident young woman expressing views that don't actually harm anyone and you think she needs to be "humbled" and "put in her place" by the entire internet dogpiling her, you've lost your mind. Using "body language experts" (fake job) to diagnose her as a psychopath is so vile. Everytime someone mentions her name online, the comments beneath it are full of the most violent, misogynistic, racist things I've ever seen. If you're contributing to that, you've chosen your side. Reevaluate or seek help.

I'm tired of seeing this happen to young women. We let this happen to Jennifer Lawrence, Brie Larson, Millie Bobby Brown, Halle Bailey, and Jenna Ortega. It's one thing to call out celebrities and hold them accountable when they're doing something actively harmful, but that's not what this is about. That's never been what this is about. We pick these girls to pieces and examine them and pull them apart to justify our hatred of young women who rise to success too quickly for our liking. We dogpile and try to stamp out the flame before they burn too bright. Barbie is still in theaters and you all loved it, yet you're demanding that a bright girl with a big future be small and submissive and humbled because you have issues. That's not feminism. You're just the girls who would have bullied Weird Barbie for using her hands too much when she talks.

[genericpuff]

Pretty much recovered, still got a bit of congestion and an on-and-off cough but well enough to be back in working order. Wish I could say everything else is on the upswing but uh... nah, the state of everything going on right now is undeniably garbage.

But we press on. We must.

To all my American friends and viewers, please, hang in there. Keep fighting. Despair is a deep and dark pit to fall into, and incredibly hard to crawl out the deeper you fall, but there are others all around you making the climb and offering you helping hands. You just have to keep climbing. What you're climbing towards can be as grand as seeing the fall of this new legislation, or as small as watching the third Sonic movie when it comes out. Whatever it is, keep it in your sights, and keep pressing forward.

I don't normally share much in terms of politics around here as I personally like to keep a space that's free of political discourse for the sake of viewers who are looking for an escape from the nightmares of the real world. That said, I'll be reblogging some great posts over the next few days that sum up better than I ever could the steps you can be taking both to protect yourself and to fight back. I hope they can give you knowledge and confidence in the journey ahead.

This isn't the first time America's found itself in the grips of white supremacy and fascism, and it's not going to be the last - the cost of freedom is constant vigilance.

If you're reading this in the swarm of posts amidst the doomscrolling - please, give yourself the grace to protect your peace. Yes, many will call it a privilege to be able to just 'log off' and not look at the news, and to an extent, I agree with the sentiment of that statement; it is still something you should do if you have the opportunity to do so. The 24 hour news cycle is designed to wear us down, make us feel helpless, give us the sense that the world is "over" when it still exists all around us and can still be saved - we can't fight this fight if we're burnt out and miserable, and that's by design.

So please, take care of yourself. Resist the urge to doomscroll. Don't allow yourself to get sucked into rage-bait arguments with trolls on the Internet, your pain is their gain. Drink lots of water. Sleep. Rest. Watch your favorite comfort shows. Reach out to your communities, both online and local. Build and nurture your support networks. Ask for help from those who are able to offer it; pass it forward to the next person seeking help when you can. Look to your local legislation, get yourself out there, whether it's volunteering, rallying, protesting, whatever you can do to get yourself involved in your community because it's on an individual level that change begins.

Worrying is a drug that impedes progress and destroys lives. None of us are immune to despair - but we are all above it, so long as we keep fighting to find the strength to overcome it. Forgo despair for hope. Forgo despair for resilience. Forgo despair for resolve.

Keep breathing. Keep living. Keep fighting.

Kesalul.

[mjbarrosart]

I did a little fanart of all the Fontaine characters.

I am enjoining a lot this new region in Genshin. Sumeru was fine, but was not my cup of tea. Decadent French degenerates?? that is right on my alley!

Also the music of Fontaine RULES!

I'll share my opinions about every character, so...

SPOILERS FOR 4.1

_______________________________________

Charlotte: A missed opportunity to do something amazing with her as a journalist. She could be a character that makes interesting commentary about Fontaine injustices, but nah, she is just chasing "a big headline", zero interest for the truth.

Freminet: He is cute. I like him.

Lynette: I love her. I wish the game put her more in the spotlight, right now just feels like a prop for Lyney and that is a shame.

Lyney: He is fine. His outfit always makes me laugh.

Furina: My baby girl, the bane of my existence, my favorite Archon ever. We don't accept Furina slander in this household. I see her as an overwhelmed person who needs to put this all this show in order to keep feeding the Oratrice, while everyone is just taking her as incompetent without knowing what kind of sacrifices she is doing, idk, she is a really interesting Archon to me. I love the idea of her being cursed, and her interactions with Arlecchino made me really sad, I feel bad for her, she is not having a good time...I hope her story don't disappoint me, hahaha.

Neuvilette: Old man, autistic coded dragon for the win, I really like him. He is also a little of a drama queen with all this "I don't belong here" stuff while outside literally 90% of Fontaine is a member of the "we love Neuvillette fan club"

Wriothesley: He is fine. I like his interactions with Neuvilette and him as Clorinde's friend. My problem with him is this thing that Genshin likes to do of "is not the system that is bad just you need to be sure to have good people on the top" kind of discourse that is really bad. So him as a cop/jail administrator kinda is another missed opportunity to make a little more commentary, but maybe I'm asking for too much.

Sigewinne: I really like her after the Archon quest. Haha, you can not trust her. Lol.

Navia: I love this woman with all my heart. She is the best, smart, badass and beautiful. Also incredibly gay for Clorinde, I love their drama. I want more Navia content now!

Clorinde: I am a sword lesbian, so she is right on my alley. I like her serious but not stoic attitude, and how she turns into a wet cat in front of Navia, lol. I want to learn more about her. She is cool.

[sophie-frm-mars]

Transmisogyny discourse on here has such an annoying shape to it.

Like I know that a bunch of it is just because it's from people who are / have always been very online / don't have much life experience as with all discourses that take on annoying shapes so I've been trying to not get too fixated on it but like,

Okay TMA (Transmisogyny Affected) and TME (Transmisogyny Exempt) are absolutely useful and valuable terms in the discussion of transmisogyny and how it works, because you need to be able to talk about who transmisogyny directly affects in order to talk about it. The much larger group of the total population is TME people, because that's (broadly) all cis people, and transmasculine people. So the majority of transmisogyny is necessarily directed from TME people to TMA people, but it's important to understand that as a social force it is actually directed from everyone towards TMA people. Trans women also engage in and perpetuate transmisogyny, sometimes incredibly vicious and harmful transmisogyny - the point of these terms is to identify the groups relevant to the discussion, not to identify an innocent oppressed class and an oppressor class who does entirely 100% of the social dynamic.

The next annoying part of the discourse is that in talking as if TME people = the transmisogyny doers, we keep winding up at a transfems vs transmascs discourse. This part of the discourse is like 1 part transfems misidentifying where the fight worth fighting is to 5 parts transmascs wanting to talk about ways they're also oppressed to like 20 parts raw transmisogyny. Yes, people who perform masculinity under patriarchy are more respected by partriarchy and get some benefits from that, and this is reflected in the differences between experiences of transmascs and transfems. This will be true everywhere that there is the basic patriarchal binary gender division between masculine (possessing agency, meaningful subjectivity, power) and feminine (being a type of property that belongs to others). Incidentally this is why the dyke butch/femme dichotomy is just there to sell more gender.

Everyone should get to perform their gender in a way that makes them happiest, and the problem is that we live under a patriarchy, which disempowers some people for the ways they perform their gender. I'm getting really basic here because some people on here talk like they need reminding.

The real reason the discourse is annoying though, just like all online discourses are, is because none of it is about how to organise to actually fight transmisogyny - that is, to make things meaningfully better for transmisogyny affected people.

2 years ago in the UK a teenage trans girl, Brianna Ghey, was stabbed to death after a prolonged campaign of transmisogynistic bullying by her classmates that the adults in her school life were absolutely aware of and did nothing about. Her death was the most important thing to every trans person in the UK for a moment, and then the political energy just dissipated without gaining any momentum. This is because organised structures of trans community, protest, politicisation and direct action just weren't there.

3 years ago in the UK a cis woman, Sarah Everard, was murdered by a police officer. There was an organised vigil which was politicised by Sisters Uncut, a feminist direct action group with chapters across london and the UK which had evolved to embrace police abolition over the course of its existence. The police escalated against the vigil and the spectacle of the police crackdown on women mourning the death of a woman murdered by police became a crucial moment in police abolition discourse in the UK. Because Sisters had already been laying down the organisational infrastructure for years, because it had been holding discussions among members and because it had responded to its members needs, it was in a strong enough position to act quickly and make change in the public consciousness. (You can read more about this in Abolition Revolution by Aviah Sarah Day and Shanice Octavia McBean.) If there was an organisation half as well put together as Sisters Uncut present in the trans community in the UK when Brianna Ghey was murdered, the organised response could have done something similar and meaningful.

I wrote a bit here about how trans people could use an assembly-organisation model to achieve meaningful change, but that's just my personal proposal for what would make a difference. The larger point is that discoursing over transmisogyny online, just like all discoursing online, is just shadows on the wall of the cave.

[anne20055]

i just finished watching Date Night With Dan And Phil for like the 5th time and now that we’ve all had the time to ponder and digest it, i’m going to give my thoughts

im not even going to touch on the title. they’ve clickbaited worse.

Firstly, despite this going against everything i say on here, id like to address the “this was an incredible video; they looked so happy” vs. “they were so uncomfortable; Relatable should have never made them do that” discourse, cause i haven’t really seen anyone have the same take as i do

i think that for at least the beginning of the video, they seemed a bit uncomfortable, and got better as they went on, but not for the same reason as everyone else. i also think this uncomfortability was mixed in with excitement, kind of like the incoherent videos, especially the first one, but going a bit deeper than just that. i think they felt a bit weird at the start cause they’ve never directly used the words “couple” or “partner” in a video before. they’ve gotten close several times, like dan saying “…and this is the divorce” in one of the stereo livestreams (i forgot which one) as well as the “Phivorce” segment in “Top Dan Memes of 2022”, and dan saying “his and hises joint shitties” then phil saying “ours actually face each other” in the “Dan and Phil React to Phan Memes 2”, but they’ve never said any words about each other that give absolutely no plausible deniability, even if they were just reading the game box/cards, which can obviously make them a bit uncomfortable.

there’s two main times that kind of jump out that they might be a little out of their comfort zone, both at the very beginning, both coming from dan, which is kinda suprising, given the fact that he’s always been a bit more open than phil has ever since they came out, but that’s a conversation for another day.

the first one was when after phil said his signature “Hello Dan And Phil Games ____!”, dan said “Here, at dan and phil games….”, and it almost sounded like a disclaimer. (it also reminded me of the “apology” which was i loved). as well as that, dan seemed to be laughing at himself and shaking his head while phil was doing the intro phrase, as if to hype himself up with what was to come. THAT BEING SAID, i’m really glad they kept this part in, cause it was hilarious, and even though they seemed a little weird, they also seemed excited.

the second and probably more obvious time, was when dan was reading the box, “‘The Ultimate Date Night Game: For Couples’”, specifically during the “For Couples” part, dan was blinking, laughing, and was looking at the camera in a way that was like “yeah, i know exactly how that sounded”. BUT AGAIN, this is not a bad thing. they were just as happy to be doing this as they were scared.

i think the initial weirdness wore off pretty quickly and they got to just having fun, but i think the reason why so many people were saying that it was like that the whole time was because it was at the very beginning, so they just assumed it’d be the vibe the whole way through and didn’t think much of it.

despite the slight uncomfortableness at the beginning, i think that the people who are saying that Relatable was forcing them to do it are kind of underestimating dan and phil’s ability to say no. i understand that in the past they’ve done stuff they haven’t wanted to before and were forced into things that they didn’t want to do, but this is the new era. they’re old. they’re gay. phil can say fuck. they’ve got no more fucks to give. i doubt they’d have trouble saying no. yes, relatable gave them the game to play, but i garantee you, if they didn’t want to play it on at least some level, they wouldn’t have played it. it’s not like relatable is that big of a brand for them anyway. it’s big, sure, but we all know nord vpn and dragon city will always be first. even during the second incoherent video, dan says “we have so much to lose…and very little to gain for filming this video”, and while of course it was a joke, it’s still that little bit saying that yeah we’re sponsored by these people, but it’s really not that big of a deal.

next up, the thumbnail. it is rare when a thumbnail change makes me happy instead of just annoyed. i’m not saying i don’t like that they (phil) changes the thumbnail a lot, but id just…rather not.

but this change could not have been better. i genuinely do not know of a single recent, or even non recent video thumbnail that has absolutely 0 editing. the muckbang doesn’t really look edited, but they very clearly posed, and i wouldn’t be suprised if they did something to it. but even if they didn’t, it’s still clear that this thumbnail was different.

it’s so chilled out and relaxed compared to anything they’ve done before. it was almost like a snapshot of an actual date. it reminds me of a thumbnail that a “third wheeling dan and phil moments” compilation video would use and i love it so so so much. it’s such a nice change of pace and i really hope they keep this vibe going

i think that’s about everything; if anyone agrees or disagrees with me, please tell me!! i’d love to have a conversation :) any kind of “controversial” dnp related opinion that anyone might have is always open to share with me!! even if i don’t completely agree, i will never discourage you for thinking one way or another. this is a safe place for everyone’s thoughts and i’d love for anyone to talk, no matter if you are on marriage hill, or if you think they’re platonic, please tell me! the only thing i will not accept is people bringing down other people’s opinions. they are not hurting you, so you should not be hurting them.

if you’ve read this far, i’m actually in love with you ❤️❤️

[rottenshotgungames]

Alright, let’s start with discourse, shall we?

Gatekeeping Combat

Three days ago, the Gorgon Bones blog made this post about fighters in TTRPGs (particularly the OSR): https://gorgonbones.blogspot.com/2024/02/choosing-fighter-means-choosing-violence.html?m=1

I recommend reading the post, it’s fun (and the comments are hilarious). But, for those who don’t have the time or attention span (trust me, I’m lacking in spoons right now too), this is a relatively short joke that suggests protecting the Fighter class’ niche by making it the only class able to participate in combat. This, on its face, seems like an inherently silly idea—because it is—but people have been interacting with it as a serious suggestion. This comedic concept has spawned a legitimately interesting design discussion. So, let’s engage with it as a thought experiment. How would one make this function in a fun and reasonable way? The simple answer is that you have to start with conflict.

Conflict in RPGs, particularly in Dragon Game derivatives (such as the OSR), is often violent in nature. This presents the first hurdle: How do we centralize combat to 1 class when it’s a major source of conflict, conflict that people inherently want to engage in? As I see it, there are two approaches:

Decentralize Combat.

Redefine “Engaging in Combat.”

Decentralizing combat is kinda just what it says on the tin; make combat a less important source of conflict and means of resolving it. The two biggest examples of this—to me—are Investigative Horror Games and Stealth Games, both of which rely on central conceits that CAN involve violence but don’t necessarily rely upon it. A non-OSR example would be John Harper’s Blades in The Dark, in which combat is resolved the exact same way as every other conflict: through a series of dice rolls that result in ticking and unticking a clock (with possible complications).

Redefining what it means to “engage” requires a bit more definition than the prior approach. “Redefining” can be subcategorized into two somewhat disparate techniques: Redefining goals and redefining interactions.

In any TTRPG combat, the party tends to have a list of goals that exist in a hierarchy of priority. For example, in a traditional D&D or Lancer combat the hierarchy of party goals might look like this:

The Contest (express martial superiority, wipe out the opposition, or otherwise win the combat)

The End State (survive the combat and prevent as much harm to yourself or other party members as possible)

The Barrier (achieve the exploration or narrative goal that’s being hindered or prevented by the combat)

“Redefining” these goals is more accurately described as a re-ordering of their hierarchy based upon whether you are or aren’t the Fighter, usually through gameplay incentives. An incredible example exists in the form of Mike Pondsmith’s Cyberpunk 2020, in which the Solo role (through virtue of acting first and being generally able to specialize heavily into combat) can almost singlehandedly decide the outcome of any fight in which they are present. If there is one Solo on the field, their side is probably going to receive a swift victory; your job, as the non-Solo, is simply to not die and accomplish what you actually came here to do. If there are two Solos on opposing sides of the combat, their goals change to winning their private fight; your job, as the non-Solo, is to survive the surrounding combat until the Solo is free again (or to run if they lose). In almost every combat, the Solo will prioritize the Contest while the rest of the party will prioritize either the End State or the Barrier, something aided by Cyberpunk’s lethality and its nature as a heist game.

“Redefining combat interaction” is . . . actually found everywhere. This is your basic class differentiation taken to a greater extreme than you may find in most tactical RPGs. For example, let’s look at the Combat relevant difference between the Thief/Rogue/Mercenary and the Fighter in a majority of games that use such classes:

The Fighter - Deals a lot of damage with consistently accurate attacks (sometimes also makes multiple attacks on their turn). Has high health.

The Thief - Deals a lot of damage with one really powerful attack made from stealth, sneaky (sometimes good at dodging). Has low health.

The differentiation is there, but it’s not really significant (for the purposes of this thought experiment). Both classes focus on damage output, but one makes multiple attacks and one makes a strong attack that requires setup. Let’s try to take this difference and expand it (with a little help from our dear friend Tolkien), particularly by focusing on what makes the Thief unique in comparison to the Fighter:

The Fighter - Deals a lot of damage with consistently accurate attacks (sometimes also makes multiple attacks on their turn). Has high health.

The Thief - Subverts direct combat through the use of trickery and cunning, plays support for the Fighter (sometimes good at dodging). Has low health.

“Subversion,” in this context, simply means fighting dirty. The Thief shouldn’t be engaging in a head-on fight, they’re a Thief. Their interaction with hostile entities should always be tinged by deceit, their goal should always be to throw their enemy off balance, to create openings for others and themselves to use. If your Thief isn’t constantly throwing pocket sand and disarming opponents and knocking chandeliers on top of them and pulling cloaks over their eyes and poisoning them and . . . are they really living out the Thief fantasy? By strengthening the Thief’s core identity, leaning fully into the trickster aspect, we have redefined how both classes interact with Combat in such a way that has made direct, head-on-head violence the apparent specialty of the Fighter.

Conclusion

As much as the original Gorgon Bones blog post is a joke, Jenx does point out a real issue that’s plagued class-based games for a while: a weak niche makes a weak class. Not necessarily mechanically weak (although that can also happen, looking at you CP2020 Cop), but weak in the sense of fundamental design. Strong niches, even if every class has the ability to participate in combat, are born of purposefully and carefully built interactions with the conflicts presented by a game’s rules and environment. If combat is too great of a focus, everyone is going to want to be able to play the guy who’s good at combat; if winning combat is the sole goal of any given encounter, everyone’s going to play the guy that’s good at winning combats; if every class gets good tools for dealing damage . . . well, I don’t really have to spell that one out, do I?

If you’re designing a tactical, class based game: don’t make the Fighter the only class able to engage in combats. It’s lazy, it’s silly, and it won’t be fun for very long. You may notice that, while the two games mentioned here have classes that EXCEL at direct combat, neither of them fully limit it. Instead, the proper lesson of this thought experiment is a far more common one in our field: keep in mind the incentives you’re building into both your game and your classes, and be aware of how all these moving parts interact with and affect each other. After all, the Solo wouldn’t be nearly as good if Cyberpunk wasn’t so lethal, and the Cutter would be far more ubiquitous if Blades in The Dark had a dedicated combat chapter.

Self Promo

Hey! Thanks for reading. Sorry to leave ya with Baby’s First Game Design Lesson, but I hope ya enjoyed the journey there. If you’d like to see my recent attempt at a class based fantasy game, you can click here to check out Hollow Halls. Otherwise, I hope y’all have a great night and a great day!