#you can make points without being hostile towards people who might like something

[coralcatsea]

You ever get the feeling you can't critique or express dislike of a ship (even civilly) because people will come after you, but you just have to put up with other people outright bashing your favourite ships because they have some self-righteous fake "moral" excuse?

Or you can't express mild dislike of a character because people will freak out, but you have to deal with them straight up bashing your favourite characters because it's "trendy" and if it bothers you in any way you must be an annoying preteen. Your love of the character is automatically dismissed as thirst/simping/immature. (I've seen people say these things in posts, though it hasn't happened to me specifically).

I try not to say negative things about ships or characters because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but then I think about how much anti stuff there is for what I like and I just think, "Why shouldn't I get a turn to speak freely?"

I at least wouldn't be outright mean, but expressing dislike for something can be very cathartic and yet fandom is so quick to shut it down by acting like you shouldn't express negativity for anything ever, then turn around and constantly, insistently hate everything you love while hiding behind excuses.

The double standard gets old.

Let's make this an even playing field here. Just be honest, say that it's not your cup of tea, and go. 😅

[scientia-rex]

Think I’m about done with tumblr. I don’t know how many aesthetic posts I have queued, so you might see more, but honestly, the thought of being on here makes me anxious and the amount of hours I have spent arguing in my head with people I blocked for being Just So Wrong have made it untenable. It’s interesting, because if I were an influencer—if that was how I aimed to make money—this is when the increased engagement with my content would start to feel like I’d accomplished something. But I’m not an influencer, and this takes mental energy away from things that make me happy instead of angry and sad.

I can live without an audience. Social media will continue to chug along without me, offering some people important things while also amplifying fear and isolation. I’ve found that I can keep myself from opening the app now that I’ve gotten out of the habit, and I’m not acquiring any new fun bullshit from people who are—forgive me—largely a lot younger than me, and whose perspectives are often not valuable given just what wildly different points in life we’re at. I don’t have so much free time that I can afford to spend any of it on Internet randos who want to take out their fear and pain on others or consolidate their sense of self by hostility towards outgroup members. Tumblr makes it very difficult to limit interaction—intentionally, I assume—and this also limits usability for people with larger followings.

I appreciate the friends I made along the way but the way this app works, the flood of dumbass notifications drowns you out, so I’m calling it. I had fun for the last 12 years. I’m done, though.

[dhiatzs]

A rant about Heimerdinger

Heimerdinger is one of my favorite characters in Arcane. I like his teacher side, his scientist side, his nice and well-meaning side and especially the approach the show gives of his immortality. I also like how his character flaws come and bite him in season 1, leaving him without anything but the promise of worse and better happening in the rest of the story.

A lot of people in the fandom expect him to have a comeuppance because of all his wrongdoings, in season 2. I fully agree with that. I think I will grow bored of Heimerdinger if he doesn't get some character developement and some charges for what he's not been doing this whole time.

However, in some way, I can't help but feel a little skeptical about the way a lot of people in the fandom feel like they straight up hate him. I guess I'll gloss over the arguments. Warning though: I've seen the show only a couple of times, and I am not the most invested in it, so some of my points might not be correct or might miss something. I've also not read many posts about Arcane, and my English is not the best since I'm not a native English speaker. All of these are just some thoughts I have and I try to translate the best I can.

About Ekko being way too nice to Heimerdinger even though he is a councelor and responsible for Zaun's state:

well, that's a mixed bag. On one hand, yes, I think this scene quickly gloss over some coldness and hostility Ekko could have felt towards Heimerdinger. If Ekko acts angry toward Caitlyn in the same episode, why was he so neutral with someone who is in a higher position in the hierarchy? It doesn't make sense, and to be fair I'm not defending that it was not treated in the way I imagined would be the most accurate for Ekko's character.

But at the same time, if you take a look at the whole context, I kinda see where it's coming from.

a/ Right before Ekko is found by Heimerdinger, Ekko had accepted the idea to negociate with the council. Only the fight with Jinx and Marcus' betrayal prevent Caitlyn, Vi and him from doing what they want; everything goes wrong, and it appears Ekko lost everything he tried to accomplish in the last hours. So… why would he consider bad news to meet a councelor, Heimerdinger especially ─ a scientist ─, who is willing to help? In this whole disaster, it is at least something he can take.

b/ Plus, when they meet, Ekko doesn't have a reason to think of the implication. He has to look for a solution, and he has the beginning of a solution with Heimerdinger, a person he didn't have a chance to meet some time ago. So he takes it.

c/ Also, Ekko doesn't have the context a viewer has. Yes, he knows what state Zaun is in, yes the enforcers are his enemies, but if you look at his actions in the course of the season… Ekko doesn't fight against Piltover. He fights against Silco. Ekko saved the people Silco has hurt. Ekko himself says his people were lost "some" to the enforcers, "most" to Silco. He believes Silco to be responsible for Piltover's violence towards Zaun, because to Piltover, Zaun as a whole appears corrupted by Silco. Once again, Ekko doesn't have the big picture.

d/ Since Vi convinced Ekko that Caitlyn is sincere if misguided, and since he accepted from Caitlyn herself that the cycle of violence needs to stop and Piltover and Zaun need to find an agreement, accepting Heimerdinger is quite the logical next step. And sure, it means that Heimerdinger gets a privilege he didn't deserve by actively doing something good himself, but I believe it to be a good start to develop Heimerdinger. If Heimerdinger's ignorance was confronted at the moment he meets Ekko, the development would have been weak and unsatisfying, given the few number of episodes left in season 1 after that. Season 2 has way more time to develop what he did wrong and how he could fix what he did. Plus, and this is my last point with that…

e/ Narratively-wise, putting a confrontation there would have been not only useless, but just a free stomp on Heimerdinger with no possible payoff. Think about it: Heimerdinger has been nothing but powerless during the course of the whole first season. His authority has been direspected times and times again, he's been excluded from the council's plans and agreements, until ultimately being pushed out of the council. Heimerdinger already lost. If there wasn't some positivity with him and Ekko, the end of season 1 would have been depressing to watch; but they're a light of hope, in the end. Sure, it isn't a duo we expected to see, but Arcane doesn't play fair with characters, it just shows the logical course of actions of broken people misunderstanding each other. And I think it's doing a pretty good job at it.

About Heimerdinger not doing anything in two hundred years to realize Zaun's situation and help it:

yes, actually. I agree with this argument, Heimerdinger had numerous occasions to see what was going on, and he didn't take any of them. But where I don't agree with most of the fandom is that this is a part of the character I actually like (given we like the flaws of our favorite characters just as much as their qualities): his heavy, heavy blindspot about Zaun. I think this is the reason why I think Heimerdinger isn't a good person; but to me, it isn't a proof of him being a bad person. It is just the proof of him being extremely coherent.

Also, just like with how Ekko reacts to Heimerdinger, there are so many contextual evidences that makes it make sense.

a/ I feel like there's some kind of math being made in the fandom where Heimerdinger equals Piltover. Which symbolicaly makes a lot of sense: Heimerdinger is this brilliant scientist whose renown you hear about times and times again. Heimerdinger founded Piltover, and the city echoes the character: immortal, wealthy, clean on himself, popular. The relation between Zaun and Piltover echoes the way we know Heimerdinger interacts with people: because of his immortality, the ones who surround him decay, and he outlives them; and he doesn't empathize with them, just like Piltover doesn't empathize with Zaun.

But as a whole, I think Piltover is also Heimerdinger's safety bubble. We know Heimerdinger has seen awful things in his past, and created Piltover firstly to escape the warmongering of mages. Under his watch, progress is made slow and careful. Under his watch, the city is some kind of wealthy peaceful place, where when something bad happens ─ the most minor thing, truly; say, a bunch of teenagers from the Undercity stealing from an Academy student ─ someone must pay. Heimerdinger is seen enjoying celebrations, concert, wonders of this kind. Heimerdinger behaves like a child in a world where he made sure any disturbance is avoided for him. His fluffy cute design and his happy-go-lucky nature are just further proof of this. We could argue that all of this is a logical reason on its own why Heimerdinger doesn't try and help Zaun: he cares about Piltover, and Piltover first. None of these things are a bad thing in themselves, but it becomes bad when you realize everything that flows from it.

b/ To support this point, one interesting thing about Heimerdinger is his ego. He sees himself as an authority figure, someone reliable ─ a teacher, even! He is wise, he is old, he keep things stable. Piltover is a city shining with pride and privilege (no pun intended). None of this leaves a door open to change. Which is pretty ironic, right? Because science should be about change, but Heimerdinger isn't. Because of his immortality, he must be a moral backbone, he must not lose his way. And since what he's been has been serving Piltover for two hundred years now, you can't make him change his mind. He's a stubborn creature, but truly, is there any character who can fully get where he is coming from? I find this awfully interesting that what he lacks is a person in the same position as him. Because the only person he can respect in this context is himself, even though it leads to permanent self-satisfaction. A permanent feeling of thinking you know better, when you actually… don't. But who could prove that?

c/ I think Piltover's council has to be mentioned. The council is made of seven people and Heimerdinger is only one of these people. This oligarchy has been present for generations; the principle allows every case presented to be examined through several nuances, which leads to debates and votes. Its core definition prevents tyrannical decisions. Sure, corruption within can lead to this instance being actually a disguised despotism… the irony is that corruption indeed runs through the council, but Heimerdinger isn't a part of it and isn't aware of it. And you can guess that since Heimerdinger is the founder of Piltover and is a part of said council, it means that he accepted the suggestion of an oligarchy. The people in the council have interests in mind that aren't purely about science: economy, politics, business… all logical angles to use to take care of a city whose importance is known across the world. Heimerdinger is described as having his only experience be science. So Zaun's situation hasn't been fixed by Heimerdinger, sure… but not by the council either. Their failure to consider Zaun's situation is even discussed in episode 4; Caitlyn's mother even argues that the Undercity can't be controlled. Plus, Marcus hide a lot of crucial information from the council, because he has to accept Silco's conditions in order not to compromise himself. The council thinks that Zaun's situation is being handled thanks to the enforcers.

And at the same time, there is such a complacency in the concept of a council made with privileged families. It is formed with elites, and this elites have an elitist view about politics, which would be better considered with a sociological approach. But this is simply the extension of Heimerdinger's wish to keep everything safe and sanitized for himself and the city. A logical outcome, which actually makes everything Heimerdinger's fault, but at the same time, which makes it logical he doesn't realize it.

This kind of is the whole point of Heimerdinger's character, isn't it…? Everything he does is flawed because he fails to see past his fears.

To conclude this (already too long) post, one thing I haven't mentioned is that I think what leads people to dislike Heimerdinger as a whole is ambiguity. The fact that we don't know yet if the writers are aware that Heimerdinger isn't a perfect person; the fact that he has such a nice presentation which distract people from the fact he's not reliable nor doing as well as you could think. The fact that all the ways in which he means well are not enough to repair what he has failed to accomplish. The fact that he is presented as a solution while being one of the cores of the problem at the same time. Believe me, like I said, I want him to get a comeuppance. But I think his flaws are as likeable as the web of flaws linking every character of this show to the others.

[brekkie-e]

Sometimes I just. Dont like the internet. I can't seem to escape seeing the Astarion's Correct Path to Sexual Healing argument no matter what tags I block.

I don't want to actually wade in to it, but I just want to say that there could stand to be a LOT less hostility being spewed about when the topic is that close to many people's hearts. There doesn't need to be a more "morally" correct version of healing for him. He is in the MIDDLE of recovery. Not at the end of it. That chapter is up to interpretation to each player.

It is incredibly unkind to automatically accuse people of infantalizing him for preferring a more ace route. It does not HAVE to be infantalizing. Astarion continuing to explore his needs and boundaries and discovering that he doesn't need sex and it doesn't give him the emotional intimacy he craves can be an empowering aspect of self acceptance. That can be growth. A sign of his continued journey towards autonomy. He has spent, unironically, a lifetimee having sex. If even at the end of the day, he comes to realize it's simply disinteresting to him- that's a valid route to recovery. That doesn't make him broken. That is without even mentioning the reality some people do not go back to "baseline" as they heal. Sometimes our baseline changes because of our experiences. He may discover as time goes on that no matter how much he tries, it never stops triggering negative feelings in him. I have my own personal experiences with this, and I think there's something very powerful in accepting yourself for who you are now, and not feeling like you have an obligation to "fix yourself" and get back to a version of you that no longer exists.

The flipside?

Astarion learning to love being sexually intimate with his partner does not inherently mean that the player is ignoring his desire to "not be seen sexually." Astarion at multiple points expresses an interest in trying it out. It doesn't always go well, but it's his choice to pursue it and that should be respected. He, just like irl sex abuse survivors, should be supported as they try to create a new relationship with it. He shouldn't be discouraged from having his own desires. Being able to take something that was used to hurt you and create a new and positive relationship with it because you found someone you love and trust that is patient with you is a BEAUTIFUL story. It is narratively satisfying and also a reflection of real growth as well. Telling people that they're somehow mistreating the character for wanting that for them is also unnecessarly hostile.

There is also a secret, third option. His relationship with it might remain fluid and change constantly through out his life. Healing is not linear. His interest in it may fluctuate. His response to it might fluctuate. He may go through periods of not wanting it again. He might one day decide he wants to try it again. It's not set in stone.

All I am saying is that there SHOULD be room in this fandom for all three of these truths to exist. It shouldn't be necessary to shout from the roof tops how much he loves sex to prove a point to people who think differently than you. They may have their own reasons for resonating with him in a different way. Flipside, it is entirely uncalled for to attack people for wanting him to be able to enjoy it again.

I guess what I am trying to say is make space for and be kind to your fellow fan.

Also, Astarion has WAY more trauma than simply his relationship to sex. So like. Maybe it's time we moved past this topic collectively and discuss the many other ways his life has been affected by Cazador.

[bellabrady]

Hey! I want to say absolutely no hate here, you can think whatever you want about characters, I just want to make some points for you to consider! If it makes you change your mind, cool! If it doesn’t, well that follow button doesn’t need my finger on it since we clearly have different views :)

I am not going to be commenting on Chim begins since I haven’t watched it in a while, but I just finished rewatching Hen Begins and was discussing Bobby Begins Again with someone, so here we go.

In Hen Begins, Tommy is never hostile towards her. He doesn’t defend her from the captain, but he’s also a young gay man who is probably terrified of that same hate being turned to him. When Hen is doing her speech on the fire truck most of the crew has tightened jaws and seems mad, but Tommy seems relaxed and thoughtful. And at the end of the episode he tells Hen: “We would’ve done a sweep of the area eventually, but eventually would’ve been too late. Good job.” with a smile and then proceeds to shake her hand and pat her on the shoulder. It is also heavily implied that he was one of the people who left a complaint about the captain and his treatment. Everything about this episode screams a man who was keeping his head low and trying to slip under the radar, not a man trying to be hateful.

In Bobby Begins Again, they throw him a nice going away party. I don’t know about you, but I don’t tend to buy assholes who are rude to me a cake.

Then later Chimney is able to call him up and ask a favor that Tommy does without complaint, which makes it seem like they’re on good terms.

And in the most recent episodes, he steals a helicopter and lies to higher-ups, something that could easily get him fired and cause him to lose everything. Once again, I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t risk my job and my life (they were on a dangerous mission after all) for people I’m not good friends with.

Lastly, Buck does not strike me as the type to date someone who doesn’t like his friends, his family

Again, no hate, just giving you my observations

thank you for being so nice about this!

i do disagree, however. tommy was 100% hostile to hen in hen begins. ('new york bitchiness is a compliment?' for example, or him throwing gear at her feet so she'll tidy it up and barely sparing her a glance)

i also am simply not a fan of giving characters' past actions depth when it's very clear that back then, they weren't written with that depth in mind. i can promise you the writers did not write hen begins & chimney begins while thinking of tommy as a gay, closeted man. (yes, i'm aware there was that one jacob twilight joke but personally i think you might be giving the writers a little too much credit if you think that was planned forshadowing or something. it was just a silly scene)

furthermore, even if we do run with the whole 'tommy was afraid to speak up because he was afraid and closeted'...standing up against misogyny and racism has nothing to do with being closeted, since neither of those things are related to sexuality, so standing up against those things won't make anyone assume that you're gay. tommy being closeted isn't an excuse, in my opinion.

i'm also aware that the characters have forgiven tommy but i just...don't really care about that because in this show, everyone forgives everyone, constantly. buck forgave his parents and they have a good relationship now — that doesn't mean i have to forgive the buckley parents now too.

as for your last point, i'd argue taylor definitely wasn't the biggest fan of buck's friends and family and they weren't a huge fan of her either. but i also don't think that really matters here, since it's been established that tommy is good with hen and chim, so buck has no reason to assume there's bad blood. it once again boils down to the simple fact that i, as a viewer, do not have to forgive a character's actions simply because other characters did.

anyway, once again thank you for not being rude about this and i hope you have a nice day :)

(i hope my response doesn't come across as rude either)

[winterandwords]

For the writers living with chronic illness and physical disability

I'm going to get into writing and posting this while my brain is still half asleep and before I change my mind because it feels too personal and I don't do that online. Please excuse any typos.

Comments on a recent post of mine about wanting to write but not being able to got me thinking. I'm chronically ill and physically disabled. I have been for most of my adult life (I'm 42 now). It's been progressing slowly throughout that time and more rapidly over the last few years. It is what it is.

I don't talk about it in detail on the internet because it's impossible for me (not saying other people can't do this) to accurately represent the full experience in a way I feel comfortable with while still engaging enjoyably with an interest-based community, which is what I'd rather be doing here.

Also, people get fucking weird about it. I have no patience for *pat on the head* "well done for existing" consolation-prize pity bullshit or inspirational cripple bullshit. Equally, I have no patience for being dragged into a who-has-it-worse competition that I'm never going to take part in because I don't see the world that way or a what-about-me-ism-fuelled derailment session.

This shit is complicated. I'm on Tumblr to write and to talk about writing. But if I'm also quietly dealing with all that other stuff alongside making up some guys (gender non-specific) in my head and putting them in situations, I know some of you are too.

And you know what? It's hard. I know it is. We live in an inaccessible world and so many parts of that world and so many people in it can be brutally hostile towards chronic illness and physical disability in ways that still shake me to my core when I encounter them. It no longer surprises me, but it still fucks me up on the regular.

But listen. YOU ARE CREATING. You're doing something huge and worthy and valuable and fucking difficult. You're carrying the weight of all that other shit and YOU ARE STILL CREATING. It might take you longer than you'd like and you might be doing it in ways that are far from ideal, but you are still doing it.

You might feel excluded from communities and events and conversations, not necessarily because anyone is intentionally excluding you, but because you have no option other than to do the sick-person version of things and it's impossible not to feel like you're on the outside looking in sometimes when that's your experience.

The point of all this is that I want you to know with my whole heart that YOU ARE SEEN. Your strength and your determination and your sadness and your rage and your pain and your more-able days and your rock-bottom days are all seen.

Your challenges and your messiness and your perfectionism and your complexity and your dichotomies and the unrealistic standards and demands you have internalised from existing in an ableist society are witnessed and felt, widely and deeply, and with a solidarity unshakable enough to hang bridges from.

I'm not going to tell you that you're good enough, because it should go without saying. I am going to tell you that you're not alone, because that does need to be said. You are so much more than a conditionally-acceptable exception and you deserve to reach and exist beyond the boundaries of the small boxes you get shoved into without your consent or permission. YOU ARE SO MUCH MORE.

Alright? Alright. Keep going 💜

In case this gains any sort of traction and people start replying to it or reblogging it, I want to make something very clear. I am also neurodivergent. That is not what this post is about. I also have lifelong experience of mental illness and trauma. That is not what this post is about. This post is about chronic illness and physical disability and it's for people who are living with those specific things, whether or not they're also living with the other things.

So, in the most loving way, if you have something to say that isn't about that, this isn't the place to say it. Thanks.

[strwberri-milk]

☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆

Heyo there!!!

Soooo how ya doin??? Great??? Great!!! Anyway, I have request. You can do this prompt for any genshin men but bonus points if it's Kaeya or Diluc. Why?? Bcs this pompt is... what if reader had an older protective sister who's like Panty from Panty and Stockin??? Basically, she's very extroverted and playfully mean towards reader as she spouts insults at her but she's never serious about them even if it seems like she is. Although she can seem mean to reader, she can also be all like:

"Ugh, you're just the cutest and smartest little shit in the world!" *starts peppering kisses on readers face as reader groans.*

And

"Do you know how lovable you are right now? Seriously, everyone one should have a sibling like you!"

And she's very protective and hostile towards readers s/o but she eventually warms up to them.

Anyway, thank you!!!

☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆-☆

ive combined the two a bit bc. i think theyre kinda smilar in some regard!! :D

The two of them didn't know what to do when confronted with such a...strong personality. Of course they both know what to do from a social etiquette standpoint but they almost don't know when to interject in conversation.

Neither of them bat an eye when it comes to the insults since they're used to that from each other, especially if they're post reconciliation. I see the two of them as having a "hostile" relationship that's really all just jokes at the end of the day.

They also both understand that there's a good chance they're going to be ridiculed for a while by your sibling because of how protective they are. To them, they're glad that you have someone like that in your life taking care of you. They will indeed do their best to get on the good side of your sibling, knowing that if they want to be with you then your sibling needs to like them.

Diluc might find your sibling a little too overbearing for him and his social battery drains quickly, but he's very good at hiding the issue at hand. He'll stay quiet and nod along, adding comments when he has something he wants to say but for the most part he's content with just sitting off to the side and just listening.

Diluc is a little easier to win over your sibling's favour. He's polite and charming and he knows exactly what to say. Unfortunately, your sibling clocks this as a result of him being a wine tycoon so he's going to have to prove that he's genuine with what he's saying.

He manages to win your sibling over in a quiet moment of intimacy between you two. Your sibling snuck into your house to surprise you after knowing you had a rough morning. They were about to jump out and surprise you when they heard Diluc's voice lowly speaking to you, comforting you earnestly and peppered with soft kisses. Resisting the urge to gag, they snuck back out of your house and gave you the seal of approval the next day.

Kaeya's a little better suited to your sibling. I like to imagine he's really quite timid when he's by himself/with people he's quite comfortable with so your sibling is definitely draining his social battery and limited extroversion. He can recharge with alcohol but it does have its limits.

When the three of you are all together your sibling definitely ribs him a little harder since he easily parries the jabs politely. He doesn't want to make any mean jokes to them without really knowing their boundaries, which might at first make your sibling think he's a bit of a wuss. Not only that, but his silver tongue makes them think he's a conman, not really trusting him with your heart for the fear that he'll just turn out to be a playboy.

He wins them over when someone starts blatantly trying to hit on him. Your sibling was expecting him to entertain the flirts before brushing them off, not Kaeya just fully refusing to look at them and only doing so to match the challenger with a hard glare. When they scurry off your sibling is treated to Kaeya's very embarrassing ramble about how much he loves you, ending with a very messy kiss to really top things off.

[wolfsbane-666]

I noticed quite a few people dislike Kit for the way she is acting, which I can understand let's face it she is a little shit. But that's exactly what I love about her.

One of the biggest problems in fiction is that characters tend to be too perfect. Especially queer ones. In so many instances, queer characters only have very few flaws that are easily overlooked or have none at all.

But not Kit. Kit's flaws are right there.

She is cocky, arrogant, confrontational, impulsive, hostile, stubborn, and so on.

But that's a good thing. Flaws are incredibly important for a character. Not only will nothing tell you more about a character and their past than their flaws, but a character without flaws is stuck in place. They can't develop because they don't have a reason to change.

Something Kit is starting to do, because of the events in episode 3 (I made a post about that too if you are interested)

She was still somewhat of a bitch to Elora, but they had a heart-to-heart and in the end, it was Kit, who gave Elora the confidence she needed to save Graydon. And I don't just mean Kit telling Elora about performing the growing seed spell successfully, but the way Kit made it clear she believed Elora could save Graydon.

If the one person, who was constantly hostile toward you, suddenly tells you that you can do something it has a huge effect. Because you can 100% trust that they actually believe in you.

Kit still has a long way to go. No one just changes overnight.

But if the writing team keeps up the good work and realistic portrayal they have shown so far, I'm sure that we are going to see a change in Kit's cocky behavior.

Here's a fact: No one is born cocky or arrogant. It's something that develops over time. For example through a history of being right or having frequent, competitive success.

Like sparing with your best friend and beating them basically all your life and being right when you say that you will keep beating them.

Just to make it clear, I'm not trying to blame Kit's flaws on Jade nor am I trying to defend Kit's actions.

Kit blaming Boorman for their situation was completely uncalled for as was the way she was acting toward everyone the whole time.

What I am going to defend, however, is her suggestion to kill Graydon. And before you yell at me through your screen, try to see the situation from Kit's point of view:

Her brother, who she had a fight with, has been kidnapped and could be tortured or dead any minute for all she knows. Every second they are not moving forward they are wasting time. Especially now that they have lost their horses.

If they can't magically heal Graydon, he will only slow them down until he eventually tries to kill them. Keep in mind that Willow had made no move to reveal that he might have a way to help Graydon until Elora explicitly asked him.

So for Kit, who had asked Willow directly if he could do the same thing he did earlier (again Willow didn't mention that there is something they could try to help Graydon), there were only two options. Either leave Graydon chained to the floor so he can suffer a lot of pain and turn into a monster that will try to hunt them down or grant him the quickest and most merciful death they could manage to give him.

Like Jade said later in the episode: Kit was right.

Kit was just the only one who had the guts to actually say what had to be done sooner or later.

And that's something no one can blame her for. In fact, speaking the truth no one wants to hear takes great courage and is something I will always respect. Even if I don't like what I'm hearing.

[overclockedopossum]

I'm just going to start unfollowing people who post dogwhistles for "you are morally obligated to vote for the genocide guy".

I'm sick of being told having zero standards for anyone as long as they're DNC-endorsed is "playing the long game"

I'm sick being told a group that is actively making things worse (re: genocide, pied piper strategy among others) is an "imperfect ally".

I'm sick of lib-left misinformation and conspiracy theories about trump (immediately deciding project 2025 is his manifesto just because a right-wing think tank published it, the idea that he's anti-vaccine, the idea that he'll somehow further intensify the genocide in gaza).

I'm sick of feeling like when I point out that almost everything said about Trump is a half-truth that might be taken as an endorsement of him when there are a lot of very strong valid criticisms mostly being left on the table.

I'm sick of watching Liberals making arguments that I know actual Trump voters will be able to easily dismiss without one iota of doubt.

I'm sick of people who went back to brunch in 2021 telling other, frequently less able people that they have an obligation to physically protest alongside voting against their conscience.

I'm sick of the idea that failing to vote for Biden betrays "privilege" when most of the recent anger at Biden comes from marginalised groups, particularly USAmerican Muslims despite Trump's active hostility towards them.

But most of all I'm sick of the fact that the main case being made is a negative one.

I'm sick of people talking about Biden as if he's universally bad and Trump is just worse. And ok, maybe it's because saying "I can excuse genocide as long as there's student loan forgiveness" is too obviously morally bankrupt. But the reason we have Trump, the reason we already had a term of him, arguably the reason the supreme court is skewed right-wing, is the DNC "pied piper" strategy. It's because as far as the DNC is concerned, it's more important for the republicans to be bad than for them to be good.

Every post that says "you are morally obligated to vote for biden because of how bad trump is" actively reinforces that pied piper strategy.

Whenever people say "look, the DNC candidate is terrible but the other guy is even worse" they're saying that as long as the DNC can keep promoting right-wing extremists with carefully-crafted "attack" ads, they'll keep voting blue no matter who.

And I'm sick of that.

Every post about something genuinely good that Biden has done - not just an empty gesture or fiddling around the edges - is a drop in the ocean of "things should actually be made better".

Every post about how much worse Trump is, every roundabout analogy, every trolley problem that neglects to mention you'd be voting for a group that helps tie people to the track, and frankly every denial of the efficacy of single-issue voting - they're all drops in the ocean of "please keep doing brinksmanship, when is it my turn on the track".

I'm not telling anyone how to vote here, but I'll say this. If you are in the USA and in all senses are able to do so, you should vote for someone you think would be an actively good president. You should vote for representatives you think would be actively good representatives. And you should vote on ballot measures as well according to appropriate research on those, because they can be hugely important but hell if I know what's going on with them. But what you should absolutely not do is keep the door closed on third parties by voting for someone you think wouldn't be a good president, just because there are worse options.

And when people care strongly about issues that they're right to care about maybe your ire should be directed at the politicians who have let them down, rather than them for daring to be let down.

[azhdakha]

Gatekeeping decolonization and indigenous identity

This is something that I, an Indigenous Tatar person, a woman, has been struggling probably since I started my way of reconnecting with my ethnic identity. It hurted to realize that I was deprived of it, deprived of culture, and got it replaced by a colonial one without even knowing it.

But once I got into my ethnic cultural spaces, there awaited another pain - "You're not enough to be a Tatar".

You're not Muslim, you cannot be a Tatar.

You're an atheist, you cannot be Tatar. You're a feminist, you cannot be a Tatar woman.

You are dating outside your ethnicity, you cannot be a Tatar woman.

You're an LGBT, you cannot be a Tatar.

Blatant antisemitism or racism towards your friends and dear ones.

You're a disgrace, a Mankurt, an Urys* doormat, Urys* s*ut, kafir, the list goes on...

You will hear this from your own people. You will hear this from people of other Turkic ethncities, you will hear this from other Muslims. From YOUR OWN. Not from colonisers and racists. I suppose one can imagine how much pain does it cause.

Years of running into such attitude and treatment caused several questions to pop up in my head. How are we supposed to decolonize and preserve our culture, if we push out anyone, who doesn't fit into a narrow category with the list of requirements? Does it even make sense to gatekeep a person from their right for their own ethnic identity because of not following a certain religion and a strict conservative traditional lifestyle in modern reality? Do we expect our nation to survive and not become an archaic thing that colonizers has been labeling us for ages, if we ostracize and kick out anyone who dares to choose a lifestyle? When I began to learn about decolonization and it's importance, the first thing I came to know was that it's first and foremost goal, it's whole purpose is freeing yourself from being forced to do or not to do something. Forced to live a certain way. What I cannot fathom is what is the whole point of decolonialism if it's not liberation and acception of diversity, if it means replacing one kind of coercion and humiliation with another one.

Now before I move to another form of this issue, I want to note that I strongly oppose any kind of Islamophobia. I believe that this might happen in any religious group. My nation, Tatars, happen to be majority-Muslim, this is why I will be talking about religious fanatism in the context of Islam.

"Tatars wouldn't be there if not Islam". It is a fact that Islam was a huge part and a huge contribution to the development of our nation and culture. Yet, the fanatics seem to reduce the whole nation to being Muslim and equalize being Tatar ro being a Muslim, erasing the difference between ethnicity and religion almost completely. Which is also something I cannot comprehend, because it contradicts the factual concepts of both. It simply doesn't work like that. Well, other than the fact that these same people are viewing people of other religious confessions and beliefs as a lower caste. Is it the justice and decolonization we're all fighting for? I think I'll pass.

Now I don't think I need to explain what's wrong with the requirement to follow the patriarchal, lgbt-phobic mindset and lifestyle. It makes things worse that my ethnic community is rather small. The circle of people that I can reconnect and practice my own culture is almost non-existent. And every time I get into one I expect hostility and ostracization, a need to prove again and again that I deserve to be accepted as some second-class Tatar.

I know that being Tatar is inseparable from what who I am, my experience, my perosnality, my idenity. This is why I believe that one can be Tatar and be and atheist. One can be Tatar and be an LGBT-person. One can be Tatar and be a feminist. One can be Tatar and be a leftist.

So I only hope that my confession will have at least a little bit of use. Will it be other people who have a shared experience, or the subject will finally be brought up in Tatar and Turkic communities. Or maybe I'll be screaming into the void once again.

[hellsvestibule]

One of the things I keep encountering w symbolism and metaphor dislikers who like think anything non literal happening on screen or in a book is “too confusing” is it’s like. Sometimes all you have to do is say the thing out loud and you’ll realize it’s already a euphemism in your lexicon you readily understand.

Do you get mad at people who use Heart metaphors when talking about love? You’re not literally carving your gushing blood organ out and handing it to someone when you talk about giving your heart to people. Pointing it out as a silly metaphor is something like, 4th graders do. But beyond Heart metaphors a lot of people become resistant to symbolism or things which require Interpretation even if it’s obvious bare minimum stuff. “Being a bug that’s sooo wacky” omg Jeff from 9th grade Honors English that’s amazing, I’m sure when you were sick last month and your mom asked if you had a bug you laughed at her and said that’s ridiculous mother why don’t you just say I’m sick you pretentious cunt

Like people are so hostile towards surrealist art which sucks bc surrealism is so -fun.- first and foremost, putting objects where they seemingly don’t belong and asking for you to interpret what this might have meant to the artist, or whether it’s pure nonsense, is -fun.- it’s not pretentious it’s the bare minimum of fantastical whimsy that will get you through life without the humorless insistence everything has to make perfect and obvious sense at first glance

“ Why use metaphors instead of just stating the mundane thing. Why are you making me interpret things I’m too stupid” I don’t think most people who say this are actually stupid, I think they’re willfully ignorant bc they’re too embarrassed by sincerity and being shown to expend too much effort caring about art or literature. The answer is literally just. Bc metaphors are spicy. When done well they pack a lot of punch. Putting surreal symbolic imagery in something can make you pause and think. I sometimes just want to slam someone who thinks like this in front of some random basic ass Magritte painting like one of the sky doves and be like, what is it about this that scares you rather than delights you. How can you look at something which is so obviously full of whimsy and feel like it’s made in an attempt to condescend to you. Why do you need to be told overtly how to feel about things.

[chekov-in-a-dress]

Would love to hear more of your thoughts about the Iso and Sova relationship ask. Doesn’t matter what ship if any.

Okay so for some reason tumblr refused to notify me of this message but HEY that's fine bc now we have more info on Iso and while I haven't looked into him directly, I have run into him in game and of course there's the new cinematic (plus the little short with Iso, Omen and Cypher) which FED ME SO WELL

So let's look at this again, shall we.

I can definitely see Sova as initially very hostile towards Iso because we know that Sova is very protective of the other members of the protocol and having someone straight up hunting a member of his team would definitely trigger his protective instincts.

We also know that Sova hates both secrets and being left out of things so if Cypher (and/or Omen) didn't involve him from the start so upon finding out about the whole situation, he would've likely been very unhappy about that lmao.

So in my head it went something like: Cypher finds out about Iso being tasked to kill Omen (I'm gonna take a wild guess here and say that Cypher is well aware of the organisation Iso works for already and that is probably how it popped up on his radar), Cypher informs Brimstone about it, who consults Sova and Viper, probably Sage as well.

Now I don't know if that was explained somewhere but I have no clue how Cypher managed to convince Iso to not try and kill Omen but instead turn against his employer and join Valorant.

Based on the short cinermatic we got it could be that Cypher told Iso Omen isn't like whatever monstrous threat he was made out to be and Iso confirmed that by watching Omen tend to his bonsai trees??? Which doesn't make that much sense to me tbh like bad people can have cute hobbies too? :'D

I think it's more likely that Cypher had some dirt on Iso's employer and managed to convince Iso that their objectives are far more malicious than Valorant's.

Which would indicate that Iso has a somewhat decent moral compass for a hitman lmao. In that regard he might get along with Sova, considering Sova himself is willing to kill if ordered to / if it's what he deems necessary.

Anyway whatever the reason behind Iso switching sides, I feel like Sova is not the kind of person to just go 'alright ur one of us now' and just drop his suspicions. I do think he's still very, very wary of Iso and definitely keeps a close eye on him whenever possible.

But since Sova cares a great deal about Omen - with or without shipping the two - he doesn't hesitate to use whatever intel Iso has to help Omen in his hunt for the past he doesn't remember. Which is where the cinematic comes in.

So I do think at that point Iso and Sova are working together well enough but Sova definitely doesn't trust him. Though judging from Sova's character he's willing to give Iso a chance to prove himself and earn his trust. ♥

And since we all know that I'm a slut for shipping Sova with anyone as long as they top him I can totally see Iso and Sova as a slow-burn distrust to lovers couple. Make Iso take a bullet for him on a mission with Sova dragging him to safety and tending to his wound while waiting for backup.

Also Iso just watching Sova, standing in the range or at the edge of the practice arena / danger room, earplugs ever present and Sova can just FEEL the intensity of his eyes on him. Maybe at first he's suspicious, thinking that Iso is sizing him up, trying to find his weaknesses - a very Cypher thing to do lmao - and he tells him in a very brusque fashion to leave because Sova prefers practicing on his own.

But after their disastrous mission and once Iso has recovered from his gunshot wound, Sova runs into him at the range. Iso has just finished his practice 'don't worry I'm about to leave' and Sova responds with 'you can stay to watch if you like'. BAM relationship development.

[autisticlee]

the whole "you shouldn't identify as X, don't form an identity when you can't/don't know yet, you're too young, what if/you might change your mind!" etc etc. it's so silly when you think about it. what's wrong with changing your mind anyway? why did we all decide that gender/sexuality identity has to be static and can never change? why did we decide that it's a bad thing to change? because the old generation tells us change is bad? because they (mostly conservatives) want to conserve "the good old days/the way things are supposed to be" in their minds???

WHO CARES if someone says they're gay then realizes 5 years later they're bi. WHO CARES if someone says they're a girl and realizes after trying it out they're not. let people explore who they are until they figure it out even if they go through every lable available to them! maybe none fit and they make up their own! who cares! who cares if they change it every year for the rest of their lives! humans change. that's the only constant about us! why is it a bad thing, even taboo, to accept change and exploration within sexuality and gender specifically?

there's always so much shame that comes with someone realizing they were wrong, changing as a person, or discovering something new about themselves. i've seen people afraid to explore themselves more or afraid to talk about a change in identity, for fear of the queer community pushing back on them the same way they're afraid to come out to the cishets in their life who are trans/homophobic. that's just not fair that their own community can become hostile towards them, too. being in a closet within a bigger closet essentially. everyone is always told to figure it all out first before claiming an identity, because then you're locked in it for life, apparently. you can't change your mind after that. why though? what's the point of that really? why can't we embrace fluidity a bit more? why can't we accept that humans do change all the time? why is making and trying to prove that these identities are static/unchanging/innate the only way to validate them? why can't they just, I don't know, BE VALID. without reason. why must we jump through hoops to be valid when we should just automatically be valid because we are human. stop letting the cishets gatekeep everything, leading to us gatekeeping each other!

I am sometimes very hesitant to talk about my own identity. I identified as a gay/biromantic trans guy for like idk 8-10 years? transitioned and everything. then like a year or two ago, I realized/decided that doesn't fit right anymore. now i'm a nonbinary, but also kinda fluid, aroace person. sometimes I don't like to talk about that because of the stigma behind changing your gender/sexuality identities. but you know what. i'll talk about it anyway and people have to learn to accept it.

what were the consequences and bad parts about changing my mind/identity like that? none. absolutely none. (outside of people being weird about it for no reason) but the benefits are feeling more comfortable with myself, and that's no one else's business.

[sophieinwonderland]

Something that occurred to us about transautism that had been brewing for a while: late diagnosis.

So like, we understand cis gender to be a matter of identifying with the gender you were assigned at birth, and trans gender to not identify that way. And we also understand that trans people are the gender they identify with right?

If we're applying that same understanding of what "trans" means, doesn't it stand to reason that "tramsautistic" would look pretty identical to late diagnosis?

Yes of course the narrative that all trans folks were born their gender and always knew is a harmful one. Gender can change unlike neuro developmental neurotypes. But that narrative is true for some trans folks. Hell it's true for a lot of trans folks.

So why wouldn't the same be true of someone who wasn't assigned autistic at a young age?

We're both trans and late diagnosed. A lot of the experiences with those identity overlap and have parallels.

We didn't "show signs" of being trans in our youth similar to how we "didn't show signs" of being autistic in our youth. We hid the things about us that others rejected and showed hostility towards because, conforming to social pressure, until we looked like a cis allistic singlet. All without ever understanding what we were doing or why, to the point where we look back and struggle to parse out those signs. There's a whole lot of gaslighting (internal and external) that happens for eggs and undiagnosed kids.

Also I can't help but notice a hint of "sex = gender" that slips into arguments against transabled IDs. Like, "you can't change your neurotype like you can change your gender" makes me wonder if that's talking about gender fluidity, or saying that trans folk are valid only because we have HRT and surgeries now. Cause in a lot of ways, you can change your neurotype if we understand neurotypes to be socially constructed like gender. You can get a diagnosis (like you can get a gender marker change). You can unmask (like you can socially transition). You can do treatments and therapy that helps (like you can do things that alleviate gender dysphoria and bring euphoria).

Anyways, I see a lot of parallels between trans in the gender sense and late diagnosis in the autistic sense. Plenty of kids were presumed to be a gender that they weren't. Plenty of kids were presumed to be a neurotype they weren't. When they seek to rectify one we call it transition and the other late diagnosis.

I know this isn't the universal story of trans gender folk or trans abled folk. But the connections between these two dots is too compelling for us not to bring it up.

-Faye

It's an interesting connection between late diagnosis and transitioning.

I don't think this is really how most transabled people use the word though.

Of course, certainly in some cases, this is going to be true where some transautistics can be cis-autistic all along but repress that.

I would say there are probably 3 general categories we could break transautism into.

The first is what you suggest, undiagnosed/late diagnosed cisautism where signs of ASD always existed but aren't recognized until later. And identifying as transautistic can supply security to someone trying to understand their identity.

The second is similar to the first, but where similar symptoms to ASD don't manifest at all until adulthood. In these cases, this might be a sign of another disorder. There's a lot of overlap between symptoms of ASD and schizophrenia for instance. So much so that ASD was at one time considered a childhood form of schizophrenia.

Then the third is what I consider the more stereotypical transautistic cases where an allistic person feels like they should be autistic for some reason, and sometimes may even feel dysphoria for not being autistic.

(This isn't mentioning trans-severity, where someone with Cis-ASD feels it should be worse.)

...

This is a bit of a side tangent, but...

To be honest, I worry a bit for people who fall into the first two categories.

There are legitimate issues with the healthcare system that would dissuade people from seeking mental help. We, ourselves, aren't seeking any treatment and don't feel it's necessary for us.

At the same time, the first step in healing a problem is recognizing it, and I do worry that identifying as having a trans-disorder may discourage someone from taking that first step of recognizing their symptoms are from an actual disorder they can seek treatment for.

This came up a while ago, with a transkleptomania anon who identified that way because they usually only felt the urge to steal things when they were stressed, and were under the false impression that cis-kleptomania required you to always have that urge.

Nothing against them, but I do have a concern that some people who consider themselves to have transdisorders may actually have those disorders and not be seeking treatment because they decided they don't have them.

...

And as I say this, I realize that this sounds a lot like sysmed arguments about how endogenic spaces supposedly discourage systems from realizing they have dissociative disorders. But the difference is that, from what I've seen of endogenic spaces, that's largely not true and many systems realize they have disorders BECAUSE of these spaces. Even in the tulpamancy community, it's common for people who show symptoms of dissociative disorders to be recommended to investigate further when symptoms of a disorder are mentioned.

I guess, one concern I have with the transabled community is that I'm not seeing as much of this.

To be fair, despite being described by one anti-endo as a radqueer God, I'm not actually part of those communities and these conversations could definitely be happening where I'm not looking.

...

Sorry, I kind of derailed there.

Anyway, while I don't think it completely applies to how I tend to see transabled identities used, I do find the comparison between late diagnosis and being transgender to be a fascinating topic.

[katyspersonal]

When I blew up at A after she defended a person who harassed me and my friends, I apologized to her not even a day later, very genuinely and owning up to how she didn't need my shit, unprompted by anything but just feeling guilty and then when it seemed that she didn't forgive me and stopped interacting, I apologized again and broke mutuals to leave her alone. And not only she didn't forgive me - she faked being cool with me, she has been faking it for like 40 days, she lied in my face that she didn't blame me and only has been interacting less because of "being busy and fandom-shifting" and then as soon as she saw a chance to get rid of me when her ableist fujo friend threw a fit about me, she just backstabbed us. In a vile way, like a rat, walking behind my back and finally throwing me under the bus, believing that she saw the last of me and so she would not have to play the role of "understanding and forgiving" person when in reality her ego is so fragile she could not take the L of ONE negative interaction. Not the first time someone sees me as a tumor on an otherwise healthy body and is desperate to cut me off from my friends/community/whatever.

But when she "apologized" to me, she only did that when it became apparent that I didn't leave and nor my friends were okay with her betrayal, she was prompted by learning that I vented about her in my blog and not by actual regret, her apology was fake as fuck with the whole "well but you can see where I came from you made me uncomfy by liking me TOO much anyhow it is not healthy because online friendships are not real uwu :((((((" and she did not even have the balls to let me react and talk it all out, blocking me instantly after that DM. Yet when I of course did not accept this, she got mad at me for making it harder for her or shit like that. Did not help that she kept LYING. She said Alfred-chan was not the one harassing us because "well I messaged them and they said they didn't do that :(" (something tells me you will never become a detective, A) but when the truth was exposed A claimed that she always knew it were them? Then when she seized the chance to get rid of me without consequences and betrayed us but I didn't leave, she pretended that she "only wanted the truth".

I really hate the ongoing insult for my intelligence like I don't see whats up. I hate how she believed my friends would be okay with her betrayal. I hate how she tried to gaslight about "I just cut off a person that made me uncomfortable" when betrayal ain't it lol. She had ONE job: if learning that I was angry and hurt more than one time in my life was ooh-so-eye-opening, she could have just DMed me that "listen, if lashing out is something that might keep happening, I don't want to be mutuals anymore, bye" and all. Nobody forced to forgive me, nor my friends would force her to like me if she didn't. But she HAD to be a vicious snake, she was EAGER to finally push me off the cliff as soon as her fujo friend made it look like acceptable thing to do. But okay, some people lack psyop immunity, fine. She still had a chance to both apologize genuinely AND to not fucking lie to look smarter. Cowardly rat!

I just hate how strongly this situation got to me. Like... It just comes back to me when I make someone uncomfortable on accident or am rude, because after what A did I just expect that this person will never forgive me. Like, what is the point of apologizing or explaining myself? If they will NOT forgive me, if clearly I just retroactively ruined all our previous positive interactions and now they will feign being "chill" just to one day ditch me, instead of being straightforward about not being able to forgive me. But I hate it. I hate now perceiving everyone /I/ have wronged even a little bit as an enemy and a liar, that will forever have ill will towards me now. I just don't believe in people's ability to forgive or understand anymore, all because of that rat. And that hostility just makes me worse the moment I realize I made a mistake, I just want to block this person, or to yell at them to go ahead and show me that they hate me now. I just wish it could heal somehow... But, unfortunately, it is not something a time heals. It is one of those things that are only healed by certain circumstance and until then it is just there. Like a fireplace that will get fuel thrown into it, whether I want it or not. Maybe my rule to not forgive people who are not sorry is not helping.. I don't know, I just don't know.

[self-loving-vampire]

This seems like a good time to talk about anger and emotional control, though.

I think mastering one’s own emotions is an admirable and very useful thing, and that destructive anger is probably the worst type of impulsive emotional response. Even in purely self-interested terms, it feels unpleasant, it can cloud judgment, make situations less controllable, and lead to unplanned conflicts as well as driving away potential allies. Anger can also be used to bait people into self-destructive action.

Even if you need to fight back against someone or something, it is best to do this “cold” rather than “hot”, distancing yourself from the present moment and restraining impulsive action. The cost of expressing anger and letting it take command tends to be greater than the short-term satisfaction of it.

I think there is value in training yourself to avoid, control, or reduce one’s anger. There are multiple paths towards achieving this even without using hypnosis to help erase it completely like I have. Even if you can’t stop yourself from feeling that kind of thing, you can at least prevent it from influencing your behaviors and plans too much and that makes your life a lot more pleasant.

I don’t think my attributes are anything special or beyond the ability of the average person.

If you feel anger, it actually seems to be best to work through it in some peaceful way or distract yourself from it until it simply passes. I have heard that some people suggest letting it out explosively every now and then but to be honest I don’t expect the people who do that to be less angry than the ones who learn to just retain control until the emotion gradually starves and weakens.

You should also try to avoid taking anything personally, even during arguments. Keep in mind that arguments tend to make people insecure and defensive, to the point where it’s extremely rare to “win” an argument in the sense of convincing the other person that you are correct and they are wrong, and even this accomplishment often brings resentment with it unless you are dealing with someone very mature and rational. If you value your relationship with the other person, you might lose even if you win.

With this expectation, you know that all kinds of strong emotions will be on display. These emotions may not necessarily be understandable to you, and they can be the result of a very fundamental difference in values.

People are a lot like plants in that their development and growth is dictated by all kinds of factors, including ones as simple as having had too little water. If a plant withers and dies on you, it does not do so out of spite but as a predictable consequence of these factors.

Similarly, a lot of the people who might get mad at you for trivial reasons are simply responding to the unseen forces that shaped their psychology and/or their current mood. It’s even possible that one of you misunderstood something or jumped to conclusions for one reason or another.

This does not mean that you should just tolerate it if they are treating you badly or being unpleasant. You definitely should distance yourself from people like that, it just helps both your mood and your abilities if you can avoid taking their outbursts personally or mirroring their hostility.

All of this does get easier if you have a more distant view of yourself but I don’t think that is strictly required.