#which might appeal to more people than this

[bonewaryreblogs]

The Justice Society of America vs. the Justice League

This is the first half of the massive post I've been working on, which I've decided to cut in half; part two will be more focused on what the Justice League looks like when the story actually starts in 2004, like membership and different teams within the Justice League, like the Justice Foundation and Justice League Dark.

But for now, enjoy the backstory!

During World War II, Adolf Hitler was interested in supernatural artifacts, ultimately finding the Spear of Destiny around 1940. President Roosevelt called on several superheroes to help defend the USA, as most local superheroes of the time tried to stay out of international conflicts to focus on their own territories. After this initial mission is complete, the group of heroes decide to remain as a team, funded and directed by the United States government, called the Justice Society of America. Founding members were Flash (Jay Garrick), Green Lantern (Alan Scott), Doctor Fate (Kent Nelson), Atom (Al Pratt), Hawkman (Carter Hall), Hourman (Rex Tyler), and Spectre (Jim Corrigan). Several heroes joined shortly after, including Hawkman’s girlfriend/wife Hawkgirl/Hawkwoman (Shiera Sanders/Shiera Hall), Johnny Thunderbolt (John Thunder) with Yz the Thunderbolt, Doctor Mid-Nite (Charles McNider), Starman (Ted Knight), among others. I’m also adding several “older��� versions of heroes who might not have originally been associated with the JSA but have more ���modern” variants that will be part of the eventual Justice League.

People with superhuman abilities have always existed, one of the earliest being Vandal Savage, but they mostly did one of three things; 1] they swore fealty to a local ruler and worked within an existing system (Alucard, though against his will); 2] they became a local ruler and created their own system (King Arthur); or 3] they worked outside existing systems as a vigilante, usually guided by their own internal moral compass (Robin Hood). These super powered individuals would often be drawn to each other, as allies or enemies, but most would remain local to a specific territory; or if they didn’t have a particular area, they would travel and help whoever happened to be around them at a given time. During the Renaissance, power and authority was more centralized, formalized, and structured, forcing super powered individuals to either fall in line with these systems or sink further into the shadows, becoming “mystery men” as a way to protect themselves and their loved ones. These mystery men were often vilified for not bowing to the government’s will, which led to more secrecy, which led to mistrust from the public, which led to more secrecy, in an ever darkening spiral.

The Justice Society of America is significant because it marked a change in the perception the general public had for these “superheroes” as the JSA preferred to call them. They were no longer mysterious boogey-men to scare kids straight; they were just people, who lived and loved and bought groceries just like anyone else, and who wanted to help others in any way they could. As the globalization of human culture increased through the rest of the 1900s, so too did the influence of superheroes; some thrived on the attention and political power their celebrity status granted them, while others shied away from the spotlight they’d been thrust into, not prepared for the nightmare that is Public Relations.

Over the next few decades, as the idea of superheroes became more mainstream, more local heroes began popping up, as well as some established local heroes releasing their stranglehold on some of their secrets; not all, but enough to humanize themselves to the general public. The idea of public adoration appealed to many, like moths to a flame, which unfortunately tended to draw the wrong crowd for the wrong reasons, saturating the “superhero market” with selfish so-called heroes who only cared about themselves rather than helping people if no one was around to praise them for it. Thankfully, these heroes didn’t last long and folded when faced with an actual threat, which often ended in public humiliation; people were finally starting to catch on to this trend by the 1970s, leading to newer heroes thinking twice before donning a cape and mask.

Three tiers of membership developed within the JSA; full members, part-time members or associates, and non-members that have been endorsed by the JSA who might become members in the future. Of course a more nuanced hierarchy developed over time, as is common among groups of humans, which was loosely based around these tiers but there were always outliers who had more or less respect than their membership status would otherwise grant them. While some were drawn to the JSA for the fame, just an endorsement could make or break a local hero; legitimizing their status as a hero in the publics’ eyes, access to better equipment and training, and, most importantly, access to medical treatment that the government would pay for and an implicit understanding about secret identities from all hospital staff. There were pros and cons for each tier; higher membership meant more responsibility but also more compensation, while lower membership offered more freedom but less access to resources. For example, members were paid based on their time, effort, and how much danger they were put in, but they had no choice but to answer the call to action. Those with just an endorsement weren’t paid at all and had limited access to other resources, but they were allowed to keep their identities a secret from the JSA, which even part-time members had to reveal, though not to the public if they didn’t want to.

Superman was inducted into the JSA fairly quickly after his debut, joining in 1978. The JSA had been around for almost 4 decades by then and its flaws and shortcomings were becoming more and more apparent; while most up-and-coming heroes had grown up with the idea of superheroes being necessary for public safety, the JSA had become increasingly political, rife with in-fighting, and interconnected with the US military. They’d become the USA’s attack dogs internationally and tended to attract those who craved the spotlight via membership more than those who actually wanted to help people, who often stayed at endorsement level. They were getting desperate for new members that could revitalize their image, which inevitably either corrupted the young heroes or disgusted them into leaving.

Trained as a reporter for his day job, Superman quickly uncovered the truth but recognized that the JSA had good bones and structure, despite its corruption. He initially tried to change things from within but realized the corruption and codependence ran too deep. Instead, he began studying the structure of the JSA, figuring out what it did well and how to avoid what it did wrong, all while making plans for his own superhero team, independent of government meddling, and international in scope; if nothing else, it could help superhero teams coordinate with each other as a neutral third party mediator.

Superman wasn’t quiet about the JSA’s shortcomings, but kept his plans for the Justice League mostly to himself; he didn’t want to be kicked out for potentially poaching talent as a competitor, not while he still needed the JSA’s resources to help people. In 1986, Superman approached newly minted CEO Bruce Wayne with his idea; he knew Batman had been approached to join the JSA but had declined and hoped that, despite their rough introduction a few years prior, Wayne Enterprise would agree to be the Justice League’s financial backer, affording them greater independence from any government interference. Bruce had a lot going on at the time and said he’d think about it.

Somewhere around 1990, Wonder Woman debuted and hesitantly joined the JSA, recognizing the corruption (not to mention misogyny) but also its usefulness to her, and was quickly approached by Superman with his new team idea. She was much more comfortable with his plan and eagerly jumped on board, agreeing to be its main leader, but until they could make it happen, she worked on establishing herself as someone the public could trust.

By 1993, Dick Greyson had graduated from sidekick Robin to independent hero Nightwing, Barbra Gordan had well established herself as Batgirl, and Jason Todd was doing well as the second Robin. Feeling more stable, Bruce asked if Clark was still serious about his idea, which he’d now had 7 more years to refine and recruit for. The Justice League finally debuted the next year, lead mostly by Wonder Woman and backed by Superman and Batman as joint seconds-in-command; they purposely never established which of the two had a higher rank and delegated the responsibilities evenly between them based on their strengths. Superman took more of front-facing role with Wonder Woman, as both were generally good with Public Relations, while Batman took on more of a supporting role, doing a lot of the background planning and coordinating to maximize efficiency. Some would compare them to the three arms of the US government, with Wonder Woman as the executive, Superman as the judicial, and Batman as the legislative. While not intentional, it helped people understand their roles and division of power so they didn’t do anything to confirm or deny the parallels.

Their initial lineup consisted of Wonder Woman, Superman, and Batman, along with Flash (Barry Allen), Green Lantern (Hal Jordan), Aquaman (Orin/Arthur Curry), and Martian Manhunter (J’onn J’onzz). After the League proved to be stable and not likely to disband, like most independent superhero teams did, they quickly gained members, especially younger heroes that wanted to change the world without being shackled to a specific government and hamstrung by their politics. Many members also joined as a representative of local superhero teams/government agencies around the world.

[thekatebridgerton]

Do you think the fandoms expectations of Sophie is too high? I feel like however good or bad she the writers will make her out to be in season 4, there will be lots of people upset.

Prepare yourself because I'm about to express a very negative opinion I have on the show

I think that either way there's going to be backlash but its not going to be the fault of the character or of the season in and on itself its just that Netflix and the showrunners have got to pay their dues.

The backlash will happen almost certainly because there are a lot of dissapointed and distrustful fans, who don't think their favorite storylines are going to get treated well and unless someone like Dolly Parton writes the Benophie season with the appropriate amount of humor, romance and respect for fans, this is the burden of negative expectation the showrunners has put on season 4.

Benophie shippers have to deal with years of accumulated fan dislike over the changes made in s2 and s3 to trust Sophie isn't going to get shortchanged in some way. Be it by having her scenes with Benedict cut short to focus on Eloise latest pet project, having Sophie's backstory changed to fit the personality of whatever showrunner was in charge or simply by cutting important scenes from the book. Because the show has proved that these things have happened and they can happen again.

I do agree that people need to separate their general upset at the show for being untrustworthy and their upset over Sophie as a character until s4 actually airs. But I'm not going to pretend Sophie and S4 are not going to suffer for the accumulated betrayal that fans have carried in the name of everything done wrong in s2 and s3. The showrunners knew this was a risk when they began upsetting fans, they still took it and there's a high possibility that unless we get some really really spectacular writing, s4 will pay for previous seasons sins.

Us Benophie shippers are going to have to defend a lot because If it's a good season, it will get lukewarm reviews but if its a bad season, disappointed fans are going to finish burning bridges with the show and boy it will most likely be on poor Sophie's funeral pyre.

I personally don't know how Show Sophie is going to be handled, Sophie in the books is someone very well written, kind, resilient, hard working, friendly but somewhat distrustful, and most of all, she's a character filled with hope that things will eventually work out for her. I cannot stress enough how much I love how book Sophie was designed as a character, but some part of it has to do with being in direct juxtaposition to book Benedict, who had a lot more growing up to do than Show Benedict does. Book Benedict, who was unsure of how to stand out among his talented siblings, passive Benedict who never actually took a stand for something he cared about until he met Sophie. Somewhat dickish Benedict who was extremely attached to his lifestyle as a ton gentleman and never questioned how women of lower status were treated by society because that's just the world he was born into.

Book Sophie shines as a character in her own right, but some of that shine has to do with the fact that she inspires the very flawed and somewhat dickish Benedict to change for the better. The Benedict in the show doesn't have the flaws that made his book counterpart both appealing and unlikeable. Which might be a good thing. But it also disrupts the balance of the expectations placed on Show Sophie as a character. How is she going to inspire a change in a Benedict who is now significantly more feminist, accepting, and non discriminatory than his book counterpart. Why exactly is he going to fall inlove with her as opposed to someone like Genevieve or lady Tilly?. What makes HER so special when his previous love affairs were not?.

And I think us book readers who love Sophie very much, have to brace ourselves for the backlash that's going to come Sophie's way. Yerin Ha has some unfair expectations to fill already (3 season's worth of accumulated disappointment has taken it's toll on the Bridgerton fandom and lets just say, there's a reason I use the block button liberally, when it gets toxic, it gets toxic) and I agree, the responsibility to carry season 4's success shouldn't be placed on her back alone. But if there's something that 3 seasons of viewership has taught me, is that it's usually the lead actress who gets the bulk of the blame when fans are mad at how their season was adapted into screen.

This is without taking into account how oversexualized the show has made Benedict. Yes this was an intentional show writing choice, yes it isn't the fandom's fault. But in my personal opinion, there way some internet users talk about Benedict as a character is so sexually obsessive, that at some point I wanna yell at them that Benedict's personality isn't in fact only made up of his number of sexual encounters and undefined sexual orientation. You think the weirdos out there sexually obsessed with Benedict aren't going to hate on Sophie for being the one who gets the metaphorical happily ever after with his D? think again readers, think again.

So to summarize, I wish I could answer this ask with a higher degree of positivity. I really do. In my heart, I do hope that my prediction doesn't come true and that season 4 is in fact so well received that we all forget that we've already had 3 seasons of questionable writing choices. In this blog I will continue to support Yerin Ha and Sophie Baek.

Heck even if show Sophie ends up being a not like other girls pick me girlboss ala Eloise of season 2 (can you imagine 'I'm Sophie I'm not like other girls, I don't need no man, I work for a living, the noblewomen Benedict has hooked up could never' ugh the nightmare), I will still support Yerin Ha because I think the casting choice was wonderfully made.

And I will still hold on to Book Sophie as a character very dear to my heart, because I can. Nothing the show does can change that. And the wonderful thing about fanfiction, is that I can use the show casting with the book character design when I write, so either way, we will always have Benophie fanworks to keep us well entertained if worse come to worse.

If best comes to best, I will be happy to be proven wrong. And I'll come back to this ask and say something like "guys you were right, season 4 didn't have any backlash, I was overly pessimistic after all" and we will all celebrate.

But until that time comes. that's the tea

[philosophicalparadox]

I think you are correct, but there is another element to balancing that is pretty consistent in Naruto, which is less balance and more “check” — many Shinobi teams seem to be organized that way, probably to keep teams from going AWOL or individuals from gaining too much upper hand. From that perspective, Sasuke is maybe not well “balanced” outside his personality, but he is well “checked” by both sensei and team, because:

1. Sakura is resistant to Genjutsu (she sorely needs help exercising this at first, but it is a latent talent)

2. Naruto is conversely very weak to Genjutsu, but he nonetheless keeps Sasuke’s dark impulses in check by being obnoxious and competitive with him, which serves the function of both Naruto being likely to snitch and also providing an outlet. Naruto can also theoretically out-stamina Sasuke (pre curse seal) which works out, because Naruto is tanky af and Uchiha typically seem to rely on efficient, well timed and hard-hitting strikes, which unfortunately can use up a lot of chakra. Knowing this, Naruto makes a decent counter because at the end of the day even if he does no damage, he still overwhelms in multiple senses, and provided he can tank or dodge that killer strike, will simply outlast his opponent (IN THEORY. Of course nobody knew that Sasuke was Mini Madara 2.0 power wise, which pretty much totally negated that safeguard eventually, but at the time it might’ve been the idea).

And 3. Kakashi. I don’t think I really need to explain that one lol. If nobody else can reign in an angry wayward Uchiha, then he can, both because of his own Sharingan and his experience.

Again I agree that personality is something that Konoha especially tends to strongly consider, because of their emphasis on teamwork, but there’s also a stratification aspect that seems to be pretty universal that teammates need to be able to both balance each other out AND keep each other in check in the event of conflict. Which one is weighed heavier, and HOW they’re checked, I think depends entirely on the purpose of the team.

The anime only (but still canon in my heart 😭) Team Ro is a good example. Tenzou, Itachi and Kakashi are terrible checks for each other, if the objective is to keep everyone alive. I mean, arguably Itachi and Kakashi are well matched enough, but poor Tenzou wouldn’t stand a chance at that point in time if they both turned on him, and might not even survive one of them turning on him. He’d have to kill them to stop them, and while he absolutely can, his abilities don’t lend themselves well against a Genjutsu specialist or a 5 chakra type using monster lol without having to resort pretty immediately to killing them outright. Similarly, like I said, Itachi and Kakashi are reasonably well matched at that point in time, but if they fought one of them would almost certainly die, and that would probably be Itachi.

The reason for that though is that they are matched very well, and balanced very well, by their personalities. I can’t picture a universe in which Itachi kills Kakashi unless he’s left with absolutely no other recourse, but the inverse is not as true. I don’t think at that point that Kakashi would want to fight or hurt Itachi, if for no other reason than that Itachi is good at being disarming, and because he is literally a child. (And those things are related). Similarly, while Tenzou would probably lose (again), he’s good at appealing to people’s better judgement, which keeps Kakashi from slipping back into bad habits.

So ability vs personality and checks vs balances are all different sides of the same cube I guess lol. How each gets represented in a team is different depending on their purpose and whatever background politicking is trying to stabilize things.

I’ve been trying to figure out how Team 7 is considered “well-balanced” because it’s pretty well known that

- Sakura and Sasuke (the two with the highest grades in their class) balance out Naruto’s lack of book smarts and help him learn along the way

- Sasuke and Naruto (the two strongest of their class) balance out Sakura’s lack of taijutsu skills and maybe help her develop them

But nobody ever talks about how they balance Sasuke out. Then I realized

- Naruto and Sakura (arguably the loudest and most extroverted pair in their class) balance out Sasuke’s hardcore introverted nature and maybe pull him out of the darkness

At least that’s what makes sense in my mind. All the teams were chosen to balance each other out and I don’t think they could be as easily changed as people seem to believe.

[just-some-guy-joust]

Hello voters c: I hope you are enjoying round 2! (there is SO MUCH yelling in the tags for matchups I DID NOT expect)

If you liked the art for Xena and Cardamon from round one, good news! My Patreon has drawing requests open and I also have commissions. You could, I dunno, legally require me to draw you a silly guy you like. A tournament contestant I killed perhaps. Or maybe your own personal guy 👀 the possibilities are endless

(I am in fact only putting this here because I do genuinely need the support rn, feel free to ignore as well I won't blame you!)

((I'm also a day late but shoutout to aromantic visibility day! If you would like to help out a fellow aro then c: haha that's me))

[danielnelsen]

so if you romance and ascend astarion you can kick him in the balls when he tries to turn you and it’s just very funny, he’s so pissy about it. so much for the most powerful vampire of all time or whatever, he stamps around like a toddler and then leaves forever

[maliro-t]

as a bona fide vaxleth lover i am more confused than ever about how they are portrayed on the animated series i'm not gonna lie 😭

[spinnenpfote6]

Regarding your author's note I think it's actually a good way to let ppl know that you are able to make them enjoy stuff they otherwise wouldn't! I've had a few comments on my video edits about the (infamous) Star Wars sequels saying that while they didn't like the movies they *did* like my edits. There were a few discussions about these types of comments on Tumblr that they might be considered kinda rude in disguise but I took them as a compliment because my skills made them look at the movies (or parts of them) a different way that was able to make them happy.

But I know what you mean! I love Frodo (obviously lol) and would love to see more Frodo x OC/Frodo x Reader but most of it is Sam x Frodo, though I have found a VERY good Frodo x OC story on AO3 ("Left The Tenderness Of Tears" by Lurea, for those who wanna know).

My best guess is that fandoms in general lean heavily on shipping and we already have an established emotional connection featuring lots of tender moments in both the movies and the books between Frodo and Sam that everybody loves. The LOTR fandom has LOTS of queer fans who see themselves in the characters where I believe the ambiguity of their relationship even fuels it instead of calming it down (what is something some would expect instead) because it's normalizing to the platonic/non-sex love parts of a gay relationship. It would be a perfect tragic love story which people simply want more of - even if the fandom has spawned some weirdly black and white corners where there's either extreme homophobic hatred for SamFro shippers OR extreme hatred for Sam/Rosie/OC or Frodo/OC shippers where the mere idea that the hobbit boys could be straight or bi/pan is simply outrageous, even if it makes total sense for Sam in canon. Much of the fandom seems to actively try to fight all the "heteronormative stuff" and while that can be good, they sometimes go overboard with it, so there's no place for Frodo x female OC for such an "obviously gay" character and it's probably also the reason Rosie isn't too much of a beloved character (not that she's hated, she just seems overlooked and more of a stepping stone or even replacement for Sam in order to get to his "true love" Frodo. Some believe she was just shoehorned into the story because of the 1900's homophobia and/or Tolkien's Christianity).

As for Frodo x OC, the fan fictions we've mentioned have female OC's where I think Frodo's personality and role come into play. The books and especially the movies establish him as a soft and more quiet and less obvious hero - someone who cries, has weak moments, fights very little and has to be saved a lot by his friends. He seems cozy and innocent, more childlike (more so in the movies but ya know) than the other heroes and his small size, huge hairy feet and Elijah Wood's youthful cutesy face with the big blue eyes certainly add to the feeling of character who is coddled and taken care of like a child or adorable fantasy creature (even in the books other characters are constantly like "OMG you little funny guys are so cute haha", despite the hobbits being grown men - well, except for Pippin). This is a stark contrast to the female fan's most popular men, Aragorn and Legolas, who are badass manly fighters whose friends are their equal. Even if they have soft and lovely moments they still fit the women's fantasy of a strong man who can protect them, while Frodo is less the type of guy to draw his sword and throw himself into carnage. He *is* good-looking, but more in a pretty, cute way and Aragorn's good-looking in a hot, handsome way, and especially since elves like Legolas are considered more traditionally appealing than hobbits (Frodo is often seen as a sort of 50-y/o rich, stoned farmer who lives in a teletubby house and just eats and writes all day) - even if most of us find hobbits more relateable lol. In theory you'd have less hot and cool adventures with Frodo n' his hobbit gang than with other LOTR characters. So people - especially straight women - are less likely to ship themselves with Frodo aka a hobbit by default and therefore do not seek out these types of stories while all the queer folks look for the cute SamFro content. (Not to mention that Frodo is more often overlooked than you'd think of the main character because he's so quiet and misunderstood)

Additionally I think many fans believe that Frodo staying in the Shire somehow undermines LOTR's main message and purpose, as in him getting a happy ending at home makes it seem like his trauma and wounds have no real consequences (since him leaving for Valinor is a big thing), even if the "Happy Ending In The Shire"-trope is popular, and the SamFro fan stuff at least has them sharing their mutual trauma and therefore aftermath of the journey. With Frodo - if you go by canon - you are somewhat bound to have your fanfiction contain heavy themes like PTSD in a homely place like the Shire and if it's not SamFro that's unappealing to many fans because they are just not interested. With an OC you don't know what to expect and, well, you simply have no audience even if the small number of people who like it absolutely love it.

(I actually found myself to have 2 reasons why I as a woman like to ship myself (or my OC) with Frodo - aside from the fact that I love the character and find Elijah Wood incredibly cute. One, I think his quiet-observing, introverted and sensitive is very much like mine and I like to see myself in him and two, with my history of chronic illness I can get some catharsis out of imagining myself as the caretaker while Frodo is the one suffering. Idk, it seems like I have a general interest in more niche and heavy topics lol)

Now I realize I still have to read your story haha. But your discussion about why the LOTR fandom seems to be so allergic to Frodo x (female) OC caught my attention because it's SO true! They're hard to find on AO3 and I wish the fandom had a bigger space for it!

(Btw with this post I'm not trying to be mean towards SamFro or queer LOTR shippers in general - or Aragorn/Legolas girls - all that was just my observation of how the shipping stuff in the fandom works^^. I very much appreciate the soft sweet queer and Stan-The-Strong-Hot-Guy content! It makes total sense! But c'mon, we should give Frodo some more of our own love as well!)

You know what's interesting?

I may have posted about this before, but the literal number one piece of feedback I get about The Flowers of Mordor is "I was skeptical about the premise, but now I'm sold!"

Which is great. It means something good about my writing - that I've been able to tell the story in a convincing way, that the characters acted in believable ways, and won the reader's hearts.

What I still don't understand, however, is why the premise seems to go SO much against the grain.

After all, I can't be the only person who wishes Frodo could have healed in the Shire. I can't be the only person who wants to ship themselves with Frodo. (Let's face it, canon/OC is sometimes, though not always, a vehicle for self-shipping, and that's totally fine! Fandom is all about wish fulfillment, and I am all for it.) In the end, I can't be the only person to wish Frodo could have found his happy ending with someone else besides Sam-maybe-eventually-in-Valinor. (Yes, sharing Sam or a poly arrangement is an option, and so is Rosie-as-a-beard, and so is erasing Rosie, but none of those approaches have felt satisfying to me, and again, I can't be the only one who holds this opinion).

Yes, I get that Frodo/FOC is not canon, but canon/OC rarely ever is. (And yes, I know I've made a fuss before about how Marigold is not an OC, but she is quite similar to an OC: she is mentioned briefly in canon, but all of her character development in FOM is my own).

Also, there are many non-canon premises that people absolutely go wild for, such as Boromir lives, or Thorin lives, or even Boromir and Theodred, so why exactly is it so difficult to see Frodo with an OC? It's been done with almost every other character, even ones who have canonical partners.

I mean, yes, to begin with, Frodo is positioned in canon as a confirmed bachelor, and Samfro is a very popular ship. But at the same time, Sam and Frodo are written and portrayed ambiguously enough that there is room for interpretation. They could be lovers, there could be unrequited pining, it could be one-sided on either of their parts, or they could be good friends. All of those things are possible. And similarly, Frodo could be a confirmed bachelor for a number of reasons: perhaps he is asexual or gay, or he is too much of an oddball, or he had a relationship that didn't work out, or it's the Ring's doing, or he senses he will someday follow in Bilbo's footsteps and is reluctant to put down roots. All of those things are possible.

So I have to wonder: maybe Frodo/OC or Frodo/someone besides Sam is not the most common ship, but why exactly is it such a hard sell? I just don't see it.

In fact, Flowers of Mordor is in part written for much-younger me, who first encountered the books and movies and genuinely wondered whether things could have been different if Frodo had found a nice hobbit lass to love.

Granted, at that age I was probably too young to understand the import of Frodo's burden, and the scars it left behind. Today, I understand that the ending was tragic but necessary, but a part of that hopeless romantic remains: I wish it could have been different. I wish Frodo could have found love. I wish that love could have conquered all. And as I said before, isn't fanfiction all about wish fulfillment?

[unproduciblesmackdown]

payoff of being embedded in a unit of authoritarianism since birth is sure then being able to go like "wow this is just like dynamics & phenomena i experienced up close & personal, repeatedly, in many contexts & configurations in my first two decades of life" plus also beyond that in abuse culture world & the noncoincidence that even interactions beyond the confines of the home(tm) reinforced / did not contradict the hierarchy & concomitant abuse within....but then like hey yeah also the Larger Units of hierarchy & abuse / authoritarianism (ft. their logics & practices necessary for continuously & continually shoring up that hierarchy) can also make it like hey yeah the Two Parent abusive nuclear family more like the Two Party [the US is also a one party state but in typical american extravagance they have two] where right wingness is defined by the degree of directly embracing white supremacy & "left wing" is "anything else" hence like wow The Left is always infighting (everyone with any ideas besides "umm christofascist white ethnostate?" so like yeah there are many other ideas) vs The Right's admirable cohesion (simply re: the white supremacy idea which also necessarily embraces all other Out Group / Nonperson paradigms & practices b/c that's what all already has been necessary for shoring up the [when has the US been a nongenocidal non white supremacist non oligarchy])

like obviously individual experiences & contexts vary but like narrowing in on [the Family as immediate relations ideally cordoned off into nuclear households] ft. [Parental Authority the top priority of which is preserving that authority, ideally patriarchal, an abusive mother e.g.? hey, that ought to be the father] times it's like, think people tend to struggle re: having the "nicer" / "safer" parent who was also shitted on as well but also at the end of the day would always side with the "meaner" "more dangerous" parent, even in whatever terms most sympathetic to the abused parties, with the underlying logic that we're always just going to have to deal with them so some secret strategic mitigation is the best that can be done, perhaps the equivalent of being sent a ":(" after an Onslaught Of Expressed / Enforced Authority(tm) event....the tendency to see the best in any lack of actual intervention / protection on the assumption That Could Never Happen Anyway & forever At Least that the one parent isn't as bad as the other [the Not That Bad / Could've Been Worse infocation, like free bingo square in manifestations of minimization if not outright abuse denial] & all the sympathy for, you know, being human & doing their best(tm) &c which sure might all be true but the abused parties (oft children, more vulnerable than adults, by virtue of being children i.e. considered legal property of some specific adults & theoretical property of any adults in general (the paternal logic in any "protect [xyz]" like maintain one group's supposed ownership / control over [xyz] "for their sake" then? great) & also generally smaller & newer at being alive in this world) but who are liable to not extend that sympathy to themselves (or certainly not be extended that sympathy....when is "they're doing their best / they're only human / they mean well or whatever / they love you, they're family" successfully deployed the Thwart an abusive parent like it is to tell an abused child to not be too resentful of this situation, when is it actually deployed toward the abusive parent at all really. & again in the lack of boundary between the authoritarianism within many individual family households & that of the state they exist in (here re: the US) like that naturally one encounters the logic of abuse expressed just as "common knowledge" & the Assumptions of other people, e.g. the rejection of a parent having zero access to a child, the reinforcement of automatic apologia deployed for whatever a parent could possibly do, argued for "family", yet not deployed the same way to automatically defend anything thee child(tm) could do, thinking emoji lol....see: like the non boundary between [the Patriarchal home/family(tm)] & capitalism when uh oh capitalism the system of continuously maximizing exploitation Needs various forms of labor to be unpaid, uh oh another lack of boundary when white supremacy is used to also shore up the patriarchy that shores up the white supremacy, e.g. that even if in some "inferior" class it's treated as More Important that at least you're not that And black, the theoretical ideal/normal white man is a person while a white woman is a woman while a black woman is black, white women could have any legal property via chattel slavery which needed white women's participation to help enforce, the specter of sexual violence all coming from nonwhite & especially black men & it's up to the genteel white man to Protect Women (see prev, implicitly white or you'd have to specify otherwise)

anyway that is to get around to pointing to the Two Parent System wherein so shockingly the results are the same as the One Parent System re: abuse maintaining The Family (properly, i.e. unquestionable & certainly undeniable parental access to children, & "ideally" ofc again the patriarchal Father as ultimate authority w/ownership over the Mother, who in turn is theoretically honored for that motherhood (at least you own your children, insofar as it doesn't contradict w/what the father wants to do with his superior claim to ownership) & then finally all the obviously shittiness from being in that position in a patriarchy is in turn dumped on The Children who are ungrateful & owe the mother everything Because of what the broader society & immediate personal expressions of that abuse have done to her. see also ofc that two adults likely don't have the resources to raise a child in time or money or energy, maybe there's only one but also even an extended family's worth of adults aren't enough, is it enough when a child is sent to school for some other adults to be in charge most of the day, or even if someone is hired to look after them beyond that, all this ofc with the assumed premise that a child is always limited to the various Domains of The Adults In Charge, & from there i segue into how naturally being in gay baby jail unless & until adults are no longer recognized as Legally In Charge Of You (the grand like 5 minutes it's relatively been since the ideal timeline of a woman's life wasn't being legal property of her father until asap passed along to legal property of her husband. still considered ideal ofc but like with "maybe you can have a bank account" now & "maybe you can become 29 before you're in Old Maid danger" Maybe, i said, Maybe....anyway that obviously adults(tm) being divided up (atomised. spritz) into Households isn't even supposed to be enough to live on their own, re: necessitating Marriage, much less uh oh having kids who are stuck with their parents who are stuck with them, but then all the obvious actual problems & abuses inflicted on Adults to have to have their family households & exploited jobs are dumped on the children who Must appreciate & be loyal to the parents (i.e. never Deny Access) while yknow kids have Fake Problems they're whining about, the one Real Problem of having to pay a bill gets the payoff of leverage to tell your children to shut the fuck up or perhaps the more vulnerable spouse

hm didn't segue right into "so shoutout to like The Ratchet Effect diagrams lol, the "Two" Party System where its supposed left wing Blocks Movement To The Left, right wing Moves Everything To The Right" but even that is like, mm, conferring a passivity to what democrats do in the continual movement to the right (won an election? lost an election? the lesson either way is The Right Is Right; exact same logic as in "winning or losing" "the war on crime" like the collection & analysis of whatever statistics show the trend of some "crime" is increasing in frequency or magnitude? show that it's decreasing? the lesson either way is Cops Need More Power) like the institutional effort of democrats to push a candidate nobody wants through primaries (did we even do that this time around. oh great that the assumed candidate even graciously agreed to not force themself as The Candidate, & now like 5 min left with the Next In Line candidate dumped on everyone now with the lesson for the left(tm) to shut up already lol) & then it's up to Grassroots Voters. it's up to Unity & well we all Need to listen to the white supremacists, points were made, in the "elections" with voting as limited as possible & with the electoral college & supreme court as Safeguards against democracy & here's the senate, eternally thus, & again the conclusions will always manage to be moving To The Right, paraphrasing from twitter like democrats are about to be or already at the point of "in the name of unity we will no longer be running against republicans; it's too divisive :(" which yknow is already The Statements of all of yesterday from various like "i'm the republican official white supremacy agree-er now" after also the entire campaign of "no, I'm the fascist" where like wow shocking that the appeal to the fascists didn't win a) the fascists who will ofc want the even more overt fascism, why wouldn't they or b) the people who want antifascism actually, and do not want fascism; who could have foreseen? & it's always the fault of being Too Antifascist for the actions of the fascists or the Diplomatic Comprimises the other party makes with the fascists &/or their Failure to thwart them....the Nicer, Safer party in power is surely doing their best & at least they're not the Meaner, More Dangerous one but at the end of the day they'll always side with that party over america(tm) & those bearing the brunt of the actions of State Power can be told to keep their chin up or else to stop acting out b/c how do you expect that state power to respond, cmon, you bring it upon yourself, & you Have to work with them & understand all their feelings & your role in resolving those feelings by being lesser inferior property, you do Have to understand, b/c in the end this is All About Family, surely Good & Necessary, whoops i mean in the end this is All About America

anyway yeah i'm like damn my "nicer" (also shitty) father who was also the even more sexist & racist (& certainly no Less ableist, queerphobic) parent was basically the democratic party of the Two Parent System of Family Government lol. b/c we Need to perpetuate this Family, no other logics much less actions are acceptable....& people struggling with the Parent / Adults in their life like that who were the "safe" & "protective" ones who markedly failed to protect & minimized the harm afterwards but also in general, never to confront the reality of the situation, or do damage control like "aw some points were made at all :( ah i see you have Feelings about this :( hmm yes the Parental Power is gonna have to make some changes" & then as soon as possible (assuming reeling in the party who was deviating too much) these changes(tm) are already compromised or diminished if done at all, & then oops things incrementally might be right back to how they always were, no guarantees it won't be Worse b/c the Power is even more insecure / aware of weaknesses, & the only way this is thwarted is if the Wayward Parties can actually leverage new boundaries / less vulnerability, not b/c the supposedly sympathetic parties, who never came through where it counts & likely would also become overt antagonizers / wielders of whatever power within the Family hierarchy / turn on the more vulnerable parties to Get Them In Line, actually came through. movement Away (more disruptive to the maintenance of The Family, The State) is blocked, incrementally only ever moving everything back, & then Further....& despite this being what the power structures are, & do, the Disruptive parties liable to be scapegoated lol, can't believe the scapegoat child is ruining everything for everyone, this Family would totally improve & start being everything it could be otherwise & we ignore who actually has the power & is actually enforcing the hierarchy harming everyone to point to that scapegoat; can't believe thee left is destroying america (republican voice) can't believe the left is destroying america (democrat voice) So You See? The Undeniable Consensus. just like how i believe it was my fault my family unit was Like That & i had those experiences, according to the vast majority of Input from that family & even others who, knowing nothing, would say how Lucky i was to be relatively close to home, or just of course that oh well parents love their children & mean well & try their best. just like how i believe that being treated like i've been generally as a neurononconforming person, i.e. hated & the interpersonal abuse & bullying & ostracization & [attention possibilities: ignored, responded to but negatively, interacted with to get something from] & actually rewarding interactions or just actions being liable to get Deluxe authority responses as disruptive(tm) & ofc disobedient(tm) like hell fuckin yeah lol. just as i don't think that other people who have similar experiences or ones i don't have, i.e. assessed race being automatically seen as wrong / inferior, being isolated & undermined from all around? well gotta be their fault then, cmon lol....Abuse is actually normative, not extraordinary, in every Arena of interactions, & so are the logics / apologia / assumptions

anyway lol re: like yeah people struggling with the like betrayal of the "nooo i'm on your side, i sympathize, i'm the one who's nicer & you Need so that things aren't even worse" party, not even One Big Novel betrayal, but rather that that's what's Been done the whole time & doesn't stop. that supposedly if you have Any sympathy for that party you have to be like aw :( keep doing your thing (necessarily reining everyone in) or if you have Any sympathy for the people who also want things to improve but blame & take it out on the more disruptive parties (more disruptive to an abusive family e.g., btw. & not like i see Cohesion as necessarily some Good rather than neutral? when i'm autistic / my existence is supposedly antithetical to this? or when i'm able to look at a zillion hypothetical or actual situations & recognize how "cohesion" isn't the best goal / a destructive one / a vague concept anyways like cohesion Between Whom? on what basis? recognized & pursued how? why? up next: same as vague shit like "family" or "community" &c) then it's like yep gotta be Responsible for their feelings too if you're at all sympathetic & capitulate, The Only Possible Action, vs the idea of those in power actually making things shit stopping, much less being stopped / having to stop in the various ways that can happen....one way being "oh no, adult children who choose to be no-contact with parents" which is seen as A Tragedy, & sign of a Deteriorating Society, take me back. ah jeez oh no, look at the divorce raaates....Oh No, twentysomething women aren't pursuing marriage enoughhhh....again the undetectably identical echo when people peak vaguely talk about "conflicts" that thwart "community" or whatever, ugh nobody will date anymore, commit anymore, be friends anymore, hang out as coworkers anymore, talk to me if i want to talk to them anymore, &ccccc....

the real tl;dr is like wait ""two party"" (one party) US electoral system, just like ""two parent"" maintenance of thee family lol. ratchet effect raise your hand if you've only ever experienced Movement Away from the abusive family blocked, forever incrementally ratcheted back in to the desires & pursuits of those most in power / top of the hierarchy / thus of course most invested in the abuse, that's what the power & hierarchy is made of, sustained by, perpetuates....sorry doing our best :( sorry that's just all that's realistic, no other choice Really. cmon. kind of Your Fault if you don't agree to that & whoops now Everything is the fault of whoever doesn't agree & cooperate enough :( now look what you've done & brought upon yourself :( & we'll just forget the eruption of violence suppression happened & will happen again & be the overhanging threat all in the meantime

[pyrriax]

zam + 8 and roshambo + 5 for the ask game!

8. What's something the fandom does when it comes to this character that you despise?

Honestly? I can't really pin the exact thing I despise about what the fandom does with him, but there's little things here and there that I can't stand. I think they forget sometimes exactly what route he takes with his paranoia, and they make it a bit too... Generic? At least from my read. But also I read him differently because of my understanding of certain things.

5. What's the first song that comes to mind when you think about them?

Problem: I think of two songs at the same time.

I blame associating both with him because of individual fics & arcs. Now one is arguably more of a... Stretch. Than the other. But I'll leave that to you to figure out.

==================

ask game!

[honestlyvan]

The main feature apps like this offer are QOL improvements like different layouts, fonts, reading statistics and timers, and the aforementioned download features that are already a part of Ao3.

And if you want to use an app for those features -- honestly, I don't see why not? But be aware that Ao3 supports user-created skins that can look like literally anything you want (and although you do have to know enough CSS to make a theme yourself, lots of fans out there make AO3 skins just for fun -- you just gotta talk to one of them to ask how to make the changes you'd prefer and most likely they're happy to help out) and there are userscripts that act as site extensions that provide all those features and more (with, again, people actively developing them that you can ask help from to write your own if you don't like any of the ones available)

If you don't want the hassle of finding this stuff out or talking to people to ask for these features, you do you I guess. But don't ever pay money for one of these apps, no matter what it does. If it's showing you adds, if it's asking you to buy it, DO NOT, they're asking you to pay for features other fans have already provided for free through other methods.

WHAT THE FUCK IS THIS

WHO IS USING THIS

AN APP??? THEY HAVE A FUNCTIONING WEBSITE

THE LAST FUNCTIONING WEBSITE

[fozmeadows]

there is no ethical consumption under capitalism

Years ago now, I remember seeing the rape prevention advice so frequently given to young women - things like dressing sensibly, not going out late, never being alone, always watching your drink - reframed as meaning, essentially, "make sure he rapes the other girl." This struck a powerful chord with me, because it cuts right to the heart of the matter: that telling someone how to lower their own chances of victimhood doesn't stop perpetrators from existing. Instead, it treats the existence of perpetrators as a foregone conclusion, such that the only thing anyone can do is try, by their own actions, to be a less appealing or more difficult victim.

And the thing is, ever since the assassination of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, I've kept on thinking about how, in this day and age, CEOs of big companies often have an equal or greater impact on the day to day lives of regular people than our elected officials, and yet we have almost no legal way to redress any grievances against them - even when their actions, as in the case of Thompson's stewardship of UHC, arguably see them perpetrating manslaughter at scale through tactics like claims denial. That this is a real, recurring thing that happens makes the American healthcare insurance industry a particularly pernicious example, but it's far from being the only one. Because the original premise of the free market - the idea that we effectively "vote" for or against businesses with our dollars, thereby causing them to sink or swim on their individual merits - is utterly broken, and has been for decades, assuming it was ever true at all. In this age of megacorporations and global supply chains, the vast majority of people are dependent on corporations for necessities such as gas, electricity, internet access, water, food, housing and medical care, which means the consumer base is, to all intents and purposes, a captive market. We might not have to buy a specific brand, but we have to buy a brand, and as businesses are constantly competing with one another to bring in profits, not just for the company and its workers, but for C-suites and shareholders - profits that increasingly come at the expense of workers and consumers alike - the greediest, most inhumane corporations set the financial yardstick against which all others are then, of necessity, measured. Which means that, while businesses are not obliged to be greedy and inhumane in order to exist, overwhelmingly, they become greedy and humane in order to compete, because capitalism encourages it, and because there are precious few legal restrictions to stop them from doing so. At the same time, a handful of megacorporations own so many market-dominating brands that, without both significant personal wealth and the time and resources to find viable alternatives, it's all but impossible to avoid them, while the ubiquity of the global supply chain means that, even if you can keep track of which company owns which brand, it's much, much harder to establish which suppliers provide the components that are used in the products bearing their labels. Consider, for instance, how many mainstream American brands are functionally run on sweatshop labour in other parts of the world: places where these big corporations have outsourced their workforce to skirt the already minimal labour and wage protections they'd be obliged to adhere to in the US, all to produce (say) electronics whose elevated sticker price passes a profit on to the company, but without resulting in higher wages for either the sweatshop workers overseas or the American employees selling the products in branded US stores.

When basically every major electronics corporation is engaged in similar business practices, there is no "vote" our money can bring that causes the industry itself to be better regulated - and as wealthy, powerful lobbyists from these industries continue to pay exorbitant sums of money to politicians to keep government regulation at a minimum, even our actual votes can do little to effect any sort of change. But even in those rare instances where new regulations are passed, for multinational corporations, laws passed in one country overwhelmingly don't prevent them from acting abusively overseas, exploiting more desperate populations and cash-poor governments to the same greedy, inhumane ends. And where the ultimate legal penalty for proven transgressions is, more often than not, a fine - which is to say, a fee; which is to say, an amount which, while astronomical by the standards of regular people, still frequently costs the company less than the profits earned through their unethical practices, and which is paid from corporate coffers rather than the bank accounts of the CEOs who made the decisions - big corporations are, in essence, free to act as badly as they can afford to; which is to say, very. Contrary to the promise of the free market, therefore, we as consumers cannot meaningfully "vote" with our dollars in a way that causes "good" businesses to rise to the top, because everything is too interconnected. Our choices under global capitalism are meaningless, because there is no other system we can financially support that stands in opposition to it, and while there are still small businesses and companies who try to operate ethically, both their comparative smallness and their interdependent reliance on the global supply chain means that, even if we feel better about our choices, we're not exerting any meaningful pressure on the system we're trying to change. Which means that, under the free market, trying to be an ethical consumer is functionally equivalent to a young woman dressing modestly, not going out alone and minding her drink at parties in order to avoid being raped. We're not preventing corporate predation or sending a message to corporate predators: we're just making sure they screw other worker, the other consumer, the other guy.

All of which is to say: while I'd prefer not to live in a world where shooting someone dead in the street is considered a valid means of redressing grievances, what the murder of Brian Thompson has shown is that, if you provide no meaningful recourse for justice against abusive, exploitative members of the 1%, then violence done to those people will have the feel of justice, because it fills the void left by the lack of consequences for their actions. It's the same reason why people had little sympathy for the jackass OceanGate CEO who killed himself in his imploding sub, or anyone whose yacht has been attacked by orcas - it's just intensified here, because where the OceanGate CEO was felled by hubris and the yachts were random casualties, whoever killed Thomspon did so deliberately, because of what he did. It was direct action against a man whose policies very arguably constituted manslaughter at scale; a crime which ought to be a crime, but which has, to date, been permitted under the law. And if the law wouldn't stop him, can anyone be surprised that someone might act outside the law in retaliation - or that regular people would cheer for them when they did?

[astrow1zar6]

Big Slay placements pt 2

Mars in the 1st house (on men): these dudes are HOTTT. They give manly man vibes, the “I’ll jump in a burning building for you” vibes. These guys have big sex appeal and are usually walking red flags (but people dig that lowkey). They are usually very confident and aren’t scared to make the first move. If they want you they will have you (even if it’s only for the short term). These people however can be very cocky & sex obsessed if not careful. This placement is also hot in women but I notice in women this placement has a tendency to crash out a lot or start arguments a lot. I’ve also seen they can come off too strong (for a woman according to society) creates more of a Tomboy vibe/masc vibe in chics they aren’t traditionally “feminine”. (But I still think these people are soooo sexy regardless of gender) girls with this placement give Revvy from black lagoon. Ifkyk 😏 their self assured/ warrior like essence can intimidate weaker men a lot & many men can try to control their fire… (good luck lol). (Ps I am not misogynistic I swear I just prefer this aspect in men nothing wrong with the women in this🫶🏽)

Jupiter in the 1st house/ on the ascendant (positive aspects): these people are just overall a pretty good vibe. They can make even the gloomiest of mfs laugh I swear. These are the best people to have around during holidays or parties they really know how to spread good vibes around. I notice they have really good social graces & are really good at social cues which is why so many people want to be their friend. It almost looks like nothing can get to these people.. they can be hit with so much bs but still be able to keep a smile on their face. Very generous with their time and resources as well. If they love you best believe they will do anything for you. Usually attracts good luck in their lives because of their happy go lucky attitude. Others can feel more lucky being around them as well. Tend to have very attractive healthy bodies.

Leo degrees on the ascendant (5,17,29): every person I’ve met with this degree on their ascendant are super pretty & have so much appeal. Their presence is just so loud (even if their rising sign is more lowkey like Scorpio or Capricorn) the minute they enter a room people stop and stare. I feel like the 5th degree is more of a beauty degree and the 17th & 29th are more charismatic star born presence. (Regardless tho still all bad b*tch placements). These people just give AURA. You also have a higher chance of becoming famous if you have any of these degrees (not just on the ascendant).

Having a sign in their home planet (ex; sun in Leo, moon in cancer, Venus in Libra/taurus ect..) having planets that are in their home sign can make themes around that planet flow easier in your life. For example if you have a mars in Aries you might find it easier to be active & chase after what you want compared to other mars signs, you can have a surplus of energy and can handle challenges thrown at you with a lot more ease than lets say someone with a mars in Pisces or cancer.

Aries sun: shocker right… but the sun in exalted in Aries so it’s able to express itself in full throttle. Aries suns I notice tend to have a really strong sense of self & no one can shame them. I notice a lot have the ability to do what others would seem as “embarrassing “ and not give a flying fuck. This is such a freeing placement when mature. These people are the definition of idgaf and I adore it. If they get those anger issues under control they can be big power houses.

Venus in the 10th house: a lot of really famous people have this placement. Most celebrities or big business people have this. Gives this worldwide beauty that’s everyone adores. Can have a very big “fan group” even if they aren’t famous. Whatever comes out of these people’s mouths others see it as the gospel. (They can have a huge impact on the public). People can become obsessed with them easily. For example Billie Eilish & Donald trump have this placement… look at their fan base 👀 can leave a very iconic/legendary imprint on the world & many will remember them. They have a tendency to pick their career & public image over loved ones and relationships if not careful. Usually find love once they are settled in their career.

Lilith conjunct ascendant: oh the power these people possess is off the charts (especially for women) if you have this in your chart you are probably used to others trying to dull ur shine down because your aura is so strong! I’ve seen people with this placement get shamed a lot by others (mostly women) because they aren’t ashamed about what most women are taught to be ashamed about. So it’s almost like a mission for others to bring them down to their level. That’s how powerful you guys are!😳 men and women will try to control you cuz others can see your potential usually well before you see your own. Once these people step into their confidence however it’s really over for everyone. They have the potential to be beautiful & powerful. I think of Daenerys Targaryen when I think of this placement.

Pluto/venus: fucking with these people will feel like they did voodoo on you.. but fr tho it is very easy to become addicted/obsessed with these people’s energy. They have the ability to put a trance over people that can lead you to acting crazy over them. (This is especially true with hard aspects CONJUNCTION, opposition, SQUARE). These people hold the power to truly break ur heart. They can use their bodies & sex appeal to get you hooked (most are very good at the act if uk what I mean😏) can use a lot of mind games and manipulative tactics to keep you interested in them if they feel ur attention is drifting anything to get you attached and them in control they will use😳 the square placement can especially be bad with this. Gives a dangerous hotness like you know they are a huge red flag but you can’t resist. With easier aspects (sextile,trine, quintile) they aren’t into mind games as much and value genuine deep connections.

Mars/venus soft aspect (trine,sextile, quintile): usually super charming & have a really healthy libido & self esteem. They are big flirts & are usually amazing with their timing in terms of seduction. They know to give just enough without being overbearing or too detached which can get their object of desire hooked in a healthy way. These people are also super easygoing and have no problem admitting when they messed up (which only adds to their charm even more). Usually physically really fit/attractive. I didn’t add the harder aspects (conjunction, square, opp) mostly because although they can be extremely charming & have great sex appeal I notice their seduction techniques can be a little overbearing? They can come off as way to strong sometimes and scare off their object of desire (especially in the conjunction & square). They can be more selfish & get really aggressive when they don’t get what they want. They can struggle with getting bored in relationships easier than those with these in a softer aspect (trines & sextiles can keep healthier relationships). Harder aspects can become very forceful with their affection if denied. Especially in the SQUARE/opposition.

Jupiter in the 2nd house: most millionaires/billionaires I see have this placement. I notice they could’ve also been raised with money which gave them a push in life compared to others. I’ve also seen people who came from poverty with this and became super successful. This is a huge entrepreneur placement. Business comes very naturally to these people & are usually money driven from a very young age. They usually have a talent that gets them a lot of money in their life. Can have a big fear of losing money however and being in poverty.

Sun/venus: these people are usually pretty likeable. I notice these people have the ability to mold into whatever crowd they are involved with which usually wins them a lot of admirers. They can either come off as super charismatic or super phony but regardless people still eat them up. They try hard to be agreeable and tell people what they want to hear to boost their egos. So regardless if it comes off a little fake they know how to make others feel really good. This can be a big fame placement as well since a lot of celebrities have this. A lot dreamed of being really well known or popular from a very young age.

MC in aspect to Venus (conjunct or trine): these are usually considered the prettiest people in the workplace. Could get a long well with coworkers & many people can have crushes on them. I’ve seen these people get huge tips at work for just looking good. Has more of an opportunity to get hired or promoted because of beauty. They are that coworker that makes more than you and barely does any work😭😂 being so pretty and likeable people tend to give them more leeway than with others.

Mars in 8th house: this gives witch girl vibes. Similar to Pluto/venus people can become very obsessed with them. They tend to have a lot of stalkers or exes that still hit them up after years. These people are SUPER magnetic & their sex is very addictive. It can be extremely hard to move on from these people. I’ve seen people with this get hexed from spiteful lovers or have love spells be put on them, I’ve seen people break into their house (mostly exes or sneaky links). Be careful when dealing with someone with this placement it’s very hard to let go of them once you’re hooked.

Beauty asteroids on the ascendant (Apollo, Aphrodite, Eros, Cupido, Casanova) the people I’ve seen with any of these aspects look like they’ve been carved by the gods. They are so beautiful to look at. Apollo gives a similar vibe to having a Leo rising but gives a more glowy and godlike effect, people can easily become in awe of the individuals & see them as really cool. Aphrodite on the ascendant is kinda a no brainer gives an otherworldly like beauty a lot of famous models have this placement. Cupido & Eros on the ascendant give a more flirty typa vibe and enjoy games of seduction. They are able to seduce anyone with just a look in their eyes, their eyes are their weapon to pulling.. I kid you not how they look at you will make your knees go weak they flirt thru their eyes. Casanova on the ascendant is the king/queens of sweet talking.. they can talk their way out of anything & talk their way into your pants quick😩 they give a sorta bad boy/girl vibe but it’s so hard to say no to them they are so darn charming!

Sorry it took so long to make a part two been working a lot lately😩

[asidian]

So, everyone's seen the theory that the dolls in the Doll House are Edwin's old bodies, right? But if you want to break your heart a little more, take a look at the doll placement.

They line the corridors, but there are noticeably more of them in two particular spots.

First up: by the exit door.

This one makes a lot of sense. In disasters, people in a panic find it hard to get through doorways, especially inward-pulling doors, in a rush. It's a dangerous chokepoint for people who are panicking, which Edwin definitely would have been, being chased.

Add that to the fact that there isn't an actual door here. This is a hole in the wall; who's to say if it was even open when Edwin first found it? He might have had to break his way through, initially, which takes time, and time means getting caught.

But that leads us to the second spot, which isn't so obvious.

It's this spot by the window.

There's no cover here. There's nowhere to hide, to make it appealing for a boy seeking safety. There's no door or anything else to slow Edwin down. So why did he die here so often?

If the window was breakable, Edwin would have figured that out early on, so it wasn't that. But he kept coming back here anyway, over and over.

There's only one thing that makes this spot unique.

It has more light than anywhere else in the Doll House.

I propose that he died here, again and again, over seventy long years, doing exactly what he's doing when Charles finds him: seeking what comfort he can in whatever little light is available to him in the depths of hell.

And then Charles comes to get him, and he brings a lantern.

[axolotlclown]

I am a little concerned that people aren't actually going on the candidates websites and reading their issues pages. Trump has branded his as "Agenda 47" and effectively lays out 47 key issues he wants to address during his presidency. It looks quite awful for the Palestinians and muslims living in the United States currently. It also looks like he's going to crack down on protests and make it harder to organize in support of Palestine.

Here are some pieces I took from his plan that should concern anyone supporting Palestine right now:

Biden banning Tiktok was a direct attack on our freedom of speech and ability to share information about Palestine. However, Trump is promising to bring back his muslim travel ban (which would succeed under his conservative Supreme Court). He will make it just about impossible for any refugees to get into America. It's already difficult for refugees to gain entry, but this is just opening the door to dangerous rhetoric.

American imperialism cannot be fixed in one presidency. That $95 billion foreign aid package that included $26 billion to support Israel was passed by Congress, with support from democrats. Biden signed it, but that's not something he can do by himself. If we want real meaningful change, we're going to have to vote for a whole lot more than just the president. Campaigning for third parties is going to have to maintain its momentum outside of election years.

Still, both candidates are supporting this war currently. They are both piss poor choices for a ceasefire. However, they are NOT equal! A Trump win could be devastating, not just for the Palestinians still struggling in the Middle East, but for the Palestinians living at home now. With the courts behind him, Chevron overturned, and a clear plan for Schedule F in place, I cannot seriously humor anyone saying that a Harris would be "just as bad" for Palestine.

"You're so privileged for caring about genocide" is not a take actually.

[vetyr]

hi, i ireally love your work and i don't know if you've answered this before but, what kinds of studies do you do or how did you learn color theory? i wanna get better at rendering and anatomy but im having trouble TT TT

Hi! Long answer alert. Once a chatterbox, always a chatterbox.

When I started actively learning how to draw about 10 1/2 years ago, I exclusively did graphite studies in sketchbooks. Here's a few examples—I mostly stuck to doing line drawings to drill basic shapes/contours and proportions into my brain. The more rendered sketches helped me practice edge control & basic values, and they were REALLY good for learning the actual 3D structure behind what I was drawing.

I'd use reference images that I grabbed from fitness forums, Instagram, Tumblr, Pinterest, and some NSFW places, but you could find adequate ref material from figure drawing sites like Line of Action. LoA has refs for people (you can filter by clothed/unclothed, age, & gender), animals, expressions, hands/feet, and a few other useful things as well. Love them.

Learning how to render digitally was a similar story; it helped a lot that I had a pretty strong foundation for value/anatomy going in. I basically didn't touch color at all for ~2 years (except for a few attempts at bad digital or acrylic paint studies), which may not have been the best idea. I learned color from a lot of trial and error, honestly, and I'm pretty sure this process involved a lot of imitation—there were a number of digital/traditional painters whose styles I really wanted to emulate (notably their edge control, color choices, value distributions, and shape design), so I kiiind of did a mixture of that + my own experimentation.

For example, I really found Benjamin Björklund's style appealing, especially his softened/lost edges & vibrant pops of saturated color, so here's a study I did from some photograph that I'm *pretty* sure was painted with him in mind.

Learning how to detail was definitely a slow process, and like all the aforementioned things (anatomy/color/edge control/values/etc.) I'm still figuring it out. Focusing on edge control first (that is, deciding on where to place hard/soft edges for emphasizing/de-emphasizing certain areas of the image) is super useful, because you can honestly fool a viewer into thinking there's more detail in a piece than there actually is if you're very economical about where you place your hard edges.

The most important part, to me, is probably just doing this stuff over and over again. You're likely not going to see improvement in a few weeks or even a few months, so don't fret about not getting the exact results you want and just keep studying + making art. I like to think about learning art as a process where you *need* to fail and make crappy art/studies—there's literally no way around it—so you might as well fail right now. See, by making bad art you're actually moving forward—isn't that a fun prospect!!

It's useful to have a folder with art you admire, especially if you can dissect the pieces and understand why you like them so much. You can study those aspects (like, you can redraw or repaint that person's work) and break down whether this is art that you just like to look at, or if it's the kind of art that you want to *make.* There's a LOT of art out there that I love looking at, probably tens of thousands of styles/mediums, but there's a very narrow range that I want to make myself.

I've mentioned it in some ask reply in the past, but I really do think looking at other artist's work is such a cheat code for improving your own skills—the other artist does the work to filter reality/ideas for you, and this sort of allows you to contact the subject matter more directly. I can think of so many examples where an artist I admired exaggerated, like, the way sunlight rested on a face and created that orange fringe around its edge, or the greys/dull blues in a wheat field, or the bright indigo in a cast shadow, or the red along the outside of a person's eye, and it just clicked for me that this was a very available & observable aspect of reality, which had up until that point gone completely unnoticed! If you're really perceptive about the art you look at, it's shocking how much it can teach you about how to see the world (in this particular case I mean this literally, in that the art I looked at fully changed the way I visually processed the world, but of course it has had a strong effect on my worldviews/relationships/beliefs).

Thanks so much for sending in a question (& for reading, if you got this far)! I read every single ask I receive, including the kind words & compliments, which I genuinely always appreciate. Best of luck with learning, my friend :)

[trainsinanime]

People keep saying that NFTs are worthless now, and always have been, but that's not true. Yes, there has been a lot of criticism and video essays and websites around the topic. But the truth is that even now, NFTs are actually worth something, at least in Germany.

Specifically 10€ worth of groceries.

German supermarket chain Kaufland has a deal where they give you a 10€ gift card if you give them your old (have to have owned them for more than three months) NFTs, which will then get displayed on their "wall of lame". It's 10€ per person, no matter how many NFTs you give them, but still, 10€ is a really good deal at this point no matter how many NFTs you have. If you stick to store brands then you can stretch this pretty far.

Now, some might say that this is just a cynical marketing ploy, an attempt to promote the supermarket chain by appealing to all of our Schadenfreude about one of the most controversial tech topics ever until AI came along. And that's because that's absolutely true.

But on the other hand it is also very funny.