#who says you're not worth it

[i-am-church-the-cat]

i try to write and my brain floats away

[starryeyed-seer]

me: I'm not a bat

Mr pages: (stuffing novels under its robe): I must abscond

[onebarofsoap]

something about this guy’s design... love to see a guy who is also a bunny 😊

[utilitycaster]

I truly have no patience for "criticizing a creative choice is disrespectful" as a statement. If you can't tell the difference between sending hate or harassing creators/fans, vs. saying "I didn't like this and here's why" you are an idiot. And on the flip side if you're a creator and someone says "I didn't like this" without any sort of personal attacks or hate involved, simply on the basis of critique and personal preference, and that makes you feel bad enough to stop creating then maybe you should step back and either get offline or make room for someone who has an actual creative vision that isn't "I want everyone to like me."

[autisticrosewilson]

So do you guys actually think that Jason's entire story, relationship to the others, and philosophy amounts to him being a rebellious teen who wants his dad's attention? Like are you 100% serious? I thought you were joking about that but too many of you are saying it with your whole chest.

And what the fuck is this "Bruce antagonizing Jason is fanon!" Shit I've been seeing? You guys are aware that a parent can love their kid and still be a shit parent right? I know you guys don't want to fathom the thought that maybe your blorbo might also occasionally have to face responsibility for consistently endangering children but let's not start being delusional now.

Bruce does love his kids, that doesn't mean that he hasn't hurt them. And I'd also argue that for the most part he feels in the right for it, and he's said multiple times that he believes it's for their own good, so you can't even argue that he's sorry about it. It's okay for you guys to admit that your PERSONAL INTERPRETATION of the character wouldn't do that but don't sit here and pretend that it's not a facet of the source.

[beedreamscape]

I'm pretty much the worst person to even weigh in on this topic because I've been partial to Suvi since day one, but in my opinion there wasn't ever a need to explain or justify Suvi's choices/reactions.

Not because she's perfect, never wrong (though in my heart I know...) but because I'm very certain that the people that keep on hammering on her mistakes/shortcomings/tendencies are people that already dislike Suvi (or don't like Aabria very much, I wish this wasn't a topic of consideration but even 30+ eps in there's still people like that around) for whatever reason and gather excuses to justify their bias against her and no amount of explanation will turn their hearts in her favour.

It really feels like a parallel to the way Suvi herself tries to be understood by her friends and yet she fails time and time again.

And people insist on forgetting that Suvi is not the Citadel, she's just one young wizard of the Citadel.

And it's gut-wrenching how much I relate to that feeling of alienation before every corner she tries to fit in: amongst her citadel peers she's othered by her position and privilege, and now by her friendship to a witch and a spirit; between her friends she's the odd-one-out because of her Citadel connections and the nature of her power; and now amongst the witches she stands out by being the face of the "enemy".

I don't blame her for clinging to the little corner of the world that has not made her feel foreign despite the very nature of her presence: in Steel's family whom she's not related to by blood, yet completely by heart.

And it'll never be a fair game. The girls especially are very young and with new-found independence, they're given colossal decisions to make, and that before beings older than three generations of them combined and incomprehensively more powerful and less empathic.

As much as Mirara wants there to be a good witch and bad witch, there's no such thing as black and white, there are decisions and consequences, what one does with the power they're given. There is no right or wrong in a fight filled with so much heart, there was never a world where a fight between Ame and Suvi would be clean.

[jewreallythinkthat]

Some people on the left in the USA need to go and read about the McCarthy Witch Trials which we all objectively know we're bad and wrong and then take a good fucking look at how they treat jews and people they dont like because it's a fucking 1:1 mapping of identicality when you start breaking down the behaviours

[lafragolina]

just kill me

[rustedleopard]

Everybody who's played Undertale/Undertale Yellow knows that in order to get through fights without hurting/killing monsters, you need to use ACTs. What you might not know is that (at least in UTY, I don't recall if this is a feature in UT) what Clover does when they ACT and how the enemy responds changes if the enemy is hurt enough to display their injured sprite.

Usually it's nothing too crazy. For example, Clover (hypnotizing +) singing to an Insomnitot will meet its SPARE conditions and have Insomnitot remark that Clover is a good singer, whereas if Clover first injures then sings to an Insomnitot, it will be too distracted to notice Clover's little ditty and will also tell Clover "You need vocal lessons." Or doing 'ACT: Touch' on Cactony will have Clover give Cactony a careful pat in-between two spines, but doing 'FIGHT: ACT: Touch' will have Clover prick their finger on Cactony's bristles. It's a fun little detail that most wouldn't notice because people generally either choose to focus on only sparing or fighting the enemy instead of trying to "play" with the enemy when they're injured.

It does fall apart a bit when you come across Sousborg in the Steamworks in a Neutral/No Mercy Run. Sousborg has a unique gimmick where, in order to meet his SPARE conditions, you have to instruct him on how to cook an egg. Unfortunately, the devs likely weren't expecting someone to do the whole "injure then ACT" deal with Sousborg*. As a result, these injury ACTs don't fit the actions that Clover can choose from the menu. For example, doing 'ACT: Crack,' which would normally have Clover instruct Sousborg to crack the egg on the edge of the pan, will instead display the text "You toss Sousborg's cooking into the garbage." which... has nothing to do with cracking anything.

The ACT menu will still progress as though Clover instructed Sousborg on proper egg preparation if they choose the correct prompts (Crack -> Fry -> Season). Some of the lines for the instructions will even be the same as they were if Clover didn't initially injure Sousborg. Sousborg also doesn't try to fight back either if Clover is ACTing against him. It's just a fun and interesting thing I noticed. Here's some screenshots from the fight, as well as what ACTs yielded which results.

An example of an ACT (Bake) displaying the same exact text that it would if Sousborg wasn't injured and Clover attempted the ACT. No egg was ever cracked, so there is also no "puppy" to throw into the oven.

This is what Sousborg's bullet box looks like when Clover does an "injury ACT." It lasts long enough for him to say his line, but once you press X to progress the text, it disappears and he doesn't try to attack you.

Another example of a selected ACT not displaying the correct action for the prompt chosen. Nothing about choosing 'ACT: Boil' should have Clover toss Sousborg's cooking into the garbage.

All the ACTs from this battle that I noticed. Note that the text in parentheses is what Sousborg responds with. Unlike other enemies where their response directly correlates to what ACT Clover chooses (even if injured), robotic enemies (when injured) will always respond with a random line that doesn't have anything to do with the ACT that Clover chooses. Like they're defaulting to programmed responses. For example, choosing ACT: Bake can have Sousborg say "D../inner _:wiLl be <r-Ready .> Soon." or "Sw/>.eet _or SAVory?" at random (I just put down the first one I noticed when I was fighting him).

*Or perhaps the ACTs that Clover could do were supposed to change entirely if Sousborg was injured, which differs from the ACT options in the other battles. Usually the ACTs stay the same but change how Clover performs those actions. I speculate if this was the intention, then they might've said something along the lines of "Wash" and "Toss," to fit how Clover can either wash Sousborg's oil off their hands or toss his cooking into the garbage.

[thesmokinpossum]

Tonight was wild, I accidentally took the wrong bus and had to wait 20 minutes in the cold for the right one and then there was a problem with the booze vouchers I prepaid and I had to fight hard for them only the realize that the only beer available was lukewarm corona, it was a lot

[kyouka-supremacy]

i do find the current evolution of what proship/antiship means really confusing, even as someone who’s always disliked how the “two sides” debate reduces the nuance of what the conversation actually is. it feels like everyone who identifies as “pro-ship”/“antis dni” assumes antiship is just being against any relationship thats unhealthy or toxic. meanwhile most of the people i’ve seen who id as “anti”/“dni proship” seem to assume proship is ONLY applied to ships between an adult and a minor.

i find the whole debate really fucking stupid because i’ve witnessed the nuance between these two factions with my own eyes. i’ve seen as many “proshippers” who enjoy underaged ships as i’ve seen “proshippers” who just enjoy toxic yaoi. and i’ve seen as many “antis” who hate couples that fight as i’ve seen “antis” who just don’t want to interact with people who ship siblings. theres no genuine consistency among the factions so why the fuck do people hold onto these labels?

speaking to bsd specifically, the discourse around so many of these ships cannot be neatly categorized by either “this ship is pro” or “this ship is anti”. the discussion around sskk is much different than it is around say, atsushi/kyoka, dazai/odasaku, or young dazai/mori. all of these relationships appear in the fandom with different contexts to unpack. trying to divide them between pro and anti would be a nightmare.

having said all this, i will admit i think ur assessment of why someone would say “proship dni” with sskk in their bio is disingenuous, but it speaks to just how meaningless all these labels are. its just as likely someone who’s anti proship in the bsd fandom wants to avoid people who make young dazai/mori content as it is that they think sskk is genuinely healthy, and hates any ship that isnt. ultimately i think if we stopped leaning on pointless labels and just said “hey if you ship adult/minor content dni” our conversations as a fandom would be much more productive. but anyway.

Yeah, you're most definitely right. Those words just don't mean anything anymore.

[katierosefun]

hm maybe i’m going to get flack for this, but i genuinely don’t understand how some self-claimed fic lovers can be the same people who a) pressure and harass writers into producing more and more stories, regardless of their current health or personal lives, b) pressure writers when they aren’t updating fast enough, again, regardless of their current health or personal lives, and c) now, apparently, feed their supposedly beloved writers’ stories into ai bots. it’s becoming incredibly disheartening and clear that some folks don’t care so much about writers and really care exclusively about feeding whatever greedy need they have to just consume.

[actualaster]

"The improvement isn't significant enough for advertising to be able to convey that it's so much better you should definitely spend money on it even if you played the original" isn't the winning argument a bizarre number of graphics-obsessed gamers think it is

[something-about-sunflowers]

Hot take: The people who are STILL insisting that Izzy is homophobic (despite the NUMEROUS instances of the cast/crew/David himself saying that nobody on the show is being targeted for their identity and ‘it’s not “I can’t believe he’s with a guy” but “I can’t believe he’s with THAT guy”‘ ad nauseam) towards Stede, Lucius, or Ed (I don’t believe I’ve seen anyone say anything about Fang or Pete, though I could be wrong, but I’m gonna touch on that in a bit too*)? They’re, unironically, being homophobic by stereotyping the characters and reducing them to just their sexuality.

If you recognize that Stede is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man born into wealth and raised on classist, colonialist ideals. Yes, he’s also traumatized by how he was treated by his father and peers but trauma doesn’t exempt people from blame when participating in, embracing, enforcing, and benefiting from classist and colonialist ideals - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he hates him.

If you only view Stede as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to hate him MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.

If you recognize that Lucius is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man who likely was born into some level of the middle class, given that he can read and write (It’s also possible that he was born into a working class family and he learned to read and write there, but it’s the unlikely option by default. None of the rest of the working class crew know how to read or write save Jim who was raised by a nun and would have been taught by her.), he also avoids doing work which is necessary for the function of the ship that they live on and depend on for their livelihoods and encourages the rest of the crew to do the same with his insubordination. He’s also in an unorthodox relationship that people who have not experienced the concept of consensual non-monogamy would not understand and might interpret as cheating - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he hates him.

If you only view Lucius as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to hate him MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.

If you recognize that Ed is a multifaceted character and you recognize the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a man of color, born into a working class family who worked hard to make a name for himself, to the point where he did not have to endanger himself or his crew to earn their livelihoods. He’s also some level of neurodivergent and understimulated by the environment he’s in (because he excels at his job) which leads him to make irrational and dangerous decisions and puts the lives of himself and his crew in danger. He’s also been making increasingly out of character decisions (corroborated by Fang and Ivan) by the influence of Stede - you will understand that Izzy is not being homophobic towards him just because he’s angry about his relationship with Stede.

If you only view Ed as a gay man and ignore everything else about his character then the only motivation for Izzy to be angry about his relationship with Stede (and only Stede, because he had no qualms about Ed and Calico Jack’s involvement with one another given that he sent Jack to get Ed out of the way of the English, but that’s another post I don’t have the spoons to make) MUST be because he’s a gay man and therefore Izzy MUST be homophobic.

If you IGNORE that Izzy is a multifaceted character and you IGNORE the ways in which he is multifaceted - He’s a gay (we’re not having this argument) working class man who earned his high ranking position on an extremely respectable pirate’s crew. He’s capable and is rightfully angry when he’s looked down on because of his class. He recognizes the importance of ship maintenance and is rightfully angry when those tasks are ignored. He doesn’t understand Lucius’ relationship dynamic and thinks he can use (what he thought was) him cheating on his partner (seriously, how is ‘I’m going to tell the man you were fucking that you were fucking another man’ threatening to out him?) as a motivation to make him do the necessary ship work. He is rightfully angry when his orders are ignored because he’s the highest authority on the ship next to the captains. He is in love with Ed and is jealous because Ed is in love with Stede - you can pretend that Izzy is homophobic because of how he behaves towards the other gay men on the ship.

If you ignore that Izzy has valid reasons for his actions (which does not mean that the actions are all entirely justified) then the only motivation for them MUST be because he’s homophobic.

(* The persistent neglect of Fang and Pete in these discussions is also rooted in homophobia. Fang and Pete are the only explicitly gay men on the ship who don’t, at any point, present ‘femininely’** and therefore don’t fall so easily into the bubble of the stereotypical gay man and so they get ignored in these discussions because they aren’t suitable to push the narrative that Izzy only interacts negatively towards ‘feminine’/’gnc’** gay men.)

(** The insistence that Stede, Lucius, and Ed are in any way, at any point, LEGITIMATELY presenting ‘femininely’ or are ‘gender non-conforming’ is ALSO rooted in homophobia - and I’d argue a touch of racism via Ed’s hair and beard as they relate to his indigenous roots. The assumption/association with those three being considered feminine comes from their identity as gay men. That is homophobia.

Stede wears men’s clothes. He wears RICH men’s clothes. Bright, colorful, patterned fabrics are worn by RICH men in the 1700s - if you want to argue that, say, king George presented femininely or was gnc because of the way he dressed be my guest but you won’t because he doesn’t and he isn’t. Lucius wears men’s clothes. His clothes are perfectly at place amongst the rest of the crew’s clothes. Ed wears men’s clothes. His leather is in direct relation to gay leather-men which is a hyper-masculine aesthetic in the same way drag is - typically - a hyper-feminine aesthetic. His appreciation for Stede’s clothes comes from the wealth and privilege that centers around the easy possession of those types and quantities of fabrics.

None of them behave in ways that are stereotypically feminine. Having and expressing emotions is not a uniquely or inherently feminine trait. Caring for and maintaining your appearance is not a uniquely or inherently feminine trait. Even if they were, Izzy also does those things. Izzy frequently expresses his emotions - yes, anger, a stereotypically ‘masculine’ emotion, but others as well. He also puts a great deal of care into his appearance, aside from the materials, the only difference between his and Stede’s outfits are the type of shoes and the presence of a jacket. If those traits are to be considered inherently feminine then it is disingenuous to not apply that label to Izzy as well.)

[dreamlogic]

aye can i get a fuckin uuuhhhh

break. on my burger

[lycankeyy]

Feel like such a traitor that there's a fnf song with lyrics that makes me more insane than silly billy now /lhj. Like Silly Billy definitely makes me more Emotional I don't think anything can beat that but fuckkkk Alomnesia. Fuckkkk