#we should ban difficult things

[jupejumble]

i have to research astrophysics and quantum mechanics for astronomyyyyy,, i dont wanna do thatttt

[useless-catalanfacts]

Something very strange happened, and I think we need to have a talk about the way some people who don't know about Catalan culture misrepresent the Tió (our pre-Christian Christmas present-bringer, a log who poops presents 🪵🎁).

I have a relative who is a teacher in an adult school, she teaches Catalan language (mostly to immigrants). Some days ago, they were doing an activity about Catalan holidays, and two of her students said that Tió should be banned and that it's the worst thing they have ever heard. My relative was very shocked and asked why they could say such a thing (imagine, it's like saying Santa Claus should be banned in the USA). Their reasoning was that they completely misunderstood everything about it. These people are native Spanish speakers and assumed that the Catalan word "tió" (meaning "log" 🪵) means the same as the Spanish word "tío" (meaning "uncle"), even though both words are pronounced differently. They believed that the Tió represents a man and that we tell children to beat people up, so much until they poop themselves, threatening them to give us things. They said it promotes violence to children and that it's disgusting. Nothing further from the truth.

This is not an isolated incident because a few days ago I saw a post on Tumblr repeating this same mistake. I texted the person who posted it saying that it's not called "Poop Uncle" but "Christmas Log" and they said that this was what they were taught by their teacher (this person is from a different continent), and haven't taken down the post. I have also seen comments on Instagram repeating the same and making fun of how gross and violent it is.

The real meaning of Tió

The Log is a way of symbolically passing down our relation with nature. This is how the tradition works:

In early December, we get a log and bring him home. We take care of him: we keep him in a warm place, with a blanket over him, and we feed him things like orange/clementine peels and walnut shells. On Christmas day, all the family comes together. Children get wooden sticks and go get ready in another room, meanwhile adults place presents under the Log's blanket. Children come back and hit the Log while singing a song. There are many local variants of the song but they all come down to asking the Log to poop us good food. When they have finished singing the song, the children remove the blanket and discover the presents that the Log has pooped. Years ago (now this is only done by some farmer families in rural areas, but back in the day this was generalized), the Log was burned in the house's fireplace and its ashes were spread on the fields, believed to act as a magical fertilizer.

Notice what this whole "ritual" has been about: we take care of nature, nature takes care of us, we are part of a whole and there's no real difference between "nature" and "us" because we all give life to each other. After the winter rest, we wake up nature (the Tió) so it will bring fruits and light again.

We take a log from the forest and bring it home. We do this for the Winter Solstice because it's the time of the return of light and the rebirth of nature after the winter sleep, and wood symbolizes the most important things for human life: food, warmth and light. It's difficult for us to imagine nowadays because we are used to electricity, but for our ancestors who only had oil lamps, fire and candles, darkness was almost absolute for many hours in winter, and that's why the Winter Solstice was very important because it meant that light is coming back. We want something from the Log, his fire will allow us to cook, it will give us light, and keep us warm. So we offer him the same: we feed him (notice what we feed it, too: a kind of compost, which is complimentary to human food), we keep him warm, and we love him. Then, we hit him with sticks (mimicking the motion of cutting down a tree) and ask him to give us food, and he does. Then, our ancestors used to burn him for warmth and light, and then take him back to plants spreading his ashes so it will give life to the fields. Which in turn will give us food again, which we will poop and it will fertilize plants again. And it's a cycle that never ends, we're all part of a whole.

We give to the forests, the forests can grow with the remains that all living creatures leave on its ground: leafs, excrements, the remains of parts of our food like nuts and fruit peels. These things give life to the forest. And the forest gives life to us: gives us fruits and wood (=light and warmth). We take these things, and in return we give to forests once again.

Nowadays, the part about warmth and light is often lost to kids, but the part about food is still obvious, even if subconsciously. This is why the Log is not the horrible barbaric tradition that the "haha poop and violence" crowd would make you believe.

And don't get me wrong, it can still be funny! We're the first ones to make jokes about it. And you can, too! But don't spread false ideas: the Spanish word "uncle" appears nowhere near this tradition because it doesn't have anything to do with uncles nor with Spanish-speaking cultures. It's called the Christmas Log (Tió de Nadal, Soca de Nadal, Tronca de Nadal, Tizón de Nadal, etc depending on the area, all meaning "Christmas Log") and it's celebrated by the Catalan people and a part of the Occitan and Pyrenean Aragonese people. The word "poop" (as an imperative verb, as in "please poop for us") appears in the song, but not in the name.

I know that, now that misinformation has gone viral, a post won't stop it. But I hope at least people with a genuine interest can learn some more. By all means, keep laughing! Make all the memes you want! But knowing the whole story will give you understanding. And, please, don't argue in favour of banning our cultural practises, we've had enough of that for centuries.

[drchucktingle]

more on the hugos (not just 2023)

i am sorry buds but it has to be said: lots of talk about the 2023 hugo awards being fraudulent because of actions of leader dave mccarty. this is true. but if we are going to be REALLY honest there is a difficult truth to accept, ANY past hugos dave ran are likely fraudulent

i do not want to have to say this as it casts a lot of doubt and i honestly do not think there is any action that needs to be taken, we should keep trotting along and give credit to winners, but it should at least be addressed. THIS DOES NOT JUST HAPPEN ONCE, IT GETS NOTICED ONCE

just went back into old emails and dave was IN FACT in charge of both the years i was nominated. will i ever know if there is any legitimacy to those results? was it politically best for me to be nominated but MAKE SURE i dont win? who the heck knows.

of course i am not saying my trot is MORE DESERVING or BETTER than the winners these year (and like i said we should respect these results), but acting as though actions of dave and the committee only effect 2023 seems a little short sighted i am sorry to say. it is much much worse

heres the thing that really bothers me when scoundrels treat outsiders and marginalized buds like this (same feeling i got from texas library banning) CHUCK is suddenly the one who has to wrestle with 'should i speak on this? will i ever be nominated again for ANY award now?' THAT is insidious part

[sirfrogsworth]

I sometimes wonder what it must be like to never experience medical complications or painful recovery periods or minimal side effects. Only a person who has never had surgery could ask this question.

I have never had a surgery go smoothly. Every single time some weird fucked up thing happened that I had to endure all while trying to heal.

Some people think you get your knee replaced and you're good to go.

But your body hates foreign objects and not everyone adapts. And a lot of replacements have a lifespan. Which means you have to get it re-replaced. But if you get too old, then you are stuck with a fake knee or hip that is causing you more pain than the real one ever was.

My dad got a new hip and my mom got a new knee. And watching them recover was difficult. And they were never good as new. Just slightly better off until they got really old and they were worse off.

No other medicine is held to the standard they are trying to impose on trans healthcare. If bottom surgery doesn't cure your depression, that is seen as abject failure. If puberty blockers don't make you jump for joy 24/7, they are ineffective. Even though their purpose has nothing to do with mental health. They are pretty much a stalling tactic. Why does a stalling tactic have therapeutic expectations?

The only standard should be "are you satisfied with the outcome?"

Because that is how we judge every other surgery and every other medication. It doesn't matter if it is elective, cosmetic, or corrective.

And then there is the risk. Everything has a risk. That's just part of it. Knee surgery has risk. Lip fillers have risk. Tylenol has risk. We as a society have allowed people to take medical risks, big and small. If we didn't allow risk, we'd have no medicine at all.

It's important that everyone understand the risks. And before taking a risk, people really need to imagine their life if that risk manifests.

"My knee hurts. I want it not to hurt. I am willing to go through the recovery. And I understand things may stay the same or even get worse."

If the knee surgery doesn't work, people don't say "we should ban knee surgery." We just say, "that's rough, buddy" and don't give it much thought beyond that.

If a boob pops, same deal.

And don't get me started on the Mar-a-Lago plastic surgery club. Are they all going to the same doctor? But as long as they are happy with their uncanny valley faces, bodily autonomy accomplished.

[lukohan]

Scipio is @vonspe s Rook.

A short fanfic of a funny scenario that i had in mind. Scipio just doesn't get along with the wisps. I wonder why...

They returned from yet another day of saving the world. After a quick debrief, Rook had retreated to his room in a hurry, which was a touch weird, but Emmrich didn’t think much of it in this moment, went to his own room thinking back of todays events. A couple of undead, some demons and of course a bunch of those unruly venatori. It was a fairly tiring day, but Emmrich was content, after all they managed to deal with a few problems and everyone returned unharmed.

Manfred greeted him with a friendly hiss, that turned into a concerned one right away. Emmrich looked down at himself and removed his coat. It was stained with some foreign blood splotches. “Worry not Manfred. None of this blood is mine. Most likely it belongs to one of those venatori we encountered today, truly the lot consist of only uncivilised fanatics.”

Emmrich was about to tell Manfred about today’s events when a few wisps came to visit. They seemed to be quite disturbed.

“Well good evening to you too. Oh, please, one at a time. I am afraid I can’t quite follow what you are trying to tell me.”

Emmrich tried his best to understand what they are trying to say, but they made it difficult by chattering over one another. At that moment one of the wisps tugged at his hair. Emmrich’s hand went up in reflex and he turned around to face the frantic wisp.

“Now, now, you lot seem to be quite restless. Perhaps you would be willing to show me, what has you acting like this. I think it would be quicker than me trying to make sense of your unintelligible chatter.”

The wisps flew out of his room right away and he followed them promptly. They made a sharp turn to the right and Emmrich walked into the corridor to Rooks room. His heart quickened with his steps. Why would the wisps lead him to Rooks room. The wisps liked Rook, so why would they be so agitated when leading him there. Did something happen to Rook? Did he miss something?

Emmerich didn’t manage to knock, the wisps simply opened the door for him. What he saw let him stop in his track. It took him a moment to take a deep breath and straighten his posture. He put his hands together in front of him and exasperated “Scipio!”

Scipio wasn’t too happy after getting back to the lighthouse. They had an eventful day with a lot of enemies and everyone came back exhausted. After a short debrief and the usual “good job today” he quickly excused himself and went back to his room. A good thing about crow training was, that he could move absolutely normal, despite the sting in his side, where a sword of some venatori had left a nasty cut.

He saw the wisp happily (?) approaching him floating around him all the way back to his room. He really didn’t have the nerves to entertain this now. He closed the door to keep it out, but of course a door isn’t going to stop a wisp. Fine, if it wants to see how he handles an injury who is he to stop it! Not like he can just ban it from his room. Maybe he should ask Emmrich for help with a ward or something… or something…

He took of his armour, good thing the blood isn’t visible on the dark colour, and takes a proper look at his injury. The wisp… the wisps! Why are there suddenly more of them. They seem to be curious about his wound as well. Scipio tried to get them to leave him alone and while they put some distance between them, they still hovered in his room. Scipio glared at them and after a few moments they actually finally left.

…

He grabbed a first aid kid, crow training made sure something like this had become a routine.

He was in the middle of stitching the wound when he heard steps approaching, quick and rushed. But he was in the middle of a stitch, he couldn’t just hide it right now, no wait, why would he want to hide it, why would he have to hide it. Damn crow reflex, trying to hide any weaknesses.

Just then the door flew open and Emmrich burst into the room, accompanied by the whisps. Scipio just froze for a moment like a deer caught in headlight. He swears for this brief moment where his brain was empty, he felt like he was a fledgling caught hiding something (he was trying to hide something though, wasn’t he). Emmrich’s exasperated “Scipio!” seemed to restart his brain and he made eye contact with Emmrich and quickly tried to reassure him “It’s not as bad as it looks.”

“My dear Rook, if you have received an injury I would like to be informed. I believe I am fully capable to help you heal it.”

Emmrich walked over to him and Scipio was sure this would be accompanied by a lecture, and maybe he really should have gone to the Professor right away, but his first instinct was to treat it himself, and maybe he should really work on not acting on this specific instinct.

Scipio resigned himself to a lecture about seeking help or allowing help or something, but how did Emmrich figure out he was hurt in the first place. Scipio is sure he kept a perfectly straight face and posture while leaving the common room.

That’s when he saw it. Behind Emmrich.

A corner of Scipio’s mouth slightly twitched. Those damn wisps had ratted him out!

[libraford]

I'm not bothered by the conversation so much as I am a growing approach to activism which makes it impossible to interact with other people. Which echoes a lot of that conversation I had with Ginger this week.

He refuses to have friends that are not faithful to Jesus. Like, he can have a productive conversation with a non-believer and nearly connect with them socially, but if he learns that they don't go to church or don't believe in christ, he finds it difficult to take them seriously because their words were not god-inspired.

Ginger was in a cult. I do not mean this colloquially- Xenos/Dwell is a prominent pseudo-christian cult in central Ohio that preys on college students in need of community. There are rules about who you can date, who you can hang with, they practice gay coversion therapy, and will tell you not to visit your family if they're not Christian.

There is a lot of focus on purity. Actions, thoughts, social groups- it's very controlling about what you can and cannot do.

So. When he goes out into the world with us sinners, it becomes difficult to interact with general society.

We were talking about Merve, one of our foremen, and I said: "the first time I was in a car with Merve, he introduced himself as a Democratic Catholic Pervert. And honestly- yeah that's a good summation."

Ginger didn't like that at all. "Well he's not a very good catholic with all that talk of pornography, he should be ashamed of himself- honestly shouldn't even call himself Christian."

Merve is very much a womanizer, but it's all talk. He's gross about it sometimes and it rubs me the wrong way, but in all fairness- he warned me. Outside of that, he's what I expected from a 60-something landscaper.

"Well, I think whether he's a good Christian or not is up to God, not us."

And he got a little pissy over that comment because I caught him judging.

He only hangs out with 'the faithful' at work, which consists of three guys who are religious in a similar way and it's caused a bit of a rift in the culture. It's gotten a little... preachy. It wasn't preachy before.

So I am making... parallels to this behavior and a particular strain of activism that's been affected by purity culture.

Nothing is ever good enough. If it touches racism, it's banned forever and you have to spread the word about how it's racist. Where doing things that are well-intended puts you in the spotlight for the underlying and actually bigoted reason you're doing a nice thing. And prevents you from doing the nice thing in the future.

Because yes you did a nice thing, but it wasn't enough- you could be doing more.

Yes you did a nice thing, but you did this nice thing instead of tackling this bigger issue.

Yes you did a nice thing, but it was through this program that you didn't know was funded somewhat unethically.

Yes you did a nice thing, but your motivation for doing it wasn't the goodness of your heart, it was motivated by guilt.

Yes you did a nice thing, but it took a horrible event to do it when you should have had the morals of goodness ingrained in you and you should have done this from the start.

Yes you did a nice thing, but you only did it when it started impacting your life and you should be thinking of others first.

Yes you did a nice thing but the nice thing doesn't align perfectly with my worldview.

The goalpost is forever moving backwards.

No one likes to be called 'racist.' It's a really easy weapon to use when something does something you don't like. If you look at anything closely enough, you will see it's racist roots. You could say the same for misogyny, homophobia. Our society is built on hatred and inequality. Untangling it and living a morally pure life free of ridicule is impossible.

Recognizing the roots of an action to be bigoted is the first step. The second step is knowing it when you see it. Step three is pointing it out.

But there are more steps.

Pointing it out, or calling it out, and chastising someone for ignoring or not knowing something actually isn't all that helpful. Because it leaves you to wonder- okay, now what? What can I do to remedy this situation?

Which is the next step- actionable items. Yes, I have done something wrong- I am sorry.

I am sorry. Now I will try to make it right.

I will try to make it right by donating, by volunteering time, by listening to the people who have been hurt and lifting their voices.

Part of healing from an oppressive Christian community is realizing that people are going to sin whether you like it or not. And barring harm to themselves and others, you're gonna have to let them.

If my tarot practice is derived from a 15th century racist, then it was derived for a 15th century racist. Refusing to participate in a past-time that helps me connect with my family doesn't make it not racist. It will still be racist. But I'm not sure who it's hurting in 2024 and I don't have a time machine and I'm not being given clear instructions for how to unracist it.

[morlock-holmes]

Towards a Unified Theory of Conspiracy Crank Politics

I've been thinking a lot about what seems to drive the person I will call, for lack of a better term, the conspiracy crank world-view, and particularly, my feelings about the great crank realignment.

A lot of people have said, "It seems like 30 years ago conspiracy weirdos were pretty bipartisan people, but now they all seem to be Trump loyalists."

My belief is that it's not that the conspiracy cranks became more right-wing; rather, it's that the Republicans have largely stopped being a right-wing party and are instead now a conspiracy crank party.

So, I've said this before, and I'm not well enough read in the history of conspiracy thinking to bring up old examples, but as a kid I subscribed to Skeptical Enquirer, and I remember quickly coming to two conclusions:

The reason a lot of the alien conspiracy X Files stuff is so interesting in fiction is that talented fiction writers have used it as a jumping off point to make an interesting story; the primary conspiracy literature is often very poorly written, not very inventive, and frequently openly bigoted, which leads into my second discovery,

A lot of times there is only one degree of seperation between "Big pharma and modern living has severed our spiritual connection to our earth mother Gaia" and "The Jews run the world with the aim of keeping the white race enslaved". Like, the far right conspiracy people were often really willing to ally with and break bread with the far left conspiracy people, and vice versa, in fact much more so then the more grounded parts of the left and right.

And I think that's because the conspiracy theorists have a kind of common mindset with certain shared features, regardless of the specifics of their conspiracy.

These are things that I have noticed as commonalities, and they aren't limited to conspiracy cranks; in fact, probably the vast majority of people have these habits of thought to some extent. My argument is that they are often abnormally strong in conspiracy believers.

Belief in a just world. A lot of fringe types have a really strong belief that the world is fundamentally just, and that in the ordinary course of things bad things do not happen to good people. Bad things only happen because a personified force arranged for the bad thing to happen. The example I've used before is slipping and falling off a ladder. Many of us would attribute such a thing to pure chance; some people will take it as evidence that a witch or a demon has cursed them.

An extreme difficulty with feeling out of control. It is hard for them to accept that in some circumstances they may not have control. Things which make them feel like they are no longer in control are very often interpreted as hostilities against them.

A severe difficulty in actually putting themselves in another person's shoes. Often, the conspiracy minded person is incredibly judgemental about others, and particularly, they really, really struggle with the idea that something might be easy for them, but difficult for someone else, or difficult for them, but necessary to help someone else.

Like I said, we all have these habits to some extent, I just think they are often magnified in the conspiracy crank.

As an example of what I mean by these thought patters, I am in the middle of a podcast reviewing a crank movie about how germs don't cause diseases. And apparently, in this movie, they first have a heroic interview with a restaurant owner who not only never required his patrons to wear masks, he actually banned any mask wearing on the premises.

Which is followed immediately by a scene of a person getting kicked out of a store for not masking, and talking about how it's incredibly shocking that what should be a matter of personal conscience is being enforced by the government.

And there's just no sense that there is any hypocrisy or tension here.

What I mean is, a principled libertarian might say, "Each individual business can require masks, or require you to take masks off, or have no policy, according to their individual decision, and we should allow them to make those decisions and abide by them."

Another principled position might be that we have extremely compelling evidence for the pandemic, and maybe certain kinds of policies should be temporarily enacted to slow the spread, even though they infringe on what would be, in ordinary times, important liberties, because they serve to protect the collective greater good.

Either of these positions sort of takes it for granted that a choice that I, personally, might not fully agree with might still be important to other people.

But the crank mindset says, "I don't want to wear a mask. So forcing people to wear a mask is an imposition on important freedoms. But since I'm already comfortable without a mask, forcing people to take their masks off isn't any kind of imposition on anybody's freedom, that's ridiculous."

You can see what I'm talking about most clearly in certain right-wing Christians. I've seen Christians say that freedom is exactly the same as following God's will, and that disobedience to God is a form of bondage and slavery.

These habits of mind are not, themselves, partisan; the can be applied to any cause, right-wing or left-wing. I might just have easily brought up "Free speech doesn't mean tolerating hate speech."

But I would argue that the reverse is not true, that you can build a political party that caters primarily to people with these habits of mind.

These people tend to flock to politicians who simultaneously promise a strong government which they can borrow to reassert their sense of control in the world, but the actual specific politics of that government are squishy and malleable.

The government has to be strong and able to domineer others because the conspiracy crank understands that they are in opposition to some large portion of the population, and so the government has to be strong enough to say, for example, "We will make sure that no private business will kick you out for wearing a mask."

When the world feels out of control, the government will lend you the tools to reassert your control over the world around you.

But the actual political goals of the government have to be extremely vague and malleable, so that they can move quickly to maintain the illusion that good people don't ever really disagree about this stuff.

A government which is coherently committed to a libertarian project might well say, "Sorry, those businesses have every right to decide who they cater to."

You have to be a weathervane, once a majority of cranks decide that vaccines and mask mandates are bad, you have to swivel and take that position in order to maintain a sort of illusion that whatever freedoms your crank audience wants in the moment are inherently sensible and that no sane person could disagree.

My argument is that Trump has turned the Republicans into the crank party, the party that signals to cranks that it will have their backs, whereas thirty years ago, the parties were still committed enough to coherent political goals that neither one could make that promise, and so cranks had to be politically idiosyncratic.

[macgyvermedical]

I encountered a drug called "Dextromethorphan" when looking up things that react with grapefruits for a fic. I found out it's been banned in Sweden since the 90s, so I couldn't use it for this specific story, but if you've got any interesting history I'd be happy so know!

Are you ready for this? Like. Ask yourself. Are you really ready for this?

In 1954, a researcher with the US Public Health Service received $282,215 (1954 dollars) from the US Navy, ostensibly to find a non-addictive alternative to an opiate drug called codeine (used for pain and and as a cough suppressant).

So the researcher found a bunch of people who had substance abuse disorder and tested 800 substances on them, trying to find ones that couldn't cause physical or psychological dependence, even on people who were prone to that sort of thing.

(Now, you might be asking if this experiment was ethical. The USPHS was concurrently doing the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study, so while I couldn't find any concrete answer, imma guess no.)

Out of these 800 tested substances, we use 3 today: propoxyphene (used as a painkiller), diphenoxylate (used as a diarrhea medication), and dextromethophan (a cough suppressant (and, as of 2022, part of a fast-acting antidepressant)).

Importantly, it was later noted that all of these are addictive substances and today most of them require a prescription. Though depending on where you are in the world, you might just have to be over 21 and show an ID.

You might think this sounds like a pretty standard story.

You would be wrong.

Because while the US Navy was the one handing the money to the USPHS, the US Navy had come by it via the Central Intelligence Agency.

Yes. The good ol' CIA.

So what stake did the CIA have in a non-addictive codeine replacement? Nothing, it turns out. That's just what they'd told the US Navy. What they really wanted was an incapacitant- a drug that causes incapacitation like unconsciousness or continuous hallucinations- without killing. Incapacitants are also useful for discrediting prominent political figures by making them look like they have severe mental health concerns, which was another reason the CIA wanted them.

This was part of a project called MKPILOT.

And wouldn't you like to know which of the three listed above they liked the most? Dextromethorphan. Because at high doses it causes severe- and incapacitating- hallucinations (this is also why it is banned in Sweden).

The problem with it is that it requires really, really high doses (about 3 grams, which would have to be packaged in some other substrate)- this would make it difficult to slip into a drink or food.

(It should be noted that around the same time, the US Army was doing research into a much more usable incapacitant called 3-Quinuclidinyl Benzilate which required as little as 150mg of the substance to be useful- it was featured in a MacGyver episode and I did a nice little review of it here. While I have no sources that say the CIA was directly involved in funding this, based on their extensive funding of similar DoD projects at the time, they probably did.)

But you wanted to know about how grapefruit interacts with dextromethorphan:

A substance in grapefruit (along with seville oranges, limes, pomelos, and possibly pomegranates) blocks the pathway by which many drugs are metabolized in the liver. This causes the levels of drug in the body to be much higher than expected. In the case of dextromethorphan in particular, it can mean that the drug stays in the body a lot longer- up to 24 hours instead of the usual 3-4 hours. It can also make side effects and toxic effects significantly worse, leading to hallucinations and sedation, even at low doses normally used for coughing.

[dragon-toad]

HOT TAKE : Makarov was a bad father (and a bad grandfather)

I'm expecting a big wave of hate with this one... BUT LET ME EXPLAIN

We can dive into the generational trauma theory : we know Yuri has been profoundly hurt by his wife's death (giving birth to Makarov) and this is a thing we should consider. In most cases, people live with the burden of the death of their partner until they die, which could have been Yuri's case. And the idea that somehow his wife died for his son... Well, angst potential.

Now : death of a loved one + wife who dies giving birth to his son = difficult father-son relationship

And even if Yuri didn't do it intentionally, there could have been a distance between the father and the son, and it has repercussions on the futur.

So yes, it maybe happened completely differently, but let's consider this hypothesis to understand what comes after :

Makarov was raised in the guild, where everybody is friendly. The only thing is his daddy issues. He ends up considering the guild more important, so the thing to cherish and protect at all cost.

Everything is fine.

Then, Ivan enters the game.

I know it's very fun to have an antagonist in the family of the master, the man presented as the most loving, a father for all the lost children, etc. BUT maybe we can go a little deeper.

We sometimes have this idea that some characters are born meaner than others, it allows us to ignore psychology and sociology, but it's not fun.

We can suppose Ivan was born in the guild, like Makarov and certainly Laxus. And as it's shown every single second that Fairy Tail is a very healthy environment, a "big family", so even if Ivan was a bit twisted, he would not have been so mean with his colleagues, provoking his exclusion, and he would have not tried to destroy the guild.

Unless he have daddy issues too. Let's consider : Makarov has a son and the mother is nowhere to be found. Doesn't it remind you of something ? But Makarov know his relationship with his father wasn't awesome, so he tries differently.

So two possibilities can be explored :

1- Ivan is a spoiled child. Being the master's son allows him to do reprehensible things and not be punished after, or not too much, and Makarov wants to give him all the freedom he didn't have. Until he almost kills another member of the guild. Then Makarov is forced to expel him. He takes away the thing that gave Ivan an almost unlimited power, and he doesn't like it. So if he can't have Fairy Tail, nobody will.

2- Makarov prefers the guild to his son. He doesn't know how to raise a kid, what if he screws like his father ? (Spoiler : he does) So when Precht makes him the new master, he puts all his soul into his job. But Ivan wants a father. So he does everything to make his father notice him, to make his father proud. It leads him to dark places, and thus, being strong = being good enough. Unfortunately, it doesn't work, because he ends up expelled. So, by pure rage, he decides to destroy the thing his father loved more than him. (It's my favorite version)

In both cases, Ivan manipulates his son into believing that being strong is the only way for him to be respected, to be seen.

Which leads us to the Laxus part (finally)

It's canon that Ivan pushed his son to be the strongest (to the point he put a lacrima in his body) so yeah, Laxus has daddy issues. But he has gampa issues too.

Let's continue with the theory we built on this post : Makarov doesn't really raise his son, why would he raise his grandson ?

But we see Makarov taking care of a very young Laxus. Thus, Laxus once loved his grandfather. Except Ivan didn't. So we can suppose he decided to keep his son under his control by manipulating him into thinking he has to be the strongest.

Then Ivan was banned.

The problem with an abusive relationship is that the victim thinks the abuser is on the right, which explains why Laxus was all but happy his father was expelled. But he stayed in Fairy Tail, because despite everything, Fairy Tail is his home. But this home is controlled by the man who banned his father (his abuser)

Laxus becomes a rank-S mage, which means he's the strongest. He has all the rights to make Fairy Tail his home, not Makarov's.

Well yes, but no.

Because there's Mirajane, a prodigy so fucking strong she becomes a rank-S mage too. But Lisanna dies, and suddenly everybody loves Mirajane. She even becomes the right arm of Makarov, because she's too weak now to create problems now.

And there's Natsu and Gray, Makarov's little boys. They're noisy, annoying, but they have potential. They have the potential to become stronger than Laxus. And Makarov loves them.

But more important, because there's Erza, who is so strong, so kind, so nice... Who is his grandfather's favorite. The same grandfather who did nothing when Ivan imprisoned Laxus into a psychological jail and who banned Ivan for somebody else's weakness. And Laxus knows it : she is the future master of Fairy Tail. She will steal his home and make it even weaker.

So he has to take Fairy Tail now, even if his grandfather dies in the process. Better, it will make things easier !

But in the end, Laxus loves Fairy Tail. He loves the guild enough to not betray everybody by joining his father's guild.

Laxus broke the cycle. And I don't think it was thanks to Makarov. If Laxus broke the cycle, it's because despite everything, he has weirdos to stick with. The Raijinshuu are a safe place for Laxus, they are strong enough to be his friends colleagues, they don't call him "psychotic" when he tells them he wants the guild, and more important, they care for him.

Laxus broke the cycle thanks to people who cared for him. They even wanted to follow him when he was banned ! But he said no, because he care for them and he knows they will be better in Fairy Tail.

Now, let's consider : travelling must have felt like therapy for Laxus : he's not part of Fairy Tail anymore and he's sure he will never have the possibility to come back, but he will not join his father because he doesn't want to put his friends in danger. So he has to do something by himself, not under the influence of his father. And I believe this emancipation was beneficial for him. He could learn what it means to be himself, not Ivan's son or Makarov's grandson.

I don't think he fully forgave Makarov for his inaction and for loving other more than him, and he's not completely out of Ivan's philosophy, those things need time, but he escaped the cycle.

[pokemonshelterstories]

"impact of socioeconomic status on how people’s pokemon care is perceived," can we hear more about that actually? i'm very curious to hear what you mean and your thoughts on it! if you've talked about it before, can i get a link to the posts?

sure! i don't want to give too much away since i may publish this later, but i spent a lot of time looking at how a trainer's socioeconomic status correlated to the amounts/kinds of welfare issues they were reported for.

unfortunately, pokemon care is something that is widely influenced by the wealth and perceived status of the trainer. obviously the wealthier a trainer is, the more access they have to pokemon with more intensive care needs and to owning more pokemon in general- and in many ways, this is a barrier to lower class trainers toward being able to compete at a high level in different forms of pokemon-oriented competition.

this isn't necessarily an issue in terms of whether or not anyone is entitled to be able to raise a certain pokemon (i still believe the vast majority of people should not try to raise the vast majority of pokemon, just in terms of how difficult it is to properly care for them), but it does cause problems when we talk about who's setting the standards of care for pokemon. a champion-ranked trainer or master contest coordinator is far less likely to have their care or training questioned than someone in low-level competitions. and because of this perception, we see an over-reporting of welfare concerns for less wealthy trainers (this is frequently compounded by factors like race as well), while welfare concerns are rare when it comes to the upper class. the types of reports are different, too, as are the consequences: a lower class trainer might be indefinitely banned from competing because their pokemon's body condition is below average (an issue that can often be remedied with education and access to higher-quality food), while an upper class trainer might get a slap on the wrist and a temporary hold on competition for overuse of pain medications to keep their pokemon battling through injuries.

one of the case studies i presented that really got me interested in this is of a wild absol named kui. kui lived in orre before cipher's invasion, but she disappeared along with all the other wild pokemon. she's recently reappeared and has been spotted throughout the region. she's actually started alerting a friend of mine who does ranger work out there to potential disasters. kui was never a captured pokemon. instead, she was befriended by a member of a native tribe, and while she was allowed to wander freely, she chose to stay among the tribe for the majority of her time. as a pokemon educator, i've been trained to see that as poor pokemon care. absol are powerful and dangerous pokemon, and habituating a wild pokemon like that without catching it is normally something i'd warn against. but that's the way this tribe has been raising pokemon for generations! and the bond they formed with kui has resulted in a positive outcome for both her and the tribe.

i've had to really reflect on my own personal biases in how i view people's interactions with pokemon as a result of researching this. i do still hold to a lot of the beliefs i have about the way people and pokemon should interact with each other, and i still think it's important to educate people on how to care for pokemon in a safe and respectful manner. it's just a good reminder that we need to care for pokemon welfare at all levels without making assumptions based on things like socioeconomic status!

[travelingbandit]

My claim: SJM is a leading cause of anti-intellectualism, lack of empathy, lack of media literacy, and pro-plagiarism (honestly, including pro-AI) in the Booktok community whether it was intentional or not.

Anti-intellectualism:

While this term most usually refers to the movement conservative lawmakers are doing when it comes to banning books and such, I am talking about this one specific kind on TikTok that is a push to read for “vibes” only. These readers will often say “it’s not that deep”, and condemn those who want to analyze what they read because they do not see value in it.

This is something I see the most in the SJM fandom. Often, a fan does not want to dig deeper than what’s written there for them, and what the MC believes. Quite literally “what you see is what you get”. They do not like making connections to the real world, valuing escapism to a degree that just isn’t functional. Escapism is absolutely a useful tool for readers, but it shouldn’t be all that you do to an extreme degree.

These fans will often take hypocritical stances because they refuse to understand a character past the beliefs of the MC, and often don’t like learning about new things.

If their favorite character is Feyre, it is especially difficult, because their favorite character does not value reading, as she practically kicked and screamed her way through learning. So why should readers who adore her put any value on reading more than surface level?

This type of closed mind reason often does not allow them to see past their own beliefs and understand other perspectives, which leads to my next point.

SJM also refuses to do her research (you can check my blog for a list of things she should be researching within her books). she disrespects different cultures, religions, etc, mostly which is frustrating.

Lack of empathy:

1) I’ve seen many SJM fans tell people of color and pagans that the problematic content they see in SJM’s books isn’t real because they personally aren’t affected by it. For example, I’m upset as a Norse Pagan that SJM plagiarizes and disrespects my faith. I’ve been told by multiple fans that my faith isn’t real so I’m getting upset over nothing. Another example, I’ve seen women of color screaming to be heard about Feyre’s cultural appropriation, and I’ve watched as they’ve been told that Feyre should be allowed to slip into a costume when she feels like it.

2) Every single SJM FMC has a problem with empathy. Feyre does not receive consequences for the harm she does to other people and “doesn’t let herself think about it”, so she clearly lacks the foundation of empathy. She thinks she is entitled to the help she receives from others and gets frustrated when they choose their own safety over helping her again. She clearly holds no sympathy for the women in 2/3 of her court. Aelin also seems to have a big empathy problem (I mean, she was literally going to use her cousin as a breeding stud???), and also never faces consequences for her actions until the last book. If these FMCs never have to care about others and never have to face consequences for hurting others, why should the readers ever have to as well?

3) we’ve all seen the SJM fans who have sent SA threats and death threats on tik tok, I’m sure. And it’s all over small opinions over characters too. This is just not normal behavior. But then again, Feyre openly allows her husband to tell people to off themselves, so how could we ever expect better behavior from her fans?

4) This is also especially interesting to me because SJM’s FMCs are all around 16-21, which I’d assume to be her target demographic. However, this is the most impressionable age because these are young adults going off into the real world right before their prefrontal cortex develops. This is a crucial time for us, and yet we are reading about FMCs our age who are doing terrible things to people with no empathy and are getting away with it. What is that teaching us.

5) also most people you meet in the fandom are younger (13 is the youngest I’ve seen) and older (I think the oldest I’ve seen was in 40-50s)than that target demographic which is also insane to me because why is my age group fighting with people much older and much younger?

6) For a while (and still in some stores) ACOTAR is branded as YA, meaning impressionable teenagers and children have better access to this material. This can shape their formative years too. Especially when this content is so pro-conservative and pro-traditionalist views.

Lack of Media Literacy:

This goes right back to my explanation about “it’s not that deep”. Fans don’t want to put in the effort because they want to “turn their brain off”. With the rise in lack of media literacy, this is especially dangerous. I’ve also noticed that people are saying ACOTAR is the gateway into fantasy. That tells me new readers are immediately jumping into this sort of story with no basic understanding at all.

Pro-Plagarism:

It’s no secret that SJM has plagiarized from many religions, cultures, movies, books- literally anything. Her fans view it as great story telling. I’ve had people tell me that she’s a genius for using Norse mythology and mashing it with other religions and that they’re excited to see her do more things like her Hades and Persephone retelling with Rhys and Feyre. SJM has not has an original thought in her life and it shows.

It also makes fans think they can steal too and get away with it because their favorite author does.

Pro-Capitalism:

We all know SJM wants money and will do anything for a quick cash grab. In the same way, I think this instant gratification for capitalism manifests itself in the use of AI- art through fans. SJM’s fandom has been almost the only fandom I’ve seen use so much AI art that I have to wonder why.

Conclusion:

I’m of a big belief that human beings are not stagnant. We are constantly changing based on our influences and environment. Reading is a big influence for many people, and what we read can shape our perception of things, regardless of age. When people tell me that these are just adults reading these books so whatever’s going on is their own problem from their upbringing and not SJM, I get frustrated, because it’s a problem for both.

The fact that SJM hasn’t recognized the harm that she’s doing to various communities and hasn’t spoken out about anything tells me everything I need to know about the type of person she is. We all know she’s eager for money and fame. I don’t like speculating about people’s political beliefs, but as much as SJM says she’s anti-Trump, I believe she’s still a conservative. Both things can still be true. Whether it’s old bias that she is trying to unlearn or she still believes those things, there are ideals within her books that are still so harmful.

I could go on and on about this, and I truly believe it. But please if you have anything to add I’d love to hear it.

[antimony-medusa]

One of the things that I think sometimes gets lost when we talk about what's appropriate in fandom spaces is the notion that things can be appropriate in one space, but not for another. And that doesn't mean that the thing that's inappropriate in that setting is wrong, it just means that it's rude in that space. I think people want a single set of rules that's appropriate everywhere, but the thing is, you have to be able to assess the situation, and adjust your behaviour accordingly.

So an example. I have a fairly popular text post that was me asking about c!phil and religion in all innocence, and someone said "the only thing I have to say about c!phil is that he worships on his knees, thank you and goodnight". And I reblogged it like "I can't believe I forgot about how this fandom does phil analysis", cause it was at the height of the dilfza memes.

Anyways that's obviously a phil-is-happily-married/oral sex joke, in an oblique innuendo way, and on this site, where Phil is not here, and his friends are not here, with it being clear I was talking about the block man character, and we make jokes about sex and profanity (a very popular url scheme for a long time was "[name]shugecock" (or smalldick, depending on the joke)�� that's a fine joke to make. I'm an adult, I can make sex jokes about fictional characters on the sex joke fictional character social media site.

If I was to make that joke in Philza's twitch chat, a) in his face, b) with his wife modding, c) in an enviroment where people aren't prepped for sex jokes, d) with it being not clear if I was talking about the cubito or about the real guy, that would be wildly inappopriate. I would be banned in every chat Philza mods in and I would deserve it.

That doesn't mean that it's inappropriate to make the joke in the first place though, just because I wouldn't do it at a Phil meet and greet. It means you gotta learn to read the room. (And like, sometimes it's hard to learn to read the room, but you can do it by pure brute-force memorization. I did.)

This is the same theory that underlies the fact that you can call your friends a bitch in a friendly way, because you are friends and you know each other's boundaries, but if you call your boss a bitch, you will be fired. There are rules about workplace appropriateness, and there are rules about what's appropriate in front of kids (I teach teens, I do not swear in front of them, I swear a LOT in front of my roommate), and there are rules about what's appropriate in different fandom spaces. Participating in an exchange about pregnancy and babies with your favourite blorbo of the moment? Great. Showing the actor gift art you got of him pregnant? No. Bad. Go directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dollars.

The thing that concerns me is that I think there are slight signs that as we get more comfortable with sexy jokes and offcolour remarks as a MCYT fandom (QSMP is the big banner example but it happens with other smps), we're taking what's appropriate in one space (tumblr, home of the brain worms, where I have seen the blog "philzaswetpussy" on my dash), and we're bringing it into places that it's not appropriate (sure, slimeariana is clearly canon, but maybe don't put the actual dicks-out fan art in the art tag on twitter that slime checks). Cause we can obviously tell that the rules twitter is going with are silly for here, so it's full speed ahead for roier/spreen etc, but the trick here is that it's full speed ahead HERE, or in fandom servers, and not necessarily in the streamer's faces.

We have a bunch of situations where creators have said that it's not their place to weigh in on shipping or nsfw etc, and people have taken that as a go ahead and that's fine, but thats still something where I'd like, caution people that just because they said "not gonna look at it not my deal", that doesn't mean that like, you should make it difficult for them to avoid looking at it. Talking about scitties is an honourable tradition, but telling scar that he makes you question your sexuality in his TTS— I made a horrified noise in real life and the cats came to look at me.

And I'm talking about the shipping, but this is also a thing with like— sometimes I see a streamer and I go "my friend you just vividly described neurodivergent symptoms" but it is ABSOLUTELY not my place to say that in their chat. It might not even be appropriate to make comments about it on my blog, with the amount of followers I have. I have to keep the "streamer just described the ADHD experience again :pensive:" comments for the group chat. And we all nod and go "yeah sounds like streamer", and we do not put it in his face, cause that's inappropriate.

We get to have fun with the fictional characters, including off-colour fun, but we still have to remember that there are real people who don't know us who are steering those fictional characters around, and it can be profoundly weird to see some of the (stuff that is appropriate in fandom spaces!) just up in your face in the regular fan art tag.

Just think about the space you're in, and who you're in front of, and if a CC notice is actually likely, and if a CC notice would be Very Bad actually with what you're doing, and keep the "world's sluttiest absent father" bracket (with associated slutty fan art) for here, not with the streamer tagged on twitter.

[kindredsoulsoftimesofold]

I think cancelling series that ended on cliffhangers should be banned, literally not allowed.

I am aware they sometimes don't know if they're gonna be cancelled until after the series is out, but so many goddamn series ended on cliffhangers only to be cancelled and I am sick and tired of it.

Esp if not based on anything (book, manga etc.), so you won't know the ending unless the creators decide to post it online (which never happens).

We need to normalize completing stories even if they're not the next BIG THING or at least giving the creators one more season to wrap things up. It's difficult to get invested in anything nowadays, because unless it explodes online you know you're pretty much screwed.

I'm actually more scared of liking something, then seeing its fandom even when small love it so much, and never see it through.

Yes, I am talking to Netflix directly actually.

[bumbled-bees]

Lily's Lack of Empathy

Lily has zero patience for struggles she personally doesn’t experience, and she refuses to acknowledge that things might be difficult for others—even when those struggles are fundamental to their identity, circumstances, or mental health. Her attitude is consistently: If I can do it, why can’t you? And if you can’t? Well, that’s your problem.

This rigid and unsympathetic mindset is blatantly evident in how she treats the idea of standing up for oneself. In her January 30th livestream, a viewer brought up how creators often can’t fully execute their vision due to studio pushback. This is a well-documented reality in media industries—executives interfere, budgets are cut, projects get compromised. But instead of engaging with that reality, Lily snapped: “Well, fight back against the studio then.” She genuinely believes that if a creator really cared about their work, they would just risk getting fired rather than compromise. She completely ignored the fact that most creators don’t have that kind of power. Someone like Lauren Faust can afford to walk away from projects if executives won’t let her execute her vision, but a new or lesser-known creator? If they push back too hard, they lose their job—and in the entertainment industry, getting blacklisted is a very real risk. But Lily doesn’t care about reality. She only cares about what fits her simplistic worldview, and to her, if you’re not standing up to authority, it’s because you’re a coward.

Her utter lack of empathy is also clear in how she talks about autistic masking. Lily has flip-flopped on whether she herself is autistic, depending on what will get her more sympathy in the moment. But what’s consistent is her contempt for autistic people who struggle with masking. She has outright said she has no sympathy for autistic people who don’t mask and that they should be doing it all the time. This is an incredibly ableist take—especially given that many of her viewers are autistic. Masking is mentally and emotionally exhausting, and for some people, it’s just not sustainable. Forcing autistic people to mask constantly can lead to burnout, anxiety, depression, and severe mental health struggles. But because Lily finds it easy—or at least, claims she does—she dismisses those struggles entirely.

Her complete lack of empathy extends to her approach to "boundaries"—or rather, her weaponization of them. Lily constantly accuses others of violating her boundaries, often in the most bizarre and trivial ways. She has framed innocent gestures like “Have you tried soup?” as boundary violations, just so she can justify snapping at people. But while she demands that her so-called boundaries be respected, she has no patience for anyone else’s emotional struggles. If someone says, “I have trouble advocating for myself” or “It’s difficult for me to confront people”, Lily has zero sympathy. She insists they should just "get over it"—because, in her mind, if she finds something easy, then everyone else should too.

And it’s not just real people she lacks empathy for—she even extends this attitude to fictional characters. In her critique of The Owl House, when Luz goes through a depression arc, Lily had no patience for it. She actively encouraged Amity to break up with Luz just because Luz was struggling. That’s a wild take for someone who claims to care about representation and character depth. Most people understand that mental health struggles are complex, and people in relationships support each other through difficult times. But Lily? She sees Luz being depressed and immediately thinks, Well, she’s being annoying—Amity should just leave her. That level of coldness and detachment speaks volumes.

And of course, we can’t forget her hypocrisy when it comes to criticism. Lily has made it very clear that she believes she is above critique. She actively punishes fans for disagreeing with her, cutting them off and banning them if they question anything she says. But when it comes to other people, she insists that they should “take the criticism and improve.” She constantly complains that creators don’t listen to feedback or refuse to change, yet she herself throws a fit the second anyone criticizes her. Once again, she thinks it’s easy to handle criticism, so anyone who doesn’t must just be weak.

This all ties back into Lily’s black-and-white thinking and fundamental lack of emotional depth. She refuses to acknowledge nuance, personal struggles, or differing experiences. If something is easy for her, then it must be easy for everyone else. If someone can’t do something, then they are the problem. She shows no understanding, no patience, and no willingness to consider perspectives outside of her own. And in the process, she alienates not only her audience but anyone who expects even a baseline level of empathy from her.

All of this ties back into one fundamental truth: Lily has no empathy because she fundamentally does not care about anyone’s struggles except her own. If something is easy for her—or if she thinks it should be easy—then it must be easy for everyone. And if you struggle, well, that’s your fault, and she has no sympathy for you.

[yuurei20]

Hi! I've seen some posts going around about Epel's accent and Vil correcting him. From what I gathered Epel has a pretty farmland accent that can be basically indecipherable so Vil being hard on him for it is both 'this is kind of casual' and 'i have no idea what you're saying' but could still be kind of elitist/classist. But I see some people saying Vil is just correcting Epel because he's swearing a lot?

Thank you so much for this question! Reading through just the EN adaptation of Book 5, I think I can understand why people might be annoyed by Vil’s wording: in English, he says outright that Epel should “speak properly,” as if his natural dialect is somehow improper and objectively “wrong.”

But his original line is closer to, “Speak more politely”! (The translations in these images are just more literal rewordings of the original dialogue, not meant to be corrections or improvements over EN’s localization)

I think the game was aware of the risk it was taking by having Vil give such an order, which is why it has Epel immediately jump to that assumption himself, so that Vil can explain it is not Epel’s hometown pride he has an issue with, but rather the outdated mindset that comes with it.

While softened on EN, Epel is quite misogynistic in the original game. He also repeats the same insult three times, possibly as an example of his limited vocabulary, which is another of Vil’s projects.

While Epel does say that Vil has told him not to use the accent specifically, Vil explains that he just wants him to consider the time, place and occasion for it.

Question: But then why does Vil order him to drop the accent entirely if the only problem is that he’s speaking rudely? Surely he can just speak politely while keeping his accent?

Answer: There is another layer to this that is more difficult to explain in English, but I shall try!

The Japanese language has multiple verb forms that change depending upon who you’re talking to at the time. “Meshiagaru,” “taberu” and “kuu” are three different ways to say “eat,” for example, depending on how polite you want to be.

In the beach scene (and anywhere we get his Harveston dialect), Epel immediately shifts into casual/impolite verb forms.

I searched for the most formal interaction involving characters speaking in the Harveston dialect that I could find (where the mayor is apologizing to Marja), and even there, the character was using casual/informal verb forms.

So that is what Vil is actually getting at: he wants Epel to use polite speech around his senpai and teachers, but Epel’s original dialect might just not adhere to that system.

The Harveston dialect clearly has its own ways to denote politeness, which must make sense when you’re there, but outside of Harveston what is a harmless and natural way of speaking becomes offensive from the perspective of everyone else (when Marja adapts her speaking patterns so that the visiting NRC students can understand her, she uses polite forms).

Not able to have a student from his dorm obliviously insulting everyone around him through his verb forms, Vil bans Epel’s accent entirely, presumably so that Epel can grow more accustomed to interacting with people from other countries and then learn to judge for himself the times, places and occasions outside of Harveston where that degree of informality is appropriate :>

(Omake: I conferred with an American friend who told me it sounds like this is the opposite of how things are in the US, where sometimes it is assumed that people from more rural communities use more polite speech (using "sir" and ma'am") than people in cities, so they visit cities and are surprised by forms are expression that are considered rude where they come from. This is the same, but backwards! Epel is going from a laidback rural village to a more populated location where polite speech is expected of everyone, and is experiencing culture shock as a result.)

[star-trek-fandom-confessions]

#1145

Eugenics and genetic modification are not the same thing. The terms are not interchangeable. Eugenics is the practice of erasing perceived ‘undesirable’ traits in the gene pool. It is motivated by racism and ableism and is horrific. Genetic modification is one possible tool that eugenicist could use to achieve that end. Another tool which has actually been used by eugenicists to advance their awful goal is compulsory sterilization. This is also horrific and recognized as such - compulsory sterilization is a Crime Against Humanity in the Rome Statute. However, sterilization procedures such as tube tying and vasectomies are not practices that people generally call for to be banned, because people may want to prevent themselves from getting pregnant or from getting another person pregnant for all sorts of reasons and we recognized that people should have autonomy over their own bodies and be free to make their own reproductive choices. Consensual vasectomies and tube tying being legal in a country does not mean that country is endorsing eugenics. A country in which there is a government program of coercing or using incentives to get members groups perceived as undesirable to have their tubes tied or have vasectomies is practicing eugenics. The legality and use of tool in general does not necessarily mean that the tool is being used for eugenics. Now, let’s take that one step further with a hypothetical on genetic engineering. Imagine that we determine that if one gene was removed from the human genome, those without that gene would no longer get dementia and there were zero other impacts. Would a country that made that genetic modification procedure available for free to everyone who wanted it and the doctors performing that procedure be practicing eugenics? Now imagine that procedure didn’t work in adults or even children. It had to be administered during fetal development to be effective. Would a parent choosing to have that gene removed from their unborn child so they would never get dementia be practicing eugenics? I'm not going to weigh in on those my point is that it’s a complex issue, there are very flew easy answers available and you really have to consider motive. Eugenicists are motivated by the view that certain people are superior and other people are inferior and they want to get rid of the latter.

Applying it to Strange New Worlds, Una has specifically stated that the Illyrian motivation for genetic modification is so that they fit in with their environment, rather than terraform (this intersects another really interesting scientific ethical discussion happening around climate engineering and the potential consequences). There is no evidence in canon that Illyrians are motivated by the need to be superior or are getting rid of undesired traits. They took up modification to live on planets that would otherwise be unhospitable to them (beta canon is that their home world is no longer inhabitable even with modification due to environmental collapse outside of their control, they’re essentially environmental refugees). While Illyrians modify themselves genetically, there is no evidence that Illyrians are practicing eugenics. In the context of DS9, Bashir’s parents believed it was undesirable to have a son with intellectual disabilities. They modified him to get rid the trait they perceived as undesirable. They were practicing eugenics. In Star Trek canon, billions of people died during the Eugenics Wars. When it comes to the law, it is incredibly difficult determining motive and therefore it is understandable that they banned genetic engineering as a way of stopping eugenicists and preventing a repeat. But in doing so, they accidentally created a legal regime in which entire families could be arrested.   The point Star Trek has been making lately with the Illyrian storyline is sometimes shit is complicated, and that a law that is meant to protect, can also sometimes harm and we need to be able to listen, think and consider complex situations. And I also hate myself a bit for writing this. I should just be able to ignore all the terrible takes and ‘I haven’t watched but…’ people.