#we unfortunately live in a society and this isn't fully possible

[leonawriter]

Okay apparently I'm going to do a study on this introduction, because going back to it? Especially knowing more about Hakuba via more recent Magic Kaito chapters? Fascinating stuff.

So. Hakuba's introducing himself, and he starts out by bringing up "My father spoke of you often" and "It seems you're a very sharp detective." Both of those are positive!

Hakuba is... high society, compared to Hattori simply hanging out around high ranking people and treating them like normal. Hattori argues with Kazuha in a very down to earth way, while Hakuba knows how to drink tea and probably how to set the table with a full set of cutlery (or at least how to use them).

So, Hakuba using their fathers to introduce himself is, to him, a normal enough way to say "I've heard good things about you, we're similar, I hope we can get along well."

What's more - Shinichi realises that, pretty quickly. Even if they hadn't met previously, he'd have been able to figure out by the words being used, that Saguru's father knows Heiji's father, or that they're in the same business.

If anything, I'd say that this slight culture clash is the second step of things going wrong between Hattori and Hakuba here, right after Hakuba being present at all, since Hattori had wanted Shinichi to take his rightful place where Hakuba is currently sitting.

Strike one, strike two.

Unfortunately, it gets worse from there, and I'm gonna go into it.

But then Hakuba brings up that he's not even fully based in Japan. To which, mostly Hattori is just "wait, what?" - but although I'm sure he means it simply to be as clear as possible, that could also be read as "I would say that, but I'm actually better." As in, being smug.

Strike three.

Still with "Kudo is the high school detective of the east, that's obvious, isn't it?" and rubbing salt into the insult to Hattori's bro with "they'd have liked me to represent the east in his place" but...

Oh boy.

This... this is also where I just stared and held my head in my hands because now? Because of something Hattori's said, and what he's going to continue saying/leaning into... we need to go back in time.

All the way back in Hakuba Saguru's first appearance, the papers say "just returned from London," suggesting (as I've seen someone say before) that he'd spent at least some, if not much, of his youth in Japan.

Certainly, he doesn't seem to speak with an accent in the present day, so he can't have grown up in the UK and only sometimes lived in Japan.

In Japan, however, he is referred to as...

In Nakamori's (uncouth) words at their first meeting, "Y-you're that bastard from London!"

No mention of how he has a fully Japanese name, partially Japanese features, a Japanese father, and no accent.

His introductory splash also frames him with the Union Jack behind him, showing off his Holmes cosplay and light hair. Almost all the major characters in the series have blue eyes, but here it's rather... plainly emphasising his Western features. His non-Japanese-ness.

Now, I do have to wonder if Gosho wrote that back in 1990 and hadn't given much thought to it. I certainly don't think it was intentionally cruel.

However, by volume 40, released in 2003, he's learned a bit more about social prejudice, and shows this with the Professor's First Love story:

This shows something that happened 40 years ago in-universe, with a girl of Japanese-American descent who has light, gingko colour hair, being very aware of how different she is, and not wanting her friend to see. She calls her hair "weird" and starts to cry.

Coming back to the present - content released in 2006 - let me go back to Hakuba Saguru.

Hattori "That's obvious, isn't it? And yer not even from this country to begin with."

Oh, Hattori. Only the previous case had you seeing how words can be as sharp as knives, and can hurt people.

Saguru doesn't seem too bothered at first, however...

First off, he points out that it isn't even his fault he's "taken Kudo's place" in the first place!

They contacted his housekeeper, who he's been shown to be very close with (I'd hazard a guess to say that, having not seen his mother at all, or seen her mentioned, Baaya is closer to him than his parents are), and when she heard that her charge would only be taking someone else's place since they weren't there, she got offended on his behalf.

Saguru, who loves this woman like she's literally his nanny, could hardly say no at that point.

More to the point: how he says "But it appears I am unfit to represent the East..."

So now we have Hattori having come in wanting his best friend to be represented and not sidelined just because of circumstances out of his control, and being in a bad mood immediately because of someone else having been called in. He also possibly inflates the number of cases he worked on or solved, by including childhood adventures, leading Saguru to point out that his count is only low if you only count the ones in one country. Saguru attempts to make friends with him regardless, and that doesn't work because Hattori is still stuck on how Saguru is "taking Kudo's place" and then focuses in on how Saguru "isn't even from this country" which... starts leaning into the uncomfortable territory of "Hattori I love you to pieces but are you being racist/xenophobic right now?"

I say that in the context of how Japan has a really big problem with seeing anyone who isn't fully Japanese as Not Japanese Enough, as I went into earlier. I don't think he's aware how he's coming across, by the way; he's simply got a big case of foot-in-mouth.

So now instead of having come to this conclusion organically and naturally, Saguru is offering to take the place of "Guest Participant from Overseas" to placate Hattori.

I'd imagine he won't be wanting to tell Baaya about that, for sure.

Saguru goes on to suggest that Conan (i.e, Shinichi himself) should represent the East instead.

I reiterate: they could well have come to this conclusion over a friendly conversation, because of how they have five detectives. But instead now Saguru has ceded his position to (as far as he knows) a child. A very clever child, but a child nonetheless.

The next time we're back at the island with Hattori and the others, he's already decided he doesn't like "that smug guy."

As said before, there are plenty of things that Hattori could have picked up on that'd suggest Saguru "looked down on people" and "had a prideful way of thinking" and he certainly could appear smug in his achievements.

Hattori himself says that Saguru was "was like a copy of [Kudo]." But he has decided he doesn't like Hakuba, therefore he won't like Hakuba.

A moment of Saguru bonding with Natsuki over their natural brown hair, a shared trait - we can see him smiling after saying "But... there aren't any tv cameras yet, so you could do what you want for tonight?"

In a way I feel like I'm making too much of a big deal out of this one thing, but I'm not the one bringing attention to it - Gosho is. Gosho's the one who reminds us that kids get into trouble for their natural brown hair, and Saguru got that too.

Those who've read Magic Kaito will know that he DOES have a Japanese school uniform - but as we saw at the start of the post, when he arrived, he arrived from his school in London.

This further emphasises how he's set apart from the others.

(An aside: it's entirely possible that his "school abroad" is more likely him going to sixth form, since our Secondary schools last (or did for me) up to the age of 16, and depending on the time of year he may have transferred over to the new school year already. Or he's just finishing his last year of Secondary. We don't know.)

Honestly... I'm going to leave this at that for now, because for one thing the post got away from me a bit, and became longer than I expected, and for another thing, I've covered the majority of the first meeting and both of them getting off on the wrong foot.

In short:

Hattori arrived with an idea of slipping Shinichi into the event, and was offended and upset when someone was already in his place. He, being the loyal friend he is, wasn't willing to simply let it lie.

Instead of backing down and accepting the situation and make friends with the new detective - who Shinichi knew and was acting friendly with, and who was willing to befriend him - he let his bad mood get the better of him and made offensive remarks of his own, most of which to the others would seem entirely unwarranted.

Because of that, Hattori still has a bad opinion of Saguru, and Saguru's opinion of Hattori has gone from "my father's spoken of you [positively]" to "rude asshole."

Neither of them are innocent, but when you look at them individually and fairly, neither of them are the only one in the wrong, either.

Like... no wonder they don't get along from here on? Wow.

I did not expect there to be so much in it, but there we go.

[dogsplayingpoker]

Ok weird it wasn't letting me reblog this properly. Anways hiiiii

I did read it (over a year ago when i reblogged this) and that isn't what I said, or my criticism of his point and, overall, the neo-liberal ancient-contemporary comparative perspective that Devereaux is routinely writing these articles in. It would be silly to be fully Pro-Rome, sure, but I'm not really accusing him of that persay. I do still think his general perspective is a silly and factually inaccurate one and disagree with it, so I therefor disagree with the arguments he makes starting from this perspective. In particular, I think that no matter how much he claims to actively be against it, Devereaux and the many historians that follow his same playbook end up: 1. romanticizing (I previously said "admiring," which may have been where we got mixed up) Rome by claiming it was a ghastly horrific slave state (true) while also being unable to help from looking to "the good parts" with a kind of breathless nostalgia, and here, overtly for guidance. This is of course a pretty common issue for classicists, unfortunately, including professors of mine that I've generally really respected. Usually the "good parts" = freedom of religion in occupied territories, civil rights afforded to slaves (+the way that pre-Race slavery functioned differently in general), and exactly what Devereaux says in the title of the article, i.e. their "Notion of authority" being likened, often, to a gentle but firm father figure who knows whats best for his children. It is absolutely hilarious to me how often historians, even ones that claim to have left-wing values, can believe in the noble pater familias rule of the romans with a smile and a tear in their eye. Does anyone else here remember 'the white man's burden'? Did anyone see that weird tucker carlson speech where he talks about daddy coming to spank the disobedient little girl that (assumably?) was supposed to be the Biden government? Anyways. Writers try to isolate only that there was religious self determination (in occupied territories of an expansionist empire), that they Ruled the horrible violent imperial war machine Fairly, and then don't even hide the fumble when they get to the slavery part, proudly saying YEAH, they were ENSLAVED, sure, and that's BAD, BUT........ This all ties into issue two, or the underlying issue:

2. Devereaux is a liberal American historian that is either unable to appreciate the full context of the country he lives in OR is actively obfuscating it AND/OR accepts it and thinks its just peachy outside of a few stubborn issues like police brutality and the like which he thinks can be handled in a vacuum by throwing enough good old fashioned liberal values at them. He fails to view issues from a systemic lens and therefor thinks anything he doesn't like is a weird flaw coming from some outside source. In that article (and I can't find this specific article again on Foreign Policy to pull examples from, I'm sorry) he was trying to 'learn from rome' for the sake of America. Even if he's saying Rome was a heavily flawed society, he is saying our empire can still learn a good thing from their empire. I disagree with that. I disagree with the empires staying empires in the first place, or that empires are things worth saving, or that they're even possible to save. My argument is also that we should actually definitely not look to Ancient Rome for advice on law enforcement, or indeed any of our policies point blank period. I personally think this kind of Rome-USA compare and contrast exercise is always fnny because the writer also never seems to reckon with how much we already, fundamentally, ARE Rome-- in all the worst ways, and in the ways he's claiming we can 'learn' from them. We already have. We've been romanticizing and following in their footsteps very intentionally the whole time, just as others were inspired to follow in ours in a horrific timeline of gore and human atrocities. Devereaux, per his website, is really into classical liberalism, liberal democracies, private property, free-market capitalism, and John Locke. (https://acoup.blog/2024/07/05/collections-the-philosophy-of-liberty-on-liberalism/). We simply have really different perspectives on politics that also inform how we view and would choose to write about things as historians.

I think this quote from that blog post on liberalism is especially funny in context: "And of course Cicero himself never fully absorbs the implications of his philosophy: a wealthy Roman slave-holder, it never occurs to Cicero that perhaps he daily violates the natural law by keeping people in bondage." Devereaux himself never fully absorbs the implications of his philosophy: a white well-to-do professor in an elite seat within American Academia, it never occurs to Devereaux that perhaps he daily violates the individual freedoms of liberalism by rationalizing and hiding away the dark parts of a fundamentally unjust empire relying on the slave labor of prisoners, the indentured servitude of sweatshop workers worldwide, the slaughter and subjugation of millions of in the global south and the underclasses within the empire itself, and the theft and hoarding of the world's resources. But okay. Cicero bad, John Locke good. Got it. My argument would of course be that they are both bad, both equally ignoring the reality of the society they lived in and their places within it. Devereaux is starting his argument from an already catastrophically flawed point of view that forces him to look past things like 'context' whenever it becomes inconvenient. He has to say in the post multiple times that like yeah, sure, Locke's view of who counted as a "person" worthy of having things like "rights" was, um...narrower than ours today, but he was still correct because I like him (and it's totally different from how other people cited, like Cicero, were incorrect hypocrites). Ignore the slavery and colonialism, same old same old, it is still correct and not at all laughable to claim that the United States was a nation formed on a defining principle of inalienable freedoms for every single person. He mentions that those things were obviously bad but doesn't see them as truly conflicting, more as growing pains. He even says the founding father's misogyny and racism (towards the enslaved specifically: indigenous people, and therefore the ACTUAL founding principles of the US colonial empire, go completely unmentioned) "[...] represented betrayals of the principles that otherwise document: the crime was common, the hypocrisy was special." American exceptionalism who? Obviously if he was saying we should instate a more 1:1 ancient roman government that would also be ridiculous. But my point is that he's asking the wrong questions about the society we have and what's wrong with it in the first place. He is often wrong about Rome and near-universally wrong about America.

Despite Sparta’s reputation for superior fighting, Spartan armies were as likely to lose battles as to win them, especially against peer opponents such as other Greek city-states. Sparta defeated Athens in the Peloponnesian War—but only by accepting Persian money to do it, reopening the door to Persian influence in the Aegean, which Greek victories at Plataea and Salamis nearly a century early had closed. Famous Spartan victories at Plataea and Mantinea were matched by consequential defeats at Pylos, Arginusae, and ultimately Leuctra. That last defeat at Leuctra, delivered by Thebes a mere 33 years after Sparta’s triumph over Athens, broke the back of Spartan power permanently, reducing Sparta to the status of a second-class power from which it never recovered. Sparta was one of the largest Greek city-states in the classical period, yet it struggled to achieve meaningful political objectives; the result of Spartan arms abroad was mostly failure. Sparta was particularly poor at logistics; while Athens could maintain armies across the Eastern Mediterranean, Sparta repeatedly struggled to keep an army in the field even within Greece. Indeed, Sparta spent the entirety of the initial phase of the Peloponnesian War, the Archidamian War (431-421 B.C.), failing to solve the basic logistical problem of operating long term in Attica, less than 150 miles overland from Sparta and just a few days on foot from the nearest friendly major port and market, Corinth. The Spartans were at best tactically and strategically uncreative. Tactically, Sparta employed the phalanx, a close-order shield and spear formation. But while elements of the hoplite phalanx are often presented in popular culture as uniquely Spartan, the formation and its equipment were common among the Greeks from at least the early fifth century, if not earlier. And beyond the phalanx, the Spartans were not innovators, slow to experiment with new tactics, combined arms, and naval operations. Instead, Spartan leaders consistently tried to solve their military problems with pitched hoplite battles. Spartan efforts to compel friendship by hoplite battle were particularly unsuccessful, as with the failed Spartan efforts to compel Corinth to rejoin the Spartan-led Peloponnesian League by force during the Corinthian War. Sparta’s military mediocrity seems inexplicable given the city-state’s popular reputation as a highly militarized society, but modern scholarship has shown that this, too, is mostly a mirage. The agoge, Sparta’s rearing system for citizen boys, frequently represented in popular culture as akin to an intense military bootcamp, in fact included no arms training or military drills and was primarily designed to instill obedience and conformity rather than skill at arms or tactics. In order to instill that obedience, the older boys were encouraged to police the younger boys with violence, with the result that even in adulthood Spartan citizens were liable to settle disputes with their fists, a tendency that predictably made them poor diplomats. But while Sparta’s military performance was merely mediocre, no better or worse than its Greek neighbors, Spartan politics makes it an exceptionally bad example for citizens or soldiers in a modern free society. Modern scholars continue to debate the degree to which ancient Sparta exercised a unique tyranny of the state over the lives of individual Spartan citizens. However, the Spartan citizenry represented only a tiny minority of people in Sparta, likely never more than 15 percent, including women of citizen status (who could not vote or hold office). Instead, the vast majority of people in Sparta, between 65 and 85 percent, were enslaved helots. (The remainder of the population was confined to Sparta’s bewildering array of noncitizen underclasses.) The figure is staggering, far higher than any other ancient Mediterranean state or, for instance, the antebellum American South, rightly termed a slave society with a third of its people enslaved.

[autistic-shaiapouf]

Sitting here pondering my age old question of, do I want testosterone?

[bleachbleachbleach]

Hello, do you think that Unohana being the first Kenpachi was a retcone or not? And what would you have done different with her story?

Thank you for allow me to ask you.

Thank you for this question! I feel like “retcon” has gained a negative connotation, where a retcon becomes a critique to levy against something. But the fact of an audience or the author (or both) assuming something to be true, only to find that it is not, isn't automatically a bad thing.

Do I think, in-universe, Unohana’s co-workers were aware of Unohana Yachiru?

Most of them, no. Everyone’s too busy and too young and the institutional memory is too poor and they respect her too much for it to come up. Though I think everyone has always been well aware that Unohana could kill them all if she wanted to. It’s the “had she ever wanted to” part they probably hadn’t really considered, or felt need to. They probably largely still haven’t, because so much was/is going on and they have so much to do and process. I’m sure Isane would appreciate some friends, though.

Do I think we, as the audience, had to reassess how we knew Unohana?

I mean, I suppose, but I don’t think it feels, like, egregiously out of step to me. It didn't take me out of the narrative. And I say this as a writer who inflicts that feeling on myself all the time (unfortunately for me). We know how long Unohana’s been around (Kyouraku makes mention of this in TBTP), and we know what Soul Society is like, and we’ve seen her ice out rowdy 11th members in her hallways. If someone pitched me “nice lady is secretly bloodthirsty af” as a premise, I can’t say it would immediately appeal to me. Who doesn’t have a bloodthirsty past in this genre, lol yawn.

But I enjoy Unohana’s story in its particularity very much. I don’t think it negates how we knew her before, or tarnishes it, or cheapens it, or renders it false. We have a woman who is/was both/an; someone who has enjoyed the sword; someone who learned healing arts in order to prolong her fights; but ALSO as someone who has nurtured generations of healers, and saved the lives of countless; brings her A-game to these dumb captain’s meetings, and built the entire 4th as we know it. You don’t do any of that if you don’t believe in it for real. Not well.

Do I think Kubo knew about Unohana Yachiru when he started Bleach?

I don’t know, but I hope not! I hope he had no clue, for years and years! I hope he had a retcon moment, because I cannot imagine anything more soul-depleting than working for years and years and years on a story you already knew everything about.

I believe that writing should be an act of discovery, a means of processing and knowledge-creation in itself. And I think that is beautiful about sprawling serialized works is that you get to see the creative endeavor—not laid bare, I suppose, but in a state of dishabille. You get to see the ideas grow and evolve and sometimes totally about-face. You can see the misses and the “actually we’re gonna drop that storyline” and the “lol we should have dropped this, but now we can’t” and the elegant saves. There’s an element of live theatre to it, except perhaps with more of a puzzle to it, too. Because the creation isn’t fully live; there’s a time-delay; there’s space to look at what has been written and ferret out where one might go from there. Like ferrets, sometimes the solutions are elegant, and sometimes they are simply bold. I love both possibilities.

If there’s one thing this blog believes in to its very core, it’s in the premise of “yes and.” Whether reading canon or creating in fandom, we believe in going on the journey and figuring out what we can make of it, or what we can make with it. On this blog, we've talked about sprawling serial canons as being full of invitations, and I think that's true for Kubo, too. Design your world with plenty of open doors, or closed ones, or doors defined loosely, to pick and choose and experiment with or abandon later on.

I’m not saying we like everything Bleach has to offer, LOL. We do not. Or that we think Kubo as a creator is beyond reproach. Generally, I don’t really care to linger too much on what Kubo does or thinks. But I do hope he’s enjoying himself. Time is precious and we all deserve to enjoy ourselves more than what this world offers on its own

[twst-hanaya]

Silver's Tragedy

Some of my thoughts on Silver and his situation.

Note: There will be spoilers, and no, I'm not paying attention to what kind, so read at your own risk. Also I dive into a LOT a lot of speculation about Silver's possible thoughts and feelings, so again, disclaimer: this is all just my opinion lol please don't get mad at me. This is chock-full of assumptions based on not a lot of evidence so and I'm willing to live with that lolol.

That being said, let's get into it!

I made sure to read through all of Silver's Vignettes before writing this all down, and it did make me restructure some of my ideas into something based more on what we've seen of Silver in the story.

Here's the thing about the Diasomnia quartet right? They're a family, really family in a way that no other dorm is. There are childhood friends and people who have known each other all their lives, but Diasomnia is different because it wasn't a group of peers growing up together. They're more close to the nuclear family structure of having a parents, an adult that is meant to be a caretaker and children who were guided under that paternal role. While Malleus is obviously not quite as guardian-like as Lilia he's basically the doting Uncle in this scenario.

The reason I mention this is because although this is their dynamic, there's an inversion of expectations here that is unfortunate and unavoidable and not normal. Whereas most people would expect the parent to be the first to die, and the child to forge ahead without them, it's the opposite here. Silver is a human, in a society full of fairies and ancient creatures, and Lilia raised him knowing that it was all the more likely that his son in all but blood would turn to dust before he even saw a wrinkle appear anywhere on his own face.

Silver expresses in his Scary Dress Personal Story that having Lilia and Malleus disappear like that was incredibly rattling, because it had never even occurred to him that they would never be in his life. He's fully steeped in the expectation that he'll be the one leaving everyone else behind, and the experience of having them stand before him as an enemy, someone he could no longer stand beside, was a moment that woke him up to the reality that this may not always be the case.

(While it seems like there was a hell of a lot of foreshadowing for the events of Chapter 7 in this particular Vignette, I'm not really gonna get into that here since I'm focusing on analyzing Silver as a character rather that the events of TWST as a whole. )

While this episode focuses on Silver waking up to the possibility of loss on his own part where it never existed before, I want to focus on the other side of this coin. I can only imagine the kind of mentality you end up having growing up as a mortal in a world of practically immortal beings. Indeed, he seems unbothered and unflappable for the most part, with a tendency towards obliviousness. He doesn't seem to have much negative emotion in general, and is fairly straightforward and honest with both himself and others. And you know what? I'm sure he is fine.

The thing about people though, is that we're capable of being "fine" with a lot of fucked up things. We get used to it, we compartmentalize - we can't keep functioning if we let it bother us. There are things that are "just the way they are" that are absolutely fucked up. While Lilia and Malleus's tragedies are the burden of time and the inevitability of it, and everything that's swept away by it, Silver's tragedy is that ever present understanding that he will be the one abandoning everything he loves. It's one thing to grow old with your loved ones - it's a whole other beast to feel time slipping by you as they remain unchanging and ever the same, on a completely different plane of existence.

Can you imagine how lonely that must be?

He isn't a dog - he's a person and he's aware. And that's all Silver has known really. He's befriended fellow humans during his time at NRC certainly, but they aren't family. He's constantly focused on what he can give back to them for loving him, and he's constantly fighting to give them something of worth while he still has the chance. What can he leave them? He talks a lot about returning Lilia's debt of kindness with everything he can, and I can't help but feel it isn't just gratitude that drives him, even if he isn't aware of it himself.

I think we focus a lot on how the ones being left behind are hurt, but it's worth acknowledging the burden that comes with being the one that leaves.

(On a sidenote, I think Sebek has a very interesting role to play in all of this, but with the level of information we have on him, I hesitate to make any speculations. He's half-fae, half-human, and I'm sure that comes with its own baggage that deserves its own post. The reason I can't make a more meaningful analysis is because we don't really have a grasp on how half-human half-fae lifespans work in comparison to full humans and faeries, and even different types of fairies, though it's pretty clear (to me at least) from what he's said that his mom is some kind of Vampire, or Baobhan Sith type of fae.)

[homeiswherethewitchcraftis]

Hi, I've been browsing your blog (instead of doing my project proposal for class haha) and I just wanted to acknowledge that yeah I'm here commenting on your controversial stuff not out of malice, but as a way of questioning my beliefs and working through them consciously rather than just believing them dogmatically. I think it's important to engage with content you don't fully agree with to see WHY it is you don't agree with it, or if there's something you do agree with. So thank you for allowing me to do that on your posts. Do you have any advice or resources for witches who would feel smothered being a tradwife but want the self-sufficiency that tradwife-ism(?) is involved with? Also just a heads up I noticed you said you weren't feminist (why would you not be on your own side to choose? That's a side question) yet you've reblogged some radical feminist content (which is often misandrist and hateful, which, again, I'm not sure that was your aim). Also also (bear with me lol) I notice you have some posts about getting off birth control? In a world that tends to treat women so poorly (I had the displeasure of finding an online community that specialzed in objectification, sexualization, and open rape threats), how can women protect themselves against these types of people? Early blessed Samhain and may whatever you put into the universe return to you thricefold

Hello, I'm glad you are interacting with my posts I always encourage people to interact respectfully with content thy may not agree with.

I am happy to address your questions and encourage you to reach out to me with any further questions you might have.

My advice for witches who want self sufficiency even if they don't want to be homemakers or traditional wives would be to focus on the aspects of these lifestyles that do work for you. For myself my time as a homemaker was freeing I feel and have always felt smothered by working/ boss babe culture. I'm a traditional witch (meaning I practice traditional folk magic ) most of the women who practiced this path before me were wives and mothers who lived off the land out of necessity.

No I am not a feminist because feminists aren't on my side. You can belive in equal rights for men and women and still not be feminist. You can acknowledge any good done by past feminists and still not be a feminist. Modern feminism does more harm to women in my opinion and the cultural impact of alot of the feminist movement has been negative.

I sometimes reblog posts I agree with even if I disagree with other thins the original poster believes or if we agree on a topic but for different reasons. It's OK to agree with someone occasionally and disagree with them the rest of the time

I'm against birth control and the way our society treats it. Many young women are FORCED or bullied into using it without ever being told about possible side effects or the downsides. Birth control leads to increased rates of depression and obesity 2 major health issues we face right now. Birth control can also be linked to long term fertility issues.

Personally I was forced into getting an invasive form of birth control (iud) that caused me alot of problems. I've known so many women and girls who have had similar experiences it's important to speak out about it. Unfortunately speaking about negative experiences with birth control (especially if they are also issues of medical misogyny) will lead to being bullied either by other medical care providers or more commonly "feminists "

My advice to women who are concerned about their safety (or in general) is get a gun. A dead rapist isn't a threat to anyone

[whiterbone-a]

i wanna know what your take on the nanami / gojo relationship is ?? cause a big part of me is like nanami isn't someone who really talks , like you won't get inside of him and he'll make jokes here and there with the whole work is shit thing . but i think he lost his heart and happiness alongside yuu and i think he even said this wasn't a mission first years should be on and the fact that yuu looked up to getou and gojo so much and still got killed was like a fucking blade to the stomach.

i mean do you think there is a romantic possability , i do play around with it but at the same time do you think it would be comforting ?? like i know the big ship is gojo and getou because of how close they were but what is nanami to gojo , a tool and a function or a friend and possible lover ??? and how will his death effect him ???

also were gojo actively smiles , nanami only smiles when death is around the corner and i am like red flags here and there . but sorry this got so long and please feel free to ignore it .

hello and welcome.  take a seat and thank you for joining me.  if this doesnt make sense just pretend u know what im talking about, its the adhd for making my thoughts so scattered everywhere

so in concept the nanami and gojou ship in a romantic concept is rly cute in concept like u have an ex - salary man whos serious doesnt allow himself the luxury of acting his age but on the other end u have someone who still acts like hes a child and never takes anything serious even when hes fighting.  they both endured the trauma being a jujutsu sorcerer entails yet they have nothing in common -- gojou dresses like hes a reflection with the moon and nanami, the sun.  also the fact that gojou thinks that he, himself, is ascended above all he works with while nanami is just a human living his day to day, and lot of ppl use this as nanami to bring down gojou to his morality just like a nudge or a friendly reminder.  he even tolerates and puts up with him a lot more than he should.  hes very patient but very honest.  a lot of the fanart of them is SO CUTE esp when theyre married and living happily with one another.  i even ship them, its actually one of my top ships next to satosugu but like in reality its not so great unfortunately

honestly?  theres a small slim of a possibility but due to the nature of the clash of personalities and what their job its like ... not rly possible

nanami, even out of being a salary man, fully treats being a jujutsu sorcerer as a 9 - 5 job and refuses to work overtime. he has small luxuries like he enjoys reading and eating left overs after a day of working hard like who wouldnt and not to mention hes the type to keep his relationships strictly professional. gojou has probably asked him several times to take him out for drinks after work (altho work never ends with gojou which is ironic) and has said no.  it’s funny now that i think about it,  shouko probably asks him for an occasional drink after hours and he accepts because at least he likes shouko and he knows theres no ulterior motive from her just a couple of coworkers doing some heavy drinking but nothing ever more than that -- hes even said that he wants to get married but when hes no longer a sorcerer

sucks tho, because like everyone else, nanami sees gojou as someone who is extremely powerful and only sees him for his techniques except more like hes a nuisance and extremely annoying, even to the point of having absolutely no respect for him.  he realizes, yeah hes strong but as for the full package that is satoru gojou?  there’s absolutely nothing to respect about that man

and while we’re talking about gojou, i’ll say it, he’s mentally unstable.  i mean, we all knew that -- hes got a couple of “screws loose” as he puts it inside that rattling brain of his.  on the opposite side of the spectrum, hes not capable of handling a romantic relationship.  hes always always busy, its rare that that he gets a breather for himself.  hes always being sent out on missions out of country and ive always portrayed gojou as the type of partner thats not even gentle on his partners in terms of being playful, childish, and being a nuisance.  his mental health is absolutely terrible (i’m not saying nanamis is any better but) hes always acted much younger than what he is altho i do blame his upbringing for that.

and gojou treats everyone as good friends but does like to particularly pick on ppl who take themselves too seriously (nanami and utahime), mei mei and yuki are exempt from this.  he also doesnt rly care for ichiji but like, that doesnt matter LOL.

i do see nanami eventually giving in for one (1) after dinner ‘date’ after work but when gojou is actually less himself, hes tolerable to be around which isnt saying much tbh.  you should def listen to the nanami and gojou drama audio if u can!  they’re so fucking funny as a pair, which solidifies them as being cute but were not talking about that rn.

in terms of being ‘what are they’ to each other, its hard to tell.  i talked about it briefly as nanami reminding him of his morality and being his humility tho gojou doesnt act like it, he fully believes hes above all and everyone, lovers and close friends are included in this.  i read a lot of nana/go fanfics and they portray nanami as someone to push down his ego;  to remind him hes actually Not all that great, a child in an adults body, etc.  he’s a brutality honest man and gojou can take critic and criticisms to his person but that doesnt mean hes going to listen (and he doesnt, hes even self aware that his personality sucks ass but does he bother to change?  absolutely not and he wont start now nor for anyone else).

yuu did definitely help nanami change and shift his ideas about the world, esp hating the jujutsu society afterwards.  like, i dont blame u king, it sucks ass.  tho, i dont think nanami looked up or cared for gojou and getou that much.  getou he looked up to more so because at least hes as a respectable guy, strong, good looking, and stimulates intellectual conversations.  gojou?  not so much.  nanami probably thought that it doesnt matter if u have techniques that is extremely rare to acquire and even more so to master but u suck ass and u dont stimulate joy to be around.

nanami is a good friend and high school buddy to gojou and nanami would definitely call him ‘coworker’ or something along those lines when hes annoyed him too much or doesnt want gojou to benefit too much from simple acknowledgement.  gojou thinks hes an ascended being but he definitely respects and finds nanami to be a strong sorcerer and was rather surprised when he took the 9 - 5 job but it was definitely safer.

death ... ah, i think about this all the time.  it’s like losing suguru all again except he didnt go rogue and kill a whole village.  hes absolutely confident in nanamis abilities to fend off curses and hes too stubborn to let himself die as well, so the idea of him dying doesnt ever cross his mind.  thats a true stab to the gut to hear that nanami has died, maybe a moment of truly being unhinged and a darker nature but we wont rly know until it happens in the manga, which i cant wait.  i mean, at least mei mei, utahime, and shouko are around but this is nanami were talking about.  if this was in terms of a romantic relationship rather than a simple seemingly one - sided friendship of enjoying of being around that person but that person just tolerating him and hoping he goes away eventually.  i can’t say, i can’t say!  just take these thoughts with like a grain of salt.

also that last statement in the ask, gojous smiles are fake and a mask while the rare times nanami does smile, its genuine.

regardless of what i said, i think it can be a comfy ship!  this ship isnt toxic but any means (unless u make it toxic then well, thats a you thing) so just enjoy it!  i know i do i think as long as u recognize that maybe neither of them being a relationship would benefit the other then go stupid go crazy, i know i will.

[thejustmaiden]

Why do you think Sunrise did that event in with Sesshomaru and Rin's VAs mirroring InuKag? They have already done that CD Drama, do you think they did that to give hope to the shippers? What if after so many hints, if they reveal in the anime that Sessrin isn't canon, aren't the shippers gonna be disapointed? This may be a dumb question and your answers are always smart and well-articulated, but i seriously don't understand their marketing strategy, do you care to explain for me?

Oh, hey there! I appreciate all the love you've been leaving on my blogs lately. I really hope I'm able to give you an answer you're satisfied with. Sorry it took some time to get back to you. I hope this makes up for it. 🙏

I'm not gonna lie, I'm up and down about how I feel about that livestream and what it means for the future of this ship. My brain has been on roller coaster mode since basically the moment the sequel was announced. We're in the home stretch now, and we better get the answers WE WANT the second that sequel comes out. Since it's evidently not going to happen anytime sooner- welp!

Before the livestream aired, I really thought us fans were on the verge of discovering the mom and that it was going to be Rin. We still had hope she wasn't, but at the same time most of us antis were "bracing for impact." lol

Then nothing happened.

We were pretty shocked but obviously relieved. The days before it came out, I was telling others (as well as myself lol) that just because Sesshomaru and Rin's VAs had a livestream together doesn't confirm anything. Besides, why does that have to automatically mean that both pairings need to be romantic? We all know how integral these characters are/were to each other's storylines, so these pairings make the most logical sense, wouldn't you say?

In the previous livestream with the voice actors who play Inuyasha and Kagome, they discuss the new character Moroha and introduce her as Inuyasha AND Kagome's daughter. Now let's compare that to the other livestream with Sesshomaru and Rin's VAs. When they described Towa and Setsuna, they did so as Sesshomaru's daughters NOT Sesshomaru and Rin's daughters. That to me is the most telling piece of evidence.

Like how could they not use that prime opportunity to tell us Rin's the mom when her voice actor was literally sitting right there??! We were all expecting it and they still insisted on giving us nothing! What this tells me is that it's possible this mom is a new character, and it even appears she is quite pivotal to the new series. I keep changing my opinion on that part though to be honest with you, because sometimes I think she won't be important at all in the grand scheme of things. (See what I mean about being up and down? lol) Idk about you, but it seems to me like we haven't even met her character. If it was Rin, why keep it a mystery? It's not like Sessrin's popularity is exactly a secret in this fandom. Why wait until the big reveal if it's "so obvious" in the first place? How does Sunrise benefit from hiding this information?

If it does end up being Rin, it would've been better to just come out and say it. If this ain't just pure fanbait like some of us still hope it is, why hold back? Give 'em what they want already and let us antis be at peace. If they hope to think that I'll change my mind and give this sequel a go just because I've waited this long so might as well, they're sorely mistaken. If anything, I'm going to be pissed they kept us in the dark this long when they could've just saved us all the trouble. I imagine that goes for a lot of us, shippers and antis alike. Whatever way you look at it, I won't be invested in this sequel if Sessrin goes canon- period. I cannot and will not be on board with a series that promotes such a harmful and insulting dynamic.

Which brings us to Sunrise's marketing strategy. Well, I definitely think they have been catering to the fans of this ship for quite some time now. Because, ya know, money. Whether that's because they plan to make this ship canon or not remains to be seen. "Show meee the moneeeeyyyy!" *yells in Jerry Maguire*

There was first the drama cd and more recently that calendar which included art of adult!Rin with Sesshomaru, but neither of those are canon first off. Also, does anyone know if it was actually confirmed to be pro-Sessrin fan art? I mean, I know it doesn't look very good when the artist who made it is a Sessrin shipper and certain fans are fawning over their OTP, but that doesn't necessarily mean the calender automatically is either last I checked. I wonder why it can't simply be Rin as an adult visiting with Sesshomaru. I believe in one picture she's seen giving him a flower, much like little Rin would've done, or just as any child does for a loved one. So if Rin is still bringing him flowers as an adult, I would assume that means their relationship dynamic hasn't changed at all. That's what's supposed to happen, too! If an adult's relationship was established with another person while they were just a child, then that adult will always view them as a child no matter what and vice versa. Even when those children become grown-ups, that won't change. That's just how things are, or how they're supposed to be rather. In other words, a normal healthy adult-child bond does not resemble one like Sessrin.

Both Sessrin fans and antis agree there haven't been any romantic implications between Sesshomaru and Rin in the original series. That's why I can't understand for the life of me why we're even having this discussion. Alas, here we are. This is what happens when society has conditioned us to believe that the only proper (aka "best") way an adult male and a young female's closeness can evolve is with romance. So maybe it's not obvious at first (because that would be illegal), but we should EXPECT their relationship to shift in that direction. Why, you ask? Well, simply because sexualizing young girls is the norm so why not, right? No clues or foreshadowing required! Because like I just said, that would be illegal. Fiction has loopholes for this kinda stuff, so problem solved?

Nope! Aging her up counts too, folks! When you look at a girl character and the first thing you think is, "I can't wait till she grows up so she can f*ck" then, yeah, you're a part of the problem. You may not realize it, but you are. That's not to say you're a bad person or that it's even your fault, just saying that there are times in all of our lives where we start to question some of our beliefs. If you not only support but desire the idea of a romance eventually forming between a grown man- yes, 19 is an adult- and a young girl, then you should probably ask yourself why that may be and re-evaluate. Please stop using cultural differences and history that dates back almost a thousand years to justify this so-called tradition.

"You all shouldn't think too deeply about this, it's just fiction! Ugh, you're ruining the fun! Antis should all just shut up! Only we can have problems, but when you do it's just complaining!"

Right....

And by the way, most of us are not even complaining. We're being critical of the content we're watching. Criticism isn't always pretty unfortunately.

If Sunrise and Rumiko do decide to go through with this, then I will disappointed, sure, but not surprised. Romanticizing these sexualized images of young or pre-pubescent girls has been happening for far too long, after all. We've become desensitized to it sadly enough, especially when the media continues to glorify it. I wish we'd realize how many young girls- or minors in general- we're putting in danger by sending messages such as this.

To you young teenage girls and even boys reading this, you may not fully understand right now, but it's never okay for anyone to tell you that your body being sexualized is a natural and beautiful thing. It's going through through a lot changes at your age, yes, but they should never use your curiosity to satisfy their sexual needs. Don't allow some of these stories to be an example of what is acceptable to occur in your own life if you were ever to encounter a similar situation, especially if fiction is all that you have to compare it to. It is not in any way, shape, or form okay for an adult to say or do sexual/romantic things to you. Even a conversation that may seem harmless at first could have dire consequences. No, not even if you trust them and they're one of your favorite people in this world are these things ever appropriate. What they're asking from you or showing you is dangerous, and even if it doesn't seem like it they are very likely taking advantage of you. If you're ever unsure about something, don't hesitate to come to me. Or maybe you have a loved one that you can go to, that works too. 😊

Idk if I even gave you a definite answer, but perhaps it's because I'm still figuring it out myself. If I ever do, ha! I hope by allowing you to get inside my head for a little bit you got a better idea. Or maybe not, and I just made it more confusing for you. Oops! lol Feel free to hit me up again, dear, and have a nice day/night!! 👋

[yaz-the-spaz]

There's a track record of celebs coming out as bi and then like a year later as gay. Example: George Shelly. And even going all the way back to Elton John. For whatever reasons management now thinks bi is the new gay. They may let someone come out as "bi" who's actually 100 % gay to save face on all the het stunting done and protect former beards . That's all my point was. Many fans in fandom are fake bi. They're really straight but pretend to be bi so that the fetishising isn't as creepy?Or?

yes that is true not only in the celebrity community but in the queer community as a whole. lots of people use coming out as bi as a gateway to coming out as gay/lesbian and that’s not at all a new trend or new track record or a new thing at all (for managements nor celebs nor any of those in the entertainment industry nor queer people at large) and while i understand it from a coming out perspective b/c for some they may feel that’s the safer/safest option as a stepping stone to coming out fully b/c they feel they may be more ‘accepted’ by society/straights/homophobic family or friends, etc. that way, it unfortunately does also inadvertently hurt the bi community b/c many people (both straight and queer) have come to view bisexuality as just a halfway point to (and/or point of confusion leading up to) coming out as gay/lesbian (or on the flipside just an ‘experimental phase’) which coincidentally enough is exactly what amandla addresses in the video of question, which again is precisely why i reblogged it. it’s something that bi/pan people need to see and hear b/c unlike others we are in a unique position b/c we have a history of being excluded and/or looked down upon by both straight and queer communities and often face discrimination from our own community in a way that gay/lesbian people generally do not and just because amandla no longer identifies as bi doesn’t make the message any less relevant or important for people to hear if only so that they don’t feel quite so alone or confused or rejected or wrong for being the way they are.

to the point of whether it’s the celebrity’s decision to adopt the bi label or their team’s decision i can’t speak on b/c in my opinion there’s no real way to tell that. whether someone for a period of time felt they identified as bi or not before realizing it was not the case or was simply using it as a stepping stone can only be known by that individual and/or those closest to them and so i don’t feel it’s fair to assume that certain celebrities coming out as bi before later coming out as gay/lesbian was simply a ploy to ‘save face’ or ‘protect former beards’ b/c they and/or their teams think ‘bi is the new gay.’ i also don’t know how you can possibly know whether someone is a ‘fake bi’ or not as you (most likely) don’t know/have never met these people you’re referring to in real life. unless you’re somehow hunting down and stalking these people to see whether or not they exhibit attraction to more than one gender (which still wouldn’t prove anything anyway tbh) or unless they’ve explicitly stated on blog ‘hey guys so just wanted to let you know that this whole time i was just pretending to be bi online, but i’m actually straight, soz’ then i don’t know how you can make that assumption.

all that said, if that was in fact your point in the first ask (assuming you are indeed the same anon from earlier) you might wanna work on your communication skills b/c if you are the same anon your ask came off as extremely accusatory and rude not only to me but to all bi/pan people in the ziam fandom as a whole. to accuse not just one person (me) but a whole community of being ‘lesphobic’ simply b/c i/they didn’t reblog a particular post is extremely inconsiderate and disrespectful and, like i said before, i have a feeling you already know that or you wouldn’t be on anon. i would also recommend doing a bit of self-reflecting b/c a lot of things you’ve expressed in your ask here and the previous one reflect a lot of highly-problematic views of bisexuality and bi people and also judgement of people in general, especially people you don’t know in real life and know next to nothing about. i would never go so far as to say you’re biphobic b/c like i said earlier calling someone something like that (especially without knowing them personally) is extremely disrespectful of them and their experiences as a queer person but you definitely do have some problematic (and quite biased imo) views that you may wanna re-evaluate.

some helpful things to keep in mind: 

try to remember that what you see on someone’s blog does not reflect their entire lives nor necessarily who they are irl, how they identify, what they do or don’t do irl, what they believe, who and what they support, what they’ve experienced, or might be going through currently, etc.

try to remember that just b/c someone didn’t reblog/blog about something in particular doesn’t mean they didn’t like it or don’t know about it or didn’t see it or don’t support it, a blog is not reflective of a person’s every thought or experience or beliefs (and even if it were those could all change in a millisecond b/c we’re people not robots and we grow and learn and make mistakes and change)

try to remember that not everything a celebrity does or says is a stunt/stunt-related, especially something as delicate as coming out and that changing their identity/label later on down the road does not mean that they didn’t identify with that previous identity/label in the past or never will again (this goes for non-celebrities too), sexuality is fluid and can be very confusing to figure out and sometimes people may change their label or go back and forth between labels, this does not make their identity at any particular point in time any less true or valid nor does it make them a ‘fake’ gay/lesbian/bi/pan/trans/ace etc.

and most importantly:

try to remember that just b/c someone doesn’t present (or say/do/act/etc.) how you think they should as a gay/lesbian/bi/pan/trans/etc. person does not negate their identity as such

try to remember that when talking to people online you’re still talking to an actual person that has emotions and can be hurt or upset just as easily as you can

try to refrain from making assumptions about people based on limited information, and especially try to refrain from insulting people or calling people names based on assumptions made from that limited information

if you ever need any resources or advice or wanna talk further (whether about ziam/the ziam fandom or lgbtq+ issues or anything at all) i’m always here and i hope this post finds you well

[papamatrix]

“Imagination is more important than knowledge.” – physicist

“The true sign of intelligence isn't knowledge but imagination.” – Albert Einstein

“Imagination is everything. it's the preview of life’s coming attractions.” – Einstein

There is perhaps no stronger trait one could have, than that of a powerful imagination.

Imagination is EVERYTHING… because without it we will not create ANY-THING NEW.

Imagination is that the preview of life’s coming attractions, because without it we are certain to repeat the identical patterns, make the identical mistakes and live the identical life over and all over again.

WITH IT, there are not any LIMITS… there’s no limit to what we could attempt, no limit to how high we could soar, how big we could dream…

Sure, our dreams might end within the dust… but what if they don’t? Would you rather LIVE having tried to achieve the life you WANT… or die with regret?

We must giving up of our need to slot in… fit in to the present small box society placed us in… and that we must imagine the life we actually want… then, once we are certain what that life is, we've got to travel for it…

We only get ammo at this miracle of human life… live it fully and exactly how you want!

Sure, we all have dreams… the matter is the general public stuff their dreams within the closet when things get hard… when life presents challenges most of the people intercommunicate what they know… they address what's EASY… but the straightforward road… and also the KNOWN will never lead you to your dreams.

“There are only two ways to measure your life. One is as if nothing may be a miracle. the opposite is like everything may be a miracle.” – Albert Einstein

“He who can not pause to wonder… and stand rapt in awe… is pretty much as good as dead; his eyes are closed.” – Albert Einstein

It really is that easy. It really may be a choice. regardless of the circumstances of our life we are able to like better to see everything around us as a miracle.

The actual fact that we are here, during a physical structure, is alleged to be a 1 in FOUR HUNDRED TRILLION chance. only a few folks believe we are a walking miracle…

Sadly such a lot of people are walking around, living their life in their head, pessimistic of the long run and bitter from the past, so much so, that they're missing the miracles within the present.

Open your eyes and open your heart to the magic all around you. The miracle of human and animal life. The miracles of nature. The miracle of YOU and what you’re really capable of once you relinquishing of caring what people consider you…

Choose, from this moment on in your life… to hunt and find the miracles around you.

“Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.” – physicist

They say the sole things guaranteed in life are death and taxes… you'll raise that list – the impossibility to please everyone.

The simple fact is… once you want to change… as in, after you want to raised YOUR LIFE… there'll be opposition, and unfortunately, that opposition is presumably to come back from people near you.

Many people won’t like your advancement because it'll remind them of their lack of it. many folks won’t accept as true with your direction because it'll remind them of their lack of it.

No matter WHAT or WHO the opposition… you need to stay faithful you, and faithful what's right. Do the correct thing, by others, and most significantly by yourself.

Those who matter will come around eventually, and people who don’t, don’t matter.

Live your life with purpose, intention, filled with SPIRIT and make no apologies to mediocre minds for dreaming and living big.

“We cannot solve our problems with the identical thinking we used after we created them.” – Einstein

“Insanity: doing the identical thing over and once more and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein

Yes, we must dream big. Yes, we must try new things… but if life isn't going the way you planned, perhaps it's time to do a distinct approach?

You don’t have to change your GOAL, but you would possibly have to change the road you are taking to urge thereto.

Never stop learning and developing yourself. you'll find the way.

“A one that never made a blunder never tried anything new.” – Einstein

The actual fact you’re committed to grow, learn more and BE MORE almost guarantees you'll make mistakes and fail, somewhere, somehow along the way.

Remember, it's only considered a failure though… if you surrender. Keep at it, learn the lesson and permit it to serve you.

Don’t let anyone discourage you due to mistakes… it's a guaranteed trait of all winners and curious seekers.

“Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow. The important thing isn't to prevent questioning. Curiosity has its own reason for existing.” – physicist

“I don't have any special talents. i'm only passionately curious.” – physicist

Never stop questioning… everything in your life.

Be so present, and in reality with yourself, that you simply can feel when it’s time for change.

Never lose that child-like curiosity to be told more, develop more, and see more. Never lose HOPE that your best is yet to come back. Never lose that knowing, that you just are a miracle. Never lose that presence… that not many have…

“Strive to not be a hit, but rather to be useful.” – Albert Einstein

Add value, wherever and whenever possible… not just in your work life, but altogether interactions… with everyone… then, you'll be a success… you may have more riches than money should purchase.

What is your favourite Einstein quote? allow us to know within the comments

[creetch]

Hey I'm gonna quickly reply in bullet points with my view on a lot of what has been said here <3

On paragraph one: a character having the theme of being an old generational hero is something we see a dime a dozen in BNHA. It's boring and beaten to death. I don't care for it.

This is just a dressier way of Hawks being able to stay the same/even regressing despite the morally challenging situations he was placed in.

When things happen in a story that have little to no impact on the characters it's unrewarding and imo, pointless. I read stories for the characters, not for the wacky hijinks of a twenty something year old Spy. Hawks being introduced as a character seemingly in BIG support of current hero society but, through the story, being placed in a situation that could challenge his views, tricks you into THINKING he could question society and fools you into thinking something interesting might actually happen with him with no pay off. To me, that's bad storytelling. Why even place him in a challenging situation at all?

On paragraph two: I understand where you're coming from with the HPSC however we saw a similar storyline with Lady Nagant that was far more interesting, unfortunately she's a woman so she got the fucking SparkNotes version of a character arc, a bite size chunk of something that was interesting before she was blown up and forgotten about, supposedly all for the sake of Hawks character development, although he doesn't seem to be very affected by this either.

His Utilitarian attitude being challenged by the LOV but him ultimately going back to it would have been fine. I didn't need him to fully feel for the villains for this plot point to have felt valuable and interesting to me, HAD we seen any sign of Hawks reflecting on the situation afterwards.

Even if he had still made all the same choices he made in canon because of the HPSC influence on him, this still could've been interesting to read. Instead it's cheap because he just jumped into fight mode with Twice like a fish to water, he just threw in some lines about how Twice could 'reform himself' (without a care to how the world treated Twice prior to becoming a Villain and purely asking him to reform himself in a way that meets Hawks standards of being 'a good person' in his cookie cutter view of what is considered good and bad) and has neither took a proper moment to reflect on it nor has he thought back to consider what he could've done differently.

The end of this paragraph about Hawks having learned the villains are complex doesn't have much manga basis to it, if I remember correctly. He doesn't reflect on what happened much at all.

On paragraph three: you're right, I did question where the Spy storyline was going, it just lead to the most boring destination possible. For a story that arc was pointless. It quite literally tricked you into thinking something interesting might happen and then it never did. Even the lesser interesting consequences of the spy arc didn't happen. Hawks has barely thought about his actions since. It's literally so unimportant it disappeared like sand in the wind. I can't think of any impact it's had except for Twice being dead.

The comparison to Hawks past was compelling. I got really excited to see that he came from a low income household with a villain father (I used to love his character) and was on the edge of my seat to see what points this would raise for him and what realisations he may come to as a result of this after finding out Dabi is Enji's son and lived in a rich household with a hero father. It made me wonder if he may question Endeavor, the man he looked up to as a child, upon finding out that he, like his own father, was an abusive person. Unfortunately this led to zero payoff and he continues to kiss Endeavor's ass to this day.

But Hawks isn't grey. Lady Nagant is grey. She would rather have lived in AFO's world than the current hero society because at least AFO was HONEST. Hawks is stuck in his ways. He doesn't question much and he upholds the status quo.

He came from a poor background but has never considered how he too could've became a villain, the story wants us to make the connection but never really makes him reflect on that. He mostly just reflects on his relationship with his parents and seems to envy Shouto as being a better person for being willing to forgive them, which btw yikes that's a real bad message nobody is a better person for forgiving their abuser/abusers.

Learning that the heroes can suck despite their job title was done already through Endeavor.

On paragraph four: Hawks hasn't shown his sympathy for the villains much. We have to infer he sympathises with them due to the sum of time he spent with them in the spy arc, but he doesn't talk about it. I see more sympathy from Shouto and Izuku and even Ochako, but Hawks is just... There, now, cheerleading for Endeavor.

Agree on the last section of this paragraph. He does need to question himself. I'm just on the side of thinking he barely has questioned himself up until now, which lead to an almost entirely pointless arc where he meaninglessly hung around as a spy only to kill Twice and move on.

His ultimate decision to question nothing and support Endeavor blindly and not reflect on the villains or his past or how he too could've easily become a Villain is what makes this pointless, and also infuriating.

There's a good story in here, it's just not what was written.

I'm not even saying he should've joined the villains, I think that it'd have been enough for him to leave the spy situation with his old views being shaped by his new experiences, instead it feels like the storyline where he was a spy didn't exist for much reason other than to lead to Twice dying which is... Cheap. Hawks came out of his mission the same person he was when he went in, he hasn't even reflected on Twice's death much yet, or at the very least still sees it as being necessary. It's just boring. He's the same as he was before he became a spy, so it all feels obsolete.

[severelynerdysheep]

To be super clear here, If somebody consumes either the flesh, milk, eggs, honey or any other byproducts of the animals when it is possible and practicable to avoid doing so, then no, they do not care about animals in their actions. The same is true for any action which is paying for/supporting any form of animal exploitation. 

You cannot both claim care for non human animals while also supporting and paying for their needless exploitation, abuse and slaughter when its at all avoidable. You cannot claim to care for those that you actively exploit, harm and slaughter. The notion that you can is just fundamentally oxymoronic. You either care for non human animals and are vegan i.e your doing your best as far as is possible and practicable to avoid animal exploitation. Which is something anyone with moral agency can do. Or you do not care for non human animals and choose to support said exploitation, abuse and slaughter. This reality may sound harsh, but we shouldn't be treating adults with moral agency with kiddy gloves here by pretending that its fine to claim to hold one moral position while acting in direct opposition to that moral position. Especially when those actions are paying for/supporting such horrific injustice.

“it sure as hell doesn’t mean they’re a bad person.” 

Nobody is saying that you are automatically a bad person if you choose to support this injustice when its avoidable, most vegans weren't always vegan and unfortunately we live in a society where many people are not aware of the full extent of what they are paying for. Carnism is a deeply ingrained belief system which results in many otherwise good people committing deeply unethical and violent actions. People who would never kill an animal themselves pay for pigs to be burned inside out in gas chambers, male chicks to be ground up alive, baby animals to be bludgeoned to death, animals to be mutilated without pain relief, babies to be stolen from mothers and so on and so on. This doesn't make you a bad person, but if you do support/pay for this injustice when you can at all avoid doing so (which the vast majority can fully do) then yes, those actions are bad. 

“I’m veggie and I’ll cook meat with meals for anyone any day of the week because that’s love,” 

That's not love, that's actively supporting injustice and violence against the defenceless. I think you may view these actions as okay because assumedly, you consume eggs, honey, dairy etc, and support other forms of animal exploitation as you say your veggie, not vegan. This may be showing love towards other humans, but it sure as hell isn't showing love to the non human animals who's butchered flesh you are cooking. It is actively supporting the brutal exploitation and slaughter of defenceless animals. Would you be so happy to cook up the flesh of a butchered dog or cat for others? That must also be showing love then. It must also be showing love to attend your friends dogfighting ring. Or to skin up a fox your friend wants to make clothing from. All needless acts of violent animal exploitation done for personal pleasure, weather that be taste, or other forms of pleasure. 

“not judging someone based on their diet.“

It seems like you still view the consumption of animal flesh, milk, eggs or honey as a personal dietary choice, It isn't since it stops being a matter of personal dietary choice when those most affected by said choices are other sentient beings being exploited and slaughtered as a result. And in the case of choosing to consume animal flesh, milk, eggs or honey when it’s possible and practicable to avoid doing so, it’s a fact that other sentient beings are being directly and needlessly victimized by being bred, kept captive, exploited, and brutally slaughtered for that choice. Peanut butter or marmite, a banana or apple, these are personal dietary choices. Choosing to abuse, oppress, and kill other sentient beings when it’s possible and practicable to avoid doing so, are not. So If you choose to consume these “products” when its at all avoidable, then yes, those dietary choices are absolutely rightfully open to moral judgment and advocacy from others on behalf of the victims of those choices. 

“Diets are extremely sensitive to a lot of people so we really need to be more mindful as a community and just be happy because someone is eating. “ 

If we are talking about eating disorders then of course, that's another matter, and @acti-veg​ has a great article about veganism and eating disorders here. But anyone with moral agency should absolutely be doing their personal best “as far as is possible and practicable” to avoid violence and exploitation against other sentient beings. And if somebody who has the ability to avoid eating, say a pig flesh sandwich, chooses to buy and consume it then no I will not be happy because they are eating it. Just like I wouldn't be happy to see someone beating a dog or wearing a fur coat, or supporting any other form of injustice, be it towards non human or human animals. Convenience doesn't justify animals being brutally abused and slaughtered, and telling others to be “more mindful” of others choices to needlessly brutalise and slaughter others is simply bananas. We definitely need to be more mindful, we need to be more mindful of the victims of animal exploitation who are completely being erased in this OP. 

~ Land of hope and glory (a documentary set in the UK)

~ Dominion (another documentary wet in Australia)

~ @acti-veg​ has an amazing new book out here which is free to download which I would highly recommend! 

~ From Dr Melanie Joy

~ Testimonies from many former “humane” farmers here

~ Two videos on welfarism here and here.

~ Why go vegan instead of vegetarian?

Just because someone eats meat doesn't mean they don't care about animals and it sure as hell doesn't mean they're a bad person. My fiance and most of my family are all meat eaters & they're lovely people so such up please. I'm veggie and I'll cook meat with meals for anyone any day of the week because that's love, not judging someone based on their diet. Diets are extremely sensitive to a lot of people so we really need to be more mindful as a community and just be happy because someone is eating.

[itscoldinwonderland]

I don't support selective abortion in cases that aren't medical necessary (and I consider rape to be a medical necessity because mental health is just as important as physical health).

But also the incidents of women getting abortions because they just don't want a baby, aren't very common.

"Some 75% of abortion patients in 2014 were poor (having an income below the federal poverty level of $15,730 for a family of two in 2014) or low-income (having an income of 100–199% of the federal poverty level)"- X

"the two most common reasons were "having a baby would dramatically change my life" and "I can't afford a baby now" (cited by 74% and 73%, respectively—Table 2). A large proportion of women cited relationship problems or a desire to avoid single motherhood (48%). Nearly four in 10 indicated that they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third said they were not ready to have a child. Women also cited possible problems affecting the health of the fetus or concerns about their own health (13% and 12%, respectively)"

"The most common subreason given was that the woman could not afford a baby now because she was unmarried (42%)." - X

The majority of people who have abortions are under 30, unmarried and poor. The reason most women get abortions is directly related to misogyny and poverty.

Any argument that tries to bring into account the fetuses developmental stage is inherently flawed. An infant isn't a fully developed human being, we aren't fully developed until our mid 20s. Humanity is not based on the stage of development, or the ability to feel pain, or the ability to see or hear or how fast your heartbeats. Humanity is simply being human, which a fetus is 100%. Unborn humans are humans, what else do you think they could possible be? They have human dna that is unique to them. They aren't not a strand of hair on a women's head or a parasite trying to kill someone.

I would rather a baby be born into a world where children do not have to face such horrible conditions. Abortion doesn't help the women who are poor. Abortion doesn't help the children already in foster care. Abortion doesn't stop the stigma against women who have children out of wedlock. Abortion doesn't end the misogyny that working women face when they have children. Abortion doesn't end teen pregnancy.

Gosh, I was poor, and it's people like you who think that my life isn't worth living because it was unfortunate. And it's sad because there are so many pro choicers who don't think like that but it's people like you who's voices are amplified.

And if you actually want my real opinon on abortion, it's simple, abortion should not be illegal in a society that does not value human life, that does not value women or children, that does not care about the poor. I would prefer to live in a world were abortions were only performed on women who medically needed them, and where women didn't have to end a pregnancy because they were too poor, and where women didn't have to feel like they needed an abortion just because of their relationship statue or their career. Unfortunately we live in a reality were women are devalued and children aren't cared about, keeping abortion illegal in this society causes more harm, more death.

Abortion is not the solution to a broken system..

[moirroar]

Maybe this is ignorant but I'm not sure why the answer to socialization vs nature really matters. It seems like the real question being asked is "are men salvageable?". If it's nature then the answer is no, if it's socialization the answer is maybe but we have no way to even test this, let alone implement a solution. It's a waste of time to think about and an even bigger waste of time to attempt to prove it. The answer should not change the overall goals of radical feminism which have nothing to do with saving men. Women will always need a way to safely get away from men. All men are equipped with the power to rape and impregnate us against our will. Unless that changes I just don't see the point. Until males become not male. The question could only be answered in a female only society by introducing a few males and seeing what happens... Why even risk it, what is the point? Everything else bad about men aside, integrating males back into an all female society would be a blow to females simply because of the impregnation ability of males. We all agree this ability is the foundation of men dominating and abusing women through the construction of patriarchy and even before that through violence and rape. We all agree women should have 100% control over our bodies. So why don't we agree on what needs to be done? Doing everything possible to protect females from males through small actions such as avoiding male staff to bigger actions of cutting male relatives and lovers out of your life and ultimately to build female only communities that are capable of defense. If you want to talk about socialization focus on helping other women unlearn theirs. I don't see a future where males are complicit in rendering themselves harmless to females via castration and caging. But I can see communities of strong women surviving like we've always done.

The primary hang up of reformist seems to be two things: the idea that if males are naturally dominant then females are naturally submissive, and separatism is impractical. For the first, socialization isn't imposed by an alien. It's imposed by patriarchy so it benefits males and steals from females. And patriarchy was invented and implemented by males. So male socialization is what males want, and female socialization is how males want us to be and it's easier to control a subdued population. Female socialization is imposed and not natural . Seems like that should be super basic radfem theory so I'm not sure where the disconnect is. Secondly yeah separatism may be a never ending uphill battle but it's actually possible and has been done, whereas reformism just a never ending sinkhole of futile efforts as men will never willingly give up their power even if they are fully "educated". Men rape and kill because they want to, not because they're victims of circumstance. Men prioritize themselves and their orgasms over everything, even life itself (auto erotic asphyxiation). If you think such a worldview is hopeless because this worldview accepts that men are hopeless, you unfortunately are still prioritizing males access to women over women's lives.

Why are tumblr radfems so eager to buy into all that brain sex nonsense when it comes to men?

I love hating on the way men behave as much as the next person but I’m not gonna call my opinions ‘science’ and claim my every notion is radical feminist theory.